《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》经典读后感10篇
《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》是一本由Ben Horowitz著作，HarperBusiness出版的Hardcover图书，本书定价：USD 29.99，页数：304，特精心从网络上整理的一些读者的读后感，希望对大家能有帮助。
《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》读后感(一)：世界不会跟着你的感觉走
看着这本书感悟超多，分分钟戳中笑点和泪点！全是干货，本以为会很technical，对于未创业的我不实用。可是还是很多想法上的东西受益匪浅！写读书笔记不够用了，书评来也～～
1. 本以为自己很辛苦，读书考试写论文面试找工作做义工照顾家人等等压力很大，很多事情都没有时间去做。结果在作者看来这些都不算什么！两页就硕士毕业结婚生子被挖到新的公司！吃一餐饭就找到了老婆你怎么那么厉害！跟你将来要处理的问题相比，眼前的难处算什么！
2. 开创一个公司要考虑的不单单是你的公司。一场金融风暴会影响你，你的竞争者，和你的客户。不同的情况有不同的处理办法。当silver bullet不在的时候，想办法去创造一个lead bullet来处理问题！
3. 当你雇用一个人的时候，你要看的不是他是否有缺点，而是看他有没有你需要的长处。（不知道这个心得在找老公方面是否valid...作者说你在和平时期或许看重一个人是否与周围的人相处得来，但是在战争时期，你需要的是一个战士！）
4. 坦诚而实际的沟通很重要。首先你自己要意识到沟通的重要性，其次你要让你的员工们都意识到沟通对你来说的重要性。如果在一个公司里沟通不顺畅的话信息无法传达，那么很多潜在的问题都会累积。个人觉得这个真的很重要，夫妻间吵架可以靠这个来解决。
5. 你要知道你要什么，这样你才能招到合适的人，才能让你的员工们知道what you're looking for from them.
6. 为了知道你要什么，你要去尝试！
7. 人生会面临很多困难。比如球赛比着比着伤了一大堆人，教练手上无牌可出。比如你要去上课，结果地铁故障延迟了一个小时。这些突发事件都无可预料，可能会给你造成无法弥补的损伤。it's very unfair. but who cares!任何事情发生了，跟别人抱怨造成这些结果的罪魁祸首都无济于事。既然结果都要自己承担，何必抱怨这么多呢！不如破釜沉舟，努力想办法从眼前的状况开始突破吧。
8. The idea seemed so simple and obvious that it had to work.
9. Life is struggle. Embrace the struggle, embrace your weirdness, your background, your instinct. 突然就励志了！
10. 这本书连Acknowledgements都值得看！作者的成功不是一个人的胜利。他强调团队合作和团队成就，所以最后有一个很consistent的结尾。人总是要厚着脸皮主动出击，以真诚的心与人相交。能够坦诚与他人沟通合作并互相欣赏，这种感觉真是太美好了。
11. 给小孩起名Boochie, Red, Boogie你是认真的吗！！！
《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》读后感(二)：领导者的4S功力
这本书被奉为创业者宝典，其实不仅适合创业者看，也适合职业经理人看。作者分享了在其创业路的很多教训和体会，从中我提炼出来成功创业者（包括职业经理人）需要修炼的4S 功力。
4S是指：Smart, Strong, Straight forward, Sympathy,下面一一讲述这几点。
市场竞争激烈，变化多。做企业第一个要回答的问题就是： 企业要去哪？怎么去？优秀的领导者能够在复杂多变的环境中认清楚方向。这就需要企业领导者足够Smart。这种Smart不是指简单的聪明与否，而是一种“拨开云雾见青天”的能力，看清楚方向。并且能够“化繁为简”，能够容易地让其他人明白这个方向，从而跟随领导者共同朝一致的方向迈进。这一点在作者的书中多次有例证，特别是在带领企业业务转型的时候。要锻炼Smart，需要经常进行复盘。作者写这本书其实也是一种复盘。在不断复盘中，提升自己拨云见日的能力。
认清楚方向只是第一步。而要到达目的地，需要艰苦地跋涉。这个过程充满了挑战，痛苦。要能走完这个过程到达目的地，需要领导者有一个Strong Mind. 书中有个章节专门讲领导者要有足够的勇气，谈的就是这一点。作者亲身的体会是在其担任CEO的8年多时间里，只有3天是顺境，剩下的8年几乎全是举步维艰。没有一个坚强的内心，是没法顺利走完这个路程的。比如作者在业务转型要裁掉原来业务单元的老员工时，在公司离破产只有几个月的时，在公司并购交易只剩2天的时候被要求更改业务收入统计方法时，这些都是非常痛苦的时候。如果没有一个Strong Mind, 很容易做出错误的选择。对于锻炼一颗坚强的内心，作者也给出了建议：1）多交朋友,领导者是孤独的，需要朋友来分享喜悦和悲伤。2）把困难写出来，而不是只停留在脑海里。3）盯着路，而不是墙。
认清楚方向并能做到坚韧不拔，剩下的事情就是带领团队跟随自己到达目的地。这时候要做的就是Straight 和Sympathy.
traight forward指的时直截了当。在带领团队时，保持直截了当的沟通方式，给与同事反馈，并寻求反馈。在面临团队内部问题，采取直截了当的措施来解决。直截了当并不是指简单粗暴，而是把问题放在台面上，减少公司内部政治。比如作者建议如果2个经理人互有抱怨，最好的方式就是把他们叫进同一个会议室，直面问题，讨论解决方法，或者互换位置。同时不要让这些事情走太远，直面问题而不是拖延。
ympathy 指的是同理心。不是人人都是CEO，每个人有她自己的考虑。要从同仁的角度出发考虑问题，营造良好地工作氛围。
并不是所有的领导者4S都很强，在不同情形下也需要不同的侧重，比如作者所描述的peace time和War time. 但总体而言，这些是基本功，而基本功才是支持一个人和企业长久发展的关键。
《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》读后感(三)：The one telling the truth
一本真诚到值得读完“Acknowledgements”部分的书，形容为“所有创业者的宝典”其实有一点点过，这的确是一本非常适合IT业创业者的书籍，而且正如Horowitz所说他和Adreessen合创VC的目标是“使硅谷变成更适合创业的地方”，而对于其他更为传统的行业以及不是美国、不是硅谷的地方，有一些参考，但不至于奉为圭臬。瑕不掩瑜。
之所以说到真诚，除了书中的建议几乎全部来自于作者在失败中的教训，或者说他作为一个Wartime CEO的血泪史，更因为尽管宣传为顶级VC、尽管这本书很大程度上也是Horowitz强调VC也要做PR的宣传品，他还是非常清楚地说明Andreessen Horowitz只是一个起步不足10年、Portfolio Company不多（Airbnb、Github、Facebook、Twitter、Pinterest）、大部分员工（Partner）来自于原来创业团队Loudcloud/Opsware各部门的不是那么高大上的VC。
书的编排也很聪明，至少没有用Shit Sandwich格式，而是上来就是Shit（从这一点看，作者默认本书的读者不是创业小白，是直奔干货而来的），前3章是作者从90年代中期到2007年把公司卖给HP的经历陈述。这里是唤起共鸣的。They would say, “How can we walk away from requirements that we know to be true to pursue something that we think will help？” 创业者经常会陷入用小修小补（通常又明显又真实）来替代真正的变革（通常又隐晦又艰难，还只是“可能”有用）的诱惑，这种小甜头吃多了就会忘记路，所以她必须时刻警惕。It turns out that is exactly what product strategy is all about—figuring out the right product is the innovator’s job, not the customer’s job. The customer only knows what she thinks she wants based on her experience with the current product. The innovator can take into account everything that’s possible, but often must go against what she knows to be true. 这与乔布斯那句“用户不知道自己要什么”的著名论断相得益彰，是不是真的都是英雄所见略同？科技界的每个创新似乎都在反复证明有洞察有勇气的颠覆者服务于麻木而又见风使舵大众这条公式，而不是商学院需求创造产品的概念推理。Early in my career as an engineer, I’d learned that all decisions were objective until the first line of code was written. After that, all decisions were emotional. 也许无论硅谷还是中关村都一样，每个被扎克伯格激发的创业工程狮其实都是感情用事的，他们的创业没有沉没成本（这让其他行业的创业者艳羡），但令人唏嘘的是他们在用理性做成最感性的事，这绝对是世上最为纠结的状态没有之一。
在第3章结束卖掉自己公司的时候，作者说和Andreessen起了创办一家VC的念头，但他要用第4～8章来说一下自己创业经历的感悟，一箭三雕，把本书的核心内容雕进去了，把读者雕进去了，把a16z的VC竞争力雕进去了。这里再穿一帮，a16z的核心竞争力就是区别于其他的科技VC，不拿空降CEO说事儿，而且帮助创始人（founding CEO）成为合格的CEO（professional CEO）。所以这核心的5章实际上就是在教读者（预期你是一个科技企业的创始CEO）如何Get CEO Skills。其实说是Skills也不太确切，作者强调要培养的CEO第一特质应该是勇气：People always ask me, “What’s the secret to being a successful CEO？” Sadly, there is no secret, but if there is one skill that stands out, it’s the ability to focus and make the best move when there are no good moves. 还有这句If a warrior keeps death in mind at all times and lives as though each day might be his last, he will conduct himself properly in all his actions. （似曾相识，对啦，这不又是小乔的经典论断live as you would die tomorrow吗？）CEO自己要有勇气不说，很多创业者之所以会去创业是就是胆子大，这里排除幼稚天真无知所以无谓者。关键是他怎么能把勇气变成一种企业文化特质，这就很难了，一些创始人有意无意地把自己塑造一言九鼎的英雄人物，在他突然出现的场合争论神奇地化为沉默，而Horowitz说A healthy company culture encourages people to share bad news. A company that discusses its problems freely and openly can quickly solve them. 在“允许畅所欲言、言论自由”与“必须有人站出来搁置争议做出向前进的决定”之间又是一次次艰难的平衡。勇气是一种行动，而不是一种感觉：“I tell my kids, what is the difference between a hero and a coward？ What is the difference between being yellow and being brave？ No difference. Only what you do. They both feel the same. They both fear dying and getting hurt. The man who is yellow refuses to face up to what he’s got to face. The hero is more disciplined and he fights those feelings off and he does what he has to do. But they both feel the same, the hero and the coward. People who watch you judge you on what you do, not how you feel.” —CUS D’AMATO, LEGENDARY BOXING TRAINER 。人们不关心你的感受，他们只看你做了什么。
另外一个可以说是一项Skill的、也是创始CEO需要重新学习的是Organization design，这绝对是技术专家型CEO的软肋，有的甚至软到拒绝去面对这个问题而选择事事亲力亲为，或者让员工们自由组织、自己来定义要什么事情。结果是什么不好说，但Horowitz提到这是必须要做的事情。CEO这个Black art实际上必须要做的是mastering the unnatural。这一段关于什么是好公司和坏公司的对话：
Me: “Do you know the difference between a good place to work and a bad place to work？”
teve: “Umm, I think so.”
Me: “What is the difference？”
teve: “Umm, well . . .”
Me: “Let me break it down for you. In good organizations, people can focus on their work and have confidence that if they get their work done, good things will happen for both the company and them personally. It is a true pleasure to work in an organization such as this. Every person can wake up knowing that the work they do will be efficient, effective, and make a difference for the organization and themselves. These things make their jobs both motivating and fulfilling. “In a poor organization, on the other hand, people spend much of their time fighting organizational boundaries, infighting, and broken processes. They are not even clear on what their jobs are, so there is no way to know if they are getting the job done or not. In the miracle case that they work ridiculous hours and get the job done, they have no idea what it means for the company or their careers. To make it all much worse and rub salt in the wound, when they finally work up the courage to tell management how fucked-up their situation is, management denies there is a problem, then defends the status quo, then ignores the problem.”
挑选执行官/经理人，或者开掉他们也是CEO一项必备技能。Horowitz详细讲述了他在Opsware招聘销售总监的过程，这位应聘者最终打动他的是拿出厚厚一本自己总结的销售员培训计划。在书最后的附件“如何招聘销售总监”里也提到应聘者对员工培训的计划是考量其是否是合格的执行官（而不是执行者）的重要因素。I learned about why startups should train their people when I worked at Netscape. People at McDonald’s get trained for their positions, but people with far more complicated jobs don’t. It makes no sense. Would you want to stand on the line of the untrained person at McDonald’s？ Would you want to use the software written by the engineer who was never told how the rest of the code worked？ A lot of companies think their employees are so smart that they require no training. That’s silly.
再说剧透就太多了，各人的笔记个人自己保存哈，记得需要锦囊妙计或者真诚告诫的时候可以找出来看看。第9章The End of the Beginning就是a16z的开始，作为看官很期待他们带来惊心动魄的投资案例，最后附上书名解读Hard things are hard because there are no easy answers or recipes. They are hard because your emotions are at odds with your logic. They are hard because you don’t know the answer and you cannot ask for help without showing weakness.
.S.很奇怪作者为什么喜欢用She作为第三人称，She as a CEO, an Executive, an Employee？
《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》读后感(四)：Embrace the struggle
作为一个马上才开始工作的学生,我没读4-8章,我觉得当有意识要做CEO的时候再来看会更有价值吧. 其余的部分更像是一部硅谷打拼的自传. 整个过程就是跟随者作者一个打击接着一个打击,每次都差点要失败,人都处于高度紧张的状态,但每次都拼了老命力挽狂澜. 你感觉像是一个做事情总是开始没做好,遇到问题发现问题的时候好像总是已经到了最危急的时刻,非常被动地来应对. 但不知不觉你发现,他最终做到了99%的创始人和CEO可能都做不到的事情. 能力挽狂澜,能不慌不忙,能至少发现问题,能杞人忧天,能有勇气说出"我们这次不xxx,就要玩完了",着一些都是大部分CEO所不能同时具备的能力.
做CEO,就要准备:被狂虐,并享受着.
《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》读后感(五)：转一篇评论
http://www.tinyepiphany.com/2015/01/you-work-you-swear.html
Once in a while, there is an article that seems strangely satisfying at first (in a self-justifying sort of way), yet strangely unsettling. This is a rebuttal to one of the articles: "I Work, I Swear". You should read it first before continuing.
Read it？ No？ Alright, fine, here are two excerpts from it.
One day in a staff meeting in the Loudcloud/Opsware days, someone brought up an issue that had been bothering him for some time. “This place is entirely too profane. It’s making many of the employees uncomfortable.” Others chimed in: “It makes the environment unprofessional. We need to put a stop to it.” Although the complaints were abstract, they were clearly directed at me since I was the biggest abuser of profanity in the company and perhaps in the industry. In those days, I directed the team with such urgency that it was rare for me to say more than a few sentences without an expletive injected somewhere.
...
After much consideration, I realized that the best technology companies of the day, Intel and Microsoft, were known to be highly profane places, so we’d be off culture with them and the rest of the modern industry if we stopped profanity. Obviously, that didn’t mean that we had to encourage it, but prohibiting it seemed both unrealistic and counterproductive.
I was very uncomfortable with both the outcome and the attitude of the article. Don't get me wrong, I swear at work too from time to time (especially at Spark). There's a difference, though, between swearing and swearing so excessively that it makes people around you uncomfortable.
After some thought, I realize that there are two main reasons why this article was so cringe-worthy.
The lack of personal responsibility
“Be the change that you wish to see in the world.” -- Mahatma Gandhi
“Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself." -- Leo Tolstoy
The author admits that although seemingly abstract, he realizes that most of the complaints were really targeted at himself. Yet he does not use this insight to resolve the problem. He frames the problem as one about company policy, and argues,
As I see it, we have two choices: (a) we can ban profanity or (b) we can accept profanity. Anything in between is very unlikely to work.
On its own, this is both a false dichotomy and a straw man. It is a false dichotomy because there are middle grounds: even the author finds a third option. It is a straw man because the complaints were about excessive swearing, and (more importantly) they were not about company policy. There are ways to make employees more comfortable without making a grand announcement about a sweeping change across the entire organization.
Just look at how hard the author tries to re-frame the problem. First, it became an issue of company policy. Then, it became an issue of culture. And somehow, it ended up as an issue of how profanity is used, not the fact that it is used too much, too often. All these issues were dragged in just so that the author could avoid personal responsibility.
If, as he said, this complaint was about him as an individual, the solution was really simple -- he just needed to try to swear less.
The propagation of the status-quo
The specific argument about culture was especially disconcerting, even on its own. Specifically, let's look at these statements carefully:
If we outlawed profanity, then some employees who used it would not come to work for us or quit once they got there because we would seem old-fashioned and prudish.
If we kept profanity, some people might leave.
After much consideration, I realized that the best technology companies of the day, Intel and Microsoft, were known to be highly profane places, so we’d be off culture with them and the rest of the modern industry if we stopped profanity.
Attracting the very best engineers meant recruiting from highly profane environments. The choice was between optimizing for top talent or clean culture. Easy decision.
Let's assume, for the time being, that the dichotomy from above (no swearing vs. all the swearing) was true. What are some of the underlying assumptions here？
That top talent only come from other highly profane places
That people coming from these highly profane places liked it
That non-usage of profanity is a definitive signal of old-fashioned-ness and prudishness.
That people who leave because of excessive profanity are not top talent
That these hypothetical effects of banning profanity will outweigh the reality of employees already being uncomfortable enough to complain
You can begin to see why I have such problems with the analysis. Even if some of these assumptions turned out to be true for the company, one could be systemically "discriminating" against those who find excessive profanity unpleasant. Are those people automatically labelled as "non-top-talent" because their discomfort signals that they are old-fashioned and prudish？
More troubling is that in his argument, you can pretty much replace "swearing" with anything else that marginalizes a particular group. Replace "swearing" with "brogrammer culture", and see what happens:
If we outlawed "brogrammer culture", then some employees who used it would not come to work for us or quit once they got there because we would seem old-fashioned and prudish.
If we kept the "brogrammer culture", some people might leave.
After much consideration, I realized that the best technology companies of the day, Intel and Microsoft, were known to be highly "brogrammer" places, so we’d be off culture with them and the rest of the modern industry if we stopped "brogrammers".
Attracting the very best engineers meant recruiting from highly "brogrammer" environments. The choice was between optimizing for top talent or clean culture. Easy decision.
The point is, this entire argument about culture is flawed and only serves to propagate the status quo. Instead of mimicking the existing culture, perhaps it will make more sense to analyze the behaviours in question and do a real cost/benefit analysis. Then, you may even find top talent elsewhere, and your unique culture may actually prevent them from switching fields.
Conclusion
It is not so much the topic of the discourse that bothered me, nor even the conclusion. Rather, it is the process in which the author reached the conclusion, and what such self-serving thought processes can do to the world of tech.
In all fairness, complaints like this are difficult to deal with. Often the solution is simple, yet following through with the simple solution might be the hardest thing in the world.
I hesitated in writing this because the author is such a prominent figure in my world. He had obviously done so many things right. Perhaps there were other factors that he did not include in the discussion. Perhaps there are other thoughts that went into his decision.
《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》读后感(六)：难以让人喜欢的创业手册
如果是传记式的写法，更多的像我们描述作者经历的事情和背景，也许我会更喜欢这本书。但是，作者更多的把自己的结论放在了书里，而没有让我们有更多的思考和场景的还原。
当然，作者可能只是为了表述自己的观点，然后用一种最简洁的方式展示出来。这一点他做到了，而且相当清晰。但是这种表述，往往缺少了很多趣味——就像是大学的课程，老师在上面演，学生在下面看。更像是一种任务，而不是真切的帮助。
书里写的大而全，包含了作者在多家公司的创业经历。面对的众多问题。但创业是一件很个性的事情，很多事情，在美国环境下是有用的，在中国可能完全相反。而这种手册式的书，不去描述一个具体的场景和情况，而总结了很多作者认为有用的结论。我觉得是意义不大的。也许很多人可以在中国的环境下，去尝试书中的做法，但我估计，往往是不灵的。
《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》读后感(七)：给创业者打电话
确实很不容易，这简直就是创业的血泪史。幸运的是，他活下来了，还有千千万万的死过去了，他们的故事甚至都不值得被传诵，就随着他们的人生飘荡过去。
跟Ray Dalio的书一样，这里面讲了千千万万的细节如何去找CEO，如何去开除一个人，这些有借鉴价值，但是因人而异。更关键的是你怎么看待创业这个事儿。
如果仅仅是为了发财，创业恐怕并不是最优选择，其实性价比并不高。去一家大公司，好好混，其实汇报很不错，创业九死一生，把失败的概率算上，那真的是太不划算了。
创业是为了解决人生意义的问题。Dalio就是这样，在于他来看，人生本身就是一个折腾接着另一个折腾，所以创业对于他来说，没有一个终点，那么辛苦是为了什么呢？因为如果不这样，人生没有意义，每天上班下班，做一个大机器上的小螺丝，带来的最大忧患就是没有创造，创造的成就感，就是解决人生终极意义的一种答案。
霍洛维茨也是一样，这哥们儿不断折腾，后来有钱了，企业被收购了，他去大公司上班当高管，一下子闲的蛋痛，然后就要开始自己做基金，因为折腾惯了的人，就像跑马拉松跑惯了的人一样，贱了，不折腾不适应，要折腾到人生最后一刻，就像这两天李嘉诚一样，都到了90了，终于退下来了。
o, The only hard thing behind hard things is life. Life is the fucking zheteng endlessly. Good luck, man.
《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》读后感(八)：每一个在创业的人都值得一读的神书
作者是最近几年硅谷最凶猛的VC A16Z的创始合伙人Ben Horowitz。
整本书非常的有诚意，作者没有吹嘘自己管理的公司是有多好，员工满意度多高。相反，花了大幅的篇幅来讲自己是怎么应对创业过程中一次次的（往往是错误决策或者市场环境变化带来的）危机，里面有大量的细节和方法论的思考。
事实上，作者也确实很有资格，在他创办并最终把Loudcloud （Opsware）以16.5亿美元的价格卖给HP的8年里，他的公司经历了网络泡沫破灭的时代，从几个月前还能融资千万美金到一分钱都融不到，公司几次离破产都只有几十天甚至几天的距离，股价从最高的6美元跌倒了0.35美元，最后又涨回到了14美元。
实在是太精彩了，待我再看一遍之后写一篇长的书评。
《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》读后感(九)：教CEO活下来的方法论
买这本书的时候在纽约玩，不经意间逛了一下书店，看到了之前Andrew Ng（Coursera的创始人，他被重金从Google的DeepMind（人工智能部门）挖到百度当首席科学家）采访中推荐的这本书，英文名是“The Hard Thing about Hard Things” 中文是“创业艰难”。 其他推荐人分别是：Facebook的创始人Mark Zuckerberg，Google的创始人Larry Page和Paypal创始人Peter Thiel。
作者叫Ben Horowitz，现在是Andreessen Horowitz，硅谷里新创立的风投，的合伙创始人。他自己在互联网泡沫之前创业，经历了最难得时刻，泡沫爆破，关掉了原有的公司又重整齐股，带领旧公司的团队，继续创业，由于融不到资，只好提前上市拿钱，再经历股价掉到$0.35元后，被交易所警告，如果股价在90天内还是低于1美元，就要被退市。最后通过各种奋斗，把公司以每股$14.25的价格卖给惠普，估值16亿美金。题外话，他们的每周录音节目也非常有含金量。这本书适合所有想要创业的，想要做CEO，在做CEO并且想做的更好的朋友看。
如果要我用一个字来总结这本书，那一定是：
难
用一句来概括那就是：
要做一名好的CEO，真的好难，成功的经验是：没有放弃！
书中前三章介绍了作者的背景和他的创业经历。之后的书，全部是他创业和当CEO的干货：
陷入绝境
依次管理好：人、产品和利润
关注眼前的麻烦
前途未卜时怎么办
创业头条法则：没有法则
开始的结束
亮点
书中的亮点在于：他真实的还原了一个当时作为CEO，各种两难处境。在面对问题是，他是如何分析后，与团队沟通，来带领他的团队向目标前进。书中有很多原稿的电邮，读的时候，会有一种画面感，自己就是他手下的员工在听他的演讲，心中是一种为他的真诚所感动而愿意为他卖命的感觉。
另外一个最记忆犹新的片段是，他需要争取一个最大的客人的单子，如果他拿不到，他的公司就肯定完蛋了。他安排了两个最得力的助手，一个负责产品问题，一个处理客户关系。最后在产品完全走投无路之下，他和客户经理下了死命令，一定要搞明白大客户公司里，谁说了算？然后这个掌权人心底最想要什么？
最后，他们发现这个人是一个讨厌家庭的人，竟然想要在机场回家的路长一点！可想而知，并不是每个人都是一样的。大客户掌权人是一个觉得这个世界上每个人都和他过不去的人。但是，最后让作者的客户经理发现，原来大客户掌权人想要一个小公司的软件，可是因为这个软件比较独特，市场上只有这个小公司在做，这个小公司知道大客户必须要用他们的软件，想让大客户付更高的价格。
这个时候，客户经理把这个情报汇报给了作者，他看了一下这个上市小公司的市值，他们决定以3300万美金把这个公司买过来以后，把大客户掌权人想要的软件，免费配套在他们的服务中，最后，他们就因为这个原因活了下来！
整本书充满了这种精彩的故事，真实的同时，也非常佩服作者解决问题的方式，不顾一切，就是为了生存。
干货
在后面大部分的内容，全都是有用的经验和干货，这本书应该会在我书架上变成工具书！在这里分享自己一个读到并且做出行动的例子。在第五章，他提到了要依次管理好：人，产品和利润。特别是在管人的一章里，他提到
我坚信培训的作用。
我希望每个经理都应该与她管理的人有着经常性开会的习惯。
我甚至给出教程关于如何开一对一的会议，所以让经理没有任何借口（不开会）。
他特别说明了在培训时的好处，培训不只可以让公司里的新员工变得有效率，而且能让整个公司就会变得更有效率！他提到Andy Grove（英特尔的CEO）在他的High Output Management算了一个非常惊人，但是又非常简单的账：
如果公司把培训课程分成4个课时，每个课时1小时，总共4个小时的培训。假设每一个小时培训需要3个小时的准备，总共就是12小时。如果我们假设有10个新员工在这个培训班上。
明年，他们将总共在你的公司工作20，000个小时。如果，培训让他们提高他们1%的效率，你的公司仅仅花了12小时就相当于收获了200个小时。
显而易见培训的用处，更别提，每年以后，你都可以用这些培训，来提高来年新人效率。培训真的是一个特别低成本，高回报的事。自己虽然只是小公司里的小员工，但是自己也非常同意他的说法。我就在问自己，如果自己是公司的新人，最希望得到的培训，能长期帮助我的是什么技能呢？得到的答案是数据库SQL语言。自己通过和经理沟通以后，帮公司的新员工申请到了数据库的安装，并自己开始动手做了两部分非常简单的培训。和网上的教程非常相似，唯一的不同是，我把所有的数据和例子，换成了自己公司的数据。每次做完以后，都发给了一个学生看，在她顺利完成后，通过她的反馈，做出更好的教程，发给其他的新同事。
自己的悟性真的是不高，有很多好东西因为现在经历有限，所以还没能用上，希望自己下一次拿起这本书的时候，能有更多的启发。
结尾
读完Ben的书以后，真的非常佩服，也因为这本书，自己总结一下他强烈推荐的读物：
High Output Management by Andy Grove （格鲁夫给经理人的第一课）
hareholder Letter 1997 by Jeff Bezos (致亚马逊股东们的信）
Reference Guide on Our Freedom and Responsibility Culture (网飞的公司文化指南)
真的要想当一个好CEO，学校里是学不了来的，只能从当CEO开始，撑住，别放弃！
《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》读后感(十)：Thanks for the ride
en is a legendary entrepreneur and reading his book felt like taking the time machine. Back in the days of 56kbps modem dialing and Netscape made its IPO. He also gave some sound advice on leadership. Some of the good take homes
1. Putting two in the same box. It's a typical problem where you put two tigers in the jungle, so to speak in Chinese idiom. This slows down decision making and at complicated times make responsibility-taking hard. Should the operational manager be liable or the head of engineering take charge if people don't know who's in charged. As CEO, you need to make the line clearer the better.
2. Politics. Sometimes the most apolitical leader tend to breed the most severe political environment. Always reward based on performance not request, if a person asks for a raise, don't reward it right away even if you think he deserves it, this will breed asking-for-reward thinking instead of working for it. Set a task for him and if he or she achieves this then reward him or her base on merit.
3. People, product, customer. In this order. People is the biggest asset, if you take care of you people, they take care of the product, and you get satisfied customer.
4. Train your people. This is something i overlook in my startup. Always take time to train your people. If you do, you'll realize alot of things fall into place naturally.
5. If you need to let go of people aka lay offs, let the immediate manager do it, and as the CEO you nede to address everyone, and your message should be for the people staying. Not everyone remembers a particular work day but they will always remember the day they get laid off for a long time, so if the manager has the guts to hire him, you should expect that manager to have the guts to let him go, and as the CEO, stick around the company when the lay off happens (you get plenty of time at the bar that night, but not in the day)
6. Don't overhire. This is a luxury to have, but it's also sound that if you want to get a great hire, hire someone great that can perform immediately but not the super executives that will only perform six months later when the team is big enough. Many big player go into a small team but expecting to play just the big games, but in fact what you need is someone that can do something immediately. If you do hire a big player, or in sports a position player - he can only run a big team, or play in a sole position, then you need to make sure they can adjust to the situation well by letting them realize in advance.
For example if someone senior from a big company joins your startup, he is used to mode of receiving, everyday he is being bombarded by issues from different hierarchy - HR, engineering, operations and he is receiving the issues and solving them, but in a startup, you need to charge to problem, no one will run to you to solve things, at least not until it's too late.
7. If you need to eat shit, don't nibble. I write it only because it sounds cool, and right in many, but not all, occasions.
The reason I gave this book a 3 star was perhaps I was hoping to get more insights out of Ben Horowitz than sound entrepreneurial advice. The hard things about hard things is a good read nonetheless.