

Good to great to gone - tyn
http://www.economist.com/businessfinance/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13980976

======
russell
First you write a book about how these selected companies are really great. A
few years later you write a book about how they took their eyes off the ball
and now they are in the tank. Case in point the once wonderful Circuit City.
Never wonderful in my book. I always found high prices, poor service, and poor
selection. Maybe I should have interviewed the executives to see how great
they were for myself.

But I did like stage four: the charismatic new boss, the new new direction,
the silver bullet.

------
ableal
_Mr Collins identifies five stages in the process of decline. Stage one is
hubris born of success (possibly brought on by reading the case study of the
firm in one of Mr Collins’s earlier books)._

Snark alert (with bonus frown on apostrophe style).

 _“Our research shows that if you’ve been practising the principles of
greatness all the way along, you should get down on your knees and pray for
severe turbulence, for that’s when you can pull even further ahead of those
who lack your relentless intensity.” Amen._

Damn it, now that we're imagining there's no religion, we get religion in
business (the "relentless intensity", not the knees bit), religion in the
environment, religion in food, health, computers ... it would be simpler to
just use the real thing.

(Paging G.K.Chesterton and Pierre Boule to the white courtesy phone.)

~~~
paulgb
> with bonus frown on apostrophe style

It appears to be correct with The Economist's own standards, since Mr Collins
is singular.
([http://www.economist.com/research/styleGuide/index.cfm?page=...](http://www.economist.com/research/styleGuide/index.cfm?page=841359)
)

I think I agree with you though, it looks awkward.

