What if companies do not fail because they ignore the future, but because they prepare for it?  Business history is usually told through reassuring stories about complacency. Kodak failed to understand digital photography. Nokia missed the smartphone. Detroit underestimated electric vehicles. The lesson appears obvious: pay attention, embrace change and invest early. There is only one problem. The story is often wrong. The global automobile industry did not ignore the future. For more than a decade, its leaders talked incessantly about electrification, autonomous driving, connectivity, software and shared mobility. They invested enormous sums, acquired technology companies, hired software engineers, launched electric vehicles and reorganized themselves around the future they believed was coming. And yet many became weaker. Poisoned asks why?Drawing on more than two dozen interviews across the automotive world, Bryan Reimer and Magnus Lindkvist examine an industry in which almost every important prediction contained some truth, yet the resulting picture of the future proved profoundly misleading. Electric vehicles arrived, but as part of a much larger system involving batteries, charging infrastructure, industrial policy, software and China. Cars became connected, but this changed the economics and architecture of the industry in unexpected ways. Automation advanced, but not along the neat trajectory that had been forecast. Technologies expected to reinforce one another began competing for capital, talent and management attention. The problem was not stupidity, complacency or a failure to notice change. It was incompleteness. Human beings simplify the future in predictable ways. Organizations then magnify those distortions through their structures, incentives, histories and identities. Poisoned traces how this happens and introduces five organizational poisons — Time, Status, Identity, True Lies and the Edges — that can turn sensible preparation for the future into a source of strategic weakness. The automobile industry provides the book's central case study, but its predicament is increasingly universal. Technology, geopolitics, capital, consumer behaviour and business models are colliding across almost every established industry. The companies most at risk may therefore be neither the ignorant nor the complacent. They may be the ones confidently preparing for a future that is real, important — and dangerously incomplete. Poisoned offers a different way to think about disruption. The challenge is not simply to identify the next big trend. It is to see how technologies, institutions, incentives and behaviours interact; to recognise what the dominant story leaves out; and to prevent yesterday's assumptions about tomorrow from becoming today's strategy.

What if companies do not fail because they ignore the future, but because they prepare for it?  Business history is usually told through reassuring stories about complacency. Kodak failed to understand digital photography. Nokia missed the smartphone. Detroit underestimated electric vehicles. The lesson appears obvious: pay attention, embrace change and invest early. There is only one problem. The story is often wrong. The global automobile industry did not ignore the future. For more than a decade, its leaders talked incessantly about electrification, autonomous driving, connectivity, software and shared mobility. They invested enormous sums, acquired technology companies, hired software engineers, launched electric vehicles and reorganized themselves around the future they believed was coming. And yet many became weaker. Poisoned asks why?Drawing on more than two dozen interviews across the automotive world, Bryan Reimer and Magnus Lindkvist examine an industry in which almost every important prediction contained some truth, yet the resulting picture of the future proved profoundly misleading. Electric vehicles arrived, but as part of a much larger system involving batteries, charging infrastructure, industrial policy, software and China. Cars became connected, but this changed the economics and architecture of the industry in unexpected ways. Automation advanced, but not along the neat trajectory that had been forecast. Technologies expected to reinforce one another began competing for capital, talent and management attention. The problem was not stupidity, complacency or a failure to notice change. It was incompleteness. Human beings simplify the future in predictable ways. Organizations then magnify those distortions through their structures, incentives, histories and identities. Poisoned traces how this happens and introduces five organizational poisons — Time, Status, Identity, True Lies and the Edges — that can turn sensible preparation for the future into a source of strategic weakness. The automobile industry provides the book's central case study, but its predicament is increasingly universal. Technology, geopolitics, capital, consumer behaviour and business models are colliding across almost every established industry. The companies most at risk may therefore be neither the ignorant nor the complacent. They may be the ones confidently preparing for a future that is real, important — and dangerously incomplete. Poisoned offers a different way to think about disruption. The challenge is not simply to identify the next big trend. It is to see how technologies, institutions, incentives and behaviours interact; to recognise what the dominant story leaves out; and to prevent yesterday's assumptions about tomorrow from becoming today's strategy.

What if companies do not fail because they ignore the future, but because they prepare for it?  Business history is usually told through reassuring stories about complacency. Kodak failed to understand digital photography. Nokia missed the smartphone. Detroit underestimated electric vehicles. The lesson appears obvious: pay attention, embrace change and invest early. There is only one problem. The story is often wrong. The global automobile industry did not ignore the future. For more than a decade, its leaders talked incessantly about electrification, autonomous driving, connectivity, software and shared mobility. They invested enormous sums, acquired technology companies, hired software engineers, launched electric vehicles and reorganized themselves around the future they believed was coming. And yet many became weaker. Poisoned asks why?Drawing on more than two dozen interviews across the automotive world, Bryan Reimer and Magnus Lindkvist examine an industry in which almost every important prediction contained some truth, yet the resulting picture of the future proved profoundly misleading. Electric vehicles arrived, but as part of a much larger system involving batteries, charging infrastructure, industrial policy, software and China. Cars became connected, but this changed the economics and architecture of the industry in unexpected ways. Automation advanced, but not along the neat trajectory that had been forecast. Technologies expected to reinforce one another began competing for capital, talent and management attention. The problem was not stupidity, complacency or a failure to notice change. It was incompleteness. Human beings simplify the future in predictable ways. Organizations then magnify those distortions through their structures, incentives, histories and identities. Poisoned traces how this happens and introduces five organizational poisons — Time, Status, Identity, True Lies and the Edges — that can turn sensible preparation for the future into a source of strategic weakness. The automobile industry provides the book's central case study, but its predicament is increasingly universal. Technology, geopolitics, capital, consumer behaviour and business models are colliding across almost every established industry. The companies most at risk may therefore be neither the ignorant nor the complacent. They may be the ones confidently preparing for a future that is real, important — and dangerously incomplete. Poisoned offers a different way to think about disruption. The challenge is not simply to identify the next big trend. It is to see how technologies, institutions, incentives and behaviours interact; to recognise what the dominant story leaves out; and to prevent yesterday's assumptions about tomorrow from becoming today's strategy.