will work with anybody who is deeply committed to protecting clean air, clean water, healthy soils. I haven't seen a lot of indication that that is the case." What distinguishes Gellert from the archetype of the activist CEO is his non-partisan position. He says it plainly: Patagonia is not "an extension of the Democratic Party." The company has had battles with the Biden administration, with Obama, "as far back as you want to go." The compass is ecological, not political. But in a country where science itself is under attack, simply defending facts becomes an act of resistance: "The attacks on scientists and science is something I would have never imagined." For the Capacity Score, this positioning is a Level 3 signal: the leader does not negotiate the purpose according to the political context. The mission (protect the natural world) takes precedence over institutional relationships. This is the posture of an architect — rebuilding despite a hostile environment — but not yet that of a gardener (N4) who would co-evolve with institutions to transform the system. Gellert confronts; he does not co-build with political power. Functional democracy is stated as a condition ( "a healthy planet, thriving communities depends on a functioning democracy" ) but Patagonia has no strategy to contribute to strengthening it beyond advocacy. 1.2 The CEO with two registers: planetary urgency and commercial pragmatism Analysis of Gellert's public discourse reveals two coexisting registers — one activist at Level 3-4, the other entrepreneurial at Level 3 — which, unlike Michelin where they are dissociated, are hierarchised here: activism IS the business. Activist register (Masters of Scale, public statements). Gellert speaks of truth, threats, combat. The vocabulary is visceral: "telling the goddamn truth about what's happening in the world," "a shit storm of threat after threat every day." The posture is that of a whistleblower who refuses self-censorship: "What you might describe as being outspoken, I would call truth-telling." Anticipatory compliance — self-censoring in the face of a punitive administration — is explicitly rejected, with a strategic nuance: "We need to be very strategic, very thoughtful. Where we can be truly authentic, it's around business and environmental and climate issues." Entrepreneurial register (Kim interview, business questions). The vocabulary shifts: margin, mission, model, impact. Gellert is categorical: "Without a margin, there is no mission." Patagonia is "without any ambiguity a for-profit business." But the relationship to growth is fundamentally different from the dominant paradigm: "We are not a growth-oriented company." Growth is accepted as "a necessary evil of sorts," useful when it takes market share from competitors "who make a lesser product or think about business differently."
Register
Masters of Scale
Kim Interview
Topic
Protecting the natural world Truth, threats, fight, goddamn
Business model and growth Margin, mission, impact, growth
Vocabulary
Posture Horizon
Whistleblower
Responsible entrepreneur
Planetary urgency
Business viability Selective strategy
Relationship to power
Confrontation ("sued Trump")
Emotional lexicon Lucidity, pragmatism, pride The structural difference from Michelin is here: at Michelin, Menegaux's two registers (humanist and industrial) are dissociated — the HR Congress and the Senate produce two parallel discourses that do not converge. At Patagonia, the registers are hierarchised: protecting the natural world is "the reason we exist — it's not about money, it's not about being the biggest player." Business serves the mission, not the reverse. This hierarchy has been inscribed in the ownership structure since 2022. Worry, hope, anger Yet regeneration would integrate both registers into a single framework: economic activity (selling clothes) and contribution to living systems (restoring ecosystems) would no longer be two hierarchised objectives but the two faces of the same model. Gellert senses this ( "growth in impact rather than growth in revenue" ) but does not formulate it in regenerative terms. 1.3 The ownership structure as a rupture act: Holdfast and the Purpose Trust The equivalent of the "virtuous dynamic with employees" at Michelin is, at Patagonia, the ownership restructuring. This is the founding act that differentiates Patagonia from every other company in its sector — and perhaps from any company of this size, public or private. In 2021, in the thick of COVID, Yvon Chouinard asked Gellert to "settle the future of the company." Gellert recalls: "The first time he said that to me, I came back a week later and he asked: 'So, where are we?' I said: 'My God, are you kidding me? I completely ignored that all week.'" The process would take 12 to 18 months, with a very tight circle around the Chouinard family. The working principle: list all the things the family wants to preserve, all those it refuses — then reduce to two or three priorities. The two priorities retained: (1) Channel far larger financial flows to the natural world, immediately. (2) Ensure that Patagonia can continue to exist as a company imbued with its values. These two objectives are, as Gellert notes, "in conflict": selling maximises flows but loses control of values; keeping preserves values but limits flows. The solution implemented is a two-tier architecture. A Perpetual Purpose Trust sits above the board of directors and ensures the mission does not drift — "so that people like me can't derail this thing." Below it, a series of 501(c)(4)s grouped under the Holdfast Collective receive every year all profits not reinvested in the company. Holdfast funds land acquisition, support for grassroots organisations, and large-scale conservation projects. In parallel, the historical device continues: 1% for the Planet, co-founded by Chouinard in 2002, draws 1% of revenue (whether the company is profitable or not) for on-the-ground environmental organisations — roughly $14–15 million per year. The original "Earth
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker