Y'know, I can see the previous reviewer's point, but I don't agree with it.
Good to Great was started to answer the question of what makes super performing companies (criteria detailed in the book - I'm not going to retype them here) different from comparable companies in the same industry. The answer is by and large common sense - identifying core competencies, how to be paid for them, confronting unpleasant facts regularly and similar things. All of them pretty much common sense. However, the book goes a long way towards proving common sense isn't.
My biggest 'issue' with the book is Mr. Collins apparent antipathy towards the cult of the rockstar leader and the merger, however, history (and The Economist) go a long way towards supporting him.
The only problem with the book is by comparing my employer against the characteristics of a Great company I know it will never make the leap and I want to polish up my resume.