Good to great to gone

economist.com

4 points·tyn··3 comments

First you write a book about how these selected companies are really great. A few years later you write a book about how they took their eyes off the ball and now they are in the tank. Case in point the once wonderful Circuit City. Never wonderful in my book. I always found high prices, poor service, and poor selection. Maybe I should have interviewed the executives to see how great they were for myself.

But I did like stage four: the charismatic new boss, the new new direction, the silver bullet.

Mr Collins identifies five stages in the process of decline. Stage one is hubris born of success (possibly brought on by reading the case study of the firm in one of Mr Collins’s earlier books).

Snark alert (with bonus frown on apostrophe style).

“Our research shows that if you’ve been practising the principles of greatness all the way along, you should get down on your knees and pray for severe turbulence, for that’s when you can pull even further ahead of those who lack your relentless intensity.” Amen.

Damn it, now that we're imagining there's no religion, we get religion in business (the "relentless intensity", not the knees bit), religion in the environment, religion in food, health, computers ... it would be simpler to just use the real thing.

(Paging G.K.Chesterton and Pierre Boule to the white courtesy phone.)

> with bonus frown on apostrophe style

It appears to be correct with The Economist's own standards, since Mr Collins is singular. (http://www.economist.com/research/styleGuide/index.cfm?page=... )

I think I agree with you though, it looks awkward.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com