To lead up to the previous thought on Hubspot’s culture code, the idea was to dig into the business side of things for the company. However, Band of Brothers happened and I digested the 10 episodes 2001 series in…..three? days.

Hence it’s taken on the lion’s share of my thoughts. I wouldn’t consider myself a history buff but I really love most literature or shows on military history.

If you aren’t familiar with the Band of Brother’s series by HBO, I suggest you go watch it ASAP. That is if you love war history like I do. It portrays the journey of members of the 101st Airbourne’s Easy Company. This was a real company and every episode starts with interviews with soldiers from the company that they depict throughout the series.

Having enjoyed Damian Lewis’ acting in other shows like Homeland and Billions, I learned that Band of Brothers was well he got his ‘big break’ and since then it had slipped the back of my mind. All until a was reading a review about HBO’s Chernobyl mini-series and the reviewer made reference to Band of Brothers.

Among my many addictions in life, TV is one. At times I consider it a flaw in character that I’m the kind of person who has watched at least 4-5 reruns of every major sit-com (13+ for Friends) and can watch 10-15 hours of TV without skipping a bit. My addictions tend to be hard and fast. This is the same for video games….hence I rarely play them unless I plan to push through for weeks/months until I lose absolute interest in it.

I don’t know how other people’s addictions are but this is how mine works.

Sometimes, I’m quite amazed at how I’ve watched so many shows. Most tend to be some mix of dystopian, dark comedy, satire, documentaries…. To think of it as a glass-half-full scenario I even thought about starting a podcast reviewing TV shows since I have…this skill….where I can crunch through a series in a day.

I’d be lying if it still wasn’t in the back of my mind. Just because I haven’t found a good enough place for finding shows that are….honest and controversial enough. But a part of me also wonders if it’s really something I should be spending any additional time on…..feeding this addiction I have a love/hate relationship with.

But what would I write a review about? That a show is good, worth watching, or is utter trash?

I might probably elaborate further.

Using Band of Brothers as an example, something I felt is how susceptible I am to marketing. The amount of smoking and drinking I saw made me think more and more about doing both.

Thankfully, smoking is too great of a hurdle for me mentally but this has resulted in three straight days of drinking beer. This is rather unusual for me as I might have one to two glasses of beer a month in normal circumstances.

Maybe it’s because the show makes you feel closer to the characters by going back and forth between the drama and the real-life interviews. Maybe it’s because a part of me wants to emulate these individuals.

Another fascinating learning was on military org. structures. I was getting quite confused with the differences between platoons, divisions, companies, squads, etc… I also didn’t understand the chain of command from privates, sergeants, lieutenants, and captains. So here’s a breakdown for you too.

The most fascinating part is the breakdown of squads, platoons, and companies. Most squads have 4-10 men each with a sergeant leading it. Each platoon has about 2 squads with a lieutenant and each company has 3-5 platoons and is led by a captain. Each company will have between 100-200 people…making it the size of many businesses.

As the show follows the journey of Easy Company…with a portion of the story focused on Major Dick Winters as he moves from being a lieutenant of platoon 2 to running a battalion (4-6 companies)….I couldn’t help but focus on the role of leadership and the structure.

While each squad has a group of 4-10 close-knit groups, each platoon has a group of ~5 with a mix of the lieutenant and sergeants and staff sergeants that lead the platoon. Then there is a group of 3-5 lieutenants with the captain for the company.

It’s a structure where decision making, collaborating, and execution are constantly whittled down to small units of people. Yes, there is a chain of command but at each level, it’s a small group always working together. Evolutionary biologists will say this is in line with the hunting squads we’ve evolved to gravitate towards and maybe that’s it.

But from the popular saying of “you are who your 5 closest friends are”, not only are we attracted to small tight-knit groups but anything outside of a group of 10 might just break down. Despite Dunbar saying people can hold relationships with 150 people before forgetting the names of subsequent new meetings….the ability to closely work with someone and form a strong bond may deteriorate after 5-10.

Then there is the frustrating process of picking the leader. One of the points of continued frustration for me…enough so that I’m saying “for fuck’s sake” out loud with headphones on to scare my partner….is when leaders all put in place of power purely based on pedigree and connections.

Sounds exactly like what we see in jobs. The soldiers too mock the "rich boy from Yale” who automatically starts as a lieutenant and subsequently gets a squad murdered because he has no idea what the hell he is doing. He was placed into Easy Company to gain “combat experience” for his resume so he could be promoted to some other area in the Army.

Once again, resume padding is at work for those who live and die by pedigree and prestige over substance. Like the “Intellectual Yet Idiot” per Taleb.

Sometimes the right decision is made and promotions are granted from within the ranks. It would seem logical to have a platoon be led by a lieutenant who has been promoted from being a sergeant in one of two squads. Yet this isn’t always the case. But if you were leading men into battle….how could you expect to lead in this kind of life and death situation without any trust (hence loyalty) from your men?

It just boggles the mind that this isn’t the norm. Yes, there are times when some move into leadership positions from another company but the difference is that they are experienced in combat.

This is probably the reservation startups feel when they think about bringing on some 25-year old from a hotshot consulting or banking job from a prestigious school. The kid isn’t battle-tested but has high expectations. Yes, the world of consulting can feel like a battle in each project but it’s nothing like the kill or be killed life of startups.

Hence, it only seems to be the obvious decision to always promote a leader internally. That should always be the first decision for any organization. The times when Easy Company does not do this is when there isn’t anyone the captain believes will be a good enough leader. Then they will think about bringing someone from another company and that is probably what businesses are signaling when they bring on outside people into their leadership team.

The reason Easy Company had to bring in outsiders is because many of their good leaders got injured or killed in the war. Most businesses don’t have that issue. Rather, it’s a problem of retention vs. the next best opportunity. Hence, I have a hard time not thinking the business has an organization that has failed to retain strong performers and/or failed to develop leaders. Either way, one that brings in lots of people from outside to lead probably has some trouble within.

Before this thought runs too long I will end it there for today. I had thought about making this into a kind of review for the show but simply, it was 10/10, and I was very sad it ended so soon. I would’ve liked it to be 10 seasons with 240 episodes.

But it once again left me thinking deeper about leadership, organizations, and some models I can carry over to investing.