The 20th-century view of shareholder primacy is flawed. By focusing first on creating wins for all stakeholders—customers, employees, suppliers, and society—companies build a sustainable, beloved enterprise that paradoxically delivers superior returns to shareholders in the long run.

Leading sovereign funds like Saudi Arabia's PIF and New Mexico's SIC are evolving beyond generating returns. They are now the primary policy tools for ambitious national goals, such as transitioning to a net-zero economy or funding universal childcare, directly tying investment success to tangible societal outcomes.

The current political and regulatory environment means running a biotech company is no longer just about science and capital. CEOs must now actively engage in policy discussions and lobby legislators to ensure the ecosystem remains favorable for innovation. Ignoring politics is no longer an option.

The current movement towards impact-focused business is not just a trend but a fundamental economic succession. Just as the tech revolution reshaped global industries, the impact revolution is now establishing a new paradigm where companies are valued on their ability to create both profit and positive contributions to society and the planet.

Amid political polarization, explicit ESG investing has faded. However, capital continues to flow into energy projects under the more neutral label of "infrastructure." This allows investors to support traditional and transitional energy development while avoiding the controversy associated with the ESG moniker.

The most profound innovations in history, like vaccines, PCs, and air travel, distributed value broadly to society rather than being captured by a few corporations. AI could follow this pattern, benefiting the public more than a handful of tech giants, especially with geopolitical pressures forcing commoditization.

The current model of capitalism prioritizes profit above all. A more sustainable and just version would reorder the priorities: first, advance a greater cause; second, protect the people and places you operate in; and third, generate profit as the means to continue the first two indefinitely.

Professor Andy Hall asserts that public pressure on AI labs to solve societal problems only exists because people no longer believe the government is capable of doing so. In a functioning democracy, companies could simply defer to government regulation, but public distrust forces them into a quasi-governmental role.

Instead of focusing on marginal emissions cuts, companies should leverage their unique capabilities to solve hard problems. This means acting as early buyers for new green technologies or investing in R&D within their supply chains, creating new markets for the entire industry.