[IsaacL]

I bought her book as a gift for my teenage sister, who is smart but also kind of a rebel. She loved it. Amoruso went from freegan anarchist going dumpster-diving to running a successful business, and so had lots of unique insights and perspectives. My sister would never read a standard life-advice book, but Amoruso is someone she could relate to.

For people saying business books are all nonsense -- why is business seen as a uniquely luck-based activity? No-one says, oh, some bridges collapse and some don't, so books about civil engineering only reflect survivorship bias. Business can't be reduced to a formula, but it can be broken down into smaller areas, each with its own principles (sales, marketing, recruiting, product development, etc). Amuroso learned these areas very quickly when she was getting started, but made some mistakes when things got bigger and the challenges increased.

[projektfu]

I haven't read Amoruso's book but business books are generally mediocre because they usually are written with the same logical fallacies. Most of them are either a businessperson extrapolating their unique circumstance to the whole world, or they are a study of a few companies that have succeeded without searching for companies that have failed using the same practices. Every now and again there is a good "philosophical" sort of book that challenges the zeitgeist. Those are the ones I usually like to read.

[aphid180]

Any particular "philosophical" business book recommendations?

[acidbaseextract]

I highly highly recommend both of Phil Rozenzweig's books, The Halo Effect and Left Brain, Right Stuff.

The Halo Effect in particular is a clinical deconstruction of the fallacies the business book genera. It tears Good to Great and company apart.

[projektfu]

Up the Organization, by Robert Townsend, for example.

[nradov]

Most business books are nonsense because they present a case study of how a single organization succeeded and are written by a single executive or consultant trying to put a positive spin on the experience. But they present no evidence as to whether the success was caused by or in spite of their actions.

One business book that actually applied hard data analysis to look for causality across multiple companies is "Good to Great" by Jim Collins.

https://www.harpercollins.com/9780066620992/good-to-great

[jstelly]

Good to great has a big problem with survivorship bias. It's fairly low-investment to read, but I wonder how much value there is in adhering to the principles it recommends.

[IsaacL]

Tony Hsieh of Zappos was a big fan, and recommended it to all his execs.

[katpas]

I agree there are a lot of crappy business books out there that fit that description. I read Sophia's after writing this list but it's good for all the reasons mentioned by IsaacL.

Here are a few I thought were interesting and in the tone 'this is my experience, apply it to your situation or don't' - https://medium.com/@KatAlexPas/an-hour-and-a-half-a-day-of-r...

[petercooper]

I also enjoyed her book and think there's good stuff in there. However, so much of the book revolved around being an independent operator and having full control and, notably, this company is tumbling once it's not in an individual's control.

My opinion is that Amoruso is a superb leader for a certain type and size of business (and her book focuses on this) but probably not for a large one with many competing interests, investors and all - notoriously difficult especially in fashion retail with all its inventory and timing issues.

[theparanoid]

Business isn't uniquely luck based that doesn't imply business books are useful, https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YlVDGmjz7eM