Jim Collins Analysis

932 Words2 Pages

Jim Collins spent 20 years trying to understand how a good company became an exceptional company, and sustained an overall high performance. His research began with 1,435 companies that appeared on the fortune 500 from 1965 to 1995. Collins began researching what factors lead to a company being considered great, then narrowed down companies that transitioned from good to great.1
To first understand what a great company is, Collins used data to answer the follow question: “can a good company become a great company, and if so, how?” The data Collins used on the 1,435 companies to see if they became a great company looks at the company’s cumulative stock return for 15 years, security prices, stock splits, and reinvested dividends.1 He then compared the data to the general stock market, omitting all companies who showed patterns similar to industrial average shifts. After narrowing down the data and comparing it to companies who once had short-lived greatness, Collins found 11 companies that showed distinctive patterns that were higher then overall industrial averages. According to his research; a dollar invested into a mutual fund of a good to great company in 1965 would be worth $470 in 2000, while the same amount would only be worth $56 in the general stock market. These exceptional numbers are on of the factors that lead Collins to believe a company went from good to great.1
In his research, Collins begins to correlate leadership to be one of the consistent contrasts between a good and great company. He develops a hierarchy of leadership using data; based on five levels, each level consisting of capabilities a leader possess. Level 5 Leadership, refers to the highest level of executive capabilities in a hierarchy.1 According to...

... middle of paper ...

... eventually causing the company to go under.2
Collins research, although flaw in various way, sheds light on what an exceptional leader is. A leader must show humility, be humble and non-egocentric, as well as show intellectual intelligence for their company and know how to effectively manager their company. Collins research however does not find the crucial question of exceptional leadership: how are level 5 leaders formed?1 Collins creates hypothesis and theories in the text but cannot find a direct correlation to how each leader on his list became a level 5 leaders. This limits the reader and leads them to guess if emulating the qualities of a level 5 leader would they ever become one themselves. Collins lack of research limits businesses in finding level 5 leaders, since a level 5 leader cannot be fully determined until after they are succeeded by another CEO.

Open Document