Loyalty Without Growth Is Not Loyalty
- Marcus D. Taylor, MBA
- Dec 22, 2025
- 3 min read
Thesis
Loyalty that resists growth is not loyalty at all. It is stagnation protected by habit, defended by tenure, and disguised as tradition.
Who This Is For
This reflection is for leaders, long-standing members, and emerging voices inside organizations who have been told to “stay in line” when asking how the group moves forward. It is especially for those navigating environments where time served is treated as authority and discomfort with change is framed as wisdom.
When Loyalty Becomes a Ceiling
Many organizations confuse loyalty with preservation. Over time, tradition becomes less about purpose and more about protection. People settle into what they know, avoid what they do not, and maintain systems that no longer produce meaningful outcomes. The only reward left is internal affirmation from those who benefit most from the status quo.
When someone identifies areas that need repair, the response is rarely reflection. Instead, the system removes the perceived disruption. That disruption is often the newer member, the younger voice, or the person not fully socialized into inherited norms. Rather than addressing the issue, the group labels the questioner as the issue.
This is how organizations stall while believing they are being loyal.
The Tenure Fallacy
One of the most misused tools in stagnant organizations is tenure.
Phrases like:
“I’ve been here for twenty years.”
“Our organization is different.”
“You don’t understand how we do things.”
are often presented as evidence of authority. In reality, they frequently signal limited exposure rather than expanded understanding.
Time spent inside a single culture does not equal mastery of organizational function. It only proves familiarity with that culture. Tenure does not create a monopoly on insight. It creates comfort.
The Franchise Analogy
Consider a global franchise like McDonald’s.
There are thousands of locations worldwide. Each one follows the same core purpose, mission, and operational principles. The supply chain, branding standards, structural hierarchy, and customer promise are consistent. The difference between locations is culture, not function.
The same applies across industries. Burger chains differ in branding and atmosphere, but they follow shared principles of commerce, logistics, marketing, and organizational structure. When a franchise fails, it is rarely because the model is unique. It is because leadership and culture failed at that location.
Organizations operate the same way.
No one group owns the concept of structure, governance, leadership, or mission. What differs is culture. When someone argues that their organization is fundamentally different, what they are usually defending is not uniqueness but familiarity.
A toxic culture in one organization does not mean all organizations are toxic. It means leadership allowed toxic leadership and toxic followership to take root. That is a management failure, not a structural mystery.
Tradition Is Not the Enemy
Tradition provides identity, continuity, and shared language. When handled responsibly, it grounds people. When handled carelessly, it becomes a weapon.
The issue arises when tradition is no longer explained, only enforced. When its original purpose is forgotten and replaced with rigid defense, it stops serving the mission. New members inherit rules without context and are expected to carry them forward without understanding. Confusion follows. Resistance grows. Engagement fades.
Questioning tradition is not rebellion. It is stewardship.
Respect Versus Submission
This distinction matters.
Respect honors the past.
Submission freezes the present.
Organizations that demand submission under the banner of loyalty eventually lose relevance. They protect systems rather than people and process rather than purpose.
A Simple Loyalty Test
Ask yourself:
Can I explain why this tradition exists without saying “that’s how we’ve always done it”?
Does this practice still serve the current mission and objectives?
Who benefits most from this remaining unchanged?
Would I defend this if I were not personally comfortable within it?
If the answers rely on tenure or control rather than outcomes, loyalty has become avoidance.
A Framework for Responsible Tradition
Healthy organizations do not discard tradition. They re-anchor it.
Tradition Re-Anchoring Framework
Identify the original purpose
Test relevance to current mission and vision
Modify without erasing meaning
Teach the reasoning, not just the ritual
This allows continuity without stagnation and honor without rigidity.
A Personal Observation
I have watched capable people pushed out not because they lacked loyalty, but because they asked better questions than leadership was prepared to answer. The organization did not fail due to rebellion. It failed due to fear.
The Real Cost of Misplaced Loyalty
When loyalty is defined as silence, growth stops. Innovation becomes a threat. Tenure replaces accountability. Culture calcifies. Eventually, the organization becomes very good at preserving itself and very poor at serving its purpose.
That is not loyalty. That is self-protection.
Final Challenge
If loyalty requires blindness, who benefits from that blindness?
And who pays the price when the mission stalls while tradition stands guard?
True loyalty strengthens an organization by insisting it grow, adapt, and remain accountable to why it exists. Anything less is comfort masquerading as commitment.
Comments