This book is a life-changing book for me. I have been a Type 2 diabetic for a little over 10 years, and never quite got my blood sugars as low as my d...moreThis book is a life-changing book for me. I have been a Type 2 diabetic for a little over 10 years, and never quite got my blood sugars as low as my doctor would like. I tried following the recommended diets, but while the results were not awful, it was a constant struggle. Meanwhile, my medication doses were slowly rising, and my doctor started suggesting that maybe we would need to move to insulin injections. But since starting this book and understanding what Dr. Bernstein is saying, my blood sugars have been excellent, I am losing weight, and I feel like I am in control of my life. IF you or anyone you know is a diabetic, I urge you to look at this book.(less)
I give this a high rating because it does what it sets out to do very well.Peter Salus was involved in the history of Unix and Linux, which makes him...moreI give this a high rating because it does what it sets out to do very well.Peter Salus was involved in the history of Unix and Linux, which makes him a good guide to that history. He presents it in a straightforward and spare style, so don't expect a gripping page turner. But if you want to have good accurate data on who did what and when, this book will deliver. Also, it is a relatively quick read because of his spare style.(less)
I think this book would be a good one for your older relative who doesn't understand everything going on in the online world. It covers how old busine...moreI think this book would be a good one for your older relative who doesn't understand everything going on in the online world. It covers how old businesses are going over the cliff, and new business models will need to be created. If you are like me, and have been parked in front of a computer screen with an internet connection every day for the last 15 years, you probably won't find a whole lot here you didn't already know. So it is not a bad book, but nothing terribly revolutionary here. Yes, we will soon be reading most things on screens instead of print on paper. Yes, the advertising support is moving away from print to online. You know, this book is a couple of years old, and maybe it is just that in that time we have all gotten used to the changes.(less)
This is a book that I gave 3-stars to because parts of it are 5-star and parts are 1-star, so this is how it averages out. If you are reading to the r...moreThis is a book that I gave 3-stars to because parts of it are 5-star and parts are 1-star, so this is how it averages out. If you are reading to the right stuff, it is invaluable, but if you read it uncritically you would be making a big mistake.
First, the good stuff. Ridley does a great job of puncturing the "doom-and-gloom" view that everything is going wrong and the world is on a downhill slide. He points out that people having been saying this for a very long time, and events tend to prove them wrong. I'm reminded of the quote that was making the rounds in my youth about "kids these days..." and it turned out to have been written in ancient Greece over 2,000 years ago. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose. A lot of that dim view comes form thinking unclearly. For instance, an example he notes is the famous Club of Rome report published in 1972 called The Limits to Growth. This book showed how we would be clean out of every resource you could name by the late 80s to mid-90s. How many of you remember when we had no oil, no steel, no copper, etc.? I don't remember it either, because it never happened. And Ridley is very clear on just why this is so, and he gets it right. The reason is that when a non-renewable resource starts to get into short supply the price rises, and this rising price causes conservation on the demand side, a search for substitutes, and the increased exploration for new supplies. And this is exactly what happened in the 1970s and 1980s when oil seemed to be in short supply. This is not a new observation, Hotelling wrote about this in the early 20th century, but it is a good idea to keep basic economics in mind when addressing resource issues.
Where he goes wrong, in my view, is taking this basic insight into an extreme of Panglossian optimism that says all problems we might think exist are simply figments of our over-active imaginations, and that if we would just relax and let free markets take over everything would be wonderful. In the end he seems to say that you should ignore scientists on issues such as global warming because what do they know really? He has a view that unrestricted capitalism and markets will solve all problems, which probably plays well in Libertarian circles, but is more extreme than even most economists would go.
So, if you read it for a useful guide to the many things that do go write in the world, that is good. And reminding us of the very definite benefits of markets, specialization, and exchange is always useful. But on this topic Adam Smith did it better and with more nuance in the 18th century.(less)
This is not a page turner. What this is really useful for is a bathroom book. Small, digestible chunks that let you read a little and put the book dow...moreThis is not a page turner. What this is really useful for is a bathroom book. Small, digestible chunks that let you read a little and put the book down. What this book does is present brief biographical sketches (around 4-5 pages each) of each of the signers of the U.S. Constitution. This is fine for what it is, and I enjoyed reading it, but don't go into it with the wrong idea. If you go into this looking for a serious work of historical analysis you will be very disappointed. At the end is the Constitution itself, and a section of trivia about it.(less)
People who know me well enough will learn that my first degree was in History, and it is still a strong interest for me. This book by J.M. Roberts is...morePeople who know me well enough will learn that my first degree was in History, and it is still a strong interest for me. This book by J.M. Roberts is the kind a sweeping history that he is best known for, in this case looking at Europe from the pre-historic times up to the very recent present. I don't think you read this to get an in-depth examination of a particular topic (contrast this with the Eisenstein history of printing I reviewed previously). I got this as an audiobook to enjoy on my rather long commutes, and it performed that role very nicely.
As happens with a book like this, the time scale shrinks as you move forward. While the first chapter covers millenia blithely, by the last part of the book a whole major section is devoted to the 20th century. Since that is our own time it shows a certain bias, but probably one that is congenial to most people.(less)
Art is always in dialog with the time of its creation, so this book is looking at 20th century music. But in saying that, you have to understand that...moreArt is always in dialog with the time of its creation, so this book is looking at 20th century music. But in saying that, you have to understand that it is so-called "classical" music that the author is looking at. That may be a bad term to use, since there is a technical meaning of classical that refers to a specific music of a time (Mozart and Haydn are classical, Mahler definitely is not), so some people use the term "serious" music instead, but I happen to think that the music of John Coltrane is every bit as serious as anything by Stravinsky. But if you decide to pick up this book, it does help to know what the subject matter will be. If you are expecting more than a passing glance at 20th century music like rock'n'roll, you will be very disappointed. Nonetheless, all kinds of music are in dialog with their times, so you can draw relationships if you look closely. For example, the book mentions that Stockhausen was an influence on The Beatles, and appears on the cover of Sgt. Pepper's as a result.
20th Century music is profoundly influenced by 2 World Wars, the atomic bomb, genocide, Fascism, and Communism. One major result is the move away from tonality, which has proceeded to the point that by the 1980s it had become almost impossible to secure any academic position if you were not a 12-tone composer. But this also meant a move away from popular acceptance, since 12-tone compositions are almost by definition impossible to listen to for the average listener. But if you are curious about why composers did what they did, what their aim was, and how they lived in this dialog with their time, this is an excellent book.
BTW, I listened to this book as an audiobook purchased from eMusic.com. They offer audiobooks in straight MP3 format without any DRM, which is why I like them.(less)
This short book (more of an essay, really) was sold as an Amazon single. I got it because I have been thinking about the premise that seeing how print...moreThis short book (more of an essay, really) was sold as an Amazon single. I got it because I have been thinking about the premise that seeing how printing changed the world in the 15th century can help us understand how the Internet is changing our world in the 21st century. Jarvis gets into this by postulating that Gutenberg can be understood as an early version of a Silicon Valley Start-Up. This is an interesting take since I never thought of it in exactly those terms before.
My own thinking has been along the lines of how we communicate is changing. Before printing, communication was essentially limited to one person talking to one other person (or maybe a small group of other people.) After printing we get one person talking to a mass market. As literacy and technology changed the size of that mass market increased, but not the character of the communication model. Radio, television, and movies were simply refinements of this model, but not essentially different. The Internet changed this, and many of the fights we see about copyrights, net neutrality, and even things as mundane as asymmetric bandwidth are just examples of the "broadcast" industries (i.e. print, radio, television, movies) trying to keep their model of the world going and stop the new model of many-to-many communication from coming into being. I think they will fail, but they can do a lot of damage along the way.
Jarvis mention Elizabeth Eisenstein as a resource, and rightly so, but he does not seem to have used her book "The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe". It is still on my "To be read" list, but I am told it is an important work on this topic. (less)
The global climate is changing and the ice caps are melting. Civil liberties are eroding. Romney is rising in the polls.
There are a lot of reasons to...moreThe global climate is changing and the ice caps are melting. Civil liberties are eroding. Romney is rising in the polls.
There are a lot of reasons to be pessimistic about the state of the world. If you are inclined that way, this book is a useful corrective.
I can't say that a whole lot of this book was new to me, since I follow many of these topics already. He brings in the exponential growth curves that Ray Kurzweil has popularized (think Moore's Law, but applied to a lot more than just transistors on silicon). And a key concept he brings in is that energy is very close to being abundant, cheap, and clean. We are within just a few years of solar voltaic electricity being cheaper than what you are buying right now from your utility. As Dana Blankenhorn likes to say "There is no energy shortage. The sun shines, the wind blows, the tides roll, we live on a molten rock." This one factor alone is going to make for radical change soon.
Another factor he points to is what he calls "the rising billions". People themselves are a resource, and we are creating the technology to empower them without even intending to do so. Even the poor now have access to the Internet through cell phones. So the future is going to be radically different.(less)
This is not a book for everyone, but it is interesting for the right person. My initial impulse to read it was because of the involvement of David Bri...moreThis is not a book for everyone, but it is interesting for the right person. My initial impulse to read it was because of the involvement of David Brin, whom I follow on Google+ and consider a very intelligent observer of society. And the book grew out of an article he wrote some years ago for Slate Magazine that compared Star Wars to Star Trek, and found Start Trek to be the better series for reasons that might not immediately come to mind to a casual observer.
The lens that Brin chose to shine on these was one of what they say about people and society. Star Wars comes from a long tradition of mythic fantasy, as should be well known. George Lucas was pretty open about being influenced by Joseph Campbell in writing these Star Wars stories, and the influence clearly shows. And these kinds of mythic fantasy stories are about heroes, and generally they are special people. Anakin Skywalker is named, among other things, the "Chosen one", and is revealed to be different in various ways, from birth, from others. (See midichlorians). And in these kinds of stories people who are born special are always the focus. The rest of us are just a backdrop to their story.
Star Trek, by contrast, is about ordinary people. It is just their circumstances that are extraordinary. While none of us could ever by Luke Skywalker or Obi-Wan Kenobi, we could all imagine ourselves joining Starfleet and rising to captain a Starship. The people here are just like us, and we can identify with them.
The reason this kind of thing matters is when you consider that our attitude towards these stories may also say something about our attitude to our own society. And that is where Brin likes to go with this analysis. If you look to special people to solve problems, you are more likely to look for a savior of some kind to come along and solve all of our current problems. And that is antithetical to how a democracy functions. A democratic society should be one where each of us rolls up our sleeves and makes solutions to problems. A subtext to this is the tendency to employ Social Darwinism to exalt those who have had success as naturally better than those who have been less successful. As a scientific view of society it is pretty much useless, but it is being pushed energetically right now by forces that are trying to drag us back to Feudal-type of society where your place in the world is largely settled by birth. I think this is a tendency that should be energetically resisted, as does David Brin.
One last connection that occurred to me is that I support Free Software, which is software made by people and offered for free use. And wherever possible I resist using proprietary software offered by companies that only "license" the use and reserve the right to take away that license any time they feel like it. I think that is an example of preference for democracy in action.(less)
This was not the best book I have ever read. The main premise is that design is very important, which is not something I disagree with, but the book i...moreThis was not the best book I have ever read. The main premise is that design is very important, which is not something I disagree with, but the book is mostly a retelling of anecdotes of how the author used design to solve various problems. If you are a design junkie, pick it up, but if you pass it by I suspect your life will somehow be complete anyway.(less)
This was a slightly tricky book to rate. I gave it four stars out of five on the merit of the book itself, though I would recommend it mostly to peopl...moreThis was a slightly tricky book to rate. I gave it four stars out of five on the merit of the book itself, though I would recommend it mostly to people who are interested in the history of science but not heavily read in that area already. This book is not one that sets a standard for scholarship, but is a well-written introduction to a worthy topic.
Isaac Newton is the primary focus of this book, though his rival Leibniz also comes in for some discussion. And Newton is valuable because he represents a transition to the modern world. Because of his invention of calculus and his laws of motion, he is regarded as one of the first modern scientists, and deservedly so. But he was equally one of the lats great medieval thinkers, drenched in religiosity, and a devoted investigator in alchemy. So he was born into a medieval world, where the great fire of London and the Plague were seen as God's judgement on a sinful people. But when he died it was a modern world, and he did a lot to make it so. so the sub-title is really quite accurate.
One of the things that should get you thinking as you read between the lines, particularly in the first part of the book, is how people reacted to the Plague. With no understanding of disease, and an assumption that such things were the just visitations of a wrathful God, they had no alternative but to die in huge numbers. Now we have science and medicine that can protest us, but those very accomplishments that define the modern world are under attack right now by religious fundamentalists who would drag us back to those days. We need to be constantly vigilant to stop them.(less)
Not quite as mandatory reading as his classic Hackers, this is nonetheless a good book for anyone who is interested in more contemporary Internet history. Levy got "embedded" in Google for a couple of years and had access to pretty much all of the significant people in the Google story. One personal note: the Google "house economist", Hal Varian, was one of my professors at the University of Michigan when I was studying for a Ph.D. there in the early 1980s. I doubt he could pick me out of a lineup, though.
This is a recently updated and reissued version of Levy's classic book from 25 years ago. He traces the development of computing from the MIT model railroad club in the late 1950s through Silicon Valley in the 1980s. All of the major figures are covered, and he really brings home what the hacker ethic is about. If you have any interest in the history of computing this is one of those books you have to read
This was a departure for me. I got interested while listening to talk by Ruth Suehle at Ohio LinuxFest in 2011. Gen. Shelton had become Chairman of the Red Hat board (Ruth works for Red Hat), and so she took a look. She said it was not the sort of thing she would normally read, but that it surprised her. I decided that was enough of a recommendation, pulled out my phone, and bought it from Google Books as an eBook.
I must confess this was my first military autobiography. I had read Steven Ambrose's biography of Eisenhower, which I greatly enjoyed) but this was different because it was so contemporary. Gen. Shelton served as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff first under Pres. Clinton, and then for about a year under Pres. Bush. He has great praise for Clinton and his Sec. of Defense William Cohen, but pretty much despises Sec. of Defense Rumsfeld.
But I would not recommend the book to get his views of politicians, since his opinions are not all that different from a lot of other people. What really made this book a great read for me was getting to know the man and his values, as well as the values of so many others in the U.S. military. As long as we can attract people of the caliber of Gen. Shelton we will be in good shape.
This is deservedly a classic work in the business and technology area because it highlights an interesting problem: When disruptive innovation occurs,...moreThis is deservedly a classic work in the business and technology area because it highlights an interesting problem: When disruptive innovation occurs, the best management practices are likely to cause your company to fail. Christensen uses several industries, such a hard disk drive manufacturing and excavation equipment to make his point.
He first distinguishes between two types of innovation, sustaining and disruptive. In short, sustaining innovation is making incremental improvements in the existing technology, such as adding more capacity to existing disk drives. And in those cases firms can do well using standard management practices, by evaluating the cost of innovation versus the return on the investment, and choosing any innovation where the metrics are favorable.
In contrast, a disruptive innovation frequently looks like a development no one needs, and possibly even a step backwards. But it can lay the groundwork for overturning the established dominant firms and remaking the industry. And the dilemma is that in the vast majority of cases, the existing dominant companies will be incapable of even following, let alone leading, in the new technology.
One reason I was eager to read this book is the Eric S. Raymond has been making the argument that Apple is vulnerable to disruption from below in the mobile market, and that interests me. I don't know that I am entirely ready to buy Eric's argument yet, though I will note that his forecasts have so far been pretty accurate.
One last note: I read this on my phone using the Kindle app. I do not recommend this to anyone else. The book uses a number of graphs and charts that are rendered unreadable on a small screen. I suspect this sort of thing will get better, but for now I would get the paper book or use a larger screen(less)
I think it is important to consider how the things we do today will create the future we will inhabit. Kurzweil's book is very important. You might th...moreI think it is important to consider how the things we do today will create the future we will inhabit. Kurzweil's book is very important. You might think that the things he talks about cannot possibly happen. But then think about Moore's Law, and what that has done in one small area.(less)
I found this book to be a fascinating look at how the Internet is changing all kinds of businesses and institutions. It really rings true. Jarvis is a...moreI found this book to be a fascinating look at how the Internet is changing all kinds of businesses and institutions. It really rings true. Jarvis is a journalist who explains why the death of newspapers is inevitable, but also what will take their place, for instance. His rules of the Google age are well worth reading.(less)
This was a fun book. I won't claim that it is cosmically significant, but sometimes I enjoy relaxing with a book that is fun to read, and this book wa...moreThis was a fun book. I won't claim that it is cosmically significant, but sometimes I enjoy relaxing with a book that is fun to read, and this book was that for me. Michio Kaku is one of those people that is always fun to follow. You may have seen him on TV where he has a show that is similar to this book.
The ideas is that he takes a number of ideas familiar from Science Fiction, and asks if they are possible, or truly impossible. Some things we can't do now, but maybe there is way we can do it in the future without violating the laws of physics as we know them. Other things would require a new understanding that the laws of physics are not quite what we think. That has happened before, and there is no a priori reason to think it can't happen again. (less)
Harry Truman once said "The only thing new in this world is the history you don't know." He was guided throughout his political career by the lessons...moreHarry Truman once said "The only thing new in this world is the history you don't know." He was guided throughout his political career by the lessons of history, a subject in which he was very well read. And studying history shows us how much our current issues can be better understood by their antecedents. As Mark Twain said, "History doesn't repeat itself, but sometimes it rhymes." Why does any of this matter? Well, right now we are going through a revolution in media known as the Internet. This is a topic about which many learned books will be written, and some of them will even get parts of the story right. But I think we can get some idea of what is happening by looking at the last real revolution in media, which was the invention of the printing press. I'm not alone in thinking this, of course. Jeff Jarvis recently published a monograph (available as a Kindle single) called Gutenberg the Geek that I think got some parts of story right. But I wanted to dive a little more deeply, which is why I read this book.
Professor Eisenstein has made a life study of this topic, and this book presents much of that research. As a word of warning, it is written as a scholarly work, so expect to work at it a little if you decide to pick it up. But it is definitely rewarding. I read it to get a sense of what might happen in our future, so I am going to focus on that as an exercise in "lessons learned".
The first thing I noticed is that "crowd sourcing" (e.g. Wikipedia) is not something brand new. The early printer/publishers were eager to solicit corrections and suggestions from the readers. The very first printed works were based on hand-copied manuscripts, and the process of hand-copying lead to inevitable corruption as every mistake made by a particular copier survived into all subsequent copies based on that manuscript, and of course even more mistakes got added by each subsequent copier. By the time of the printing press, in the 15th century, no two copies of any work were the same. But by printing mass quantities and distributing them widely, these variants could be compared, scholars could focus on the discrepancies, and mistakes could be fixed. And with printing allowing for mass duplication of identical copies, the process of textual drift got stopped in its tracks. The idea that with many eyeballs all bugs are shallow really begins in the 15th and 16th century with mass printing.
Another development from printing that we are still dealing with is the invention of "Intellectual Property". In the days of hand copying this concept did not exist. Most of the works people cared about were from antiquity anyway, and copying them to preserve them was a sacred trust. But with the development of a mass market for books, more new works were being created, and financial compensation became an issue. By 1500 this was already underway, and what been a commons was subject to an "enclosure" movement. One of the ironies is that a pioneer printer who was part of this process, Louis Elsevier, gave his name to a modern publishing company that is now being attacked by scientists for locking up what they believe should be a common. (Note, the modern company is not the legal continuation of the house of Elsevier. But they took the name of their countryman in recognition of his fame in printing history).
The religious wars are intimately linked to the rise of printing. On the one hand, it is difficult to see the Protestant Reformation succeeding if printing had not been available, since previous "heretics" had been rather easily suppressed by the institutional power of the Catholic Church. But with the ability to spread their tracts all over Europe in mere weeks this revolution could not be stopped. But it is equally clear that the Reformation had much to do with the success of the Printing revolution. Protestant Princes sheltered and supported the printers who published many notable scientific works. Interestingly, they did so not because of any commitment to free speech or freedom of thought, but primarily to antagonize the Catholic Church. In fact, the well known Index Liborum Prohibitorum (i.e. Index of Prohibited Books) compiled by the Catholic Church became the favorite source for printers in Protestant countries who were looking for works to print. Indeed, by specifying exactly which lines on which pages it found objectionable, the Catholic Church provided an invaluable guide to the printers as to exactly which passages to highlight and mass duplicate! I find it interesting that at the present time the situation has nearly reversed, with the fundamentalist Protestants opposing science and the Catholic Church mostly accepting science. But the lesson I draw form this history is two-fold: First, as during the Reformation, you cannot stop ideas from spreading. With the Internet, instead of traveling in weeks, an idea can travel at the speed of light. And the more you try to prohibit something, the more attractive it becomes.
The final idea I want to highlight is the this revolution did not take place primarily in the large nations, but in the small principalities. It was the smaller areas that lead the way, and I think you can see why when you consider how revolutionary printing was. Large nations by their nature resist revolutions because they have nothing to gain from them and much to lose. The printing revolution succeeded in large part because no one was in a position to stop it. And that is significant when you look at the desperate attempts of nations (and even the U.N.) to take control of the Internet. Whether they can do it at this point is a question for another day, but I think it is clear that they should be resisted as much as possible.(less)
This book is interesting, though in some ways it shows its age. For instance, you need to overlook the references to Myspace as the examplar of what s...moreThis book is interesting, though in some ways it shows its age. For instance, you need to overlook the references to Myspace as the examplar of what social networking is. Facebook gets a small mention along the way, as well. And of course when the book was written that was the relative importance of these two services. But don't let that distract you from what Tapscott does here. He systematically explores the effect of collaboration on how we will be doing business in the future. Some of this may seem obvious now, since we have lived through a few years since the book was written, but I think any reader will find some topics that make you go "Hmmm..." (less)
This is a very interesting book about how the Internet changes the way people interact and how business will be done. The companies that don't underst...moreThis is a very interesting book about how the Internet changes the way people interact and how business will be done. The companies that don't understand this will have difficult times ahead. I found myself thinking about how healthcare will be affected. (less)
This is the last book in the Jim Collins trilogy, a follow-up to his hit "Good to Great", which itself followed "Built to Last". I actually read this...moreThis is the last book in the Jim Collins trilogy, a follow-up to his hit "Good to Great", which itself followed "Built to Last". I actually read this one first because it was given to me by the head of my company during a hospital stay. I was so impressed I grabbed "Good to Great" off of my wife's bookshelf, and then went to the bookstore to buy the first one, "Built to Last". So I read them in reverse order, but I think the main thing is that you should read all three to get the full picture of what Collins is talking about.
Although these are primarily Business books, I think there is a lot of useful information here about leading any organization.(less)
This is the big smash hit from Jim Collins, and you probably don't need me to promote this this book. But you may not know that this is the middle boo...moreThis is the big smash hit from Jim Collins, and you probably don't need me to promote this this book. But you may not know that this is the middle book of a three book series that shares a common methodology and should be read as a group. The first book is "Built to Last", and the final book is "How the Mighty Fall". I actually read them in reverse order due to an odd combination of circumstances, but the three books together tell a very interesting story(less)
Oddly enough, though this was the first of the big Jim Collins books, it was the last one I read. Since this was first published in 1994 you can note...moreOddly enough, though this was the first of the big Jim Collins books, it was the last one I read. Since this was first published in 1994 you can note that one or two of those companies may not last much longer. Motorola, for instance, may be on the edge. But the core concept of this book is still relevant, that you need to stick to your core values but be willing to change everything else.
This book preceded Collins' smash hit "Good to Great", but in fact I would read all three of them together (the most recent is "How the Mighty Fall"), as together they tell a story. They also share a methodology that makes a great deal of sense: match each "success" company with another very similar, but not as successful company. That way you can pick out the distinguishing factors that separate the great from the merely good. (less)
This is a great introduction to Lean ideas. I think this would be a good starting point for someone who wanted to implement Lean processes where they...moreThis is a great introduction to Lean ideas. I think this would be a good starting point for someone who wanted to implement Lean processes where they work. I did have to wonder, though, after reading how Toyota does everything so well, just how that accelerator problem came about. Did they stop following thier own rules? Hmmm...
The other thing is that I am somewhat skeptical that very many American companies could become Lean organizations. Toyota had the ability to take a long view, and stay on their strategy over decades. American companies are constantly trying to produce quarterly numbers to satisfy Wall St. analysts, and tend to go with the management fad of the week. Combine that with the tendency of Boards to look for "charismatic" leaders, and you have to wonder. I did find it interesting to look at this book together with Jim Collins' books. Both of them really push the idea of doing a few things well over a long period of time. (less)
This book is all about applying Lean ideas to Healthcare. John was the CEO at ThedaCare, and put this transformation into practice there. For people w...moreThis book is all about applying Lean ideas to Healthcare. John was the CEO at ThedaCare, and put this transformation into practice there. For people who think Lean is only about manufacturing, this book might be an eye-opener. And for anyone who, like me, is in the healthcare industry and interested in Lean, it is invaluable as a source of ideas.(less)
Loading...
