Author Simon Sinek explains his book “The Infinite Game,” and why there are no rules in business. Get social with Inc. on: Facebook: / inc Twitter: / inc Linkedin: / inc--magazine Instagram: / incmagazine Pinterest: / incmagazine
The interviewer is quite nice. Usually interviewer far to often disrupts guest with questions. But he just asked a question, let Simon talk over that, and listened, really listened.
25 years ago I remember taking over a failing contract where I was told to babysit while my company tried to get out of it. While ther i thought I would do my best to help the staff who were completely demoralised. We ended up saving and turning the contract around, the team worked for standard rate in overtime and the company ended up with a successful contract that they kept. I am now coming to the end of my career and from this I can now see I was playing the infinite game because the rules of the finite game were taken away from me. I wish I had realised or had seen this back then as I'm sure I would have been so mush happier in my life an career! Please take note everyone.
I appreciate the interviewer’s questions. I just attended Simon’s tour in New York and my main question was, ”How do we practically apply this thinking?” Very glad to hear the answers here.
I love the way this man thinks and talks. there is so much openess to explorer and be better, not only in business, but in other aspects of life too. because it is about relationships. Good relationships are built and forged over time. Facts (known) and theorems held should be second priority but they should be tweaked and/or discarded as more knowledge is uncovered.
I kind of wonder if it's automated in some fashion. It seems to change focus and movement based on the movement of the speaker. I don't think human camera operators do that except in action movies.
This is a very great perspective uncovered by Simon Sinek, the most inspiring public education expert in modern days. If I am a “finite game” manager I will just set an arbitrary deadline or objectives to my subordinates and then, coldly, leave it alone and get back to my office. But, with “infinite game” mind set, I not only set the deadline or objectives but also work with my subordinates to explore all possible ways to accomplish those targets together.
Excellent. A manager is the person who takes responsibility for their team to work as a 'community' of intentional purpose. It's about being a productive community in all aspects of 'community'. That is, people first.
I have always wanted to read "start with why" but have been putting it off for a really long time. But this video got me to believe that Simon sinek is legit 🔥
@@MrWilfredBramble thanks a lot. Actually on the contrary I really love reading from books can't stand audio books for some reason. Like podcasts though
@@vshettyvs I have read the book and, honestly, it is a lot of the same. The need for a Why is quite quickly made clear and I was dissappointed that he just kept on underlining that need, with the obvious recurring examples of Steve Jobs, Martin Luther King and such. I was hoping to get some more practical advice on how to implement it and create a company culture that actually sticks to it. The conclusion for me was that a Why is paramount for a company to succeed and the given examples of the most succesfull people/companies had that properly worked out; it's up to the reader to actually figure out how he/she can put this 'Start With Why'-principle to work.
@@LeonSlapak damn I hate it when books do this. I can't tell you how many books I've read that keep repeating the same thing over and over again. Something that can be completed in a 500 word article becomes a 400 page book sold for 19.99$ + bonuses I had to learn to give up my need to finish a book and get started on the next one of the content gets repetitive. I might miss out on some info but with all the work I have in my business I only get about 2 hours a day to read so I want it to be as productive as possible
@@vshettyvs Then don't waste your time on this guy. It's not necessarily badly written or so, but just not as valuable as he presents it. The TED talk basically says all there is to the theory. A theory that, by the way, is developed by a marketeer, not someone who actually ran companies/movements of the size that he keeps mentioning. I would also say that his 'idea' is not really that new, there are more books or talks that one way or another state the importance of a bigger/overarching goal that pushes your daily operations in some direction. He just made it easier to follow because he is a great public speaker and focussed only on this idea. Books like Zero to One by Peter Thiel and The Art of the Start by Guy Kawasaki were way more valuable to me than Simon Sinek's. Written by people who were actually inside of spectacular companies, which for me made it more inspiring and credible.
I work for a finite company that thinks they are an infinite company. Talk about frustrating. It’s only about the numbers and beating last years numbers by x%. Then forecasting numbers for the next 5 years. A complete waste of time and such a time waster. Instead of being focused on innovation, we are forever chasing our tails
@@drissalaoui4101 Everyone (adult) has financial responsibilities and so what if it's easy to say? Easy to say things are wrong now? 2+2 is 4, that's easy to say. It's also correct. Just like what Robby said. If you don't like your job, quit. Get a better one. Yes, it's easy to say and also good advice.
Simon gets me through my Job when mentally drained. I listen to clips frim him a few times a week before bed to recharge for the next day. The bad side effect is I have kinda fallen for him. He'd make a GREAT Husband 😁.
Sir Richard Branson stands behind: "Clients don't come first, your employees come first, and let your employees take care of the clients" -something in those lines. Employees should definetly be the number 1 concern in every company. Not shareholders. Sir Richard Branson I think is the best example of this and his Virgin group of companies. He runs them amazingly and if you want to take a look in how he thinks read The Virgin way (his book). He is a true entrepreneur and I think every business owner should follow his principles. Also there are more and more examples of companies giving priority to their employees and the productivity and profitability of these companies actually increases A LOT, so I hope that's the future. Even though, don't be an employee is rule number one 😎
As soon as the interviewer asked Simon how he's company was doing I could tell Simon was surprised and did not have an answer. He's an idealist and a very smart man, but actions speak louder than words.
I have seen your infinite thinking concept in business applied as Total Quality Management, I experienced how difficult it was to implement such concepts to change the outlook and goals of the organization. Like you say in the video, it’s much easier to just set a goal or number and when you reach it, your successful...not much thinking involved. I particularly liked the part of the video when you talk about the difference between competitors and rivals and learning from your rivals to reveal your own weaknesses. Since retiring from my career, I coach High School track and Instruct Taekwondo. My focus is to get my students to think in the infinite concept: always improving and constantly helping themselves and those around them getting better rather than winning, beating a particular person or obtaining a Black Belt. I explain to them that they will still be competitive, but their skill level will be much improved due to this introspective approach. I find that this helps the students, no mater the age, maintain a more optimistic approaching towards learning. My hope is they will maintain this concept and help them mold a good work ethic and outlook that will help them in the future. Thank you for sharing such a poignant video.
8:34 This mindset. We have it in politics. The majority must protect the rights of the minority and allow freedom of speech to criticize and challenge settled arguments of the majority to further hone those arguments. Your company/business/firm must be challenged so that it does not grow complacent and obsolete. While you are fighting to be number one, someone else is innovating and looking to and will surpass you possibly knocking you out of the game all together. Adapt, evolve and survive.
The problem with looking at the responsibility of businesses as maximizing profit is that the common interpretation is to only look at profit rather than maximizing shareholder value. Profit is only one aspect of value. Another aspect would be consistent growth or elasticity in markets. It doesn't do a business any good if it tanks during a recession but had profit all of the other years. If productivity is low and turnover is high, but the profit of the business meets projection, that's not necessarily what it means to maximize value. Because, like Sinek is arguing, treating people better and providing a desirable work environment will lead to more productivity, lower personnel costs, and less turnover. So, Simon's concepts still maximize shareholder value, only it looks beyond traditional finance interpretation. As he says, it takes on new meaning.
I'm about 3/4 of the way through and it seems like a good metaphor for finite thinking would be someone who's in a burning car (blockbuster) but doesn't want to cut the seatbelt (lose late fee revenue) because it would cause damage to the car.
Sinek has defined, in terms that current executives can understand, the difference between the ongoing concern and the limited-run. "The finite game" as he defines, is exactly why you see - and will continue to see, business collapse and the loss of valuable brands. During the economic recession of 2006-2008, companies DESTROYED excess capacity. All the millions of dollars in decades gone by that were spent expanding were squandered because the finite game lies to the players about the cost that it takes to restore capacity quickly. It's this mindset that tells the players that infrastructure maintenance has nowhere near the importance as expansion. This is corporate governance and management by crisis. If you can't adapt in crisis the entire business fails, and you will get exponentially worse at handling crisis over time. You build water towers to meet the spikes in water demand over time. The crisis executive blows up water towers instead of maintaining them, buys more pumps, and when demand spikes, demands price increases on consumers to cover the costs to add much more expensive new pumps. In a business environment where everyone does the same thing and operates from a crisis, the consumer will look to eliminate the need for the product altogether, because unlike these crisis businesses, the consumer seeks to gain and maintain capacity - the family can expand at any time, and a lifetime is spent trying to gain and hold onto the ability to handle that spike in demand.
he is so right about companies not being loyal...i have been employed by the same company for 20 years and i believe once they let me go. I won't find a stable job that will be willing to keep me for the next 20 or 5, so it is very difficult in this days and age.
memoranda1 yes your absolutely right! That’s why more than ever we must do something else job security is obsolete . You just have to have he right information and the right vehicle
Excellent interview. He articulated many of the thoughts I’ve had over the last few years about the moribund nature of business and the all too-frequent bounding of decision making in unhelpful metrics and structures.
My first real company, I worked for, from 1994 towards had those principles. The work was fun, the company was something we all trusted.. and we became the number one mobile phone company in the world - but that was just a bonus.
A powerful view on what it takes to build a lasting enterprise where people can find a career, instead of a step!!! Great insights! I'm already testing the concept against the cultures of businesses that are growing and going! Regrettably, those who don't share his views often take lot's of people down with them!
You are explaining exact how our system works . My profession is a specialist in consumer finance for the last 20 years and I’ve often worked with colleagues who want to be the best in making money and colleagues who want to ensure that the costumers get the best advice for what kind of product they must chose for their financial future . Commerce vs ethnic, for many it’s a struggle!
Planning to read this, because I have heard a few of Simon's talks and have always found them thought provoking. That said, I'm not sure where's he's going with the premise "you can't win in business... no defined metrics, etc...". In the most simple terms, public companies compete with themselves. Gross revenue is up, you're winning. Gross revenue down and you're not. So there's the most important metric.... Executive and management make wrong decisions all the time, jobs are sometimes lost because the business went down the wrong path, but the driving goal of making business owners the most money possible will not change and employees are only entitled to their jobs while the business has a need for them.
Re: Milton Friedman, he would say deciding what is ethical is a personal decision just as is the decision to work for an employer. If an employer is unethical, it carries the risk of losing valuable employees based on said decisions.
I heard about "making the numbers" from employees in a corporation in our city but never heard that sort of conversation from any of the hundreds of small businesses or sole proprietors that I worked with during the time I operated my own business (1979 to 2020). We cooperated with each other, traded or borrowed supplies from each other, and it was never "dog eat dog". We never required customers to fill out credit applications and I don't recall ever losing a total of $500 in the 40+ years due to bad debts. There is a lot more cooperation in business than the general public is led to believe.
Okay... so this was very difficult to understand, and I’ll admit to any misconceptions that I may harbor about this topic. However, this is what I understand. • The premise is that we are engaged in an unending game that envelopes other games {The Infinite Game}. • The enveloped games, in contrast, do have an end and are subject to the rules of the former. {The Finite Game} • One rule of the infinite game is to attempt to perpetuate one’s game. In other words, one must play the longest lasting game or make a better one. Simon seems to possess the view that, in the context of business, some are failing to properly adhere to the rules of the infinite game. Subsequently, they fail to perpetuate their game. He seems to think the main reason for their failure lies in a lack of ethics and an inability to adapt. How to fix this? He listed five things here (13:52 - 14:00 ) but I only recognize two or three of them as real solutions. “Having a just cause” => Ethics “Build Trusting Teams” => Ethics “Worthy Rival” => ? “Existential flex” => Adaptability? “Courage to lead”=> Leadership Ability In summery, there are parallels between what he’s seems to state and the old adage: “you’ve got to play the long game if you truly want to win.” That’s my take on this video. What’s yours?
That's precisely how I understand it as well with one addition - extending the definition of 'playing for the long game' beyond annual economical success and also incorporating ethical and moral responsibility towards the customer, the community and the employees - as opposed to only the shareholder. With regards to the comments on rival vs. competitor, it is the acceptance that you'll never play the infinite game alone and will always face or enjoy a level of competition. Herein lies the difference - enjoying competition (friendly rivalry) and using it as a motivation to infinitely and constantly further the quality of your offering as opposed to fighting fierce competition that you are trying to 'crush' with short-term agendas that may well have you ignore a bigger trend that collapses your business model. I hope this helps. :)
Aloha, first off, I am a huge Simon Sinek fan. The ideas that he is trying to make more commonplace I feel will help businesses grow and become better places for their employees to work. As for me, I agree with your assesment expect for the parts where the infinite players are playing with finite rules. In truth, I think they are actually constantly changing the rules and end goals. Also in regards to the courage to lead, it reminds me on what Brene Brown says about being vulnerable. That the courage to lead is not about a leader ability to lead, but instead is about their ability to handle being wrong and taking risks where the outcomes are too unknown, and that those leaders will remain loyal not the the company's bottom line, but to the worker putting in the work to make the company what it is. Thanks for asking.
Adriano Olivetti did all those things mister Sineks said. Since he was given his father's legacy, the typewriter factory. He did so much for the good of his employees, that if we compare to what Google praises in doing, Olivetti did much more and better... from 1920's till he died in the 1960. Olivetti didn't care of the costs, he knew that the best investments were in the welfare of the employees, in the research and innovation, he didn't care to be the first or the best. Steve Jobs once admitted he got inspired to him. Olivetti has been a cutting-edge personality of his time.
Sounds like the military 🪖 we the team versus the individual. There's no monetary incentives in the military and no colleges but we do have brother and sisters who support each other and our adaptable environments. Thank you Simon for your support of us
My only wish toward Mr. Sinek: Please provide a list of those companies, that already follow the infinite game - so I can apply there. I think, the hardest part is to find out, which of the companies are really (!) creating meaning on this planet. Is Apple really act meaningful/ethical, when they try to pull every trick to minimise their taxes they have to pay and also fight the independent repair shops, that add value ...?
That’s why you focus on chunks of time within the infinite game. I try and keep my employees updated on the daily sales and emphasize how much more we need to hit sales or how far over the target we are. Find joy in the little Goals achieved.
The process to become a infinite thinker is a very difficult journey. Infinite thinkers are exceptional people and very hard to find . A scholar warrior is even more difficult to find 💯. One in a billion.
It's holes vs drill bits. Companies that focus on making drill bits miss the fact that customers need holes, and someone will come along that is in the business of creating holes, and your drill bit business is bankrupt.
If a company acts unethically, the market is supposed to punish it for doing so by declining to enter into business with them (boycotting etc.). So Milton Friedman implied that behaving ethically is coupled with the pursuit of profit (if the company is somewhat transparent)
Not all business have a clear cause. Some start with one and lose sight of it later, and a select few maintain a clear view of their cause. These can progress in there cause and that is success. As he says it's progress towards a cause.
Satisfying your relationships and working the bounds of the laws seems worthy! Comparing apples to oranges. Shareholders typically want profit. Some don’t.
What an awesome concept. Simon is such a brilliant leader. Love this idea. I think we are doing some of this stuff really right, and then have other areas we need to work on. Can't wait to read this book! :) - Erin + Brian
everything I do now is for those who come after me, yet in doing so I find peace for myself as well, this paradox is the very foundation of existence living a finite life playing in a infinite game
This thought seems incomplete to me though, because motivation and empathy are not 100% linked, and it's not clear that all people are capable of the same levels of empathy. Also, there are different kinds of empathy, and personality can determine when empathy is applied. Also, misplaced empathy can make one a victim, because cheaters and criminals are very hard to identify. Were it not for that challenge maximizing empathy would probably be ideal. I think we need more empathy in business, though it can't be simplified down to just that. And it's not clear exactly how to go about fostering empathy within organizations from the outside. Hopefully Sinek's approach has a positive affect on some of them, and doesn't simply get reinterpreted into a shallow scheme. I think it's more accurate to say that an infinite game is oriented toward service to All, while a finite game exclusively serves the Self, where "self" can apply on the individual level, but also to an organization. Organizations are "superorganisms" after all. An organization can in principle be bad for society even if none of the individuals have ill intent. It just requires that the share the right set of misunderstandings and/or ignorances.
I like Simon's perspectives, because he always talk about TRUST, HONESTY, and EMPATHY which is nowadays becoming more and more irrelevant in business, organisation and teamwork, so sad :( I think the infinite game based on those virtues, rather than just hitting the target, It's about the opportunity to grow to be a better person, better team, better organisation everyday..like Simon said, it's a constant improvement. Thanks, Simon! very inspiring.
I think this is an unfair bash on Friedmann. He just says that a corporation exists to generate wealth for its shareholders, he doesn't tell you how. But creating a sustainable business with loyal workers is going to create way more profit for its shareholders in the long run. So he is still right.
Excellent. This is how it should be. I believe that ultimately if you rigidly set fixed targets, then you are setting yourself up to fail. Or accumulate issues stemming from the mentality. Yep I'm talking about being human. Anything depending upon human beings to function, needs to function in a very human way.
Several questions for Simon: 1) Do you acknowledge that an "infinitely led company" can use its "just causes" to justify just about anything? 2) What restraints are there, if any, that keep an "infinitely led company" from going astray? 3) What distinguishes an "infinitely led company" from a cult? @6:38 Simon said _In an infinitely led company, you'll find that as a sense of cause so just that people are willing to sacrifice for it. Meaning they would turn down, for example, a better paying job because they'd rather be here and be a part of this. It feeds my soul...it makes me feel like my life has value...my life has meaning. So you'll find just causes at the center of it._ That sounds a lot like the messianic zeal sweeping though Silicon Valley and payment processors these days. Tim Cook preached that "Not Banning Those Who Violate 'Our Morality' 'Is a Sin'", Patreon's Jacqueline Hart defined her company's mission thusly: "...If we said, we want this to just be a free speech platform - we’re 100% dedicated to free speech - then that isn’t really true to our mission....So for Patreon, we can have free speech up to a point.", and Mastercard told Patreon to delete Robert Spencer's (of JihadWatch) account "because they reserve the right to not offer their services to accounts of their choosing." In the 3 examples I listed, one "infinitely led company" smeared people with opposing ideas as sinful, the second admitted to suppressing the speech of its users [now former users], and the third admitted to pressuring other firms to drop customers [possibly illegally]. Which leads to the 3 questions above I have for Simon. [1] www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/openly-gay-apple-ceo-tim-cook-not-banning-those-who-violate-our-morality-sin [2] www.reddit.com/r/podcasting/comments/a8nexc/transcript_from_phone_call_between_matt/ [3] www.jihadwatch.org/2018/08/patreon-and-mastercard-ban-robert-spencer-without-explanation Robert Spencer is a staunch critic of fundamentalist Islam but he is civil (no slurs and no profanity at all) and meticulous (he cites chapter and verse). He is in no way related to alt-right figure Richard Spencer.
You nailed it, Simon. Millennials did not matriculate in a meritocracy. No matter how hard they work, it does not matter. Reward is given for other things. My generation, Generation X, failed to lead the subsequent generations and we should all be using our remaining years to stand tall and do right. There is much smart thinking to think and much hard work to be done. Although, I do disagree with your characterization of Friedman.
Jordan Peterson is very limited in his ability to comprehend topics with broad backgrounds and complexity, and has no economic motivation to expose himself further than his current state. He speaks with authority from 3/4 of an understanding. While those that laud him as some expert are those that have 1/4 of an understanding, and because Peterson crafts his argument to reinforce the Dunning-Kruger bias amongst those with limited understanding, he continues to be presented as some genius. The King of the Imbeciles is still an imbecile. You'll disagree, of course, because you don't have the understanding to know that Jordan Peterson doesn't know, hasn't experienced, and can't see.
I spent years listening to Greg Steinhaffel CEO Target saying we were going to be the ‘Best Company Ever’ and thought it was being arrogant. He was finite.
4:08 not only does it not matter how hard you work: if you work harder you just prove that you are exploitable so the people upstairs try to exploit you more!
Kodak is another example of finite thinking. There are also the challenges of group think mentality and complacency. These ideas are not just business issues, they occur in all aspects of human endeavor both intra and inter personal. The relationship we have with our planet is also one that is seen as a fight and why we will lose unless we make it interpersonal. Oh you talk about Kodak now and I wrote this before the end. Lol.
Thanks, Simon for sharing the retrospective on the misguided values of the '80s and 90's the question in my mind is if this infinite pursuit of self-interest is endemic to societies everywhere and it is only a question of social shifts that trigger changes in our socio-economic values.
Also, "Genius At Play" - a 'metabiography' of John Horton Conway, by Siobhan Roberts. I bought it, read it, loved it. Gives a bit of a 'flavour' of Game Theory.
