Brain rules is easily the best book I’ve read this year. I don’t say this lightly as I read many books, skim many more, and read lots of things I enjoy.

This book hits the non-fiction trifecta:

• It’s about a universal subject - how we think and how our minds work.
• It’s well-written, funny, entertaining and concise.
• It’s based on research with support for nearly every claim made in the book.
• Bonus: the author admits lots of things he and the field do not know (Huge credibility points - I love this)

Unlike Pink’s A Whole New Mind, a book whose premise I’m fond of but whose arguments were often weak and in some cases absurd, the book Brain rules never strays. He follows most of his own rules in how the book is structured, one main point per chapter, one set of basic advice derived from his interpretation of research.

As a teaser here’s some of what I learned:

• Sleep makes your smarter - your brain processes information you need in your sleep
• Exercise makes you smarter - our brains and bodies work best when moving
• There is no scientific basis for how schools or courses are structured
• The left vs. right brain thing is waaaay overblown (Pink needs to read this)
• True multitasking is biologically impossible

I’m recommending the book to just about everyone - other writers, teachers, parents, friends, friends with kids, kids with friends.

If you’re not sure, check out the excellent supporting site for the book:  Brain Rules website.

Or go ahead and pick up the book here. (The hardcover version includes a DVD)

Posted in Book reviews, Recommended | 9 Comments »

My favorite books on start-ups and entrepreneurship is Founders at Work by Jessica Livingston. It’s simply a collection of good interviews with the right people asking the right questions. No phony big theories. No made-up jargony words in the title. Just good conversations with people who have experience I want to learn from. Love it.

In that vein, I’m happy to recommend Blog Blazzers: 40 top bloggers share their secrets. Stephane Grenier, the author sent me the book a few weeks ago and I read through it in a few hours. Seth Godin, Jeff Atwood, Eric Sink, Dan Lyons (Diary of Steve Jobs), and 35 other successful bloggers explain how they do what they do, what they’ve learned, and how they make money or get other rewards from their work.

For $16 and a couple of hours (books of interviews are fast reads) I learned some new tricks, had more confidence in the old ones, and definitely got my money and times worth. At first I was annoyed by some repetitive questions - but in some ways it was interesting to see how different bloggers answers compared with each other. I read a lot of blogs, including some blogs on blogging (but gratefully no blogs on blogs on blogs) but there’s still nothing as good as sitting down with a book.

Posted in Book reviews, Recommended | 2 Comments »

I have this pet interest in books that people, myself included, refer to when making a point, even though they haven’t read them. Thoreau’s Walden is on that list. I read it last month and here’s my review.

It’s a curious book. It’s well known in our environmentally aware age, to be about a person who spent years living off the land, in harmony with nature. But that’s not quite right. Early in the book Thoreau makes clear his spot in the Walden woods, donated by a friend (Emerson), is just a few miles from town. He was not a hard core hermit or back to nature zealot, as one might assume. His ambitions were more philosophical than tied to a specific set of rules for what nature is, or how often he could talk to people or have them over for dinner. It was an inquiry, a thought experiment, and arguably an American pioneer in self-discovery and taking responsibility for learning how to live. This idea is popular today, perhaps in slicker form, in books where people spend a year following the bible or traveling by bicycle to see what happens.

I was surprised by the three distinct themes I found in the book.

One is an attempt to provide a do it yourself guide. There are several lists of things purchased with prices and sources. Thoreau is thrifty and proud. He refers to how inexpensive his life is often, and there are long stretches where he describes, on a line item basis, how much it cost to build, supply and maintain his house. It seems he had some interest in providing a how to manual of sorts, but he gets lost in his ideas. Kind of like a lonely shop clerk who keeps telling personal stories instead of getting you the ham sandwich, sitting in front of him on the counter, you came into the store for. And the details don’t age well as a practical guide as the prices for nails have gone up, and home depot puts a new spin on what it means to do it yourself. There are frequent journal style mentions of hunts, food procured from his garden, and other daily facts of his existence.

The second theme is transcendent prose. This was what I hoped for. He was a student of Emerson and it shows, with page long riffs on the strange nature of man, the potential for greatness, the limits of our cities and times, and on they go. Some of these totally rock:

“There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root”

“As for the pyramids, there is nothing to wonder at in them as much as the fact that so many men could be found degraded enough to spend their lives constructing a tomb for some ambitious booby, whom it would have been wiser and manlier to have drowned in the Nile and then given his body to the dogs.”

“The millions are awake enough for physical labor; but only one in a million is awake enough for effective intellectual exertion, only one in a hundred millions to a poetic or divine life. To be awake is to be alive. I have never yet met a man who was quite awake. How could I look him in the face?”

These are moving, potent, memorable words. If Thoreau achieved his goal of transcending normal existence through a return to nature, and sharing that experience with the reader, it comes through in these passages.

But the third theme of the book is thick, meandering, writing. He runs with the same rambling narrative for pages at a time, beating his own point into the ground or losing it altogether. Anne Dillard’s Pilgrim at Tinker Creek captures the experience of being alone in the woods with a completeness well beyond Thoreau’s, simply because she provides a consistent, reliable and intensely fascinating narrative. Thoreau seems like the kind of fellow who spent too much time on his own, and his wandering mind, unaware of the confusion he creates in the minds of others, rambles around on its own selfish whims. He was a true recluse and I think it shows. Emerson, though long-winded, keeps his points in straight lines. Thoreau writes like strings of thread, thrilling when they lead somewhere interesting, but often they just get tangled up so tightly you wish he’d take more frequent care to tie them up into neat, memorable bows.

For a short book it is not tightly written and although it has great themes, I find it hard to call it a great read. And Emerson, for all his own verbosity, should have suggested more edits in Thoreau’s work than it seems he did (I understand Emerson played a key role in getting the book published at all, but I can’t find the reference). Perhaps I came to Walden too late, having read many books clearly influenced by Thoreau’s work. And although I respect the fact the book was written more than a hundred years before I was born, I can read Emerson’s collected essays with fewer complaints.

Check it out for yourself: Walden, by Thoreau. This is an online, and annotated edition.

I tend to avoid annotated editions on first reads, so here’s the edition I used: Walden, by Thoreau (amazon)

Posted in Book reviews, books, philosophy | 2 Comments »

I’m a big fan of essay collections and when I came across this one, The New kings of Nonfiction, edited by Ira Glass of This American Life fame I had high expectations.

The book is good. Three of Five stars. If you’ve never gone out of your way to pick up a book filled with non-fiction essays, this is a decent place to start. I’m a bigger fan of the Best American Essays series, which has never failed me. I enjoy being able to abandon authors or essays I don’t like, and try another in the next chapter. It’s like a writing sample pack: great way to discover new voices and different kinds of writing.

In Glass’s compilation you have Michael Lewis (Moneyball, Liar’s Poker) reporting on a teenage day trader arrested by the SEC, A Malcolm Gladwell essay that appears in The tipping point, and other essays by Dan Savage, Michael Pollan and more.

But by far my two favorite essays were from two writers I’d never heard of before. Losing The War (full essay online), by Lee Sandlin and Toxic Dreams: A California Town Finds Meaning In An Acid Pit, by Jack Hitt. The $10 you’ll pay for this book is worth it for these two superior pieces of funny, clever, tightly written, truly thought provoking works. “Losing the War” explores a truer history of heroes and WWII than most of us know, while “Toxic Dreams” is the story of one of the first toxic waste dumps, and how the imact on the town nearby slowly unraveled over more than a decade.

Posted in Book reviews, Recommended, books | No Comments »

I’m nuts about books. I finish a book a week, and abandon many more. Looking back on the year, picking a favorite, #1 book to recommend is easy - that’s how much I enjoyed this book. It’s Over the edge of the world, by Laurence Bergreen.

The book tells the wild, nearly unbelievably difficult tale of Magellan’s expedition to circumnavigate the world. In short, everything goes wrong. Mutiny, starvation, politics, bad project management, and on it goes. There’s also what has to be one of the greatest idea pitches ever (”Yes, I will go all the way around the world, requiring several routes no one has discovered yet, and you will pay for it”). And it’s all told with the perfect balance of tight, thrilling storytelling and historic detail.

I love books like this for their power to humble: they put all of the challenges and complaints people have today in relief. Nothing any entrepreneur or middle manager faces today even approximates the risks, suffering, and significance of what these historic figures did. Finishing this book I felt inspired by the realities of what Magellan and his crew did, rather than the false, simple tale I’d learned as a kid.

It’s a great gift choice for anyone interested in innovation, how progress happens, how myths compare to realities, project management, people management of all kinds, and well told true adventure tales.

Over the edge of the world: Magellan’s Terrifying Circumnavigation of the Globe, by Laurence Bergreen.

Posted in Book reviews, Recommended, books | 6 Comments »

If you write about innovation or creativity there are certain books people will continually tell you to read - they’re not necessarily the best books, just popular ones. I’ve kept track, and the top # of mentions have gone to: Malcolm Gladwell, Connections by James Burke, and A Whole new mind, by Daniel Pink. I’d already read Gladwell and much of Burke, and this week finally read A whole new mind.

Short review:

It’s a light, positive, inspiring read. It makes strong claims about the value of right-brain, or creative, thinking, and how the economic conditions in the world have created big opportunities for creative people. However the arguments are often one-sided with claims that verge on pollyanna (creative thinkers will rule the world!). If you or people you work with are logic centric thinkers, this book will help you understand the value of a holistic view of what our minds do, and give you ammunition for debates, as well as resources for how to grow the intuitive parts of your brain. But while I’m a fan of the theme, and anyone that defends left-handed people (we are the only people in our right minds, ha ha) I struggled with his arguments despite my agreement with some of his conclusions.

Long review:

I had major criticisms of both the assumptions he makes, and how he makes them, primarily ignorance of history, unnecessary polarization, and lack of devil’s advocacy. If you don’t care about my gripes, stop reading: I’d generally recommend the book. And since what follows is long, I have to say the book was thought provoking, though not necessarily in the way the author intended.

If you haven’t read it, and don’t want spoilers, go read it before continuing. Ok, you’ve been warned.

Ignorance: Right brains have been dominant at other times: namely, the European Renaissance. What happened? Why didn’t the world change in the ways he describes ours will if we can get better at Right brain thinking? He doesn’t say. The rise of Impressionism, Cubism, Rock music, Surrealism, Punk rock, Free Love, Video Games, Movies, Music videos, the birth of Greek philosophy and drama, and other huge cultural/political contributions driven by R-dominant (his term) behavior aren’t mentioned either. R-dominant thinking is old: it may be so old it’s new again, but to frame the argument as a Whole New Mind, without any hat tip to things pre-1950 is glaring, or as Tom Standage might say, overly chronocentric. The shifts between L to R dominance at the culture level, across time, has been discussed by other authors, from Leonard Shlain’s excellent Art & Physics and to some extent, Daniel Boorstin, but no reference from this line of thought is mentioned.

Polarization: Isn’t the best possible world one where we use all of our talents, as appropriate, to the problems at hand? Wouldn’t it be just as dangerous to have an R-dominant world as it is to have a logic, or L-dominant one? The tag line for the book is Why right-brainers will rule the future. Rule? Is that for the best? I bet he’d agree our rulers should be people who recognize the value of both kinds of thought, and that he’s fighting for a return to some kind of balance, but the book doesn’t say so (If I does, I missed it, despite a careful read). Perhaps I should have read the book as a manifesto, but I found that hard given the attempts at logical arguments and statistics he uses in his arguments.

Devil’s Advocacy (DA) : Every book makes a bet on a core theme and then tries to live up to it. But what should a writer do in chapter 6, when they realize a good point that disagrees with the title? Or several major points? Ideally at least one of them is discussed ( however briefly), hopefully they’re mentioned, and minimally they’re referenced. I didn’t find any kind of refutation or questioning of the core thesis in the text or in the notes. If I’m guilty of this in my books, fine, I’m a hypocrite and I’ll do better next time. But that said, my DA questions included:

• The book states MFAs are the new MBAs. What? Pages 54-56 discusses the rise of design in business, which is true and good. But if MFA’s are infiltrating the management ranks of GM, GE and McKinsey, it’s to complement the L-Dominant people they have in abundance, not to replace them all. I’m all for R-dominant people, but I doubt they’d be great at doing corporate taxes, remotely managing 1000s of employees (remotely in Asia), or the other dozens of core business functions that will always be core business functions. Or put another way How many R-Dominant people does a company really need? (And footnote: he mentions the low acceptance rates in MFA programs as an indicator of how hot MFAs are in the business world, but likely makes the wrong conclusion. First, there are likely fewer MFA programs than MBA programs, and the class size accepted are generally much smaller (often 20-30) - I bet this has always been true, so it’s not a trend, and likely has more to do with how MFA programs work than anything going on in the rest of the world).
• The environment. Pages 74-86 explore the increasing value of design, a point I agree with. But the emphasis here is heavy on consumerism, not designing things better for the world. Pink writes “The forces of Abundance… turn goods and services into commodities so quickly that the only way to survive is by constantly developing new innovations, inventing new categories, and… giving the world something it didn’t know it was missing” (pg. 81). Victor Papanek, one of the fathers of Product design, would call this a horribly selfish distortion of the power of design. How is it good for the planet, and our grand-children, if our only solution to problems is to keep making new stuff for people to buy, only to throw them away, despite their perfectly good conditions, replaced by more stuff people really don’t need? How is this sustainable in any way? Not mentioned.
• Are there tests or skills for helping a person have a balanced mind? Is it possible for a person to not be L-Dominant nor R-Dominant? I kept wondering if this binary kind of thinking is useful, other than as a polemic. I mean, doesn’t the book rely more on L-Dominant thinking in most of it’s arguments? Sure, that’s a side effect of written language, but then doesn’t anyone who works via e-mail, or the web, face the same challenge? Namely, that R-dominant talents are, almost by necessity of how modern communication happens, filtered through L-dominant skills?
• Do some cultures, perhaps in Europe, Africa or Asia, have more balanced views of the mind (e.g. Yin/Yang)? The United States has a poor view of art and architecture relative to Europe, if not other parts of the world. So is this an American problem? If so, why did we become so L-Dominant when other cultures did not? One argument is the Enlightenment of the 18th century sent Europe, and America, on a logic dominant world view, with Descartes’s “I think therefore I am” (ab)used to overstate the importance of rationality over other modes of mind. Pink doesn’t ask these questions or hint at their possible significance (If these themes are embedded in our history, culture and government, how do we remove/modify them?).

Posted in Book reviews, books, creative thinking | No Comments »

Founders at work is a collection of interviews with, surprise, founders of tech-sector companies. The goal is to capture their recollections of the early days of their successful ventures, and share stories that were often overlooked.

The interview list is first rate: founders from Hotmail, Adobe, Excite, Firefox, Yahoo! and more than 20 other well known companies are included.

The upside is that these stories read honest: there’s struggle, failure, fear, mis-steps and changes of direction, all the things often glossed over by high level mainstream interviews of success stories. If you’ve wished you could have a chat with some of these folks, you’ll be happy with this book. Livingston does a good job of staying out of the way and tries to cover similar territory with each interview (however it has the minor effect of making the book more readable in separate sitings, as the repetition of questions tires after 5 interviews in a row).

The other risk for those with dreams of entrepreneurship is that the stories come across as ordinary: there are few magic moments, radical breakthroughs, or amazing coincidences: its mostly hard work, and fantasies of what starting a company is like will fade by the 8th interview.

This book is inspiring at times: mostly because it makes the stories of these startups real. These were human beings doing these things, not omnipotent geniuses. Anyone expecting triumphant, and replicable, vision for why these folks succeed will be forced to look elsewhere, or perhaps more to the value of this book, reconsider what it takes to found a successful company.

Founders at work at Amazon.com.

The author, Jessica Livingston, is a partner at Y Combinator, a venture firm for early startups with some novel ideas on what venture firms should do.

Posted in Book reviews | No Comments »

Disclaimer: I met Bill Moggridge (the author) when he volunteered as a judge, with Brenda Laurel, and Andrew Dillon, in the CHI.

Designing Interactions is a book of stories. It takes the novel view that the people behind the designs can teach us more about design than the designs themselves. Although there are plenty of ID-magazine style photographs, they’re not the centerpiece: the people and their design stories are.

If you’re fond of interviews, and want to hear first person stories about how various famous designs were made, this book is for you. I’m a story guy so I was happy, finishing most of the book in one sitting (More theory-driven readers would be happier elsewhere).

The book’s content is well described on the companion website, including a chapter overview exposing an emphasis for tech-design history: From the mouse, to the PC, to PalmPilot, Moggridge starts at the beginning and works his way, one person at a time, to the Internet, gaming and the future. While there is some predictable designer-self worship, and a shortage of stories of failure, many of the stories are humbling, refreshing and inspiring.

One warning is that the book has a San Francisco & IDEO centricity: more a reflection of the author’s network than an objective history of tech-design. IDEO, which Moggridge co-founded, is mentioned often and if this annoys you either filter it out or look elsewhere.

The book is a bargain, coming in at a hefty 800 pages, many amazing color photos (including archival), and a companion DVD (although it overlaps with the published interviews). I can’t think of another book like it.

Interview list includes: Bill Atkinson • Sergey Brin • Stu Card • Gillian Crampton Smith • Jane Fulton Suri • Bill Gaver • Bing Gordon • Rob Haitani • Jeff Hawkins • Matt Hunter • David Kelley • Brenda Laurel • David Liddle • John Maeda • Tim Mott • Joy Mountford • Takeshi Natsuno • Larry Page • Mark Podlaseck • Larry Tesler • Bill Verplank • Terry Winograd • Will Wright

Sample chapter and interviews. Buy from Amazon.

Posted in Book reviews, Design | No Comments »

I was greatly anticipating Scott Rosenberg’s, co-creator of Salon, new book, Dreaming in code and was happy to get a free copy in the mail.

In short: I enjoyed the book and recommend it - it’s a good, though uneven, book exploring why software is hard to make. I read most of it in one night and finished it off in a second, and despite anything else i say, that’s an endorsement of any book of any kind.

However my take on the book is unavoidably hurt by its lead praise from James Fallows, of The Atlantic, who said ‘The first true successor to Tracy Kidder’s The Soul of a New Machine’, in reference the Pulitzer prize and National book award winner that defined the ‘computer engineering as human narrative’ genre. Kidder’s book was personally seminal and I have respect for Fallows, but it’s misguided praise, and worked to Rosenberg’s disadvantage. I don’t think his intent as an author was to write the same kind of book, and the comparisons in my mind didn’t help. However, as an author I’m ambivalent on the appropriateness, or dangers, of comparing a book based on what it’s blurbs say, so I’ll leave it at that.

Dreaming in code is three books woven into one: one of them is a narrative story of of the Mitch Kapor lead project to create a new PIM application called Chandler. The other threads introduce software concepts (e.g. explaining object oriented programming and how Python differs from C++) and explores why software is hard to make. All big topics, and fun ground for Rosenberg’s curiosity and intelligence to explore. The book struggles however with keeping them together: the 3 threads are uneven, and I was often unsure where he was going, or when we’d get back to the Chandler story, the one I expected to be, based on the cover and Kidder reference, the focus of the book.

For example, the book dances between assuming the reader has tech-interests vs. being a layperson, with side threads into esoterics like Hungarian notation and Literate programming, that made me wonder. Most books in this genre don’t go that far, drawing the line around the depth of what a magazine feature article would explain: even Digital woes, a favorite book on why software fails, nails the topic without getting into construction or showing code samples.

Steven Levy’s Insanely Great, about making the Macintosh computer, or Zachary’s ShowStopper, about Windows NT, are classics in this genre, and unlike them Dreaming in code has a higher degree of difficulty: it doesn’t have a star central project at the book’s core. I would never have heard of Chandler without picking up the book. Mitch Kapor and Andy Hertzfeld, industry pioneers and legends, play leading roles which adds some star power, but they’re not the focus.

And without the natural tension of a big well known project, the players in the book feel light: the drama and passion that are integral parts of good projects aren’t there (and it’s something Kidder went to great lengths to capture). I can’t tell if that’s Rosenberg’s polite reporting, or something missing in the project itself, but the emotional commitments of people to each other, and the project, is critical to making good software, and might be the secret Rosenberg seems to seek in the book, but it’s never mentioned.

That said, Rosenberg is smart and insightful, and the book has its share of gems. Ideas from many luminaries are touched on, from Doug Englebart, Fred Brooks, Alan Kay, Richard Stallman, Don Knuth, Watts Humphrey and more. The result is a good, often charming book, that would be good fodder for a team to read together, discussing their own opinions as each chapter unfolds.

But with the rickety management example of Chandler at the book’s core, software management, as a discipline, is portrayed as an immature, misguided, geeky business: perhaps an accurate snapshot of the average team today, but not of the best. Rosenfeld doesn’t give serious context until the last 1/3rd of the book, when Joel Spolsky, 37 Signals, and Google’s theories surface as cautious remedies to the challenges Chandler faced, but the vibe is cynical, and I found myself, especially with Chandler as the example, defensively optimistic about what a good project manager could have done.

As a sweet side note, Rosenberg did uncover thought provokers I hadn’t heard before:

• Alan Kay’s wonderful software as a doghouse metaphor
• Linus Torvalds on how you should start large projects
• Richard Gabriel’s passionate criticism of programming education

Rosenberg’s perspective cuts both ways: his outsider view is an advantage as he asks questions veterans and gurus have forgotten or are scared of, which paves new ground on old topics. But it you want guidance, harder critiques, or expert analysis of what to learn from Chandler, you’ll need to discuss the book with someone else, or look elsewhere.

A Chapter is available online, and it’s worth a look. Also check out the Dreaming in code website or Pre-order at Amazon.com (Out Jan 17th).

Posted in Book reviews, Design, Management, Software/Web development | 1 Comment »

Sometimes good books sneak up on you - you enjoy reading them, but their full value doesn’t surface until afterwards, when in the days and weeks that follow you find yourself thinking back on how the book changed your mind. Engines of ingenuity by Historian and NPR host John Lienhard, fits this profile.

The book is comprised of short essays on the history of technology and invention, largely from his NPR show by the same title (transcripts onlne). These essays read well, cover many famous bits of technology history and offer insights and fresh perspectives on some stories I thought I knew well. Highly recommended.

Lienhard’s new book, How invention begins picks up where EOI leaves off. This time he looks deeper into how inventions develop, exploring how often desire, and not true necessity, led to many of the major technoligical innovations of our past.

It’s written in a more challenging style than EOI: longer pieces, more rigorous history, and covers less well known territory. For that reason I recommend EOI or Leinhard’s short NPR pieces first, and if you enjoy those, they’re excellent introductions for How invention begins.

Posted in Book reviews, Innovation, Recommended | 2 Comments »

The folks at 37 signals have well earned their reputation for making great web applications. They’ve established a strong identity for with a line of web tools for project management (Basecamp), To-do lists (Backpack) and simple collaboration (Whiteboard).

They recently published a short book called “Getting real” about how to build web apps - and here’s my review.

The book is short - 170 pages with lots of whitespace and heavy quoting. If you’ve used any of their apps you’ll feel right at home as they do a fine job maintaining the same voice and style.

The highlight is their passion for making good things. They are most effective when they boldly express their ideals, using them to slash through common assumptions about features, big planning, organization and customers. It’s a brisk and optomistic read. At turns clever and confident, but ocassionally nieve, this book will generate strong opinions and can spark healthy debate even if you don’t like or agree with what they say.

The lowlights are the how - While I’m philosophically aligned with these guys, this book is more mantra than guidance or instruction. I imagine it working as a boost for people who believed some of these things prior to reading the book who, now reaffirmed, can point others to it as an external and respected source. There are obvious counter examples to some mantras, but they’re beyond the point, as the questions raised are worthwhile.

But for those in old-school organizations or with dysfunctional teams, this book doesn’t give the tools needed to turn things around nor provide individual readers with “Real” practices they can employ on their own. Most of “Getting real” is about approach and attitude, and it requires your co-workers to share it with you to work.

The book’s strength and weakness is the experience of the authors: they started 37 signals on their own, and advise largely from that context. While they don’t try to direct readers for how to convert older, larger, slower, less talented teams of people into “Real” teams, there is the vibe througout the book that the world would be a better place if everyone did.

Summary: I recommend this book - it’s a fast and opinionated read. It’s most valuable to small self directed teams, as a reference for how one small, talented, self directed team has successfully built quality software or as a hand grenade for teams that have been doing things the same way for too long. However it doesn’t quite justify the $19 price: there are tragically no references and no links to other sources, something I hope they’ll remidy in a 1.1 book update. (For reference: McConnell’s Rapid Development, with a 5 star average over 100 reviews at amazon, covers similiar ground with near opposite highlights/lowlights, for $22, with thorough links to other sources to go deeper than the text. These two books make a fine pairing).

The Book: Getting real by 37 signals ($19, online PDF only)
Free Excerpts: Scale later, Meetings are toxic, and more

Posted in Book reviews, Recommended | 7 Comments »

I found this book in the discount rack at a used bookstore in Fremont. Having found much of what people call management quite ridiculous I laughed at the title and flipped it open. Inside I found validation for many of the pet theories and uncorrelated observations I’ve had over the years, written in clear, short, insightful chapters. It’s a gem. You’ll have many deep sighs when you read it and will feel relieved about the insanity at work that, until reading the book, you though only you felt.

The book does offer advice but is not a a how to guide. I found it more of a catalog of the inherent paradoxes of managing teams of people, things that impact everyone but are rarely mentioned.

The management of the absurd, Richard Farson. 172 pages.

Posted in Book reviews | No Comments »