The ART OF WAR For Startups

[AcademyBridge]

Sun Tzu emphasized the importance of positioning in military strategy. The decision to position an army must be based on both objective conditions in the physical environment and the subjective beliefs of other, competitive factors in that environment. He thought that strategy was not planning in the sense of working through an established list, but rather that it requires quick and appropriate responses to changing conditions. Planning works in a controlled environment; but in a changing environment, competing plans collide, creating unexpected situations.
How to apply THE ART OF WAR in Startups

1. Waging War Successful military campaigns require limiting the cost of competition and conflict. Startup Advice - Successful startups are comprised of people who have worked on startup teams before.
2. Strategic Attack The source of strength is unity, not size. Startup Advice- It’s better to be the team quietly plugging along on a product instead of the team that is at every event, celebrating before they have actual success.
3. Forces Importance of creativity and timing in building an army's momentum. Startup Advice - All startup team members must work hard toward a common goal, but there has to be a reward for doing so.
4. Military Maneuvers How to win confrontations when they are forced upon the commander. Startup Advice - Larger companies should keep startup teams and their product intact after an acquisition.
5. Variations and Adaptability The need for flexibility in an army's responses. Startup Advice - Form strong alliances with other startups and trade services to help each other grow.

Now watch a short animation on: The Art of War - Sun Tzu

Good Luck!
Dr. G.L. Danford

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Ubermensch]

Sun Tzu emphasized the importance of positioning in military strategy.

Thank you for your post, sir. May I ask what makes you a "Dr." (I would be happy to learn that you are a professor of warfare.)

Indeed, Sun-Tzu emphasized the importance of positioning. He did so with his actions. As we see in the famed story of Sun-Tzu defeating an army of 300,000 with a mere 30,000 soldiers. Only his positioning, applying (and teaching grand strategists both centuries, and millennia, in the future) guerrilla warfare, and the principles of Go, can logically explain the most legendary of stories, the stories of war and battle (perhaps eclipsed only by Genghis Kahn's arrival at The Gates of The Shah). And even if you subscribe to the "Sun-Tzu did not exist and was not a real person) doctrine, you cannot deny the affect of The Art of War, even in modern-day warfare. How else does one explain how Vietnam subdued the USA decades ago?

In terms of entrepreneurship, this should give one extraordinary confidence, even if (and perhaps especially because of) he is small in number, for Sun-Tzu advised NOT to rely only on military strength, on mere numbers alone. Numbers, yes, but calculated numbers, calculation done by rigorous thinking and deep contemplation of The Ultimate Strategic Goal.

Translation: Are you small? A one man army, even? Fear not. You can attack a $1,000,000,000,000 - yes, Trillion, with a capital "T" - with proper strategy and tactics. Just ask General Giap and the Vietnamese. They dropped the USA, just like David dropped Goliath, with only one stone: The unbreakable rock of strategy. The rock did not break, even though the USA dropped more bombs on Vietnam than they did in WWII.

As the bombs dropped, and the sky filled with black smoke from the flames of hell below, one can almost hear the voice of Sun-Tzu whispering from The Grave: "Do not rely on military strength alone."

The decision to position an army must be based on both objective conditions in the physical environment and the subjective beliefs of other, competitive factors in that environment. He thought that strategy was not planning in the sense of working through an established list, but rather that it requires quick and appropriate responses to changing conditions.

Indeed, and this is reflected in Robert Greene's favorite Law of the 48 Laws: The 48th Law... Assume Formlessness.

In this chapter, Greene discusses the ancient board games Go and Chess, and how they respectively reflect the dichotomy between Eastern and Western thought regarding strategy. Greene, a huge fan of Sun-Tzu, regards this law as the most important, and in doing so, he aligns himself with Sun-Tzu, one of the few men to truly deserve the title "Master," with a capital M. Musashi, of course, but he already had an M. Like @Mattie. LOL. Ah, I kill myself.

Strategic Attack The source of strength is unity, not size. Startup Advice- It’s better to be the team quietly plugging along on a product instead of the team that is at every event, celebrating before they have actual success.

Absolutely correct. A real hustler stays busy, focused on the bottom line. I had a meeting with a company on the Inc. 500 the other day. You know what it says on their board in the conference room? There's a list. Number one on that list is "Revenue."

In my head I'm thinking, hell yea, these are guys I can do business with. That's basically the Gordon Gekko Greed is Good speech all summed up in one word.

I like to work with busy companies. The business owners I know who win celebrate with their clients. They reward their clients with their time, thus strengthening the bond, causing more business to flow in, in the form of references and repeat business from expanding clients.

I know a guy who tried to celebrate before he got a deal. Fact is, he tried to steal the deal from me. Turns out, he celebrated before he actually had success, because I got the deal, and he lost. (Crush You Enemy Totally)

Now he feels like:

Yea. That's right. F*ck with the Ubermensch again, bitch. See what happens.

But I digress.

Forces Importance of creativity and timing in building an army's momentum. Startup Advice - All startup team members must work hard toward a common goal, but there has to be a reward for doing so.

This definitely reflects one of Sun-Tzu's most important concepts: The Death Ground Strategy. In essence, the Death Ground Strategy states that, because all warfare constitutes life and death, the soldiers must carry this in the hearts and minds at all times. To ensure this, a wise general puts himself and his troops on death ground. When on death ground, the troops must either fight like hell for their lives, or die. American soldiers faced this Biblically horrific plight when they stormed the beaches of Normandy. Sun Tzu faced this when he and his troops invaded Chu. A hustler faces this when he goes all in, when he puts everything - his blood, his life, his money, his honor, his respect, his hopes, his dreams - into his hustle, and fights to the death to win.
.

 

[Mattie]

I love that book. And yes, I agree. Eastern & Western see things differently. I think I learned this a few years back. If you're thinking the same way everyone else is thinking, you will be crushed.

When on death ground, the troops must either fight like hell for their lives, or die. American soldiers faced this Biblically horrific plight when they stormed the beaches of Normandy. Sun Tzu faced this when he and his troops invaded Chu. A hustler faces this when he goes all in, when he puts everything - his blood, his life, his money, his honor, his respect, his hopes, his dreams - into his hustle, and fights to the death to win.

This is very true. I suppose only a certain portion of the population understands this philosophy.

 

[Ubermensch]

I love that book. And yes, I agree. Eastern & Western see things differently. I think I learned this a few years back. If you're thinking the same way everyone else is thinking, you will be crushed.



This is very true. I suppose only a certain portion of the population understands this philosophy.

War is life. That particular piece of wisdom is even quite Biblical. No one can disagree that war is life.

War is also business.

He who masters warfare masters life and business.

I'm with you on the East/West thing. That said, Schwerpunkt is still a really cool word.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Kung Fu Steve]

Ok... I've got a question and an opinion... be warned, I'm tearing into you a bit here so watch out for the teeth!

Question: why does the video on your blog (presumably about this subject you've posted here) teach me how to interview better... not to be a phone-answerer... and not to compete on price?

I'm guessing it's not you in the video but I question why you would put it up there when you have so much other great stuff on there! (Sorry, question also had my silly opinion in it)


Opinions: Comparing business to war has been one of the most frustrating things to me over the years. It's just plain stupid.

Sure, we all want to wake up, go to work on our business and pretend we're more important than we really are (I do, too). But it's definitely not war.

In war, your entire goal is to kill more of their people and break more of their stuff. Whoever kills the most people and breaks the most stuff, wins.

(And please don't quote and/or paraphrase "battles should be won without fighting" just yet...)

Business is about creating something from nothing. Not destroying -- BUILDING. It's about synergy -- where 1+1 = 3.

Yes; there is COMPETITION in business. But competition is waaaay different from war. The very word "competition" in it's original Latin roots means "to conspire together" -- to push each other to become better, stronger, faster, smarter, and MORE successful.

Sure -- it's a blow to all of our male egos (including mine) to realize we are not 5-star generals fighting a war in the battlefield of business... but I think it's an important distinction the the testosterone-heavy teens coming in to our fast lane family to know the difference.

Call it a war for prosperity if you have to... but don't break shit, provide value to people that will improve their lives.

 

[Ubermensch]

The war and business analogy is sound, and the connection between the two is infinitely irrefutable.

The quote below demonstrates how to apply Sun-Tzu to a litany of business situations.

Six Principles of Sun Tzu & the Art of Business
1) Capture your market without destroying it

“Generally in war, the best policy is to take a state intact; to ruin it is inferior to this….For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.” Sun Tzu

Sun Tzu calls this the need to “win-all-without-fighting”. Since the goal of your business is to survive and prosper, you must capture your market. However, you must do so in such a way that your market is not destroyed in the process. A company can do this in several ways, such as attacking parts of the market that are under-served or by using subtle, indirect, and low-key approach that will not draw a competitor’s attention or response. What should be avoided at all costs is a price-war. Research has shown that price attacks draw the quickest and most aggressive responses from competitors, as well as leaving the market drained of profits.

2) Avoid your competitor’s strength, and attack their weakness

“An army may be likened to water, for just as flowing water avoids the heights and hastens to the lowlands, so an army avoids strength and strikes weakness.” Sun Tzu

The Western approach to warfare has spilled over into business competition, leading many companies to launch head-on, direct attacks against their competitor’s strongest point. This approach to business strategy leads to battles of attrition, which end up being very costly for everyone involved. Instead, you should focus on the competition’s weakness, which maximizes your gains while minimizing the use of resources. This, by definition, increases profits.

3) Use foreknowledge & deception to maximize the power of business intelligence.

“Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril” Sun Tzu

To find and exploit your competitor’s weakness requires a deep understanding of their executives’ strategy, capabilities, thoughts and desires, as well as similar depth of knowledge of your own strengths and weaknesses. It is also important to understand the overall competitive and industry trends occurring around you in order to have a feel for the “terrain” on which you will do battle. Conversely, to keep your competitor from utilizing this strategy against you, it is critical to mask your plans and keep them secret.

4) Use speed and preparation to swiftly overcome the competition.

“To rely on rustics and not prepare is the greatest of crimes; to be prepared beforehand for any contingency is the greatest of virtues.” Sun Tzu

To fully exploit foreknowledge and deception, Sun Tzu states that you must be able to act with blinding speed. To move with speed does not mean that you do things hastily. In reality, speed requires much preparation. Reducing the time it takes your company to make decisions, develop products and service customers is critical. To think through and understand potential competitive reactions to your attacks is essential as well.

5) Use alliances and strategic control points in the industry to “shape” your opponents and make them conform to your will.

“Therefore, those skilled in war bring the enemy to the field of battle and are not brought there by him.” Sun Tzu

“Shaping you competition” means changing the rules of contest and making the competition conform to your desires and your actions. It means taking control of the situation away from your competitor and putting it in your own hands. One way of doing so is through the skillful use of alliances. By building a strong web of alliances, the moves of your competitors can be limited. Also, by controlling key strategic points in your industry, you will be able to call the tune to which your competitors dance.

6) Develop your character as a leader to maximize the potential of your employees.

“When one treats people with benevolence, justice and righteousness, and reposes confidence in them, the army will be united in mind and all will be happy to serve their leaders.” Sun Tzu

It takes a special kind of leader to implement these strategic concepts and maximize the tremendous potential of employees. Sun Tzu describes the many traits of the preferred type of leader. The leader should be wise, sincere, humane, courageous, and strict. Leaders must also always be “first in the toils and fatigues of the army”, putting their needs behind those of their troops. It is leaders with character that get the most out of their employees.

These principles have been utilized throughout time in both the military arena and the business world to build creative strategies and achieve lasting success. If you use them properly, they will bring you success as well.

Mark McNeilly offers keynote speeches on the Six Principles.Here is a short introduction to them:

Ok... I've got a question and an opinion... be warned, I'm tearing into you a bit here so watch out for the teeth!

Question: why does the video on your blog (presumably about this subject you've posted here) teach me how to interview better... not to be a phone-answerer... and not to compete on price?

I'm guessing it's not you in the video but I question why you would put it up there when you have so much other great stuff on there! (Sorry, question also had my silly opinion in it)[/QUOTE]

Unless you are Ari Gold going on a paintball rampage (see above), then you don't have literal weapons to fire at the enemy. This does not mean that the art of strategy (as applied to warfare) lacks application to business, and even sports and other realms of life.

http://garyrushin.com/my_blog/busin...s-war-strategy-and-business-strategy-similar/
The Debate—Similar or Dissimilar

A debate exists as to whether business strategy and war strategy are equivalent. The attraction of applying strategic, operational and tactical strategies of war to business is similar. Many principles and tools of war strategies can be applied to assist those in the business world. Some view business and war strategies differently and come up with a new view of how they can be applied.

One dissimilarity with business is that, within the context of past military planning and doctrine, there tended to be, generally, only one enemy and the purpose of the planning activity is to fashion the conditions for a specific, decisive act to bring defeat to the enemy. However, the nature of current warfare has transformed vastly from the days of state-to-state positional warfare and two well-defined enemies fighting within distinct geographic theaters of conflict.

For more than seventy years, war planners have been dealing with asymmetric warfare, fourth generation warfare, low intensity conflict, nonstate actors participating in various wars and skirmishes. As in business, rarely do we deal with a single enemy or a single decisive battle to end a conflict and bring about the defeat or surrender of the single enemy. The Iraq and Afghan wars of conflict are examples of this assessment.

Current Warfare Strategy

In Iraq, the US military and its allies were fighting Iraq’s the Sunni Arab community upon their toppling of Saddam Hussein’s brutal Baathist regime and subsequently these same Iraqi Arab Sunnis allied themselves with US forces to extract from communities the menace and plague of Al Qaeda. Both in Afghanistan and Pakistan, US military forces were fighting alongside of, and supporting, the national security forces of these two nations while the next minute they are combating them directly and indirectly while fighting the Taliban, fragments of Al-Qaeda and different Jihadist combatants.

Accordingly, current warfare strategy, as we know it today, and business strategy have begun to converge with more remarkable similarities than differences. In business, the competitive landscape is generally complex and dynamic. Strategy and tactical interplay are vital in business. Similarly in warfare, the multitude of different stakeholders must be considered. In Afghanistan, the US military must, at the same time, plan and manage relationships encompassing Pakistanis, the Iranians, the Russians and several Afghan clans. Some times they are treated as friends and sometimes as foes. This complex relationship is also trues in business. Look at Apple Computer and Samsung. Both are fighting in the battlefield of the courts over intellectual property rights and at the same time cooperating and collaborating on other projects.

The competition is more vague and often operates over an ill-defined territory. Consequently, modern warfare is more about politics and community action than purely military engagement and its goal is to wear down the various forces working against your army and render them ineffective and unwilling to continue fighting rather than totally eliminating them. An example is Coca Cola versus Pepsi. Both companies have waged a very expensive conflict, however none have the intention of totally destroy the opponent.

Types of Warfare

In large part, warfare strategy, at a tactical level, fosters “kill, capture, destroy” asuch of the military opponent’s capabilities as fast as possible while protecting current forces. In business strategy, parallel tactics are called upon. Types of warfare include:

Limited War—a military example is the US versus the Nicaragua Sandinistas whereas the US used overwhelming superiority to defeat. A business example is Microsoft versus smaller software producers in the 1980s and 1990s. Microsoft used patent trolling techniques and it market dominance to block competition.

Counter-Insurgency (COIN)—a military example is the US versus the Taliban. Although decisive victory probably cannot be achieved within the normal mode of warfare, a COIN strategy use the divide and rule tactic that bifurcates the existing power structure and prevent smaller power groups from linking up. The strategy is designed to fracture the connections between insurgency and the population thus weakening the enemy. A business example is the US versus Microsoft for violating the Sherman Antitrust Act. Microsoft used its WINTEL dominance to crush its competition during the browser wars with Netscape’s Navigator and Opera Software’s Opera browsers. By bundling its Internet Explore web browser into its operating systems (O/S), making it difficult to download competing browsers into the Window O/S, and forming restrictive licensing agreements with its original equipment manufacturers, Microsoft prevented smaller companies effectively from competing or gaining any traction.

Total War—a military example is the Soviet Union versus Nazi Germany. Typically a high intensity conflict of balanced opponents, such wars tend to be a victory at any price, even if truce would be advantageous for both parties during a stage of the war. An example is two of Germany’s most well known brands Volkswagen and Porsche and reclusive industrial families, the Porsches and the Piechs; both belong to the same family line. This resulted in the 2008 majority takeover by Porsche of Volkswagen. The typical strategy is total exhausting of the opponent similar to war.

Conclusion

Correspondingly, purpose of much of the best of current business strategy is to transform the rules of the game in favor of the business. Creating unique market niches based on the first move advantage, and discovering a unique technology as well as product, and process innovation can grab an unquestionable market share based on a combination of these factors that competitors simply cannot weaken. Accordingly, warfare, whether business or military, becomes a series of battles whereby the cleverest “wins”, but where victory is more about the superiority at what you do rather than total dominance leading to a wholesale decimation of the company’s competition.

Strategic Business Warfare Tactics Series:

This it is first of a blog series on business warfare strategies. The series will discuss various war tactics that can be used as competitive strategies for family businesses, entrepreneurs, small businesses, and business executive to thrive in both good and tough market conditions. Sign up at http://garyrushin.com to follow the series.

 

[Ubermensch]

More...

http://www.lifehack.org/articles/pr...applying-sun-tzu’s-teachings-to-business.html

http://iveybusinessjournal.com/publication/in-war-and-business-its-the-terrain-that-matters/

IN WAR AND BUSINESS, IT’S THE TERRAIN THAT MATTERS

Add the dictum, “Know the terrain” to “Know your customer” and you’ve got the two most important principles that a manager needs to follow to compete successfully. At first, and perhaps even later on, the playing field may not be level, but managers who consider the observations of this Ivey Business Journal regular contributor will surely be able to compete with any player, under any conditions.

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War (300 BC.–500 BC), Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince (1532) and Carl von Clausewitz’s On War (1832) have become popular with executives seeking leadership and management insights that might improve the performance and competitiveness of their enterprises and, along the way, advance their own careers. I use Tzu and Machiavelli in a capstone course for MBA students called “The CEO,” and have found them very useful in bringing out key executive principles. I am going to add von Clausewitz in the future.
The CEO course involves 10 separate, two-hour, question-and-answer sessions with 10 different CEOs, as well as considerable additional classroom time to discuss what the CEOs had to say. Tzu, Machiavelli and von Clausewitz make a point that the CEOs continually reference and reinforce. In competitive activities like war, sport and business, knowing the terrain can make all the difference between winning and losing, success and failure.

For executives, substitute the expression “business conditions” for the word “terrain” and you have the concept. If you are the one calling the shots, it is critical you know and understand the world around you that everyone must take as the same given. The terrain is the playing field on which you and everyone else competes, over which no one has control, but on which outcomes often totally depend. Decision makers who do not know and understand the terrain better be lucky.

Listen to Machiavelli on terrain. “He [the prince] should, therefore, never take his mind from this exercise of war, and in peacetime he must train himself more than in time of war.…He must also learn the nature of the terrain, and know how mountains slope, how valleys open, how plains lie, and understand the nature of rivers and swamps; and he should devote much attention to such activities. Such knowledge is useful in two ways: first, one learns to know one’s own country and can better understand how to defend it; second, with the knowledge and experience of the terrain, one can easily comprehend the characteristics of any other terrain that it is necessary to explore for the first time.…A prince who lacks this ability lacks the most important quality in a leader; because this skill teaches you to find the enemy, choose a campsite, lead troops, organize them for battle, and besiege towns to your advantage.” Terrific advice for executives: never take your mind off defending market you have and taking market from others; know the terrain you defend and the terrain over which you will advance.

Sun Tzu devotes a chapter to terrain and the appropriate, associated tactics and strategies. “We may distinguish six kinds of terrain: accessible ground, entangling ground, temporizing ground, narrow passes, precipitous heights, positions at a great distance from the enemy.” Von Clausewitz offers: “There are certain constant factors in any engagement that will affect it to some extent…[one of] these factors [is] the locality or terrain…which can be resolved into a combination of the geographical surroundings and nature of the ground.” Notice the use of the expression “constant factors.” That is the notion of those things that cannot be controlled in a competitive environment; hence, they must be taken as a given by all competitors. Von Clausewitz also devotes a chapter to terrain, which he argues “bears a close and ever-present relation to warfare.”

Tzu, Machiavelli and von Clausewitz were in the war business when war was mainly hand-to-hand-style infantry fighting. Not surprisingly, terrain to them was things like the geography of the land, mountains, lakes and rivers, the weather, the fullness of the moon and the length of the day. Each must clearly be taken as is by the warring parties and exploited through tactics and strategies. For warring executives fighting over the same market, the terrain that must be grasped and then exploited includes demographics, politics, the economy and technology. That is the playing field on which enterprises succeed or fail but over which they have very little say.

First, demographics. Auguste Comte, the French positivist philosopher and coiner of the term “sociology,” famously said, “demographics is destiny.” Every dollar of business revenue involves either directly or indirectly selling something to someone. That makes it important to know who the someones are, how old they are, what sex they are, where they are and so on; the stuff of demographics. It is not possible to run a good business and at the same time ignore its demographics.

Second, politics. Politics is the machinery through which societies determine what the laws and penalties will be. Von Clausewitz’s most famous line links politics and war: “War is not merely a political act, but also a political instrument, a continuation of political relations, a carrying out of the same by other means.”
If you want go run a good business, you better be on top of the terrain that is determined by the political process: taxes; rules, regulations and standards; corporate, trade and securities law; subsidies and grants. And, as well, do not overlook that government plays a huge rule in economic growth, employment, inflation, exports, imports, exchange rates and interest rates.

Third, the economy. The economy is that vast space where goods and services are produced, sold and consumed, jobs are created and destroyed, prices are set and funds flow from savers to investors in stock, bond and money markets. For executives, the key components of the economic terrain are aggregate demand, growth, employment, labour availability, inflation, exchange rates, interest rates, credit, savings and investment. Decision-makers who constantly misjudge the economy will not keep their businesses out of trouble. Time spent on the economic terrain is time well spent.

Fourth, technology. Technology is simply the way we get things done that need to be done. Knowing and properly reacting to where the technology relevant to a business is headed is essential to survival and prosperity.

If you were in the watch business and you did not make the shift from mechanical movement to quartz crystal in a timely fashion (no pun intended), you probably did not make it. The same if you were in the music business and you did not make the transition from pressed vinyl records to tape to disc, or the computation business and you did not make the transition from the slide rule to electronics.

Executives should spend a lot of time thinking about how they make and do the things customers pay them for and how those ways will change in the future. This is one train no business can afford to miss.

One of the great business books of all time is My Years with General Motors by Alfred P. Sloan Jr. Bill Gates said, “My Years with General Motors is probably the best book to read if you want to read only one book about business.” High praise!

Sloan nails the importance of business conditions. “[Executives make business judgements.] The big work behind business judgement is in finding and acknowledging the facts and circumstances concerning technology, the market, and the like in their continuously changing forms.… The field was open to all; technical knowledge flows from a common storehouse of scientific progress; the techniques of production are an open book, and the related instruments of production are available to all. The market is world-wide and there are no favorites except those chosen by the customer.” And he knew why General Motors was in business: “General Motors is an engineering organization. Our operation is to cut metal and in so doing to add value to it.” A goal everyone could get their mind around. No wonder GM came to dominate the business world. How they lost their way is another story.

Add the dictum, “Know the terrain” to “Know your customer” and you’ve got the two most important principles that a manager needs to follow to compete successfully. At first, and perhaps even later on, the playing field may not be level, but managers who consider the observations of this Ivey Business Journal regular contributor will surely be able to compete with any player, under any conditions.

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War (300 BC.–500 BC), Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince (1532) and Carl von Clausewitz’s On War (1832) have become popular with executives seeking leadership and management insights that might improve the performance and competitiveness of their enterprises and, along the way, advance their own careers. I use Tzu and Machiavelli in a capstone course for MBA students called “The CEO,” and have found them very useful in bringing out key executive principles. I am going to add von Clausewitz in the future.
The CEO course involves 10 separate, two-hour, question-and-answer sessions with 10 different CEOs, as well as considerable additional classroom time to discuss what the CEOs had to say. Tzu, Machiavelli and von Clausewitz make a point that the CEOs continually reference and reinforce. In competitive activities like war, sport and business, knowing the terrain can make all the difference between winning and losing, success and failure.

For executives, substitute the expression “business conditions” for the word “terrain” and you have the concept. If you are the one calling the shots, it is critical you know and understand the world around you that everyone must take as the same given. The terrain is the playing field on which you and everyone else competes, over which no one has control, but on which outcomes often totally depend. Decision makers who do not know and understand the terrain better be lucky.
Listen to Machiavelli on terrain. “He [the prince] should, therefore, never take his mind from this exercise of war, and in peacetime he must train himself more than in time of war.…He must also learn the nature of the terrain, and know how mountains slope, how valleys open, how plains lie, and understand the nature of rivers and swamps; and he should devote much attention to such activities. Such knowledge is useful in two ways: first, one learns to know one’s own country and can better understand how to defend it; second, with the knowledge and experience of the terrain, one can easily comprehend the characteristics of any other terrain that it is necessary to explore for the first time.…A prince who lacks this ability lacks the most important quality in a leader; because this skill teaches you to find the enemy, choose a campsite, lead troops, organize them for battle, and besiege towns to your advantage.” Terrific advice for executives: never take your mind off defending market you have and taking market from others; know the terrain you defend and the terrain over which you will advance.

Sun Tzu devotes a chapter to terrain and the appropriate, associated tactics and strategies. “We may distinguish six kinds of terrain: accessible ground, entangling ground, temporizing ground, narrow passes, precipitous heights, positions at a great distance from the enemy.” Von Clausewitz offers: “There are certain constant factors in any engagement that will affect it to some extent…[one of] these factors [is] the locality or terrain…which can be resolved into a combination of the geographical surroundings and nature of the ground.” Notice the use of the expression “constant factors.” That is the notion of those things that cannot be controlled in a competitive environment; hence, they must be taken as a given by all competitors. Von Clausewitz also devotes a chapter to terrain, which he argues “bears a close and ever-present relation to warfare.”

Tzu, Machiavelli and von Clausewitz were in the war business when war was mainly hand-to-hand-style infantry fighting. Not surprisingly, terrain to them was things like the geography of the land, mountains, lakes and rivers, the weather, the fullness of the moon and the length of the day. Each must clearly be taken as is by the warring parties and exploited through tactics and strategies. For warring executives fighting over the same market, the terrain that must be grasped and then exploited includes demographics, politics, the economy and technology. That is the playing field on which enterprises succeed or fail but over which they have very little say.

First, demographics. Auguste Comte, the French positivist philosopher and coiner of the term “sociology,” famously said, “demographics is destiny.” Every dollar of business revenue involves either directly or indirectly selling something to someone. That makes it important to know who the someones are, how old they are, what sex they are, where they are and so on; the stuff of demographics. It is not possible to run a good business and at the same time ignore its demographics.

Second, politics. Politics is the machinery through which societies determine what the laws and penalties will be. Von Clausewitz’s most famous line links politics and war: “War is not merely a political act, but also a political instrument, a continuation of political relations, a carrying out of the same by other means.”

If you want go run a good business, you better be on top of the terrain that is determined by the political process: taxes; rules, regulations and standards; corporate, trade and securities law; subsidies and grants. And, as well, do not overlook that government plays a huge rule in economic growth, employment, inflation, exports, imports, exchange rates and interest rates.

Third, the economy. The economy is that vast space where goods and services are produced, sold and consumed, jobs are created and destroyed, prices are set and funds flow from savers to investors in stock, bond and money markets. For executives, the key components of the economic terrain are aggregate demand, growth, employment, labour availability, inflation, exchange rates, interest rates, credit, savings and investment. Decision-makers who constantly misjudge the economy will not keep their businesses out of trouble. Time spent on the economic terrain is time well spent.

Fourth, technology. Technology is simply the way we get things done that need to be done. Knowing and properly reacting to where the technology relevant to a business is headed is essential to survival and prosperity.

If you were in the watch business and you did not make the shift from mechanical movement to quartz crystal in a timely fashion (no pun intended), you probably did not make it. The same if you were in the music business and you did not make the transition from pressed vinyl records to tape to disc, or the computation business and you did not make the transition from the slide rule to electronics.

Executives should spend a lot of time thinking about how they make and do the things customers pay them for and how those ways will change in the future. This is one train no business can afford to miss.

One of the great business books of all time is My Years with General Motors by Alfred P. Sloan Jr. Bill Gates said, “My Years with General Motors is probably the best book to read if you want to read only one book about business.” High praise!

Sloan nails the importance of business conditions. “[Executives make business judgements.] The big work behind business judgement is in finding and acknowledging the facts and circumstances concerning technology, the market, and the like in their continuously changing forms.… The field was open to all; technical knowledge flows from a common storehouse of scientific progress; the techniques of production are an open book, and the related instruments of production are available to all. The market is world-wide and there are no favorites except those chosen by the customer.” And he knew why General Motors was in business: “General Motors is an engineering organization. Our operation is to cut metal and in so doing to add value to it.” A goal everyone could get their mind around. No wonder GM came to dominate the business world. How they lost their way is another story.

More evidence from Business Insider.

People interested in really studying The Art of War for business should read
Sun Tzu - The Art of War for Managers: 50 Strategic Rules Updated for Today's Business



In short, pointing out the obvious dissimilarities between business and warfare does nothing to erase their obvious similarities. Ironically, those who like to point out the manifest dissimilarities are often those most ignorant of the similarities revealed through study.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, not their own facts. And calling a well-established, logically validated and empirically supported idea - the link between sound warfare strategy and business strategy - "stupid" does not reduce the truth of the fact in the slightest.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Ubermensch]

From McKinsey and Company, publicly traded consulting company, writes about playing war games to win in business.

Playing war games to win
They can be a powerful business tool—but only if you get the design right.
March 2011 | byJohn Horn

As the global downturn kicked in, a high-tech company’s senior executives decided to run a war game to prepare themselves for the uncertainties of the post-crisis landscape. After two days of simulations—when teams representing competitors and stakeholders role-played against a “company” team—the executives understood that a strong competitor on the sidelines was likely to enter the market aggressively. The executives also realized that the low end of the product range would face more price pressure than they had been anticipating. Moreover, while there would probably be industry mergers and acquisitions, as the company had expected, the deals were unlikely to kick off a wave of M&A or to have a material impact on the company’s share of any market.

These insights made a difference. When actual deal making began and the player on the sidelines announced its intention to become a market leader, the high-tech company didn’t leap into the M&A fray or otherwise lose focus. Instead, it concentrated on protecting its core business, minimizing low-end losses, and investing in a major growth opportunity that required new technology and a long incubation period—and has since proved valuable.

For a variety of reasons, many companies don’t learn as much from war games. Some misjudge when they are appropriate. Others foul up the game’s design by not including the right participants. Still others take a cookie-cutter approach and rely on standardized game design software or apply to operational problems the same approach they previously used for strategic or organizational ones.

To avoid these pitfalls—and the wasted time, money, and poor strategic decisions that go with them—CEOs and other senior executives should ask tough questions when contemplating war games or answering proposals to use them. Four questions, drawn from our experience with more than 100 war games at scores of companies around the world, can greatly increase the chances that your managers will use war gaming to make better decisions in the real world.

Can a war game help with our problem?
The sweet spot for games is some moderate level of uncertainty.1 If the uncertainty is too great—say, the impact of robotic nanotechnology on manufacturing industries—game planners can’t offer enough guidance for the players to make reasoned decisions. More suitable is an industry environment where, say, two or three outcomes seem plausible along each of several dimensions. When no amount of analysis will provide the right answer, the results of gaming can shed valuable light on the range of possibilities that executives should be considering.

In addition, there must be some meaningful competitive dynamics between the company and various stakeholders—a game to be played, in other words—and a clear way of representing the most relevant players. Often this presents little challenge: the high-tech company, for example, ran its game against current and potential competitors and included consumer teams in some rounds. But it can be tricky to portray certain stakeholders, such as the US Congress, which one aerospace and defense contractor realized it had to include for its game to yield valuable insights.

Consider other approaches if the level of uncertainty, competitive dynamics, or stakeholder realities seem problematic. Scenario planning can help with decision making if there is too much uncertainty. Cost curves, profit pool analyses, or other standard frameworks are effective when complex competitive dynamics are absent.2

A final word of caution: be wary of the argument that war games are primarily about generating new ideas. Companies following this approach often find participants taking an “I’m going to prove how clever I am” posture, leading to unrealistic, impractical ideas. We suggest conducting idea generation workshops instead (for more, see “Seven steps to better brainstorming”).

What kind of game should we play?
Let’s say a consumer goods company is considering a narrow problem—raise prices 5 percent or keep them constant—and wants to know how its biggest competitor might respond. Given the tactical objective, the consumer goods maker might run two separate games: one in which it raised prices and one in which it didn’t. Alternatively, the company could run a game in which it raised prices by 5 percent but made other adjustments, sometimes boosting marketing expenditures and sometimes offering retailers concessions. It could then compare the result with the outcome of the game in which it didn’t change prices. The key is running the gamut of potential choices to make sure each is tested. Such games are most valuable when a company has very few but discrete choices to test, as well as a similarly small set of possible responses by competitors.

Tactical games aren’t always practical, though. The aerospace and defense company mentioned above originally considered running a tactical game to better understand shifts in the US defense budget and their impact on the business. But the benefit of testing a very large number of scenarios for individual weapon systems—scenarios involving, for example, levels of funding, moves by competitors, and outcomes of technology investments—would not have justified the executive time spent on the exercise.

Instead, the company designed a game to answer the more strategic question: how can we win market share given the budget pressures on the Department of Defense and the moves of competitors? The game tested levers such as pricing, contracting, operational improvements, and partnerships. The outcome wasn’t a tactical playbook—a list of things to execute and monitor—but rather strategic guidance on the industry’s direction, the most promising types of moves, the company’s competitive strengths and weaknesses, and where to focus further analysis.

Who will design and play the game?
You have big personnel choices to make or approve—who designs the game and who plays. In both cases, deciding exactly how wide to cast the net depends on whether the game’s objective is primarily tactical or strategic or the creation of organizational alignment.

Tactical games, with their detailed moves and evaluation criteria, are relatively straightforward: leaders with deep expertise about and responsibility for implementing the decisions are critical sources of input. The design of a strategic war game requires much broader interaction. To ensure that the defense contractor’s game wasn’t unduly influenced by the hypotheses of its designers, for example, they asked all 40 executives who would play it which trends, scenarios, and decisions should be tested.

The selection of players is also critical. A tactical exercise, such as a pricing game, can have a relatively small set of participants. You should cast a wider net in a strategic game and a much wider one in an organizational game in which the objective is to get people on board for a strategic move.

In a game in which the goal is organizational alignment around a strategic decision, for example, you should include leaders of all functions that will be involved in its execution. Often, it’s also worth including frontline managers, product designers, and account reps, since they can raise different viewpoints during the game and disseminate the lessons to colleagues afterward.

A more diverse set of participants also creates valuable opportunities to broaden their understanding of the industry—for instance, by assigning them to stakeholder teams with roles that are less familiar to them. In the debriefing session after the high-tech company’s game, the leader of a business unit, who had paired up with a salesperson on a customer team, remarked, “Having played the customer, I now understand what the sales force means when they say we get push-back on price. I am going to make sure we give you the support you need to make the value-based argument to the customers.” This shared experience, which would have been impossible with a smaller or more homogenous group of participants, has continued to stimulate discussions across the company as market conditions evolve.

How often should we play?
The one-off games described so far are the most common type; it’s usually pointless to run a game repeatedly to test the same uncertainties with the same participants. It’s often beneficial, however, to repeat a game for the sake of organizational alignment when you want to bring along people who didn’t experience the first game—usually, the wider group of employees who will implement the decision. Most people learn better by doing, and when they have shared experiences, they are more likely to embrace change.

Repeating games also can be useful when conditions are changing. If competitors or technologies have evolved, for example, it may be time to rerun a strategic game. Tactical games like those for pricing negotiations may bear repeating as frequently as every three or four months, with the same set of players and slight modifications to reflect changes in the market. That helps salespeople refine their pitches as customer needs, competitive offerings, regulations, and other factors shift.

You may, however, want to run the same set of players through a game repeatedly and rapidly to practice for a critical upcoming test. The negotiation team of a health insurer, for example, was entering into a renegotiation with its key provider partner and felt it had little room to maneuver. To explore its options, the team played a war game in which it chose a negotiating approach, negotiated with the provider team, huddled up to reformulate its strategy and tactics, and then reentered negotiations—all in several quick rounds.

The participants replayed the game several times in one day (starting again with new tactics when they got bogged down), reflected on the results, and repeated the exercise the following week. The improvement between the first and the last sessions was enormous: the players uncovered areas where they could stand firm and learned how to craft their message more adroitly to regain control of the situation. They also became more confident and ready to flex their muscles in real negotiations with the provider.

Well-designed war games, though not a panacea, can be powerful learning experiences that allow managers to make better decisions. By asking a few tough questions, executives can help their organizations be smarter about when and how to play.

About the author
John Horn is a consultant in McKinsey’s Washington, DC, office.

 

[Delmania]

I think the part I (and probably @Kung Fu Steve) don't like is that when comparing war to business, terms start bleeding in. I was talking to a woman who is in a "war room". I was once a part of a "SWAT" team. Some developers I know like to go by the title "Code Warrior". There is a team here that goes by the title "ninja", complete with belt levels for training. (Ironic, belts are an American invention and ninjas were assasins that avoied combat)

The Art of War is an excellent book to learn competitive strategy from, and thus it applies very well to business, war, sports, any place there is competition. That doesn't mean we need to bring in the terms, though. Business is about providing value, not destruction.

Edit: and my value is learning to spell, apparently.

 

[Ubermensch]

I think the part I (and probably @Kung Fu Steve) don't like is that when comparing war to business, terms start bleeding in. I was talking to a woman who is in a "war room". I was once a part of a "SWAT" team. Some developers I know like to go by the title "Code Warrior". There is a team here that goes by the title "ninja", complete with belt levels for training. (Ironic, belts are an American invention and ninjas were assasins that avoied combat)

The Art of War is an excellent book to learn competitive strategy from, and thus it applies very well to business, war, sports, any place there is competition. That doesn't mean we need to bring in the terms, though. Business is about providing value, not detruction.

So, you agree with the basic premise that studying the Art of War is useful, in terms of understanding strategy.

No one said you have to get carried away, and start comparing yourself to the legends of old. And yet, so what if a modern-day hustler dons the name "ninja"? Self-applied titles for hustlers are like job titles for people with jobs. Some people deserve the title, others don't. I presume most people reading this thread know the legend of The 47 Ronin. Can't this story teach one the importance of patience? Can't it help you find the discipline within yourself to endure - and perhaps even enjoy - the hundreds of days of waiting? The days of working behind the scenes, in the dark, sweating through the chores of building a business... those days go down more easily when you have a look-at-these-ancient-heroes-who-won-in-epic-and-glorious-fashion story to hold onto).

Working overtime, because time is money, and money (call it "revenue" or "cashflow" if you prefer) is over everything (for the 47 Ronin, it was revenge and honor).

Anyway, yes, you are correct. The Ninja way, the Art of War way, is to not fight a battle. Basic Sun-Tzu. Don't shed blood. Win without bloodshed. Think the board game Go, where you capture space. Contrast that with chess, a game of attrition, where you have to wipe out a bunch of pieces and kill the king in the end.

So, to the self-titled warrior who truly understands The Art of War (as well as Game Theory, the five decade old science of strategy), this warrior understands the lessons of history. He knows the power of the Death Ground strategy, because of how it worked for the American troops storming Normandy. He knows that if The Art proves true in the worst of circumstances (literally hell on earth) then it will surely work in the non-violent, (physically) non-confrontational world of business.

A modern day warrior who understands Sun-Tzu would know that The Art condemns a general who has to resort to bloody battles in the first place. This concept ties to a key tenet of Sun-Tzu: The protection and conservation of resources. This is why, psychologically, the Art of War practitioner approaches with a Go-style mindset. Capture the board territory (market share) with as few of your pieces as possible. Again, this is diametrically opposed to Western style warfare, chess-type, attrition warfare.

Sun-Tzu was not an advocate of destruction. Not to yourself. Not to your enemy. Hence Sun-Tzu focused on psychological warfare.

It's like Eminem said: Map shit out strategically. Timing is everything. In order to Master the Art of War, don't start a war.

Those who express concern over using warfare have their hearts in the right places. As for their heads, they should focus on a true understanding of warfare, rather than adopting a fearful Ostrich's posture.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Kung Fu Steve]

It just isn't that deep, brother.

Yes I've studied Sun Tzu extensively, yes, I've studied Musashi extensively, yes, I've studied practically every other strategy guide there is (I'm a fan as well).

It's also very apparent this is something you're very passionate about so I don't mean to downplay you...

...but, first, recognize you and I both have an opinion -- neither are irrefutable. Sincerity is not a test of truth.

Once again you're basing all of your assumptions that you must beat your competitors to make money. The truth is you need to provide more needed and wanted value to your customers at the right time.

It's very subtle shift but it makes all the difference in the world.

Here's the thing I hope you consider:

When you use a global metaphor such as "business is war" that embeds many beliefs inside of you that will affect your actions and therefore your results.

Maybe you have a different list but here's what I would believe if business is war:

• Someone has to lose for me to win.
• Someone will always try to take from me and therefore I must always try to take from them.
• I must destroy my competitors resources including reputation, service, skills, and abilities.
• I must not let my competitor serve a customer.
• I must never let my competitor get an edge even if that means destroying it.

I will say from experience this tends to reinforce the scarcity mindset. "There's not enough to go around" -- which is one of the largest problems in an entrepreneur's mentality.

---

If you'll indulge me, I'll tell you the story of two martial arts schools

I set up shop about 2 blocks away from an old boss actually, but I did my research ahead of time and sent him a letter.

It basically said "Sir, I'm opening a school in your area and I wanted to be very open about it because I sincerely respect you. I've done my research and the market in this area could support 5 martial arts schools. We would not even bump into each other because the market is so large."

I went on to share my numbers, some of my best practices, etc....

Needless to say -- he wasn't happy. He viewed it as a declaration of war. Stopped talking to me, said as many nasty things about me as he could, did whatever he could to try and block me from promotional events such as school nights, parades, community expos, etc. etc.

Any time someone asked about him I said he was an amazing teacher and I highly recommend checking him out!

Any time someone asked him about me he said I was terrible, and I betrayed him, and I couldn't run a school to save my life.

It took about a year for my school to triple the size of his. Shortly after he went out of business. Looking at it from a "war" perspective you could say I must have demolished all of his leads and stole all of his students... But I'll tell you the real numbers -- out of (literally) 10's of thousands of people coming through my doors only 1 (yes, I'm serious) ONE ever came from his school to mine.

But I sent dozens to him because he was the more affordable option (and he actually was a great instructor).

His ads specifically targeted me -- and in a really awkward way. He tried attacking everything we did -- to the point where people would come in and say they didn't go to the other school because their ads were really strange.

He tried to put us down in every way possible. He fought the "war" when I just went on to service our clients as best as I possibly could.

Here's my point: trying to pull others down doesn't get you higher up the mountain.

 

[Delmania]

"We have to let go of this notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose.” - Steve Jobs, 1997

 

[Mattie]

In war, your entire goal is to kill more of their people and break more of their stuff. Whoever kills the most people and breaks the most stuff, wins.

I used to be a nurse aide and worked for one company, and another company hired me and I met them at the clients house. They were upset at the client because the other one stole their employee. As a in-home care nurse aide at the time, well it was just regular practice we worked for one company and couldn't work for competitors for this reason.

Fortunately, it's just how it works. When I worked at K-mart and Wal-mart I can tell you there where undercover employees price checking and observing the other company. You can't get rid of competition knowing what you're doing and stealing clients or even employees. Even Facebook was stolen idea.

Fortunately, I learned earlier on right off the bat don't allow people to read my novel. And why? If you happen to be a J.K. Rowling someones going to rip off your work. Sure there is lots of my writing floating around, but the great ideas you don't share with just anyone. And probably why I haven't done a lot of things yet to protect my work even in coaching.

Personally take it from an INFJ you can win a war without you even being aware someone is winning the war. You're opponent you're talking about is always going to be there. Just like in writing, I have other authors attacking me, because your competition. Do I go fight with them? No I don't, but I don't allow them to stop me either.

Someone will always try to take from me and therefore I must always try to take from them.

I think you're really naive if you believe this doesn't happen. I see it all the time. Not everyone does it, but there are plenty of people out there who couldn't care less about your business, your feelings, your emotions, or finances.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Bouncing Soul]

Ask any gray haired guy in Silicon Valley who manages groups of creatives how well West Pointers manage these type of people. Then go look at a company like Wal Mart, who very aggressively recruits West Pointers.

Peter Thiel's opinion is competition is stupid, along the lines of what Kung Fu Steve is saying. This is also more of an abundance rather than scarcity mindset, which I try hard to cultivate.

It is going to depend on the founder and vertical. I love Musashi, I love to compete, but experience has taught me to like and appreciate Thiel's mindset more.

 

[Kung Fu Steve]

I think you're really naive if you believe this doesn't happen. I see it all the time. Not everyone does it, but there are plenty of people out there who couldn't care less about your business, your feelings, your emotions, or finances.

I think you're really bitter since it has happened.

Duh. Of course it happens.

It's not black and white -- and it's naive to assume my one sentence encompasses all of my beliefs (and not just an example) ;-)

Here's the thing:

We don't all play by the same rules -- and unless you know the rules of the game it's pretty tough to play.

It's all sheep and shepherds until a wolf shows up... and it sounds like you've had a few wolves show up in your life. And you've earned the right to be defensive about your life's work.

Yes, be smart about what you do. But much of what we're discussing here has to do with this general sweeping mentality that "business is war".

It just isn't.

Funny how it started because the OP only seems to post articles from his blog and nothing else

 

[Kung Fu Steve]

Along the lines of abundance...

Money is the ocean of abundance. You can come to it with a cup, a thimble, or a dump truck -- you'll get what you ask for.

When you go to the ocean of abundance, you aren't afraid if you take a bucket that you'll drain the whole ocean... your job is just to keep coming back and eventually you start bringing a bigger bucket.

Business is not war. Business is abundance. And there's plenty to go around... if you decide to play that way.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Mattie]

Bitterness isn't my style. And no, I haven't run into any wolves with my personal business yet. Four bad reviews in two years isn't that much to bark about. Really I don't ever hear anything. I take that is a good thing.

 

[Mattie]

Along the lines of abundance...

Money is the ocean of abundance. You can come to it with a cup, a thimble, or a dump truck -- you'll get what you ask for.

When you go to the ocean of abundance, you aren't afraid if you take a bucket that you'll drain the whole ocean... your job is just to keep coming back and eventually you start bringing a bigger bucket.

Business is not war. Business is abundance. And there's plenty to go around... if you decide to play that way.

Abundance is overflowing with joy, happiness, confidence, being fearless, and fruitful in all areas of your life. I think what you're trying to say is money is energy you exchange with other people for services.

Anything you give is returned naturally by the way you treat others. Give and receive. It's a natural law. What you put out there you get back in return. So yes, you can carry lots of buckets, but you have to give a lot of buckets in exchange for your buckets. You may just have to give quality work and customer service to get the money you desire.

I love metaphors, I'm a writer, but since I've been in this forum, I think it's good to point out I've learned it's much more clearer if you just get to the point in simple language. I guess when I started in here a year ago, I didn't understand how metaphors can get in the way of what your trying to say. Now I do, because I read others doing the same thing, and recognize it gets cloudy.

Fortunately taking all the money you want doesn't exactly make it happen without you providing quality service, adds value, and meets a need. Law of supply and demand.

 

[Ubermensch]

In war, your entire goal is to kill more of their people and break more of their stuff.

If you have, in fact, read Sun-Tzu, then you have obviously forgotten most (or even all) of it. Or, perhaps you simply did not understand what you read. If you have three minutes, the video below demonstrates how your view of war is very Western, very Chess-like, very much UNLIKE Sun-Tzu.

I mean, really "brother." It's really, really not that deep. @Kung Fu Steve You only need to watch like 30 seconds of the above video to realize that you're completely misrepresenting Sun-Tzu and completely missing the point.

Your views on war are literally the exact opposite of Sun-Tzu's views. LITERALLY THE EXACT OPPOSITE, and the documentary on Sun-Tzu supports that claim 100%.

I think you're really naive if you believe this doesn't happen. I see it all the time. Not everyone does it, but there are plenty of people out there who couldn't care less about your business, your feelings, your emotions, or finances.

Naivete, perhaps. It could also simply be a lack of experience, or experiences. Selling widgets to consumers online, for instance, is much different than selling to corporations and businesses.

I'm not sure how many people on this site actually make money doing THAT, but if you've ever had to fight over a six-figure commission (not sure how many people on this site actually do THAT), for a client that brings in seven to eight figures in revenue (not sure how many people on this site actually do THAT), then you know (at least intuitively) that business is war.

If I ever met a Fortune 1000 chief executive, and he didn't know the name Sun-Tzu, I'd conclude the man or woman is a puppet, wholly and completely undeserving of the title (probably just a mask for a behind-the-scenes Oz-type character, or group of characters)

Anyone who has ever sold a service - on a business to business level - knows that, in many cases, there is only one winner, and many losers. @MKHB Am I right or wrong?

If you have the gall to pick up the phone to sell a business owner, or the decision maker of a Fortune 1000 company, you had better have your act together. In other words, you have to convince the DM that buying your service, signing your contract, equates to a positive for him. Preferably, you do this by emphasizing the ROI, the payback, the return, the increased margin, the enhanced cash-flow, etc.

On a very simple level, it doesn't take a hedge fund manager, an investment banker, a private equity fund manager, a venture capitalist, or a Jordan Belfort-obsessed Glen Gary Glen Ross-watchin', coffee drinkin' closer to understand the following situation.

Acme, Inc wishes to procure service X. To do so, Acme, Inc interfaces with Salesman A (from Company A), Salesman B (from Company A), and Salesman C (from Company C).

Only one company wins the bid.

The other two lose. All three companies provide the same service, in the same market. They all fill the same need. They can't all win.

A war. Yes, a war. A War, in fact, with a Capital W.

I once stole a large client (corporate headquarters of a large retail clothing chain) away from a commercial energy broker. We both bid on the deal. They lost. I won. Won, in fact, with a Capital W.

If you can't see the simple and obvious win-loss dynamic in the above type of situation, then... I'd question if you even have a triple digit IQ.

It's not my problem if people wish to ignore the wisdom of Job 7:1: It's not my problem if people like to ignore mountains of scholarly support for the war and business connection.

Not my problem. Not my concern. My concern is winning the war, not with others misunderstanding of the concept.

For every supercilious twit and nitwit mindlessly prattling about how war and business have absolutely zero connection, there is a Sun-Tzu based Forbes or Business article for businessmen that wish to use their brains:

Forbes: Another article demonstrating the connection between war and business

Forbes: Another article on war and business.

Don't take my word for it. I don't write for Forbes.

Is it not really as deep as all of the erudite say, or is it only shallow and unread minds that think it so? If truth were a popularity contest, then the latter could be true, as I live in an Idiocracy.

"We have to let go of this notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft has to lose.” - Steve Jobs, 1997

Consider what Instagram did to Kodak.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Kung Fu Steve]

Ok, you guys win

 

[Mattie]

Not my problem. Not my concern. My concern is winning the war, not with others misunderstanding of the concept.

Think that was stated by someone in Fastlane as Zero F's Given if not mistaken.

Ok, you guys win

What did we win?

 

[Kung Fu Steve]

Besides my undying admiration?

The opportunity to buy me a drink at the meetup and have a spirited debate in person!!

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Ubermensch]

Bitterness isn't my style. And no, I haven't run into any wolves with my personal business yet. Four bad reviews in two years isn't that much to bark about. Really I don't ever hear anything. I take that is a good thing.

Think that was stated by someone in Fastlane as Zero F's Given if not mistaken.

What did we win?

Lol. Future owns that: "Give No F*cks" in commas chorus.

@Kung Fu Steve

We are more on the same page than you may realize.

I prefer non-violent approaches to achieving my goals.

But sometimes, if you want to take the crown, you have to rip it off of the corpse of a dead king.

Until next time...

 

[Delmania]

I once stole a large client (corporate headquarters of a large retail clothing chain) away from a commercial energy broker. We both bid on the deal. They lost. I won. Won, in fact, with a Capital W.

To @Mattie's point, did you do this by disparaging your competition, or just doing a vastly better job? If you can identify a situation in which a company has grown complacent with an opportunity and you can grab it from them, then I'd agree with the notion of grabbing a crown from a corpse. But that doesn't mean you need to kick the corpse a few times as you do it..

 

[Ubermensch]

To @Mattie's point, did you do this by disparaging your competition, or just doing a vastly better job? If you can identify a situation in which a company has grown complacent with an opportunity and you can grab it from them, then I'd agree with the notion of grabbing a crown from a corpse. But that doesn't mean you need to kick the corpse a few times as you do it..

I pretty much spelled out the process here.

I didn't even know the other brokerage existed. Big shop. 30 brokers in house.

They missed the obvious signs of the market, which led to the big opportunity. By time they realized their mistake, I had a letter of exclusivity signed, and then four days later, a supply contract.

The last five years of my career have been aimed at being able to do that every day.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Leo Hendrix]

@AcademyBridge thanks for sharing Doctor.

How might you suggest modification of this approach with regards to Solopreneurs?

 

[Ubermensch]

To @Mattie's point, did you do this by disparaging your competition, or just doing a vastly better job? If you can identify a situation in which a company has grown complacent with an opportunity and you can grab it from them, then I'd agree with the notion of grabbing a crown from a corpse. But that doesn't mean you need to kick the corpse a few times as you do it..

Only the blind and foolish doubt the business strategy and war strategy connection; there is a reason The Art of War has been specifically translated and interpreted for executives, managers and owners of businesses.

@axiom