Customer Reviews

How to Lose Friends & Infuriate People: Leadership in the Networked World

5 star:		(12)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Mr Nader certainly is opinionated. He can succintly mock management fads, criticize spineless leaders and spot organisation problems with great success. However I think many of his solutions are just as bad as the original problems.

He has lots of "I told you so" examples where he has been in an organisation, said something was crap and sure enough it turned out to be that way. However there are no examples of people who have implemented his ideas with great success.

Perhaps that is because most of his ideas are completely unworkable: Get every citizen to vote on every issue, pay everyone in the company the same, allow managers complete control and just be a leader.

He had an example of how during a presentation of a bad idea he just burst out laughing for a couple of minutes. It just makes this guy sound arrogant and immature, not a revolutionary thinker.

There was a lot of hype throughout the book. Of course if you don't agree with him you're obviously not a thinker. Well its hard to agree when many of his examples didn't really back up his arguments.

There are a couple of good points, reduce the amount of time you waste, get rid of beauracracy, leadership is important, but these are hardly revolutionary.

I was drawn to this book by the interesting title. Unfortunately, the text left me rather unfulfilled. Nader is a self proclaimed "Post Tentative Virtual Surrealist". This is a rather pompous and meaningless title that is never explained.

The book is full of vague concepts that requirement further elaboration. Nader talk about logicitivity and loosely describes it as a combination of logic and creativity. No practical guidelines are given has to how to develop this skill. He seems to spend a lot of time arguing semantics. He spends a chapter talking about the difference between a "leader" and "leadership". By the end of the chapter, he hasn't really made any valid contribution or furthered his argument in any way. He states that "Supreme leadership must do what is necessary to remove these barriers for the benefit of those who are unable to fend for themselve". This sounds like a definition of a good Samaritan rather than a good leader.

Another chapter is spent discussing "attitude" and "atmosphere". Once again his discussion trails into nothing. Some of his points are factually incorrect. He states that the statistic of "50 per cent" is "meaningless because it only applies to situtations that can be simulated at least ten times". This is incorrect project success can be estimated using historical data. Bookmakers must do this all the time when estimating the probability for events that will only ever occur once.

There were some aspects of the book that I liked. He had a "rule of halves", whereby you make an effort to halve the time you spend on trivial and frivolous tasks. He also takes a realistic approach to business, stating that the goal is profit and not customer service. Customer service is simply a means to profit and is not the prime objective.

All in all I think the book is a thorough waste of time. There are a few gems but it's really not worth the effort of pouring through this whole tome in order to separate the wheat from the chaff. My recommendation is to avoid it completely the only person it will infuriate is the reader!

This has some eye-opening helpful info and advice. I would liked to have had some real life examples of his ideas working (i.e. "And when this business structure was implemented at Apple Computers, profits soured 50%" or like that). You have to take it on faith that his ideas will work. And the parts of the book could have meshed together better. But the writing is lively, and clear, and the ideas are certainly worth pursuing. I bought this book after hearing Nader interviewed on Johnny Rotten's radio show, and Nader impressed me with his lively personality and sense of humor. And that personlity comes across on the page. This is a book well worth reading.

Maybe I bought this book mostly because of its catchy title, but I was not disappointed. A series of clever observations, anecdotes and home truths, the book may be seen as controversial by some. However, the book is about effective leadership, creativity, courage and vision; and as such it should be compulsory reading for today's managers (along with Dilbert). Particularly in organisations ineffectively following the latest management fads, such as matrix management.

Mild critisicm. Nader does tend to go on a bit. The same message could probably have been given in less words. Nevertheless, it is fairly inspiring Christmas holiday reading. Dale Carnegie, eat your heart out.

I probably bought this book for the same reason many others did: its catchy iconoclastic title. What lies between its covers is a treatise on leadership, management, and personal achivement seemingly totally unlike the few inspirational gurus whose books I have skimmed or heard about. In three parts, this books covers: 1) the challenges we all face at home, at work, and within society, and issues of motivation, inspiration, belief and conviction, self control, brain power, creativity, and one's perception of the world; 2) how to work in teams, and 3) how to survive in the modern world. However, these synoptic titles will not provide clues until you actually read the book, especially if you are expecting this to be another addition to a bookshelf full of other motivational titles.

If you take anything from this book, be prepared to stick up for your convictions because it is unlikely that anything from this book will be supported by conventional organizational development experts and inspirtaional gurus. Some of Nader's unconventional style may seem over the top, but I recommend you approach this book sceptically and yet with an open mind which might also surprise you, in the spirit of the quote from Budha which I have provided you in my profile on this website.

This book is one you will love or hate. I think that if you hate it, you just do not understand it, because it makes heaps of sense, but only to those who really understand the issues. I read this book sometime ago and I did not agree with three of the chapters, and now that I have read it for the third time, and had new experiences at work, and can see just how spot-on nadar was. It is fabulous to have a book that actually grows on you. I am now wondering what more i will realize when i read it again next year.

is the sub (sub) title of this insightful work. Mr. Nader's thoughts are clear and well explained predominately. Perhaps because of my own lack of intellectual development however I found some of his ideas a bit vague. As such there were certain parts of the book that I will need to read over to gain a more thorough understanding of the concepts Mr. Nader expresses.

I particularly found the distinction between leaders and leadership very enlightening and clarifying. Not too mention his recommendations for streamlining organizations thereby making them much more effective. His approach to what democracy means in a 'networked' world is identical to my own and holds what could be the prescription for a more knowledgeable and less apathetic electorate.

The only chapter with which I must take issue with is the chapter on his concept of fluid shares in which he prescribes, if my understanding is correct, a flat salary structure for all the members of a company from the floor sweeper to the vice president. This salary would be derived (essentially) from computing the average of all salaries within the organization. As greater profitability is achieved then all workers will receive bonuses. Consequently he states that (traditionally) more elevated workers in the hierachy would still receive the same level of compensation yet the (traditionally) lesser compensated employees would be more motivated to contribute thereby leading towards better, more cooperative, and productive employees. Perhaps this is an over simplification. If I am incorrect I would welcome clarification from any source.

My dissension with his opinion is that there is much greater incentive for the lower levels than the higher ones who would initially have to take a substantial pay cut. Obviously great for the lower levels and I agree a contributing factor to many positive influences being released. However it seems to me that the upper levels suffer unfairly in the process and consequently this could lead to more apathy and less excellence from the upper echelons. Although I definitely agree with the basic premise that all members of an organization regardless of position perform essential functions there are degrees of knowledge, skill, and work levels that (in my mind) naturally lend themselves to a clear delineation (compensation wise) between differing job functions.

I could go on at length but suffice it to say that I will read this fine text again to challenge my own assumptions and endeavor to see the wisdom that is contained within.

This book reassured me that it is okay -- in fact courageous and admirable -- to be sick of the 'facts' that people learn, the 'system' that society upholds...

Most people should be very scared of this book.

I picked this book up at school book sale. Typically personal development books are timeless so the fact that it was written in 1999 wasn't a concern. I figured with such a creative title and a very good forward this book would be worth the time. Unfortunately this was not the case.

I think this author would call himself a "realist" which is actually a code word for pessimist. Rather than writing a book that inspired me to improve myself instead it did just the opposite with ideals like these:

- No matter how generous you might be, you cannot pass it on to someone else
- Inspiration cannot be found because it does not exist
- The best that others can do is offer an incentive, or bribe you, or intimidate you, or threaten you with something you fear or hold dear

I must say that I struggled through the first half of the book before finally giving up and putting it down. Recognizing that it was not inspiring rather it was depressing and negative. I cannot recommend they book.

Hi, I obtained a copy of this book from overseas (it was a gift from a friend in Australia), and I have to say that I did think it was a joke. The title is funny. But I could not put it down. It is one of the most serious and useful book I'll keep in my library.

It is powerful, and offers some new stuff that I have to say is brilliant. The book is excellent for managers, leaders, and students (my son loved it. I could not believe that he would read it, but he did, and said that all kids should read it. He is 21).

I think that the likes of Drucker and De Bono will have their days numbered now that Nader's on the loose.