There are plenty of people who like to be mavericks, do their own thing, and go against the flow. In other words, they like to be weird and do very unusual things. I have found in my own field that approach usually fails badly. Being in the mainstream and being conventional are what work best most of the time. I disagree with their claim that Google is run by mavericks!!! Google is a very conventional and mainstream business! All they did was create a search engine that simply works better than all the others! What is so unconventional about that? Nothing! When google first was created, there were already many other search engines. Google did not create any new idea there. They simply made a better version of something that already existed. And there is nothing maverick about that! By the way, making better versions of things that already exist is a good way to make money. It really works. What kind of movies make the most money by far? It's the mainstream summer blockbuster movies that make the most money, not the "maverick" art house films. Most things that succeed are conventional, high quality, and give the mainstream what it wants. Things that succeed generally are not unusual, bizarre, weird, or unconventional. Most good ideas have already been thought of. We live in a world of over 6 billion people. So you rarely find a unique new idea that is actually a good idea. Usually, if something is original, it's bizarre and undesirable too, because virtually all the *good* ideas have already been thought of and done.

This is an extremely readable book full of wisdom. Underlying Polly's book is the eternal but often overlooked truth that the right people make all the difference. The primary role of leaders is to find and nurture bright people. Organizational success depends entirely on great innovative ideas executed brilliantly and loyal customers. Customers and employees and suppliers and all stake holders even critics need to feel valued and touched. Based on my extensive experience in leadership development, most organizations instead waste a lot of time on internal politics and bureaucratic, self serving matters.

As the economy faces new hurdles, Polly's nuggets are more valid than ever.
Deepak / Dick Sethi
CEO Organic Leadership

This book is one of those books where you want to keep a notepad or highlighter marker close at hand. While not every company will rise to the levels of those highlighted in this book, there is much to be gained by readers who are willing to take a fresh look at how to do business in today's marketplace.

This is a thought provoking book about how the business landscape is changing and innovators in their sectors are winning. The book is well articulated in 4 sections, each of 3 chapters: rethinking competition, reinventing innovation, reconnnecting with customers and redesigning work. Each resembles the findings of the authors during their long journey in search of new ways of doing business. The section on innovation is compelling. The authors also provide a lot of annotated references that by themselves are worth the price: the Appendix Maverick Material (20 pages) and the end notes (roughly 20 pages too). Being aware of the Enterprise 2.0 concepts, this book also helped me undestand how this concepts can work in the real life.

This book is completely idealistic. The downside of it all is that its authors propose so many creative ideas through up-and-coming businesses that you start wishing that you worked for one of those companies. In reality, I wish that innovation and creativity were as rewarded as much as they told me in college. I am beginning to wonder if the reverse were not more true. Most people who keep their job in this world, do it well, and make alot of money are more often those who keep their mouths shut and make no effort to change status quo. My international ecomics professor told us that he ascribes to the 70/23/7 percent rule. 70% = the rank-and-file who make the world go round, 23% = the managers (the leaders who perhaps were among the 70% but outcompete or outanalyze the rest of the field). finally the 7% = the entrepreneurs and idealists. I think that the last group is the most doomed for failure. These are the inventors and such that become famous in spite of all of their wastful failures. Maybe I fit in that group. I have failed or departed from arguably 3 other professional areas. My problem I wonder is that I am not really an entrepreneur. I fiel at times that I am supposed to be a rank-and-file member of society. I am supposed to be someone who questions not the system, but instead is just a pack-follower. Unfortunately, it entirely depends on the culture of your company. It may be such that the culture of your company disincentives creativity or innovation of procedures. If your seasoned coworkers are not open to change, you are stupid to rebel against them, even if they are doing things as if it were the 1970s. I'll survive. I simply need to shut my mouth and follow orders. This is the real truth of how you make a successful career for yourself - not with your personality! This book ignores the reality of companies which tend to prefer someone who is a 'hard-worker' than someone who can speak 1 or more additional languages. Almost none of my colleagues know that I am fluent in 3 languages and almost functional in another. At the end of the day, they don't care about that - only about my work-ethic!

It's not that I disagree with these authors, I just feel that they are stories which are all in context and not without hard work and strategizing one's ascent to higher things.

Nathan Arnold
Kansas City, MO