The authors spent six years studying visionary companies to see what accounts for their success. Their goal: to uncover the underlying factors that helped the visionary companies outperform the competition.

The authors chose eighteen visionary companies for their book: 3M; American Express; Boeing; Citicorp; Ford; General Electric; Hewlett-Packard; IBM; Johnson & Johnson; Marriott; Merck; Motorola; Nordstrom; Philip Morris; Procter & Gamble; Sony; Wal-Mart; and Walt Disney. These are the premier organizations in their field; firms that have a long record of having an impact on the world. They have distinguished themselves as a special and elite breed of institution. And, with an average founding date of 1897, and stock-return performance of fifteen times the general market since 1926, they are companies that have stood the test of time.

Some of the main factors for success were: To preserve the values that set your company apart from others; to set audacious goals; and to experiment freely.

The authors use the following analogy: Suppose you read of a person who could tell the exact time just by looking at the position of the sun or stars. "It's April 23, 1996, 2:36 A.M." Wow, you'd think. What a remarkable person. Yet wouldn't it be more remarkable--and useful for the world--if that person built a clock that anyone could refer to, even after the clockmaker had died? Having a great idea, or being a charismatic, visionary leader is like "time telling." Building a company that's healthy long after the visionary leader is gone, or after the great product is passé, is "clock building."

Visionary company founders concentrate first on the organization's systems and values, then on products. In fact, you don't need a great product idea to begin. William Hewlett and David Packard of Hewlett- Packard, for instance, had no product in mind when they got together in 1937. They just wanted to start a company together. Early products included a bowling foul-line indicator, a clock drive for a telescope, and a device to make a urinal flush automatically. They persisted until they figured out how to build a firm that could pump out great products. Likewise, Masaru Ibuka didn't have a single product in mind when he launched Sony in 1945. The company survived selling heating pads. Paul Galvin, Motorola's founder, didn't dream about making battery eliminators for radios, its first product. He dreamed foremost about building a great and lasting company. He did that by developing people. He encouraged dissent, discussion, and disagreement, and he gave people freedom to make contributions. He set challenges and gave people responsibility to achieve them.

Here are some interesting notes I took:

Though many visionary companies have had high-profile leaders like Henry Ford or Sam Walton, charismatic leadership is not necessary for success. 3M, for example, has never had a charismatic CEO.

The firm is not a vehicle for products or personalities; products are a vehicle for the company. Looked at in that light, Walt Disney's greatest creation wasn't Snow White or Disneyland, it's the Disney Company and its ability to make people happy.

Purposes are your organization's fundamental reasons for existing beyond making money. They are broad and enduring. For example, Robert W. Johnson founded Johnson & Johnson "to alleviate pain and suffering." Purposes are not about specific products or services. The Disney Company doesn't exist to "make cartoons for kids," for example. It exists to "use our imaginations to bring happiness to millions." Asked whether he started Marriott Corporation to create an empire, J. Willard Marriott, Sr., said no. He wanted to give friendly service to guests, provide good food at a fair price, and work hard to make a profit to create more jobs.

Merck has long used its values to guide its actions. For example, it once developed a drug called Mectizan to cure a Third World disease known as "river blindness." While it hoped to sell the drug to government and relief agencies, the return on investment would be small. When it came time to sell Mectizan, however, no one bought it. So Merck gave the drug away to the millions who needed it. This was good public relations that could pay off down the road. But it was also because the company has never forgotten George Merck's words: "We try never to forget that medicine is for people. It's not for the profits. The profits follow . . ."

To come up with a purpose, ask: What is our reason for being? What would be lost if we ceased to be?

Boeing's core value, "being in the leading edge of aviation; being pioneers" is permanent. Whatever your business, strategy and tactics, operations, culture, and products are they must change over time. The only thing that shouldn't change is core ideology. When Eastern Airlines said it needed a jet with precise specifications, Boeing took on the challenge. The plane had to land on runway 4-22 at La Guardia Airport in New York, a notoriously short runway. This jet also had to be able to fly non-stop to Miami without refueling, seat six abreast, and hold 131 passengers. Most agreed this was an impossible task. Boeing met the challenge with its 727. It succeeded because, once it got going, it had no other choice. Such goals are always aligned with a Boeing core value: to be on the leading edge of aviation.

Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing's initial idea, to mine corundum, failed, and the company searched desperately for something to do. 3M settled on sandpaper and grinding wheels, which kept it afloat. Such troubles led CEO William McKnight to insist on diversifying. But rather than chart the course himself, he built an organization that would continually change based on the initiative of employees. McKnight hired good people, let them alone to do their work, and encouraged experimentation. The result was many unplanned, successful products. For example, 3M employee Dick Drew was visiting an auto paint shop when he saw a problem to solve. Two-toned paint jobs had become popular, but shops had trouble separating the two colors. Drew went to work and came up with a solution: masking tape. Five years later, he used his experience to develop Scotch tape. Note that 3M hadn't planned to get into tape, now a huge part of its business. It was an outgrowth of the organization McKnight created.

Visionary companies don't ask, "How well are we doing?" They ask, "How can we do better tomorrow than we did today?" This question requires constant self-criticism and investment in the future for a race with no finish line.

Motorola has used an "innovate or die" technique. It has been known to cut off mature product lines that still account for significant sales volume in order to keep innovating.

Boeing uses a process called "eyes of the enemy." It assigns managers the task of developing strategy as though they worked for a competitor and wanted to wipe Boeing off the map. What weaknesses would they exploit? What markets could they invade? Boeing then figures out how it would respond to each threat.

A visionary company is like a great work of art--magnificent in detail, with all elements working together in concert.

Briefly, Although this book was written some years back;yet it is still strongly valid and valuable for today's business cases.

"Built to Last" is an enlightening and interesting classic on business strategic management. The authors, Jim Collins and Jerry Porras spent six years in research and compared the practices of 18 visionary companies in the USA to those of a matched set of good, though not great, companies. Their fundamental observation is that average companies are driven by the power of "or:" You can have either short term profits OR long term growth, either stability OR progress. Visionary companies, in contrast, embrace the power of "and:" You preserve the core AND stimulate progress.

The authors then methodically, step-by-step proceed to explain how great companies erect structures that embrace these seemingly contradictory goals. The great companies the authors studied, contrary to conventional wisdom, are not profit focused at their core but rather, they are `value' focused. These values are a sort of nucleus, around which leaders in visionary companies grow the company. This was the case in such great companies as Disney, Wal-Mart, Merck, Ford, Hewlett Packard, 3M, Johnson and Johnson and others.

Among the core myths that Collins and Porras shattered are that visionary companies must start with a great product and be pushed into the future by charismatic leaders. Instead the great visionary companies they studied were characterized by total lack of an initial business plan or key idea and by remarkably self-effacing leaders. The authors are much more impressed with the great companies' almost cult-like devotion to a "core ideology" or identity, and active indoctrination of employees into "ideological commitment" to the company.

The book is interesting to read, is humorous, is among the best, easiest to follow guide to strategic management. The book also provides guidelines to help managers at all levels to apply the concepts. It is well written with compelling case studies. I highly recommend the book to those looking for a practical down-to-earth book that is readable and useful.

It is interesting to review a business book more than 10 years after it has been labeled a best seller - is it still relevant today? Yes, in the case of this classic! The lessons conveyed are as useful today, as they were when it was first published. No surprise, given what the authors set out to discover when they began their research: What distinguishes long-time, high performing companies from their competitors? Their key concept about what it takes to build a visionary company - "preserve the core and stimulate progress" seems to be a fundamental truth about the evolutionary nature of free markets. Certainly their, "Try Lots of Stuff and Keep What Works" and "Good Enough Never Is", lessons sound like evolutionary processes of adaptation.

The key concept might be more simply described by saying, "Maintain your identity - core values & purpose - while focusing on a living performance vision." That makes it a personal concept as well as an organizational concept - not a bad thing when you consider that any organization is a collection of people. When something makes sense for the individual and the organization, perhaps there-in resides the reason it is a long-term winner! Dennis DeWilde, Author of The Performance Connection

This is the most relevant, well-presented, easy-to-read research project I've seen. The data is easily transferable to to practical use. I have seen its implementation make a really big positive difference in groups within organizations.

This book can be aptly tagged as a textbook for Leadership 101. It is a must read for every career-conscious person, at any level of organizational hierarchy. The best thing about this book is that every reader will be able to get something useful and meaningful out of it. Unlike other run-of-the-mill leadership books/material which just mention stories for motivation, this book is completely based on real concrete data. Rather it is presented in the form a thesis/dissertation after about six years of research. Before reading this book, I did believe in some of the myths which are shattered in the first chapter and then proved to be only myths. The conclusions are completely data-driven.

Choosing a set of companies as visionary companies on the basis of their overall past performance (not just financial) and an another comparison company, authors cite the fundamental elements of a visionary company. I will not go in detail of those reasons and would recommend one to read it directly as you go through the book.

Authors have done a great job in explaining and justifying their research and data through the appendices and bibliography. A study of all the existing companies to find the visionary ones is really a daunting task and this research team has done a terrific job in establishing a definition of a "visionary company".

Both Built to Last and Good to Great are the best business books anyone can ever read. Nice work!

I would not necessarily agree that the predecessor was a better book. The two books have different purposes, and I believe both are very helpful.

The authors present their research process and findings, as well as 12 myths:

Myth #1: It takes a great idea to start a great company.
Myth #2: Visionary companies require great and charismatic visionary leaders.
Myth #3: The most successful companies exist first and foremost to maximize profits.
Myth #4: Visionary companies share a common subset of "correct" core values. [Note: by this, they do not mean to say that values are not important; on the contrary. However, they explain that there is no specific set of values common to all successful companies, but that these vary from one to another.]
Myth #5: The only constant is change.
Myth #6: Blue-chip companies play it safe.
Myth #7: Visionary companies are great places to work, for everyone.
Myth #8: Highly successful companies make their best moves by brilliant and complex strategic planning.
Myth #9: Companies should hire outside CEOs to stimulate fundamental change.
Myth #10: The most successful companies focus primarily on the competition.
Myth #11: You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Myth #12: Companies become visionary primarily through "vision statements".

The authors debunk each of these myths by presenting their findings.

One of the most powerful lessons, which I underlined, is this: "... most of them view their products and services as making useful and important contributions to customers' lives... they exist to do something useful..."

The authors show that companies with long-term and solid success throughout time are not simply focused on making money or growing their business by X% annually. They have a stronger and greater mission, and their products and service exist primarily to support that vision. This is why, even when products become obsolete, the company with a strong sense of purpose continues to change and evolve beyond product life cycles. An important lesson for most companies in corporate America.

Built to Last explains the differences between the great and the REALLY GREAT companies. The book asks the question why settle for being great when you can be monumentally stupendous? It is an impecably researched book (the appendix in the back of this book is excellent) that breaks many of the stereotypical beliefs of success experienced by large corporations.

We can learn new things and new ways of looking into things. Also we can discover why visionary companies stay forever. Money seems to be everything in our lives and it is the reason for these companies' existence. However, it is not what drives these visionary companies.

The characteristics defined to select the most successful companies are excellent measures of quantity and quality. The key idea, that success does not depend on having an early vision and charismatic leaders but on identity, culture and commitment to the company steer us into different paths for future success.

The focus is not only on the executive team to set the tone, but also on the hiring process and the freedom people are given to create. It will give you new insights and most importantly ways to implement

And by the way, nice guys (and nice corporations) DO finish first.

A lot of good information, found the early parts of the book a bit long-winded. I found myself skipping the 'how we arrived at this conclusion' parts to get to the information I was looking for.

Simply put, this is good but not nearly as impactful as "Good to Great" by Jim Collins.

Read this book and enjoyed it. Like many management books, it does a good job of packaging common sense, but I suppose distilling information into bite-size chapters is valuable.

The book has entered the lexicon of Corp America and management consultants a bit too much, but overall, it's worth the read.

Despite trying very hard to deny that this is just another fad management book - there is nothing new in this title. Clueless managers will recite the core principals of this book and treat them as gospel as they try to improve their bottom line. It is also worth noting that at least one of the "great" organizations in the book, Fannie May, has imploded in an accounting scandal. Not the worst fad management book ever written, but that isn't saying much.

The book separates core values from the operating practices of
companies. Ultimately, the core value system is the determinant
of success. It is the driver of success. The author plots the
profits of visionary companies as against non-visionaries. The
visionaries make over 5 times the profits. The challenge is to
preserve the core values and stimulate progress in the industry.
The core values involve innovation, integrity, individualism,
initiative, personal growth, quality, risk-taking ability and
expanded service. These types of attributes will give a large
institution the speed and agility of a small company according
to the authors.

The book is an excellent value for anyone navigating through
a large organization or facility in search of a strategic
plan or implementation .

This is one of the business classics in the past twenty years. It has sold a huge number of copies and I am sure many of those purchased copies were actually read! As impressive as its sales numbers have been, the way it has affected the approach to the way business was discussed and talked about for the past dozen years has been even more impressive.

Yes, there are always newer fads and business is subject to fads more than most fields of human endeavor. There are lots of theories about why this is so, but it might have something to do with the new managers coming in wanting to bring something new with them and so the previous guy's stuff is no good. Hence, something comes and something goes for reasons beyond its ability to run business in a sound and profitable way. However, when something comes along with some real substance it spreads and lasts, at least for awhile. The ideas of core values and big (hairy audacious) goals hit a chord and lasted. Of course, today they are part of the air businesspeople breathe rather than a quote from this book.

The authors looked at a number of big companies and found a list of those that had been around a long time, been financially successful, and were on a roll at the time of this book (but they don't say this is one of their criteria). They also found some comparable big company that hadn't found the level of success of the "visionary company" as they call the successful firms. They then looked for some traits common to those big successful companies that might explain their success.

The four big principles they came up with were: 1) Be a clock builder - or architect - not a time teller [once you read the chapter it will be clear], 2) Embrace the genius of the AND, 3) Preserve the core / stimulate progress, and 4) seek consistent alignment.

All this has to do with being opportunistic, building the organization that best supports the opportunities you are pursuing rather than letting the organization dictate what you pursue, that success requires doing seemingly contradictory goals simultaneously, making sure that the core culture gets preserved (if it has been a successful culture), and making sure that the whole process is focused on the core ideology - the core values and core purpose of the organization. Sounds simple? It's not. And even so, the "visionary" companies the book lauded a dozen years ago have all, or almost all, fallen on various levels of hard times since the book came out.

This fact is addressed in a soft way in the frequently asked questions addition for this paperback addition. There is also a new last chapter on building the vision and a section on questions for research (this acknowledges areas left unexplained by the book).

A book that has been this influential deserves your attention if you are interested in business literature. However, as with all of these books, use the principles as they apply to your real life in the real world of competitive business rather than treating them as some kind of final truth.

I don't have much to say about this book. I am finishing reading it now; it took me 2 years off and on to finish it. It seemed like more of a chore to read than Good to Great, which is funny because I had to read Good to Great for a class and I am reading Built to Last "for fun".
It's a good business book, their research and conclusion makes sense, and their are some good stories about the various companies in there. However, the book is dry at times, which makes it hard and not very enjoyable to read.
If you want to learn about the prequel to Good to Great, read this. It's a good book. But, if you're looking for something entertaining to read, you probably need to find something else: read Good to Great if you haven't read that or go to the fiction section.

A very inspiring book about creating and maintaining a vision for yourself, your company and even applicable to your own family.

A challenge given to plan and define the future in more than years but in decades.

Jim Collins' books are well-researched, easy to read, and usually provide thoughtful, actionable guidlines for business owners. This book fits that mold in the context of describing precisely the framework that is needed to build a company that will both last a long time and outperform the market.

The "prequel" to Good to Great, this book covers the principles and practices of great companies, using a variety of companies that have lasted multiple chief officers for basis and comparisons. If you're looking to bring some moral fiber and long-term success to your company, I can't think of a better book to read and act upon.

Built to last means preserving the core ideology and beliefs and stimulate progress over long periods of time. Visionary companies have well defined values and know their core purpose for existence. Visionary companies use process and process analysis to discipline and move their organization. The processes, engineering, and management closely adhere company core beliefs. Visionary companies over power and outcompete comparison companies by taking on bold commitments of change. BHAG maybe both daunting and risky, but the adventure, excitement, and challenge of it grabs people in the guts and momentum flowing. Visionary companies take a "try and see if it works" attitude. Visionary companies make some of their best moves by experimentation, trial and error, opportunism, and by accident. Visonary company CEO and management rise up through the ranks and rarely come from the outside. Visionary companies focus on beating themselves. Visionary companies elevate in stature through thousands of well defined processes.

Social Darwinism is 1800s and it is old hat. Attributing social darwinism as the reasons for corporate success is like fitting a square in a round hole, it doesn't make sense. The authors praise visionary corporations by personifying corporations by use phrases like "cult-like" devotion, "evolutionary" attributes, "survival of the fittest" emergence, as glorification and justifications. Cults are idol worshippers and so the authors seem to be suggesting visionary company achieve cult like status among their followers.

It is exhausting how many times authors seem to praise and give tribute too the Darwin's survival of the fittest doctrines, as if this doctrine was the reason corporations have withstood the test of time. The evolution jargon and rhetoric seems pointless. The fit and flourish principles mercilessly pounds a path to its objectives and destroys the worth of the individual. The actualization of this doctrine being, a fit individual in the visionary company will be happy. The corporate God becomes the source of mans happiness. Corporation devices transfer wealth, product products and service, and preserve wealth.

The history of corporations demonstrates they amass great wealth by promoting opulence, manipulation tax laws, and gain legality monopoly power stifling competition. These practice provide an unfair advantage in the market place and have stifled competition allowing great accumulate wealth uncontested. Core Ideology can not explain how $1 invested from 1926-1990 would return $6,356.

Second, visionary companies most like did not perform beyond the comparison companies during boom periods. Instead visionary companies had deep pockets to weather the bust periods and received large transfers of wealth which allowed them staying power. Investors typically flee innovation and growth oriented medium size companies during bust periods and sink their money into large cap companies. Large companies buy up innovative small companies during boom periods to avoid disruptive technologies from disturbing their empires. So the whole ideology of what made the visionary companies wealth could be incorrectly place. Wealth does not have to prove itself.

The authors could have explained their observations simply as follows: 1. Enduring great companies decide what core values it holds to be core, largely independent of the current environment, competitive requirements, or management fads. When defining values focus on "actual" verses "should" values. The core values can be anything and they do not have to reflect moralistic, humanistic, or enlightening values. 2. The core purpose for the organizations being. The core purpose reflects the importance people attach to the company's work and taps into the idealistic motivations. Purpose should not be confused with specific goals or business strategies. A purpose should be able to last 100 years. A purpose does not change, yet it inspires change. Core ideology and envisioning the future are not the same. BHAG is envisioning the future. Defining the core ideology is discovery, whereas, BHAG is creativity. BHAG is creating the future not predicting the future. Most companies want to analyze their way into the future and this does not work. "The envisioned future must be truly exciting to those inside the organization, otherwise it's just not a full-fledge BHAG. Indeed, the envisioned future should produce a bit of the gulp factor when it dawns on people what it will take to achieve the goal and the level of commitment to the goal, there should be an almost audible gulp"

Merck core values: corporate social responsibility, excellence in all aspects of the company, science-based innovation, honesty and integrity, and profit from work that benefits humanity.

Merck purpose: To preserve and improve human life.

Merck BHAG: To transform the company into the preeminent drug-making company in the world.

Sony core values: elevation of the Japanese national culture and status, being a pioneer, respect and encourage of individual ability and creativity.

Sony purpose: To experience the sheer joy of innovation and the application of technology for the benefit and pleasure of the general public.

Sony BHAG: Change the worldwide image of Japanese products as one of high quality.

3M: Innovation, integrity, respect for individual initiative and personal growth, tolerance for honest mistakes, product quality and reliability, and "our real business is solving problems".

American Express: Heroic customer service, worldwide reliability, and encouragement of individual incentive.

Boeing: lead edge of aeronautics, tackling huge challenges, product safety and quality, "To eat, breath, and sleep" the world of aeronautics.

Citicorp: Expansionism, being out front, autonomy and entrepreneurship, meritocracy, aggressiveness and self-confidence.

Ford: People as source of strength, products as end results, profits as necessary means, honest and integrity.

GE: Improve quality of life through technology and innovation; interdependence balance between customers, employees, society, and shareholders; individual responsibility and opportunity, and honest and integrity.

HP: Technical contributions, respect and opportunity for HP people, contribution and responsibility to communities, affordable quality, and profit and growth.

IBM: Giver full consideration to IBM employee, spend time making customers happy, and go the last mile to make things right.

J&J: alleviate pain and disease, customer centered, and decentralize-be creative-and productive.

Marriott: Friendly service, people are number 1, work hard, continual self-improvement, and overcome adversity to build character.

Motorola: Superior quality products and service, continues self-renewal, latent creative power within, and treat employee with dignity.

Nordstrom: Service to the customer, hard work and productivity, continuous improvement, and excellence in reputation.

Phillip Morris: Personal freedom of choice, winning, individual initiative, achieve on merit, and hard work.

P&G: product excellence

Wal-Mart: Swim upstream, run lean, and value to the customer.

This is a book that tries to uncover the common traits between companies considered visionary (companies that are regarded as being the standard bearers for the industry they compete in, that outperform the market and have been around for at least 50 years).

I think the sequel 'Good to Great' is better but this one is pretty instructive too.

The 12 myths it explodes are:
1. Visionary companies do not all start with a great idea. In fact great idea companies soon founder after the idea loses relevance. A company that is set up with processes that keep generating good ideas (a research lab that attracts the brightest talent for example) will over time outperform one set to capitalise on one 'big thing'
2. Visionary leaders and charismatic leaders are sometimes destructive for their companies in the long term since they lead to an over reliance on themselve and do not build successors who can take the company to the next level after them. Humble gritty guys are more likely to make the best CEOs
3. The best companies don't put shareholder returns as the prime objective. Although they think it's important they define their raison d' etre as for some greater cause - quality or innovation or pride or people or customers or product or whatever
4. Visionary companies do not all share the same set of shared common values. In fact some companies have completely opposite values from other companies and both can be equally succesful. However whatever they value, great companies truly believe in it.
5. Great companies do not keep changing with the times. There are core features that they just do not change no matter what. At the same time on the superficial level they adjust and keep ahead of changing times.
6. Blue chip companies do not always play safe. The best companies have at some time stake the house on a bet. But it has been a calculated well though out approach to risk taking.
7. Visionary companies are not great places to work for everyone. If you believe in their values then it is but for others it is distinctly an uncomfortable place and many people who 'do not fit' hate it there and soon are ejected like a virus. Fit is vital
8. Complex planning is not vital to building a great company. Instead quite often their strategies come from a 'let's try lots of stuff and keep what works' approach that is the opposite of analysis paralysis that plagues other companies.
9. The best CEOs are not those brought in from outside to reform a company. They are in fact the ones who have grown up from within the ranks who strongly believe in the company and have grown with it.
10. The most successful companies don't focus on beating the competition. They focus instead of focusing relentlessly on self improvement.
11. Great companies manage to make paradoxical things work together rather than chose one of them. for example they manage to give freedom of expression and yet have cult like conformity. Other companies try to go one route or the other or fail at trying to take the middle path.
12. Comapanies don't become visionary through visionary pronouncements and mission statements. Instead the entire tapestry fits seamlessly together and those mission statements and values are embodied in every facet of the organisation.

Some pretty interesting stuff here.

I found Built to Last to be an analytical look at the intangibles of success. Core development and maintenance, personal growth, employee development and more, highlight the "outside the bottom line" look into an organization lasting longer than any one leader's tenure of influence. Although I don't agree with every aspect of the book I still rate this high due to its ability to stimulate positive thinking.

I'm an employee with a small educational business, and I've started reading more business related stuff to get some perspective on how I can help our business evolve. I recently read "First, Break All of the Rules" and I picked this book up as a follow-up to get a different vantage point on growing a business. This study, completed in the early 1990s, focuses on 18 historically visionary companies that have built stable core cultures that can serve as role models for any business.

I greatly appreciated the historical perspective that evaluated the companies from their early roots. 3M a failed mining company? Sony building heating pads? Realizing how far rock-solid brands like this have come helps me to have some hope that a persistent, grounded organization can adapt to changing conditions.

I also value the emphasis on core values and presenting how these companies translate those values into a pervasive attitude throughout the company. Wal-mart and Nordstrom's are compared to "cult-like" organizations in a favorable way. Successful visionary companies not only have a vision, they find a way to attract employees who adhere to that vision and are able to "eject like a virus" any employees who don't match that vision.

This book, in contrast to many other business books I've read, relies heavily on thorough properly annotated sources. Even if you disagree with the author's conclusions you'll be pointed in the direction of some valuable published resources to assess companies like IBM and Merck for yourself.

My only concern with this book is the challenge of properly evaluating comparison companies and some of the visionary companies that look considerably less visionary in the present moment in time. The comparison companies are drawn from the time of the companies' founding. With companies like Boeing, this makes a lot of sense. With companies like Sony, this doesn't make as much sense to me. Sony has expanded into the music industry and technology industries successfully. I'd like to see how Sony's present comparision competitiors in industry compare on the visionary scale. Likewise, companies like Walt Disney thumped Columbia, which is now owned by Sony I believe. How does Walt Disney compare to some of its present competitors like Six Flags in the theme park arena or some of its competitors like Nicolodeon in the cable TV department?

The other criticism that some readers will have is that companies like Merck, IBM, and Wal-mart may not look as visionary in the popular press as they are presented in this 1994-completed work. The authors do speak to that concern in a later chapter and I accept their arguments for looking at the companies over 100 years and saying that, like Ford, they have the potential to return to visionary ways.

This book was real insightful, and I strongly recommend it to those who like some rigorous research with their business strategy advice.

4 stars

--SD

I hope none of my competitors find out about this book.

We have a family owned cabinet business www.cohenwoodworking.com that was about to go under. Every day was a painful frustration, and we didn't understand why.

Then I listened to the audio versions of "Built to Last" and "Good to Great." That was around two years ago.

I spent hundreds of hours discovering and developing our core values, and am still in the process of building a great team.

Combine this with Michael Gerber's "The E-Myth," and we have now a solid foundation and a growing company with growing revenue that's fun to work at. Or should I say fun to "work on"?

Read these three books if you want to enjoy life more. Shh... don't tell your competition. And please don't tell mine.

If you are an investor, this book is your best friend for you to understand the greatest companies in the world. It let you know how the great companies were formed, what their values were, how they became "great".

If you are interested in business history, this book is the best one to show you analysis of different companies, and each one has an alternative to compare.

If you are not the two mentioned above, you have to learn more about your world, in a business view. You use 3M, Ford, HP, Philip Morris, do you think of why you are using them but not others?

Most of the companies mentioned in the book are those you must hear before. You probably know Disney, so don't you want to know more about Disney? Don't you want to know about their management principles?

You can hardly find any other books comparable with this one. Scientific methodology is used to ensure the materials contained reflect the "truth". Serious findings can be showed as there are so much reference in the book.

It is an "UNPUTDOWNABLE".

The book is good for those looking at the big picture of company management - but it also applies to smaller teams or personal goals. I have not read widely in this field, but I found the book easy to read and fairly entertaining.

I thorougly enjoyed this book by Jim Collins. You can tell how much research and effort went into both of his books (Good to Great and Built to Last). I could see the huge benefit of all the work he did to bring the ideas and concepts that most formed the visionary companies. The one thing that he kept saying was that the best companies preserved their core while at the same time stimulating progress. This was the key concept from the book that should be applied to any company that wants to succeed in the long-term. He also had a huge emphasis on creating mechanisms that align with the core and to fix misalignments. He said that this is easier to do when you are starting, but it can also be done with a long standing corporation. I think that his emphasis on action coming from the core values was really instructive.
Here were some quotes I found to be particularly instructive

"The continuity of superb individuals atop visionary companies stems from the companies beings outstanding organizations, not the other way around."
Here Collins is saying that the great companies make great leaders because of their values and set up.
"Walton didn't just preach these values, he instituted concrete organizational mechanisms to stimulate change and improvement."
For example he started the store within a store concept, created cash awards and public recognition for associates with cost saving ideas, etc...
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function" -F. Scott Fitzgerald
"Our research indicates that the authenticity of the ideology and the extent to which a company attains consistent alignment with the ideology counts more than the content of the ideology."
-This is a fascinating idea. It proposes that having the right vision isn't the important thing, but rather that living consistently with the vision is the key.
"Intentions are all fine and good, but it is the translation of those intentions into concrete items-mechanisms with teeth-that can make the difference between becoming a visionary company or forever remaining a wannabe."
-This is a key concept from the book; we must create mechanisms that encourage the core instead of deviating from it. Everything in the organization should be pointing to the core, and I mean everything. This is the same in the church. When your value is that mission is why the church exists then everything in the church should point to that value.
"Nordstrom is only a great place to work for those truly dedicated-and well suited to-the Nordstrom way."
-This should be true of our churches. If we have people who don't align with the core they should get weeded out quickly. This isn't a call for conformity except in dedication to the core.
"Visionary companies tend to be cult-like around their ideologies instead of around their leaders"
-This is huge for the church. I saw this problem at Mosaic with about half of the people buying into Erwin and half buying into the vision. However, this is very hard to do.
Examples of concrete mechanisms to reinforce the core p. 136
"It means getting the right actors on the stage, putting them in the right frame of mind, and then giving them the freedom to ad lib as they see fit. It means, in short, understanding that cult-like tightness around an ideology actually enables a company to turn people loose to experiment, change, adapt, and -above all-to act."
-This is the kind of company that I want to work for or to be leading. I want to hire the right people or be the right person with the freedom to be creative and innovative while being passionate about preserving the core.
"Visionary companies develop, promote, and carefully select managerial talent from inside the company to a greater degree than the comparison companies."
"Comfort is not he objective in a visionary company. Indeed, visionary companies install powerful mechanisms to create discomfort-to obliterate complacency-and thereby stimulate change and improvement before the external world demands it."
"What is the true meaning of the black belt?" "The black belt represents the beginning-the start of a never-ending journey of discipline, work and the pursuit of an ever-higher standard."
"The basic difference I see between the two companies is rhetoric versus reality."
"The real question to ask is not "Is this practice good?" but "Is this practice appropriate for us-does it fit with our ideology and ambitions?"
"It's not what you believe that sets you apart so much as that you believe in something, that you believe in it deeply, that you preserve it over time, and that you bring it to life with consistent alignment."
"Creating alignment, which is a key part of our ongoing work to help companies transform themselves into visionary companies, requires two key processes: 1) developing new alignments to preserve the core and stimulate progress, and 2) eliminating misalignments-those that drive the company away from the core ideology and those that impede progress toward the envisioned future."

A visionary company, say the authors, is one that is the premier organization in its field, one that has had a long standing impact on the world, and has had an average stock-return performance of fifteen times the general market since 1926. The authors of Built to Last spent six years studying visionary companies in-depth to uncover the underlying factors that helped them to outperform the competition. They first polled hundreds of CEO's to find out what companies they most esteemed. They then chose eighteen to profile in-depth and also researched a competitor to compare them with.

Here are some of their findings about visionary companies:
· Visionary company founders take an architectural approach to building their firms. They concentrate on the company's processes, systems and values, not their products. They also develop their managers and employees, so that the company survives long after the visionary leader is gone.
· Ideals and core ideologies drive visionary companies, not profits alone. Visionary companies have basic precepts that say, "This is who we are; this is what we stand for; this is what we're all about."
· Visionary companies commit to Big, Hairy, Audacious Goals (BHAG's), that serve as unifying focal points for development. These goals should be clear and compelling, involve risk, be consistent with the core ideology of the company, and be so bold and exciting that progress will continue even if leaders leave before the goal is achieved.
· Visionary companies have cult-like cultures. They are great places for people to work, if the people "fit" into the company culture and ideology.
· Visionary companies use home-grown management. Of the eighteen companies studies, only four times did one of them go outside of the firm for a CEO.

excellent

For one, it is slightly difficult for me to review this book because:

1. It shares completely all its structure & methodology with Good To Great. This is not exactly bad, but it is no different.

2. It shares a good amount of its content with Good To Great. This is to be expected because it stands to reason that companies who made it "Great" will have commonalities with companies which have been "visionary".

To those of you who are looking for an isolated review of "Built To Last", I apologize. This review will not cover a lot of it. I'd instead say that in my own opinion, "Good To Great" is a far better book. Now this could be because I read that one first, but I'd also like to think that this also because "Good To Great" has:
1. About all the specific traits as far qualifying differentiators of great companies is concerned. The phraseology could be different, e.g. what is termed as "Clock Building" in BTL is called "Level 5 Leadership" in GTG.

2. And it has more, particularly two traits that come to my mind right away. One is "Face the brutal facts" & the other being the "Hedgehog concept". The authors in many ways might have implied these traits in visionary companies in BTL, but they are not identified as points to focus on - as they are in GTG.

On the whole, my advice is read any one of them for the marginal value of reading the other having read any one first is really little. And in case you intend to read just one, I'd recommend GTG over BTL.

And here is one last thing I think that both books did not emphasize enough:
So if
Business success = Traits A(Traits common to all successful companies) + Traits B (Traits about great companies that separate them from just successful companies),

then both books just talk about traits B. May be I should talk to JC about that, :)

S!

This is an inspiring book, and informative. It answers the "what" question convincingly. I missed answers to the "why" questions. Why, for example, are successful visionary companies characterized by their emphasis on ethical standards? There are many possible explanations: the staff of the company are inspired by the ideals and give more to their employer; the companies reap payoffs in the long term from grateful recipients of their honorable deeds; the companies acquire a good reputation which increases sales and hence profits. More interesting, is the question of the logic of ethics in the business game - not even touched by these authors.

According to Jim Collins and Jerry Porras, it does not matter what the company ideology is, as long as it is passionately believed by the management and employees. I find this a dubious claim, and not supported by the data. The ideological frameworks of the companies that were studied are not interchangeable, not for the trivial reason that the ideology of another company happens not to be the one believed by each of them. Boeing is unlikely to spend money on a program to cure river blindness in Africa. Why does Merck do this? Clearly, a pharmaceutical firm does well to invest in a reputation for medical generosity that flows from a passion for making people well? Merck is purchasing precisely the trust that pays-off in the medical market place. Trust reduces transaction costs, and in some cases is almost as good as a monopoly. Boeing, on the other hand, must buy a brand name attached to their dedication to engineering excellence. It does matter what companies are passionate about.

My company operates on the Internet. Our pledge includes the words: "The tragedy of the commons is the propensity of users to take more from the commons than they give. We undertake to contribute more to the commons than we take. Our presence shall make the Internet safer, more useful and greater fun." Why is this a suitable ideology for our company? The answer is not that this is one we happen to believe in, and feel passionate about - although we do. Rather, this ideology is strategically fitting. We enhance to our brand name, and therefore the value of our software, by adding our reputation to the web applications we write.

In one of our daughter businesses we are a broker of information from merchants to consumer (information about products that are available) and from consumer to merchant (we generate real time demand curves for a large range of commodities). We have pledged not to become a trader. Why? In ethical terms, we should not be a trader because our insider information would give rise to conflict of interest. The trust that we gain by not being a trader, and hence remaining a disinterested supplier of market information, enables us to broker Coasian agreements with reduced transaction costs between the parties on the Internet. The advantage is large. It is on the Internet commons that trust is scarce. We are able to purchase this by foregoing some potentially profitable trades, and that pays us more in the long term in our role as an information service provider.

Our ideology was designed to give us the greatest possible strategic advantage in our markets. That is not to say we do not believe in our ideals, but that the nature of our ideology is important. It does matter what we believe. It matters what you believe, and it matters that you understand that it matters.

I strongly recommend "The Modern Firm" by Roberts. Read this alongside "Built to Last". Roberts is a harder read, but he gets under the logic of corporate dynamics better than Collins and Porras. Because "Built to Last" is characterized by an ubiquitous analytical paucity, Jim Collins and Jerry Porras' interpretations of their data are not always correct. That is a pity. Their findings are exciting, inspiring even, and the book despite its limitations is a good read.

This book is a master piece, and is one of the most interesting business books I've ever read, I recommend this book to anyone who is studying for an MBA or doing research related to business organizations. The authors have done lot of work before they wrote this book, it is evident with the amount of references that they have quoted in the book. It busts the myth that "management is complicated science" and shows you simple and intriguing stories as to how some of the top companies in the world stumble upon fortune. And how they kept the company afloat during times of struggle (did you know that Boeing had to do furniture business to keep the company running? I read it on the book), the way they treated their employees.. Its an investment to buy this book.

Great book, excellent non conventional ideas to help everyone from the executive to the small business owner. Discusses ways successful companies became that way, not by using the "kill instinct" to make profits at all costs, but by thinking about the products and services they provide and how they will enrich and improve their customers' lives.

I am working for one of the major visionary Inc. companies (not included in review though at all) and all discussed in this book helps significantly to prepare oneself for a managerial position in such a company. It sort of answers the questions that are normally asked at the assessment for managerial position.

A good read the outlines the history of many firms. Trying to provide answers to the six questions on page 2 of the book is an interesting exercise.

Excellent reading. The interesting tidbits of information about how the various companies evolved made it difficult to set the book down.