<Dd> (In) Search (of Excellence) started out as a study of 62 companies . How did we come up with them? We went around to McKinsey's partners and to a bunch of other smart people who were deeply involved and seriously engaged in the world of business and asked, Who's cool? Who's doing cool work? Where is there great stuff going on? And which companies genuinely get it? That very direct approach generated a list of 62 companies, which led to interviews with the people at those companies . Then, because McKinsey is McKinsey, we felt that we had to come up with some quantitative measures of performance . Those measures dropped the list from 62 to 43 companies . General Electric, for example, was on the list of 62 companies but didn't make the cut to 43--which shows you how "stupid" raw insight is and how "smart" tough - minded metrics can be . </Dd> <Dl> <Dd> Were there companies that, in retrospect, didn't belong on the list of 43? I only have one word to say: Atari . </Dd> </Dl> <Dd> Were there companies that, in retrospect, didn't belong on the list of 43? I only have one word to say: Atari . </Dd> <Dl> <Dd> Was our process fundamentally sound? Absolutely! If you want to go find smart people who are doing cool stuff from which you can learn the most useful, cutting - edge principles, then do what we did with Search: Start by using common sense, by trusting your instincts, and by soliciting the views of "strange" (that is, nonconventional) people . You can always worry about proving the facts later . </Dd> </Dl>

Stick to the knitting in search of excellence