Reader

My first “career move” was time in the Marine Corps. And so, sixty years later, I’m still interested in military history. One of my favorite books is Miliary Misfortunes: The Anatomy of Failure in War (Cohen and Gooch, 1990). The book was centered on failure modes and how they can interact.

The point of the book is that there are three failure modes and when they interact they can result in catastrophe. They are:

• Failure to learn
• Failure to anticipate
• Failure to adapt

The authors described military failure, but I’ve used the lessons in my consulting and education work for years.

Here’s my premise: Organizations rarely fail because they stop being good at what made them successful. They fail because they become so good at yesterday's game that they fail to notice the rules have changed.

QUESTION: What might SpaceX learn from past technology challenges?

Lessons from the past

19th Century - Western Union

Assumed telegraph dominance guaranteed long-term control of communications.

Dismissed the telephone as a novelty rather than a platform shift.

Chose litigation and defense instead of reinvention.

Bell created the future while Western Union defended the past.

20th Century - Kodak

Focused on film profits rather than the broader purpose of preserving memories.

Underestimated the speed of digital photography and changing consumer behavior.

Protected the legacy business despite inventing the technology that replaced it.

Lost the industry it created.

21st Century - Intel

Assumed PC and server dominance would continue to define computing leadership.

Missed the shift toward smartphones, AI accelerators, and specialized chips.

Organizational complexity and capital allocation slowed strategic pivots while competitors accelerated.

Lost technological leadership to companies such as NVIDIA, TSMC, AMD, and others.

The Pattern

Past Success >>> "We know how this business works." >>> Weak Signals Ignored >>> Delayed Response >>> Defensive Decisions >>> Declining Performance >>> Even Less Willing to Change

This is a "Perfect Failure Loop."

SpaceX – 2035??

SpaceX just engaged in a massive IPO and a LOT of smart people bet a lot of money that they are going to succeed. Maybe, maybe not.

Let’s play with a “premortem,” a technique I’ve used with clients in the past.

No prior knowledge, I’m just playing with a “what if” scenario. Let’s imagine that SpaceX is in trouble in 2035. How did it happen?

Possible Learning Failure

SpaceX continues assuming that:

• Engineering solves every problem.
• Speed beats process.
• Technical superiority wins.

Those assumptions were true for twenty years so leadership, therefore, spends relatively little attention to:

• Geopolitical alliances
• International governance
• Cybersecurity
• Succession
• Institutional resilience

Possible Anticipation Failure

Several weak signals appear simultaneously.

Governments begin asking:

• Should one company control global satellite communications?
• Should orbital traffic be internationally regulated?
• Should military dependence on commercial providers be reduced?

And, at the same time,

• China develops comparable launch capability.
• India becomes a major commercial launch provider.
• Blue Origin becomes operationally mature.

SpaceX sees each development individually, but it misses their convergence.

Possible Adaptation Failure

Instead of evolving from a revolutionary engineering company to a resilient global infrastructure company, SpaceX continues to optimize launch cadence.

Meanwhile competitors focus on partnerships, cybersecurity, interoperability, and government relationships.

2035 Results (?)

The basis of competition changes and engineering is no longer enough. Although SpaceX remains technically excellent, it is no longer the obvious choice.

Its advantage slowly eroded because the competitive game changed. Its technology is great, but not enough.

That is exactly how Western Union lost communications, Kodak lost photography, and Intel lost semiconductor leadership. Musk is smart, but not invincible.

And so …..

Your “thinking operating system” got you to today. Will it get you to tomorrow? Do you need to tailor it for today's wicked environment?

Improving the thinking operating system for leaders is the reason Julie, Jim, and I started The Prepared Mind Project. Check us out and watch for some announcements.

Cheers,

Bill