Inside CVC: Resilience Over Sovereignty: Philipp Mueller on Europe’s Strategy for a Disrupted World

In this episode, Philipp Mueller, Vice President, Public Sector at DriveLock and Co-Founder of the European Resilience Summit Series, joins Inside CVC to explore why resilience — not sovereignty — is becoming Europe’s defining strategy in an age of constant disruption.

He shares how leaders can rethink governance, investment, and collaboration around adaptation and trust rather than borders and control. Philipp, Steve, and Philipp Willigmann discuss:

• How resilience shifts from a defensive posture to an enabling mindset
• Why “flows, not borders” defines the new logic of global management
• The four pillars of European resilience and what they mean for business
• The role of corporate leaders as ethical guardrails amid rising division

In a world defined by disruption, what if resilience — not sovereignty — were the true measure of strength?

Transcript

Steve: 0:01

Welcome to Inside CVC, the podcast that brings together leaders in innovation and capital investment to explore the trends shaping the business of corporate venture capital. I'm your host, Steve Schmidt, and together with Philip Willingman, we're speaking to corporate investors, entrepreneurs, and ecosystem builders driving the future of innovation. InsideCVC is brought to you by UPath Advisors, helping corporations and startups unlock sustainable growth through strategic partnerships. To learn more, visit upath.com. That's the letter Up-enpath.com. And to catch up on all of our episodes, search InsideCVC on your favorite podcast platform or visit upath.com forward slash podcast. Today we're joined by Philip Mueller, Vice President of Public Sector at DriveLock and co-founder of the European Resilience Summit series. Phillips' career spans academia, government, and technology leadership at AWS and DXC, and his work sits at the intersection of cybersecurity, governance, and global collaboration. He argues that resilience, not sovereignty, is the defining strategy for Europe. In this conversation, we explore how leaders can rethink strategy and governance for a world defined by constant disruption. We discuss why resilience is an enabling mindset rather than a defensive one, how Europe's dependencies are reshaping its concept of sovereignty, the four pillars of European resilience, and the role of business as an ethical guardrail in a divided world. In a world defined by disruption, what if resilience, not sovereignty, were the true measure of strength? Philip Mueller joins us to unpack that idea.

Philipp M.: 1:51

I guess I have a bit of a forest gump background. So I've spent 10 to 15 years as a professor in academia, um, tried to bring democracy to Mexico at some point, and then was was actually hired into industry um in the White House and on one of those trips where government comes to visit and they brought academics and industry. And then one industry guy asked me, don't you want to do something um with your life and grow up? But then ever since I've been on this ride web of learning, and it's it's been first working for a systems integrator DXC for several years, leading the European public sector business at the end, then AWS, where where I did business development essentially in the field of um government, again, dealing with issues of how do you build cloud computing that actually works for governments in Europe. Now I'm working for German cybersecurity company, Drivelock. And what we do there is um we really care about hardening organizations on the one hand, and on the other hand, trying to build the community of companies that that build European resilience.

Steve: 3:08

You've argued in your work that resilience, not sovereignty, is the defining strategy for Europe. Why why does that distinction matter for corporates and boardroom leaders navigating what you describe is disruption and in today's age, constant disruption?

Philipp M.: 3:27

Constant disruption. In some ways, I mean, we could even go back to the very, very, very old Greeks, i.e., Heraclit, um, who would who distinguish two types of um worlds we could live in. One one he calls the world of stasis, and that's the world we would call the world of optimization and efficiency, and and things will be the same tomorrow as they are today. And um, the other world would be a world of flux, i.e., constant change, constant disruption, um, that you've you've just been alluding to. And um, living in such a world, we need to have frameworks that allow us to deal with that world. And um, I mean, what do we do at the sea level essentially? We're we're far away from from the actual manufacturing. Um, and so so we need to have frameworks that allow us to understand what's going on. And um, and there, my argument is sovereignty, i.e., a framework that's about drawing borders around companies, um, nation states, is not a useful way of imagining how we work, how we get stuff done in today's world. And um, resilience, um, a concept that allows us to think about adaptation, about contextualization, about thriving in times of disruption, um, is is much better at allowing us to think about what we could actually do in terms of assigning ownership for tax, um, asking questions of of those owners, um, developing KPIs to actually get stuff done. So that's that's my thinking there. And again, I mean, we should never forget um words are just frames or frames of reference or frameworks or or ways of imagining the world out there.

Steve: 5:24

It's interesting you use the word words, right? Because the word resilience, I think, is often equated with protection, walls, right? Getting through disruption, getting through uh tough times, if you will, preparing for that you know rainy day. What makes resilience an enabling mindset rather than a defensive one? And how does you know what you've described as a sovereignty of agency help Europe act with confidence amid all of this uncertainty?

Philipp M.: 5:56

We were thinking about this. And um, it was it was a group of us um who started something called the European Resilience Summit series a while ago, and we were we were reflecting on is resilience the word we want to be out there? And um, and what we learned when when when we asked ourselves about it, it was really about three things. One is about adaptation. So the ability to not build like a rigid um wall around an organization or a nation or or an idea like the European Union, but actually um um actually something that adapts quite fast. The second the second point was about challenges, and challenges always mean we need to learn new tricks to get stuff done. And so responding to challenges. And then there was a third part, um, which took a while for us to wrap our minds around, but it's like it's really the fun part of responding to these games that are out there, the plays that are being played of enemies, of frenemies, of collaborators, and um, and how we can bring that together and then actually build something that's positive. That's why we in the end, we we we settled on thriving in times of disruption. And and thriving is such a such a beautiful word because it also entails the growth, but also the challenges and also the the necessity of adaptation.

Philipp W.: 7:34

Philippa, thank you for coming on the show. When we talk about resilience, you know, boards and corporates, they often nod and say, Yep, makes sense, sounds good. I think the hard part is also that we do have to face reality, right? And and in Europe, the reality includes also that we have a lot of dependencies when it comes to energy, defense, also increasingly technology. So can Europe truly be resilient if it avoids really confronting uncomfortable truths about its dependencies, not just on China, but also the US and Russia?

Philipp M.: 8:10

Can it? Yes. Do we do we do a really good job at it right now? Probably no. Should we think about it harder? Yes. So, and what does that actually mean? Um, first of all, we need transparency about where we are dependent on others. Now, does that mean we should do everything by ourselves? Probably not. But does that mean we should look at the flows of where we're dependent on each other as something that needs to be managed? Um, very much so. I think there's one framework we've we've been alluding to implicitly, but not explicitly, in the conversations about a few minutes ago, is namely that our world as it's become digital has also become a world where it's much more about flows and much less about borders. Um obviously there are still borders and jurisdiction still matters. That's something we we clearly learned when we're at AWS, and that we needed to build um technologies that stay in one jurisdiction. But but in many ways, it's not so much about borders, but about flows. And that means management also needs to be about flows. We need to move from the idea of the task to the workflow. And in a very, and that's on an organizational level, but uh very much on a societal level, um, we we need to do the same thing. As we're dealing with migration flows, um, as we're dealing with um with um dependencies, and there are different types of management skills. We need to manage flows, then we need to manage borders.

Philipp W.: 9:56

If I let me stick with borders for a little bit longer, but if we stay with the geopolitical challenges we are facing today, um, you know, oftentimes we describe the US as still our protector, right? And and uh Russia as the aggressor. Um, but you know, the geopolitical picture is obviously not as simple. Um, do we also, when it thinks we think about how Europe can you know build real agency, do we need to have a more nuanced realism about power interests and interdependence?

Philipp M.: 10:27

I think we do, and we we need to bring to the foreground some things that we've automatically done well and maybe do more of them. So, for example, Europe in the last 20 years has been incredibly good in bringing foreign students to Europe and um thereby building a network of soft power. Europe over the last hundred years has been incredibly good in ensuring that trade fairs still happen in Europe. Europe is probably best in a world that's a globalized world. And right now, because that world is is changing and there's a lot more disruption and thrive and geopolitical uncertainty than we've we've seen in the last 10 years, 20 years, maybe. Maybe we need to figure out how to build on these strengths that we have instead of flagellating ourselves for things we're not so good at.

Steve: 11:31

You've mentioned the European Resilience Summit a couple of times in this conversation. For those those of our listeners that aren't familiar with it, can you describe what it is, why you started it, the mission that the European Resilience Summit is on?

Philipp M.: 11:47

So it's it's a fairly embarrassing story, actually, because I was I was this February, I was in Italy in Milano, and um in an event, and there was someone who's like doing a fantastic project, and and they they treated us like kings. So we got to see The Last Supper and enjoyed the all this beauty of the Renaissance um um um humanistic world, world perspective. And um and and then later in the evening, I thought to myself, well, would I buy from them? Would I buy Italian? Um and my answer was like I don't know, because like I normally live in my German bubble. And then I was thinking, this is not good. Like we talk about Europe all the time, but we live in our national bubbles. And um we need to do something about that. And the second thought was um sovereignty really frustrates me because not because it's not a good concept, and not because we we don't have to do stuff in Europe by ourselves, but it's because it's it's it's it leads to anxiety and leads to some type of funk. Um and and this and then it leads to um individual interests. Like there, there's there's a group of open source companies that then only push open source, and open source is probably part of the solution, but only part of the solution. And um, and obviously their commercial interests brings them to say open source is the solution to everything, and and so on and so on. So, so or there's a the the German companies say like you need to buy everything from Germany, and there's probably part of that is true, and part of it is you should use best in class technologies from somewhere else, especially if you're in an export, export-driven economy like Germany, right? And um, and so that's when when these two things came came together, European and resilience. And um, I got together with with a friend, um Paul Hama, and he has an um a media company, and so so and he they also organize events, mainly tech events. But we said, why don't we do a summit where we move from one European city to the next so that it's just not a one-off thing, um, and that we actually bring together the local communities. And it in between these summits, why don't we do a series of thinner conversations? And then we asked ourselves, well, how do we operationalize um um resilience? And I'm not sure where we've got it fully right. We said it's actually about four things, four different dimensions. So you need to be not ambidextrous, but actually polydextrous um on this one. And um, the number one question is how do we harden organizations? So, how do we make sure that organizations survive um an onslaught or survive, are able to adapt, to recover, um, and um to thrive in in this more complex geopolitical environment. The second one is how do we build a European industry where European companies, just because they know each other, work together, you probably know the the Israeli cybersecurity community. They're doing an amazing job in just like working with each other and helping each other, and thereby also helping helping their customer organizations. So um, so so that's that's really that question. The third question, which is the one that normally is also like mixed in into everything else, and it needs to be it needs its separate track, it needs its separate um cap capabilities, is the question of how do we work with global best in class companies in so that they don't decrease but increase our resilience, our ability to get stuff done. And there's there's two aspects there, essentially. There's the data issue, is like how do we make sure that our data is not being misused or is that being listened to? And the second one is the operational question is like, what if crisis hits? Um, how do we ensure business continuity, essentially? Um and um and there are technological and organizational measures to deal with that. Um the last question, and this is also why I'm so excited to be talking to you guys, because I think that's what you're also doing is um we need to build communities that that learn from and with each other in times of peace, and that you that that trust each other so that if there's a crisis or a war or something, you just pick up the phone, you call them, and then you work together. Um and and these are four very different skill sets you need. And probably not everyone's good at all of them. So you guys are amazing at community building, and you're probably really good at industry building too. That's that's how I've gotten to know you. But um, I'm not sure how interested you are in hardening organizations or in working with the hyperscalers. But you don't have to, right? We can have different people to do different things. But it's really for us, these are the four um dimensions we think are critical for European resilience. But I still think we might be missing something. So maybe if if some of our listeners here now come up with something that we're missing, then then shoot me in a message and tell me and we'll put that onto the agenda.

Philipp W.: 17:21

Well, Philip, if if if we are um you know uh thinking about going a bit down into the uh from the macro level, right? And if we if we translate resilience into what does it what does it mean for corporations, right? Uh it's it's also a business capability. So the same dependencies we talk about at the geopolitical level uh show up in large corporations, right? It goes to your point. Are you going to buy the product in Italy, right? Are we going to invest in some state-of-the-art um research lab in France versus in Germany? Why there's all these questions come with it. Um so how how do you translate resilience into an investment strategy? And what does it mean from your perspective for corporations? And you work with some big ones, um, to invest in systems and not silos, right? To really invest in a European system similar to the example you brought up with Israel. And how do you deploy the capital in a way that it's really strengthening the whole ecosystem rather than just one individual venture?

Philipp M.: 18:23

I think some of the abstract principles we use in um, for example, in Amazon, we always used one-way door and two-way door decisions. So one-way door decisions being decisions that you you make, and um um, and if you make them, you can't step back again. Um, and therefore you need a lot of information on them. And two-way door decisions are decisions where you you could, at a cost, just go back, and these you should take as fast as possible. Um, so I think that type of thinking, principled thinking, makes sense. Moving decision making to the edge obviously makes sense. We we talked a bit about Heraclit this and about flux versus stasis. And if we're in this aestasis world, we need to optimize for it because that's the competitive advantage we get. Um, and and I think we've all been trained in stasis worlds, and so we've built supply chains that that are um fragile but super efficient. Um and now we need to move back to a world where things tomorrow will be different from today. And so we need to build the supply chains that are less fragile uh but more adaptable.

Philipp W.: 19:38

I do think one you know, one piece maybe bringing bringing us back to like you know how how much the political system or the state actually is is trying to take influence in Europe, uh, you know, to create social systems and so on and so forth. And I feel like you know, there's probably a way um to have a more European strategy in place where we would say, you know, build on the strengths we have, and then to say, well, in order for us as a European continent and and society to be successful, we do need to uh you know accept the fact that you know we have to invest in certain areas and we have to double down, right? I don't think, you know, I'm just giving the example of Germany here for a moment, you know, building out two or three AI hubs in Germany um will not really support us uh to become like the leading AI um country or the leading AI group in in Europe. So it might might be much better to say, okay, well, we should double down on one location. Uh, you know, I'm from Berlin. We also always love to talk between Berlin and Munich, you know, and have these little fights where say, well, maybe it's good to have one superpower AI center in Munich, uh, and therefore uh we have a different um you know focus in a different region and really build around that and then have corporations behind it who can lean in and kind of can can plan according accordingly so that um you know we can um yeah, combine investments, combine funding, uh, and use this as a way to to really double down in some areas uh to build growth and strengths. Um that's will be one way to think about it.

Philipp M.: 21:13

Yeah, let me let me so so if the world's a world of we're very big infrastructures and bringing people together is what is needed, then I think that's the right right approach. Um so if we're thinking about AI gigafactories, um then that's clearly that. Now, on the other hand, I I I'm from from this part of Germany where um the Swabian Alp, um which is an interesting place because roughly 800,000 years ago the Neanderthals arrived there, and then like like 80,000 years, Homo sapiens, and then they they actually mingled. Um, and um and that's where they developed um the cloud of the cloud of the stone age, which was um um spirituality and like um sculptures and paintings, and so that you could externalize brains into something. And um and there even even today you have a lot of these hidden champions, um, like Lieper, like Romage, like um and so on and so on. Um, some of them I don't even know. Um, and and for example, good friend of mine who is that and and his wife, both Stanford PhDs, um, they they took jobs at this Max Planck Institute for Intelligence Systems and um and um eight eight years ago, roughly. And then they brought in all their buddies. Um, and by now Tübing Stuttgart has become, at least in robotics and AI, probably one of the top three places globally. And um, and that would have not happened if we would have all clustered everything into Berlin or into into into into Munich. Um, because the magic of how they got people to come to Germany was they basically took them to the Christmas markets. Um, they're very they're both very smart people. And so they took them to the Christmas markets, they showed them the kindergartens, um, they showed them the free schools, um, they showed them the swimming pools, um, the communic, the municipal swimming pools, and so on. And that's how they got each of those top superstars from Stanford and from Harvard and from wherever they came from. So maybe, maybe, maybe centralization is right for some things, but not for everything. Um, so so I think the beauty of Europe might be a connected heterogeneity or connected, um, connected at the edge, or whatever you want to call it. Um, and in some ways on the AI gigafactories, I like we have a farmhouse, and behind the farmhouse, there's there's a big wood. And in that wood, um, very hidden, hidden deep, deeply in the wood, is is a big stone um tower, and it looks like a medieval fortress, but it actually isn't. It's it's a cement factory from the 19th century, and it was like two two kilometers long and hundreds of meters wide and really big. And it was the infrastructure, it was the AI factory, super factory of the of the 19th century. Um, and um, but nobody needed it in the end. And so the forests have taken over again. And in some ways, with some of those infrastructures, similar things will happen. Not sure where and how and what, and then and and again, um, but but again, when once you've seen such a place, um, it's quite humbling. Okay, I have one more thing on on this one. So, so here's what I think is the magic sauce of Europe. Um, and again, this comes right from the conversation Philip and I had. Um, and then but not sure if Philip will agree, but it's and it goes back to not everything being expensive here and and the social security being fairly okay. So most people in Europe actually aspire to be middle class, they don't aspire to be rich. And um, even in Stuttgart, where everyone works for Porsche or Mercedes, they drive gray Porsches. So that no one sees that it's actually a 150,000 euro car. Um, but so they aspire to they aspire to be with their neighbors. Um and um because of that, we have a little part of their entrepreneurial spirit that that really is more willing to go for purpose than in other parts of the world. And that again allows you to do organizations that are much cheaper than in other places, again, reducing GDP in some way, um, but increasing output. So, for example, take the Technical University of Munich, produces like an amazing amount of engineers at a price point that's roughly a tenth of what an MIT engineer costs. And the reason is because they don't have to have, they don't have all the overhead. So, so maybe this idea from the early internet, well, if you can do a product for free at first, um, then you can grow, you can scale much better because you don't have the you you don't produce all that cost of the overhead cost of building, etc. These types of things. So maybe something is there. So the beauty is not that Europeans are better pre-group. No one, they're not. The beauty is because they're not forced to to aspire to being being top of the pub, um, they can actually build things that matter. And if we use more of that, um, I think we can we can get stuff done.

Steve: 27:01

Philip, thank you so much. I'm I'm curious, and let's let's maybe close on this question. Uh in a world where we're seeing all of division and arise in many parts of the world, nationalism, and at the same time, this need to create resiliency, whether it's supply chain, whether it's in job growth, GDP growth, all of these wonderful areas. Do you see businesses and maybe business leaders becoming an an emerging guardrail against all of that geopolitical discourse, that division?

Philipp M.: 27:38

That's an amazing question. And and and obviously the simple answer is yes, I hope so. But um the more complex one is is um is the ethical aspect of it. We we for the last uh 30 uh years we've tried uh to take ethics out of the realm of business. So we've reintroduced it at some point, but but we've really like with this idea of shareholder value maximization, we've said uh ethics is the realm of politics and of individuals. So I do think um there is something there, but we need to be very careful um because businesses are there to make money. I wouldn't only want to bet on that. And so I would want um to have a political system, maybe, maybe, maybe out of Europe, um, jumpstart or jumpstarting out of Europe that goes back to actually celebrating multilateralism and multilateral institutions.

Steve: 28:52

That was Philip Mueller sharing how resilience can serve as both a management framework and a societal mindset, one that helps leaders move from protection towards progress. To learn more about Philip and the European Resilience Summit, connect with him on LinkedIn at Philip Mueller or visit drivelock.com. For more insight and upcoming episodes, visit UPath.com forward slash podcast. I'm Steve Schmidt alongside Philip Willardman. Thanks for listening, and we'll see you next time on Inside CBC.