[55.0] be nice, think twice

on qualifications and confidence

Picking up where we left off in issue [54.0], wherein I poo-poohed the who’s who of executives ~*spearheading*~ a green-tinged version of capitalism insufficient for actually decarbonizing our planet to spare us from DOOM. (All caps because it’s real.)

One such c-suite c-hode was Mads Nipper, CEO of Orsted, the world’s largest developer of offshore wind: 

“We want to really substantiate the message that financial value creation is at the very core of our industry,” said Nipper. “For us that means that if we cannot get to a satisfactory value creation, we are prepared to walk away.”

But also a deeper dive into Mads’s past might make us question his qualifications. Namely, that he came into this job after serving (bravely!) as Chief Marketing Officer of LEGO. What exactly qualifies someone to go from peddling plastic bricks that make you go ouch, to manufacturing and selling massive electrical infrastructure?

It seems as if profit and growth tout court help justify and moralize the ascendance of business leaders over others. If Mads could help Lego grow, couldn’t he do the same for a greener form of power generation?

And that framing is definitely valid to an extent! A certain generalist acumen can help spur new ideas and distribution strategies. 

But an entrepreneurial mindset holds a series of humanity-ending double-binds at its core: at once short-termism centering shareholder value and long-termism in the form of executive apologia. The former meaning that “financial value creation” matters more than rapid decarbonization, for example. And the latter—well, look at an executive archetype as exemplified by El*n M*sk and his capacity to fail upwards into corner offices by promising moonshot products that never materialize. (Hyperloop me to my demise, amirite.)

In other words, part of my hesitation here about a business leader with potentially, quite literally, salvific potential (at least a little bit) has to do with the ethical nebulus surrounding them. Their ability to squirm out of any outcome or decision that’s subprime for humanity writ large. The reason I return to this for, seemingly, the umpteenth time, is due to the consistency of this moral malleability across industries. That it applies as equally to some scion of the metaverse as it does a green-tech innovator. From there, it’s worth asking what perceptive strategies they borrow from each other, and the extent to which those ideas overlap with the financial flows they share (venture firms in common, etc.).

And finally, there comes the question of alternatives, which feels a little “don’t boo, vote!” to me. Here’s a great org that I look to in times of fiduciary-structural doubt. Happy perusing, if you please!

Divine Innovation is a somewhat cheeky newsletter on spirituality and technology. Published once every three weeks, it’s written by Adam Willems and edited by Vanessa Rae Haughton. Find the full archive here.