This is a transcript excerpt from Simon Sinek’s talk "Adopting an Infinite Mindset," explaining Dr. James Carse’s distinction between finite and infinite games. Sinek defines finite games (known players, fixed rules, agreed objective) versus infinite games (known and unknown players, changeable rules, objective to perpetuate play) and applies the idea to business—arguing business is an infinite game where firms must stay in the game rather than 'win' (example: Circuit City bankruptcy vs Best Buy).
Chapters
So I'm a devotee and complete fanatic for the infinite game and having an infinite mindset. Very quickly, just a quick definition, so you know what I'm talking about.
Dr. James Carson, the mid-1980s defined these two types of games, finite games and infinite games.
A finite game is known players, fixed rules, and an agreed upon objective. Football, baseball, there's always a beginning, middle and an end. And if there's a winner necessarily, they have to be losers. Then you have infinite games. Infinite games are defined as known and unknown players, which means new players can join anytime. And you don't necessarily know who all the other players are. You definitely don't know every brewery in the world. You know the rules are changeable, which means every player can play however they want. And the objective is to perpetuate the game, to stay in the game as long as possible.
Turns out business is an infinite game. When Circuit City went bankrupt, Best Buy didn't win anything.
They had to keep playing. Companies come and go, and yet the game continues with you or without you. And there's no such thing as winning. Nobody wins business, it doesn't exist. But if you listen to the language of too many leaders, it becomes abundantly clear they don't always know the game they're playing in. They talk about being number one or being the best or beating their competition based on what. And I love it when executives come to me and say, we are number one. And I always say, for now, you know.
And so the idea of building a company that can survive every single employee in this room after you've long gone, and that that company remains true to its purpose is a very, very powerful thing. A great example is right outside the front door. You know, the Walt Disney Company, you know the purpose that Disney founded. And they've gone through trials and tribulations for sure, ins and outs. But for the most part, when they are at their natural best, they hearken back to their founding purpose. And I love that. I love that. You ask me, is it essential? I mean, depends on what kind of company you want to run. If you want a company that can continue to innovate and set the course for what business should look like, define what innovation looks like in your industry long before you're all, long after you're all gone, then build that company. But if you want to build a company that just sucks the life out of people who work there and does damage to the industry all in the name of it does damage to the communities in which we work, all in the name of short term gains. You can build that company too. It'll come at a much steeper cost in terms of love, loyalty, et cetera, et cetera.
