Book · 2009
Start with Why
by Simon Sinek
A consultant argues that Apple and Martin Luther King succeeded for the same underlying reason, then builds an entire framework around explaining it.
What does Reddit think of Start with Why?
r/Entrepreneur is where this book actually gets discussed, and it isn't kind. The top comment (↑36) calls it "my biggest disappointment," conceding the core idea is fine but that "the whole book could easily be a two-pager." A second, more direct comment (↑28) goes further: "Start with why is complete BS," arguing the framework gets retrofitted onto companies that never actually used it going in. That's enough to pull r/Entrepreneur's own scored excerpts into critical territory by this site's own scoring, the only subreddit here with enough scored mentions to say that with confidence. r/datascience, r/smallbusiness, and r/ExperiencedDevs threads mention the book too, but none of the displayed excerpts from those subs argue with it one way or the other; the title just appears inside longer reading lists. Nine mentions and nine distinct account identifiers over seven years is a thin trail, especially set against how well-known this book is outside Reddit.
Community feedback & reader fit
Themes
- · The golden circle framework of why, how, and what
- · Whether a viral TED talk idea justifies a full-length book
- · Leadership communication and organizational purpose
- · Retrofitting a framework onto companies after they already succeeded
Common praise
- + Even in the most critical r/Entrepreneur thread, the commenter concedes "great idea" before getting to the complaint; the golden-circle concept itself survives the takedown.
- + It shows up in reading lists across five different subreddits, not just business ones, including r/ExperiencedDevs and r/datascience.
Common criticism
- − The top r/Entrepreneur comment (↑36) calls it "my biggest disappointment" and says the whole book could have been a two-pager.
- − A second r/Entrepreneur comment (↑28) is blunter, calling it "complete BS," with the specific complaint that the framework gets applied to companies retroactively, after they'd already succeeded.
- − r/Entrepreneur's own scored excerpts cross this site's own critical threshold, and it's the only subreddit here with enough scored mentions to say that with any confidence.
Who it's for
Watch the TED talk instead if eighteen minutes sounds like plenty. r/Entrepreneur's two most-upvoted mentions both land on some version of good idea, thin book, so go in expecting an essay stretched to book length. Running a company and want the golden-circle framework applied honestly? At least one Redditor here warns it gets forced onto companies after they've already succeeded, not before. There isn't much in this data to recommend beyond the core idea, which even the critics concede is fine.
Mentions over time
Top subreddits
Which Reddit comments matter for Start with Why?
The most relevant excerpts across the subreddits where this book is mentioned — opinionated, argued takes first, then top-upvoted mentions. Click through to read the full thread.
“**Strategy:** Scaling Startups by Jason Quey (lot of mindset shifts how to create an effective strategy and how each strategy impacts others) and [Playing to Win by A.G. Lafley and Roger Martin](
“My biggest disappointment was Start with why by Simon Sinek. Great idea but the whole book could easily be a two-pager.
“If we launch businesses that are boring and there is no passion behind them, they will fail. Running a business is hard as I don't need to tell anyone here. Mustering the will to overcome challenges, work long hours, and continually show up needs to come from more than "I want to make money". It is…
“I like to take these challenges and turn them into wins. Basically challenge yourself to spell out your sales strategy in a document or presentation and approach your partners and say "hey, here's what I'm doing and my strategy." "Here is how it's best for me to receive feedback." You are at a po…
“0. Take a few courses on the basics of business: \- \- \- Starting a Business All-In-One For Dummies: [
“Literally anything Simon Sinek says. “Start with why” is complete BS and only works being applied to companies that didn’t even use that methodology, it’s just a bunch of BS.
“Here are the ones I aggregated from a couple of places - haven't read all though. Many of these have had really good feedback/upvotes/comments, and therefore I believe make a really good list. ​ **Tranche 1 - without a summary (However, well recommended):** 1. The Black Swan 2. Thinking…
“Based on what you're said, here's a list I'd go through: **Tech:** * Clean Code * Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering * [Pa…
“Start with the "why". talk about the life you could have if you save and why it's worth doing. and show how saving doesn't have to make you miserable to get there. and of course, check yourself and be open to make compromises. and if you need help:
Convinced? Pick up Start with Why
What else does r/Entrepreneur read?
Other books mentioned in the same sub, ranked. Shared-sub overlap with this title breaks ties.
Start with Why — frequently asked
Is Start with Why worth reading, per Reddit?+
The displayed evidence leans no. r/Entrepreneur's top comment (↑36) calls it "my biggest disappointment," saying the book could've been a two-pager, and a second comment (↑28) calls the whole framework "complete BS." Both concede the underlying idea has merit; neither thinks the book delivers on it.
Is Start with Why just a stretched-out TED talk?+
That's close to the exact complaint. r/Entrepreneur's top comment (↑36) says "the whole book could easily be a two-pager," pairing that with "great idea" as a concession. Nothing in this data pushes back on that specific criticism.
Does Reddit think Start with Why's golden circle framework holds up?+
The idea, yes; the application, less so. One r/Entrepreneur commenter (↑28) argues it "only works being applied to companies that didn't even use that methodology" in the first place, meaning it gets fitted onto success stories after the fact rather than proven in advance.