Seth Yakatan

Raising & Selling 📈 $1B+ Raised 💰 22 Companies Sold 🤝

Are you struggling to communicate your vision to the capital gatekeepers?

Are you exploring selling your business but don’t know anything about:
✘ Due diligence
✘ Term sheets
✘ Earnouts

Friend, you're lucky you found me...

I'm Seth Yakatan.

I have 30-odd years experience as a corporate finance professional.

My specialties are:
💰 Raising money
🤝 Selling companies

And I’m f**king good at it.

I’ve raised over $1B and sold 22 businesses.

My career has mostly been supporting small-cap and major corporations seeking capital to grow, or
to find strategic acquirers.

Most of these companies are in: 
— biotech
— cannabis
— pharmaceuticals
— DTC consumer goods

I’ve been on boards, taken companies public, gone up against multinational corporations, raised from VC and PE funds.

All of it. 
Many times over.
Whatever your problem is, I’ve seen it before.

But let me level with you:

What I REALLY love is helping people to get to the finish line.

Talking to entrepreneurs excites me.

But in my experience, entrepreneurs are mostly s**t at raising capital and selling companies.

** They just don’t understand investors **

And that’s where I come in.

Together, we workshop: 
✔ Your pitch
✔ Your deck
✔ Your strategy 

And help you raise the capital to GROW and SELL your business.

If you need this help—and almost every business does—send me a DM.

Like, now.

Don't lose another potential investor or acquirer with the wrong pitch.

Seth ✌️

Co-Founder

Merchant Bank / Advisory / Family Office

Give me $10 on Pump #6 and a case of THC Bevs!

WAIT WHAAAAAAT??

This is Circle K 2026 baby!


>> What’s Happening?

A Circle K franchisee in DFW started selling hemp-derived THC beverages.

This is the 1st major C-Store in Texas to stock THC drinks on shelf.

Lots of SKUs and get this…in-store tastings planned throughout 2026!


>> Why Does This Matter?

This ain’t a trial folks. This is mainstream retail entry.

Circle K is as mainstream as it gets. A roadstop brand with millions of daily customers.

Regulatory limbo? Who cares… make money when consumers buy drinks.


>> What I’m Watching

Can THC drinks outperform impulse staples like coffee and Red Bull?

How do Texas policymakers respond to non-dispensary THC sales?

Who’s next to join the party…Flying J??


The future of THC is in the cold box next to your protein shake.

No alternative text description for this image

Is this the FIRST MAJOR ON PREMISE shot fired for THC beverages??

WELCOME to the 2026 Stadium EXPERIENCE!

THC Drinks are coming soon to an ARENA NEAR YOU!


>> What’s Happening?

Chicago’s United Center just announced its serving hemp-derived THC drinks.

Concerts/Sporting events/Big shared moments.

In case you didn’t know, that’s alcohol’s home turf….

THC is showing up more and more, without asking ANYONE for permission.


>> Why Is This Important?

Booze vs. THC is not the point.

The point is THC is now competing for share of occasions.

Normalization comes from repetition in trusted environments.


>> What Am I Watching?

The first league, venue group, or national operator that treats THC beverages in the same way ?

Who puts up the first THC Beverage advert in a stadium? (Remember USC/ Cookies?)

What major sports/food/airport group jump in next ?


5 beers or 5 2MG THC Beverages??

Same night, VERY different morning

A long held belief just got UPENDED last week:

Vapes just eclipsed FLOWER in terms of sales in CA.

YUP. WILD.

So, ask YOURSELF why…


>> What Happened?

In CA, vape products overtook flower as the #1 seller in licensed dispensaries.

This is a HISTORIC first in the U.S. legal market.

In 2025, vapes pulled ahead, with higher monthly sales and widening share


>> Why Does This Matter?

Flower has been KING forever.

Economics, culture, product…it was Michael Jordan.

Now the consumer wallet has shifted its preferences.

And upended norms (hello Gen Z!)


>> What Am I Watching?

Is Gen Z the demand anchor we should be trying to reach?

Does margin in vapes continue if this trend sticks?

Does quality and testing MATTER, or is price #1?

How does this change the retail plan-o-gram??


Flower has to take off its crown, for now…

But let me be clear: I don’t think flower is losing its heritage or dominance, YET….

I do think that consumer choice and pricing show us how the market is shaping the future…

Little more love from the MJ BIZ scene...
Shout for Rectitude Partners LLC
and my man Nicholas Bowers

thanks to the squad at 

Fat Nugs Magazine
Puff Creative

for a great night....4 Grams...COMING!!!!!

Guess who just figured out how to crack the Show Me State:

My guys at Jeeter - a DreamFields Brand + Elevate.

Keep telling me cannabis is a commodity business….

Jeeter just walked into MO and reminded everyone what a REAL BRAND looks like.


>> What’s Happening?

Jeeter, the No. 1 pre-roll brand in the U.S., just launched in Missouri.

They hit the ground running with a smart partnership with my guys from Elevate (GREAT TEAM) and hit 70 %+ day-one coverage of doors

These guys are going to CRUSH.


>> Why Is This Important?

Brand dominance via culture, community and premium perception.

Missouri is a BEAST with 4-6 groups there KILLING IT and MAKING MONEY.

Jeeter + Elevate treated this one like a brand build, not just a SKU drop.


>> What I’m Watching

Does Jeeter’s lifestyle strategy expand average ticket or just front-load hype?

Can culture from places like California translate to Show-Me economics?

Does this push a pre-roll war in the Show Me State?


Missouri didn’t “get” Jeeter. Jeeter chose Missouri.

Pre-rolls are crowded. Brands aren’t.

Jeeter + Elevate = WINNING.

So did you REALLY think the ban was about hemp??

No no no.

It was about ALCOHOL.

And now the numbers are in:


>> Whats Happening?

Alcohol is done watching hemp from the sidelines.

In Q4 2025 a bunch of companies files highlight lobbying disclosures tied to intoxicating hemp:

Moët Hennessy
Bacardi
Diageo
Brown-Forman
The HEINEKEN Company
Sazerac Company

Hmm….read the tea leaves and follow the money.


>> Why Does This Matter?

Lobbying is balance-sheet-based muscle memory for alcohol.

They have been doing it since 1950 and they are GOOD at it.

Make no mistake, the alcohol industry is acknowledging something BIG:

THAT intoxicating hemp is already part of the adult-use landscape.


>> What I Am I Watching?

Which alcohol players move from lobbying to minority investments?

Or does alcohol flex harder to push hemp off the shelves?

Can cannabis incumbents realize they were out gunned (and outspent)?


Not sure how this plays out but I am going to crack 10mg bev and grab the popcorn!

The hemp ban is coming annnnnnnd it's going to be unenforceable. Full stop.

Everyone screaming "shutdown" is missing the point.

The math just does not math…

>> What's Happening?

Lawmakers have stuffed an effective intoxicating-hemp ban into federal language.

On paper, it tightens THC limits and nukes most hemp-derived products.

In reality, it hands enforcement to agencies that already can't enforce federal cannabis prohibition today.


>> Why Is This Important?

We already ran this experiment.

Cannabis has been federally illegal for decades and yet here we are with regulated markets in most states.

The federal government does not have the manpower, political appetite, or operational clarity to police every convenience store, DTC website, and warehouse in America.

A ban without enforceability isn't regulation ? Just funny…


>> What Am I Watching?

States quietly filling the vacuum with their own rules while Washington argues with itself.

Hemp operators adapting structures, formulations, and channels instead of disappearing.

Cannabis incumbents cheering a "win" that may actually strengthen the very gray market they hate.


You don't fix consumer demand with a memo and you can't kill markets with paperwork.

If lawmakers actually want control, safety, and tax revenue, there's only one answer:


Regulate it and LEGALIZE IT…


Don't pretend you banned it.


If this sounds familiar, it should. We've been here before….

Guess who’s messin’ with Texas?? Cann, that’s who.

Cann is fixin’ to dominate the Lone Star State.

Here’s what’s going down:


>> What’s Happening?

Cann secured Texas distribution with Spec’s.

Spec’s, for those that don’t know, is THE LARGEST beverage retailer in Texas.

Full SKU set in one of the biggest alc retail channels in the USA.


>> Why Is This Important?

This is not a test, a dispensary, one franchisee gone rogue, or a limited run.

THC drinks are moving via mainstream beverage infrastructure.

Spec’s has 200+ doors statewide.

Say what you want, I AM seeing a distribution shift...


>> What Am I Watching?

What other brands can howdy on down to distribution?

What other retailers jump on board now that we have Target, Circle K and Spec’s?

Is there movement on the regulatory side in Texas? (Remember a few months ago they tried to BAN HEMP??)


Want to make sure we give a big congrats to the Cann Team!

Jake B. and Nick Fasano 👏 👏

Feels like Danny Stepper and the LA Libations team left their fingerprints all over here, cause this ain’t my first rodeo…

Want to LEARN MORE? Get your spurs to The Beverage Forum April 2026.

Hang 10 and hit the dispo??

Adult use cannabis may be coming to the Aloha State…


>> What’s Happening?

Hawaii lawmakers filed legislation that would put rec cannabis to voters in November 2026.

If passed by a two-thirds vote in both chambers, Hawaii voters would be asked whether to amend the state constitution to legalize adult-use cannabis.


>> Why Does This Matter?

Ballot initiatives are cool but they are NOT a guarantee.

This was not brought forth by the electorate but by elected officials…

Not sure this get traction or mahalo…


>> What Am I Watching?

Do MSOs even bother modeling Hawaii as a near-term market?

Is capital ready to fund something in one of the worlds largest tourist economies?

Do voters notice they’re being asked to decide a policy?


Feel like another version of Pele’s curse.

Cannabis style…I will just grab a shaved ice.

Why can’t an MSO be successful in one of the BEST markets in the US?

Missouri is quietly becoming one of the most attractive cannabis markets in the country — WITHOUT the MSOs.

Go figure.


>> What’s Happening?

Curaleaf exited Missouri.

Not cut back. Not paused. EXITED.

And they are not alone. No major MSO has meaningful exposure to Missouri.

Yet MO is consistently ranking among the healthiest AU markets in the U.S…


>> Why Does This Matter?

Missouri breaks the MSO playbook.

Limited license structure, strong retail economics, rational competition.

Not race-to-the-bottom pricing.

This is the rare cannabis market where operators actually make money (REALLY).


>> What Am I Watching?

When do private equity and strategic buyers re-rate “boring” markets?

Does the next consolidation wave starts OUTSIDE the MSO universe?

Who comes out of this market as a winner?


Missouri didn’t fail the MSOs but the MSO model failed in Missouri.

Not every great market wants a national flag planted in it.

Sometimes the best markets are the ones Wall Street ignores.

Where do hemp beverages belong?

Well, what do we know:

1. They sure found a way to enter traditional distribution channels

2. Alcohol use is declining

3. Consumers are driving demand

With the hemp ban looming I'm not sure which way is UP.

So you tell me?

Thank you to my friend Peter Su, PBC-CP, CTP, CCBP, CRS, GRCP, GRCA, IDPP, CBE for having me on...

Why do you keep doing this LinkedIn thing ???

BECAUSE THE POWER OF PERSONAL BRANDING IS YOUR FUTURE.

Here's a case study:

Few years ago met Lisa Williams via LinkedIn.

She reached out.
We got to know each other
We have supported each others' collective journey.

Lisa Williams is: 
— A working mother
— An entrepreneur
— Who owns two businesses
— Keeps up with her content 
— And is a TOTAL badass!

About 2 years ago she purchased a product SHE believed in. 

Hello Again...Something to help female health, specifically menopause.

She started putting some videos on TikTok...

And guess what... last week SHE WENT VIRAL.

1,000,000 views
122,000 likes
5,000 comments
21,000 saves 
59,000 forwards

AND SO MANY SALES SHE COULD NOT KEEP UP.

NEVER QUIT. 
NEVER question if you should be posting.

And buy some Hello Again!

And check the video here: https://bit.ly/4qCX4sq

When you fail 3 times, why not try for a 4th??

That’s what PA is doing right now as the state makes its FOURTH attempt at a move to Adult Use.

Sure, why not??


>> What’s Happening?

My guy Shapiro gave his fourth budget address.

Increasing overall spending by 6% without broad-based tax hikes.

Oh and he put adult-use BACK on the table…AGAIN.


>> Why Does This Matter?

PA is surrounded by NJ/NY/MD/OH, all of which are pumping REC.

The budget conversation shows how much $ PA is leaving on the table staying medical.

How ELSE can you spend more and NOT tax the general public?


>> What Am I Watching?

This is now #4. Can it REALLY HAPPEN this time?

What will be the policy tradeoffs if this happens? Who loses?

Is THIS a state surrounded by AU finally admitting leakage is a tax policy?


Adult-use didn’t magically reappear…

It reappeared because PA needs the $$$.

Politics and budgets are not based on morality…

Bet your butt they are based on COLD HARD CASH.

And AU seems like a magical cash machine.

Everything's BIGGER in TEXAS? Well, Texas Original just bet the ranch.


>> What's Happening?

Texas Original just opened the largest medical cannabis facility in Texas.

They’re expanding cultivation and processing capacity to meet rising patient demand.

No change in law…no ballot initiative.

Just cash, concrete, steel, and CONFIDENCE.


>> Why Does This Matter?

Well son, you don't go build the largest facility inside one of the most restrictive medical programs in the country…

THIS is what early movers look like in medical states.

And might signal that regulators are comfortable enough to let serious operators scale.


>> What Am I Watching?

Does demand absorb this build?

Does the program allow for success?

Who’s the next operator is to break ground?


Texas ain't first.

It won't be loud.

But when it moves, it will move at TEXAS SCALE.


Cowboy UP y'all.

This will make some people uncomfortable.

Good. Read it anyway.


>> What's Happening?

A new study from the National Bureau of Economic Research suggests that legal marijuana access is associated with lower suicide rates among older adults.

Particularly once dispensaries actually open.

Not legalization on paper.

Real access. Real products. Real use.


>> Why is this Important?

Older adults deal with chronic pain, sleep issues, anxiety, isolation.

And guess what? They're also the group with the highest suicide risk.

When legal cannabis becomes available, suicide rates in this cohort go down.

Let's not pretend this is nothing while we happily prescribe opioids, SSRIs, and booze like Tic Tacs…


>> What Am I Watching?

How long policymakers keep saying cannabis has "no proven benefit" while data quietly stacks up.

Whether public-health conversations finally acknowledge harm reduction instead of moral panic.

Who actually cares about outcomes and who just cares about optics…


No one is saying cannabis is a cure.

But dismissing data because it challenges the norms is bad science and worse policy.

If legal access helps even a subset of people feel less pain, less despair, or a little more okay, maybe that's worth taking seriously.

Just a thought…

Montana, the Gold and Silver State, is going GREEN.

Montana’s cannabis market just put up a number…which I found very interesting.


>> What’s Happening?

AU retail in Montana threw up a record $327M in sales in 2025.

AU represents roughly 90 % of Montana purchases.

AND this growth came DESPITE falling retail prices per gram.


>> Why Does This Matter?

Pattern recognition: price compression + volume growth = real consumer demand.

Out of this, the state grabbed $60 million in tax revenue, underscoring how important this product can be.

Medical markets seems to vanish in the face of AU. Unclear how this moves in S3…


>> What Am I Watching?

Montana works because it’s not drowning in licenses or over-financialized.

Its relatively open licensing structure and modest population make it a unique case, but can it last?

It’s also a NO MSO Zone…proving that you don’t need MSOs for a sold adult-use market.

Low population, controlled rollout, limited speculation.


Markets like this don’t scale nationally, but they do expose what broke elsewhere.

Record sales are nice, but structural market health is the REAL story.

We’ll see what prevails here.

Best advice for a bad outcome: Let someone ELSE pick your dose.

Or worse still, let someone who knows NOTHING about dosing pick your dose…

Because that’s what’s going on


>> What’s Happening?

Food & Beverage put out an article on the “perfect dose” for HEMP Beverages.

At 2.5MG

2.5MG??

REALLLY???


>> Why Is This Important?

It reveals a gap between cannabis reality and every outside stakeholder.

2.5mg ain’t a “sweet spot”. It’s a training wheel AT BEST.

Alcohol didn’t scale on near-beer.

Cannabis won’t scale on microdoses dressed up as safety or wisdom.

Low-dose has a place. (THANK YOU Cann)

Calling it “THE PLACE” is telling me you don’t understand the market.


>> What Am I Watching?

How much mainstream “acceptance” does this get?

Is this the way Bev/Alc gets comfortable?? (You sure sell more cans at 2.5mg…)

How many consumers do not “feel” an effect at this level???


2.5mg is not the right dose.

If your entire thesis starts and ends there, you’re throwing darts blindfolded.

While congratulating yourself for hitting something, anything.

Think your business is HARD?

Try this:

1. Every state (and city) has a different set of rules

2. The Government taxes you at an exorbitant rate 

3.  Capital flow is weighted to larger and later-stage operators

4. There is very little capital to begin with...

Now tell me you product is not Federally legal...WELCOME TO C@NNABIS!!!!

Appreciate the love from Alex D. and the squad from The High Index for the spot!

Failing to raise capital in c@nnabis ?

Get yourself to where the decision makers gather in ONE ROOM
Hyped as always for another sesh with my folks from IgniteIt Cannabis
thats right...

I AM COMING DOWN THE PIKE...
February 10th, 2026
Westin Jersey City

I heard The Boss is playing a set....

Register HERE: https://bit.ly/49pHgUF

and use my CODE: SETH20

Patrick Lane Elliot Lane Javier Hasse

It’s NEVER a good idea to let government run a business.

Right??

Anoka, Minnesota is set to cut the ribbon on the Anoka Cannabis Company.

The first and ONLY city-managed dispensary in the U.S.

What could possibly go wrong??


>> What’s Happening?

A city running retail cannabis is like a turtle teaching people how to fly…

Bad idea for government to staff, regulate, and be accountable to voters.

This seems like a BIG departure from the usual “license it and pray” model.


>> Why Is This Important?

This city just decided licensing WASN’T enough.

Screw regulating private operators, Anoka wants to own the P&L too.

This is a fundamental shift for government FROM oversight TO asset control.


>> What Am I Watching?

How soon till every cash strapped municipality gets in the game?

Does this model work financially?

How does a city deal with illicit markets?

How long until they start growing weed and creating their own brand…??


Cannabis didn’t normalize…

It went on the city Balance Sheet.

Government is best which governs least, PERIOD.

Cofounder of Lead In 30 • Upgrade your leaders • Human resources and leadership development

It was one of the most memorable moments of my career. I was standing in the front of the room finishing a meeting with the top 200 leaders of a large hospital system in the DC area. I handed the microphone to the CEO to close us out. What he said shocked me and has stuck with me for years. After hours of discussion about the culture of his organization of 18,000 people that day he ended the meeting looking into the eyes of his top 200 and saying into the microphone, "I have come to an inconvenient and disgusting conclusion that I am the problem."

That's a direct quote.

He was gone less than two months later. 

He left.

For almost a decade I've traveled the world meeting with leaders of some of the world's biggest companies. Amazon, Walmart, Lockheed Martin, General Motors, Johnson & Johnson, Cigna, Hormel, BD, Darden Restaurants, Fox, and HCA to name a few. I've averaged 165 flights a year. New York, London, Singapore, Sydney, New Zealand, and a lot of less notable locales have been stops along the way.

Here's what I've learned...

Leaders make or break an organization.

They are the competitive advantage.

Or the anchor sinking the ship.

One leader can change everything. Positively or negatively.

After years of consulting senior executives on their company-wide culture transformation projects I'm now spending all of my time with a smaller group of leaders. Call them executive coaching clients or whatever you want. They are leaders of teams, divisions, business areas, or enterprises that aren't yet who they want to become.

We help successful executives grow their careers through strengthening their leadership effectiveness.

That's the phrase we wrote as we founded our firm.

Perhaps you're that leader who could benefit from our questions, perspective, and proprietary models. Or maybe you know that leader.  

DM me. 

I'd love to chat. 🎯

Russ Hill

The biggest leadership mistake? Trying to fix everything at once. Irene Rosenfeld became CEO of Kraft Foods and did the opposite. Here's the disciplined choice that unlocked billions in value:

When Rosenfeld took over Kraft in 2006, the pressure was immense. The company had been spun off from Altria Group with a sprawling portfolio of brands across dozens of categories.

Everyone expected her to optimize everything simultaneously.
She made a different call.

Rosenfeld focused Kraft's resources on a narrow set of global powerhouse brands like Oreo, Trident, and Cadbury while systematically divesting non-core businesses. 

In 2011, she split the entire company into two, separating the $31 billion international snacking business from the $17 billion North American grocery operation.

The result? She created Mondelēz International, a focused global snacking giant that could compete effectively against Nestlé and Mars.

This connects to a principle I teach in Deliver: leaders who get results don't try to solve every problem. They choose the problems that matter most and ignore the rest.

Strategic restraint beats scattered action. Every time.

Under pressure, the instinct is to tackle everything. But the discipline to choose what not to fix is what separates leaders who spin their wheels from leaders who actually move the business forward.

Want to develop the discipline to focus on what matters most? Lead In 30 transforms how managers and senior executives lead and deliver results in just 30 days. Message me to learn how this framework can work for your team. Learn more here: https://lnkd.in/gsb3qeCF

Cofounder of Lone Rock Leadership • Upgrade your managers • Human resources and leadership development

In 2021, as GM pledged $35 billion to go all-electric by 2035 and Ford committed $50 billion to EV transformation, Akio Toyoda stood firm. Here's why this "mistake" became one of the smartest decisions:

While every major automaker announced aggressive EV timelines, Toyota's CEO refused to follow. Industry analysts predicted Toyota would lose its market leadership.

Environmental groups called the company "behind the times." Business publications questioned whether Toyoda understood the future.

Even some Toyota board members pushed for bolder EV commitments.

Toyoda said no.

Not because he feared change. Because he understood something most leaders forget: short-term applause and long-term results rarely align.

Instead of committing billions to full EV infrastructure like competitors, he doubled down on hybrid technology. The unglamorous middle ground everyone else abandoned.

While GM and Ford raced to build EV-only lineups, Toyota quietly perfected the Prius platform and invested in hydrogen fuel cells.

His principle was clear: engineering excellence and reliability matter more than market perception.

By 2023, as major automakers struggled with EV profitability and infrastructure challenges, Toyota's hybrid sales hit record highs. The patient approach was paying off.

The lesson isn't about EVs. It's about leadership.

The crowd wants you to move fast, chase trends, and make decisions that look good today. Real leaders protect tomorrow's outcomes, even when it disappoints today's critics.

Disciplined patience means having clear principles that outlast the noise. For Toyoda, that meant refusing to sacrifice engineering excellence for market perception, even when it meant years of criticism.

Want the complete framework for delivering results through disciplined patience instead of reactive decision-making? Deliver: Why Some Leaders Get Results And Most Don't: https://lnkd.in/eaiPFZhw

Bernard Arnault runs the world's largest luxury group. Worth $400 billion in brands. 200,000 employees. Yet he still walks stores unannounced and checks for dust:

You'd expect someone at that level to be completely removed from day-to-day operations.

But this isn't micromanagement. It's how you protect an empire where standards can't slip even 1%.

Here's what most leaders miss about how quality actually dies:

A display case has a small scuff. Nobody fixes it because "customers probably won't notice." Next week, there are two scuffs. Then the lighting is slightly off. Then product arrangement gets sloppy.

Each moment feels insignificant.

But teams are watching what you walk past without comment.

At LVMH, Arnault knows that luxury exists in the details customers feel but can't articulate. The moment you accept "good enough," you've lost what made you special.

This is why he still checks himself.

When the CEO of a $400 billion company inspects store windows personally, it sends an unmistakable message: we protect what matters, even when nobody's watching.

The principle works everywhere:
- In manufacturing, run your hand along welds and joints. Feel what quality means.
- In customer service, read actual support tickets, not summary metrics.
- In sales, listen to full client calls, not highlight reels.

People perform to the standard you inspect, not the standard you expect.

Standards slip quietly. Great leaders don't.

This principle of visible reinforcement is central to creating environments where results compound instead of drift.

Ray Dalio records every meeting at Bridgewater and shares the tapes with all 1,500 employees. Most CEOs would call this insane. He calls it essential. Here's what most leaders didn't get: 

Most organizations treat transparency like a trust exercise. Dalio treated it like debugging code.

Every meeting recorded. Every decision tracked. Every outcome analyzed against the original logic.

When an investment thesis failed, they could replay exactly where the thinking broke down - not to blame, but to upgrade the decision-making system itself.

This is why Bridgewater's transparency worked when others' failed: it was designed for learning speed, not team bonding.

Here's the difference: At Bridgewater, people could challenge Dalio's investment thesis in front of 50 colleagues without fear of retaliation. But they couldn't avoid the data showing their last 3 predictions were wrong.

Real safety means you can surface hard truths. False safety means hard truths stay buried until quarterly results force them into the open.

Ask yourself: When was the last time someone 3 levels below you told you a project was failing before you discovered it yourself?

If the answer is "never" or "I can't remember," truth is moving too slowly through your organization.

And when truth moves slowly, so do results.

The question isn't whether truth will surface. It's whether it surfaces fast enough to matter.

Deliver: Why Some Leaders Get Results, And Most Don't shows you how to build systems where clarity drives performance without sacrificing trust: https://lnkd.in/eaiPFZhw

Your highest-performing team just put in three brutal months. The effort was there. The results weren't.

Before you question their commitment, Angela Duckworth's research on grit suggests you might be asking the wrong question.

Most leaders know Duckworth's work shows that perseverance matters. What they miss is the critical qualifier: grit only drives breakthrough results when it's anchored to clear goals and consistent feedback loops.

Without that foundation, what looks like admirable persistence is actually just expensive stubbornness.

Watch what happens when teams grind without clear direction. Effort multiplies while frustration compounds exponentially, and nobody can explain why all that hard work isn't moving the needle.

I saw a product team work 60-hour weeks for three months rebuilding a feature. Incredible effort, total commitment. The problem? Leadership kept saying "make it better" without defining what better actually meant.

They built five different versions before someone finally articulated clear success metrics. All that grit, pointed at a moving target.

The outcome wasn't breakthrough performance. It was exhausted people who couldn't understand why their grinding effort produced so little progress.

Here's what clarity actually requires: specific outcomes everyone can visualize, defined metrics that show real-time progress, and tight feedback loops that course-correct before effort becomes waste.

Without all three, you're not building grit. You're building frustration.

Before demanding more perseverance from your team, ask: Can every person clearly articulate the goal, their role in achieving it, and how they'll know they're making progress?

If you're getting vague answers, you don't have a grit problem. You have a clarity problem.

And no amount of perseverance fixes unclear direction.

Subscribe to my newsletter for leadership insights that cut through conventional wisdom and give you frameworks that actually work: https://lnkd.in/gsb3qeCF

Most leaders think their job is to motivate their team every morning. Jim Collins' research proves this is completely wrong. Here's why discipline beats motivation every time:

They show up with energy. They give the inspiring talk. They pump everyone up for the day ahead.

And when performance dips, they assume they need to motivate harder.

This is exhausting. More importantly, Collins' research shows great organizations don't run on charismatic speeches.

They build cultures where people do the right things even when no one's watching.

That's the difference between motivation and discipline. And discipline compounds while motivation fades.

Here's what Collins actually found:

The best companies don't depend on inspirational leaders who keep people fired up. They depend on systems where following through isn't optional - it's just how things work here.

This matters because motivation creates a dependency loop. You become the energy source. Your team waits for you to pump them up before they perform. The moment you stop, everything slows down.

You're the bottleneck.

Discipline works differently. It's the behaviors and standards that run without you. The meeting that always starts on time. The commitment that's always honored. The standard that never gets compromised.

Take that first one - meetings starting on time. Seems small. But when meetings always start on time, something shifts. People show up prepared because they know wasting 15 minutes isn't an option. Decisions get made faster because there's no buffer time. Accountability becomes normal because the standard is clear.

That's one small discipline compounding into faster decisions, better preparation, and stronger accountability. All without you having to motivate anyone.

Collins found this pattern everywhere in great companies. They don't have more charismatic leaders. They have more disciplined systems. The discipline stacks. It builds momentum that doesn't require constant energy input from the top.

Your job isn't to be the most motivating person in the room. It's to build repeatable behaviors into how your team operates. To shift from being the energy source to being the architect of systems that create their own momentum.

On the Lead In 30 podcast, Russ breaks down the repeatable behaviors that separate effective leaders from everyone else. Listen wherever you get your podcasts: https://lnkd.in/d_-Knwhy

Isabel Ge Mahe faced an impossible challenge at Apple China: Scale in a market that demanded compromise on everything Apple stood for. Here's how she did it without bending on a single core principle:

She faced a market where local competitors dominated, government regulations demanded data localization, and consumers expected features Apple had never offered anywhere else.

Different regulations. Different customer expectations. Different competitive landscape.

Most leaders would have compromised the core to adapt. Build a cheaper iPhone. Loosen privacy standards. Partner with local manufacturers who didn't meet Apple's quality bar.

She didn't.

The paradox most leaders miss? Being crystal clear on what's non-negotiable actually makes you more adaptable, not less.

Isabel adapted execution relentlessly. She integrated WeChat Pay and Alipay when Apple typically controlled the payment experience. She worked with China Mobile on distribution when Apple preferred direct control. She navigated complex government relationships while other tech companies struggled.

But walk into any Apple Store in Shanghai or Beijing, and the experience is unmistakably Apple. The Genius Bar runs the same way. The packaging feels identical. The customer service standards don't bend.

That's the difference between adapting how you execute and abandoning who you are.

Most leaders confuse adaptation with compromise. They think being flexible means being loose with standards. So they either stay too rigid and fail to execute, or they bend on fundamentals and lose their identity.

The best leaders know the difference.

Think about your own team. What's actually non-negotiable? Not everything can be. If you're leading a sales team, maybe your non-negotiable is honest communication with customers. Everything else - your pitch structure, your demo format, your follow-up cadence - can adapt based on what works.

When you're clear about what you absolutely won't compromise, you free yourself to be radically flexible everywhere else. That clarity becomes your permission structure for smart adaptation.

Ask yourself: If I had to move my team to a different city, different industry, different company - what would I absolutely insist on maintaining? That's your short list of non-negotiables. Everything else is negotiable.

This is the framework: be clear about what is non-negotiable and flexible everywhere else.

Sounds simple. But here's why most leaders struggle with it - they've never been forced to articulate their actual non-negotiables. They confuse preferences with principles. They think everything matters equally.

That's exactly what Lead In 30 helps you clarify. In 30 days, you'll identify your true non-negotiables, build the execution skills to adapt everywhere else, and develop the leadership clarity that drives real results. Learn more at https://lnkd.in/g6wjxWmv

Image credit: Apple

You don't wait until you feel brave enough to lead. Katharine Graham proved this when she took over The Washington Post in 1963. She wasn't ready. She knew it. Everyone around her knew it too...

Her husband had run the paper. She'd never led anything. When he died, she inherited chaos and doubt in equal measure. Board members questioned whether she could handle it. One executive reportedly dismissed her as "just a housewife" playing publisher.

But she accepted the responsibility anyway.

In 1971, the Pentagon Papers decision landed on her desk. Her lawyers warned that publishing classified documents could mean prison time and the end of The Washington Post. The company was about to go public, one wrong move could kill the deal and everything they'd built.

She could barely sleep. But she knew staying silent would betray what journalism existed for.

She published.

About a year later, Watergate. Two reporters she barely knew were chasing a sitting president. The pressure was different this time—not just legal threats, but direct White House intimidation. Her business advisors begged her to back down.

But something had shifted in her. The Pentagon Papers decision had shown her she could survive choosing right over safe.

She backed her reporters.

Those decisions didn't come from some innate courage gene. They came from a pattern she'd built. The Pentagon Papers taught her she could survive choosing principle over safety. That experience gave her the foundation for Watergate. Each hard choice built the muscle for the next one.

This is how leadership courage actually develops. Not through waiting until you feel confident. Through taking responsibility when you don't.

Your courage builds the same way Graham's did. The budget conversation you're avoiding. The underperformer you need to address. The strategic pivot everyone resists. Each one builds capacity for the next.

One difficult decision at a time. One moment of choosing discipline over fear. The results compound.

My new book, Deliver: Why Some Leaders Get Results And Most Don't, shows you the framework for building this discipline into lasting results.: https://lnkd.in/eaiPFZhw

If you're tired of repeating yourself, you're probably doing your job right. Most leaders think constant repetition means they're failing to communicate. But here's what Vince Lombardi knew that changed everything:

He won 5 NFL championships by drilling the same fundamentals, blocking, tackling, discipline, in every single practice. Before the 1961 season, his veteran players complained they'd heard the blocking lecture 100 times.

Lombardi's response? "Then you'll hear it 100 more until it's instinct, not thought."

That season, the Packers went 11-3 and won the championship. Their offensive line allowed fewer sacks than any team in the league, not because they learned new techniques, but because the basics became muscle memory.

Here's what Lombardi understood that most leaders miss: your team hasn't heard it enough if you're tired of saying it.

Research shows people need to hear a message 7 times before it influences behavior. Leaders typically say it twice and move on.

The disconnect? You've internalized the vision, priorities, and standards. Your team is hearing them for the first time, processing while multitasking, or filtering through their own priorities.

What actually deserves repetition:

• The 2-3 outcomes that define success this quarter
• The non-negotiable standards that separate good from great
• The decision-making principles when choices aren't obvious

The difference between productive repetition and nagging? Productive repetition reinforces what matters until it becomes reflex. Nagging focuses on trivial details that don't move the needle.

Great leaders don't apologize for reinforcing what matters. They lean into it.

On the Lead In 30 podcast, I break down how the best leaders master this skill, knowing what to repeat, when to repeat it, and how to make it stick. If you're ready to stop second-guessing your leadership and start reinforcing what matters, listen wherever you get your podcasts: https://lnkd.in/d_-Knwhy

Ken Chenault had employees trapped in the towers on 9/11. Every CEO faced the same chaos. But only one stayed calm. Here's why his composure mattered more than his crisis plan:

American Express headquarters stood just blocks from the World Trade Center. Communication systems were failing. Financial markets had shut down. Most leaders would have spiraled into reactive mode.

Chenault did something different.
He didn't rush to create a 47-point response plan. He didn't send panicked memos. He didn't call emergency meetings every hour.

He regulated himself first.
Then he focused on 3 things: Get people to safety. Communicate honestly. Keep the business functioning.

While other companies created confusion with contradictory directives and constant pivots, Chenault's composure created clarity.

His team knew what mattered. They could act decisively instead of second-guessing every move.

Here's what most leaders miss: Your calm matters more than your plan.

When you're reactive, your entire team becomes reactive. Decisions get worse because everyone's operating from fear. Priorities blur because panic spreads faster than clarity.

When you're calm, you create the conditions for clear thinking. Your team can execute instead of just surviving.

This isn't soft leadership advice. It's a competitive advantage that determines who recovers and who doesn't.

The gap between knowing calm matters and staying calm under pressure? That's where most leaders fail.

Deliver: Why Some Leaders Get Results, And Most Don't teaches the frameworks that turn this insight into action. If you lead a team through uncertainty, this book will change how you show up when it matters most.

Image source: Aspen Economic

Most leaders think they have an accountability problem. They don’t. They have a self-accountability problem. Here’s what I’ve seen working with leaders at Lone Rock:

When teams feel stuck, it rarely starts with performance. It starts with mindset.

You hear it in the language:
“That’s not my job.”
“They won’t let us.”
“Leadership hasn’t decided.”
“We tried that before.”

That's when blame replaces ownership, excuses justify inaction and energy leaks out of the room. And the harder leaders push, the more resistance they create.

This is what I call the “powerless” trap.

Most leaders respond by tightening metrics, adding process, or increasing oversight.

But powerless cultures don’t need more control. They need a shift in where power is generated.

That’s why we teach PowerOS. PowerOS is a simple framework that helps people move from reactive to proactive by focusing on the only three places power actually exists:

- Get Curious
Where am I making assumptions? Where am I giving my power away through my story?

- Choose Your Control
What thoughts, choices, and actions are actually within my influence right now?

- Create Momentum
What consistent behaviors will reinforce ownership instead of reactivity?

When leaders model this, language changes fast. Victim thinking drops, decision velocity increases, and then the energy returns.

I’m hosting a live 45-minute webinar next week: From Powerless to Powerful: How Leaders Generate Ownership

If you lead a team and want:
• Less blame and more ownership
• Fewer excuses and more initiative
• A practical framework you can use immediately

Join me.

I’ll walk through how to implement PowerOS with your team and where most leaders unintentionally undermine ownership.

Register here:
https://lnkd.in/gs4iwDsW

Would love to see you there.

You can't demand outcomes from people who don't believe they belong. Deborah Bial proved this when she founded The Posse Foundation in 1989. Here's the leadership lesson that separates high-performing teams:

She was working with high-achieving students who kept dropping out of top colleges. They had the grades, the test scores, the talent. But many were leaving anyway because they didn't believe they belonged in those environments.

So she rebuilt belief first. College graduation rates for participants jumped to over 90%.

Most leaders get this backwards.

They set aggressive Q4 targets for the new manager who's never hit quota before. They assign the high-stakes client presentation to the junior person who's convinced they'll mess it up. They promote someone into leadership and expect immediate results without addressing their impostor syndrome first.

The results break down every time.

Belief isn't soft leadership. It's the foundation that makes performance possible.

When someone doesn't believe they can succeed, no amount of pressure will fix it. The performance gap isn't about effort or accountability. It's about confidence and ownership.

The warning signs are subtle. Someone with a belief gap will ask for excessive confirmation before making decisions, over-prepare for meetings but still seem uncertain, deflect credit when they do succeed, and frame every setback as proof they don't belong.

These aren't performance issues. They're belief issues masquerading as performance issues.

Before you demand better results, ask yourself: Does this person believe they're capable of delivering them?

If the answer is no, have a different conversation. Ask them what would make them feel more confident tackling this. Listen for whether they need more context, clearer authority, skill development, or just permission to make mistakes. Then address that first, before you talk about deadlines or metrics.

Your job isn't to push harder. It's to build belief first.

Subscribe to Russ's newsletter for weekly leadership insights that help you build high-performing teams without the fluff: https://lnkd.in/gsb3qeCF

Most leaders think fast decisions prove they're decisive. Howard Marks built a $170B investment firm by doing the opposite. Here's the one question that changed everything:

While other investors rushed to buy during market euphoria in 2006, Marks would gather his team at Oaktree Capital and ask: "What is everyone else assuming, and what are they missing?"

That single question helped Oaktree avoid the 2008 financial crisis while their competitors collapsed.

They didn't just survive. They acquired distressed assets at historic discounts and generated billions in returns.

The difference wasn't speed. It was thinking quality.

Here's how this played out in 2006-2007:

First-level thinking said: "Real estate has gone up for 5 straight years. Housing prices never fall nationally. This is a great investment."

Second-level thinking asked: "Everyone believes housing only goes up. But what happens if interest rates rise? What percentage of these mortgages are subprime? If defaults increase even slightly, what's the cascade effect?"

Most investors used first-level thinking. They saw rising prices and bought more.

Marks used second-level thinking. He saw the same data but examined the assumptions underneath.

The result: Oaktree positioned for the crash while others were wiped out.

The same principle applies when you're evaluating any major decision.

Before your next big call, write down the consensus view. Then force yourself to answer: What would have to be true for the consensus to be wrong?

That's your entry into second-level thinking.

The difference isn't intelligence. It's discipline.

My new book, Deliver, breaks down the exact disciplines that separate leaders who deliver from those who don't: https://lnkd.in/eaiPFZhw

In exit interviews, 67% of departing employees say they flagged the problem that made them quit months before they left. Here's the uncomfortable truth about why execution fails:

Your team already knows what's broken.

They know which projects are doomed. They know which clients are problems. They know the exact moment a deadline became impossible.

The question isn't whether they have the information. The question is whether you've created an environment where they feel safe telling you.

Most leaders think execution fails because of bad data, unclear priorities, or poor planning. But here's what actually happens: your team sees the problem, does the math, recognizes the risk, and then stays silent.

Why?
Because they're watching to see if you're the kind of leader who shoots the messenger or faces reality.

Every organization has this moment. The project fails. The client leaves. The launch misses. Then comes the autopsy where everyone discovers the team saw it coming weeks ago.

The failure wasn't the outcome. The failure was the silence.

Here's how to test if you're tolerating that silence right now:

In your next 1-on-1, ask this question: "What's the one thing everyone on the team knows is broken that we're not talking about?"

Then stay quiet. Don't fill the silence. Don't defend. Don't explain.

Their answer tells you everything about your team's candor. Their hesitation tells you even more.

Most leaders won't ask this question because they're afraid of the answer. They'd rather manage around the problem than confront it directly.

But execution doesn't fail because teams lack information. It fails because leaders tolerate avoidance instead of demanding truth.

The choice is simple: be the leader who asks for more reports to explain the failure, or be the leader who says, "We all know what's actually happening here. Let's fix it."

The truth rarely destroys teams. Avoiding it does.

Subscribe to my weekly newsletter for leadership insight that helps you close the gap between knowing and doing: https://lnkd.in/gsb3qeCF

2014: Microsoft is drifting. Innovation slows. Internal rivalries dominate. Wall Street questions relevance. Satya Nadella takes over and does something unexpected:

The stack-ranking system forces managers to rank employees against each other.

No mass layoffs. No public culture purge. No flashy rebrand.

Instead, he removes one system: Stack ranking.

For years, employees were graded against each other.

Top bucket. Middle bucket. Bottom bucket.

Collaboration was risky. Helping a peer could hurt your ranking.

First leadership cycle without it? Confusion.

Managers ask: “How do we differentiate performance?”

Nadella reframes the standard:

From “know-it-all” to “learn-it-all.”

Curiosity becomes measurable.
Collaboration becomes expected.
Leaders are evaluated on collective outcomes, not individual dominance.

Then comes the strategic shift:

“Mobile first. Cloud first.”

Microsoft stops protecting Windows at all costs.
Products ship on iOS and Android.
Azure becomes the priority.

Teams that once competed now have to build together.

Azure scales into a global cloud platform.
LinkedIn and GitHub expand the ecosystem.
Microsoft regains relevance in cloud and AI.

Eventually, the company crosses a $3 trillion market cap.

But here’s what most leaders miss: Nadella didn’t motivate alignment.

He removed the system that made misalignment rational.

If incentives reward rivalry, you’ll get silos.
If performance systems punish collaboration, you’ll get ego.
If culture and strategy aren’t aligned, execution stalls.

Most leaders swing between two extremes:

• The Nice Leader: strong culture, weak accountability
• The Hard Driver: strong targets, fractured teams

Both fail.

Because they think alignment is soft.

Nadella proved it’s structural.

He made collaboration measurable.
He made learning a standard.
He made strategy dependent on alignment.

Clarity → Alignment → Movement.

Want more research-backed insights on leadership?

Join 11,000+ leaders who get our weekly newsletter:

👉 https://lnkd.in/en9vxeNk

Most leaders run from storms. Reed Timmer drives a reinforced vehicle straight into EF5 tornadoes while other meteorologists watch from 50 miles away. 

He's collected data that revolutionized how we predict severe weather. His edge? Getting close to what everyone else avoids.

That's the difference between managing and leading.

When you avoid hard conversations, they don't disappear. The senior developer who misses deadlines and dismisses feedback in every 1-on-1. You've rescheduled the performance conversation three times because confrontation feels uncomfortable.

Meanwhile, two junior developers are now copying his approach because that's what they see rewarded.

The storm you avoided? It just got three times bigger.

Avoidance feels like protection. It's actually compounding debt with interest you can't afford.

Smart leaders do the opposite. They run what I call the Tornado Test: If you're hoping the problem resolves itself, that's your signal to drive straight toward it.

Your VP of Sales missed quota three quarters in a row. Everyone on the leadership team knows it. Nobody wants to start succession planning. While you wait, your best account executives are interviewing elsewhere because they see the writing on the wall.

Small storms are manageable with direct action. Ignored storms destroy entire teams.

The question isn't whether you'll face turbulence. It's whether you'll confront it now with a plan or later when it's 10 times more expensive.

Ask yourself: What's the one conversation I've been postponing? The one initiative everyone knows is failing, but nobody addresses?

That's your tornado.

Subscribe to our newsletter where I break down the exact frameworks leaders use to identify and confront their biggest storms before they become crises: https://lnkd.in/gsb3qeCF

Mellody Hobson asks leaders one diagnostic question: "If I gave you our P&L with the labels removed, could you identify which lines drive profitability and which are cost centers?"

Most can't answer it.

That's the gap between strategic theater and strategic leadership.

I watched a director greenlight a product expansion without understanding customer acquisition cost. Six months in, they'd spent $2M acquiring customers worth $800K lifetime value.

The vision was clear. The economics weren't.

Leaders who avoid the numbers avoid accountability. 

They create ambiguity for their teams. They can't answer the hard questions because they don't understand the mechanics behind their own decisions.

Here's the test: Can you explain your business model to a smart 12-year-old without looking at a spreadsheet?

If you can't explain how you make money, what it costs to acquire a customer, and which metrics actually matter, you don't understand the mechanics of what you're leading.

Financial literacy is execution literacy. And execution is what separates leaders who deliver from leaders who just talk.

I dig into the mechanics behind effective execution on the Lead In 30 podcast. If you're ready to move past leadership theory and into what actually works, listen here: https://lnkd.in/d_-Knwhy

taplio

The Battle

Seth Yakatan

Russ Hill

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreSeth Yakatan's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreRuss Hill's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Seth Yakatan

Russ Hill

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Seth Yakatan's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreRuss Hill's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreSeth Yakatan's LinkedIn Performance