TLDR: Carrick’s work is probably immensely helpful to companies that have already acknowledged they have a problem and chosen to listen. However, this book overemphasizes emotional arguments, so the CEOs (and this book does seem to be written to CEOs) who need to listen to her won’t be convinced.
Although I believe many of Carrick’s ideas on workplace ethics—I can’t say all, because I started skimming partway through the book—the author delivers a lot of already widely discussed arguments as if they were facts some people simply hadn’t heard, without the backing that would convince a nonbeliever to implement her strategies. For example, she says <10% of the population makes way more money than the rest of the world combined; and people in charge of companies should compare their wages to their lowest paid employees’, ask themselves if that gap is really OK, and do the right thing. They should, but they’re already aware they’re rich and paying others minimum wage, and I don’t think they’ll be convinced by phrases like “do the right thing,“ or “people are beautiful.“ How can a leader who isn’t absolute top dog convince them to phase change in? The book didn’t really discuss things normal people can do at large companies, which makes it seem like the intended audience is a really small group that can’t be reached this way. What they need is data on how poor practices impact those who implement them.
Carrick discussed unpleasant things in non-inflammatory, plain speech, and cited many sources; but I was surprised by the lack of sources cited for some controversial bits, and lack of substantial argument in general.
The book also didn’t grab my attention, and was repetitive.