Skip to main content
Since 2004, revealing what drives you!


Welcome to Philippe Vivier's Blog. The publication of my books on the guidance business and my self-coaching manuals led me in 2020 to finally regroup my editorial content within a Blog, you will be able to find all my news, my latest articles, my essays, my publications as well as my latest interviews in the press.

With the humility and logic that are mine, I attempt a quick, deliberately simplified and popularized critique of the ideas, concepts and theories that I encounter in the field of my specialty. I encourage you to be equally critical of mine. Constructive exchange is a formidable gas pedal of thought, especially when it is based on argumentation.

Critical review of Simon Sinek Start With Why book and concept

I stumbled upon his TEDx conference "start with why" ( during one of my field actuality searches and then I read his book which essentially repeats what he explained during his conference. Anyone who has seen it will admit that he is a very good speaker who knows how to convince. Moreover, the sales of his books are doing very well and this video, on the TED website, will soon exceed the 55,000,000 views mark.

1) The concept

This concept was initially developed for entrepreneurs or business leaders to help them inspire. Inspire their employees is important because we never work better than when we share the company's mission, but it is also question to inspire consumers. You might wonder why I'm interested in this subject since it doesn't have much to do with career choices, well think again, because he used this concept to create a method of orientation or at least a method that allows everyone to find their "Why".

For those who don't know the principle he describes, it's basically explaining that to inspire people, you have to be invested with a mission and not simply seek to make money. We're still on the subject of optimizing loyalty and sales. We will focus later on the underlying influence issue.

He breaks down the concept into three layers of three circles, at the center the "Why", then the "How" and finally the "What".
I am not going to paraphrase the author word for word, but rather give you a summary of the concept.
He explains that the majority of companies complain about not succeeding or not selling their product, because they fail to communicate to our deep emotional self, the part of our brain which guides the instinctive choices of most people. On this last point, it is proven by various psychological research that many of the choices we make are influenced by emotion.

To act on emotion, we must therefore, according to Sinek, start with the "Why", i.e. why I do what I do rather than the "What", i.e. look at my product it is great. Communicate on the "why" allows to ensure an emotional attachment to the cause, i.e., the desire in a human being to be part of a group, a group that is formed on the basis of common beliefs or goals in that case. What you need to do to inspire, to influence emotional choices and to sell your products is to start with why, why we do what we do. As opposed to all those who start with their product and explain why it is better than the others.

We could discuss this question when we know that many marketing and commercial studies show that the most important thing to sell is to communicate on the customer benefit, which Apple knows very well how to do, since when the iPod was released, the slogan was something like: more than 30,000 songs in your pocket. There are many other conferences on the subject, especially by Harvard professors...

So already, if you attacked the concept from that angle, you would start to shake it...

But for Sinek: "People don't buy what you do they buy why you do it! ".

2) Argument:

First, a question arises. Does the "Why" really act on emotion? What is the evidence for this? Using Apple as an example, what is the main reason that makes me personally choose an Apple product? Innovation, design, functions, brand image, what I think of myself when I buy it, or the why? I have not found any scientific studies or other type of research that remotely corroborate that the reason why companies were founded plays on emotion as suggested by the author. It seems true, it speaks to us, it makes sense, it even seems logical, but that does not mean it is true.

Let's move on to Sinek's argument, whose premise I recall is that money is just the bottom line and that it's why you do what you do that counts and sells.

He cites three examples, Steve Jobs, Martin Luther King, The Wright Brothers.

The boss of Apple, Steve Jobs, according to what Simon Sinek implies, would not have had as a primary motivation to make money when he started building his first computer in his garage. It would be necessary to do a research on the question that I simply don't want to do.
On the other hand, when you know Apple's economic history, you realize that there are certainly many other things that go into a company's success or turnaround than simply starting with why.

We can also spin things differently.
There are a lot of very successful companies on the planet. Can we explain these successes according to Sinek's concept? He didn't try to or even mentionned it...
Marketing experts know how to generate sales and even habits without the company having found its "Why", I think of the pork industry which, by surrounding itself with high-flying marketers, found the best way to influence the masses was using doctors to publicly sell a product so that the Americans' breakfast be composed of bacon and succeeded in making them believe that it was good for their health.

As for Martin Luther King, he just explains that to rally the spirits, he started with : "I have a dream" and so it speaks for itself. Ok.

The example of the Wright Brothers is quite astonishing because it is so fanciful, even flagrantly inaccurate historically. I encourage you to read this very well done collection of American sources on the subject:

Sinek explains that the best example of his theory is that of the Wright brothers who had no money or subsidies, were not helped by engineers or "brains" and that they were not attracted by money, but by something else and that's why they were the first to create a motorized plane and to fly. And he compares it to Samuel Langley who had all of that, but didn't get there and resigned when he heard that the Wrights had flown instead of contributing. He concludes that the Wrights got there because they were motivated by something deeper than money.

I'll let you do the research on this, but this is all completely false.
The Wright brothers were not the first to fly in a powered aircraft, they were just gliding for 50 to 100 meters in a glider propelled by some sort of slingshot from an overhanging sand mound. They were so attracted by money that they drew on the research of all the other manufacturers of the time, but did not communicate on their advances. They stopped wotking on their prototype and immediatly tried to sell their plane in Germany and France in particular, because the American government did not want it, but without making any demonstrations and finally by wasting time trying to monetize their invention, Louis Blériot crossed the channel.

In short, his concept is based on a rather thin argument, in my opinion, when you dig a little.

As an aside, this is the simple, but time-consuming work that needs to be done in relation to everything you are told to counteract the influence. That's what I try to help you do about career change pseudo truths and beliefs in my book for adults seeking change: Overcome Influence and Thrive, available on Amazon.

3) Limitations.

This is where you see the impact of the influence of a good speaker who seems passionate and convinced of what he or she is telling you. Your defenses are lowered and the message gets through. What he says then becomes embedded in you not as belief, but as knowledge, truth.

But is it really new knowledge on this issue? Is it a discovery?

Absolutely not, what he says has no basis, is not empirically tested nor scientifically proven and the argumentation on which this scaffolding is based is vague, unverifiable, even totally false.

I have a lot of respect for Simon Sinek and I would like to point out that he presents himself as a "leadership expert" and that many of his short videos on his YouTube channel are very interesting. Wanting to "inspire" business leaders and employees by making them question why they do what they do seems to me to be beneficial for everyone, but if we look closely at the theory behind this speech, it has a number of weaknesses when you break it down very quickly, notwithstanding all his fans.

It is important to note here that what is also interesting is that what he says makes sense to many. He has managed to convince many people. And personally, even if his arguments do not support his theory, the apparent logic and his conclusions appeal to me. Wouldn't we be at the border of sophistry.

I think the main reason is that it touches on the question of meaning. We are on the theme of the meaning of our lives, and of what we are going to leave to the future generations, which leaves nobody indifferent.

The search for meaning and why is fundamentally linked to the evolution of mankind, to the understanding of the world.

Anyway, it is a bit thin to try to adapt this to build a method of career guidance and terribly problematic. I will try to go deeper in a next article about Sinek's next book "Find you why", directly focused on the problematic of orientation / personal development.

Anyway, you will admit that you don't need to be a great thinker, or a researcher, to go deeper into someone's concept, theory, speech, examples and arguments, to highlight the different points of questioning and to uncover much of the influence inherent in it all.

  • Created on .
  • Last updated on .

The national education system uses videoconferencing for the bac exams

Here is a news article I wrote in 2013 and it is clear today that very few clients are reluctant to the idea of learning or getting help at a distance.

However, I still sometimes have the opportunity to sense in the parents of my clients and even in some pupils and students who contact me directly, some reluctance towards distance coaching via Skype*. Generally, the explanations given lead me to believe that they feel that it is less "serious", that the nature of the contact will not allow the same benefits in terms of quality of work and results. I know from experience that this is not the case and it will take time for mentalities to change permanently and globally, even if the confinement and teleworking have changed practices within companies in a lasting way. Fortunately, as these new means of communication are now widely used by the national education system, habits should quickly change.

Yes, students are now taking their baccalaureate exams by videoconference. Of course, these are oral exams. This is a new proof, if it were necessary, of the great tool that videoconferencing or webconferencing represents, but above all that this tool allows for absolute verbal and non-verbal communication. And when the investment is complete and the framework is not disturbed by external distractions, it is just as effective as face-to-face.

I have been accompanying students for years on all types of issues in videoconferencing and this validation, in a way, of the government on my research, my convictions and the excellent results obtained via this mode of communication in my work with students is today a real satisfaction. du bac par visioconference



In fact, it is only half a surprise and it is not really new that the French Ministry of Education wonders about the possibilities offered by such a tool, and sets up pilot projects in order to define the limits and benefits, since already in 2007, a first "experiment" had been set up by the French Ministry of Education for the learning of foreign languages and which had been "extended" in 2008 and this in particular in primary and elementary schools!

"40 pilot sites were selected in the framework of the call for projects "Videoconference to promote language learning". This system was extended to 1,000 schools at the beginning of the 2008 school year". appprentissage langues vivantes


I am glad that this medium is finally validated by the government as a full-fledged teaching tool, but it actually goes much further since in June 2014, an open online course on teaching and learning with computer technologies started on April 30, 2014. This MOOC (understand in English: massive open online course), constitutes an example of open and distance learning in distance education. Co-produced by ENS Cachan and ENS Lyon aims to provide an overview of issues related to education and digital tools, and also to promote the implementation of training projects using these same technologies.

"The course is intended for teaching and training professionals (teachers in primary, secondary or higher education), adult educators, those in charge of educational issues in communities, resource producers, and even all those who are involved in education or training activities such as parents and students. et former avec le numerique


I hope that all this will make people think twice about starting a remote coaching process via videoconference. If you want to know more, I invite you to read my page dedicated to remote coaching.

  • Created on .
  • Last updated on .

Want to assess your situation?

© All rights reserved.

Article L122-4 of the Code of Intellectual Property: "Any representation or reproduction in whole or in part without the consent of the author [...] is illegal. The same applies to translation, adaptation or transformation, arrangement or reproduction by any art or process."


  • 254 rue lecourbe
    75015 Paris
  • 23 avenue de coulaoun
    64200 Biarritz
  • 71 allée de terre vieille
    33160 St Médard en Jalles

Phone : +33673176667

History & Info

Practice founded in 2004.
Website and content redesigned in 2012.
SIRET NUMBER: 48990345000091

Legal information.