Business bestsellers survive but where did management gurus go?
To understand how this happened, flashback to 1982, when In Search of Excellence by Tom Peters and Robert Waterman hit retail shelves with evangelical zeal. American businesses, battered by stagflation, oil crises and the rise of Japan Inc, were in search of reassurance. The book offered exactly that: proof that US companies could still thrive, and more importantly, a codified playbook for success: eight easy-to-recall traits, apparently data-driven and actionable enough for managers to feel empowered.
Also Read: When will business books focus more on corporate failures than successes?
Critics later pounced on its methodological flaws and Peters allegedly even confessed to having 'faked the data" in retrospect. But the damage was done. A new genre was born: the business bestseller. And with it, a new mantle: of the business thought leader.
From that point on, books were no longer just idea containers. They became platforms for corporate wisdom. Successful authors got lucrative speaking engagements, management consultancy gigs, corporate board seats and media publicity. Business books became business. High stakes meant new tactics. Michael Treacy and Fred Wiersema, authors of The Discipline of Market Leaders, reportedly spent over $250,000 buying their own books across the US to get into the New York Times bestseller list. It could let them hike their speaking fees and get bigger consultancy and book deals.
In India, many business authors, especially those who were already well known for their professional success, have become public figures. Gurcharan Das's India Unbound transformed him from a former CEO into a public intellectual. Nandan Nilekani's Imagining India served not just as commentary, but as a policy guide. Raghuram Rajan's Fault Lines earned him stardom beyond the field of economics.
Also Read: The best business books tend to be about music and sports
Today, the business book has become something of a glorified business card. Many are padded essays stretched to 200 pages, bloated with anecdotes, loaded with buzzwords and dressed in covers screaming for attention. With an estimated 12,000 business books published every year, the genre is suffering a global glut.
Few books offer a breakthrough idea. Many are simply checklists. And in a world of digital content overload, thought leadership is shifting to more dynamic platforms. Podcasts, newsletters, X threads, LinkedIn posts and short videos are shaping professional discourse faster than traditional publishing cycles can churn out books. A book can take two years to write and publish. A podcast can go live right away and viral soon after. Publishers are adapting: Simon & Schuster recently announced it will reduce reliance on expert reviews on back covers.
This isn't merely administrative; it's an acknowledgment that curated praise doesn't drive sales. Another brutal reality for authors is that a book that takes four years to write can vanish in four months, even before it gets a chance to appear in a cheaper paperback edition.
This doesn't mean books are obsolete. They allow for depth, with slowly built and layered arguments. Jonathan Haidt's The Anxious Generation, which explores the profound impact of digital life on young people, is a case in point. The book format allowed him to explore a cultural phenomenon in a way no blog post or tweetstorm ever could. Books are also timeless. They endure in libraries, sit on shelves and signal intellectual gravitas. But their monopoly over idea dissemination is over.
Today, thought leadership is an ecosystem. Books are part of it, but so are newsletters with subscriptions, viral LinkedIn posts, Substack essays, X threads and, yes, 30-second videos on Instagram or YouTube Shorts. Political influence has gone the same way.
Also Read: From stock market advice to the Medimix story, business books to add to your TBR
So, what should a would-be thought leader do? Write that book with a big idea, yes. But don't stop there. Treat it as one gear in a larger machine. Build an audience through diverse platforms that use voice, video and short-form text. Share ideas in real-time. Experiment. Engage. Books are for depth. Podcasts are for reach. Newsletters are for loyalty. Tweets are for traction. Master the digital mix.
Books will still matter especially in policy, academia and legacy media, but they no longer offer an automatic key to the kingdom of influence. In a world oversaturated with information, clarity is currency, velocity is value and reach is power.
So, have we reached 'peak book' point à la 'peak oil'? Quite possibly. The hardcover may no longer be the sovereign badge of authority it once was. But in the age of agile content and restless attention, thought leadership is no longer about a singular polished manuscript. It's about being present, persistent and plural.
Anyone who writes a book now to get an important idea across must also embrace digital channels. Because in the new world of ideas, it's not just about being read. It's about being ubiquitous—heard, shared, seen and of course remembered.
The authors are, respectively, professor at Columbia Business School and founder of Valize; and Fortune-500 advisor, startup investor and co-founder of the non-profit Medici Institute for Innovation. X: @MuneerMuh
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
Trump new tariff rates ‘pretty much set,' says US trade representative
Speaking on Sunday, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the rates, set to take effect on August 7, are 'pretty much set,' defending the president's strategy as both economic and geopolitical. read more US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer gives a live TV interview about tariffs at the White House in Washington, DC, US. Reuters New US tariff rates are 'pretty much set' with no immediate possibility for discussion, Donald Trump's trade advisor said in remarks broadcast Sunday, justifying the president's politically motivated charges against Brazil. Trump, who has used tariffs as an instrument of American economic supremacy, has set tariff rates for dozens of economies, including the European Union, at 10 to 41 percent starting from August 7, his new hard deadline for the tariffs. In a pre-recorded interview broadcast Sunday on CBS's 'Face the Nation,' US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said that tariff rates are unlikely to see changes in 'the coming days'. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'A lot of these are set rates pursuant to deals. Some of these deals are announced, some are not, others depend on the level of the trade deficit or surplus we may have with the country,' Greer said. 'These tariff rates are pretty much set.' Undoubtedly some trade ministers 'want to talk more and see how they can work in a different way with the United States,' he added. But 'we're seeing truly the contours of the president's tariff plan right now with these rates.' Last Thursday, the former real estate developer announced hiked tariff rates on dozens of US trade partners. They will kick in on August 7 instead of August 1, which had previously been touted as a hard deadline. Among the countries facing steep new levies is Brazil. South America's largest economy is being hit with 50 percent tariffs on exports to the United States – albeit with significant exemptions for key products such as aircraft and orange juice. Trump has openly admitted he is punishing Brazil for prosecuting his political ally Jair Bolsonaro, the ex-president accused of plotting a coup in a bid to cling to power. The US president has described the case as a 'witch hunt.' Greer said it was not unusual for Trump to use tariff tools for geopolitical purposes. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'The president has seen in Brazil, like he's seen in other countries, a misuse of law, a misuse of democracy,' Greer told CBS. 'It is normal to use these tools for geopolitical issues.' Trump was 'elected to assess the foreign affairs situation… and take appropriate action,' he added. Meanwhile White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett said that while talks are expected to continue over the next week with some US trade partners, he concurred with Greer's tariffs assessment in that the bulk of the rates 'are more or less locked in.' Asked by the host of NBC's Sunday talk show 'Meet the Press with Kristen Welker' if Trump could change tariff rates should financial markets react negatively, Hassett said: 'I would rule it out, because these are the final deals.' Legal challenges have been filed against some of Trump's tariffs arguing he overstepped his authority. An appeals court panel on Thursday appeared skeptical of the government's arguments, though the case may be ultimately decided at the Supreme Court. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Donald Trump and Mark Carney headed for talks soon as US' 35% tariff shocks Canada
Canada's federal minister overseeing US-Canada trade relations, Dominic LeBlanc, said Sunday that he sees a pathway to reducing newly imposed American tariffs. LeBlanc expressed optimism that a deal could be reached to reverse or lower the 35% US tariff on Canadian goods not covered under the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement (USMCA), speaking on CBS News. 'I believe there is an option of striking a deal that will bring down tariffs,' LeBlanc stated, just days after President Donald Trump signed an executive order sharply increasing tariffs, citing fentanyl trafficking and national security concerns. The Canadian government, led by Prime Minister Mark Carney, has voiced disappointment over the move but remains engaged in dialogue, with LeBlanc suggesting high-level talks between Carney and Trump could occur 'over the next number of days.' The trade tension marks the latest development in a growing economic dispute between the two countries, with potential ripple effects on key sectors including lumber, autos, and manufacturing. Despite the tensions, US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick hinted at the possibility of flexibility, saying Trump might reconsider the hike if Carney eases Canada's retaliatory stance. Canada previously responded to US trade moves with two rounds of counter-tariffs earlier this year. The first, under outgoing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, targeted about C$30 billion in US exports, including food, apparel, and motorcycles. The second round matched US tariffs on steel, aluminum, and foreign automobiles. However, in mid-April, the Carney government introduced exemptions for certain business inputs critical to health care, public safety, and industrial production. Automakers like General Motors and Honda, which operate Canadian manufacturing plants, were also granted relief from import duties. The new US tariffs are expected to hit key Canadian exports, including lumber, steel, aluminum, and vehicles. While retaliatory duties have been put in place, Canada continues to allow the majority of US goods to enter tariff-free.
Economic Times
2 hours ago
- Economic Times
Trump's tariffs are making money. That may make them hard to quit
WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump's extensive tariffs have already started to generate a significant amount of money for the federal government, a new source of revenue for a heavily indebted nation that American policymakers may start to rely on. As part of his quest to reorder the global trading system, Trump has imposed steep tariffs on America's trading partners, with the bulk of those set to go into effect Thursday. Even before the latest tariffs kick in, revenue from taxes collected on imported goods has grown dramatically so far this year. Customs duties, along with some excise taxes, generated $152 billion through July, roughly double the $78 billion netted over the same time period last fiscal year, according to Treasury data. Indeed, Trump has routinely cited the tariff revenue as evidence that his trade approach, which has sowed uncertainty and begun to increase prices for consumers, is a win for the United States. Members of his administration have argued that the money from the tariffs would help plug the hole created by the broad tax cuts Congress passed last month, which are expected to cost the government at least $3.4 trillion. "The good news is that Tariffs are bringing Billions of Dollars into the USA!" Trump said on social media shortly after a weak jobs report showed signs of strain in the labor market. Over time, analysts expect that the tariffs, if left in place, could be worth more than $2 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade. Economists overwhelmingly hope that doesn't happen and the United States abandons the new trade barriers. But some acknowledge that such a substantial stream of revenue could end up being hard to quit. "I think this is addictive," said Joao Gomes, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. "I think a source of revenue is very hard to turn away from when the debt and deficit are what they are." Trump has long fantasized about replacing taxes on income with tariffs. He often refers fondly to American fiscal policy in the late 19th century, when there was no income tax and the government relied on tariffs, citing that as a model for the future. And while income and payroll taxes remain by far the most important sources of government revenue, the combination of Trump's tariffs and the latest Republican tax cut does, on the margin, move the United States away from taxing earnings and toward taxing goods. Such a shift is expected to be regressive, meaning that rich Americans will fare better than poorer Americans under the change. That's because cutting taxes on income does, in general, provide the biggest benefit to richer Americans who earn the most income. The recent Republican cut to income taxes and the social safety net is perhaps the most regressive piece of major legislation in decades. Placing new taxes on imported products, however, is expected to raise the cost of everyday goods. Lower-income Americans spend more of their earnings on those more expensive goods, meaning the tariffs amount to a larger tax increase for them compared with richer Americans. Tariffs have begun to bleed into consumer prices, with many companies saying they will have to start raising prices as a result of added costs. And analysts expect the tariffs to weigh on the performance of the economy overall, which in turn could reduce the amount of traditional income tax revenue the government collects every year. "Is there a better way to raise that amount of revenue? The economic answer is: Yes, there is a better way, there are more efficient ways," said Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab and a former Biden administration official. "But it's really a political question." Tedeschi said that future leaders in Washington, whether Republican or Democrat, may be hesitant to roll back the tariffs if that would mean a further addition to the federal debt load, which is already raising alarms on Wall Street. And replacing the tariff revenue with another type of tax increase would require Congress to act, while the tariffs would be a legacy decision made by a previous president. "Congress may not be excited about taking such a politically risky vote when they didn't have to vote on tariffs in the first place," Tedeschi said. Some in Washington are already starting to think about how they could spend the tariff revenue. Trump recently floated the possibility of sending Americans a cash rebate for the tariffs, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., recently introduced legislation to send $600 to many Americans. "We have so much money coming in, we're thinking about a little rebate, but the big thing we want to do is pay down debt," Trump said last month of the tariffs. Democrats, once they return to power, may face a similar temptation to use the tariff revenue to fund a new social program, especially if raising taxes in Congress proves as challenging as it has in the past. As it is, Democrats have been divided over tariffs. Maintaining the status quo may be an easier political option than changing trade policy. "That's a hefty chunk of change," Tyson Brody, a Democratic strategist, said of the tariffs. "The way that Democrats are starting to think about it is not that 'these will be impossible to withdraw.' It's: 'Oh, look, there's now going to be a large pot of money to use and reprogram.'"Of course, the tariffs could prove unpopular, and future elected officials may want to take steps that could lower consumer prices. At the same time, the amount of revenue the tariffs generate could decline over time if companies do, in fact, end up bringing back more of their operations to the United States, reducing the number of goods that face the import tax. "This is clearly not an efficient way to gather revenue," said Alex Jacquez, a former Biden official and the chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal group. "And I don't think it would be a long-term progressive priority as a way to simply collect revenue."
