Man and superman

http://www.cdixon.org/?p=1391

by lrm242 • 17 years ago

15 10 17 years ago

cdixon.org

cracki• 17 years ago

It's "Übermenschen", with sch, not ch.

As a German, I'm offended. They chose to use the word but they failed to make sure they got it right.

on the content: interesting observation.

pmichaud• 17 years ago

His superman reference to Nietzsche is totally wrong. Overmen weren't supposed to be super-duper great, productive people. He was making a really complex argument about human beings shedding their animal nature and antiquated morality to ascend into a new kind of intelligent being.

He doesn't make any kind of argument anyway -- pointing out that some leaders of companies are more effective than others does nothing to support the argument that complex forces are not at work.

petewarden2• 17 years ago

I was hoping for more meat in the argument too, the plural of anecdote is not data. If Steve was the sole factor behind Apple's success, then why didn't Next take over the world too?

I'd be a lot more interested in the mechanics of how 'great men' make a difference. I'd argue in Apple's case Steve's biggest influence was building a culture fanatical about the customer's experience, replicating versions of himself across the company. He's also been amazingly hands-on about the details of the business.

Most fans of the great man theory in business seem to be looking for a quick fix, a savior they can recruit. That leads to hiring apparent visionaries who spend too much time thinking deep thoughts about strategy, and not enough on the operational and personnel nuts-and-bolts of the company.

ZeroGravitas• 17 years ago

"why didn't Next take over the world"

You could make a strong argument they did. Next and Apple is often cited as a case where the bought company took over the buyer.

Netscape and Collabra is another, less successful, and recently modish example.

(not a fan of the great man theory in general though)

Perceval• 17 years ago

I also grated at seeing that reference to Nietzsche in there. Probably because I recently read On the Advantage and Disadvantage of History for Life, but still. Nietzsche is probably Top 3 on the list of 'most abused philosophers.'

camccann2• 17 years ago

Alternative theory: Many people of the type he talks about 1) were lucky to be in the right place at the right time, 2) had strong, effective organizations working for them, 3) were smart and competent enough to make effective use of #1 and #2, 4) stepped down while they were near or at their peak.

Most people, no matter how great, are not going to have #1 and getting #2 is difficult and unreliable.

Too much focus on the traits and actions of individuals is probably a result of the general cognitive bias to cast events in terms of structured narratives with well-defined causes and effects.

scotty79• 17 years ago

It just shows how dumb are large organizations. Single human being doing educated guesses can be smarter than corporate entity.

Great leaders perceived efficiency is effect of two factors. One, they manage to actually strongly influence what happens in their organizations. And two, they are not dumb.

At least one of these just must be false for Steve Ballmer.

Man and superman

Related Stories