W why

When employees belong, they will guarantee your success. Once that is established, only then should their skillset and experience be evaluated. Great companies do not hire skilled people and motivate them; they hire already motivated people and inspire them.

Such employees are more productive and innovative, and the feeling they bring to work attracts other people eager to work there as well. How do you differentiate between a fad and an idea that can change lives forever?

Rogers pertains to the bell curve of product adoption. The curve outlines the percentage of the market who adopt your product, beginning with the Innovators 2. The ones who queued up for hours, or days outside an Apple store to buy the latest iPhone are all early adopters and belong to the left side of the curve.

The people on the far right instead are never content and never loyal. Energy motivates but charisma inspires. Energy is easy to see, measure and copy. Sinek cites the example of Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer.

Steve Ballmer was energetic. Bill Gates, in spite of being shy and awkward, is charismatic. When Steve Ballmer speaks people are energized, but that tends to dissipate quickly. When Bill Gates speaks people listen with bated breath. They remember those lessons for weeks, months or even years. When a company is small, a founder has plenty of direct contact with the outside world. The leader is the inspiration, the symbol of the reason we do what we do.

They represent the emotional limbic brain. What the company says and does represent the rational thought and language of the neocortex. Most companies struggle to differentiate or communicate their true value to the outside world.

When we as human beings struggle to put emotions into word, we rely on metaphors, imagery, and analogies in an attempt to communicate how we feel. We use symbols. We create tangible things for those who believe in what we believe to say.

Symbols help us turn the intangible into tangible. And the only reason symbols have meaning is because we give them a meaning. A logo can only become a symbol when it inspires people to use it to say something about who they are.

Take the example of Harley Davidson: Harley Davidson embodies the values and lifestyle of the people wearing it. The symbol is no longer about Harley Davidson. Instead, the logo embodies an entire value set—their own. To do this, Sinek proposes The Celery Test. Imagine if people told you that to grow you need cookies, Nutella, celery, fruits and ice cream.

Should you get them all? The original VW Beetle was a cheerful symbol of freedom and a simple, carefree life. Walmart was a more serious case. Walmart was started by Sam Walton with the idea of helping people and communities by providing products at low prices.

The style of the book is short, blockish sentences. Clearly it is written so that even people with short attention spans will be engrossed. This works better in speech than in print. Overall, I'd say the TED talk is a far more successful product than the book. View all 7 comments. Feb 15, Avolyn Fisher rated it did not like it Shelves: dnf , I am only on page 90 and this book is driving me nuts. I usually don't review a book or make a comment before I have finished reading it but I have to get this off of my chest so I can power through the rest.

I believe that it is important to hold yourself and your company to an ethical standard. However, beyond that I think Sinek I am only on page 90 and this book is driving me nuts.

However, beyond that I think Sinek was a little misguided in weaving together the fabric of his theory. First of all, his examples seemed a little far fetched, he mentions countless successful companies and individuals and says that they succeeded because of his theory without presenting any substantial examples or evidence to make the connection between them and his theory.

It's as if he said "These people were successful because they were able to get off of the couch and do it. You can't be successful without getting started" - ok that isn't what Sinek says but the concept and theory of his book is so vague and loosely tied together that it feels like a similar sentiment.

Second of all, business is not emotional. Yes, if I worked at a children's hospital or if I managed an animal rescue it might be a different case, but in many professional settings our emotions have to be checked at the door. And even at a children's hospital or an animal rescue I feel you would have to check your emotions when it came to working with others. Sinek mentions that you shouldn't work with people you don't like and for many of us, the reality is that we will encounter people we don't like.

We will encounter people who have different beliefs than us. That doesn't mean we can't work together and be successful and I would argue that the ability to get along and work with others who have different cultural backgrounds and beliefs than you, is key to being successful and being a leader at work.

Even his comments about moving to another city were driving me crazy. I moved from Des Moines, IA to California last year and I can tell you that people who live in different cities and states are more alike than we think and I don't think it's simply because we're "American" and we fit into "American Culture" I feel that it's because most people are good, want to do good, and are good at heart.

The people who are bad or don't have the best interest of others at heart are few and far between and I have learned that if you believe in the good of others and make a conscious effort to be a positive person and a positive force, you can get along with almost anyone.

It's not a "cultural" thing, it's a "respect" thing. We will see if I can power through the rest of this book I'd probably have abandoned this one if I weren't reading it for a book club at my office. Life is too short, abandoned this one. View all 13 comments. Dec 31, Henry Manampiring rated it it was ok. I was lured by this book because of Sinek's TED video. Great video and idea, and I should have stopped there.

What's really annoying is the overuse of Apple as a example. Like, really? There are other examples in the book, the massive use of Apple story is just irritating. Borrow the book and skim through it. But it is not worth buying.

Watch the TED video for free instead. View 2 comments. One good point, offered with endless repetition, extreme oversimplification, and annoying inconsistencies, in a bad writing style.

View 1 comment. Jun 27, Loy Machedo rated it liked it. Lets start with the fundamentals. What made Simon Sinek famous? It was his 20 minute TED Talk. And obviously, for those who have spoken on the TED Talks stage, you are not allowed to speak beyond your allotted time. Tony Robbins was the only exception to this rule as he very intelligently saved the best story for the last — and then got his extra few minutes of fame.

So in the case of Simon, in those amazing 20 minutes, he not only impressed the audience with the simplicity and powerful message, he created a fan follower. I became his instant fan after the video and that is why I was desperately waiting to get my hands on the book. But this is where he goofs it up. For instance, if he would pay you a dollar for every time he repeated that phrase, I think you could buy yourself 3 copies of the same book.

I remembered the overly used example I think it was a Chicken Soup for the Soul — please correct me if you do find the right reference — The example where a Priest roused the congregation to donate money for the new building. The author immediately took out a dollar from his pocket — which was quite a lot for those days. And as he held on to that dollar waiting for the collectors to come and collect the money, the priest went on bombarding the audience with his oratory.

And he went on so long, that finally, when the collectors came, he had irritated the audience so much, the author in anger, took out money from the collectors box instead of putting the money in. This is exactly the effect Simon Sinek had on me. He irritated the bananas out of my head. So overall, what would I say? However, too much of Sugar is bad for taste and health. So, if you can bear an overdose of sugar for once in your life, go ahead and buy this book.

However, if you just want a gist of the book, watch his TED Talks video. Loy Machedo loymachedo. This is another book Suggested to me by my good ol friend Mr. Now this ain't it!!! Definitely a must read for all those who are interested in working out their own business and even the others who are struggling with finding stability in their lives and things around them "Start with Why" definitely has a lot of Answers.

Disclaimer - you will repeatedly find examples of "Martin Luther King" and "Apple" however I still loved the book. Feb 10, jade rated it did not like it Recommends it for: no one. Shelves: non-fiction. BUT… his tedtalk makes for a poor, badly researched, and repetitive book.

View all 26 comments. Apr 28, ScienceOfSuccess rated it it was amazing Shelves: goodgift , favorites. TL;DR The author wants us to communicate from the inside of the golden circle, not from the outside of it.

They do business with people who believe in the same thing they believe in. Apr 07, Lili Manolache rated it it was amazing. This idea explains why organizations and leaders inspire the others. Everybody knows what they do, some know how they do it, very few people know why they do what they do. The way we communicate, think and act is very easy: we go from the clear things we know to the more fuzzy ones. The WHY theory gives us the ability to communicate why we are doing certain things, helps entrepreneurs take better decisions, as well as individuals in the every day life.

All in all, the most important fact Simon Sinek is trying to point out is that the way something is communicated must be believed in, explained, and people accept it for themselves, because THEY believe in it. It is a very inspiring, enlightening and insightful book that I would recommend to anyone! Apr 10, Bharath rated it liked it. This is a nice book — the premise is vital and critical, and the coverage is unambiguous to reinforce the point. That said, the examples repeat and subsequent chapters after the initial ones incrementally introduce only little further depth to the concept.

The examples which are discussed in a good amount of detail are Apple finds the most coverage , Wright Brothers, Martin Luther King, Southwest Airlines. The examples are easy ones to relate to, and all of whom I respect very much as well. The concept is powerful and important for companies to inculcate.

The examples are repetitive though and at times simplistic. The loyalty which Apple inspires is certainly phenomenal I am an Apple fan too! Also, if you can recall or pull up the discussions which were prevalent in the early — mid 90s on the technology industry, there was concern even then on companies using brute force tactics to crush competition. The marketplace is far more complex than what the book makes it out to be.

A book which should have been a lot crisper, but the matter is certainly important. Dec 31, Mehrsa rated it it was ok. Have you ever noticed that books written for entrepreneurs or other tech-bros love to write about Shackleton? Am I the only one who thinks the dude put himself and his crew in a pickle and then gets lauded for getting them out of the self-imposed pickle? Anyway, they also love to talk about the Wright brothers and Steve Jobs.

The thing with these books is that they can't prove that these people succeeded because they had a WHY. In fact, I've seen those stories used to prove a whole bunch of diff Have you ever noticed that books written for entrepreneurs or other tech-bros love to write about Shackleton? In fact, I've seen those stories used to prove a whole bunch of different things.

There is a lot of luck involved and there are lots of other market factors and just plain numbers. So how do we know that Southwest succeeded because they had a why and then it failed because they lost their why? I mean, there are HBS studies on southwest and none of them mention the golden circle, but they do talk about stuff that matters like competition, etc?

As Karl Popper said--the scientific method requires that a hypothesis be disproved. This one cannot be. And so you're going to have a bunch of failed Shackleton and Jobs wannabes out there looking for their why and blaming their failure on not finding it as opposed to say, the coming tech bubble. Feb 02, Jason Boling rated it did not like it.

Using selective facts or analogies to suit an assertion, gratuitous statements often contradicting other assertions, and selective use of parts of a bigger story while conveniently overlooking others in the same context are among the reasons why I found this book to be of no value in leadership development.

The author works backwards in that he has a belief in his view of what makes great leaders and selects biased or incomplete data or uses unsubstantiated hyperbole to set about making the case Using selective facts or analogies to suit an assertion, gratuitous statements often contradicting other assertions, and selective use of parts of a bigger story while conveniently overlooking others in the same context are among the reasons why I found this book to be of no value in leadership development.

The author works backwards in that he has a belief in his view of what makes great leaders and selects biased or incomplete data or uses unsubstantiated hyperbole to set about making the case for that view. It is easy and academically lazy to decide what you believe and then to set about finding examples of supporting evidence while simultaneously omitting examples of things from those same sources which would contradict the view you are attempting to convince the reader is valuable.

The only real benefit I can see to this book is seeing how using management speak and lazy manipulation of data can let one manager or business person sell to another.

For the rest of us who are the actual customers of the companies the author uses as examples, this is at best detached and at worst condescending popular psychology without the merit of peer review. For example, the last time I checked, data was plural and the author refers often to "the data" as if it is singular.

It is, start to finish, lazy hyperbole and more of the same fist bumping "you're number one baby" so called "leadership" slang that business people often spout to one another to convince themselves how masterful they are at understanding the customer and what it is they need to hear. Simon Sinek presents a compelling vision of how companies, organizations, and individuals can achieve success. His simple message? Start with why. Which is to say the guiding principle of our endeavors should be based not on what we do or how we do it, but rather on why we do it.

According to Sinek, those agencies that can effectively articulate their "why" or purpose are most likely to develop loyal followers and long term success. Sounds great Jeff, so why just two stars? Well, there's a nu Simon Sinek presents a compelling vision of how companies, organizations, and individuals can achieve success.

Well, there's a number of reasons. First, the redundancy of Sinek's message played a role. I'm not sure I got much more out of the book than I'd gotten previously from his minute TEDtalk.

Second, Sinek overreaches a bit when he tries to connect his Golden Circle to both our brain structure and the Golden Ratio. I understand the intent "See? This is universal! This is big picture stuff! The fabric of the universe! Finally, the evidence Sinek presents is all very anecdotal. Sinek provides maybe a dozen or so examples from Henry V to MLK Jr to Apple , but really just focuses on a few cases that neatly fit the narrative of success he's constructed.

And that narrative? Apple is successful because they start with why. How can we tell they start with why? In Latin, U represented a W sound, which could only occur before a vowel. You see that literal double U , that UU , and how it is associated with our W sound? While the W disappeared from much of Latin pronunciation as it evolved into the Romance languages , one influential variety of French, Norman French , did have a W sound, especially as a result of the Germanic words that flooded the language from Viking incursions into northern France.

And Germanic languages love a W. So, Norman French used a double U to represent W sounds in words. Meanwhile in Anglo-Saxon England … Old English used the Latin alphabet, but with some twists, including a letter wynn. The printing press came to English in , and it used a single double-U block, helping cement W as its own letter by the early s. As the printing press evolved, so did the shape of the letters. Interested in more alphabet history? Feedback Tired of Typos?

Word of the Day.