Started: Nov. 5, 2012
Finished: Dec. 16, 2012
Pages: 186
Some organizations are very open to change. Others, not so much. I've been curious about that, and whether it's possible to move an organization from one state to the other. But when you go trolling for books on "change management", much of what you find is patronizing and trivial. Both Who Moved My Cheese? by Spencer Johnson and Our Iceberg is Melting: Changing and Succeeding Under Any Conditions by John Kotter are gag-inducing parables that I couldn't force myself to read. I attended a seminar based on The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business, by Charles Duhigg, but either the seminar or the source material trivialized reasons why people might resist change. It makes sense that habit can play a role, but the example in the seminar had everything to do with the fact that the change being resisted actually removed control over parts of people's work, so calling their resistance "habit" was either dumb or disingenuous.
But I liked Serial Innovators. It's popular non-fiction: it's a brief book that summarizes and synthesizes a lot of research about and how and why most organizations "age" and often vanish (viz Eastman Kodak), while others adapt and thrive over longer periods of time (viz Apple). It does include a "story" (NOT a parable), but explains why it does so in terms of human psychology, and then uses the story to directly illustrate the principles that it discusses.
Maybe it helps that it's not a "change management" book per se. Instead it talks about the factors that cause most businesses to fail over quite short timeframes: the average post-listing lifetime of a publiclly traded company in the US is apparently 15 years.
So what does it have to say? Basically that corporations naturally tend to rigidity. Your initial success is always due to following a certain set of strategies. But nothing stays the same. Your own success changes the marketplace you participate in, and your competitors may emulate you, counter you, or outpace you. Internally, as your organization grows you're likely to impose more structure on its operations. But it's human nature to continue and even reinforce what brought you success in the first place. So you're very likely to continue with counter-productive marketing strategies, and to fail to recognize that the amount of hierarchy and process you've introduced has strangled your ability to act, let alone adapt.
How do organizations avoid failure? By encouraging a learning culture and a diversity of viewpoints. By giving teams the autonomy to organize their own work. By making sure that the organization as a whole has a clear sense of purpose, that is reflected at every level of the organization.
Those are just a few of the points that have stuck with me, probably because they especially reminded me of the glory days at CREO. And are a few of the things I've seen be spectacularly absent elsewhere.
Sunday 23 December 2012
Thursday 13 December 2012
Bleeders by Bill Pronzini
Started: Dec. 6, 2012
Finished: Dec. 12, 2012
Pages: 213
Yet another mystery, and yet another mystery from a series I'm familiar with. I have to admit that I've read fewer of the "Nameless Detective" books than most of the other series that I've covered, mostly because Pronzini's books are harder to find. I've never seen a paperback, and only sought out the first of his books because I'm familiar with his wife's.
What are the "Nameless" books like? Standard private eye fare, set in San Francisco. I've come to the series late, so "Nameless" is no longer a loner running a one man agency. But you get the idea. Missing people, small time hoods, stakeouts, and bars that have never seen better days. But although Nameless is introspective he's not hard-boiled. The title of this one reflects his emotional state as he works his latest case: one he survives only because a gun held to his head mis-fires.
Why is the detective nameless? I don't know if the schtick was deliberate, or if Pronzini ran with it once he noticed that a story told in the first person does not necessarily need to spell out who the protaganist is. Either way, it's not obtrusive. If the cover didn't say "a 'Nameless Detective' novel', you might not notice.
Finished: Dec. 12, 2012
Pages: 213
Yet another mystery, and yet another mystery from a series I'm familiar with. I have to admit that I've read fewer of the "Nameless Detective" books than most of the other series that I've covered, mostly because Pronzini's books are harder to find. I've never seen a paperback, and only sought out the first of his books because I'm familiar with his wife's.
What are the "Nameless" books like? Standard private eye fare, set in San Francisco. I've come to the series late, so "Nameless" is no longer a loner running a one man agency. But you get the idea. Missing people, small time hoods, stakeouts, and bars that have never seen better days. But although Nameless is introspective he's not hard-boiled. The title of this one reflects his emotional state as he works his latest case: one he survives only because a gun held to his head mis-fires.
Why is the detective nameless? I don't know if the schtick was deliberate, or if Pronzini ran with it once he noticed that a story told in the first person does not necessarily need to spell out who the protaganist is. Either way, it's not obtrusive. If the cover didn't say "a 'Nameless Detective' novel', you might not notice.
Sunday 9 December 2012
And be a villain by Rex Stout
Started: Nov. 28, 2012
Finished: Dec. 3rd, 2012
Pages: 247
Rex Stout, like Ellery Queen, began his career during the Golden Age of Detective Fiction during the 1930s. And be a villian was the 13th in the series that nominally starred the eccentric genius Nero Wolfe as its detective. I say "nominally" because in fact Wolfe is only the costar: he provides the brains, but his confidential assistant Archie Goodwin provides the charm, brawn, and ingenuity necessary to corral clues for Wolfe.
The plot: clever, as is usual in Golden Age fiction, and especially as is usual for a Nero Wolfe tale. After all, why write a novel about a reclusive genius detective unless you're going to come up with a puzzler? In this case Wolfe is prodded by Archie and the state of his finances to approach a radio star who has just had a dramatic on-air murder occur on her show. Contrary to logic and fairness, the guest was NOT killed by the execrable beverage that they were drinking as a promotion...but by someone who managed to introduce poison into a single glass poured from a just-opened bottle in front of the host, several guests, and a studio audience. Who did it? How did they do it? And did they mean to kill the seemingly innocuous guest at all or perhaps the host?
Read And be a villian to find out. And see if you spot the same plot hole that troubled me. :-)
Rex Stout, like Ellery Queen, began his career during the Golden Age of Detective Fiction during the 1930s. And be a villian was the 13th in the series that nominally starred the eccentric genius Nero Wolfe as its detective. I say "nominally" because in fact Wolfe is only the costar: he provides the brains, but his confidential assistant Archie Goodwin provides the charm, brawn, and ingenuity necessary to corral clues for Wolfe.
The plot: clever, as is usual in Golden Age fiction, and especially as is usual for a Nero Wolfe tale. After all, why write a novel about a reclusive genius detective unless you're going to come up with a puzzler? In this case Wolfe is prodded by Archie and the state of his finances to approach a radio star who has just had a dramatic on-air murder occur on her show. Contrary to logic and fairness, the guest was NOT killed by the execrable beverage that they were drinking as a promotion...but by someone who managed to introduce poison into a single glass poured from a just-opened bottle in front of the host, several guests, and a studio audience. Who did it? How did they do it? And did they mean to kill the seemingly innocuous guest at all or perhaps the host?
Read And be a villian to find out. And see if you spot the same plot hole that troubled me. :-)
Tuesday 4 December 2012
Revolution Business/Trade of Queens by Charles Stross
Started: 23 November, 2012
Finished: 30 November, 2012
Combined pages: 324/303 = 627
Technically these are the last two books in a series of six: but like Blackout/All Clear, all of the books in the Merchant Princes series are part of a single narrative. There isn't even a trace of a recap at the beginning of each book.
Which was a bit of a problem: I read the first three books in about 2009, and ummm....wasn't entirely clear on every detail anymore when I started in on The Revolution Business. But I soon remembered why I'd stalled before finishing the series. Despite the non-stop action, the books are kind of tedious.
Yes, there are a few interesting ideas. There is suspense. There are surprises. There is action and adventure. The main character is an innocent abroad who acts as our proxy as we learn about the parallel world that exists beside our own, separated from us only by several hundred years of economic and social development, and the rare inherited ability to step between worlds.
But....there are also plots and counter plots, alliances and betrayals, double-crosses and triple-crosses, and schemes within schemes. Which is all well and good until...you begin to feel an irrestistible urge to ...yaaawwn. Of course subplot x is actually an attempt by character X to double-cross character y. We haven't had a plot shift in almost 3 pages. Yaaaaawwwn. What was I saying again?
Oh yeah. Stross calls this economic science fiction. And it could have been, if he's spent more time exploring why one world is our world and one world is medieval, and played more with the Family Trade instead of writing a series of cheap thrillers.
Finished: 30 November, 2012
Combined pages: 324/303 = 627
Technically these are the last two books in a series of six: but like Blackout/All Clear, all of the books in the Merchant Princes series are part of a single narrative. There isn't even a trace of a recap at the beginning of each book.
Which was a bit of a problem: I read the first three books in about 2009, and ummm....wasn't entirely clear on every detail anymore when I started in on The Revolution Business. But I soon remembered why I'd stalled before finishing the series. Despite the non-stop action, the books are kind of tedious.
Yes, there are a few interesting ideas. There is suspense. There are surprises. There is action and adventure. The main character is an innocent abroad who acts as our proxy as we learn about the parallel world that exists beside our own, separated from us only by several hundred years of economic and social development, and the rare inherited ability to step between worlds.
But....there are also plots and counter plots, alliances and betrayals, double-crosses and triple-crosses, and schemes within schemes. Which is all well and good until...you begin to feel an irrestistible urge to ...yaaawwn. Of course subplot x is actually an attempt by character X to double-cross character y. We haven't had a plot shift in almost 3 pages. Yaaaaawwwn. What was I saying again?
Oh yeah. Stross calls this economic science fiction. And it could have been, if he's spent more time exploring why one world is our world and one world is medieval, and played more with the Family Trade instead of writing a series of cheap thrillers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)