Stoic thinkers like Epictetus have observed that “Happiness and freedom begin with a clear understanding of one principle: Some things are within our control, and some things are not.”
As always, a very interesting read Peter. It reminds me of when Stevie G was close to leaving Liverpool FC in the summer of 2004. Thankfully, he didn't and he went on to drag them single-handidly to Champions League glory. But if he had left, the entire club would have broke.
A club with 100 year legacy and illustrious history was entirely dependant on one individual. Not healthy. Can you run this article by our Western Leaders please? :)
I’d love to, Kieran. Any contacts in your circle? 😉
Your Stevie G analogy is spot on. That’s exactly the pathology I was trying to describe.
A legacy institution can still become structurally fragile if too much capability, judgement, and cultural gravity collapses into one person. The system looks strong right up until the moment that person leaves.
I had a very similar feeling visiting Yale a couple of months ago. Whatever these institutions are now, there is still a sense that they were trying to build beyond individual careers and reporting cycles - particularly with my coming from a country younger than that institution. Legacy felt architectural rather than performative.
I think a lot of Western institutions are wrestling with the same tension now: Are we building systems that endure, or systems that only function while the current custodians are present and then crumble?
That’s a very different question from quarterly success metrics, and completely changes the game being played.
I love this concept of a Horizon Debt, it's so powerful, and makes total sense.
Thank you, Melitta.
Stoic thinkers like Epictetus have observed that “Happiness and freedom begin with a clear understanding of one principle: Some things are within our control, and some things are not.”
We can all think a bit further and a bit larger.
As always, a very interesting read Peter. It reminds me of when Stevie G was close to leaving Liverpool FC in the summer of 2004. Thankfully, he didn't and he went on to drag them single-handidly to Champions League glory. But if he had left, the entire club would have broke.
A club with 100 year legacy and illustrious history was entirely dependant on one individual. Not healthy. Can you run this article by our Western Leaders please? :)
I’d love to, Kieran. Any contacts in your circle? 😉
Your Stevie G analogy is spot on. That’s exactly the pathology I was trying to describe.
A legacy institution can still become structurally fragile if too much capability, judgement, and cultural gravity collapses into one person. The system looks strong right up until the moment that person leaves.
I had a very similar feeling visiting Yale a couple of months ago. Whatever these institutions are now, there is still a sense that they were trying to build beyond individual careers and reporting cycles - particularly with my coming from a country younger than that institution. Legacy felt architectural rather than performative.
I wrote about that experience in a previous post: https://peterashbysmith.substack.com/p/the-architecture-of-permanence
I think a lot of Western institutions are wrestling with the same tension now: Are we building systems that endure, or systems that only function while the current custodians are present and then crumble?
That’s a very different question from quarterly success metrics, and completely changes the game being played.
I second that!!!!!!! Can you run this article by our Western Leaders please?