Roger: Hey everyone, welcome to the show! Let’s kick things off with a question: Are you in a game you can actually win, or one that's designed to outlast you? It sounds a bit abstract, I know, but it's really the foundation of how we define success, whether it's in our personal lives or in leadership roles. Patricia: Right, Roger, it’s fundamental. Because whether you're leading a Fortune 500 company, a small team, or even just navigating your own life—you're always "in a game" of sorts. But is it a "finite" game—you know, where you're chasing quick wins, trying to reach a specific finish line? Or is it the "infinite" kind, where the real goal is to stay in the game, to build something that lasts beyond your own time? Roger: Exactly! And that's the core idea of the book we're discussing today. It's all about shifting your mindset from focusing on short-term gains to building something truly enduring, something resilient, and something that actually benefits the world around us. Patricia: The book is filled with great examples—like how Apple, for example, moved beyond just making money and started focusing on a larger purpose. Or even CVS—remember when they stopped selling tobacco, even though it cost them a lot of revenue? And I know you’re itching to bring up the Siege of Leningrad—there are some really interesting historical stories in there, too. Roger: Absolutely! They all illustrate this concept of the "infinite mindset." The author makes the point that great leadership isn't just about beating the competition today, it's about building trust, fostering resilience, and inspiring others to continue pursuing the cause tomorrow. It’s about legacy. Patricia: So today, we're basically going to break down this whole idea. First, we’ll explain the difference between finite and infinite games—and don't worry, it’s not all sports analogies! Then, we’ll explore some crucial leadership practices that can transform your organization into a long-term powerhouse. Think of it as giving you the tools to lead with purpose, not just for profit, got it? Roger: And finally, we’ll talk about why ethical cultures – those that prioritize trust and values – are the ones that “really” last, well, long after the quarterly reports are forgotten. Ultimately, it all comes down to leaders who think big, think long-term, and, most importantly, think beyond their own self-interest. Patricia: So, put on your thinking caps, folks – because this isn't a sprint. It's a mental marathon! Let's get started, shall we?

Roger: Okay, so let’s dive right in—finite versus infinite mindsets. This is really the foundation for everything else we're going to talk about. Basically, finite games have fixed rules, known players, and a definite end. It's all about winning or losing, and that’s that. Think, you know, a soccer game. Ninety minutes, and then the score decides it. Patricia: And someone always ends up being a sore loser, right? The stakes feel so high in the moment, but then everyone moves on. So, finite thinking—it's about that immediate win. But what happens when you apply that to something like business? Roger: That's where it gets complicated. When leaders—or organizations, for that matter—become hyper-focused on those finite goals, like, "We need to be number one this quarter," or "Let's crush the competition," they lose sight of the bigger picture. Things like innovation, maintaining trust, or even the long-term health of the company. It just becomes chasing short-term wins. Which doesn’t last! Like you said, people move on. Patricia: Yeah, but there’s a real attraction to finite thinking, isn’t there? So many leaders fall for it because it’s measurable, it feels tangible. You can point to a trophy, an increased share price, a successful product launch and go, "See? We did it." It's seductive somehow. Roger: Absolutely, it’s all about that instant gratification. But it's just not sustainable. A classic example is Microsoft during the Steve Ballmer days. They got so caught up in competing with Apple, they lost their own direction. Remember the Zune, that infamous iPod competitor? Patricia: Oh, the Zune. A footnote in tech history. It had some cool features, I guess, but it felt like they just launched it with a "we-have-to-beat-Apple" mentality. That was the only motivation. Roger: Exactly! When your only goal is to beat someone else, you forget about building something meaningful, something that actually reflects your organization's identity. Apple, on the other hand, wasn't focusing on "beating Microsoft" back then. They were building a bigger vision, like empowering educators with tools to transform classrooms. Patricia: So, while Microsoft was playing this finite game of "defeat the enemy at all costs," Apple was in this infinite game of creating a legacy. And, well, look where the Zune is now. Roger: Even beyond that, look at how it built Apple's resilience as a company. Their infinite mindset allowed them to build a brand that stands for creativity, simplicity, and progress. That's why customers trust them, even decades later. Patricia: Okay, but let's be real. Playing the finite game feels kind of unavoidable sometimes, right? Think about CEOs in big corporations. Quarterly earnings calls, anyone? If they don’t hit those short-term targets, the stock price drops, shareholders get angry, and suddenly you’re out. So, isn't infinite thinking a bit idealistic in that kind of environment? Roger: That’s a great point, and it’s definitely not easy. But the book makes it clear that finite and infinite mindsets aren't mutually exclusive. You can't completely ignore the need for short-term wins. It’s more about using those as stepping stones toward a larger purpose. Leaders need to balance those immediate demands with longer-term strategies. Strategies that build trust, foster innovation, and encourage resilience. Patricia: So, instead of obsessing over short-term market dominance, it's about... sustainability? The company version of eating your veggies instead of junk food? Roger: Exactly! Sustainability—both in a business sense and a cultural sense. Infinite thinking lets organizations think generations ahead. And here’s the fascinating thing: it doesn’t just impact the company itself, it inspires employees too. When people feel like they’re part of something bigger, something meaningful, they give their best. It’s that sense of purpose and belonging. Patricia: Okay, so get everyone to buy into the mission, like Apple’s employees and their education initiative. But still, isn’t an infinite mindset more of a luxury? Something companies indulge in when things are already going well? Roger: I hear you, but I’d actually argue the opposite. When a company's struggling, when things are “really” tough, that's when an infinite mindset becomes critical. It’s like a compass that helps you navigate stormy seas. Without it, you just get stuck in firefighting mode, jumping from short term problem to the next one. Patricia: Alright, fair enough. But it’s easy to talk about purpose and legacy. Actually delivering on it is another story. What does infinite thinking look like, day-to-day? Roger: Great question! One of the key takeaways from the book is that infinite thinking isn't just some abstract philosophy, it’s actually a practical framework. It starts with defining what Simon Sinek calls a "Just Cause"—a clear and inspiring vision that goes beyond just making money. Then it’s about fostering trust, encouraging collaboration, and building resilience. Leaders have to create a culture where people feel safe, valued, and empowered to innovate. Patricia: So, we're talking about a total overhaul, aren’t we? A mindset shift from the top leadership all the way down to the newest hire. Roger: Yeah, and it’s not easy, it requires commitment and courage. But the long-term payoff? Priceless. Organizations that embrace infinite thinking aren't just stronger. They actually contribute positively to the world. And the book “really” drives it home: when you move beyond just finite goals, you transform from being just a competitor, to becoming a builder of legacies. Patricia: A builder of legacies... I'll admit, that's pretty compelling. But if you're counting on your legacy to drive results, you better have your act together, huh? No Zune moments allowed.

Roger: So, understanding this dichotomy really sets the stage for seeing how these infinite-minded practices can transform leadership and organizations. Which brings us to the really big question: how do you actually “do” this? What are the tools, the strategies, to make this mindset real? And that's where the book's Five Practices of Infinite Leadership come in. Patricia: Ah, finally – the "how"! I was half-expecting you to just keep philosophizing about the grand ideals of infinity, but this is what we need – a blueprint. So, what exactly are these five practices, Roger? Lay 'em on us. Roger: Okay, so the five practices are: advancing a Just Cause, building trusting teams, studying worthy rivals, demonstrating existential flexibility, and leading with courage. This is where we move from just talking about the theory into real, actionable strategies. It outlines how leaders can create sustainable impact, not just, you know, chase those quarterly goals. Patricia: Sounds good in theory, as you said. Let's start with the first one, advancing a Just Cause. What exactly does that mean? Is it like some amped-up company mission statement? Roger: Sort of. A Just Cause is an aspirational purpose, a visionary purpose that inspires people to contribute beyond just their own self-interest. It’s inclusive, service-oriented, resilient, ambitious, but still achievable. Think of it as a north star that keeps you and the organization aligned, even when things get tough. It's bigger than profit; it's about contributing meaningfully to society or the world in general. Patricia: Okay, I get the idea. But, inspiring people to think beyond themselves? You can't really force that. So, where do you even begin with creating something like that? Roger: Well, one of the best examples in the book is Nikolai Vavilov’s story from the Siege of Leningrad. Picture this: World War II, millions starving, and Vavilov, a botanist, and his team decide not to eat the seeds they were preserving—even though these seeds could have saved their lives. Why? Because their mission was to safeguard genetic diversity in agriculture for future generations. The idea of global food security mattered more to them than their immediate survival. Patricia: Whoa. Let me get this straight: they literally gave their lives to preserve crop diversity? I mean, that’s dedication. That’s, like, the ultimate Just Cause, right? Roger: Exactly! It highlights how a really powerful cause can drive people to transcend even the most dire circumstances. Vavilov's team could have, you know, thought short term—they were starving, after all. But their commitment showed a resilience and a purpose that echoed far beyond their immediate problem. And that reminds us that leaders need to articulate causes that go way beyond today's crisis or opportunity. Patricia: Okay, I'll admit, that's pretty inspiring. But modern organizations aren't preserving seeds during a world war. How do you apply that to, I don’t know, a tech company or a retail business? Roger: The principle still holds, Patricia. Leaders can take this framework and translate it into their particular context. Say you're in renewable energy—your Just Cause might be about creating a sustainable planet for future generations. If you're in education, it could be about ensuring equal access to transformative learning tools. When people see their work contributing to something bigger than themselves, they become more engaged and resilient. Naturally. Patricia: So, it's not just about flashy slogans or those hollow mission statements you see plastered on corporate websites; it's about actually embodying that cause, right? Roger: Precisely. It becomes part of the organization’s DNA, not just a box to tick. And that kind of commitment can turn a struggling team into one that thrives, even under pressure. Oh, and speaking of people thriving, let’s move on to the second practice: building trusting teams. Because this, too, goes beyond just surface-level strategies. It's about creating what Sinek calls a "Circle of Safety." Patricia: Alright, I'm listening, but isn't trust one of those fuzzy intangibles? I mean, everyone says it's important, but what does it actually look like in practice? Roger: Okay, so let’s look at the Castle Rock Police Department under Chief Jack Cauley’s leadership. This department used to have a super stressful, metrics-driven environment. The officers were evaluated based on ticket quotas; it was essentially an environment focused on finite wins. But Cauley realized that trust and well-being were “really” suffering. Patricia: Makes sense. Who wants to work for someone who reduces them to just a set of numbers? Roger: Exactly! So, he started making changes to rebuild trust, including some symbolic but really impactful gestures. For instance, he had a secure fence built around the department's parking lot, which might seem small, but it sent a huge message. And that message was: "Your safety matters to me." He coupled that with actively listening to their concerns and creating more structures for open communication. Patricia: Let me guess – gradually, the team culture started to shift. People were happier, more productive. Roger: Exactly. The officers felt valued and protected, which led to stronger morale and better collaboration. A "Circle of Safety" is really about more than just physical safety; it's about making people feel psychologically secure. That's when creativity and problem-solving can really thrive, even under pressure. Patricia: I'll hand it to Cauley. That is a practical approach. But here's the thing: most leaders don't always walk the walk. You can't exactly build trust on empty promises, right? Roger: Which is why trust has to be demonstrated consistently, over time. It's not just about one grand gesture. This is where infinite-minded leadership requires vigilance—that commitment to nurturing psychological safety day in and day out. And when leaders do that, they enable their teams to “really” reach new heights. Patricia: Okay, so now we've got our cause and our team. But where do we find the inspiration to grow beyond ourselves? What stops us from getting stuck in our own little echo chambers? Roger: You're leading me right into the third practice – studying worthy rivals! Yes! This is all about reframing competition, not as a thing to dominate, but as an opportunity to learn and improve. What do you think of when you hear "worthy rival," Patricia? Patricia: Hmm...Someone who forces you to level up, right? Like, for instance, Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova in tennis. Absolute monsters on the court. They weren't just competitors; they were mirrors to each other's strengths and weaknesses. Roger: Exactly! Their rivalry wasn't hostile, but symbiotic, even. Navratilova’s aggressive volley style forced Evert to refine her precision and consistency, and vice versa. It's the perfect example of rivals not as adversaries, but as sources of growth. Their games—and themselves—improved because they each recognized the value in the other. Patricia: Makes sense. But in the corporate world, doesn't that just mean, like, spying on your competitors? Roger: Not at all. It’s “really” about identifying and respecting competitors who excel in ways that you don’t, and then using that insight to improve yourself or your organization. Think of it as learning, not copying. Patricia: Alright, I'll buy that. But I still think some leaders might find it hard to study rivals without secretly wanting to, you know, utterly crush them. This takes maturity, doesn't it? Roger: It does. Infinite leadership isn’t for everyone. It requires humility and the courage to admit that you can learn from other people. But when leaders embrace this mindset, it pushes their organizations to reach new levels of excellence. And that, Patricia, is where the infinite game “really” starts to pay off.

Roger: So, with those practices established, next comes the really interesting part: seeing how they prevent ethical slip-ups and build a strong organizational culture. This leads us to ethical leadership and its lasting impact. This final piece really connects everything, linking those individual actions to larger cultural shifts and even societal progress. Patricia: Okay, so we're zooming out now. We started with specific tools, like having a Just Cause and building trust, and now we're looking at how those things shape an organization's core values, right? Roger: Exactly. Think of it as everything coming together—how ethical leadership not only keeps the organization going but also has a positive effect on employees, industries, and even society. And the book really focuses on this idea of "ethical fading." Patricia: Ethical fading—sounds like corporate jargon, but I bet it's more serious than it sounds? Roger: It really can be! Ethical fading is when the pressure to perform or make a profit gradually weakens our moral standards. It doesn't happen suddenly. Little compromises start to feel normal until unethical behaviors become routine and even invisible. A prime example is the Wells Fargo scandal. Patricia: Ah, yes, the unauthorized accounts and aggressive sales targets. That's definitely in the corporate hall of shame, isn't it? Roger: Absolutely. To quickly catch everyone up, Wells Fargo employees created millions of fake bank accounts without asking customers. Why? Because they had to meet impossible sales goals. What's so shocking is how that toxic environment made unethical behavior seem normal in order to hit those targets. Employees justified it because those quotas felt like a matter of survival for their jobs. Patricia: And the crazy thing is, from a short-term perspective, those quotas worked—at first. Profits went up, things looked great. But the long-term consequences were devastating. Roger: Exactly. It's a classic case of short-sighted thinking destroying trust and accountability. Once it all came out, it cost Wells Fargo billions in fines, not to mention their reputation, which is priceless. Customers lost faith, and employees felt demoralized. That's the danger of ethical fading—it eats away at the core of an organization. Patricia: It also shows how we can trick ourselves, right? If everyone believes that unethical behavior is just part of "getting the job done," those warning signs stop looking like warning signs. It's a slippery slope. Roger: Totally. That's why having a strong purpose—something bigger than quarterly earnings—is so important. It acts as an ethical guide, keeping organizations true to their values. Which brings us to a more positive example: Patagonia. Patricia: Ah, the "Don't Buy This Jacket" people. That story always <Laughs> cracks me up, because who expects a company to tell customers “not” to buy something? Roger: It was a bold move! In 2011, Patagonia ran a full-page ad in The New York Times with the headline "Don't Buy This Jacket." The ad explained the environmental costs of making their products, like how one fleece jacket uses 135 liters of water and releases a lot of carbon. The campaign asked customers to only buy what they really needed, discouraging overconsumption. Patricia: Let me guess—it wasn't just a publicity stunt? It actually paid off? Roger: It did, but in an unexpected way. It “could” have hurt sales in the short term, but it actually increased long-term customer loyalty. People admired Patagonia's honesty and commitment to the environment. That trust led to financial growth as well as a reputation for real accountability, which is invaluable. Patricia: So Patagonia used their purpose as a compass, even when it meant potentially fewer sales. It's the opposite of Wells Fargo, right? Roger: Exactly! Their purpose—environmental responsibility—was more than just a slogan. It influenced everything they did, from how they designed products to how they marketed them and ran their business. And that's what long-term thinking is all about: making decisions based on a cause that's bigger than the bottom line. Patricia: Okay, but let's play devil's advocate for a minute. What about organizations that don't have an obvious, “noble” cause like climate change or social justice? How can they find a purpose in what might seem like a more ordinary business? Roger: That’s a great question. Purpose doesn’t always have to be some grand, external mission. It can be as simple as innovating to improve people's lives or prioritizing employee well-being. Take Apple, for instance—not exactly a "noble" mission like Patagonia, but still based on a higher purpose: empowering people with intuitive, beautifully designed technology. That vision guides everything they do, right? Patricia: Speaking of Apple, there's the famous contrast with Microsoft, isn't there? Back when Steve Ballmer was in charge, Microsoft was focused on beating Apple, while Apple seemed more focused on innovating for its own sake. Roger: Exactly. Microsoft launched the Zune to "beat the iPod," but it felt empty because it lacked a deeper purpose. Apple's iPod wasn't just about dominating the MP3 market—it was part of a bigger plan to change how people listened to music and used technology. That long-term mindset gave them an edge that Microsoft lacked at the time. Patricia: It's kind of ironic, isn't it? By obsessing over Apple, Microsoft lost sight of its own potential. Meanwhile, Apple just focused on being Apple—and that's why they're still successful. Roger: Right, and this goes back to ethical leadership culture. When leaders focus on short-term goals, like beating a competitor or increasing profits, they create a culture that is inherently short-sighted. On the other hand, long-term thinkers build cultures that are strong and adaptable because their decisions are based on values and vision. Patricia: And that resilience isn't just valuable—it's essential. Especially in a world where things change so quickly. So, what's the key takeaway for leaders who want to build not just trust, but a legacy? Roger: It's about weaving ethical leadership into the culture itself. That means creating systems where ethical reflection is normal, measuring success by societal impact as well as financial results, and being completely transparent. Leaders need to show their commitment to values through their actions, not just their words. Patricia: And we've seen the results. Patagonia and Apple have loyal customers and employees who believe in their mission, while Wells Fargo is on the other side of the spectrum, with public distrust and a reputation damaged by short-sighted thinking. Roger: Exactly. It's a clear contrast and a strong reminder that ethical leadership isn't optional. It's crucial for any organization that wants to truly thrive in the long run, not just survive in the short run. Patricia: So, the bottom line is that ethical leadership isn't just about avoiding scandals—it's about building something that lasts. And when you do it right, it inspires trust, innovation, and, yes, resilience. Roger: Couldn’t agree more!

Roger: Okay, wow, what a ride today! Let's quickly recap what we've covered. We kicked things off by differentiating between finite and infinite mindsets, right? The finite mindset is all about those quick, short-term wins. But the infinite mindset? That’s about resilience, having a real sense of purpose, and “really” playing the long game for future generations. Patricia: Right, future generations. It's not something you hear every day in business podcasts, so that's refreshing. Roger: Exactly! Then we dug into the Five Practices of Infinite Leadership - advancing a Just Cause, building trusting teams, studying worthy rivals, demonstrating existential flexibility, and leading with courage. These aren’t just nice-sounding ideas; they’re actually actionable steps leaders can take to build long-term success. Patricia: And, you know, we didn't shy away from the messy stuff either. We talked ethical fading, that whole Wells Fargo scandal, and the real dangers of prioritizing short-term gains over trust and core values. It's tempting, but obviously you shouldn't. On the flip side, we also highlighted examples of infinite thinking done well, like Patagonia's deep commitment to environmental responsibility and Apple's relentless pursuit of purposeful innovation. Roger: Absolutely, Patagonia and Apple are great examples. So, the main takeaway here is that true leadership isn't about crushing the competition or hitting those quarterly profit targets. It's about building something truly meaningful, something that endures. For leaders, this means “really” embodying values in every decision they make and creating an organizational culture that outlasts them. Patricia: Okay, so for our listeners, here’s a challenge: Ask yourself, are you building toward a Just Cause that genuinely inspires people? Are your actions today laying the foundation for a positive legacy tomorrow? Whether you're managing a team or just navigating your own life, adopting an infinite mindset might just be a game-changer. But is it really that easy? Roger: Ah, I hear your skepticism there, Patricia. But seriously, at its core, infinite-minded leadership isn’t just about organizations; it’s about humanity, about trust, and about shaping the kind of world we want to leave behind. It's something we should strive for. Patricia: Okay, I'm buying it, I'm buying it. It sounds great in theory, but let's be real. How would someone apply this to modern urban life where everyone's rushing, competing, and trying to get ahead? Roger: That's a “really” good question. Well, I think first and foremost, it starts with self-awareness and reflection. Take a moment to “really” think about what matters to you, what impact you want to have, and align your actions with those values. It's easy to get caught up in the day-to-day grind, but stepping back and reassessing your priorities can make a huge difference. Patricia: Good point. Roger: Well, thanks for joining us today, everyone! We'll catch you next time. Patricia: Until then, stay infinite, folks.