Leadership Using the Hedgehog Concept Collins was not incorrect in the way he described the leadership at Wells Fargo. When Collins and his research team were carrying out the research, the relied on interviews and newspaper articles plus the performance of the company on the stock market. All this combined resulted in their assumption that the leadership and change in strategy by Wells Fargo was resulting in the increase in stock price. It is true that for a company to become a great company it needs to identify the three things pointed out by Collins (2001) namely what is the company good at, what drives the company, and what are employees passionate about? Wells Fargo managed to identify all these three things and discovered that in order for it to increase investor profits it needs to change its business strategy. Changing the business strategy did have the expected results, and the company experienced superior profits. However, all this was based on the performance of the company on the stock exchange. There was no tangible evidence that showed the company stock rose because of the changes implemented. In the book, there is no demonstration anywhere that the authors carried out any empirical research or capture any data directly related to the company's performance. All the information is based on published newspaper, and magazine articles and interviews conducted. This resulted in the bias of information collected since most of the interviews would paint the company is good light and the articles were all showing the improvements made at the company. Collins did the best he could to explain the situation at Wells Fargo and his findings at that time looked accurate. The measure employed by Collins to determine a company's greatness was stock market return. This measure could be influenced by numerous factors and assuming that the measure...

Mainly because the book was written and focused on what the company had done in the past and not what it was going to do in the future. The future is not so easy to predict, and one can only base their analysis on how the company has performed previously. This is a good measure for predicting and positioning the company to continue succeeding. Understanding the past is valuable in order for one to predict the future (Ortmeier & Meese, 2010), but in the case of Collins he never fully understood what was going on at Wells Fargo. What Collins wrote about was based on the past performance of the company, and he had hoped that since the company was performing well and it had performed so well during the research phase, it would continue to perform well in the future. Like earlier pointed out the research carried out did not involve looking into the business practices, and they only collected data from articles and interviews. The data collection methodology was itself skewed in that all the information was going to point out how well the Hedgehog Concept had worked for Wells Fargo. Since its CEO had opted to transform the business from being a per loan profit to a per employee profit, it looked the company was going to continue its growth trajectory. The mantra embraced by the company was 'run it like you own it.' This mantra meant that each employee would do their work as though they owned the company or as though the company was their own. The mantra was good, but it seemed it could not run for long. This was something that Collins had not foreseen. However, had he conducted a much intensive research and collected data by observing what and how the employees went about performing their jobs. The lack of such…