The WAY to WOW Shows
The 24-Episode Campaign: Culture & Long-Term Survival 8
July 14, 2026
Automatically generated from YouTube captions; names and wording may contain errors.

[0:04] Who are [music] you and where are you going? What [music] do you want? Hello and welcome to Business Lessons from the Military. I'm your host, Kevin Bemel, and I'm here every Tuesday at 10:00 a.m. Pacific time to talk about military history, doctrine, and leadership practices, and then distill from those lessons we can apply to our businesses and professional practices. So, today is the final episode of our 24

[0:42] episode campaign. Uh we're wrapping things up after, uh gosh, you know, uh six months. Uh, see, it seems like just just yesterday I was starting this this out. We're in the third and final section of the 24 episode campaign called culture and long-term survival. This is the eighth episode of that third part. [snorts] And I'm going to be talking about the business of long wars. So, this has been a topic uh much in the news of late um because of what's going

[1:20] on in Iran. And I'm not going to get into the politics of that, but this this idea [snorts] of of long wars is uh it's kind of a bugaboo, I think, uh in the United States. Um but the reality is that um so-called long wars are really the norm [clears throat] when it comes to warfare. So [clears throat] although you know battles may be short as you know like just uh even a few

[1:55] minutes um they may be longer you know a day or a couple of days or several days. Um, [snorts] rarely is a a war comprised of, you know, one battle and and also we tend to think of wars as being continual combat action, but but they're not. [snorts] Um, there can be lulls. Um, World War II ostensibly started September 1st, 1939, um, with the invasion of Poland by Nazi

[2:30] Germany. [snorts] But between September 1st, 1939 and December uh, 7th, 1941, Pearl, i.e. Pearl Harbor, um, there was not continuous combat action. There was a time period known as the Phony War where not a whole lot was going on. Um, Nazi Germany had kind of gotten control of of uh by then of of Poland, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and then things

[3:06] were sort of quiet for a while until they heated up again. Um, nonetheless, it wasn't as if World War II was several separate wars. It was a it was a long war. It was a four-year long well actually it was a uh um a fiveyear almost six-year long war right and even that while that's a long time that is short by um the standards of of other conflicts. So I mean I think we need to have sort of a a paradigm shift when we think about

[3:43] war. Okay. and and in business too um I think it there's a tendency to look at the short term and [clears throat and cough] excuse me conclude that well you know I'm going to do this thing because this is going to work for now I'll worry about the future later for the long-term viability of a business that is not a workable strategy even though things change very quickly economically, technologically, all these

[4:18] things, we still have to balance whatever shortterm um steps we take uh with an eye toward the long-term existence of the company. So, I think, you know, most people think success comes from winning. Um and and of course winning as a concept is important uh to success. We're not going to succeed if we fail. Um but the

[4:53] reality is winning is not enough. So although you know an organization can achieve success, it can capture market share, it can experience rapid growth and it can dominate its competitors. um those gains can disappear and they can disappear relatively quickly. In just a few years there can be a significant turnaround. In a generation a company can go from being dominant in the marketplace to being virtually nowhere. So look at a company like Intel.

[5:28] Intel was dominant in computer chips for a long time and then very quickly fell almost to irrelevance and now it's being built up again at least in part due to the federal government making an investment in it and and and you know companies realizing that okay you know Intel uh is going to be around for a while we can maybe use some of its chips that we hadn't considered using before etc. So uh Intel was was fortunate that um you know the president decided to intervene

[6:05] on its behalf. Uh but you know a lot of companies probably most companies can't count on that um as as their um sort of shity for success. So companies that endure, they do so despite uh economic crisis um despite technological disruption, despite leadership changes and wars and recessions and competitive threats. And the difference between having short-term

[6:41] successes and uh and building long-term viability and resiliency is actually not brilliance. Okay? It's it's endurance. It's it's creating within the company the ability to get through the hard times successfully and maybe even thriving through the hard times. So, [clears throat] um, this this, you know, series finale, I'm I'm going to be looking at this probably one of the most important

[7:18] lessons that that comes out of the military, and that is success only begins with winning battles, but it's those who remain capable of fighting the next ones who endure, right? [snorts] And so uh you know the the the the military doctrine side of this the reality of long wars [snorts] is that um military history teaches conflicts are not decided quickly. So most conflicts

[7:53] become a test of resilience of logistics of leadership continuity of national will and of institutional strength. So when we think about the pelpeneisian war, the hundred years war which literally went on for hundred years and the cold war, right? These were all tests of all those issues, right? And the reason the victors were victorious is because they had the resilience. They could sustain the logistics. They had continuity of leadership because

[8:31] leaders, generals and admirals get killed in battle. And perhaps most important, they had the national will and the institutional strength to go on fighting when the other side was losing its will and when its institutions were starting to erode. Okay. And and I think we can't uh overemphasize how important national will and institutional strength are in a nation being victorious using

[9:09] its military power. Okay. To a certain extent, military the use of military power for short-term means is largely useless. Okay? Because if an enemy knows that a battle, a military incursion is going to be a short oneoff phenomenon, if you will. So, all they need to do is withstand that and they can go back to doing whatever it is they were doing before. they don't have to negotiate any

[9:44] kind of settlement because there's no threat, right? And so this is where I think that um we really need to focus our attention um of course on the military on the use of military force but more importantly o on our businesses. So um long wars are different because short campaigns they reward speed, surprise and decisive action, right? Think of again one of my favorite military figures, uh General George Patton,

[10:20] right? He he was a c a campaigner, right? That's that's where his brilliance was. Okay. Long wars reward patience, sustainability, adaptability, and continuity. Okay, those are the four traits that are essential to military action actually having an impact in changing the the the direction of of international relations. So when we when we think about war in

[10:56] its actual context that is a long war. So the challenge shifts from winning quickly to surviving consistently and that's what we need to be thinking about as as businesses, right? So let me give some some historical examples. So, we tend to think of the War of 1812 as being a short war and indeed it wasn't really that long. Couple of years really, but in some ways um the War of 1812 was kind of a continuation of the

[11:32] American War for Independence. So, there were ling there were issues that lingered after the end of the revolutionary war. uh things like impressment of Americans onto British ships etc. that were not solved in you know during um or as a result of I should say the the war for independence. And what happened after um uh 1783 was there was kind of a cold war for

[12:08] about 25 years or so that finally erupted in the war of 1812. 20 29 years I guess would be closer. Um that finally erupted into a hot war, the hot war of 1812. And so even though the War of 1812 was relatively short, it was really part of a longer military conflict. And it wasn't until after the War of 1812 ended

[12:43] that relations between Great Britain and the United States really began to normalize and uh this this what's what's you know now called the special relationship started to develop. Okay. And so I think we need to be careful about saying oh but you know such and such was a short war. Well, we need to sort of uh open up our aperture and look, was it indeed a short war or was it really part of a longer conflict that had hot and cold periods, right? And so

[13:20] if we look at for example the Cold War, so you know the the the Cold War basically started soon after World War II ended in 1945. And in fact, in a speech in um I believe it was Arkansas, uh Winston Churchill talked about the iron curtain that had dropped between uh western and sort of central and eastern Europe, which for all intents and purposes signaled the beginning of the cold war. So that conflict went on until

[14:00] depending on how we define it 1989 to or 1990 1999 somewhere in that that you know two to threeyear period okay was it the fall of the Berlin wall was it the fall of the Soviet Union you know what really sort of signal the end of the cold war right now during that time okay there were times when the cold war flared up. So, one could, I think, make a credible argument that the Korean War was a flare up within the Cold War

[14:36] context. Same with the war in Vietnam. Fundamentally, these were wars between two competing ideologies. Republican democracy as we practice it here in the United States and communism as was practiced in China um and in um in North Korea in North Vietnam etc. Um as well there were a number of incidents that didn't lead to actual open combat but

[15:11] were certainly hot incidents. So for example, the closing off of Berlin by the Soviet Union and the Berlin airlift um you know while that what didn't involve you know bombing and shooting and such the massive airlift that was uh mounted um basically by uh George Marshall um in order to relieve um the the the danger of starvation in West Berlin. in um you know that hardly qualifies as a cold war in that sense I

[15:48] mean there were thousands of planes involved making thousands and thousands and thousands and thousands of flights bringing in fuel food etc right and so the the the cold war it wasn't won through a single battle and in fact the cold war was became a contest of economic strength of political stability of technological innovation and of institutional resilience, right? And for decades um leaders needed to

[16:25] maintain public support. They needed to preserve alliances. They needed to adapt strategies and they needed to prepare successors. So, you know, Harry Truman was president of the United States when the Cold War started. uh Ronald Reagan presided over the end of the cold war you know roughly what about 45 years later right so and during that time we had several presidents after Truman came uh Eisenhower and then uh Kennedy and then

[17:02] uh Johnson Nixon etc etc right and so um um you know each successive president had to maintain public commitment to the Cold War in order to achieve the United States's geopolitical objectives, right? Um, as well, they needed to preserve those alliances. The NATO basically was an outgrowth of the Cold War, necessitating Western Europe and the United States to remain militarily and

[17:37] and at least diplomatically aligned um as as a bull work against further Soviet uh aggression, you know, more deeply uh moving more deeply west, right? Um, you know, there was another organization known as SITO, the Southeast Asian Treaty Organization, which was supposed to do the same thing with the nations of Southeast Asia. Uh, it didn't work nearly as well um as as NATO has worked. Um, but preserving those alliances was

[18:13] important. Preserving an alliance with uh Japan, with uh the Philippines, with Taiwan, right? Um all of these have become important to making sure that uh the people's republic of China and the Soviet Union and its successor um Russia um didn't take over more territory and in fact in the case of of the Soviet Union lost territory right and and strategies had to adapt as well. So um the way America spies on its

[18:48] enemies now is very different than it was uh you know 50 60 uh 70 years ago. So for example um we used to have a lot more human intelligence involved in our espionage efforts. Um now a lot of it relies on electronic intelligence, satellites, etc. Um and um all of that boils down to this the decadesl long process it took to eventually triumph in the cold war. Now I would be remiss if I didn't mention that in the end it really

[19:26] was the economic might of the United States I think that defeated the Soviet Union. Um the you know economically um the United States has been dominant in the postw World War II period and the reality was that once communications started to become more open and people in Russia saw the kind of life that people in the United States enjoyed versus what they had. it became very difficult to sustain what

[20:01] was an illusion that communism was providing them with this amazing way of life um when clearly that was not the case. And so the economic diamondism of of the United States was a a crucial if not the crucial factor in winning the cold war. So the the lesson of all of this from a military standpoint is endurance itself becomes a strategic advantage and we need to always be

[20:36] keeping that in mind as we guide our businesses. So businesses face long wars as well. Uh so a lot of business leaders they they plan for the next quarter for annual goals immediate challenges and yet organizations operate in competitive environments that last for decades. Now we are seeing you there there recently has been discussions about the SEC the securities and exchange commission uh changing the requirements for companies to report quarterly earnings maybe only

[21:13] reporting earnings semiannually or annually or something like that. So I think there is a trend in business in America today to start taking a longer view and that that is positive. The the sort of drum beatat of having to report quarterly earnings uh isn't necessarily uh a good thing for the United States economy and it and it tends to pull companies away from having a long-term focus. So many or many the many

[21:48] businesses um non-publicly traded businesses especially they since they don't have to deal with with that the constant need to report quarterly earnings right they can they really can focus on uh longevity with without you know being hampered by you know regulations that require them to or not require them but but sort of encourage them to take a short-term outlook. So we talk we can talk about family businesses that are you know

[22:24] closely held. We can talk about professional services firms. There's a number of law firms that have been around for you know over a hundred years. Uh same with the big accounting firms right manufacturing companies less so financial institutions again many banks have been around for well over a hundred years. Um, Wells Fargo, I think, was founded in 1875. It's been around for 150 years. American Express, same. It's been around for, I believe, over a hundred years, right? And consumer brands, right? Coca-Cola as a brand has been around for more than a hundred years. Um, uh, the Walt Disney Company,

[23:03] uh, brand, um, has been around for since, you know, almost a hundred years. Um Mickey Mouse was debuted in 1928, right? So the these enduring brands speak to the the sort of long war nature that business faces and they're having endured, right? Whether it's, you know, the Walt Disney Company started out as Walt Disney Productions. Um but you know, and they've had their ups and downs, but they have endured, right? And it's because

[23:38] um I think that um the culture within that company as as developed by Walt Disney and uh his brother Roy really had a a visionary aspect to it. Right. I think one of the problems with the Walt Disney Company as it operates today is that that culture of having a long-term vision has eroded somewhat over the last decade or so and and it's it's it's it's having a very

[24:15] negative consequences for the company, right? So um the you know for for organizations that are engaged in this sort of long war perspective the challenge is not really growth or it's not merely growth it's really survival and and I I maybe that's better put it's it's really longevity right survival tends to imply just sort of getting by whereas longevity uh implies like um a sort of um robustness of of

[24:54] longtime existence, right? Okay. So there is a hidden threat um in shortterm thinking and that is um you know organizations will will sacrifice durability for immediate results and so they will underinvest in their people. They will um neglect succession planning. They will pro prioritize quarterly earnings over innovation and and they will they will mount initiatives that that just exhaust

[25:30] employees for short-term gains and don't allow them the kind of um uh stability that will nurture the organization over the long term. And so the the organizations get get short-term and temporary successes um but they create long long-term fragility uh within the organization right and and um you know many companies lose their endurance by pursuing efficiency. So I

[26:08] was listening to a podcast this morning. It was talking about the lawsuit that uh Apple uh has launched against um uh Open AI over Open AI hiring a lot of um people who used to work at Apple and Apple is accusing them of stealing what amounts to trade secrets. And [clears throat] I think this is an interesting well so one of the points that uh the person talking about this

[26:43] situation brought up is uh Apple of course has had tremendous success. It's one of the most successful companies of all times. Uh but um uh Open AI seems to have been pretty successful in in sort of enticing away um hundreds of the best engineers working at Apple on things like the iPhone. And the the uh uh the host of the podcast was was asked, well, why do you think that's the case? And while money is certainly part of it, um

[27:20] the you know OpenAI is offering much larger salaries or comp I should say compensation packages than Apple is. Um they're not anything like the enormous packages that Meta was offering what was it about a year or two ago. Um what it it appears that um uh uh Open AI is doing uh to enhance its u its desiraability to these Apple engineers is it's offering them a new challenge.

[27:56] Right? So rather than being at Apple year after year refining the iPhone, which although it's of course changed quite a bit from when it was launched, fundamentally it's still the same thing it was when it was launched in 2007. So it's been the same product for 19 years now. Um, and for innovative people, that's boring, right? So AI is giving them the opportunity to do something creative. And you know, I think this is something Apple probably needs to take a look at

[28:33] is are we sacrificing uh endurance for shortterm uh gains, right? in in terms of um underinvesting or under supporting all of the you know innovative people who work in the company right and so companies you know a company needs to uh to develop a legacy mindset. So organizations that endure think differently. So they ask several

[29:10] questions. One is how will this decision affect us in 10 years? Not in one quarter or one year or even two years but 10 years, right? What happens after the current leadership leaves? Are we are we preserving institutional knowledge? And finally, are we strengthening or weakening our resilience? So um one of the big business happenings of the last couple of weeks is the SpaceX IPO. It was um

[29:45] you know by any measure a tremendous success and I I listened to a lot of people talking about it both before and after the IPO. The one thing I have not heard them talking about really at all is what happens when Elon Musk leaves. Okay. Uh that's not to say that there aren't hundreds or maybe even thousands of very uh um uh intelligent, innovative people working at SpaceX. But so much,

[30:22] it seems to me, of SpaceX's value rests with Elon Musk. So if he were, you know, god forbid to die or become incapacitated or something, what's going to happen to this company, right? And and I I don't know the answer to that. I I did not, you know, full disclosure, I did not buy into the IPO or anything like that, but I I found it curious that this issue was not being discussed among all the other issues that were talked about visav SpaceX and, you know, is it

[30:57] going to, you know, merge with Tesla and and how does um uh XAI, you know, factor in this? All those kind of things were were talked about almost at nauseium. Uh but but this idea of what happens when the guy at the top isn't there anymore. Uh I I think there's an assumption that you know Elon Musk is never going to retire. Okay, fine. That's maybe a valid assumption, but but that doesn't mean that something can't happen to him. like what happened to Senator Lindsey Graham who was fine one day and the next day

[31:32] you know sadly uh you know died of you know a heart condition. So um the these are the kind of things that companies with a legacy mindset need to look at. So, let's take a quick break and we'll come back and look at five ways to translate this into our businesses. When life brings unexpected changes, managing inherited property shouldn't add to your stress. Magnum Properties specializes in probate and trust real estate management. We handle the

[32:08] complexities while you focus on what matters most. From property maintenance to tenant relations, from legal compliance to maximizing value, we're your trusted partner through every step. Magnum Properties, Inc., turning property challenges into peace of mind. Call us today at 213-264-4396 or visit magnumprops.com. Okay. So let's look at five applications

[32:43] we can we can do to translate this doctrine into uh our businesses. So first of all number one pri prioritize sustainability over maximum efficiency. Now that qualifier is is important right ma we want to be efficient but sometimes achieving maximum efficiency is going to shortch change the longevity of our companies. [clears throat] So uh we want to we want to maintain

[33:18] strategic reserves. We want to maintain strategic capital reserves. We want to maintain some strategic personnel reserves, right? We we we don't want to so overt tax our resources trying to squeeze out every last, you know, iota of of efficiency from them that we burn them out or we deplete them down to zero. So we also want to preserve organizational flexibility. And again that may mean we need to have more people or we need to keep more cash on

[33:56] hand in order to be able to make pivots and make shifts in order to address a change in the marketplace address a change in technology etc. Right? We also may need to um maintain some time, some open time. So I I know I tend to do this. I tend to get into my every moment of my day is scheduled with a meeting or a task or whatever. And I I have no time to reflect on what I'm

[34:34] doing. And that is I've I find that that's when I start making mistakes. And so what I've started doing uh more and more over the last year is as much as possible building some slack time into my schedule. So I don't have to constantly be driven to the next task, the next meeting. I have some time to reflect for a few minutes, you know, codify things and and and make sure that where I'm heading next is where I need to be headed for the long-term viability

[35:10] of my practice. And finally, uh well, and and this this dovetales with what I just said, I we need to avoid operating at permanent maximum capacity. Okay, we we we we need to keep some slack financially, personnel-wise, timewise, right? So, uh, sustainable organizations outlast optimized or organizations because inevitably when an when an organization is running so close to its

[35:45] limits all the time, if a if if there's a significant need for adaptation, it does not have the resources to do so. Okay, so that's number one. Number two, build leadership continuity. So the reality is no leader is permanent. Okay? Because no human being lives forever, right? None of us are God. Um you know despite what maybe some of us think, right? So our first I've talked about this before. The first job of any leader is to groom

[36:21] his successor. Right? someone who can step into his shoes if for whatever reason he cannot fulfill his duty. Right? We that's that's a cornerstone of the military. It should be a cornerstone of business. The charismatic founder who makes sure that there's no one who can take over from him so he doesn't feel threatened is making a huge strategic error for his business. Number one. Number two, he is almost assuredly

[36:57] holding back the value of his his company. Okay. So, uh I I I'm administrating a company where the the owner of the company did not do anything to empower the other people to step up into his shoes. Not not a single person was able to. And as a result, there really was no goodwill in the business. It would have been much more valuable if he had empowered his people and

[37:32] encourage them to grow professionally. Right? So, so this is especially when there's a sort of charismatic hard-driving founder, the the necessity to build leadership continuity tends to go against everything he thinks about. And yet it's it's even more important um so that the you know the business will survive the the death or other other loss of the founder right so we need to develop future leaders we need to create succession pipelines right so it's not

[38:09] just the you know person at the top of the company that needs to see to it that someone can step into his role it's people throughout the organization they need to Make sure there are people who can step into their roles who can then step up and step up and step up right and institutional knowledge needs to be distributed throughout the company so that there's not a catastrophic loss of that knowledge if one person leaves or even worse you know dies right so enduring organizations they survive

[38:45] leadership transitions okay and and they do so intentionally by building up that leadership cadre. Okay. Number three, preserve organizational culture. Now, in this third section of the 24 episode campaign, I've talked about organizational culture quite a bit. It is part of the this, you know, the third part, which is u uh culture and long-term uh survival, right? And so the first step is to build a culture.

[39:22] Now the fact of the matter is every organization has a culture. Okay? It may have been incre It may have been created intentionally. It may have been created just because that's what's going on, right? much better to decide proactively what do I want the the the culture of my company to be or we as a group of senior leaders what do we want the culture of this company to be okay so for example in anything

[39:58] in which I'm involved whether it's the overseeing of a company that's that's an an um that's an asset of an estate whether it's a transaction to sell a property. Part of the culture of my organization is treat people decently. Okay. Now, you may notice that usually they people say, "Well, everybody deserves respect." That is of course not true. Not everybody deserves respect. Some people act very disrespectfully and so they don't deserve respect. Okay?

[40:36] But every person deserves decent treatment. That means no yelling at people, no using profanity to them, no name calling, uh no you know physical you know stuff that is not decent treatment. Okay. and and and indeed I choose the people with whom I work in part based on how committed I think they are to treating other people decently. Now that's not to

[41:11] say that sometimes there aren't lapses. Of course there are. I occasionally lapse. the people with whom I work occasionally lapse and then as the you know quarterback in quotes right it's incumbent upon me to address these lapses to the person and and be assured that they understand what was done wrong and and will avoid doing that in the future right so in my sense you know my organization is really kind of a series of relationships right now for a large company, it isn't

[41:47] any difference. A large company is a series of relationships. It's just they're all within that company, right? So, that organization needs to decide what is what is its culture going to be? Are they going to permit people to yell and scream, to throw tantrums like their 5-year-old children? Okay. If so, they're going to push away a certain type of person and they're going to attract another type of person. And anyone who doesn't fit into that combative mode is going to feel

[42:22] constantly under pressure, even under threat. And the longevity of their time at the company will probably be reduced. It'll be attenuated. Right? So we need to reinforce core values consistently. We need to protect standards during growth and we need to transmit institutional identity to new generations. Culture is a long-term asset. We need to treat it like an asset. We need to

[42:58] invest in it and we need to see to it that it endures. Much of the endurance of a company can be traced back to how diligently leadership developed and maintained the organizational culture. Okay. Number four, we need to invest through cycles. So long wars include setbacks, okay? They include losses. That's just the reality of it. No country

[43:35] consistently wins. Okay? So the United States effectively lost the Vietnam War. Okay? We moved out of Saigon and and and South Vietnam fell. Okay? That was a strategic loss for the United States. And yet we continued to endure throughout the balance of the Cold War and eventually won. Why? Because we continued to among other things invest in our military. Okay. Now, military capabilities certainly declined quite a bit uh after Vietnam.

[44:12] And then along came uh Ronald Reagan and after him um President Herbert Walker Bush who rebuilt American military capability and demonstrated to the world that we were still the most formidable power um on the face of the earth, right? And so you know we need to continue to invest even through the down cycles. So we need to maintain the discipline of long-term investment. Right? We can't so spend

[44:47] money in any given year that we're jeopardizing the long-term viability of the company on the one hand. Um and yet so we need to come up with a a an investment rhythm that is sustainable. And so even if there are downturns um in in the economy or downturns in our company, we can continue to invest in innovation, invest in in our people, etc. Okay. We need to avoid panic during downturns. Right? It can be quite unnerving to face a a significant drop

[45:23] in business, the loss of a major client, right? We need to keep our cool, okay, and figure out how do we respond? If if we make some kind of gaff that causes a public relations nightmare, okay, we need to stop and say, okay, it happened. What are we going to do about it? How are we going to move forward from this? Right. And we need to prepare for the inevitable volatility of of the economy of the business world. It it's it's going to be there. Okay?

[45:59] You don't even the only question is when, not if. If is never the question. Okay? And [snorts] so we need to be patient. We need to be thorough in our um investigations and examinations. Okay? And in doing so, we'll be able to invest not just monetarily but uh physically in terms of energy, emotionally we will be able to invest through up and down cycles. Finally, okay, we need to think in

[46:36] generations not quarters. And I mentioned at the beginning um there appears there's there's possibly there is somewhat of a shift happening now as as companies strive to uh perhaps not have public companies I should say strive to not have to report quarterly earnings. Okay, this could be a good trend, right? So, um shortterm wins should support long-term objectives. Now, if the move away from reporting quarterly earnings is is just a way to

[47:11] save some money in the short term um and not be bothered with doing it. Okay, that change will not necessarily be have any benefit in terms of moving from a quarterly to a generational perspective. But if the idea is instead of reporting earnings quarterly, we're going to report them semiannually or annually because that will give us the opportunity to engage in more long-term planning and to be more deeply concerned with the long-term viability of a

[47:46] company that will be an excellent change. Right? So we need to align decisions with enduring goals. Right? That means not taking for example ethical shortcuts. Okay. If we have a company, you know, based on a reputation of security, probety, those kinds of values, we we we want to make sure our our decisions are aligned with the goals of maintaining the the public perception of our company

[48:21] as such. So we want to avoid sacrificing future capability for current gains. So that means that for example when I was talking about having a leadership pipeline, right? We want to maintain the ability to bring in and nurture younger people and and and show them a path to growth within the company. Right? So uh my nephew works for a company. He's he's a young man. and he's 29. Um 28 I think he turns 29

[48:56] next month if if memory serves. Uh so I I you know I I don't want to talk about the company for which he works. I because I haven't asked him if it's okay. But one of the things I will say is he he works very hard and they are showing him as a result of his hard work that there is a place for him in the company, a place for for him to grow and and move up through the organization. That's smart. Now, this it's a family-owned business. Um, it's been around for a long time. I think I want to say 75 years, maybe maybe longer than

[49:33] that. Okay. and and and good for them, right? That's that's the right way to do it, right? So, they are and and one of the things he's concerned about is he he, you know, he racks up a lot of hours of overtime. And so, he talks to him, he says, you know, I'm I'm happy to do this work. I'm I'm mindful though that, you know, my expense as an employee goes up when I do all this overtime. And they've been very good about saying, "We understand. Go ahead and do it. this is important work and it's an opportunity for you to grow. Right? So they're they

[50:09] are not sacrificing future capability for current gains. The opposite they're investing in him because he is potentially the future of this company. Finally, we want to build institutions, not just results. Now, when I say institutions, I don't necessarily mean, you know, buildings and that kind of thing, although that may be part of building an institution. When I say institutions, I'm talking about things like reputation, adherence to values, something that will endure, right? And

[50:44] so that all comes back to the things that I've talked about before. setting and maintaining a culture, building a leadership pipeline. All of these are part of building an institution. Even if the business in terms of a location is actually virtual, right? You can have an institution that has no, you know, fixed address per se, right? Any of us can do that with our businesses. Okay? I think about that with my company. What's going to happen when I'm not here, right? I'm not a young man anymore. So, you know, is my

[51:21] company just going to go away or am I going to build something that I can hand over to somebody else? So, legacy thinking creates lasting advantages. So, here we are. We have the ultimate leadership challenge, right? Most leaders can manage success. So, fewer can build organizations that outlast founders, that survive disruptions and can adapt. across generations. And this is, I think, because this type of institution building

[51:57] requires humility. It requires patience and it requires stewardship. And that's hard. All of those are hard. Okay? They're not necessarily natural human traits. And so leadership needs to be as much about achievement as it is about preservation. Okay? And the achievements sought should undergur the preservation of the business. So what does this mean today? So modern organizations face

[52:33] accelerating changes in technology, changing demographics, geopolitical uncertainty and econom economic volatility. All of these really force an organization to be nimble, adaptable. And the temptation is to focus on the immediate, you know, crisis. That's one of my least favorite words in the English language right now. everything is a crisis. No, most things are actually are not crises. Most, you know, bad things that are going on now have developed over years or decades and

[53:10] they're going to take years or decades to resolve. And calling them crises seems to imply they need to be dealt with now conclusively and that's it. That's not how life works. So history uh suggests a different lesson and that is that organ organizations endure not because they avoid challenges but because they endure them and build the capacity to absorb the challenges and stay vital. So in this 24 episode

[53:45] campaign uh it was divided again into three parts. Strategy, execution, and culture and long-term survival. I'm not going to go through all the lessons within those three sections. But I invite you to go to my YouTube channel or Spotify or Apple Podcast and see all the past episodes if you're just joining me today for the first episode. And you will see it really goes through the gamut of issues that we need to address as as business owners as people who w work within organizations.

[54:21] Together though, these 24 lessons over the three sections uh reveal a central truth and that is organizations succeed when strategy, execution and culture reinforce one another over time. They're not three separate sections. They're they're meshed together, right? and and the better we can coordinate and work together on these three main themes, the more successful

[54:56] we'll be in building an enduring business, an enduring organization. So, closing reflections, right? Most organizations focus on the next battle and but the best organizations they prepare for the next generation. That's why they endure. So in war and in business resilience is not the is not the ability to avoid hardship. It's the ability to continue despite hardship.

[55:33] Right? And the final measure of leadership is not whether you can win today. It's whether what you build will still stand tomorrow, next month, next year, next decade, and beyond. So, I thank you very much for joining me today. And uh if you I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on what you feel is most important in building an enduring

[56:08] resilient company. So if you look right below you, you'll see in the show notes links to social media. Drop a comment in social media. I'll be happy to respond. what what are you doing to make your company resilient or about what are you concerned that might hamper the building of resilience in your company? Okay, real quickly then slate of shows. Mondays at 10 a.m. Pacific time, uh, trust and estates weekly. Tuesdays like today at 10 a.m. Pacific, business lessons from the military. Wednesdays at

[56:43] 10 a.m. Pacific, people making money. And every other Thursday at 5:00 p.m. Pacific is my show, Jiggers's Place, where we have a cocktail and a schmoo, sit back and talk about all of those things not related to finances. So, if you're not a subscriber, I I I would really appreciate if you would consider subscribing on YouTube, on Spotify, on Apple Podcast. If you know someone who would benefit from these shows, um maybe uh you know, share an episode with them and see what they think. Again, I I' I'd

[57:19] really appreciate the opportunity to gain them as a subscriber as well. So, again, thank you so much for joining me today. Wishing you a an outstanding rest of the day and signing off as I always do.