In his opening remarks at the Black Hat conference a couple of weeks ago, the event founder, Jeff Moss, stressed the importance of mission and culture for effective cybersecurity. If that had come later in the week at DEF CON, the other conference Moss also created, I would have credited those ideas to The Dark Tangent. Hold that thought until tomorrow.
This year, Moss veered away from his traditional technical focus in his kickoff speech and instead concentrated on people. He acknowledged that many of us feel like we are living in uncertain times. The world is chaotic, and the cybersecurity industry is no exception. Artificial intelligence looms large, with a lot of hype that promises transformational disruption that introduces a myriad of new risks. Competition is intensifying, regulatory and trade pressures are mounting, while political and social crosswinds complicate every decision. As Moss put it, these challenges are not something AI will solve because each of these requires human and personal judgment.
In moments of churn and uncertainty, mission and culture become paramount. Teams need adaptability and resilience. You cannot simply spend your way to excellence by hiring an “A team” unless you have billions of dollars to throw around. Instead, the foundation of a strong organization is a clear purpose that people believe in. To borrow from Moss’s exact phrasing, “If you don’t have a mission, you better have a lot of [expletive] money.”
Culture is not a side note, but rather a limiting factor of what is possible. A strategy that runs counter to culture will never survive. No matter how elegant the plan, if the organization’s values and norms are misaligned, execution will fail. That idea resonated with me as it is the core concept that underpins The Fundamentals of Secure Aviation Design, the guidebook I spent the better part of the past couple of years working on.
The same concepts also hold true for tennis.
The USTA’s current mission statement is “Grow tennis to inspire healthier people and communities everywhere.” That phrasing is broad and in some ways empowering. “People and communities” can encompass many forms of tennis engagement. Yet in practice, I perceive that the mission statement is used as a justification for the prioritization of league tennis over tournaments. League culture undeniably fuels growth, but when left unchecked, it risks overshadowing other forms of play. That fails to support vital communities.
USTA League cannot serve every constituency. Players who fall at the extremes of the competitive mastery bell curve within their local areas, such as highly competitive seniors or those committed to tournament play, often find themselves without the critical mass required to sustain meaningful engagement. If those communities are neglected simply because they are small or perceived as unsustainable, then the culture is no longer aligned with the mission. Growth should not create a monoculture of exclusion.
If its mission truly matters, then the USTA must embrace a broad vision of the “communities” it serves. That means ensuring tournament tennis, senior tennis, and other niche but vital playing populations remain viable. A culture that devalues or sidelines small communities risks undermining the very mission it proclaims to advance.
