I’ve read Ray Dalio's Principles 3 times. I’ve used this book as an accompanying book in my Organizational Behavior university-level class at the Umbra Institute. I now can say with authority that I do not like this book.
This book didn't need to have a pluralized title. It's a single principle book: radical transparency. Maybe that’s not fair; while the book does have the three principles, really it is the second one that drives the book’s core.
1) Feedback - seek it and give it aggressively;
2) Transparency - expect it from yourself and others;
3) Open-mindedness - expect it from yourself and others.
I don't think that there are really any other principles, but I'm open to it.
There is a graph early on in the second section of the book that is about the contrast between savoring life versus making an impact. Dalio argues that these are diametrically opposed options - one can either savor life, or try to make an impact with it. There are two things here that I'm wondering about: 1) why is it assumed that one can just "savor life?" What I mean is that for Dalio, there is no uncertainty for savoring life. Basically, there is no trying, rather it seems like if you chose to do it, you will certainly achieve the goal of savoring life. Now, when it comes to making an impact, it seems like uncertainty is fundamental. What I mean is that for Dalio, there is inherent uncertainty when considering making an impact. 2) More importantly, for me the real question is, does Ray himself really believe this principle? While this binary choice between savoring life versus making an impact simplifies choices, this, frankly seems untrue.
I'm flabbergasted that the book just doesn't take any time concretizing its principles (again, it's really just a one principle book - radical transparency.) Even more so stunned that without these concrete examples, people (and rather important people) actually like the book.
I’m concerned that his principles - and again, I'm just not sure that there is more than just radical transparency - are not really principles that other companies can adopt. It seems like they are things that work for his company in relation to how he works, helping him make better decisions, which then cascade down and benefit his entire company.
Overall, and unfortunately, the book has passages that are condescending, overbearing, patronizing, and pretentious. Frankly, Ray Dalio just doesn’t sound like a “nice guy.”
I wanted to like this book. Ray is a very smart man, and he's written articles online that I've enjoyed.
This book, and the time I've spent with it have not been repaid. This book doesn’t do a good job telling the necessary stories to flesh out it’s principle(s.)
Principles without stories are laundry lists, and laundry lists don't convince because they sound preachy.
The only way I can think of that this book sold so many copies is if Ray himself bought them and then set them on fire as a true bonfire of the vanities.
Cover Image via principles.com.