Skip to main content
Customer Review
Reviewed in the United States on August 27, 2021
The book’s format is EXACTLY the way I love to read these kinds of books. It’s not all about some smart-ass guy who was lucky and successful and won’t stop bragging how he got there. Reed was humble in his writing. He explained a theory and practise. Then it was backed up by science through his co-author using psychology and social psychology. Even with 30 years of experience, I was able to learn new things. But with 30 years of experience, I wasn’t totally convinced.
One, I don’t think a lot of what is being done at Netflix is original. Talent density and individual responsibility was discussed years ago in books such as “From Good to Great” and “Reengineering the Organization”. Even the Live 360 reminded me of Synanon’s The Game sessions. But at least he is implementing these practises, and there is no doubt that it is contributing to Netflix’s success. What I really liked was that Reed did admit sometimes there were flaws in their approach, but they are minor enough not to affect the overall success.
Another key flaw that the book skipped was teamwork and collaboration. The book focuses more on individuals. I am not convinced that success is based on a single employee working in a vacuum. I think Moneyball makes more sense than talent density. High talent density with the threat of high turnover can easily lead to hoarding information, chasing after glory at every moment, and basic zero-sum game theory where there is constant fighting between employees. There is always someone better out there. That is just plain statistics. Does that mean you spend endless amount of effort looking for them or upgrade the employees as the market shifts? Also, what happens if your company can’t hire the best talent as they may be a start-up or just generates less revenue than the competition. Does that mean this book is worthless?
There are a lot of good lessons and takeaways when Netflix went international. They wanted to obtain their business culture but when it clashed with the local country’s culture, they were willing to bend. Last, the book does not explain why Netflix is successful. I am sure HR policies are part of it, but I am not sure that it could even be considered the main reason. Even in the book from Good to Great, many of the mentioned companies that were considered the darlings of their time, are no longer in existence. Another example is the good old Nifty Fifty of the 60s and 70s of whom many of them are now defunct. I claim that Netflix is enjoying success from what they created, and they made the right decisions during key periods (video streaming). Their ability to continue be successful will not be based on their HR practises, but rather decisions made at the top and how the market receives their offering. Yes, nurturing creativity and independence can spark a new and even brilliant idea but there is no guarantee it will be successful. In the late 90s and before the dot.com crash many so-called good ideas blossomed. Many respectable high revenue companies thought the good times would last and implemented every stupid idea in the name of creativity. This led to an overload of great ideas and creativity and ridiculous amount of money chasing them, only to come crashing down. And this is where my last criticism lies. What happens when there are bad times?
The book assumes life will be great at Netflix and doesn’t mention what happens when times go bad like during the dot.com or 2008. What happens when the company hits personal hard times unique to their market like a great disruption? Can they still keep their practices? I doubt it.
Don’t allow my scepticism to push you away. The book is still a good book and should be read. Enjoy!!!
One, I don’t think a lot of what is being done at Netflix is original. Talent density and individual responsibility was discussed years ago in books such as “From Good to Great” and “Reengineering the Organization”. Even the Live 360 reminded me of Synanon’s The Game sessions. But at least he is implementing these practises, and there is no doubt that it is contributing to Netflix’s success. What I really liked was that Reed did admit sometimes there were flaws in their approach, but they are minor enough not to affect the overall success.
Another key flaw that the book skipped was teamwork and collaboration. The book focuses more on individuals. I am not convinced that success is based on a single employee working in a vacuum. I think Moneyball makes more sense than talent density. High talent density with the threat of high turnover can easily lead to hoarding information, chasing after glory at every moment, and basic zero-sum game theory where there is constant fighting between employees. There is always someone better out there. That is just plain statistics. Does that mean you spend endless amount of effort looking for them or upgrade the employees as the market shifts? Also, what happens if your company can’t hire the best talent as they may be a start-up or just generates less revenue than the competition. Does that mean this book is worthless?
There are a lot of good lessons and takeaways when Netflix went international. They wanted to obtain their business culture but when it clashed with the local country’s culture, they were willing to bend. Last, the book does not explain why Netflix is successful. I am sure HR policies are part of it, but I am not sure that it could even be considered the main reason. Even in the book from Good to Great, many of the mentioned companies that were considered the darlings of their time, are no longer in existence. Another example is the good old Nifty Fifty of the 60s and 70s of whom many of them are now defunct. I claim that Netflix is enjoying success from what they created, and they made the right decisions during key periods (video streaming). Their ability to continue be successful will not be based on their HR practises, but rather decisions made at the top and how the market receives their offering. Yes, nurturing creativity and independence can spark a new and even brilliant idea but there is no guarantee it will be successful. In the late 90s and before the dot.com crash many so-called good ideas blossomed. Many respectable high revenue companies thought the good times would last and implemented every stupid idea in the name of creativity. This led to an overload of great ideas and creativity and ridiculous amount of money chasing them, only to come crashing down. And this is where my last criticism lies. What happens when there are bad times?
The book assumes life will be great at Netflix and doesn’t mention what happens when times go bad like during the dot.com or 2008. What happens when the company hits personal hard times unique to their market like a great disruption? Can they still keep their practices? I doubt it.
Don’t allow my scepticism to push you away. The book is still a good book and should be read. Enjoy!!!
