Things that worked for me may not work for you

I recently read an old article by Nicolas carr on the Google Enigma, pretty much a critique on the hype created around successful companies by business publications, management academics, writers and authors. [A book on Nokia's strategic agility, is another example, :-) ] The article may be yet another attempt to make one wiser with the basic paradigm that successful business model innovation may not necessarily be repeatable. Simply put, "things-that-worked-for-us-may-not-work-for-you".

What interested me the most is Nicolas' conclusion on the "mutually inclusive" three qualities common to all successful companies, namely:
* They hire talented and clever people and give them room to excel
* They measure progress and results rigorously and make course adjustments quickly
* They remain disciplined in their work and their spending; curbing their instinct to do too much at once (Exceptionally relevant for product development?)

A clear fourth one from me is:
* They win their stakeholders/shareholders confidence

The above qualities are potentially inclusive. It is so because each of it, on its own merit, cannot bring forth a successful business. For example, what happens if we overemphasise one over the other? What if we only have talented people without key performance index (KPI) measurements in place or vice versa? Your successful business model turns into a strategic risk shunting the possible success its built on.

Whats essential is to be aware of the hypes and not to get carried away with "tried-and-tested" successful business models. It is important to develop the ability to make quick adjustments, be strategically agile and be able to continously recoup your business based on the market dynamics.

Well.... Perhaps I am wrong! What we are today is based on what we did in the past, our history!  And history is written by the winners; ALWAYS! Thoughts?