I am generally disappointed when I read trade/mass market business books. The experience is so common that I cannot attribute it to poor reading choices or inept/lazy authors, although there are some of those around. I think the issue goes deeper than that.
To start with, the unspoken goal of good business practices almost has to be that of combining people, resources, and activities to fit some situation so that the best results are obtained according to some chosen metric (costs, profits, stock price, etc.). Most business books and most advice from members of the guru profession boil down to this in some measure. I would love to hear the arguments against it.
This leads to problems with the advice-giving enterprise, however, as soon as one leaves the realm of one-on-one situation based settings, such as one gets in mentoring or consulting arrangements. When one tries to generalize about what to do in business, the problem arises that advice is general while the situations requiring advice are idiosyncratic. So in order to provide useful advice, it is necessary to abstract away from the details and provide help that will be useful across physical settings, industries, and even cultures. That tends to make the advice unhelpful or even worse. The major consulting firms are probably the best at this in their development of frameworks and position papers as a way of marketing their services to new clients without compromising existing clients too much.
The extreme form of this shows up in business books in what might be called "be smart management". The intellectual foundation of this is to redefine the problem in the form of a solution. So according to this, it is important to make good decisions (although what constitutes good is not known until afterwards). It is also important to act in a timely manner, but not to rush things -- even though the relevant time frame is seldom clear to most of the people involved. Similarly, it is important not to follow the crowd in acting, although in the same book it may also be claimed that managers need to follow industry "best practices". When this mode of thought gets to finance, you arrive at the classic formulation of "buy low, sell high". I will grant that there is some basis for all these statements. The issue is how to bring such desired states about, when to buy, when to sell, etc. Business books as a genre do not give answers to these questions that are substantive rather than tautological. Indeed, they cannot provide such answers, since if the authors knew the answers, it would be a legitimate question to ask why they were so willing to share their knowledge with the masses for a song.
This brings me to Jack and Suzy Welch's new book. The intent appears to be to provvide in a series of short chapters the basic insights for each of the major functional areas of business that MBA-type managers can be involved with. So, for example, the chapter on finance goes through some summary definitions of overall terms, variance analysis, and a comparison of profitability versus free cash flow measures of financial health. So much for finance! Other chapters discuss, leadership, alighment, marketing, managing difficult employees (various flavors), and the like. To justify his principles and recommendations, Jack and Suzy draw upon Mr. Welch's famed experience at the helm of GE, his post-GE experience in private equity, and their joint experience writing business columns and speaking with executives while out on the speaking/executive education circuit. The book is well written and even punchy and it is hard to take too much issue with the content, as far as it goes, which is not very far.
While the book suffers from genre-related issues, what I found more disconcerting was reading the books conclusions and then comparing them to the prior record of the principal author. The first book of Mr. Welch that I read was "Jack: Straight from the Gut". I remember exactly when I read it, since it came out for order on Amazon early on September 11, 2001. Welch's memoirs recounted how he led and supposedly saved GE by improving its planning and accountability siystems, instituting a tough up or out system for evaluating GE managers, streamlining the GE business portfolio, making stock price the central corporate metric, and the like. "Straight from the Gut" was a statement of the most notably corporate CEO of the time about how he ran the firm and became famous. The sense one gets from reading "The Everyday MBA" is that Welch is now cautioning managers to be nimble and flexible, not encumbered with bureaucratic requirements, and even to be more "entrepreneurial". If anything, this is arguing against the Jack Welch who ran GE and promoted GE Capital - which is now being separated from the firm.
So who is the reader supposed to follow - the Jack Welch who prospered as the super CEO at GE or the Jack Welch who is a writer of columns and a frequent visiter to CNBC? Careful readers can certainly sort out what is what, but why should that be necessary? As these books go, it was OK, but I expected more from these authors - or failing that a little bit of history. Mr. Welch might note his experience with private equity as a basis for some of the conclusions made in the book. It is not entirely clear, however, the degree to which private equity as an endeavor is appropriate for a book on general management perspectives. Yes, firms run by private equity are managed, but it is not clear that the configuration of goals and interests of all the parties is consistent with the ideas of alignment that lead off this book.