What happens to a company when folks realize its purpose is disconnected from reality? Flock Safety is finding out.

Founders discover how much of the place was them at the exact moment they can no longer do anything about it. Ted is unusual because he spent three years handing pieces away while he still had the power to keep them. He gave the goldfish to the players. He gave Roy the freedom to find his (f***ing) humanity. He gave Nate a second chance. By the time he got on the plane there wasn’t much more of him that he could’ve given. A year after you go, what would still be running in th

It’s not that hard to find your opposite. Telling that person the things they’re supposed to stop you from doing is, though. Writing down that list means admitting that there’s a chance we’re wrong. Which, I think, is why we generally don’t go through the painful process of doing it. We find our counterweights, and then we don’t give them permission to sit opposite us on the seesaw. We’ll listen to their opinions, but nothing they do can move us until they’re on the same bar

Organizations that can’t identify the people who know stuff that no one has asked them to explain, or can’t help those people learn how to communicate what they know, are ceding control of their organizational knowledge and institutional memory to whatever the next hire brings with them.

An identity connected to one thing has no fallback position. While that thing - like your job - lasts, the connection looks like dedication and commitment, and it’s rewarded and encouraged. But every role ends, and when it does... if you approach it like this... you experience total loss, because there’s nothing left of you to go forward with afterwards.

The working part is the naming. An injury that stays hidden is indistinguishable from personality. The moment it’s made visible, it becomes a fact about you rather than who you are.

We’re stuck with two options. Keep the decision open and pay for it with bursts of energy, or plan ahead and pay for it in missed predictions and wasted effort. Most leaders and orgs pick a lane, and the failure they can't manage is the one that hides in their strength.

Want to know what your culture actually is? Don't read the values page. Don't check at the annual meeting... the annual meeting knows it's being watched. Watch what people do when they think nobody's checking. Every organization has a way it runs naturally, and that default is the real culture.

Organizations don't just have a gap between what they say and what they do. They also have an audience keeping score, and the audience's read is built from everything it was allowed to see. Keep the performance going long enough and the audience builds its loyalty on the performance. When the truth surfaces, they don't just lose the claim. They lose everything they built on it. That's why the reaction is rage and lawsuits instead of a shrug.

A loss no one names just hides and grows, and it tends to seep into the next effort as fear. Hesitation. The team takes the safe path instead of the ambitious one. Meaningful topics of conversation become off-limits. The ability to learn from what happened goes away. Naming it converts the isolation everyone is feeling into something that teams were literally created to achieve - a challenge that can be overcome together.

Belief is a practice you keep, especially after it's torn. A value that has never been tested and broken is a guess... a wish. Nobody bets on it when it matters, because nobody knows what it costs. The taped sign carries information the new sign couldn’t: everyone in that room knows exactly what failure looked like, and chose to believe again anyway.

You can’t learn what’s safe in an organization by reading the handbook. You learn it by watching what happens to the last person who shared a hard truth, or admitted a mistake. That outcome outweighs the entire universe of inspirational posters about open communication and trust.

I’m beginning to think that we shouldn’t worry so much about whether people like us. In business and life it seems like it’s healthier to focus on whether they have enough evidence that they’re willing to rely on us (for things we’re capable of) when that reliance could cost them something.