Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Prioritythinking2003 (talk · contribs)
Dsgarnett (talk · contribs)

The content of the article misses the main points ...[edit]

Most of the article is taken up with a lengthy description of which companies were studied and who was on the research team. Who cares?

Members of the research team[edit]

I would suggest delete the section on the research team (who cares?) and add more about the key ideas in the book and the critical reception of those ideas ...

I removed the list of research team members from the article as it took up too much space without adding any value - if anyone wants to restore it the list is:

"Top members of this research team were:

Brian J.Bagley
Lane Hornung
Vicki Mosur Osgood
Scott Cederberg
Christine Jones
Alyson Sinclair
Anthony J.Chirikos
Scott Jones
Peter Van Genderen
Jenni Cooper
Stefanie A.Judd
Paul Weissman
Duane C.Duffy
Brian C.Larsen
Leigh Wilbanks
Eric Hagen
Weijia (Eve) Li
Amber L.Young
Morten T.Hansen
Nicholas M.Osgood"

Say more about the key ideas[edit]

I would have through the focus should be on the findings and ideas like the ideas of the Hedgehog model.

Expand on the methodology[edit]

Say more about the methodology,

Lauchlanmack (talk) 01:55, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism / The Halo Effect[edit]

The book The Halo Effect (business book) has a lengthy critique of the methods and conclusions of Good to Great. The references and links in that article may be useful for this one. This article needs more detail of the book's critical reception, especially since there's a respectable academic position that it has been debunked as pseudo-science. MartinPoulter (talk) 12:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews, articles, interviews[edit]

Here's some articles, reviews, and interviews I found for a related AfD that may be useful to expand this article.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] --Colapeninsula (talk) 12:00, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Social media is stress generator[edit]

Tell me 37.111.136.254 (talk) 07:33, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]