Rating: 
Summary: The best book Uncle Chuck has ever written
Review: The best book ever. You should buy two copies
Rating: 
Summary: Great paperweight, good consolidation of other people's work
Review: This book provides various sources of information but no analysis by the book's authors. It is a patch work of case studies, excerpts, and paraphrasing of other texts to which I hope the original authors are getting paid royalties for.Some of the diagrams are simplistic, others are useless. More than half of them are from other sources. The book seems to formulate points of interest (e.g. traditional, evolving, and present-day IT roles) without providing analysis of why and how this affects future trends in IS management. I had to write a review after reading nebulous fluff like, "Being a manufacturer, LifeScan has instituted quality processes." (which successful company doesn't) or "Way back in 1964,..." (not just back, but WAY back). When you do read something of slight interest it is almost always followed by something like, "so says Mr. so-and-so, in this-paper-that-he-wrote." (e.g. pp. 126-127 whenever "Rayport and Sviokla" is mentioned - 4 times in about 1 page of text and in every paragraph - the authors are paraphrasing a point Rayport and Sviokla made) I'm truly amazed this book is this bad after five revisions. The authors seem to have the right information, but they really need to provide their own insights and analysis. And also have my high school english teacher review it to cut the fluff out.
Rating:
Summary: Great paperweight, good consolidation of other people's work
Review: This book provides various sources of information but no analysis by the book's authors. It is a patch work of case studies, excerpts, and paraphrasing of other texts to which I hope the original authors are getting paid royalties for. Some of the diagrams are simplistic, others are useless. More than half of them are from other sources. The book seems to formulate points of interest (e.g. traditional, evolving, and present-day IT roles) without providing analysis of why and how this affects future trends in IS management. I had to write a review after reading nebulous fluff like, "Being a manufacturer, LifeScan has instituted quality processes." (which successful company doesn't) or "Way back in 1964,..." (not just back, but WAY back). When you do read something of slight interest it is almost always followed by something like, "so says Mr. so-and-so, in this-paper-that-he-wrote." (e.g. pp. 126-127 whenever "Rayport and Sviokla" is mentioned - 4 times in about 1 page of text and in every paragraph - the authors are paraphrasing a point Rayport and Sviokla made) I'm truly amazed this book is this bad after five revisions. The authors seem to have the right information, but they really need to provide their own insights and analysis. And also have my high school english teacher review it to cut the fluff out.
| 
