This post continues our project explaining each stanza of Sun Tzu’s work. The English translation and Chinese transliterations are from my award-winning book, The Art of War and The Ancient Chinese Revealed.

Due to our members’ generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To support this work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This article discusses the second and third stanzas of Section One of Chapter 11 of The Art of War. This chapter analyses the “nine grounds.” These “grounds” explain the different common situations. These situations, in a sense, measure the “progress” of a competitive contests that that continue over time. The three stages introduced here are initial situations. The first three situations describe conditions more common at the beginning of a competitive contest.

Scattering

<Various> <noblemen> <self> <battle> <this> <ground> <is>
Warring parties must sometimes fight inside their own territory.

In this situation, the contest comes to us. A potential competitor moves into a territory in which we have established our positions. If this were an ordinary competitor, we would simply defend our positions. Defense is easier than offense

However, we must first make a calculation. Defense is easier than offense, but sometimes the opponent is large enough and well-organized enough to overcome our defenses. Typically, this means that they have at least five times the resources that we do. We must realize when we are in this situation and respond accordingly,

<Become> <scattered> <ground>
This is scattering terrain.

When our existing positions are challenged or threatened by a large, well-prepared opponent, this is called a “scattering” situation because we cannot win by facing that opponent directly. Opponents creating these situations will obviously overwhelm our defensive resources so we must “scatter” rather than face them directly.

Easy

<Enter> <men> <’s> <ground> <no> <deep> <is>
When you enter hostile territory, your penetration is shallow.

This situation arises when you first start exploring a new opportunity. Our initial tests of the new ground teach us a little about the opportunity, but such initial steps are frequently all positive. This positive information teaches us little new.

The danger here is that we are too conservative when we find ourselves in this situation. We build only positions that are the easiest, those that use methods similar to what we have done before.

<Become> <easy> <ground>
This is easy terrain.

The temptation of easy terrain is to stay where it is easy, enjoying our good fortune in finding an area that is rewarding without developing new methods . While this sounds like good strategy, it is a form of laziness that eventually gets us into trouble.

Leave a comment

Disputed

<I> <obtain> <then> <advantage>
Some terrain gives you an advantageous position.

When a new territory produces easy rewards for us, the situation changes. We establish a successful position within it, but rewarding positions are, by their nature, visible. Positions are what others see about what we are doing.

<Others> <obtain> <also> <advantage> <is>
But it gives others an advantageous position as well.

When others see that this new territory offers easy rewards, those easy rewards attract others. Everyone is looking for rewarding new positions.

<Become> <contentious> <ground>
This will be disputed terrain.

As the competition moves in, what was easy ground quickly changes into ground where people are competing with us for its rewards. This is now contested terrain. The change from easy ground to disputed ground surprises many, but we should expect it as the natural flow of events.

If we developed only the easiest ground, close to our existing positions, our situations can get even worse. As this disputed ground lures others near to us, our base positions can become contested ground as well. Our mistake was in how we handled the easy ground.

Conclusion

These early stage situations all arise in almost every competitive contest. We must know the appropriate response if we want to be successful. Large competitors can move in. What do we do? We can find new opportunities that seem easy. What do we do? Competitors will challenge us on this new ground because it is easy. What do we do?

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

Share

This article discusses the first stanza of Chapter 11 of The Art of War. This chapter discusses the “nine grounds.” These “grounds” explain the different common situations that arise in competitive meetings that continue over time. Sun Tzu lists these situations in the order they commonly arise in many competitive battles. Battles may not progress through every stage, but they can. This chapter discusses each stage in depth and gives the appropriate response to each. This stanza, however, simply lists the nine situations.

<Use> <war> <’s> <methods>
Use the art of war.

In this case, “the art of war” is using the response that is suitable to the stage of competition that we are in. The nine common situations discussed in this chapter fall into three different categories.

The Initial Stages

The first three situations describe conditions more common at the beginning of a competitive contest.

<Have> <scattered> <ground>
Know when the terrain will scatter you.

This situation arises when your existing positions are challenged or threatened by a much larger force.

<Have> <easy> <ground>
Know when the terrain will be easy.

This situation arises when you first start exploring a new opportunity. Beginning to explore a new opportunity is the easiest stage.

<Have> <contentious> <ground>
Know when the terrain will be disputed.

Most new opportunities can lead into conflict because others often recognize the opportunity as well. This is the end of the initial stages.

Leave a comment

The Middle Stages

This brings us into the middle stages when our opponents and we use more specific methods to explore the opportunity.

<Have> <meeting> <ground>
Know when the terrain is open.

Open terrain is unobstructed, allowing us the choice of many different paths. Competitions in open situations are races in many different directions.

<Have> <highway> <ground>
Know when the terrain is intersecting.

On intersecting terrain, our interests merge with those of others. This is where we need and find allies.

<Have> <serious> <ground>
Know when the terrain is dangerous.

This is a deep penetration into a new territory where supply lines are a problem, and we must find new resources to continue our progress.

Late Stage Situations

These last stagees typically signal that our moves are coming to an end.

<Have> <ruined> <ground>
Know when the terrain is bad.

This is the stage where our progress slows to a crawl. Many give up at this stage, but it often signals that success is near.

<Have> <surround> <ground>
Know when the terrain is confined.

These are situations where we are surrounded by opponents or obstacles and must find a hidden path through them.

<Have> <death> <ground>
Know when the terrain is deadly

This is the final and worst competitive situation where we must use all of our resources to survive.

Each of these states and our best responses to them are explained in detail in this chapter, which is the longest in the book.

This post continues our project explaining each stanza of Sun Tzu’s work. The English translation and Chinese transliterations are from my award-winning book, The Art of War and The Ancient Chinese Revealed

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

Share

This article discusses the last two stanzas of Section 5 of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. These are the last two stanzas of the chapter, and they summarize its basic concepts.

Competitive Know-How

<Make> <know> <war> <is>
You must know how to make war.

Sun Tzu’s system is based on comparison. Strategic positions are what people compare in competitive battles. When people make decisions about whether to support us or oppose us, they make their choices based upon what they see as our position. To win at competition, we must know the five basic elements of our positions—mission, heaven, ground, command, and methods—compare with alternative those of choices. We must know what those judging competitors use as the basis of their competitive comparisons.

<Act> <and> <yet> <no> <confusion>
You can then act without confusion.

If we know what points of comparison are relevant in any given situation, we can know what kind of actions to take to improve our positions. The basic challenge is one of identifying opportunities that are worth our resources.

<Lift> <and> <yet> <no> <limit>
You can attempt anything.

The <lift> here refers to how high we can rise within a competitive arena. If we know all the relevant factors for comparing positions within that area, we can continue to find opportunities and continue to rise.

Painless Success

This next stanza summarizes what is included in our big picture. It summarizes not only this chapter about certain aspects of the ground and the flaws of leaders and their organizations, but Sun Tzu’s entire book up to this point.

<Make> <say>
We say:

This line announces that we are coming to a handful of simple aphorisms that Sun Tzu uses to summarize his system.

Leave a comment

<Know> <each> <other> <know> <self>
Know the enemy and know yourself.

The original Chinese of this line is broader than the English translation. We must know ourselves and our opponents, but we must also know everyone else involved: allies, bystanders, and anyone making decisions based upon these comparison.

<Victory> <consequently> <no> <dangerous>
Your victory will be painless.

“Painless” and <no><dangerous> are perhaps best summarized as “less costly.” The idea of competition is to win rewards not to sacrifice resources.

However, our success requires going beyond knowing the people involved.

<Know> <heaven> <know> <earth>
Know the weather and the field.

We must also know the competitive landscape and what changes over time. The nature of the competitive ground determines how easily we can move from one position to another. The changes that are taking place create new opportunities for us.

Leave a comment

<Victory> <consequently> <can> <complete>
Your victory will be complete.

If we can see the big picture and use this knowledge wisely, we will be successful. Victory doesn’t go just to the strong. It goes to those who best understand their situation and don’t waste their resources. Winners are those who do not make success more difficult than it needs to be.

.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

This article discusses the first stanza of Section 5 of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. This section’s first stanza expands on the idea of knowing your enemy and knowing yourself.

Share

Offensive Comparison

We can know when our forces are relatively strong, with enough resources to move into an new territory.

<Know> <our> <soldiers> <it> <can> <by> <strike>
You may know what your soldiers will do in an attack.

We can know that our forces will show themselves to be strong during any sort of advance into new areas, but is this enough?

<And> <yet> <no> <know> <enemy> <’s> <no> <can> <strike>
You may not know if the enemy is vulnerable to attack.

However, competition is a comparison. We may have all the resource we need to advance, but what happens when we meet opposition. Will we win the comparison with whoever opposes us. We don’t want to advance into an opponent who looks even better than we do.

<Victory> <of> <half> <also>
You will then win only half the time.

Having half the needed knowledge for a comparison results in half of the number of possible successes.

Offensive Ignorance

We must understand our relative offensive capability as well.

<Know> <enemy> <’s> <can> <strike>
You may know that the enemy is vulnerable to attack.

We can know when an opponent has weaknesses that allow them to be challenged. The Chinese here is confusing because Chinese characters can be nouns, verbs, and other parts of speech. The same characters can be active or passive. Here, the sense is passive. The opponent “can be struck,” in other words, they have weak places that will not fare well in a comparison. The Chinese doesn’t simple mean that an opponent has the ability to attack us.

Leave a comment

<And> <yet> <no> <know> <our> <soldiers> <it> <no> <can> <by> <means> <of> <strike>
You may not know if your men have the capability of attacking him.

This line of Chinese makes it clear that we do not know how well our people will compare to an opponents in their areas of weakness. Will our capabilities in these areas be good enough for us to win the overall comparison?

<Victory> <of> <half> <also>
You will still win only half the time.

This lack of knowledge will also result in half as much success as we might hope.

Awareness of Opponent’s Strength

These same ideas are applied to defending our own positions.

<Know> <enemy> <’s> <can> <strike>
You may know that the enemy is vulnerable to attack.

The Chinese has the sense of “we can know that the enemy’s position can be struck. We must know that the opponent forces are at a disadvantage in certain areas of weakness. We must know that we can successfully strike them where it matters.

Leave a comment

Comparing Relative Terrain

Our forces may appear ready to win any comparison of abilities.

<Know> <our> <soldiers> <it> <can> <by> <strike>
You may know that your men are ready to attack.

But this comparison of relative forces is not enough. We do not fight in the abstract. We compete over real territory.

<And> <yet> <no> <know> <ground> <form> <’s> <no> <can> <by> <means> <of> <battle>
You may not, however, know how to position yourself in the field for battle.

We must know the terrain: the terrain we are on and the terrain of those whom we are opposing. We want to know use that position. Positioning our forces on it for moving forward where the opponent’s terrain is not easily defended,

<Victory> <’s> <half> <also>
You will still win only half the time.

If we do not know the nature of the terrain and who it favors, we will also lose half of the comparisons we have with opposing forces. One of my favorite aspects of this stanza is that it adds up to losing a hundred and fifty percent of our comparison is we lack the needed knowledge.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

This article discusses the third section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. This section’s first stanza compares managing those on the front-line of competition to managing children. The second stanza compares being too generous with them to spoiling children. It is interesting that the concept of spoiling children has been around for over twenty-five hundred years and spans such a variety of cultures.

Share

Emotional and Physical Dependency

Working on the front-lines of competition is among the most emotional challenging forms of work. This includes the roles of a soldier or policeman, but it also includes salespeople and any other job responsible for “fighting” for competing positions. We are all on the front-lines when we are seeking a new job. All these jobs must produce tangible, measurable results that decision-makers can use in order to compare their organization. If the the front-line of competition fails, the whole organization fails.

<Consider> <as> <soldiers> <comparable> <to> <infant> <son>
Think of your soldiers as little children.

These front-line jobs are the most emotional. When the organization comes out second-best in a comparison, these front-line people feel this rejection personally. It is their work that is being judged as second-rate. Most jobs on the front-lines of competition meet a lot more failure than other types of work. This failure is like that of children who constantly try and fail to live up to the expectations of the adults around them.

<Make> <can> <give> <of> <attend> <deep> <brook>
You can make them follow you into a deep river.

The goal is to train those facing competition on the front lines to do difficult things. People fear change and failure, but those on the front-lines face constant change and frequent failure. They must still do their jobs.

<Consider> <as> <soldiers> <comparable> <to> <love> <child>
Treat them as your beloved children.

We must care about the emotions of those on the front lines. Selling, for example, is one of the most emotionally demanding jobs because it involves constant rejection. Salespeople stand at the interface between largely indifferent potential customers and the immediate needs of their organizations. Closing a sale is asking for validation in a more emotionally risky way than any other business transaction. It is not merely order-taking. Rejection in sales is personally painful, much like romantic rejection.

<Make> <can> <give> <of> <all> <death>
You can lead them all to their deaths.

Soldiers and policemen face real death in their jobs, but everyone on the front-lines of competition dies a little when they are rejected. Too many rejections and they will lose their jobs and livelihood. The entire organization depends upon those making sales to succeed. If sales falter, jobs throughout the organization are at risk. A salesperson is an easy person to fire because others can see their effectiveness when compared with other salespeople in sales reports.

Share

Paying Salespeople too Well

<Generous> <and> <yet> <no> <can> <use>
Some leaders are generous but cannot use their men.

Successful organizations should generously reward those who are instrumental in helping the organization win comparisons with its competitors.. Those on the front-lines of competition are often among the best rewarded people within an organization. However, those rewards should be based upon the difficulties of the job. If the base salaries of those on the front-lines of competition are too generous, these people will feel no urgency to win. They must also win these comparisons on the basis of the organization’s real value. For example, to close sales, salespeople must not make unrealistic promises. They must highlight the true value or the organization’s product or service. Their goal should be not just closing the sale but creating happy customers who will buy again.

<Love> <and> <yet> <no> <can> <command>
They love their men but cannot command them.

The entire organization must appreciate the work of those on the front-lines. They should not be jealous of how well such jobs are rewarded. However, everyone must work to create satisfied customers. For example, salespeople that make sales by offering customers more than the organization can deliver are just creating future problems, not only for themselves, but for everyone else, especially the organization’s leaders.

<Disorder> <and> <yet> <no> <can> <govern>
Their men are unruly and disorganized.

Success on the front-lines is never completely predictable, but the process of competitive comparison must make be as orderly as possible to deal with the chaos of competitions. This starts with finding those for whom our organizations can provide value. It then involves collecting information to compare the fit between what we produce and what others need. We must assure ourselves that those people have the ability to reward us for our efforts. Those on the front-lines must portray the fit between the needs of others, their offering, and the reward expected in a realistic way. If this process is not organized correctly, the chaos of competition becomes even more confusing than it already is.

Leave a comment

Just Rewards

When those on the frontlines of competition are too well rewarded, the organization will be out of balance. These jobs must reward skill and courage. The world of competition will always be emotionally trying, with winners and losers.

<Compare> <seem> <proud> <child>
These leaders create spoiled children.

We learn important lessons from the competition for front-line players. For example, good salespeople will go elsewhere if they are not well compensated. Organizations attract lazy front-line staff if they overpay them. Our process for hiring and keeping front-lines workers must continuously challenge them to produce results.

<No> <can> <use> <also>
Their soldiers are useless.

There are a great many front-line people that are useless in terms of representing their organization. Some present themselves well enough within the organization to hang on for a time, but the proof of success always comes from outside the organization. When an organization attracts weak front-line representatives, it cannot succeed in its competitive arena.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

This article discusses the third section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. This stanza’s general topic is the need to use our positions in order to win rewards. These fourth, fifth, and sixth stanzas of this section how winning or losing is the basis for choosing whether or not we understand a competitive battle, i.e. comparison.

Share

The Prime Directive: Victory

The first line below gives us Sun Tzu’s prime directive: successful comparisons are all that matter. A “battle” is a comparison among competitors. We only seek these comparisons when we will win them.

<Make> <battle> <philosophy> <must> <win>
You must provoke battle when you will certainly win.

The surer we are that our position will win, the more frequently we must look for opportunities for comparison.

<Ruler> <say>
It doesn’t matter what you are ordered.

While our CEOs”determine the mission of our organization, and that mission determines our goals, chief executive managers, who are not skilled in directing competition, cannot determine which comparisons we will win. Those not responsible for competition are simply not close enough to the competitive ground. The larger the organization, the less likely chief executives are to pick the right battles.

<Without> <battle>
The government may order you not to fight.

The “government” here refers to those in charge of the productive parts of the organization. Those responsible for production can also be afraid of losing resources, so they avoid fights. It is such weaknesses that tend to undermine a competitive force. We must understand the weaknesses of our managers, the topic of the previous section of this chapter to understand which battles they will avoid and why.

<Must> <battle> <can> <also>
Despite that, you must always fight when you will win.

Avoiding a battle can save us resources, but we must not worry about using resources when a comparison will allow us to improve our rewards. A better position will always result in more resources over time.

Avoiding Loss

<Battle> <philosophy> <no> <victory,
Sometimes provoking a battle will lead to a loss.

We must make sure that the success of a comparison supports our mission. Comparisons that do not support our mission must be avoided.

<Ruler> <Say> <must> <battle>
The government may order you to fight.

The fact that an executive says that we must avoid a comparison doesn’t effect this rule. Again, success in competitive comparison is a matter of winning comparisons that will be rewarded, not avoiding challenges.

<Without> <battle> <can> <also>
Despite that, you must avoid battle when you will lose.

We can also lose a comparison simply by avoiding it. Giving our opponent default victories makes them stronger while making us weaker in future comparisons.

Leave a comment

Wrong Priorities

There are other reasons why the leaders of competitive forces seek winning comparisons even when it doesn’t improve their competitive position.

<Make> <advance> <no> <seek> <fame>
You must advance without desiring praise.

In Sun Tzu’s strategic system, we must hold to a very narrow definition of “winning.” Winning makes making victory pay. We can come out better in a comparison with a competitor, but it that comparison doesn’t give us a better position and that position doesn’t grant us more rewards, we have not achieved true “victory.”

<Retreat> <no> <evade> <crime>
You must retreat without fearing shame.

The same is true for avoiding battle. If there is nothing for us to win in terms of rewards, we must avoid comparisons. coming out on top of such comparisons simply doesn’t matter.

<Only> <people> <correct> <preserve>
The only correct move is to preserve your troops.

If we cannot win more rewards, we must conserve our resources, especially the skills of our people that allow us to win comparisons.

<And> <yet> <advantage> <to> <ruler>
This is how you serve your country.

Conserving our competitive resources for the comparisons that can win us more rewards is how we serve our organizations.

>Nation> <’s> <treasure> <also>
This is how you reward your nation.

This is how the competitive half of an organization and its leader makes its organization strong: by winning more and more resources over time.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

This article discusses the third section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. These first three stanzas of this section describes positions on these terrains as what I call “field positions” and Sun Tzu calls “ground forms.” It divides these field positions into three categories that must be mastered.

Share

The first line gives these “field positions” a name. The sense is that these are the positions that we occupy temporarily as we move to new, more permanent positions or to expand our existing positions.

The Six Weaknesses

<Husband> <ground> <form> <is>
You must control your field position.

We control our field position by choosing our path forward. All of these “ground forms” create predictable problems when occupied leaders with certain types of weaknesses. Since we all have weaknesses, we have to be careful about picking terrains that we are “just” passing through because each of those positions must support us, if only for a little while.

<War> <’s> <assistance> <also>
It will always strengthen your army.

All competitions are comparisons. We want field positions that support our forces and create problems for those opposing us. A big part of picking the right terrain is less about us than about our opponents. We want to take positions on the types of terrains that give our opponents problems. All competitions are comparisons. We want field positions that allow us to use the strengths of the ground rather that run into problems on it.

<Predict> <enemy> <overpower> <victory>
You must predict the enemy to overpower him and win.

Picking the right ground depends both on understanding our own weaknesses and the weaknesses of our opponents. The Art of Was has already covered the six types of terrain and the weaknesses that create the biggest problems on them. Knowing this information allows us to foresee who will do better on which type of terrain.

<Plan> <obstructed> <adverse> <distant> <near>
You must analyze the obstacles, dangers, and distances.

We put these different types of ground into three categories: obstructions, dangers, and distance. We mentioned these categories earlier when explaining these problems, but here is the first place that Sun Tzu discusses them. Obstructions are the number of barriers that we must overcome. Dangers are the forms of ground that are sticky and slippery. And distance is the amount of ground that must be covered.

<Above> <general> <’s> <philosophy> <also>
This is the best way to command.

The six different weaknesses of leaders, including our own, allows us to know which weaknesses endanger opposing forces the most and us the least. By picking the paths that put opposing leaders on ground puts them at the biggest disadvantage, we pick the situation that is most likely to help us win comparisons with them.

<Know> <here> <and> <yet> <use> <battle> <is>
Understand your field position before you meet opponents.

The two key factors—their commanders, and the ground on which we will be compared— determines how we will win these comparisons and why we will lose. By understanding the key conditions, we can predict the likely result.

<Must> <win>
Then you will succeed

If we understand our potential field positions and the leader of the opposing force, we pick paths whose ground supports us and weaken opponents. Making the right choices assures us that we will win time after time.

<Not> <know> <here> <and> <yet> <use> <battle> <is>
You can fail to understand your field position and meet opponents.

However, we can only do this if we understand the terrain on which we are being compared and the strengths and weaknesses of ourselves and organizations with whom we are being compared. This doesn’t happen by accident. We must choose paths that keep us on the right ground and facing opponents who are at a disadvantage.

<Must> <be> <defeated>
Then you will fail.

If we don’t understand the competitive terrain and our opponents relative strengths and weaknesses on that type of terrain, we will lose..

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This article discusses the ninth stanza of the second section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. This stanza summarizes the previous stanzas of this section, which focus on the six flaws in organizations that arise from leadership weaknesses. This stanza looks at these ideas from a different angle.

Share

The purpose of this stanza is to suggest that we can predict what others will do based upon what we know about their leaders’ weaknesses.

The Six Weaknesses

<All> <these> <six> <things>
You must know all about these six weaknesses.

1. What matters in competition is not the size or other characteristics of the competitive forces involved. It is their positioning on the competitive terrain. Some armies can be outmaneuvered, especially on unobstructed terrain (see this article) where competitors can move in any direction that they desire.

2. The competitive positions that require the most discipline are on entangling terrain (see this article). Some armies are too lax because their managers don’t instill discipline in their people.

3. There is one type of terrain where we don’t want to fall down: the slippery slope of supporting positions (see this article). Organizations hold a supporting positions because their work is supported by a mountain of customers. Organizations that take these customers for granted will fall down.

4. Some general do not understand the competitive battles within their organizations. On constricted positions (see this article) this weakness is fatal. The unity needed to hold constricted positions falls apart.

5. A leader can survive for a time in a barricaded positions (see this article), but weak organizations tend to degrade over time, especially within protective barricades. Their disorganization fails over time to earn rewards.

6. When organizations try to develop positions on a spread-out terrain, they are spread too thin. Their leaders cannot predict where to defend against competition. These armies must eventually retreat.

<Defeat> <’s> <philosophy> <also>
You must understand the philosophies that lead to defeat.

To defeat many types of opposing organizations in competition, all we must do it meet them and their leaders on the type of terrain when the ground itself will overcome them. The key part of the competitive comparison is their suitability for the ground. Not understanding position is always a mindset that leads to defeat.

<General> <’s> <arrive> <allow>
When a general arrives, you can know what he will do.

When we understand an opponent’s unsuitability for the ground, we only have to allow their leaders to try to develop a position upon it. That position will be self-defeating. We will not have to invest any resources in winning out over them in a comparison. The flaws in their leaders and the resulting weaknesses of their organizations will speak for themselves if we point them out.

<No> <can> <no> <examine> <also>
You must study each general carefully

Being outmaneuvered, lazy, falling down, falling apart, and/or retreating speaks for itself.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This article discusses the sixth, seventh, and eighth stanzas of the second section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. These three stanzas focus on the second three flaws in organizations that arise from leadership weaknesses.

Share

The flaws discussed in these stanzas are all organizational problems. All organizational flaws flow from bad decision-making in these areas. Leadership picks the direction of an organization. Leadership is concerned with the big picture, those dealing with positioning.

Collapsing Forces

<Big> <officers> <rage> <and> <yet> <no> <obey>
Another has subcommanders that are angry and defiant.

In an organization, there are levels of management. The top managers head various divisions. Those who manage divisions can disagree with the leader of the organization and the organization’s shared mission, but when they do, the organization is doomed.

<Meet> <enemy> <hate> <and> <yet> <self> <battle>
They attack the enemy and fight their own battles.

The organization will be compared to other organizations, but these managers are more concerned with the comparisons among different divisions. They are fighting for themselves and their base of power rather than for the organization as a whole.

<General> <no> <knowledge> <this> <can>
The commander cannot know the battlefield.

This can happen without the organization’s leader being aware of what is really going on. The leader thinks that he or she understands the basis for how the organization is compared. However, these leaders don’t understand that there isn’t a shared basis for comparison but separate divisional ones.

This means that his army will fall apart
<Say> <collapse>

Being on constricted terrain(see this article) exaggerates this weakness. These positions have limited space within them. The unity that produces strength is more important on constricted terrain because these divisional manager cannot grow their divisions by expanding without taking away from other divisions. To survive on this terrain, we must remain united, using only a shared mission as the basis of comparison.

Disorganized Forces

<General> <weak> <not> <strict>
Another general is weak and easygoing.

One of the five defining characteristics of a leader, see this article, is self-discipline. Those who use self-control know the importance of those within their organization following instructions. However, not all leaders have discipline. Some are lazy and sloppy.

<Teach> <philosophy> <not> <clear>
His officers and men lack direction.

Sloppy leaders do not make their organization’s mission or position clear to others. Without understanding their position and mission, others cannot appreciate the organization’s direction and how they need to be compared.

<Officers> <soldiers> <without> <rule>
This shows in his military formations.

When a leader fails to communicate the big picture, the individuals in the organization cannot communicate the competitive position of the organization to others. They cannot know how to act to validate that position to outsiders.

<Show> <war> <vertical> <horizontal>
He fails to make his orders clear>

Even with clear instructions, organization members cannot interpret their instructions correctly because they don’t understand the larger context of those orders. Instructions concerning competitive positioning cannot be understood unless the context of mission is understood first.

<Say> <disorder>
This means that his army is disorganized.

The result is that the organization’s competitive position is confused. This is especially a problem in barricaded terrain. Since the organization is protected by barriers to entry, it can survive even as it grows more and more sloppy. Its methods can become confused because it is protected. The unity that creates strength is lost over time, not to division, but to confusion. Because their actions are confused, people work at cross purposes, making the organization less and less productive over time. Rewards from these positions will decrease and eventually the territory will fail.

Abandoning Positions

<General> <no> <can> <predict> <enemy>
Another general fails to predict the enemy.

When organizations try to develop positions on a spread-out terrain, they are spread too thin. This leaves many openings for their opponents. To defend themselves, their leaders must correcting predict the ground that opponents will attempt to occupy. They must make sure that these openings are filled to discourage others from coming in.

<By> <means> <of> <few> <join> <crowd>
He pits his small forces against larger ones.

However, the inherent problem with attempting to develop spread-out positions is that, eventually, large competitors, whose size fits the territory better, are likely to move in. This puts the smaller competitor at an immediate disadvantage.

<By> <means> <of> <weak> <strike> <strong>
His weak forces attack stronger ones.

Larger competitors can be defended against, but only if the smaller competitors choose comparisons with parts of the larger organization. The smaller organization must have local superiority. However, not all leaders know how to pick these battle correctly so they find themselves facing a competitor that has better local resources.

<War> <without> <choice> <sword> <point>
He fails to pick his fights correctly.

Sometimes, these larger organizations do not offer the smaller competitor the choice of a good battle. In every contest, they will face a superior foe.

<Say> <flee>
This means that his army must retreat.

When this happens, the smaller organization cannot invest resources in a comparison. If they do, they will simply lose whatever time, money, and credibility they invest.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This article discusses the third, fourth, and fifth stanzas of the second section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. These three stanzas focus on the first three flaws in organizations that arise from these leadership flaws.

Share

The flaws discussed in these stanzas are all organizational problems. Organizations require three types of skills: leadership, management, and productivity. All of these components must contribute to the organization’s strength. All organizational flaws flow from bad decisions in these areas.

Leadership is different than management. Leadership picks the direction of an organization, while management deals with the day-to-day problems of moving in that direction. Productivity includes the skills needed to satisfy customers with services or products. Leadership is concerned with the big picture. Management is concerned with local obstacles and issues such as money management. Productivity deals with the day-to-day work of providing the value to customers that wins rewards. Of course, in small businesses, the entrepreneur must combine all these skills. When we are entrepreneurs, we must realize which categories of problems that we are dealing with. Are they long-term strategic issues dealing with positioning? Or are they local, temporary problems dealing with making immediate moves? Or are they solving problems with addressing customers needs?

Wrong Positioning

<Husband> <force> <equal>
One general can command a force equal to the enemy.

The method of practical strategy is comparison. There can be many differences among different competitive forces. The way we understand their key differences is to compare forces that are equal in most respects. The apparent similarities between two groups of competitors can lull us into thinking that the two groups have an equal chance of winning. Assuming this is a mistake.

<By> <means> <of> <one> <strike> <ten>
Still his enemy outflanks him.

What matters in competition is not the size or other characteristics of the competitive forces involved. It is their positioning on the competitive terrain. Their position determines which and how much of their force they can bring to bear upon a specific competitive challenge at a specific time. Two organizations may seem well matched in various ways, but this doesn’t mean that their forces can be used in similar ways. This depends upon the ground they control. It is what is already in customers’ minds that shape their decisions.

A high-tech company and a consumer products company may be equally well known and have similar financial power, but which is positioned to bring out a new high-tech product and which is positioned to bring out a new consumer product? Asking the question in this way answers it. Organizations must stick to their own skill sets. However, in the coming years, many companies will bring out AI products because AI seems to open new competitive battlegrounds. Most of these moves will fail because these organizations are not properly positioned to utilize AI.

<Say> <move>
This means that his army can be outmaneuvered.

Just because an organization is excited by a new competitive terrain doesn’t mean that he should have the organization move into it. Good leaders understand that choosing their opportunities depends upon their current position not how exciting the new terrain might be.

When Weak Management Leads

<Officers> <weak> <soldiers> <strong>
Another can have strong soldiers managed by weak officers.

New entrepreneurs often lack both leadership and management skills. Instead they have only the skills of good workers. Unfortunately, great bakers cannot necessarily run a good bakery. Great chefs cannot necessarily run good restaurants. Being skilled in doing the work, does not automatically grant us skills in either leadership or management. An organization with poor management and skilled workers can find some success. However, over time, firm management will eventually be needed.

<Say> <relax>
This means that his army is too lax.

When organization decisions are made by weak managers, they eventually fail. They must be made because the organization’s position demands them. Otherwise, they are run too sloppily. This is especially dangerous on entangling terrains (see this article on the six terrains), because the organization cannot return to their position if an advance out of it fails. Good decisions must be made about when to move into new areas and when to stay put.

On entangling ground, the organization must only make successful moves forward. They must stick to their current positions until any move forward is certain to succeed. This requires good discipline that comes from good management, not relaxed managers.

Poorly Managed Workers

<Soldiers> <strong> <officers> <weak>
Another has strong officers but weak soldiers.

When strong workers lead an organization, weak management will follow their lead. This can lead to an organization of superior service. However, over time, decisions cannot be made for the benefit of the workers. The skills of the workers must serve the needs of the customers. Only customers can make positions pay.

When skilled workers serve dedicated customers, organizations can find themselves in supporting positions (see the above article on different terrains) they are on slippery ground. Bad decisions can lead to a slide into worse positions and that surround these peak positions. When organizations start making decisions for the organization or its workers instead of the benefit of customers, they are setting out on a slippery slope.

<Say> <sink>
This means that his army will fall down.

Organizations that take supporting positions for granted will fall down. Such organizations hold a superior position because their work is supported by a mountain of customers. Weak managers who start making decisions for their own benefit instead of for the benefit of customers are surrendering what holds them in that superior position.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Happy 2026!

We start with this year with a short article about the next stanza of Sun Tzu’s work. This article discusses the very short, second stanza of the second section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This section focuses on the six weaknesses of the “armies” involved. Here, we discuss the source of those flaws.

Share

The Flaws

<All> <these> <six> <things>
Know all six of these weaknesses.

This line refers to the six flaws listed in the previous stanza and discussed in this article.

<Weak> <heaven> <ground> <’s> <disaster>
They create weak timing and disastrous positions.

These organizational weaknesses are magnified on the wrong types of ground with the wrong type of associated climate. This also was discussed briefly in the previous article.

Leave a comment

<General> <’s> <pass> <also>
They all arise from the army’s commander.

The leader of that competitive force makes the decisions that create its weaknesses and amplifies them by taking a position on the wrong type of ground. He may not directly make the bad choices involved, but he let’s them pass.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This article discusses the first stanza of the second section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete, but this section focuses on the weaknesses of the “armies” involved. Later in this section, the book describes how these weaknesses come from the flaws of their generals. In this article, however, we discuss how each of these six weaknesses can be connected to one of the six types of field positions, discussed in the first section of the chapter.

The method of practical strategy is comparison. We compare potential competitive terrains, but we also compare the forces that compete on those terrains. Each of the six terrains magnify one of the six organizational flaws listed here. Sun Tzu doesn’t explain this connection, but he lists the terrains in the same order as their associated flaws. We are interested in where these forces will be united and therefore strong, and where they will be weak. We especially analyze our own forces to know where we will fail.

Share

The flaws discussed in this stanza are all organizational problems. Organizations have three components: a leader, management, and workers. All of these components must contribute to the organization’s strength. The most important part is the leader, because he builds the organization. All organizational flaws flow from the leader.

The flaws of an organization are magnified on the wrong type of terrain. This stanza lists the six problematic terrain. The following stanzas discuss each flaw in more depth.

The Flaws

<Make> <military> <have> <move> <is>
Some armies can be outmaneuvered.

The challenges of unobstructed terrain (see this article) are that all competitors can move in any direction that they desire. There are no obstacles to prevent us from moving directly toward our goals, but others can move to outflank us, putting them in a better position to get to where we want to go. On unobstructed ground, good leadership requires being able to see the big picture, to understand who might outflank us. We must see not only where we want to go, but where others can go as well.

<Have> <relaxed> <subject>
Some armies are too lax.

The competitive positions that require the most discipline are on entangling terrain (see this article). All movements forward out of these positions must be successful because we can not return to them. Discipline is required to stick to these sticky positions, and discipline is needed to make successful moves out of them. Only discipline keeps competitive forces in place when they need to stay and allows them to successfully move when an opportunity presents itself.

Leave a comment

<Have> <sink> <subject>
Some armies fall down.

There is one type of terrain where we don’t want to fall down: the slippery slope of supporting positions (see this article). These peak positions are slippery because all the surrounding terrain is downhill, that is, weaker. These positions cannot be advanced by moving out of them, so they must be improved by building them up. In hierarchical organizations, those managers looking for more power are tempted to move outside of the supporting terrain to develop their own, more independent territories.

<Have> <collapse> <subject>
Some armies fall apart.

Constricted positions (see this article) are also built up, but for a different reason. These areas have limited space within them. The unity that produces strength is more important in these positions because they cannot grow large by expanding beyond their scope. We must fill all these constricted spaces and defend them.

<Have> <disorder> <subject>
Some armies are disorganized.

In barricaded positions (see this article), organizations tend to degrade over time. They are protected by barriers to entry, so the entire organization gets sloppy. Its mission and its methods become confused. The unity that creates strength is lost, not to division, but to confusion. Because their direction is confused, people work at cross purposes. Rewards from these position will decrease and eventually the territory will fail.

<Have> <flee> <subject>
Some armies must retreat.

When organizations try to develop positions on a spread-out terrain, they are spread too thin. This leaves many opportunities for their opponents. Eventually, larger competitors whose sizes better match the size of the opportunity, move in. The smaller organizations are squeezed out. Because of the mismatch between territory and organization, the unity and focus the produces strength is impossible.

This post continues our project explaining each stanza of Sun Tzu’s work. The English translation and Chinese transliterations are from my award-winning book, The Art of War and The Ancient Chinese Revealed.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This article discusses the eighth stanza of the first section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. This verse offers a summary of how we use these types of terrain in decision-making. Each of type was examined individually in each of the previous six verses.

We describe the psychological space of competition with physical analogies like these because our minds were designed to work in a material world. We can make the comparisons on which competition is based much more easily and quickly when we can use physical analogies. These analogies also make it easier for us to communicate and discuss the nature of a competitive terrain with others.

The method of practical strategy is comparison. We compare potential competitive areas against these six extreme forms of positions to gauge how easy those positions will be to win, to hold, and to move on from. In other words, these extremes allow us to easily evaluate positions and foresee potential opportunities and problems.

Share

We must aim at new positions in order to make moves, and make claims to improve our existing place in the minds of others. Evaluating potential moves is difficult given the limited amount of information we have before exploring our opportunities by moving into them. Aim requires us to judge potential positions from a distance, by their surface characteristics, those we can evaluate before our costly investment in a move.

The Benchmarks

<All> <these> <six> <things>
These are the six types of field positions.

All six terrains have three dimensions of characteristics: obstacles, dangers, and distances. Each of these three dimensions is a range of values. The extremes, \the minimums and maximums, of these characteristics , are “benchmarks,” used for comparison. These benchmarks are used to evaluate both existing positions and new areas in which we might stake new positions.

In terms of obstacles, values range from unobstructed (see this article), to barricaded (see this article). All competitive areas fall somewhere on this range, from few to many obstacles. In terms of dangers, potential values range from entangling, the sticky areas that are destroyed if we leave them (see this article), to supporting, slippery areas where all directions away from them lead us downhill to a worse position (see this article). In terms of distances, values range from constricted, (see this article), to spread-out(see this article).

<Ground> <’s> <philosophy> <also>
Each battleground has its own rules.

To win a position, we must be able to advance into it. To maintain that position and win its rewards over time, we must be able to defend it. To move on from it, we must be able to advance out of it in the future. The six benchmarks allow us to compare these different positions more easily.

• Unobstructed positions are hard to defend but easy to advance.

• Barricaded positions are hard to get into and easy to defend.

• Entangling positions work only one-way. If we leave them, we cannot return.

• Supporting positions are easy to defend, but should never be left.

• Constricted positions are easy to defend but impossible to expand.

• Spread-out positions are hard to defend but easy to expand.

Leave a comment

Using Benchmarks

<General> <’s> <arrival> <assignment>
As a commander, you must know where to go.

While this knowledge may help us understand the capacities and limitations of rival positions, there real value is in helping us choose among potential new positions for future moves. We must remember that positions are a path, each must be seen as a stepping stone to the next. To pick the best stepping stones, we must judge their future potential based on the nature of the ground. These six extremes discussed here make our decisions as simple as possible.

The method of practical strategy is comparison. Each potential position falls somewhere on the range of possibilities in each of these three dimensions. The question is always:

• How many barriers of entry are there? Do we have the resources and skills to surmount those barriers?

• What is the danger of getting trapped in that position? Will we want to move on from it, and, if our move fails, can we return.

• What is the size of the opportunity? Is it one we will quickly outgrow? Or are we too small to fulfill its demand?

Leave a comment

<No> <can> <no> <examine> <also>
You must examine each position closely.

These rules were devised for making decisions quickly. We do not want to get bogged down in analyzing each potential opportunity, but each opportunity must be evaluated. These three dimensions and six benchmarks give us a mental map on which we can place each opportunity to quickly tell us how they compare to other potential opportunities. Some will have more barriers. Others will be harder to move out of. Still others create a mismatch between the size of the opportunities and our limited resources.

There are no perfect opportunities, but some opportunities are better than the rest.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This article discusses the seventh stanza of the first section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. This stanza focuses on the sixth and final type: spread-out ground.

All six terrains are the extremes, the minimums and maximums, of three dimensions: obstacles, dangers, and distances. These dimensions are used to compare competitive positions and opportunities. This terrain is the maximum of the dimension of distance. It is the opposite of constricted terrain (see this article). These are competitive positions that are not focused. Saying this another way, these positions cause us to spread ourselves too thinly.

Distance can refer to physical distance, but it is best understood as psychological space. This psychological distance can exist in large scales, such as the distance between competing worldviews, but it also exists on smaller specific scales, such as the differing steps between one type of selling and another. It can be as simple as the distance between separate grocery aisles that carry a company’s products. Or the differences in skill needed to make one item as opposed to another.

Share

These positions are easy to get into but difficult to defend. Opportunities are openings. These competitive positions have many openings within them. In Sun Tzu’s philosophy, strength comes from unity and focus. Strength is very difficult to achieve in spread-out positions. Being spread out is the opposite of being united and focused.

Spread Out

<Distant> <form> <is>
Some field positions are too spread out.

The specific problem with these positions are that their different parts are too distant from one another. This means that, if any part of our position is challenged, our other resources from distant parts of the position are difficult and costly to bring into play.

<Influence> <fair>
Your force may seem equal to the enemy.

We cannot compare different competitive forces by the total number of their resources alone. There is a big difference between a company that has a million customers buying the same product and a company that has a million customers buying a thousand different products. Money, manpower, and other resources are more usable when they are concentrated in fewer areas. Spread-out positions are, by their very nature, difficult to manage because their numbers on spreadsheets must be broken down on the basis of location. We must recognize which resources are only available in limited localities and those that are available to the territory as a whole.

Leave a comment

This dilution of resources is most damaging when we are compared to others when people are making decisions about who to support. All competitive battles are local, existing at a specific place and time, usually within the specific minds that are comparing alternatives to make a decision. In these decisions, local resources are usually much more important than global ones unless the decision involves a global organization.

<Disaster> <by> <means> <of> <choose> <battle>
Still you will lose if you provoke a battle.

Most comparisons are not won on size alone, but when a small number of local resources are compared to a large number of local resources, the smaller number is always at a disadvantage. Sun Tzu’s advice for winning battles—that is, comparisons—against larger opponents is to challenge them one small piece at a time. When we take a position on a spread-out territory, we are breaking ourselves down into small groups that others can challenge one at a time.

Leave a comment

<Battle> <and> <yet> <no> <advantage>
If you fight, you will not have any advantage.

We are always at a disadvantage when compared to others if we spread ourselves too thinly. In these types of positions, we are always leaving holes in our positions that others can move into. There is no way to correct this other than deciding what our core competency is and focusing on it. Over time, we must gradually lose the parts of our position that are further from our core, and, as much as possible, bring all positions into that central competency.

This post continues our project explaining each stanza of Sun Tzu’s work. The English translation and Chinese transliterations are from my award-winning book, The Art of War and The Ancient Chinese Revealed.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

This article discusses the sixth stanza of the first section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. This stanza focuses on the fifth type: barricaded ground.

All six terrains are the extremes, the minimums and maximums, of three dimensions: obstacles, dangers, and distances. These dimensions are used to compare competitive opportunities. This terrain is the maximum of the dimension of obstacles. It is the opposite of an unobstructed terrain (see this article). This is a competitive area that has many barriers to entry.

Share

These territories are the most difficult to get into, but the easiest to defend. Opportunities are openings, but in this case, the opening exists at the other side of a number of barriers. Think of a broad valley surrounded by high mountains.

Obstructed

The barriers that protect these areas are natural, not walls that we ourselves put up.

<Obstructed> <form> <is>
Some field positions give you a barricade.

While we might see obstacles as a problem because they block our path, they are also an opportunity because they block the paths of others as well. If we surmount these obstacles first, these obstacles work for us as strongly as they once worked against us.

<I> <first> <reside> <it>
Get to these positions first.

The advantages in these areas go to those who are able to surmount these barriers to entry first. These are usually the people that are able to see a innovative way over the obstacles and who are able to assemble the assets needed to get the job done. This frequently requires a number of supporters who trust the concept enough to finance it. Elon Musk is the person in our era who has been able to do this the most consistently.

Leave a comment

Unlike constricted areas, the territories inside these barricaded positions can be quite large.

<Must> <reside> <high> <south,> <sunny> <hillside> <by> <means> <of> <await> <enemy>
You must occupy their southern, sunny heights in order to await the enemy.

This is similar to the advice regarding unobstructed terrain. If the internal area of the barricaded terrain is large, we cannot necessarily fill it, as we can with constricted terrain, so we should find the best position within in it. Residing on “high, south, sunny, hillside” means developing a highly visible position. Our first job in an these areas is winning recognition, so we can be seen. We seek recognition, both for the value of the new ground and for our position as the first to provide value from that barricaded ground. We use this visibility either by selling products or by attracting investors. Elon Must has demonstrated this technique again and again.

Once someone finds their way into barricaded positions, others will copy them. When we lead the way into these territories, we must expect competition. We want to meet them by already occupying the most valuable and defensible territories. Elon Must has, again, demonstrated this many times. He uses the income from these areas—selling electric cars and launching satellites—to finance overcoming barriers in other areas, such as launching his satellites to build a worldwide internet network.

Leave a comment

<Seems> <enemy> <first> <reside> <it>
Sometimes the enemy occupies these areas first.

Just finding these areas first is not all that is required: we must also see their value and how to develop it as a building block of our positions. A way to enter barricade terrain may be found by others first, but they may fail to make the territory pay.

<Full> <and> <yet> <do> <not> <follow>
If he fills them, do not follow him.

Many recognize the value of a barricaded terrain and, if they can, they fill it completely. These areas are difficult to enter, and impossible to acquire if they are filled completely. If there are no open positions beyond the barricades, they cannot be taken away from anyone who already controls them. In the case of launching satellites there are small opening for smaller launches and other opening for state-sponsored launch providers, SpaceX doesn’t have the capacity to launch all satellites so there is a niche for these other players.

<Pull> <and> <yet> <remove> <it>
If so, entice him away.

The only way those filling these positions can lose them is to be lured away. Earlier in a post on supporting terrains, we gave the example of Coke versus Pepsi to illustrate this idea. No one has come close to enticing Musk away from his dominant position in electric cars, space launches, communication satellites, and so on.

<Do> <not> <follow> <also>
Never go after him

This is the most general advice. Generally, following someone into a barricaded position is costly and cannot result in a leadership position.

This post continues our project explaining each stanza of Sun Tzu’s work. The English translation and Chinese transliterations are from my award-winning book, The Art of War and The Ancient Chinese Revealed.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

This article discusses the fifth stanza of the first section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. This stanza focuses on the fourth type: constricted ground.

All six terrains are the extremes, the minimums and maximums, of three dimensions: obstacles, dangers, and distances. These dimensions are used to compare competitive opportunities. This terrain is the minimum of the dimension of distances. It is the opposite of a spread-out terrain. In marketing, these constricted terrains are known as market niches.

Share

We must always consider the size of the opportunity that we are pursuing. Is it too big for our resources or is it small. Pursuing small openings is seldom a bad thing. Opportunities are openings. Pursuing an opportunity that is too large is often a problem. It is easier to fill a small openings than a big one. It is easier to solve a small need than a large one.

Constricting

The goal of strategy is to move from position to position as stepping stones to improve our competitive strength. However, this doesn’t always means moving from smaller positions to bigger and bigger ones. We can also accumulate small positions to grow.

<Narrow> <form> <is>
Some field positions are constricted.

Many of us think that winning small positions is a bad thing. The problems arise, however, when these incremental positions are spread out over too large a territory, a problem we will discuss in a later article. When these small additions to our position are concentrated, that is, close by and connected to our existing positions, they are always valuable.

<I> <first> <reside> <it>
Get to these positions first.

Because they are small, these constricted positions are not always obvious. When we watch Shark Tank, the show on investing in small companies, we cannot help but notice almost all those looking for investment are in market niches. They are discovered by people who are part of the small market who have a need and solve it. Sometimes these niches are too small to support an investor like a Shark but still be very good for those working within them.

Leave a comment

Constricted terrain allows us to move into it easily as long as it is open.

<Must> <fill> <it> <by> <means> <of> <awaiting> <enemy>
You must fill these areas and await the enemy.

When we are on constricted terrain, we must find everyone in our niche. We must develop relationships with them. The solutions we offer must address the majority of their needs. We do not want to leave an opening for a competitor to move in. By being the “market leader” in the niche, the one that everyone knows, we can easily win a comparison with any new competitor.

Leave a comment

<Seems> <enemy> <first> <reside> <it>
Sometimes, the enemy will reach them first.

Just finding these areas first is not all that is required: people must also see their value as a building block of their positions. A constricted terrain may be found by others first, but they may fail to appreciate it. The smallness of the opportunity can seem beneath them.

<Full> <and> <yet> <do> <not> <follow>
If he fills them, do not follow him.

However, many do recognize the value of a constricted terrain and fill it completely. These areas a easy to move into if they are open, but impossible to acquire if they are filled completely. If these positions are not open, they cannot be taken away from someone who already controls them.

<Not> <full> <and> <yet> <follow> <it>
However, if he fails to fill them, you can go after him.

If a competitor is on constricted terrain, they may not fill it completely. Even though these opportunities are small, they can be too big for some to fill completely. Some may fill part of a constricted terrain without realizing the nature of the whole. In these cases, we can go into these areas and leverage them away from those who were there first.

This post continues our project explaining each stanza of Sun Tzu’s work. The English translation and Chinese transliterations are from my award-winning book, The Art of War and The Ancient Chinese Revealed.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

This article discusses the fourth stanza of the first section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. This stanza focuses on the third type: supporting ground. Its focus is on the advantages, disadvantages, and defense of such terrain.

What Sun Tzu calls the “danger” of a terrain is how difficult it makes our next advance. Dangers are how the terrain affects advancing from a position. The two extremes of dangerous ground are “sticky” and “slippery.” Supporting terrain is another name for “slippery” positions, those that we cannot leave without putting ourselves on a slippery slope.

Share

When we think about a competitive landscape, we can visualize it as a terrain of better or worse positions where the better positions are higher and the worse ones are lower. Positions are associated with each other, some sloping uphill to better positions and others downhill to worse ones. We seek to move higher in this terrain where we earn better rewards and get closer to our goals. However, among these slopes, there are places where we find peaks and valleys. In terms of rewards, peaks generate the best rewards while valleys produce the worst.

Leave a comment

Supporting

The goal of strategy is to move from position to position as stepping stones to improve our competitive strength. However, slippery positions that a much better than all surrounding opportunities. While all positions decay over time, these positions tend to last longer because they are higher, decaying slowly.

<I> <exit> <and> <yet> <no> <advantage>
You cannot leave some positions without losing an advantage.

This is the reverse of the line that began our discussion of unobstructed terrain ( see this article( and about entangling terrain (see this article). This terrain is the opposite of entangling . It is known as supporting. Entangling is sticky terrain, the maximum of danger, while supporting terrain is slippery, the minimum of danger. We cannot move away from these supporting positions because every place around them is on a downslope.

<Mutually> <exit> <and> <yet> <no> <advantage>
If the enemy leaves this ground, he also loses an advantage.

When we hold these types of positions we should not relinquish them, and, if our opponents hold these positions, they should not relinquish them either. While we cannot leave entangling ground unless certain of success because we cannot return, we should not leave supporting ground because to do so, we will be giving up our advantage. However, if we do make this mistake, we should immediately return to these positions. These positions take time to fade from the minds of our supporters so returning is usually easy.

<Say> <support>
We call these supporting field positions.

This terrain is supporting in the sense that it lifts us above all the surrounding areas, giving us a superior position to all our potential competitors in our local neighborhood. These positions are also known as “peak positions” because to leave them we must go downhill, accepting positions that are not nearly as good.

Many of us work hard to discover peak positions in our competitive arenas, but when we find them, we don’t necessarily recognize them. We only realize it when we explore the surrounding territory and examine surrounding competitive positions and find them all less desirable than our current places.

<Support> <form> <is>
These positions strengthen you.

Supporting positions offer the best rewards. These rewards allow us to build up our defensive resources. We need these resources because other competitors will be coming after our positions. This will be very difficult for them. Those in peak positions always have an advantage. Opposition that has to fight uphill is always at a disadvantage.

Leave a comment

<Enemy> <although> <advantage> <I>
The enemy may try to entice you away.

The only way we can lose these positions is to be lured away from them. The most famous example of this was in the soft drink industry. Coke held the peak position in soft drinks for decade. Pepsi was the competitor fighting uphill against Coke. Pepsi had a worse position, but they were superior in flavor, at least in taste tests. When Pepsi started their “taste test” ad campaign, Coke’s position as the leading seller was not threatened, but Coke wanted to compete on the new ground that Pepsi had established. To this end, Coke replaced their traditional formula with a new one called “New Coke.” This move hurt Coke much more than the Pepsi campaign had. Within six months, Coke brought back the original formula as Coke Classic. The product was accepted back into its former peak position. New Coke faded away.

<I> <without> <exit> <also>
Still, hold your position.

When we are in a peak position, the best strategy is to hold onto it. These positions exist in people’s minds, so those in peak positions must always maintain that identity in the minds of their supporters. This is why products such as Windows, iPhone, and so on just add numbers to their new model rather than renaming them. New names are reserved for products that expand on their peak positions.

<Pull> <and> <yet> <remove> <it>
You must entice the enemy to leave.

When we have a competitor in a peak position, we can only entice them to leave it. We must promote our products to make their existing positions seem to be a disadvantage. Pepsi’s strategy was not a bad one: find a new basis for competitive comparison.

<Command> <enemy> <half> <exit> <but> <strike> <it>
You then strike him as he is leaving.

Whenever opponents make any move, we must characterize their moves as abandoning their supporting position and their current supporters. Those in supporting position can and will explore new areas. When they abandon those explorations, we can characterize it as a tendency to abandon customers in general. Our goal is to create doubt about their dedication to their supporting position.

<Advantage>
These field positions offer an advantage.

Supporting positions are always an advantage. Even if we make the mistake of moving away from them, they will accept us back if we recognize our error quickly, before others can take our place.

This post continues our project explaining each stanza of Sun Tzu’s work. The English translation and Chinese transliterations are from my award-winning book, The Art of War and The Ancient Chinese Revealed.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

This article discusses the third stanza of the first section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. This stanza focuses on the second type: entangling ground. Its focus is on the advantages, disadvantages, and defense of such terrain.

The danger of a terrain is evaluated in terms of how easy or difficult it makes our next advance. Dangers are how the terrain affects advancing from a given position. The two extremes of dangerous ground are “sticky” and “slippery.” Entangling terrain is another name for “sticky” positions, those that are destroyed when we try to move out of them.

In these positions, we are punished by our previous supporters if we attempt to abandon them. Those previous supporters will prevent us from moving back into these positions if our move forward does not succeed. We must only move if we are certain of finding a better position elsewhere.

In general, any position built on a contract is an entangling position. If one party violates that contract, it is unlikely that the other party in that agreement will trust the violating party again. An ally that abandons us during a battle should never be trusted as an ally again. If we leave a job for a better job, it is difficult to go back to our previous employer if the new job doesn’t pan out. Many financial agreements are sticky ground. While filing bankruptcy may allow us to move away from our debtors legally, borrowing from them in the future is impossble.

Leave a comment

Entangling

Sun Tzu starts with an advantage of this type of ground.

<Can> <by> <means> <of> <depart>
You can attack from some positions easily.

This is the same line that began our discussion of unobstructed terrain in the previous article. Entangling terrain doesn’t interfere with moving on. It allows us to move easily in any direction, toward our goals or out of a bad situation. Positions developed in entangling terrain are, however, more delicate than those on unobstructed terrain.

<Disaster> <by> <means> <of> <return>
Disaster arises when you try to return to them.

We must remember that all strategic social positions exist primarily in the human mind. Even if those positions are substantiated by a contract, it is the position in the mind that matters the most. As people, we must all take a leap of faith to give or accept positions in each others’ lives. When that faith is violated, that trust is not easily rebuilt.

<Say> <suspended>
These are entangling positions.

This terrain is <suspended> in the sense the it is supported by a future obligation. Not all positions are entangling. Many of our positions are positions of opportunity and convenience. As circumstances change, all parties expect these positions of opportunity to change as well. For example, most customer and supplier relationships are not entangling. This is especially true for retail. Buying from one grocery store does not obligate us to buy from that same grocery store forever.

Many companies, however, work hard to entangle their customers. Apple is a good example of this strategy. Their products often require the use of other Apple products. If, for example, we use their software development products we must use them on Apple computers. Many organizations try to “entangle” their customers in a web of dependencies. Most award programs, such as airline miles, are part of an entangling strategy.

<Suspended> <form> <is>
These field positions are one-sided.

Sun Tzu saw these positions as suspended in the sense of at the top of a steep slope. Once we rush down to a place below, we cannot climb back. Another name for these types of positions is “one way.” All the roads leaving them are one-way paths. If we move from them to a new position, we cannot turn around and go back to where we were.

<Enemy> <without> <preparation>
Wait until your enemy is unprepared.

Leaving these positions successfully is mostly a question of picking the right time. The issue today is not so much about the enemy being unprepared for a downhill rush as it is about our being prepared to make a successful move. We must be certain our window of opportunity is open to establish our new position.

<Exit> <and> <yet> <win> <it>
You can then attack from these positions and win.

Moving into entangling positions requires thinking two moves ahead. We must know when the position into which we are moving is sticky, and, because of that, we must know that there are opportunities surrounding this terrain that will be easy to move into. Most positions are stepping stone to future positions, but entangling positions can only be used as a stepping stone once.

<Enemy> <seems> <have> <preparation>
You will try to attack and lose.

If we fail in our moves forward from these positions, we are stuck without a position. This is never good.

<Exit> <and> <yet> <no> <win>
Since you can’t return, you will meet disaster.

It is always easier to move forward when we already have a position on which we can base our move. Sticky positions are not as good as most types of ground for exploring surrounding territory. Those who expect us to stick to our positions will look even upon this exploration as a kind of betrayal.

<Disaster> <by> <means> <of> <return>
Avoid a well-prepared enemy.

We must assume that by leaving an entangling position, we will create an mild form of enemy behind us, one who is prepared to rebuff us if not attack us.

<No> <advantage>
These field positions offer no advantage.

Generally speaking, entangling terrains are best avoided. Instead, we should seek supporting terrains, which are their opposite in terms of danger. These position are also difficult to return to, but for a different reason.

Due to our member’s generous support, we will send all our articles to all subscribers. To enjoy my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This article discusses the second stanza the first section of Chapter 10 of The Art of War. This chapter’s general topic is the six types of terrain on which we compete. This stanza focus is on the first type of terrain: unobstructed ground. Its focus is on understanding the advantages, disadvantages, and defense of such terrain.

Unobstructed terrain must be evaluated in terms of how easy or difficult it makes our next advance. In some cases, we must also consider how such positions may affect our ability to retreat from advances that lead us into problems.

Obstacles are barriers to movement. When those barriers surround a terrain, they make it difficult to get into that area. However, they also make it easier to defend. One position’s obstacles are another position’s defense. Obstacles are one of the three dimensions that define the key differences among strategic areas, These three strategic dimensions are called dangers, distances, and obstacles. Unobstructed terrain has a minimum of obstacles.

Unobstructed terrain is an area with no or few other competitors. Opposing competing positions are the most common form of barrier. This is why new, unexplored territories are where we look for opportunities. Besides other competitors, however, there are other forms of obstacles as well: technological, monetary, regulatory, and so on, but in Sun Tzus time, the most unobstructed ground was the ground where no one was producing rewards. The ground is “open” with few positions on it.

Leave a comment

Unobstructed

Sun Tzu starts with the advantage of this type of ground.

<I> <can> <by> <means> <of> <depart>
You can attack from some positions easily.

The English translation of this line of Chinese is narrower than its original meaning. We can <depart> this type of ground both to advance and to retreat. Unobstructed terrain is often used as temporary stepping-stones to stronger, nearby positions. It allows us to move easily in any direction, toward our goals or out of a bad situation. Positions developed in unobstructed terrain, can be built through alliances and later fortified.

It is easy and usually inexpensive to explore open terrain. When we find opportunities on them, we can explore those opportunities with little opposition.

<Mutually> <can> <by> <means> <of> <meeting>
Other forces can meet you easily as well.

One advantage of unobstructed or open terrains is that it allows different individuals or groups to come together, that is, join one another in alliances. This enables one of the nine common strategic situations, “highway ground,” (see this article), where position paths can intersect. Developing relationships with allies is an important early step in developing these positions. Alliances are made easier on open terrain because each competitor has an abundance of ground to choose from, more than they can develop on their own.

<Say> <unobstructed>
We call these unobstructed positions.

The internet was built so recently that we can see how it created various forms of unobstructed terrain at various points of time. The first open terrain was “need” for networked computers. People would see how connecting computers would make many tasks easier. The “need” was for a connection, a network, that when everywhere, enabling applications like email. This need for more and more connection was a very open terrain eventually stretching to the worldwide web. Then there was a need for websites so that people could organize the information on their local networks for easy access. More and more websites created the need for search engines. Search engine created the “need” for what we call AI. The process keeps opening more and more new territories, each of which in initially open to a new group of competitors.

Our ability to open up these new terrains has created more abundant competition as more and more competitors flood into each new area, exploring its opportunities.

<Unobstructed> <form> <is>
These positions are open.

The competitive areas that we tend to notice are those that have competitors. Truly open terrain are harder to see because there is nothing there, no competitors and no solution. We can see this at each new stage of Internet development. There may be problems there, but people usually don’t see problems as opportunities to create new terrain. When a new technology opens up a new terrain, it takes time for people to find what needs it creates. We can see this today because we have experience with new technology opening one new area after another.

<First> <reside> <high> <south,> <sunny> <hillside>
On them, be the first to occupy a high, sunny area.

Residing on “high, south, sunny, hillside” is means developing a highly visible position. Our first job in an open area is winning recognition, so can we be seen. We seek recognition, both for the value of the new ground and our position of a first mover by providing value from the ground. We do this either by selling products or attracting investors by promising such products.

<Advantage> <provisions> <way> <by> <means> <of> <battle>
Put yourself where you can defend your supply routes.

Both by selling products or attracting investors, those in these new territories soon find themselves competing for the rewards of the unobstructed ground. Competition is a comparison. They find ways to win rewards from them. As an open terrain attract more people and solutions to compare, those who are more successful, start investing their rewards in defense. They fortify their positions, creating barriers, blocking the once-open ground until it is no longer “open.”

<Then> <advantage>
Then you will have an advantage.

When we win these comparisons, we become the leader in what is no longer “open ground.” We have a position. Our advantage allows us to expand into the open areas around us, if they still exist. A well-known position create walls for defense.

No of terrain of value ever “stable.” Whether was a talking about Antarctica, the ocean floow, or the far side of the moon, once value is found in that area, people will be competing for advantageous positions in that area.