There's a lot of good content here. But the author's advice isn't always consistent with the stated ideals. For example, there are many suggestions that sound like servant leadership, and many of these are solid and awesome. But there are as many or more pieces of advice advocating for a top-down, hierarchical style of management, including the author's frequent use of constructions such as "soandso reported to me" and "I had 100 people reporting to me," and so on.
I found this inconsistency puzzling. Usually when someone gives lip service to a concept such as servant leadership but behaves another way, my first question is whether they understand the concept well enough. Maybe it's an education problem. But the author appears to be highly educated and widely read, and runs a company that helps companies implement management practices, so I don't think ignorance is the answer to the puzzle.
I don't know the answer. I'll never know it. But I have had the misfortune of working with executives who understand concepts like servant leadership, and use the language fluently, but who have terrible self-awareness blind spots (aided by a lack of listening skills) that keep them from seeing just how hierarchical they are. This is the most charitable interpretation. I hope it's the case here. Because the other situation (I've experienced) is that the executive is a sociopath, skilled at appearing to be a culture fit, but ultimately more skilled at using people for their self-enrichment and power fantasy fulfillment.
I wish I hadn't picked up this icky vibe, which other reviewers also noticed and commented on, because it made it difficult to suspend disbelief and judgment and really read with an open mind. The self-aggrandizement is just hard to get over.
Overall, the internal inconsistency of this book makes it a dangerous tome. The sort of "management bible" that can be used to justify many good practices and many bad ones. Already, in the short time it's been out, I've seen the book used by a bullying manager to deliver obnoxiously aggressive feedback labeled as "radical candor." I fear that this book will be a greater friend to legions of sharp-elbowed asshole managers than to the cowardly types who veer into "ruinous empathy" (which, in my experience, is usually a bigger problem with a company culture, and the individual manager isn't the right locus of attention).
My conclusion is that I don't think there's nearly enough attention and thoughtfulness around the "care personally" dimension of the book's core framework. Other writers and thinkers such as Fred Koffman, Thich Nhat Hanh, Frederic Laloux, Diana Chapman, Edgar Schein, and Marshall Rosenberg... to name just a few who are leagues above this book in terms of conscious attention to the human and humane elements of working well with others.