Hello Partners,
Recently, while listening to Naval Ravikant, I came across an interesting expression —
missionaries versus mercenaries. Around the same time, I had just finished reading
Mixed Signals by Uri Gneezy. Two very different contexts, but somehow the ideas connected for me and stayed in my mind.
They made me think about something that I believe every business leader should occasionally ask:
Are we building an organisation of missionaries, or are the signals we send inadvertently creating mercenaries?
The distinction, to me, is not about one person being good and the other being bad. Nor is it about whether people should care about money, incentives or career growth — of course they should. It is really about what drives the individual. A mercenary tends to see work more transactionally:
What is my target? What do I get for achieving it? What exactly am I responsible for? A missionary understands the larger purpose:
What are we trying to achieve? What does the customer really need? How can I contribute to making that happen?
The incentive still matters to both.
The difference is whether the incentive becomes the purpose.
I see this distinction very clearly in sales. Someone focused primarily on the transaction will naturally optimise for the order in front of him — the product that closes fastest, the opportunity that gives the best incentive, or the number that helps achieve this quarter’s target. Someone who feels ownership of the larger mission starts asking different questions. What problem is the customer really trying to solve? What more can we bring to the conversation? Can I build a relationship rather than simply close an order? What opportunity am I creating for tomorrow?
Interestingly, I have seen repeatedly that the second approach eventually creates much greater commercial value as well. When a salesperson starts looking beyond the immediate product and understands the customer’s larger challenge, new conversations open up. One opportunity leads to another; relationships deepen and what began as a transaction can become an account that grows for years.
But this is where the responsibility shifts from the employee to the leader.
We all say that we want people with this mindset. We ask our teams to put customers first, think long term, collaborate, take ownership and help others succeed. But one of the thoughts that stayed with me after reading
Mixed Signals is that people don’t only listen to what leaders say.
They also watch what leaders measure, reward and celebrate.
If every conversation with a salesperson ultimately comes down to this month’s billing, that sends a signal. If helping another salesperson win has little value because the revenue doesn’t sit against your name, that sends another. If opening a strategic account that could become significant next year receives less recognition than an easy transaction closed today, people quickly understand what the organisation
really values.
And over time, our people adapt to those signals.
Which raises an uncomfortable question:
Can we incentivise people like mercenaries and then expect them to behave like missionaries?
Consider two salespeople. One delivers the highest number but largely operates within his own world — protecting accounts, chasing transactions and maximising today’s outcome. Another may deliver slightly less today, but opens new accounts, builds deeper customer relationships, helps colleagues, creates opportunities across multiple areas and leaves behind a strong pipeline for tomorrow.
Who is more valuable to the organisation?
There is obviously no simplistic answer. Numbers matter. Targets matter. Performance and accountability absolutely matter. But perhaps leadership is about ensuring that what we measure doesn’t eventually become more important than what we are actually trying to build.
And this isn’t only about sales. A technical person can think,
“I completed the POC,” or
“I helped the customer make the right decision.” Marketing can think,
“We delivered the campaign,” or
“We created meaningful conversations for the business.” Finance can think,
“This is outside our process,” or
“How do we enable this while protecting the organisation?” A manager can celebrate achieving the team’s number, but can also ask whether the team is stronger and more capable today than it was a year ago.
The difference in each case is subtle, but important.
One is ownership of the task. The other is ownership of the mission.
This is why I increasingly believe culture is built as much through signals as through statements. Who gets recognised? Who gets promoted? What behaviour gets rewarded? What do managers spend their review meetings discussing? What stories do we celebrate inside the organisation? Collectively, these seemingly small decisions tell our people,
“This is what really matters here.”
Every business owner I interact with would love to have more people who think like owners — people who care about the customer, the team and the institution beyond their immediate transaction. We often describe such people as being difficult to find, and perhaps they are.
But maybe there is another question worth asking.
Instead of only asking,
“Why don’t I have more people like that?”, perhaps we should also ask,
“What signals am I sending that would make someone want to behave that way?”
Because missionaries may not simply be people we hire.
They may also be people our organisations help create.
Regards
Prashanth GJ
CEO, Technobind
