First, Break All the Rules: What the World's Greatest Managers Do Differently Reviews

• Great management book

  
  By ABVMTX7KTP4CO on 2001-05-22
  If you're a manager, if you work in human resources, or if your company hires managers and you are seeking criteria to hire great managers, you'll want to give "First, Break All The Rules: What The World's Greatest Managers Do Differently" by Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman a read.

  After extensive research, Buckingham and Coffman summarize the twelve key factors in retaining star employees. If employees can answer the below questions affirmatively, you probably have a strong and productive workplace:

  "1) Do I know what is expected of me at work?
  2) Do I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right?
  3) At work, do I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day?
  4) In the last seven days, have I received recognition or praise for good work?
  5) Does my supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about me as a person?
  6) Is there someone at work who encourages my development?
  7) At work, do my opinions seem to count?
  8) Does the mission/purpose of my company make me feel like my work is important?
  9) Are my co-workers committed to doing quality work?
  10) Do I have a best friend at work?
  11) In the last six months, have I talked with someone about my progress?
  12) At work, have I had the opportunities to learn and grow?" ("First, Break All The Rules: What The World's Greatest Managers Do Differently")
  

  What about stock options, high pay, and other more obvious benefits? Don't employees want those also? Yes. However, Buckingham and Coffman point out that those benefits attract all people, including what they classify as ROAD warriors (Retired While On Active Leave or unproductive employees). The above twelve factors attract and keep productive employees.

  So, can anyone become a great manager? According to the research of Buckingham and Coffman, probably not. They found that among great managers, those who are effective catalysts for turning employee potential into production, the motto is "People don't change that much. Don't waste time trying to put in what was left out. Try to draw out what was left in. That is hard enough."

  Buckingham and Coffman found that the greatest managers make a clear distinction between knowledge, skills, and talent, where talent is defined as natural recurring patterns of thought within a person. While knowledge and skills can be taught, the greatest managers know that talent cannot be taught. A key of management success is finding the right kind of person for any given job.

  Each person has a unique set of talents and proclivities making them unique. This set of talents defines who the person is and, more importantly, the kinds of work the person will enjoy.

  What about the various self-help and self-improvement programs used by companies today? Buckingham and Coffman say that most great managers dismiss them as ineffective. You can't just teach employees "the nine habits of an effective life" and expect them to excel. Buckingham and Coffman explain that each individual's brain is uniquely wired. Performance is in the synapses, or the connections between a person's brain cells. This develops in early childhood.

  When a child grows, many brain cells exist. There are relatively few connections between the cells. Certain pathways between various groups of brain cells will be strengthened as the child grows. Other pathways will rarely be used. These seldom used pathways and cells will be pruned by the brain.

  The result? Some people will be great at strategic thinking. Others will struggle with strategic thinking. Some people will have a talent for mathematics. Others won't. Some people will be naturally empathetic and verbally fluent. Not so for others. Trying to make someone function in an area his or her brain hasn't developed will lead to stress, low satisfaction, and, probably, on-the-job failure. But, putting someone in a role where he/she is naturally wired will probably lead to satisfaction and competency.

  What about simple roles that "anyone should be able to do." Roles people are in only because they need a job and hope to leave as soon as possible? This is a flaw in manager thinking. Disparaging any role within an organization is wrong. Rather, great managers recognize greatness and excellence in any role, even if it is usually considered a common job. Some people will have the talent to do that job while others won't.

  Buckingham and Coffman criticize the conventional career path of promoting people out of roles in which they excel and moving them into roles in which they struggle. The authors say it is foolish to reward excellence in a role by removing the person from the role. For example, not everyone has the talent or the desire to be a manager. The talent to be a great computer programmer will not be the same talent needed to be a systems analyst or project manager.

  "First, Break All The Rules" gives solid advice about finding people suited to a given role and, then, managing them effectively. This applies to all roles, including management. Are you a potentially great manager? Do you have the talent and recurring patterns of thought to manage others effectively? I'll leave you with a question asked by Buckingham and Coffman:

  Do you feel respect and trust must be earned by your employees?

  Great managers and average managers answer this question differently. Don't feel bad if you get the answers "wrong" and answer differently from the greatest managers. Maybe, you're a better strategic thinker than a manager, for example. I highly recommend "First, Break All The Rules"

  Peter Hupalo, author of "Thinking Like An Entrepreneur"
  
  

• Choose Best Practices Over Academic Theory

  
  By A1K1JW1C5CUSUZ on 2000-04-12
  Management is one of those areas where academic theory and best practices on site often clash. The problem is that there are usually 99 theories (often provided by professors with limited experience) for every good study of outstanding practices by great business people. This book exhibits one of my favorite principles: Build around the strengths of people to get the right results. The results described in this book fit what I have observed works well in over 30 years as a management consultant. That is the reason why I often encourage new managers to get more experience by coaching children's sports teams. In that environment, you soon learn that building around the talent is a critical first step in making progress. Building an imaginary perfect team doesn't work, because you cannot find these perfect people to play the roles. On the other hand, a weakness of this book is that there are many other best practices that this book does not explore. For example, even the best talent will perform better if presented with timely and relevant information, knowledge, and focus. A book like The Balanced Scorecard gives you lots of insight into how to do that. Add lots of low-cost capital and an exciting purpose (see The New New Thing), and you will do even better. A potential misunderstanding of this book is that people cannot change or improve: That is simply not true, nor is it what this book means to argue. Rather the outstanding manager or leader must learn to combine many types of best practices to get the right result. For example, if you combine the lessons of this book with the lessons of Topgrading (the best practices for recruiting the right people for what your organization needs), you will get better results than if you used just one or the other book's lessons. Combine several best practices that are often not combined and you can exceed anyone's performance, anywhere. That's the real lesson I hope you draw from this excellent book and other outstanding ones like it that build on careful measurement of how to get the best results. Management needs to become more like medicine where clinical tests run by practicing doctors provide most of the insight for improvement, rather a philosophical debating society run by hypothetical thinkers. Other good companion books include The Fifth Discipline, The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook, The Dance of Change, The Living Company, and Moments of Truth.
  
  

• Follow the Four Keys and be a Great Manager!

  
  By A306NW4ELSRPFF on 2000-06-21
  (email: shashi-kant@usa.net )

  "First, Break All the Rules: What the World's Greatest Managers Do Differently" is an excellent book, which will help not only the managers, but all other talented employees as well, who have the potential and will eventually become great managers. This book extols the wonders and potential of human resource development in organizations of all sizes.

  The authors, Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman, based on Gallup's interviews over a period of 25 years with about 1 million staff and 80,000 managers from over 400 companies pinpoint "four keys" to evaluate the performance of an organization in general. This reflects the competence of the managers to get the best in terms of:

  -Selecting the staff for talent (not just for experience, which can be acquired and updated with rapid change in technology), -defining the right results expected (and should be clearly understood by the individual), -focusing on strength of employees (leaving scope for their professional growth), and -finding the right fit for all of them.

  How much successful the manager is with respect to these four keys, will be reflected in terms of performance in assignments or projects the company has undertaken.

  I am a firm believer that employees will do what you pay them to do (in terms of responsibility and recognition, scope for professional growth, appreciation and salary).

  The authors reach the conclusion that a company that lacks great frontline managers will bleed talent (or, will produce `talented deadwoods'), no matter how attractive the compensation packages are! Why should a highly motivated employee waste his or her time if a weak employee gets the recognition?

  First-line supervisors and managers are the key to our success. They are the vital link between the top management and the staff. What separates the great manager from the mediocre manager is the ability to recognize and develop talented individuals right from the initial point of employment, and the key to finding the right supervisor and manager is in this book!

  The book also describes: `The Art of Interviewing for Talent' - 'Which are the right questions to ask?' 'Past performance is indicative of future performance'. But it is a must that assessors are more talented than the candidates are. If you promote or favor an employee mainly for his talents, let everyone else know about his capabilities and achievements over the others. Because it is possible that a group of some mediocre or manipulative managers, for their personal gains, form a cabal and help promoting "pseudo talents" and/or mask actual talents. They may do it by passing incorrect or "selective" information about their subordinates to the top management (or "by dragging and dropping" credits from deserving candidates to the `favored ones'). The book, however, does not explicitly describe how the organization can be saved from such managers. "Favoritism" or "First, Break All the Rules", as advocated in this book, can be even detrimental, and may lead the organization to a vertical collapse. Here top management's role becomes crucial, as the staff may not come out openly due to some apprehension or someone's bad experience in the past. Also, while responding to any survey conducted, based on this book, it may not be suitable to reply those 12 questions just in `yes' or `no'.

  Gallup's ideal symbolic manager `Michael' says that a true manager is always in the process of learning new techniques. When asked about his best team, he gives credit to the entire team. This is the crux of success! He says, "A manager has got to remember that he is on stage every day. His people are watching him. Everything he does, everything he says, and the way he says it, sends off clues to his employees. These clues affect performance - never pass the buck, make few promises and keep them all."

  This book, written in plain English, tells us how to make our workplace great. I strongly recommend you to read and absorb it.
  
  

• Well researched and well presented. All managers must read this book.

  
  By A12N9WYHS0OYLK on 2006-02-10
  This is a well researched book. The authors arrived at their conclusions after analyzing data collected by Gallup over 25 years - using an impressive sample size of 80 thousand managers and 1 million staff from 400 companies. Gallup has used its expertise in survey research to link employee engagement to business performance. The concepts are well explained and presented.
  The essence of the findings lie in the 4 Keys of great managers and the 12 Questions that give organizations the information they need to attract, focus, and keep the most talented employees.
  The 4 Keys of great managers:
  1. Select for talent - the authors define talent as "recurring patterns of behavior" and state that great managers find the match between talents and roles.
  2. Define the right outcomes - managers needs to turn talent into performance. This can be done by defining the right outcomes and letting people find their own route toward the outcomes.
  3. Focus on strengths - managers need to concentrate on strengths and not on weaknesses.
  4. Find the Right Fit - managers need to assign roles to employees that give the employees the greatest chance of success.
  The 12 Questions make an excellent list of questions that will be helpful to organizations as well as to employees. The authors group the questions into various categories and explain the importance of each question and group.
  I give this book 5 stars because the insights are practical and backed by empirical evidence, and the book is well presented. I was able to apply the concepts immediately. I read this book when I was assigned the role of a team lead. I was able to improve the efficiency of the team by assigning tasks to people based on their individual strengths.
  This book has a lot of substance. I am sure I will be referring to it often to make the valuable insights a part of my management style. In addition, it does a good job explaining key business terms that people often take for granted, such as talent, skills, knowledge, etc.
  I also like the fact that this book has proven some of Peter Drucker's concepts with scientific research. Here are a couple of examples that are verbatim quotes from "The Essential Drucker" :
  Chapter 9 : Picking People - The Basic rules: (page 130):
  "... the person and the assignment need to fit each other.",
  "... effective executives do not start out by looking at weaknesses. You cannot build performances on weaknesses. You can build only on strengths".
  "First Break..." is an excellent book that I recommend as a must read to every manager and anybody interested in management.
  
  

• Best set of management tools that I've ever seen!

  
  By A1V3RIKMM8I5DN on 2000-01-27
  I am a recent MBA grad with 15 years' experience in different company environments. I've worked for Silicon Valley startups, large national corporations, and family-owned businesses.

  The scenarios, myths, situations, and other examples in the book are 100% right on! Gallup has put names and descriptions on things that I have lived with for years.

  Now a manager at another tech startup, I plan on using this book as a template to grow our company into a vibrant workplace that attracts and KEEPS talented individuals.

  I don't understand the reviewers who say they gained nothing from this book. There is a well-documented framework that is not weighted down with technical terminology, and a productive toolset to implement the theory.

  I especially appreciated the section on creating Advocates, something that I have been prevented from doing by supervisors in past positions. In my opinion, anyone who does not recognize the business implications of Advocates needs to go back and retake Business 101.

  Understanding and measuring "Talent" is what this book is based on, and is worth learning. It is not as "out there" as personality typing, and makes good business sense. Put people where they will naturally do well, and your business and Clients will do well also.

  I am a firm believer that employees will do what you pay them to do. Incentive plans are critical in controlling what people do on a daily basis. Here, again, this book makes a lot of sense advising that incentive plans must be tailored to the individual.

  I do not climb on many bandwagons, but I will get up on my soapbox about this book.

  It is simply the best book I have ever read about managing people and making the most of a workplace. Much has been written about what makes a workplace great. This book tells you how to make YOUR workplace great.

  I recommend it without hesitation.
  
  

• Well researched platitudes.
  By on 2000-02-17
  The title of the book is a misnomer. If you purchase the book expecting to encounter an unconventional and original theory of management, you will be sadly disappointed. What you will find is a book full of cleverly presented platitudes.

  For example, the authors really hammer home the point, 'Don't try to draw in what's been left out. Instead you should draw out what's been left in.' The authors explain that each person has his or her own unique talents. Instead of wasting energy getting people to overcome their weaknesses, great managers learn to get the most out the talents their employees already possess. (We merely good managers don't do this, only the great ones do). They go on to suggest that great managers then place people where their innate talents will do the organization the most good.

  If a football coach were to apply this revolutionary bit of wisdom he might allow Kurt Warner to play quarterback instead of making him work on his blocking skills as an offensive lineman. Or he might let Randy Moss catch the ball instead of teaching him tackling skills he can use as the new middle linebacker. You get the idea. The rest of the insights into the thinking of great managers is much the same. There's nothing insightful about it.

  And don't let all the research fool you. The authors certainly have done a massive number of surveys and interviews and some of this information is interesting. But the conclusions they draw are only loosely connected to the research. I'm left with the impression that they would have presented the same paradigm of management had the survey results been much different.

  I often circulate my books and audio tapes among my management team. But I won't waste anyone's time with this one. The book's one redeeming feature is that it's good for the ego. Because if this book really identifies the behavior of great managers, you will read the book thinking to yourself, "Geez, I do that already. I must be a great manager, too!"
  
  

• You don't know what you don't know!
  By A2DJQLIFV53CJA on 2000-07-28
  I found this book valuable as it was based on research with over 80,000 managers, not just one person's personal experience. As a manager, the 12 questions that define a great place to work helped me step back and identify what type of environment I am creating for my employees --- or failing to create. Reading the book has led to some very open discussions with my direct reports on those issues. I especially liked the six questions for a review that turn a brief look at past performance into a discussion about what the person needs to do to move forward. I included those questions in my reviews this year.

  In our department's people development, we often focused primarily on where people need to improve. The authors gave a different perspective on leveraging strengths and managing around weaker areas.

  I also liked the definition of "manager" vs. "leader". Too often management skills are seen as inferior to leadership, yet this book showed that they are separate skill sets. I've got a ways to go with both skill sets, but now have somewhat of a blueprint for how to move forward. This book has helped me look at what I am doing to impact the quality of our work environment.
  
  

• A new perspective
  By on 2004-03-13
  What appealed to me about this book is that it offers a new perspective to succeed in a new world. Today, we have to be able to bend, stretch and flex to reach our goals.

  First Break All The Rules gave me a new perspective on management and I am already reaping rewards by implementing new strategy.

  Excellent book.
  
  

• Data-Driven Conclusions
  By ABMEWDWHPR2KS on 2001-04-11
  Management books are everywhere. They espouse a great many theories. Often they explain what has worked well for one corporation, industry, or professional field. The books share the secrets of success as understood by that shining example. The data consists of their productivity indicators. But what may work well for one, may not work for another.

  The book First, Break All the Rules by Buckingham and Coffman has the data. It is a research-based analysis of over 80,000 managers in over 400 companies. Their conclusions are the result of their data analysis rather than the other way around.

  The essence of the book consists of 12 questions that have a high degree of statistical reliability in predicting organizational productivity and success. Buckingham and Coffman then go on to offer four keys to receiving a high score from employees. The keys break with conventional thinking and rules of operation: talent is more important than qualifications; outcomes are more important than process; treat every employee differently; and throw out the career ladder.

  I highly recommend this book. It has substantially changed my management style.
  
  

• A New Age of Management
  By A3JPFWKS83R49V on 1999-11-07
  Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman reinforce what I already knew was true to begin with: the company that I work for, and the majority of other companies, are managed ineffectively.

  What seperates the great manager from the mediocre manager is the ability to recognize and develop talented individuals from the initial point of employment. Where I work, this simple policy is ignored. My company fails from the start by promoting employees to managerial positions based on personal friendships, political motives, and the understanding that the new manager will adhere to the rules. I'm sorry to say it, but I have witnessed several instances in my place of employment where an individual who was talented, but independant in his/her thinking, was refused promotion to management because it was feared that he/she was the type who would break the rules.

  After the newly hired manager takes over, there are inevitable problems. My company tries to train the new manager to perform his/her role effectively, but there isn't much improvement because the individual was miscast from the beginning. The talent to manage was never there. And, because the manager is incompetent, he/she is likely to hire employees who are also incompetent. These employees eventually become inept, but loyal, managers in the future. The chain remains unbroken.

  This book also speaks out about the importance of rewarding positive behavior. I can recall several occasions where rewards have been given to weak performers. I have been highly critical of this practice, but it still continues. The reason for rewarding bad behavior, I'm told, is to motivate below average employees. This is counter-productive for two important reasons: First, it encourages the weak performer to remain weak; second, it frustrates and discourages the excellent employees. Why should a highly motivated employee waste his or her time if a weak employee gets the recognition?

  Conventional wisdom, and the ineffective management that it breeds, are going to take a good amount of time to change. My company is notorious for resisting change, promoting based on political reasons, and then refusing to remove inept managers from their positions. These "inner circles", "buddy systems", etc, are commonplace throughout corporate America. My company is not the only one with these problems. The majority of companies have the same problems.

  I think the time has come for management to drop these conservative ideas and pave the way for a new, aggressive approach to management. The results of great management are too obvious to ignore any longer.
  
  

• How this book changed my life
  By on 2000-06-30
  After reading this glorified hype manual about how to effectively manipulated humans so they are more productive and efficient, I resigned from my position as vice-ceo of a large firm I cannot name. Why? There is more to life than wasting away by exerting your energies on the dynamics of "business". Every day for the last 15 years all I've done is maximize profit for a wealthy few (including myself) by generating services and products that have absoutely no benificial effect on the greater good of humankind. Why do I care about other people? Poor people? Oppressed people in other countries who serve as slave labor for companies in my great nation? People who are murdered for wanting to be free? People who are imprisoned because they had no recourse in a system that excludes them? Why not! From this point on I volunteer and assist social causes, environmental causes, and causes that advance worker's rights and protection all over the globe. It's more legitimate than what I was doing. It's real and has measurably good effects on all people. I won't get a fat paycheck anymore, but I'll finally feel like a human being. No more race to the bottom for me.
  
  
• Right Measurement for Talent
  By A306NW4ELSRPFF on 2000-06-19
  "First, Break All the Rules: What the World's Greatest Managers Do Differently" is an excellent book, which will help not only the managers, but all other talented employees as well, who have the potential and will eventually become great managers. This book extols the wonders and potential of human resource development in organizations of all sizes.

  The authors, Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman, based on Gallup's interviews over a period of 25 years with about 1 million staff and 80,000 managers from over 400 companies pinpoint "four keys" to evaluate the performance of an organization in general. This reflects the competence of the managers to get the best in terms of: - Selecting the staff for talent (not just for experience, which can be acquired and needs be updated with rapid change in technology), - defining the right results expected (and should be clearly understood by the individual), - focusing on strength of employees (leaving scope for their professional growth), and - finding the right fit for all of them.

  Since employees are individuals and to get best out of them, the manager has to spend lots of time with each of them, make them comfortable and listen to them. How much successful the manager is with respect to these four keys, will be reflected in terms of performance in assignments or projects the company has undertaken.

  I am a firm believer that employees will do what you pay them to do (in terms of responsibility and recognition, scope for professional growth, appreciation and salary).

  The authors reach the conclusion that a company that lacks great frontline managers will bleed talent (or, will produce `talented deadwoods'), no matter how attractive the compensation packages are! Why should a highly motivated employee waste his or her time if a weak employee gets the recognition?

  First-line supervisors and managers are the key to our success. They are the vital link between the top management and the staff. What separates the great manager from the mediocre manager is the ability to recognize and develop talented individuals right from the initial point of employment, and the key to finding the right supervisor and manager is in this book!

  The book also describes: `The Art of Interviewing for Talent' - 'Which are the right questions to ask?' 'Past performance is indicative of future performance'. But it is a must that assessors are more talented than the candidates are. If you promote or favor an employee mainly for his talents, let everyone else know about his capabilities and achievements over the others. Because it is possible that a group of some mediocre or manipulative managers form a cabal and help promoting "pseudo talents" and/or mask actual talents. They may do it by passing incorrect or "selective" information about their subordinates to the top management (or "by dragging and dropping" credits from deserving candidates to the `favored ones').The book, however, does not explicitly describe how the organization can be saved from such managers. "Favoritism" or "First, Break All the Rules", as advocated in this book, can be even detrimental, and may lead the organization to a vertical collapse. Here top management's role becomes crucial, as the staff may not come out openly due to some apprehension or someone's bad experience in the past. Also, while responding to any survey conducted, based on this book, it may not be suitable to reply those 12 questions just in `yes' or `no'.

  Gallup's ideal symbolic manager `Michael' says that a true manager is always in the process of learning new techniques. When asked about his best team, he gives credit to the entire team. This is the crux of success! He says, "A manager has got to remember that he is on stage every day. His people are watching him. Everything he does, everything he says, and the way he says it, sends off clues to his employees. These clues affect performance - never pass the buck, make few promises and keep them all."

  This book, written in plain English, tells us how to make our workplace great. I strongly recommend you to read and absorb it.
  
  

• Outstanding Example of What You Can Learn from Best Practice
  By on 1999-07-25
  Management is one of those areas where theory and practice often clash. The problem is that there are usually 99 theories (often provided by academics with limited experience) for every good study of outstanding practices. This book exhibits one of my favorite principles: Build around the people to get the right results. The results described in this book fit what I have observed works well in over 30 years as a management consultant. That is the reason why I often encourage new managers to get experience by coaching children's sports teams. In that environment, you soon learn that building around the talent is a critical step in making progress. On the other hand, there are other best practices that this book does not explore. For example, even the best talent will perform better if presented with timely and relevant information, knowledge, and focus. Add lots of low-cost capital and an exciting purpose, and you will do even better. Some people who read this book will conclude that people cannot be changed or improved: That is simply not true, nor is it what this book means to argue. Rather the outstanding manager or leader must learn to combine many types of best practices to get the right result. For example, if you combine the lessons of this book with the lessons of TOP GRADING (the best practices for recruiting the right people), you will get better results than if you used just one or the other book's lessons. Combine several best practices that are often not combined and you can exceed anyone's performance, anywhere. That's the real lesson I hope you draw from this excellent book and other outstanding ones like it that build on careful measurement of how to get the best results. Management needs to become more like medicine where clinical tests run by practicing doctors provide most of the insight for improvement, rather a philosophical debating society run by hypothetical thinkers.
  
  
• Same Old thing
  By A3EBRZXH5A5JO1 on 1999-12-22
  Overall, I'm quite disappointed about this book.

  I think this book title and subtitle are great, especially subtitle - 'based on in-depth interviews by the Gallup organization of over 80,000 managers in over 400 companies - The largest study of its kind ever undertaken', and I bought this book because of this subtitle and Gallup brand name. Yet I found the content of this book has a huge gap vs. its subtitle, or I should say the book almost didn't provide any new learning for me. The key point of the book is 'poeple development is important'. It can be summarized as the mantra it quoted:

  'People don't change that much. Don't waste time trying to put in what was left out. Try to draw out what was left in. That is hard enough.'

  However, this is really nothing new. The four keys which authors suggested are not new either, such as focusing on strength instead of on weakness. I think the authors just used 80,000 manager interviews learning to endorse 'people development is important' and 'respect individuality'. Though it might be faithful to the research result, it didn't help me. It's kind of like telling you 'by interviewing 80,000 managers, we found innovation is important.' It's true but I knew it already.

  Net, recommend NOT to buy.
  
  

• Results Need Supporting Evidence
  By A2ACRNZHL2RNU8 on 2006-09-01
  The Scientific Method applied to this book:
  
  1) Form a hypothesis: Great managers do something differently than mediocre managers.
  2) Conduct an experiment: Interview 80,000 managers.
  3) Analyze data: ???this step is missing???
  4) Draw conclusions: Write this Book.
  
  With the exception of the "12 questions", the authors make no attempt to back any their conclusions with the results of their study. They make several insightful statements, such as "many managers say they would like to define the right outcomes." However, they do not even attempt to tell the reader how the study led them to this statement. Did 90% of the managers interviewed state this? Did 60% of the great managers state this while only 10% of the mediocre managers did? Does "many managers" mean 100 managers? 100 managers seems like "many managers" at first, but considering 80,000 were interviewed I 100 managers is a negligible amount. The entire book consists of several rational statements that are not supported by their study.
  
  It seems to me that after conducting a huge study to find out what great managers do differently, the authors found almost no common trends. However, since they put a lot of money and effort into conducting the study, they needed something to show for it and wrote this book. If Buckingham and Coffman didn't claim this book was a result of "the largest study of its kind," I would say it offers some decent advice; however, since it does make this claim, I wish they would have back up their conclusions so the readers would be able to determine how valid they are.
  
  
  
• Proof Positive that Managers matter!
  By A2ZRGLLISWYMUK on 2000-06-23
  I found this an immensely readable book, despite the fact its a "business book". Easy to skim, every chapter seemed bursting with information and ideas I can use. Most valuable for me: The 12 most important questions to ask to measure the strength of a workplace, linked to four business outcomes: productivity, profitability, employee retention and customer satisfaction. This book is about measuring Human Capital. AND it provides the numerical, statistical proof that people work for a company, but they LEAVE their manager. People don't change, but great leaders learn to use what's there. Four core activities of Leader Catalyst: Select a person, set expectations, motivate the person, and develop the person. Great information on Performance Management, Hiring, Motivating and Developing. Template quality stuff. I give it an A+, great book. Pay attention, CEOs: Even if you don't have every senior manager read it, this book has tons of material you can mine for discussion and learning throughout the organization. And make sure your Chief People Officer and CFO read this.
  
  
• Some basic common sense, not much else
  By A2FKHZ5BVYL2IL on 2001-02-23
  There are a few good common sense ideas in this book. For example: 1.It's hard to change people; 2. Make the most of an employee's talents instead of trying to fix their weaknesses; 3. Don't micro-manage; 4. A good way of doing something is not simply the opposite of a bad way. The authors then contend that these ideas go against conventional wisdom. I don't know what conventional wisdom they are talking about since it agrees with most of mine. But then again I went to an engineering school, not a business school. After presenting these ideas there is not much else in the book except a series of disconnected management anecdotes. Curiously most of these anecdotes are examples of bad management. This is in direct contradiction to idea 4 above, which the authors spent several pages discussing. I think the first example of good management was about halfway through the book when they started to talk about Southwest Airlines. (Actually if someone wants to write a good management book, do a case study on Southwest Airlines.) Also most of the examples deal with restaraunts, hotels, and banks with almost none from a high tech or software business. Finally I think (and this is conventional wisdom again) a good manager must be able to 1.Prioritize; 2.Organize. The authors say nothing of these abilities and obviously know little about them.
  
  
• Excellent Management Book
  By AKSCA0P2Y4QRU on 2002-11-08
  I definitely rank this title among 5 best business books I have read. Its conclusions have two strengths: a/when implemented translate to a much improved business performance, b/are exceptionally well backed by a massive research.

  This is the essence of my particular out-take from "First, Break Every Rule":

  1/Select a person for talent (not for well-roundedness, lack of weknesses). Talent is any recurring pattern of bahaviour that can be productively applied. You cannot teach talent, ergo your time is best alocated when you use and further develop your and your subordinates existing talents rather than spend it on trying to change weaknesses into strengths. Weaknesses can be only neutralized which is a must when they are a major obstacle to talents.

  2/Having selected employees, set expectations for them (which are right outcomes and not right steps!), motivate them (when motivating pople focus on their strengths not weaknesses) and develop them (the talents already existing in them).

  3/Your employee will perform best when 6 fundamental conditions are met by you as his/her direct superior:

  a/She knows what is expected of her at work (outcomes again).
  b/She is properly equiped to do the job.
  c/She is assigned in line with at least one of her best talents.
  d/She has received praise in the last week (which, let us note, will not be difficult if conditions a/,b/ and c/ have been met by her manager)
  e/She is convinced that her supervisor cares about her as a person.
  f/She feels there is someone at work who encourages her development.

  You manage around people's weaknesses focusing on their strengths, you choose jobs that play to your strengths, you spend most time with your best employees - there is a consistent streak in this book that calls for giving attention to the positive rather than negative as the way to produce results. A sequel to this book is a logical next step.

  Finally, in the light of this reading a talent to identify talents seems to be the greatest of them all.
  
  

• Must read for managers of all levels
  By A383H9K6OEMFWN on 2002-08-29
  If you think you can change people, think again. If you think one of a manager's job is to help people improve upon their weaknesses, think again. If you think climbing the corporate ladder is the best way to improve one's position in the corporate world, well, you got it, think again.

  This book, written by Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman, and based on 25 years of research by the Gallup Organization, on over 1 million respondents, has debunked a number of management "myths". I put myths in inverted commas simply because they were "truths" -- until First, Break All The Rules (published by Simon & Schuster, London, New York, 1999, ISBN 0-68486138-0) came along.

  The Gallup Organization discovered, after asking one million people hundreds of different questions on the subject of managing others, that people excel only when their talents are put to use. Talents are the recurring patterns of thought and behavior that can't be turned on and off at will. They can't be created or altered. According to the authors, people don't change much. Managers should not waste time changing their subordinates, or making them into what they are not. You cannot give new talent to a person.

  The books suggests that every human being has talent, and all roles/functions/jobs in a company require talent. You cannot train or develop talent, but you can train, develop and enhance skills and proficiencies. Talent leads to interest; interest leads to motivation; motivation leads to a desire to learn; a desire to learn leads to skills and proficiencies

  As for the corporate ladder, the authors suggest that you should throw it away. For example, good sales person might not perform well if she is promoted to sales manager position. She might not have the talent to manage others. Instead, let her continue in the sales position, but improve upon the salary and benefits.
  
  

• Don't buy this book unless you also have another $50,000!!!!
  By A15GPZ8ML3NZ0B on 2003-09-28
  This is a book filled with interesting ideas and a survey tool that seems to be revolutionary.

  There is a warning that the survey tool, known as the Q12, is copyright protected and therefore cannot be used without permission. We called to seek permission; was advised that the Gallup Legal Department said absolutely not. The only legal way to use the Q12 tool is to pay them $50,000 and have Gallup administer it. We don't have that much money.

  Therefore, don't spend $18 to buy this book unless you also plan to spend another $50,000 to use it (legally).

  Those of you who do not respect copyright laws will no doubt have no trouble using the survey tool.
  
  

• Defining a Talent v. a Skill? Help!
  By A1TR9DX5HZWUK4 on 2000-06-12
  .... Great book. It provides some quantification what many feel (or want to be) true.

  It usefully separates, and gives needed recognition of the separate and necessary skills of Management (devalued in most books) versus Leadership (which despite being done to death in academic literature is still sadly lacking)

  The problem I have is in applying the learning's: separating (native) talent from (learnable) skills.

  The book seems to suggest that by the mid teens your talents are fixed...Training can add 10% to them (maybe?)

  Perhaps I reject this determinist view for emotional reasons - I find it unacceptable to believe that people cannot significantly change themselves. I believe they can ...if they have both the will AND are given encouragement.

  In my experience of managing people, I find the biggest thing holding people back is not just spotting & defining their talents, but rather getting people to BELIEVE in their own talents. (Maybe British University graduates are naturally less self confident than American MBA's? )

  Most managers I have met don't help in this situation - they tend to look for and spot error / mistakes rather than things well done and to build on.

  So my advice to anyone managing a bright, but maybe insecure, 20 something is not to assume that their life was written for them at 15, but to take the time to help them explore and discover themselves ... and help you work out how you can help them.

  This , as the book indicates, takes time and discussion, but it is worth the effort for any manager who cares for the development of their people.

  If "talent" is the ultimate driver, really take the time to understand it, before your employee (& or you) do less than full justice to what they have.

  There are tools for this, but they are most often used to help employers rather than candidates. Companies that really want to make the most of their people may wish to pay for their employees to receive a (confidential if they desire) Myers Brigg or Hermann whole Brain assessments.

  Universities should offer it to Year 2 students before they embark on, the often painful task of, deciding what it is they really want to do in their working life.

  If they are anything like my kids, who have just graduated, they will be a bit uncertain and confused. Finding the "right job", as it was for me, more about pot luck than anything else.

  From what I have said the authors may be able to put my talent set into their boxes - but the boxes they will ascribe me to me are not the place they would have put me at age 22 (I am now 49)

  Maybe I have always been the same, but the diagnosis made of me by my first employer was very different. Thank goodness I followed my own instinct rather than the advice of this global multi- national who - after a battery of psychological and IQ tests suggested a role in Accountancy. (I built a successful career in Marketing & Advertising)

  These comments are not so much a critique as a request for further clarification of "talent". Help me and other managers distinguish, and measure, talents & skills. (Maybe not a job for Gallop.)

  If all managers focused the first 6 questions proposed by Gallop in a diligent way this would already be a major step forward for most businesses.
  
  

• My Secret Weapon in Executing as a People Manager
  By AL3WGXHG50TOW on 2004-08-24
  This book is provocative and it challenges conventional wisdom in people management.
  
  Gallup's thorough research presented in this book reveal the "Four Keys of Great Managers" that should unlock the potential of each and every employee (the "... not" statements represent conventional wisdom according to the authors)
  
  1. When selecting someone, they select for talent ... not simply experience, intelligence, or determination.
  2. When setting expectations, they define the right outcomes ... not the right steps.
  3. When motivating someone, they focus on strengths ... not on weaknesses.
  4. When developing someone, they find him the right fit ... not simply the next rung on the ladder
  
  So great managers don't believe that a person can achieve anything he sets his mind to. They don't try to help a person overcome his weaknesses (instead they devise a support system. Find a complementary partner. Or find an alternative role). They consistently disregard the golden rule - i.e. treat people as you would like to be treated - instead they acknowledge that each employee is unique and thus would demand different things of you, the manager! And they even play favourites (i.e. spend the most time with your best people).
  
  Many of us know by experience that it is hard to manage others well. Continually, you have to balance the competing interests of the employee, the customer, the company, and even yourself. You attend too much to one, and you invariably upset the others.
  
  This book cannot make the manager's role easier. But it certainly provides you with some brilliant insights into effective people management. The book's Four Keys should be inspiring for any people manager, even if you do not accept all of their findings. At least, you'll find yourself challenged as they document their conclusions based on 80,000 interviews.
  
  I have found their twelve questions to measure the strength of a workplace very helpful for regular individual reviews as well:
  
  [What do the employee get?]
  1. Do I know what is expected of me at work?
  2. Do I have the materials and equipment I need to do my work right?
  
  [What do the employee give?]
  3. At work, do I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day?
  4. In the last seven days, have I received recognition or praise for good work?
  5. Does my supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about me as a person?
  6. Is there someone at work who encourages my development?
  
  [Do the employee belong here?]
  7. At work, do my opinions seem to count?
  8. Does the mission/purpose of my company make me feel like my work is important?
  9. Are my co-workers committed to doing quality work?
  10. Do I have a best friend at work?
  
  [How can we all grow?]
  11. In the last six months, have I talked with someone about my progress?
  12. At work, have I had opportunities to learn and grow?"
  
  I liked the book so much that I also bought the audio CD, which is enthusiastically read by Cunningham with a British accent.
  
  At last, one of my favourite quotes from this book:
  
  People don't change that much.
  Don't waste time trying to put in what was left out.
  Try to draw out what was left in.
  That's hard enough.
  
  Peter Leerskov,
  MSc in International Business (Marketing & Management) and Graduate Diploma in E-business
  
  
• A Hard Sell of Pop-science
  By ALVEF81AKGMGF on 2006-02-06
  Seems that Buckingham and Coffman have gone for the sales approach of a TV shampoo commercial - baffle them with science. From the extensive references of their research which they assure us goes beyond any research done previously, to their neuro-science analogy of highways and dead ends, the authors manage to fill 200 pages with - what? We get a checklist of questions that a manager should ask themselves. We get a serious rewrite of the Mercury programme and of the responses of the astronauts. We get a bizarre overview of what they believe talent is (complete with a highly amusing and faulty series of word activities). And we get a hard hard sell that they have the answers we are all looking for.
  
  This book falls squarely into the idea-as-hero category. Read with a critical eye, it is full of pretty fluff and little substance. I cannot recommend this book.
  
  
• Very Useful Book - Strongly recommended
  By A1SJXAW4AYFPCF on 2002-06-22
  This book deals with people management. It adopts a generally accepted concept: "The most important resource for a company is its HR capital". Gallup organisation tried to experimentally :
  1. Check the validity of the Assumption Above
  2. Understand, which are the factors that make a business a place where high talented people will work.
  The research has been massive, involving thousands of people. A clear relation between a company's HR capital and its performance could be identified.

  The research results for the second question are VALUABLE TO THE READER, SINCE, MANY TIMES ARE COUNTERINTUITIVE AND THEY DON'T AGREE WITH COMMON SENSE. HOWEVER, THEY HAVE BEEN VALIDATED BY RESEARCH. FURTHERMORE, AFTER TRYING TO USE SOME OF THE CONCEPTS OF THE BOOK, I WAS EXTREMELY SURPRISED TO SEE THAT THEY WORK IN PRACTICE (WITHIN 6 MONTHS THEY HELPED ME WITH AT LEAST 2 PEOPLE OF MY TEAM).
  The basic concepts follow:
  1. Usually the manager is more important for the performance of his people than a company itself. 12 fundamental questions to check this are provided.
  2. People are greatly defined genetically and in their childhood. It is a mistake to try change them. "Learn-able" skills and knowledge are different from genetically defined talents.
  3. People should be used in positions that are in agreement with their genetic pre-disposition.
  4. People should focus on strengths and work around weaknesses (instead of the usual effort to improve weaknesses).
  5. Excellence is a result of people working with their strengths to positions that match their talents.
  HOWEVER THE ABOVE COMPRISE A VERY SHORT BRIEF OF THE BOOK. I STRONGLY SUGGEST IT FOR ANYBODY DEALING WITH MANAGEMENT. IT WILL HELP BOTH THE MANAGEMENT OF HIS TEAM AND ALSO THE MANAGEMENT OF HIS OWN CAREER.
  
  

• Manage Outside the Box
  By A9P3UYCL5K5OJ on 2003-04-23
  FIRST BREAK ALL THE RULES "is the product of two mammoth research studies undertaken by the Gallup Organization over the last twenty-five years." Rather than just reporting isolated success stories the authors and their staff dug through their data looking for patterns and distinctions.

  "Conventional wisdom is comfortingly, deductively easy. The revolutionary wisdom of great managers is much more exacting. It demands discipline, focus, trust, and perhaps most important, a willingness to individualize. In this book, great managers present no sweeping new theories...All they can offer you are insights into the nature of talent...The real challenge lies in how you incorporate these insights into YOUR style, ONE EMPLOYEE AT A TIME, EVERY DAY." (emphasis mine).

  There's a lot of "meat" in this book that should be studied by every manager and aspiring manager. To summarize key points: seek and keep talented people, give them the tools and other assistance to make them stars. After exhaustive research, a core set of 12 questions answered by employees seemed to be the best indicators of outstanding management. Some of the questions seem a bit off-beat: "4. In the last seven days, have I received recognition or praise for doing good work?" "10. Do I have a best friend at work?" Predictably items such as pay, benefits and senior management were not factors that had a bearing on superior management. People in outstanding organizations gave high scores on many of the 12 questions.

  Key discussions are on the distinctions between skills, knowledge, and talent. Skills and knowledge can be taught, talent is something innate. Someone can be given the information on how to type (knowledge) and then given exercises to practice (skill development), but not everyone will be able to type over 100 wpm due to differences in talent. There is a wide variety of talent in art, music, problem solving, etc.; additional training and practice will only go so far with those who lack talent in an area. A frequent management mistake is to try to get people to improve in areas where they lack talent such as the approach in many popular employee review processes.
  
  Breaking the Rules means building on strengths and capitalizing on them. The question comes up, what do you do about your star salesperson who doesn't submit their expense reports properly? Reprimand? Hardly. First confirm that they understand what's required and have the proper tools. Then if it's still not working, create an easy way for them to do it or have a clerical person do it for them.

  Attitude is another interesting component in that it can't be taught and only rarely can it be improved significantly. Companies should seek to hire honest people with good work ethics plus the appropriate talent- the skills and knowledge can be taught.

  Another interesting insight from the studies was that in numerous job functions the best and the worst performers shared some, but not all, traits. Both the best and the worst salespeople have call reluctance; the mediocre performers did not. Both the best and the worst nurses had a personal connection with their patients; mediocre nurses stayed aloof. What was important is what the top performers did about this strong emotional link; they used it to empower and motivate them. The poor performers used it to shrink from effective action. Those with no emotional attachment lacked the motivation to excel.

  From their research the authors present 4 management keys:
  Select for talent (not experience or intelligence)
  Define the right outcomes (not the steps)
  Focus on strengths (don't try to work on weaknesses)
  Find the right fit (don't keep promoting people out of positions they're strongest in)

  A typical question asked of great managers was:
  "You have two managers. One has the best talent for management you have ever seen. The other is mediocre. There are two openings available: the first is a high-performing territory, the second is a territory that is struggling. Neither territory has yet reached its potential. Where would you recommend the excellent manager be placed? Why?"
  The great managers generally answered this the same way, read the book to find out the answer - it's worth it!
  
  

• Interesting data, uninteresting book.
  By A3EY9SAUWUT0Y on 2001-01-02
  This book has its pros and cons. The cons, unfortunately, outweigh the pros. On the positive side, the Gallup data that Buckingham and Coffman present are intriguing. It is interesting that high-performing business units can be distinguished from those that perform poorly based on employees' responses to certain questions. But the responses of the employees or, more appropriately, their opinions, are not the reason for the good performance. Recognizing this, the authors appropriately move on to describe the management style that makes for good business performance. This, however, is where the book breaks down into an obtuse, vague, and unrealistic personality theory that is justified (as if to impress) with a reference to a study of exorbitant sample size (as if the sample size is what makes for a quality study ... Gallup folks should know better than that). Besides a few reasonable points, the message is essentially that managers should look for "striving", "thinking" or "relating" talents of various kinds (e.g., "relating individualized perception talent") and make sure people who posses those talents are cast in jobs that require such talents. As with most theories of personality, such speculations are of little value and are exceedingly impractical. Assuming for a second that these personality traits do exist, how does that help? First, how do we identify employee's personality traits? The authors pay lip service to this issue (at best, see for example p. 218 and 219), but with the loosely defined personality traits that they invented, how could a tool for identifying those traits be expected. Second, how do we know which jobs require which personality traits? The answers, after reading this book, are not immediately clear. Worse yet, there probably aren't any answers to those questions. Personality theories are not useful tools... especially not for managers. What is clear, however, is that in writing this book the authors extrapolated well beyond the tremendous amounts of data they had. It is commendable that someone is doing research on the ingredients of effective management and that there is some willingness to present those data. The data are of interest. The theory presented in this book, supposedly based on the data, is not.
  
  
• Break all the rules - and get fired!
  By on 2002-03-15
  This book is fundamentally flawed. It criticizes conventional wisdom, and describes it as "comfortingly, seductively easy."
  "It is easier to believe that each employee possesses unlimited potential." Untrue. No one in their right mind has ever believed this.
  "It is easier to 'do unto others as you would be done unto'." Untrue. It's very difficult to put this into practice as anyone who has tried knows.
  One wonders how the authors identified "great managers".
  'First Break All the Rules' - would anyone in their right mind make it their first priority to break all the rules?
  Stick with reputable sources such as Harvard business books unless you like [bad].
  
  
• This Book Will Make You a Better Manager
  By A1KEP5RI5T0QP3 on 2001-11-19
  REVIEW: I loved this book and I'm sure that it is one that I will read more than once. The book is excellent at debunking common managment myths and assumptions. How do you become a great manager? Well, since management is a practice and a discipline, and not personality, it can be learned and taught. Thus, the concept of this book which is: If you want to become a great manager, study them, learn what they do that makes them great, then emulate them. The authors found out by surveys and research what makes great managers and put the results in here. This book will make you a better manager and help you increase the effectiveness of those whose performance you are responsible for. It may even help you learn more about yourself. This is not just a book to be read, but studied and put into effect. Many serious managers will want to read it more than once.

  STRENGTHS: The content - this is not just a theoritical book, it is very practical for helping you to become a better manager. The concepts are simple, but powerful and the book is easy to read. Could become a management classic.

  WEAKNESSES: I hate it when books, like this one, don't include an index. Another gripe is that the authors should have given credit to Peter Drucker for a number of the key concepts. For example, "focus on strengths" and "management by outcomes" are classic Drucker. Lastly, I found the repeated references to the surveying techniques and statistics a little annoying. I just didn't care about the techniques, just give me the results.

  WHO SHOULD READ: Anyone responsible for the performance of others including business managers and supervisors and non-profit managers/administrators.

  ALSO CONSIDER: Peter F. Drucker - The Effective Executive; Andrew Grove - High Output Management
  
  

• Interesting stats--not enough meat
  By A2KO9I83SIQIFF on 2000-12-12
  I did not gain significant insight from this book. I did give it three stars because the authors did a thorough job compiling management data; however, they did not derive any substantial conclusions from the data. In addition, the book was tedious to read. The novice manager will not gain "how-to" information, and the experienced manager will not find new thought-provoking management ideas.
  
  
• First, You should know what you are talking about
  By on 2002-10-10
  I began reading this book with an open mind. I am an HR VP with over 20 years of experience at Fortune 500 organizations. This book tries to be iconoclastic and innovative for line management, however, any good manager should see through its marketing and catchy title. This book is based on the "strengths" concept which has no empirical data other than that done by those on the Gallup payroll.

  I strongly recommend sticking with more trusted and proven business advice from better publishers and authors with degrees in the field in which they are writing about.
  
  

• The One Thing You Need to Know: ... About Great Managing, Great Leading, and Sustained Individual Success
• First, Break All The Rules: What The Worlds Greatest Managers Do Differently
• Go Put Your Strengths to Work: 6 Powerful Steps to Achieve Outstanding Performance

• Now, Discover Your Strengths
• Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap... and Others Don't
• Go Put Your Strengths to Work: 6 Powerful Steps to Achieve Outstanding Performance
• StrengthsFinder 2.0: A New and Upgraded Edition of the Online Test from Gallup's Now, Discover Your Strengths
• Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done