If You Want To Be SUCCESSFUL In Life, Master This ONE SKILL! | Simon Sinek
Watch on YouTubeVideo summary
In this episode of Impact Theory, Simon Sinek introduces his latest book, *The Infinite Game*, which reframes business and leadership not as a series of finite competitions with winners and losers, but as an ongoing journey to perpetuate the game itself. Drawing on James Carse's 1980s distinction between finite games—like football or chess, where rules are fixed and objectives are clear—and infinite games like marriage or politics, Sinek argues that business is inherently an infinite endeavor with no agreed-upon finish line. Despite this reality, many leaders operate with a "finite mindset," obsessing over being number one, beating competitors, and hitting arbitrary quarterly targets. This approach leads to predictable negative outcomes such as declining trust, reduced cooperation, stifled innovation, and eventual organizational demise. Sinek emphasizes that the great irony of modern business is that companies built on an infinite mindset—those prioritizing people before profit—are actually more profitable and sustainable in the long run because they foster loyalty and resilience during tough times. Central to this philosophy are two essential currencies: will (the commitment and motivation of employees) and resources (money). Sinek insists that while both are necessary, will must always come first; money is merely fuel for the organization, not its purpose. He illustrates this with a hypothetical scenario where one CEO prioritizes growth over people, claiming that caring for staff leads to financial success, versus another who explicitly states their number one priority is their people, asserting that taking care of them guarantees exceeding financial goals. The latter approach creates an environment where employees are willing to give blood, sweat, and tears because they feel valued as humans rather than mechanisms for profit. Sinek critiques the shareholder supremacy theory popularized by Milton Friedman in the 1970s, which prioritizes shareholders over customers or employees, noting that mass layoffs driven solely to meet arbitrary projections have eroded loyalty and created a culture of fear where people hide mistakes and hoard information. To lead effectively within an infinite game, Sinek outlines five practices: having a just cause, building trusting teams, identifying worthy rivals, maintaining existential flexibility, and possessing the courage to lead. A "just cause" is not merely a personal origin story or "why," but a future-oriented vision that inspires people to sacrifice their own interests for something larger than themselves. Trusting teams are forged in psychologically safe environments where individuals feel comfortable admitting mistakes or asking for help without fear of retribution, contrasting sharply with toxic cultures driven by excessive incentives that encourage unethical behavior like backstabbing or information hoarding. Sinek also introduces the concept of "worthy rivals"—individuals whose strengths reveal our own weaknesses and motivate us to improve rather than competitors we seek to defeat at all costs. This mindset shift transforms rivalry into a tool for collective growth, allowing organizations to innovate continuously without fixating on beating others in an endless race with no finish line. Existential flexibility is perhaps the most challenging aspect of this framework, defined as the willingness to make profound strategic shifts—sometimes 180-degree turns—to advance the just cause when circumstances change or new technologies emerge. Sinek cites Steve Jobs and Apple's decision to pivot from a different R&D direction at Xerox Park in December 1979 to invest in the graphical user interface, even though it meant potentially blowing up their existing company structure. Such shifts require not only a clear just cause but also trusting teams willing to endure short-term pain for long-term gain; without trust and shared purpose, organizations will abandon necessary changes under pressure from Wall Street or external metrics. Finally, courage is essential because playing the infinite game means swimming upstream against overwhelming pressures to prioritize short-term gains over sustainable practices. Sinek argues that true courage comes from strong relationships and a supportive ecosystem where people feel they have each other's backs during storms, enabling them to innovate and persevere even when it feels impossible. Ultimately, Sinek urges individuals to become the leaders they wish to see by taking responsibility for those around them regardless of their rank or title. Whether leading an entire company or simply being a check-in agent at an airline counter, anyone can practice leadership by caring about colleagues as human beings and fostering environments where people feel supported and valued. He encourages listeners not to try changing cultures beyond their control but instead to focus on influencing the immediate circle around them, creating pockets of infinite-mindedness that eventually ripple outward until "the tail wags the dog." By joining this movement through daily practice—studying leadership like parenting, listening actively, giving feedback, and maintaining curiosity about others—individuals can help build organizations that outlast their founders and leave the world better than they found it. Sinek concludes by inviting everyone to contribute their piece of the puzzle toward a vision where work fulfills people rather than just extracting labor for profit, proving once again that prioritizing will over resources is not only morally right but strategically superior in an infinite game with no end.
Read the full video transcript
To me, this is a world is flat moment
that the people who've learned to game
the system that this discomfort that we
feel, we're we actually are right. Like
they actually don't understand the game
they're in. Business is an infinite
game. And when you play with a finite
mindset, lots of people suffer,
including the companies that they
themselves are trying to build. That's
the great irony. The great irony is the
way you build great companies is with an
infinite mindset. The way you build
great companies is by prioritizing
people before profit. The way you build
great companies is will before
resources. Both things important, but
there has to be this general leaning
where we can feel when we come to work
and feel like we're part of something
bigger than ourselves. Where we feel
that our work and our effort is worth
more than simply the money we make.
[Music]
Hey everyone, welcome to Impact Theory.
Today's guest is a multipletime
best-selling author with one of the most
viewed TED talks of all time. His talk,
which popularized the notion of starting
with Y, has been viewed roughly 45
million times and translated into 48
languages. The speech he gave on
millennials the first time I interviewed
him broke the internet, garnering well
over 300 million views and making him
YouTube's fifth most searched term of
the entirety of 2017. His unconventional
views have made him one of the most
sought-after speakers on the planet and
have seen him invited to meet with the
leaders of some of today's most
important businesses and institutions
including Disney, American Airlines,
Microsoft, the United Nations, the
United States Congress, and multiple
branches of the US military. He is a
self-described, unshakable optimist who
has dedicated his life to bringing to
fruition a world where people feel
fulfilled by their work. He is truly
helping to shape the minds of the next
generation of leaders. He is also
helping to shape public discourse
through continued contributions to such
prestigious media outlets as the New
York Times, Wall Street Journal, the
Washington Post, the Huffington Post,
MSNBC, and countless others. So, please
help me in welcoming the man who has
been described as a visionary thinker
with a rare intellect, the author of
Start with Why, Leaders Eat Last, and
now, The Infinite Game, Simon Synynic.
Good to see you.
Good to see you, too, man.
So, the new book, dude, it is wicked.
I'm It's really been interesting to see
you call your Babe Roo shot, say that
you want to start a movement, and now be
insanely consistent with the bricks that
you would have to lay to actually get a
mass of people on board with a movement.
Uh, it was pretty exciting to read.
Thank you. Really interested knowing how
much your ideas are like mind viruses
that get inside people's heads and
really do echo through culture, dude, in
a pretty cool way. That's very
interesting to see what happens with
this one because I think you're right on
the money about something incredibly
powerful. Define for us an infinite
game.
So in the mid1 1980s uh a theologian
named James Carsey wrote this little
book called finite and infinite games in
which he defines these two kinds of
games. Uh finite games which have known
players, fixed rules and agreed upon
objectives football right there's always
a beginning, a middle and an end. Um,
and the object the the objective is to
win the game. Um, and then there's
infinite games. Infinite games are
defined as known and unknown players.
You don't necessarily know who all the
other players are. Um, the rules are
changeable. You can play however you
want. Um, and the objective is to
perpetuate the game to stay in the game
as long as possible. Um, what I find so
fascinating about this idea when I first
learned about it is we are players in
multiple infinite games every day of our
lives. There's s no such thing as being
the winner in your marriage, you know.
Um um there's no such thing as winning
global politics and there's definitely
no such thing as winning business. Um
business is an infinite game. Um and yet
when we listen to the language of too
many leaders, they talk about being
number one, being the best, and beating
their competition based on what? There's
no agreed upon objectives. There's no
agreed upon time frames. And so what
ends up happening is you have people
building organizations and leading with
a finite mindset, playing to win in a
game where there's no such thing as
winning. And when we play with a finite
mindset in an infinite game, there's a
few very predictable and consistent
outcomes amongst which include the
decline of trust, the decline of
cooperation, uh the decline of
innovation, all of which contribute to
the eventual demise of the organization
itself. Um, and so what I wrote about is
is is what it means to lead with an
infinite mindset because we teach
leadership as if it were a finite game.
Um, you know, people start business with
the goal of winning or being number one
and that's a problem. Um, because that's
impossible. Um, so what I wrote about in
the infinite game is is leading with an
infinite mindset.
So talk to me about why revenue is a
mistake because as a business leader
when you walk in that actually seems
like an agreed upon metric. Certainly if
you're playing to Wall Street,
understanding your price per share, like
what that means, the value that you're
adding to shareholders, like I think
most people at that level of business
would say, "What do you mean that we all
know what the the scoreboard is?"
There's nothing wrong with revenues. Um
there are two uh currencies in the
infinite game, will and resources. Um
resources is money. You need money to
stay in the game, but you need the will
of the people as well. And um the
problem is is that when we organize to
win, that means the score is more
important than the inspiration or
motivation that people have to to give
their blood, sweat, and tears. Um and
when we prioritize resources before will
that's a problem. I've never met a CEO
that doesn't believe their people are
important. The problem is where on the
priority list, you know, you've been to
any number of uh presentations where
they put their priorities on the wall.
you know, number one, growth, number
two, shareholder value, number three,
our customer, number four, our
employees. There it is. See, I do care
about our people. Um, and the reality
is, as social animals, we want to work
for and we're willing to give our blood,
sweat, and tears to leaders who
understand that the balance of those two
essential uh currencies. The balance of
those two things is will has to come
before resources. And that doesn't mean
9010. When I talk about putting people
before profit, you know, people freak
out, which is ridiculous. You need fuel
for the car to go. Money is fuel for the
organization. Of course, even if there's
a leaning, if it's 5149, there has to be
a slight leaning towards people because
there will always be decisions that a
company has to make in which those two
cannot uh uh both be supplied and one
will have to be sacrificed. The question
is which will you always prioritize? Um
let me give you a hypothetical example
to make my point. two CEOs. The first
CEO says, "Our number one priority is
growth." And of course, our people are
important because if we take care of our
people, we will meet and exceed our
financial goals. Second CEO says, "Our
number one priority is our people. And
if we take care of our people, we will
always meet and exceed our financial
goals." Which one would you rather work
for?
I don't want the priority.
I mean, it's obvious, right? It's
obvious. Um, so this is what it means to
prioritize will of resources. It has, of
course. Of course. Uh, money matters.
Um, but the people matter more.
Yeah, that's um it's one of those things
when you get into business that probably
intellectually feels um obvious. If you
said that to people, they'd be like,
"Yeah, yeah, I get that." But I think
that it plays out so often the way that
you explained it the first time, like we
want growth. Yeah, of course. Like take
care of the people. It's really going to
feel the growth, all that. And it's
speaking from experience, it is very
easy to slide into that mentality. And
it is insanely difficult to execute at
the level of no, no, no, my people
really do come first. They're going to
come first in not just what I say,
they're going to come first in policies
that we write. They're going to come
first in the actions that we do. And one
thing that I really liked about the book
is um you're you're intimating and at
times just flat out saying it's also the
best way to run a business if secretly
what you really want are the profits.
Why is that true? the best way to run a
business when you see what you want the
profits. No, it's the opposite. It's the
opposite.
Do you think that's true? Because I have
actually seen like I and maybe I saw in
your book what I wanted to see what it
it seemed like you were saying to me
was, "Hey, don't run your business for a
profit. Don't even have it in the back
of your mind. Take care of your people."
But the irony of ironies is when you
take care of your people and they trust
each other, the profits will come.
Oh yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Of course.
Yes. Of course. Um people who are
willing to give their blood, sweat, and
tears make for better, more profitable
companies. people who are only there for
their own selfish needs and would would
be willing to jump ship as soon as they
get a better better offer. They're not
the best people to help build a company
for the long term. Um, we can throw
money at people which will last for a
while and you can make a company look
successful for a while, but it doesn't
mean it can last. Um, we can't judge a
ship by how well the crew performs in
calm waters. We judge a ship by how well
the crew performs in rough waters. And
and um the problem is is uh is in good
times we don't use all that extra money
to take care of the people. You know, we
use it to distribute and distribute and
then when hard times come sometimes
there's not enough padding and the
culture hasn't been fostered over over
that time. But that is the irony which
is when we lead with an infinite mindset
and the leaders that do lead with an
infinite mindset have disproportionately
more successful companies, more
innovative companies, more profitable
companies, all of which are strong
enough to to last for a very very very
long time. um uh and not because they
just have the financial wealth to to
weather storms, but but the company
continues to grow and innovate and
reinvent itself so that it's it's
relevant in the face of new technology
and and changing tastes and politics in
the world. Um so that is the great
irony. But it has to be genuine, meaning
to say that I care about my people
because they're a means to an end. It's
like we only we only like you because
you help us make money. uh makes us not
only feel used but that that we're a
mechanism for somebody else's success.
Um where when we say um we care about
our people and money is the mechanism by
which we can take care of people. You
know, the more money we make, the more
we can take care of our people and serve
our customers. Um it has a profound
impact on on our desire to to to give
more.
Yeah, it's um that's something that in
founding impact theory. So I I really
learned at Quest, you're only as good as
what you write down when you start
scaling. And
really having to crystallize it and put
something down, it really does make your
values insanely clear. And I started
thinking a lot about safety and trust,
which are two of like the big pushes in
your book. And I'd love to know like
what do you see as the difference
between the the way that safe is being
used now is like safe space um versus
the way that you talk about safety in
the book to are they one and the same?
Do you differentiate um from a safe
space? Like how do you think about
safety?
It has all those definitions. I mean we
want to feel safe at work which means we
feel that we can be ourselves. It means
that we feel safe enough to raise our
hands and say I made a mistake or I
don't feel qualified for the position
you've given me. I need more training or
I'm struggling at home. It's affecting
my work. I'm scared. I need help. um and
to say any of those things with the
confidence that our boss or any of our
colleagues would rush to support us.
Because if we don't create those
psychologically and sometimes physically
safe spaces, but those psychological
safe spaces, what we end up is with a
group of people who come to work every
day lying, hiding, and faking.
They're hiding mistakes. They are um uh
not admitting if they don't know how to
do their jobs.
Um they will never admit that they don't
know something. um for fear that it
makes them vulnerable, for fear that it
maybe makes them the weak link, that
they'll find themselves on some short
list at the next round of layoffs. Uh
and uh the problem is is how do you run
a successful organization that's
supposed to sustain over the long term,
uh thrive over the long term if people
are literally hiding things that go
wrong, not admitting that they don't
know how to do their jobs, and never
admitting they need help. That doesn't
last. That doesn't last. And the problem
is is when um someone leads with a
finite mindset where they attempt to
incentivize performance. And by the way,
you can't incentivize performance. You
can only incentivize behavior. Then bad
things eventually happen.
That's interesting. Talk to me more
about why can't you incentivize
performance and how do incentives end up
influencing behavior?
Well, you can't incentivize performance
because somebody has to do something to
achieve that performance. There's
there's a there's a cause and effect.
You know, you you you can't incentivize
an effect. you can only incentivize the
cause that would hopefully yield that
effect, which is behavior. So, if I say
to you, um, I will give you a massive
bonus if you hit a certain target at the
end of the year, no matter what. What
you're incentivizing is that I will do
certain things to achieve that goal that
you set for me. But the problem is is
when we apply excessive amounts of
pressure and it's at all costs like my
very livelihood depends on that it can
accidentally incentivize some quite
unsemly behaviors like hoarding
information right because this is what
gives me my value and I don't want to
share information or things that I've
learned um with my colleagues and
co-workers which is madness or uh
unethical behavior stabbing other people
in the back and this is one of the
problems with I think our modern
business today which is too much of
business is is run right now with an
excessive amount of finite thinking. Now
there are always finite games within the
infinite game. The infinite game however
provides the context and without that
infinite mindset all you have is win-win
win win um which is unsustainable. An
infinite game is not a series of finite
games. Um it's unsustainable because
nobody has that energy and there's no
such thing as a perfect growth chart. It
doesn't exist.
Really fast. Tell me why. Why isn't an
infinite game just a series of finite
games?
For the same reason you can't just keep
eating chocolate cake every day because
it feels good. Um because simply driving
people driving people driving people
driving people driving people driving
people gets exhausting. It destroys the
the foundations of trust. It destroys
the foundations of cooperation. And when
we don't work well together, share
information, admit mistakes, there's no
innovation. And we we know what simply
driving uh a series of finite games
looks like. It looks like investment
banking before 2008 which produced an
artificial uh man-made recession. And so
much of the the the finite thinking that
we have today unfortunately is a really
reasonably modern invention. It's it's
not like business has always operated
this way. The the thinking of Milton
Friedman, the the the 1970s economist
has really dominated sort of business
theory today. He theorized that the
responsibility of business, this is his
definition, the responsibility of
business is to maximize profit within
the bounds of the law, right? He what
about ethics? You know, like a a
pharmaceutical company that raises the
price on essential drug 200%, 300%,
500%, 800%. It's not illegal. It is
unethical, right? It makes us
uncomfortable. And yet the law is not
broken. That's not a good enough
standard to run a business. Um and it
was his thinking that gave rise to the
the theory of shareholder supremacy
which was a theory proposed in the late
1970s
where um we prioritize the wants needs
and desires of a shareholder over the
needs of the customer or the employee
which is like a coach who's trying to
build a great team by doing what the
fans want versus what the players need.
Right? That's basically shareholder
supremacy. And as I said, it was just a
theory proposed in the late 1970 that
was popularized during the boom years of
the 80s and 90s. Um, mass layoffs where
we use the livelihoods of human beings
to meet arbitrary projections on an
annualized basis at the end of the year
um did not exist did not exist as a
standard business practice prior to the
1980s. Did not exist. It was popularized
during during the 80s and 90s. um the
dismantling of glass deagle which was an
act passed after the great depression to
prevent another great depression from
happening and by the way was extremely
effective between the dismantling of the
glass deagle in the 80s and 90s and the
great depression there were a total of
zero stock market crashes since the
dismantling all in the name of corporate
profit we've had three we had uh the
dotcom boom black Monday and 2008
um in other words when we play simply
with a finite mindset, we actually do
long-term damage to our own system
that's supposed to benefit uh all of us.
Um and and and I find that upsetting. Um
we've seen the rise of of of Milton's uh
Freriedman's thinking rather. Um and
like I said, his theories dominate
business today and we feel it. Not only
have we had those those stock market
crashes, but anybody who goes to work
today, there's a general feeling of
unease. you know, especially if you work
for a company that embraces annual or
even quarterly layoffs to meet arbitrary
projections. Keep in mind, a lot of the
companies that employ uh mass layoffs
are profitable, just not as profitable
as they would like. It's not like
they're losing money and they had to do
this to save the sink sinking ship.
That's something completely different.
These are highly profitable companies
that missed a projection and so they
laid people off so they could meet that
projection. There's something
fundamentally wrong with that and we
know it because we feel it at work. We
see this decline of trust. We are not
loyal to our companies anymore. Why
would we be? They're not loyal to us.
And leaders set the tone. So when
companies are loyal to us, we will give
loyalty back to them. When they're not
loyal to us, why would we be loyal to
them?
I'm tired of of CEOs telling me that,
you know, uh millennials these days
don't stick around very long. Well, why
would they if you don't offer them any
kind of loyalty uh back? And it's not
for the people to prove to you that
they're loyal. It's the other way
around. Leaders set the tone. And so,
it's because of this general business
theory that we've seen a steady decline,
a steady erosion of loyalty in in the
business world today. We don't want to
work at a company for 20 or 30 years,
mainly because we're not sure we could.
uh we're not sure that the company
actually cares to keep us around that
long and so we constantly have our eyes
open and we're constantly scanning. We
come to work feeling uncomfortable that
some of the decisions that are being
made
don't benefit the good of the employee.
Um that it really benefits this this
artificial constituency that we call the
shareholder which is really just a bunch
bunch of institutional investors.
There's this shareholder myth because
there's been a steady decline of the
middle class being involved in the stock
market for years. And the whole point of
the stock market was that we all get to
share in the wealth that we helped build
because it's on the back of average Joe
employees that produced the great wealth
in the nation. And the whole point of
the stock market, the genius of the
modern-day corporation, the genius of
the public company was that we all get
to share in the wealth that we're
helping produce. Unfortunately, over the
course of the 80s and 90s, we've seen
systems produced where we're seeing the
general population, the middle class,
actually be less included in in that
success. And the reason I wrote The
Infinite Game was because I myself got
tired of being told by people in
positions of authority or people of
extreme wealth that I was naive, that I
don't understand how business works. And
for many years, I believed them. I
thought maybe I am the dumb one, right?
We all kind of feel that because they
have the power, they have the authority,
they have the money, they know more than
we do, but we still go to work and feel
uncomfortable. And it turns out that
that discomfort, that gut feeling that
says that there's something wrong here,
turns out that the majority actually
knows something. Uh and to me this is a
world is flat moment that that the the
the the people who've learned to game
the system that this discomfort that we
feel we're we actually are right like
they actually don't understand the game
they're in. Business is an infinite game
and when you play with a finite mindset
lots of people suffer including the
companies that they themselves are
trying to build. That's the great irony.
The great irony is the way you build
great companies is with an infinite
mindset. The way you build great
companies is by prioritizing people
before profit. The way you build great
companies is will before resources. Um
both both things important but there has
to be this general leaning where we can
feel when we come to work and feel like
we're part of something bigger than
ourselves where we feel that our work
and our effort is worth more than simply
the money we make.
We know that, right?
And so for me, I got tired of being told
I was naive. I got tired of being told
that that that I don't understand how
business works. And it turns out that me
and the majority of people actually
understand more. We may not understand
the mechanics, but we understand that
what's happening isn't right. It doesn't
feel right.
Did you have a breakthrough moment? Like
what was the thing that made you go,
"Actually, I'm not wrong."
Um
well well you the discovery of of of
this definition of the infinite game um
was was a large part of it um because I
recognized that business is an infinite
game and almost all of the leadership in
business today is finite-minded and so
there's literally you can't show up to a
game of basketball ready to play
football like it's not going to go well.
We overuse sports analogies in business
but sports has beginning, middle, and
end. there actually is a finish line,
right? We overuse the analogies. They're
incorrect analogies. You know, running a
business is the same as as getting
healthy. It's a lifestyle. Leadership is
a lifestyle. An infinite mindset is a
lifestyle, right? So, for example, you
can't get healthy by going to the gym
for 9 hours. It doesn't work, right? Um
um but if you go every single day for 20
minutes, you'll absolutely get into
shape 100%. But I don't know when. And
it's different times for different
people, right? And leading is the same
thing. You can absolutely have fitness
goals. You can absolutely have finite
goals within the infinite context of
being healthy. But there's a practice
that you have to do. You have to get
enough sleep. You have to go to the gym.
You have to eat well. You have to
protect your relationships. You know,
because healthy relationships really
matter to our health. And you have to do
all those things vigilantly. And if you
miss your health goal, it's okay. You
keep working at it and you know you will
hit it. Business is the same. Who says
that you have to meet this goal on this
arbitrary date? Now, it helps to drive
and it's good to have incentives and we
we're we're very goal-oriented species.
That's fine. But if we miss the thing,
it's fine. We just keep working towards
it. Like they're guidance. They're not
absolutes cuz they're arbitrary dates
and arbitrary numbers. And even if you
do hit your fitness goal, you don't get
to stop working out.
To my you have to keep going for the
rest of your life, right? And this is
what leading with an infinite mindset
means. Here's an example. This is a
normal scenario in business, right? We
will give a team um a target, a goal to
hit by a certain time frame, usually a
year um because that's usually when we
pay taxes, right? That's the only reason
things are done in years, right? If we
pay taxes every 18 months, all the goals
will be 18 months, right?
So, we usually give people a financial
target. And there's two teams. One that
is driven solely by hitting that goal
because all they care about is getting
their bonus at the end of that goal.
Morale is up and down. If they happen to
have a good month, morale is up. If they
have a bad month, morale is down.
Retention is terrible. They can't hold
on to employees. Um, nobody really
trusts each other. The boss is toxic.
And right before the end of the
financial year, they have some mad push
where they're dropping prices all over
the place and they're managed to drive
revenues and hit the goal, right? The
problem is we bonus that team. We bonus
that leader because of what uh because
of the goal they hit, right? And
basically what we're doing is spreading
a message to the rest of the company
saying, "We don't care how you get
there. We don't care if you step on your
people. We don't care if you act
unethically. If you hit your number,
you're going to do very well in this
company." Versus another team that's
doing extremely well, good, steady, slow
growth, like really, really on target,
you know, not the highs and lows, the
peaks and valleys. Morale is super high.
Retention is amazing. It's a model team.
They trust each other. They share
information and they miss their goal on
the agreed upon date, right? At at the
end of the year, they're just shy of it.
But clearly, you can see from the trend
data, they're going to hit it at 13 or
14 months. The problem is we don't give
that person anything. We don't give that
team anything, right? And this is part
of the problem. When you have an
infinite mindset, absolutely have the
goals, but the trend matters more. How
you get there matters as much, if not
more. And we pay attention to that. So
even if I hit my fitness goal, I'm
eating better. I'm sleeping better. My
relationships are great. I'm going to
the gym. Yes, I missed my goal, but I
know if I just keep going, I'll hit it.
I'm I'm getting healthier and healthier,
right? I just got the timing wrong. And
this is what we need to build into
business. That infinite mindset. Yes,
have the goals. Yes, have the ambitions.
Yes, have the annual targets. If we miss
them, as long as we're doing the right
things, we have the right lifestyle to
take us there, that's a much healthier
way to live a life and a much healthier
way to build an organization.
So, let's talk about that recipe. you
break it down pretty eloquently. I'd say
the book is actually organized around
the five elements that seem like yeah um
the very things you're talking about
now. What are those? And
um ultimately where I want to get maybe
not right now, but ultimately what I
want people at home to be able to do is
if they're not a business owner
understand what to look for in that and
understand how they can play a role in
shaping it.
So there are five practices in order to
lead uh with an infinite mindset. Um,
you have to have a just cause, you have
to have trusting teams. You have to have
uh a worthy rival. You have to have a
capacity for existential flexibility.
And you have to have the courage to
lead. So just cause. We have to give our
people something to advance. A cause so
just that they would be willing to
sacrifice their interests in order to do
so. In other words, turn down a better
paying job or um frequent business trips
or working late hours. And though I may
not like those things, I do them because
it feels worth it. Because I believe in
what I'm a part of here. Because I feel
that I'm helping advance. Because
there's no achieving in the infinite
game. Um the goal is not final
achievement. The goal is advancing to
progress in the infinite game. And to
have that vision of an idealized state
of the world um that um all men are
created equal, right? It's an ideal that
a nation is striving towards that we'll
never actually get there but we'll die
trying. That's the point. And we can
offer people the same thing inside an
organization. In fact, in fact, we have
to um to give them something to advance.
Now, how is this different from the why?
A why comes from the past. It is an
origin story. Every single one of us has
our own unique why. It is our
birthright. It comes from the sum total
of how we were raised as kids. It is
objective. You have one and you have one
for the rest of your life. the only one,
right? And the rest of our lives are
about making the decisions that help us
uh keep in balance with our why. A just
cause doesn't come from the past. A just
cause is about the future. It's about
where we're going, right? Um you can
have multiple just causes. You can have
one professionally. You can have one
personally. You can have one for your
family. You can have one for your
church. And we're involved in all of
these. There's massive pressure put on
people, especially young people, to
what's your vision? Well, we're not all
Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. We're not all
visionaries. We don't have to have a
vision, but we do have to find a vision.
That we can find someone else's vision
and we are so compelled by it that we
want to make it our own. That's what it
means to go work for a company with a
visionary leader. That we believe in
that vision so clearly that we take
their vision and we make it our own and
we will happily contribute our work, our
effort in order to advance what is now
my vision. Right? Martin Luther King had
a vision. He stood on the steps of the
Lincoln Memorial and told us his vision,
but his vision became our vision. So, I
may not have come up with that vision,
but I found it and I'd like to devote
time and energy to help advance it. Even
beyond him, we have to give our people a
just cause. We have to have trusting
teams. We have to create environments
inside our organizations in which people
feel psychologically safe, safe enough
to raise their hands and say, "I made a
mistake or I need help."
Uh the absence of trusting teams means
we have groups of people lying, hiding,
and faking. And that comes from good
oldfashioned leadership. Leadership is
not about being in charge. It's about
taking care of those in our charge. And
the very responsibility of a leader is
not to drive performance. Leaders are
not responsible for the results. Leaders
are responsible for the people who are
responsible for the results. And the
problem is is we don't teach people how
to lead. Right? When you're very very
junior, we give people tons of training
how to do their jobs. Some people get
advanced degrees how to do their jobs so
that they'll be good at them. And if
you're really good at your job, we'll
promote you. And eventually you get
promoted to a position where you're now
responsible for the people who do the
job you used to do and we don't teach
you how to do that. So how can we expect
people to be good at their jobs if we
don't train them how to do it? Like
would you go see a doctor that didn't go
to medical school? No. So why would we
work for a leader who has no training in
being a leader? That's why we get
managers. that why that's why we get
micromanagers. That's why we get
toxicity. It's not cuz they're bad
people. It's because they don't know
what they're doing and they're making it
up as they go along. And those lucky
times that we get to work for a great
leader, well, they were lucky that they
probably had a great leader before them
or they learned it somewhere else or
maybe they had a terrible leader and
they committed to do the total opposite
of everything. The point is they learned
it. Well, we have to teach leadership so
that leaders can create environments in
which all of us can work to our natural
best. that produces trusting teams.
All right, I don't want to derail
because I know we have three more, but I
think this is so important. What in a
crash course format like what does that
type of leadership look like? How do you
create the environment where people are
going to thrive and create those results
that you're talking about?
What does it You're asking me the
question um uh what does it mean to be
healthy? You're asking me the question,
what does it mean to be a great parent?
Like I don't have five things to be a
great parent, right? It's a lifestyle
and it's comes number one with the
commitment that I am responsible for the
life of another human being, the growth
of another human being. The closest
thing to leadership is parenting. You
have to be an infinite student of
parenting. You know, you want to be a
parent. You ask your friends, you ask
your own parents, you join groups, you
read magazines, you watch talks,
whatever it is, you're constantly
consuming how to deal with this
constantly changing challenge of being a
parent. And it's ups and downs and
successes and failures, you know, and
that's what it is. Leadership is the
same. Leaders, great leaders are
students of leadership. No matter how
achieved they may be, um, they're still
learning. Um, and it's a lifestyle. It's
the lifestyle of what I need to do to
look after people, which includes things
like listening. Uh, learning how to give
and receive feedback. Um, learning how
to have effective confrontations, how to
discipline when necessary in a way
that's constructive. Um,
roam the halls, get to know people,
learning what it means to to ask
somebody questions. How do you ask
questions? You know, like some people
are naturally good at being curious
about other human beings and some people
are uncomfortable because they're
introverts or whatever, socially
awkward, but we can learn, you know, how
do you learn to remember people's names?
Oh, I'm bad at names. No, you've just
decided you're bad at names. We can
learn to be good at names so that when
we walk down the hall and say, "Hey,
Tom, oh my god, he remembers my name."
It's a nice feeling. It's a lifestyle.
It's a lifestyle. There are many, many
things we have to do and constantly work
on to be a great leader to create that
environment. That's pretty damn good.
I'll take that. All right. So, that was
two trusting teams.
Yep.
Uh, worthy rivals.
Uh, this one's a funny one. This one,
this one I actually get more questions
on than any of the others, believe it or
not.
I love the way you rolled it out in the
book.
So, so
I'll tell the story. So, there's another
guy who does what I do. Uh, he's
extremely wellresected. Um, he does
extremely good work. Um,
I hate him. I have an I have an
you know it's he's always been very nice
to me when I've seen him professionally.
it just I have an irrational hatred of
him and uh whenever his name comes up I
like it drives me nuts like people bring
it like we're we hired him and I was
like
you know uh and and I and because I'm
because I I hate him uh I'm really
competitive with him and so I will go
online and look at my book rankings and
I'll immediately check his and mind you
I don't look at anybody else's just his
and uh if I'm ahead I've got this like
smug bug feeling and if he's ahead uh I
get really pissed off you know um so
anyway we had the opportunity to uh
speak at the same event I don't mean
like me in the morning him in the
afternoon like we were interviewed
together on the stage and the
interviewer thought it would be fun if
if we introduced each other and so I
went first and then I looked at him and
I said um
you make me really insecure
um all of your strengths are all of my
weaknesses. And when your name comes up,
it makes me really uncomfortable. And he
looked at me and he said, "Funny, I feel
the same about you." The reason I had
such an irrational hatred of him had
nothing to do with him. It had to do
with me. He's my worthy rival. His
strengths revealed to me my own
weaknesses. And instead of confronting
and taking a hard look at myself and
evaluating those weaknesses and working
on those weaknesses, it was much easier
to take all of that negative energy and
direct it towards him. In other words,
to be competitive, to want to beat him,
right? It was a very cathartic
experience. Uh um we've since become
very close friends, have worked
together. I no longer check his book
rankings. And because we share the same
cause, we can actually work together. Um
and so and so what I recognized was so
often in business, we have these
competitors sometimes on our own teams
that we want to beat them. We've all had
the experience where one of our
colleagues got a promotion and we got
upset. We got angry. We got angry at
somebody else's success. Think about
that for a second. Why couldn't we share
in the joy, right? What is it about them
that's being revealed in us? That's the
problem, right? And so having worthy
rivals instead of competitors,
competitors are are other players we set
out to beat. But the problem with that
is there's no finish line. And so we're
obsessed with beating the other company.
Then at some point, sure, you're ahead
in whatever metric you chose until when,
right? At what expense? at what cost? Uh
that's not sustainable. But rather the
other players inside our industry,
outside our industry, on our own teams,
we can choose our own worthy rivals.
Their strengths reveal to us our
weaknesses. And by having our weaknesses
revealed to us, it means we have the
opportunity to grow and improve. And the
infinite game at its core is basically a
game of constant improvement. And so our
our our worthy rivals reveal to us our
weaknesses and our opportunities to
improve.
Yeah, that's that's one of the areas
where switching your mindset really has
a powerful impact and beginning to
change the way that you think that one.
And I mean, yeah, god, all these are
pretty powerful. The next one, the
existential um flexibility. This one
maybe has the headiest title. What is it
and how do we watch out for it?
Existential flexibility is the
willingness to make profound strategic
shifts in order to advance your cause.
180 degrees, right? Um this is not the
daily flexibility that you need in
business. Um a leader or even us as
individuals um may never have to perform
an existential flex. Um and at most you
might ever have to do it in an entire
career once or never. But the
responsibility of the of any leader is
to prepare their organizations for an
existential flex should it need to
happen. So what is an existential flex?
Um so the best case is really uh Steve
Jobs um and his just cause. uh Jobs and
Waznjak had a very clear just cause
which is to empower individuals to stand
up to big brother right they're
revolutionaries at heart and they saw
the personal computer as a brilliant
tool to help them advance that to to
empower individuals to stand up to to
big brother and Steve Waznjak imagined a
time in which uh an individual could
compete in business against a
corporation thanks to a personal
computer
preient right um Apple's already had
success from the Apple 1 the Apple 2
it's already a big company Steve Jobs is
already a became a CEO. And in December
of 1979, Jobs and a bunch of his senior
executives go and visit Xerox Park,
which was Xerox's R&D division. And
Xerox shows them a new invention of
theirs called the graphic user interface
that allows a user to click a mouse on a
desktop to move icons and folders to use
the computer instead of having to learn
an entire computer language. Now Jobs
who believes in empowering individuals
sees this technology and says to his
team we have to invest in this graphic
user interface thing and the voice of
reason I guess in the team says Steve we
can't we can't do it we've already
invested millions of dollars and
countless manh hours in a different
strategic direction if we suddenly
change directions we're going to blow up
our own company to which Jobs actually
said better we should blow it up than
someone else and that decision led to
the Macintosh
um the first properly graphic user
interface computer that had mass market
appeal um that was so profound um that
the entire platform of Windows Windows
2.0 know was basically designed to act
like a Macintosh you know and the reason
we all have computers on our desks today
the reason it's a household appliance
the reason any one of us can compete
against a corporation is because of this
profound shift he was willing to do that
now I call it a capacity for existential
flexibility because it's not shiny
object syndrome which you know too many
entrepreneurs are subjected to you know
this is it this is it guys you know
flavor of the moment um uh it's done
with the very specific reason of
advancing the cause I found a better way
to advance the cause and you have to
have the just cause otherwise how do you
know what to shift and you have to have
the trusting teams because you will put
the organization through short-term hell
and the and the numbers probably will go
down in the short term and the team has
to be willing to say we agree we
understand why you're making the shift
let's do this and it's going to suck but
we're in and they hunker down and they
figure it out um if you don't have a
just cause you're literally just chasing
thing and uh if you don't have the
trusting teams, this happens a lot where
sometimes the leader has the just cause
but the team doesn't know it. Um and if
you don't have the trusting teams then
people will think you've lost your mind
and they'll start abandoning ship or you
respond to the pressures from Wall
Street or outside because the numbers
start to go down.
Um but but uh existential flexibility
like I said if if you don't have to do
it you have to prepare the organization
for the for your success for your
successor to be able to do it which
means keep the cause alive and and
maintain the the trusting teams. Yeah,
the existential flex to me is where your
the the brilliance of what you're
talking about comes into crystal clear
focus because it's where all the things
come together. You have to have the
trust of your team, which is something I
think about a lot. I think about it a
lot because storms come inevitably. Um,
and I think that if you can invest in
your employees before you ask them to
invest in you in the moment where you
need them to show up for you, they will.
I think that if people are you, oh, you
have a quick three-word phrase you use,
but basically people are keeping their
head down. They're afraid of being
punished. It's like then you're never
going to get these revolutionary ideas.
Yeah. A lot of this points back at
courage. What are your thoughts around
courage? How do people um get the
courage to to play the long game to
It's not the long game, it's the
infinite game
because a long game could be five years,
right?
True.
Yeah. This is forever.
Uh how do people build that? Everything
that we talking about in the infinite
game is really, really, really, really
hard. It is so much easier to build a
company based on short-term ambitions
than it is an infinite cause. It just
is, right? It's also fun, right? Until
it's not. Um, less inspiring, but
sometimes sometimes fun, right? Hitting
a goal feels good, right? Um, it's much
easier to just hire and fire people
frequently, hire fast, fire fast, as to
hiring slowly. and and firing slowly
because we we we try and take care of
our people as best we can. It's just
it's hard to build teams. All of that
stuff we talked about leadership, like
what am I supposed to do to build a
trusting team? Well, I wish I could give
you a list of five things. It's really
really hard to be a parent. It's much
easier to be an uncle or an aunt or not
have kids, right? It's hard, right? So,
why do it? You know, it's fun and and
and exciting to be to try and beat our
competitors, you know? But to to have to
face our own weaknesses every day, oh
that's exhausting, you know, existential
flexibility. I'd rather not. I just
would rather not, you know. So, so the
reason this takes courage to completely
change our mindset a about the game that
we're actually players in um and how we
want to approach these things and do we
want to shift our mindset and our
organizations to prepare for the
infinite game to be organized for the
infinite game. It takes courage because
we're going to be swimming upstream in a
world that is very finite driven. You
know, the pressures on us are
overwhelming from Wall Street or our own
egos or from internal incentive
structures or our bosses, whatever it
is. The pressures are overwhelming for
us to play the finite game. And so, how
do you stand up to massive external
pressure? Courage. And courage is
something that comes from relationships.
You know, it's external.
a a a world famous trapeze artist would
never attempt a brand new deathdeying
act for the first time without a net.
They would never do it. So why do we
think that we could do something
difficult without external support too?
Um I've had the opportunity to meet real
heroes, people who've risked their lives
to save the lives of others with the
belief that they were going to die and
they didn't. And when I asked why did
you do it, they all say something
similar which is they would have done it
for me. It's external. And so we have to
have we have to take the time to foster
and take care of people around us to
nurture our relationships because when
we're going to be doing something
difficult, when we're going to be
swimming upstream, when we're going to
be innovating and and and and doing
something different, there are days
we're going to doubt ourselves, there
are days we're going to get knocked on
our ass. There are days that storms are
going to rise. And we have to have
people who say, "I got your back. You
need to do this. We need you. the world
needs this. Keep going. I believe in
you. You know, um,
and so courage courage comes from from
not only our willingness to do that for
others, but then their willingness to do
it for us. And if we commit ourselves to
a just cause and we're willing to to do
those things, then, you know, the great
thing is we take a lot of people with us
and change the world for the better. And
isn't that sort of the the point of an
infinite life? To leave this world in
better shape than we found it. To leave
the companies that we work for in better
shape than when we started. To leave our
families stronger and better capable
than than they can do without us. You
know, isn't isn't that what it means to
live an infinite life that we can live
literally live on beyond our own lives.
So now when people have that and they
take that mantle on and they have the
ecosystem around them that gives them
that powerful support that they need to
really be courageous and I'll assume for
a second that the people watching this
they have that.
One thing that I imagine a lot of people
feel helpless to do is influence the
culture of the company that they're
already in.
So is your what is your advice for
somebody that's in a company that they
they don't have an infinite-minded
culture? Don't
don't be there.
No, don't try and influence that which
you cannot influence. Don't control that
which you cannot control. You know, an
infinite mindset means that is something
I can't do. But I can influence and take
care of the people to the left of me and
to the right of me. I can take care of
the people who work for me. I can even
take care of the person I work for.
Sometimes we have a toxic boss, not
because they're bad, but because we
don't understand the pressure they're
under. Sometimes to simply exhibit
empathy to our boss. you know, hey boss,
you were really harsh on us today.
Everything all right? What's going on?
I'm worried about you. You know, um I'm
here like we can we can succeed
together. I'm we're here to help you.
You know, if we're no matter where we
are in inside an organization,
leadership is not about rank or
authority. Leadership is taking
responsibility for the people around us.
And so any anybody on any team at any
rank at any level can be a leader. The
first choice is that we have to want to
be. A dear friend of mine, Lieutenant
General George Flynn from the Marine
Corps said that the first criterion to
being a leader is you have to want to be
one. Um, so any of us can volunteer to
be a leader. Um, and that's what you do.
You commit yourself to seeing that the
people with whom we work on a daily
basis love coming to work. They feel
that someone's got their back. They feel
supported. They feel that they have top
cover. They feel someone cares about
them as a human being, listens to them,
knows their story, allows them to be
themselves. We can be that leader. Um,
and what you start to see is those teams
becomes really high performing. those
teams become super tight and you start
to hear rumors across the company
because everybody wants into that team
because apparently it's a great team to
work with to work on. Um, and before you
know it, one of those people goes and
moves to another team and they take
everything that they learned because
leadership is learned and they do it for
another team. And if we take that
infinite mindset and eventually the tail
will wag the dog and it doesn't matter
if it's this CEO or another CEO because
we will outlast whoever is in charge
right now. And that's the goal. We're
doing this for the good of the
organization. We're doing this for the
good of the cause, right? And the tail
can wag the dog.
Dude, I love that. I think you've got
your finger on something so important
right now. And I can feel um this shift.
It was it I can feel that there's a
shift happening, but they need the words
to understand it. And I feel like your
book delivers that. And to me, it was
when you were explaining that the
breakthrough moment for you was when you
read about Infinite Games and suddenly
you had the lexicon with which to
conceptualize all this. And I feel like
what your book is delivering on is
giving people the the framework with
which to understand it. I can't remember
where I saw this, but there was
something that said, "Oh, there's this
color, a shade of blue that's been lost
forever, not because it doesn't exist in
in waveforms of light, but because we
don't have a word for it, and because we
don't have a word for it, we can't
conceptualize it. And thusly, our brain
just shunts it off into one of the
colors that we do have a name for." I
thought, whoa, that's so powerful and so
true and so accurate to the way that the
brain works. And reading the book,
that's what this felt like. It was like
now people are going to be able to talk
about it in a way that's going to let
them conceptualize what a company
culture can be. The way that the company
can be driven by something bigger than
the profits. It gives them that
organizing principle. I think that's so
incredibly powerful.
Thank you. I appreciate that. And I I
agree. And I mean that's what happened
for me which is I found words for the
discomfort I had. I had I had words for
you know when people called me naive and
said you don't understand how business
works. I didn't have a a response
because I didn't have words. I just had
a feeling and they had more success than
me and they had more power than me. So,
I didn't say anything, you know, call me
oldfashioned. I'd like to work for a
company that outlasts me. I'd like to
work for a company where I can feel like
I can be myself when I go to work. I'd
like to work for a company where I feel
that my boss actually cares about me
like I'm a human being. Um, rather than
a, you know, just a number on a
spreadsheet.
I'm with you there. Where can people
find more about you? Where can they
engage in this movement?
you know, all the usual places, uh, you
know, the interwebs and the LinkedIns
and Facebooks and Twitters and
Instagrams and all those things. Um, you
know, I think the the question is, you
know, when people say, "How do I join
the movement? How do I be a part of it?"
Um, I always ask people the same thing,
which is be the leader you wish you had.
Become a student of leadership, study
it, read about it, watch things about
it, practice it every day, you know,
like be a parent, you know, like join
the movement means I'm I'm going to take
care of my team. Sometimes I'm in a
leader leadership position and sometimes
I'm not. And it doesn't matter. I'm
going to practice leadership. If I'm a
salesperson, you know, I'm if I'm if I
work at the if I work at uh the check-in
counter of an airline, I'm going to take
care of the people I work with. I'm
going to take care of the customers as
if as if they're my family, you know,
like practice leadership, learn about
it, study it. Um because I do these
things because I I recognize I'm just a
piece of a jigsaw puzzle. You know, it's
one of the reasons I wanted to come talk
to you on camera. It's because, you
know, when we do a jigsaw puzzle, the
first thing you do is lean the the
picture, the the box against the wall,
and then you start putting the pieces
together to build that picture. My job
in this movement, I'm the guy who points
at the box, right? I'm the one who's
pointing at the picture, pointing at the
picture, maybe pointing out a couple of
the pieces and where they go, but I need
lots of people to join me. We need lots
of people to join us um who say, "I have
a piece of the puzzle. I'm willing to
lead this way. I'm willing to abandon
Milton Freriedman ideals and and and do
something bigger, something more.
Follow, you know, live with an infinite
mindset, lead with an infinite mindset.
Um, and put their piece down and say,
"How can I help build that vision?" We
we there's we need the army. And so, how
people can engage in the movement is
actually practicing all the stuff
more than anything else. That's what we
need.
What's the impact that you want this
book in particular to have? I know your
your life mission, you've articulated
that well, but what do you hope is the
impact of this book?
The book is written for two reasons.
One, it's to rally those who who who
know that we have to do things
differently and give them the words and
some of the guidance on how to do things
differently, how to play with an
infinite mindset in the infinite game.
And the and the other reason is to help
us recognize those finite players
because we're going to have to work for
them, buy from them, and invest in them.
And it's okay if they're finite-minded,
but we have a right to know. So when
companies say we're purpose- driven, but
they don't actually make decisions to
advance their purpose, you know, we have
the right to be able to try and figure
out, are they lying to us or not,
because we have to work for them, buy
from them, and invest in them. Um, and
and and so it's it's uh it's to help us
not only do it ourselves, but recognize
when others are doing it or not.
I love that.
Simon, thank you so much for coming on.
Thanks so much. Thanks for having me
back. Of course, guys, if you haven't
already gone so deep into this man's
world, you are missing out. It is
absolutely extraordinary. If you haven't
already, be sure to subscribe. And until
next time, my friends, be legendary.
Take care. Time and time. That was
wonderful. Your book's amazing. Your
idea of Tom is just this vast collection
of narratives that you've constructed
around your own experiences. And it's
layer on top of layer on top of layer on
top of layer.