Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small: Being the Third Edition of Systemantics” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small: Being the Third Edition of Systemantics

John Gall

4.01 · Rating details · 536 ratings · 63 reviews

Get A Copy

Or buy for $6.99

Hardcover, 314 pages

Published January 1st 2002 by General Systemantics Press (first published 1977)

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about The Systems Bible, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about The Systems Bible

Lists with This Book

Systems Thinking Made Simple by Derek Cabrera

Thinking in Systems by Donella H. Meadows

Systems Thinking by Jamshid Gharajedaghi

Thinking on Systems Thinking

39 books — 2 voters

From Talking Drums to the Internet by Robert Gardner

Strategy and Structure by Alfred D. Chandler Jr.

IASummit 2013 Reading List

7 books — 1 voter

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 4.01 ·

Rating details

· 536 ratings · 63 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of The Systems Bible: The Beginner's Guide to Systems Large and Small: Being the Third Edition of Systemantics

Jul 27, 2013 John rated it did not like it

I think what this book demonstrates is that a certain kind of common sense isn't sense at all, but rather a cynical tyranny of half-truths. It is disingenuous, in that it attempts to borrow the prestige of technical language exactly while also writing in a register of humor, so that any attempt to see past it would provoke the guard reflect of not being in on the joke. Another frequently-used convention is to use upper-case words to make conceptual entities seem justified, well-known, and I think what this book demonstrates is that a certain kind of common sense isn't sense at all, but rather a cynical tyranny of half-truths. It is disingenuous, in that it attempts to borrow the prestige of technical language exactly while also writing in a register of humor, so that any attempt to see past it would provoke the guard reflect of not being in on the joke. Another frequently-used convention is to use upper-case words to make conceptual entities seem justified, well-known, and cohesive, while offering no definition or justification of those entities as common phenomena. For example, I could call it Sophistical Trickery to make such a move, but I really don't mean anything more than sophistical trickery no matter how much the emphasis seems to imply. However, beyond the matter of style, there is what this little book of systems ethics forgot: what it is good to do, given the state of living within systems.

Such is the dogmatism of this volume that I fear this negative review might cause partisans to label me as some kind of "systems thinker" or "change agent", for which the book spares no tar. What I am an apologist for is straightforward speaking, careful scholarship, and thoughtful analysis. The great tragedy of this book is that in spreading the tar around it covers good intuitions with bad argument.

There are good intuitions; I might say that there is a lot of half-truth to be found here, and in particular the last sections, which suggest guidelines, are useful. Here is what is useful to know about this book: don't build systems, but instead solve the problems you encounter directly. I think this is right, but let me say something further: don't be afraid to build frameworks, to build guidelines, to build processes, to nonetheless undertake design and undertake it creatively. You should resolve the matters in front of you as straightforwardly and conclusively as possible, but with all of the preparation, care, and design you think is truly appropriate to the task.

The author notes that everything is a system, and all systems attempt to preserve themselves: therefore, we are systems and our obligation is our own care. We are within a profusion of systems, so it is for us to preserve the practices that demonstrate their capacity to care for us, and don't just do things because they are there to do, but because they genuinely promote flourishing as we see it. ...more

flag 19 likes · Like · see review

Sep 13, 2017 Sai rated it really liked it

Some parts systems theory, some parts psychology. Author has a quirky writing style and a consistent dry sense of humor which I enjoyed, but can't see it being everyone's liking.

This book reads like as if a shaman were educating you about complex systems. Very pithy, but also can come across as not rigorous enough.

I wish the author had tackled more systems post-failure scenarios and how to deal with messes, and I would be happy to add that 5th star. Author briefly touches system resiliency, but ...more

flag 12 likes · Like · see review

Apr 27, 2008 Will rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

It's a one of a kind book -- it's the System as idiot blind Azathoth, piping a monotonous tune on a flute at the center of the Universe. It's the System at two in the morning, faking a human voice, blithely informing you there is no emergency and you have always been on fire. It's the System you created that tells you it's going to take your face to make its customers feel more comfortable.

It's a book that tells you every program that you write will have bugs, every company you work for will ...more

flag 7 likes · Like · see review

Dec 30, 2019 Kaspar rated it it was amazing

Shelves: complexity

A simple and brilliant work that you'll probably misunderstand.

Gall, with wit and concision, advocates an attitude and mindset of deep humility and skepticism when dealing with systems. The problem is that this book really is the Tao of Systems Thinking. To receive its wisdom and recognize its profound depth, to grasp even the need for systems-skepticism, the reader should expect to meditate on these aphorisms for days, months or even years. As an intro to systems thinking, its not very good or ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Dec 26, 2010 Ushan rated it really liked it

Shelves: engineering

A cross between Dilbert, Dao De Jing and Charles Perrow's Normal Accidents. Large technological and social systems lose track of their original purpose and turn self-serving; they do not function as designed because their creators forgot Le Chatelier's principle and were unaware of various feedback loops. The process of observing the systems changes them. Passive safety is better than active safety; when used mindlessly, safety devices and procedures themselves become safety hazards.

The examples A cross between Dilbert, Dao De Jing and Charles Perrow's Normal Accidents. Large technological and social systems lose track of their original purpose and turn self-serving; they do not function as designed because their creators forgot Le Chatelier's principle and were unaware of various feedback loops. The process of observing the systems changes them. Passive safety is better than active safety; when used mindlessly, safety devices and procedures themselves become safety hazards.

The examples of systems gone bad are great. An enormous hangar designed to house space rockets and protect them from the elements generates its own weather, so it can rain inside it upon the rockets. When the Fermi I experimental breeder reactor experienced partial meltdown, radioactive sodium was drained and a complicated periscope and pincers were lowered into it; it was found that a foreign object blocked the flow of sodium; the object was later identified as a safety device installed at the very last moment and not documented (Perrow also tells this story; Gall is mistaken in calling it an anti-meltdown device: this would've been too cute). A Peruvian railroad replaced its steam locomotives with diesel ones; they discovered after the fact that diesel locomotives lose most of their power at Andean altitudes, unlike steam ones, but instead of going back to steam, the Peruvians used two 3000hp diesel locomotives where one 1300hp steam locomotive sufficed before. The Nile used to flood annually and fertilize the Egyptian fields; Nasser built the Aswan dam, which stopped the flooding; the dam produces electricity, which is used to make artificial fertilizer (J. R. McNeill also tells this story in his environmental history of the twentieth century). The examples of ignored feedback are also nice. The Green Revolution caused third-worlders to go hungry as before - but at much higher population densities. Widespread application of antibiotics caused antibiotic-resistant germs to emerge. On the other hand, Washington D.C.'s international airport has a better-than-average safety record despite its hazardous features: "It was safe because it was bad. It kept pilots alert".

Every engineer could cite many examples of systems gone bad. So could everybody interested in politics. I wonder if politically Gall is a Reaganite; certainly his book made me think of Reagan's famous remark, "My friends, some years ago, the Federal Government declared war on poverty, and poverty won." My favorite political example is the agricultural policy of the USA and the EU. The United States Federal Government on the one hand, subsidizes farmers and tries to keep food prices and demand for food high, on the other hand, issues food stamps to poor people because food prices are too high, and on the third hand, combats obesity through the National Institute of Health. The EU countries' governments give out large amounts of aid to poor countries, yet impose high tariffs on agricultural imports from them. Like Stanislaw Lem's King Murdas, they are examples of systems so large that their various parts have minds of their own, sometimes contradicting the minds of other parts. ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

May 24, 2019 Otto Lehto rated it really liked it

Do not take this book very seriously. It is a quirky little comedy essay about General Systems Theory. There is really nothing to compare it to, so I really have no idea how to rate it...

Although it lacks any kind of scientific rigour or empirical accuracy, it does a pretty good job of explaining the basics of how (complex) systems work. It does so in a surreptitious way by simplifying the science behind systems theory and complexity theory into pithy slogans and anecdotes. (This is bad ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Mar 18, 2019 Phil Eaton rated it it was amazing

Shelves: engineering-to-read

Douglas Adams writes a book on complexity and failure.

In the top two books I've read in the last five years.

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Aug 01, 2014 John Fultz rated it really liked it · review of another edition

What a very odd book. The voice is incredibly serious, yet often with tongue planted firmly in cheek. The style reminds me a bit of The Dilbert Principle, but with less overt humor and more "wink-wink-nudge-nudge, but no, this is really serious".

Also, it's an old book, and it shows through the examples and footnotes. Many of them date to the 60s and the 70s. Although this printing was released in 2012, there's a lot of the previous decades leaking through.

All of that having been said, the ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Feb 06, 2019 Eric Franklin rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Absurd, hilarious, and useful, this is a complete and creative toolkit for understanding and interacting with systems. Replete with humorous examples and rife with overt cynicism, a timeless representation of human futility for engaging with our own creations.

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Jun 05, 2016 Mark Sanchez rated it did not like it

Funny at times, but I'm not sure there was actually much I could take away from it. I did like the use of very short chapters.

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Nov 20, 2010 Justus rated it it was ok · review of another edition

tries unsuccessfully to be flip and not very insightful, but its a quick read with an interesting of mind tickling maxims.

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Oct 27, 2017 Prasanna rated it it was amazing

I read the book in one sitting on a Friday when I was taking a break from working on some annoying distributed systems issues. It speaks to the timelessness of Systems problems that a book that was first published in 1975 can have such an impact even today. There have been many Systems Theory books since this one and I had just read John Miller's "A crude Look at the whole" and expected more of the same treatment. Boy, was I surprised!? The book is broken into very small chapters that ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Mar 21, 2018 Alexander Yakushev rated it it was amazing

Shelves: management, classics, philosophy

However satirical, this book presents hard questions and no easy answers. It is a very humbling experience that makes you rethink your approach to solving problems (and whether what you do solves them at all).

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Oct 08, 2018 Ulas Tuerkmen rated it it was amazing

Things are not working, that much we agree about. For me, these 'things' are mostly software systems which drive me closer to the edge of insanity the more I work with them, and for the author of this book it's mostly human organizations. The arguments of the book are supposed to apply to all systems, so we can ignore this minor difference. Who or what is to blame for this state of affairs? Or even better, how can we navigate it? The culprit, according to the author,is the systems that we see Things are not working, that much we agree about. For me, these 'things' are mostly software systems which drive me closer to the edge of insanity the more I work with them, and for the author of this book it's mostly human organizations. The arguments of the book are supposed to apply to all systems, so we can ignore this minor difference. Who or what is to blame for this state of affairs? Or even better, how can we navigate it? The culprit, according to the author,is the systems that we see everywhere, enjoined and entangled,permeating our lives, and pulling us in all directions. The solution proposed by the author is to be suspicious of systems, and know their tricky ways ("We must learn to live with systems, to control them lest they control us", p. xiii). An extensive definition of a system is not attempted by the author, rather wisely, because this gives the reader the drive to look for systems in their own life. There is one roundabout way of defining systems towards the end of the book which I found rather enlightening, however: "The system represents someone's solution to a problem. It does not solve the problem" (p. 74). More than systems per se, the author targets what he calls systemism, the vacuous belief in the fundamental usefulness of systems, and the book aims to cast it out of the reader by succinct statements of the flaws of systems. The book is written in a tongue-in-cheek style. The author makes claims of systematicity, and orders his argument in axioms that should somehow lead up to a consistent theory, but that's not really the case. This doesn't mean that the book is inconsistent,however. The axioms serve to deconstruct systemism, and show, in the process, how systems not only fail to function as advertised, but also blind us to their failure.

The argument starts off with a statement of the singularity of systems: All systems exhibit system behavior, and when we have a new one, we will have to deal with its problems, just like with all the others. Systems also have a will to survive and grow. Based on work on the size of administrative systems, the author (rather informally) judges the annual growth of systems to be in the order of 5 to 6 percent per year. This despite the fact that systems do not produce the results we expect them. In fact, we cannot even project what kind of behavior complex systems will exhibit. This is due to what the author calls the Generalized Uncertainty Principle (GUP): "Complex systems exhibit unexpected behavior" (p. 19). The simple and straightforward explanation for the GUP is that the no one can understand the real world good enough to predict the outcome of complex processes. This is a fact that has been internalized in parts of the startup community with the principle of experimenting and failing fast to find out what is working, instead of just guessing it. One obvious trick to beat the GUP is taking a simple system that is well understood, and making it bigger. This will not work, however,which I have had the chance to observe personally a number of times,and the author agrees: "A large system, produced by expanding the dimensions of a smaller system, does not behave like the smaller system".

The next axiom, called Le Chatelier's principle, is also something I have had the misfortune of observing: "Systems tend to oppose their own proper functions" (p.23). That is, systems, through ill-defined proposals for improvement, will install procedures which in name aim to do so, but bind people and resources in what the author calls Administrative Encirclement. The example the author gives is from an academic setting, but every software developer knows the dread of having to attend meetings that are supposed to improve efficiency, but acoomplish nothing other than holding back people from working.

The result of the GUP and Le Chatelier's principle is that systems do not perform the function a similar system of smaller size would perform. The relationship is in the opposite direction: The system is not defined by the function, but the function by the system: "The function or product is defined by the systems-operations that occur in its performance or manufacture" (p.36). But if systems are inefficient, and producing the wrong thing at the same time, how come they don't self-correct? To do so, a system should have the capacity to perceive the situation, which is not the case. For systems, "The real world is what is reported to the system" (p. 39). I think this is one of the most striking lessons of this book. It is astonishing how distorted the views of people working within a company (especially in higher positions) can become, and this precludes making any significant changes in the company. This is also one of the most significant parallels between human and software systems. A software system is also as good as its fidelity to the real world. Some systems keep on running for a long time as their records of reality and the real world drift apart. The author also has a really nice name for the ratio of reality that reaches administration to the reality impinging on the system: Coefficient of Friction.

What about intervening into systems as an outsider? Can one judge their behavior from the outside, without the tinted glasses with which the system sees the world, and improve the system? According to the author, this is possible only if the system already worked at some point. One cannot build a complex system and expect it to work; this is not possible. A working complex system can be achieved only by starting with a small system, and growing it. This is another parallel to software development: Large systems that are designed without one line of code being written, and are then built by separate teams, face huge problems when the time for integration comes. This insight has led to the agile movement, which aims for always working software that is integrated as frequently as possible. What's more, software teams also face a similar issue. Gathering a large number of developers together, and telling them to build a specific thing does not work either. The best approach is to start with a relatively small team,see what works and what doesn't, establish a culture, and grow around them.

How systems deal with errors (or fail to do so) is one of the most relevant parts of the book for modern technological systems. Due to the fact that systems tend to grow and encroach, they will have an infinite number of ways in which they can fail. These ways, and the crucial variables which control failure, can be discovered only once the system is in operation, since the functionality of a complex system cannot be deduced from its part, but only observed during actual functioning. These points lead to the conclusion that "Any large system is going to be operating most of the time in failure mode" (p. 61). It is therefore crucial to know, and not delegate as only extraordinary, what a system does when it fails. This is not so easy, however, since as per the coefficient of fiction, it is difficult for a system to perceive that it is working in error mode,which leads to the principle that "In complex systems, malfunction and even total nonfunction may not be detectable for long periods, if ever" (p. 55).

If it is so difficult to design systems that work, and keep them working as they grow, how are we supposed to live with them? The obvious step is to avoid introducing new ones, that is, "Do it without a system if you can" (p. 68), because any new system will bring its own problems. If you definitely have to use a system, though, the trick is to design the system with human tendencies rather than against them. In technological systems, this is understood as usability. Another principle is to design systems that are not too tightly coupled in the name of efficiency or correctness. This is stated as "Loose systems last longer and function better" (p. 71).

After reading the book, and writing this review, I have only one question in my mind: Why does this book exist? How can it exist? How can it be that so many mind-blowing insights about technological systems were derived by a MD, and recorded in an obscure 80 page book sometime in the seventies? And which other books exist out there that are as good as this one, and are not yet discovered?
...more

flag Like · see review

May 30, 2014 Tony rated it really liked it · review of another edition

I read this book on a Saturday afternoon. Small book, amusing writing, easy to follow.

This book was published in 1975. Don't be surprised if some of the examples, and some of the language, is somewhat dated.

The author attempts to be both amusing and academic in his approach. I find most academic writing to be dry and overly intellectual. While the intellectual aspects of this book annoyed me to some degree (otherwise it would have 5 stars) the humor does shine through.

What are the common I read this book on a Saturday afternoon. Small book, amusing writing, easy to follow.

This book was published in 1975. Don't be surprised if some of the examples, and some of the language, is somewhat dated.

The author attempts to be both amusing and academic in his approach. I find most academic writing to be dry and overly intellectual. While the intellectual aspects of this book annoyed me to some degree (otherwise it would have 5 stars) the humor does shine through.

What are the common characteristics of systems? Keep in mind: machines are systems, as are electronic devices, as are organizations of people, as are computer programs. What things can we say about ALL of these things?

First off: have you ever noticed that systems tend to fail? So much, in fact, that we consider that normal? So much so that we have a common acronym for when it does (SNAFU; Situation Normal All F***ed Up)? Systems tend to spend more time in "failure mode" than in proper working order. And attempts to remedy the situation, usually by making the system more sophisticated, only increase probability that it will be in failure mode at any given time.

As someone who creates systems for a living (I'm a programmer), I tend to think that just a few more tweaks to my shiny new system is all that is needed to get it working properly, reliably. Instead, I need to be designing systems to be as easy as possible to clean up after when they do fail and the consequences of said failure need to cause as little pain as possible. Because the only thing you can count on is that it WILL fail, at least part of the time.

Right. I needed a book to tell me this? It's full of things which should be "duh!" And, in retrospect, are. But going in, you will probably find yourself with a lot of "AHA!" moments.

Spend an hour or two with this one. You won't regret it. You'll probably have a couple laughs. And sometimes, we just need to have those things we've been feeling, down in our bones, publicly stated.

Never forget. The hot air balloon was invented by a couple paper makers (Montgolfier brothers). And the airplane was invented by a couple bicycle makers. Not by some organization. ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Nov 01, 2014 Nathan Glenn rated it it was amazing

Not what I expected, but still very relevant. I expected something very academic and mathematical. The author claimed many times that his principles were "axioms", and that they were pristinely mathematical in nature and all self evident. This was a rather annoying claim, since the book was not mathematical at all, nor were the axioms necessarily self-evident (though good supporting examples were provided). Despite this, it all still rings perfectly true. A system can be a blessing or a curse, ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Feb 08, 2017 Taylor Pearson rated it really liked it

Shelves: business, complexity

Complex systems are one of my favorite subjects and The Systems Bible is a great entry in the genre.

Simple systems are a sum of their parts: a bike is just a bunch of parts. If you take a wheel off and replace it with another, no big deal.

In a complex system, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. If you take the heart out of a horse and then replace it a few hours later, it doesn’t start working again like a bike. This does not mean we can’t understand complex systems, only that they ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Feb 10, 2016 Raziel rated it liked it

Shelves: lifelong-learning

"we humans tend to forget inconvenient facts, and if special notice is not taken of them, they simply fade away out of awareness", p. xx.

"The reader is hereby warned that any such optimism is the reader's own responsibility", p. xxi

"Error is our existential situation and that our successes are destined to be temporary and partial", p. xxv.

Efficiency Expert: Someone who thinks s/he knows what a given System is, or what it should be doing, and who therefore feels s/he is in a position to pass ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Jun 07, 2016 George Anderson rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

This book was first published in 1975 and has gone through several printings.
It is a serious book that sometimes masquerades its points with humor. The general theory supported in the book is that: "Systems in general work poorly or not at all". Two representative corollaries of this theory are: "Large systems usually operate in failure mode" and "The system tends to oppose its own proper function." The strength of the book is the examples of real world systems behaviour ranging from the ...more

flag 1 like · Like · see review

May 26, 2008 John rated it it was amazing

I would like this book to be required reading for all high school or college students. It would help dispel the now unhealthy wide-spread blind faith in "systems." To paraphrase the author: A large system (Congress for example) never does what it says it does. Large systems have their own goals.

"The Systems Bible" is written for the layperson. It is very witty and full of usable wisdom.

flag 2 likes · Like · see review

Sep 10, 2014 Lou Cordero rated it really liked it

The copy I read is subtitled "How systems work and especially how they fail". Wonderful easy read sheds light and humor on the development of complex systems. The impossibility of solving the problem correctly and completely. I recommend this book to anyone involved in the design of complex systems.

flag 1 like · Like · see review

Sep 15, 2019 Gordon rated it really liked it

On the one hand, this book is an opinionated rant about how systems are unpredictable, unworkable and difficult to make work, cloaked in a (moderately clever) satire of a pretentiously-academic tone. I suspect he's sending up the confident systems-thinking texts of the era it was written in (70s). So not a lot of evidence, and his case studies are often more curmudgeonly than clearly representative. Also the way in which public-service departments fail to work feel a bit dated - computers have ...more

flag Like · see review

Jan 09, 2019 Steliyan Stoyanov rated it it was amazing

This book is an absolute must-read for everyone building anything (be it IT professionals, any kind of engineers, etc). So many stories (and hopefully lessons learned) are listed in this book. Now that I am thinking of it, it's really interesting from a consumer point of view as well, because exactly the consumers are using a big number of systems. This book can just give a different perspective on those.

Personally, I really like the writing style of the author, he is not ridiculing or ...more

flag Like · see review

Jan 04, 2019 Jan D rated it really liked it

The book gives principles or rule of thumbs on the behavior of cybernetic systems (which can be almost anything: Companies, machines, nation states…).
The style is direct and dry and the assertions tend to be more cranked-up rather than careful; fittingly, what I called “rule of thumbs” is refereed to as “axioms” of system behavior.
The author gives many examples, mostly ones where things go wrong due to being unaware of the systems behavior pointed out in the rules. These examples are often ...more

flag Like · see review

Sep 25, 2017 David Westerveld rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Presented in a very humorous and entertaining way, this book is packed with ideas that make you stop and think.

Why don't things work the way you expect them to? Well, this book will tell you. It might seem discouraging to know that a "Complex System cannot be 'made' to work. It either work's or it doesn't," but when you think it about, it is easier to (principle 31) align your system with human motivational vectors, than to keep banging your head against fundamental systems laws.

And never ...more

flag Like · see review

Dec 10, 2018 Deane Barker rated it it was ok

This book infuriated me. I wanted a serious discussion of systems theory, but what I got was a Dilbert-esque attempt at comedy.

The book is incredibly hard to follow. I started off diligently trying to highlight stuff and make sense of it, but the writing is scattered, and is going for laughs most of the time. I gave up trying to treat it as a cogent discussion of anything.

Every once in a while, there's a centered statement in ALL CAPS, which meant to be a "principle of systemantics."

The only ...more

flag Like · see review

Nov 07, 2019 M rated it it was ok

A really weird book, I couldn’t gage how seriously it wanted me to take it. The general spirit the book is written in is easy to agree with; we should be cautious when interacting with, understanding, and designing systems. However, nothing about most of the individual rules feels profound. Many rules feel vague and arbitrary. The optimistically named “axioms” feel vulnerable to counterexamples.

The overall cynical view the book takes is disappointing, lacking substantial constructive advice to ...more

flag Like · see review

Jan 08, 2018 Mack Clair rated it liked it

Shelves: owned

A good read. The actual book as such lasts only for 193 pages; the remainder is spent on appendices containing bibliographies, indices, and expertise.

I wish the examples weren’t so dated. In the age of the internet, humans are more intimately involved in systems than ever and interact with systems of unprecedented complexity and size. As examples:
-We add privacy settings to our social media accounts because the information we added to the site negatively impacts our privacy.
-We live in the most ...more

flag Like · see review

Aug 25, 2019 Tom rated it really liked it · review of another edition

This should be required reading for anyone contemplating stepping over the line from hobbyism into corporate America. 'A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work. You have to start over, beginning with a working simple system.' should be a corollary to Fred Brooks' second system effect.

I think reading this book as if it is NOT satire makes it even funnier. Try it! It's a fun read, and doesn't take long to get through. Not sure how easy this book ...more

flag Like · see review

Aug 26, 2019 Carlos Arias rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

A bit pessimistic but brilliant nevertheless

I enjoy this refined manual on systems. The style sarcastic and provocative challenges your assumptions and keep you thinking. I found it a bit pessimistic because systems (not all of them!!!) are the foundation and the way societies reinvent themselves. I liked the image about that the parts of a plane fight the purpose of flying but in the right combination and the due maintenance they are able to fly! So are systems...

flag Like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend It | Stats | Recent Status Updates

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Goodreads is hiring!

If you like books and love to build cool products, we may be looking for you.
Learn more »

Genres

Nonfiction

33 users

Business

23 users

Computer Science > Programming

16 users

Science

15 users

Science > Technology

13 users

See top shelves…

About John Gall

John Gall

13 followers

John Gall (September 18, 1925 - December 15, 2014) was an American author and retired pediatrician. Gall is known for his 1975 book General systemantics: an essay on how systems work, and especially how they fail..., a critique of systems theory. One of the statements from this book has become known as Gall's law.

Gall started his studies in St. John's College in Annapolis, Maryland. He received ...more