Comparing: Using Benchmarks
The Art of War 10:1.49-52
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.
This post is public so feel free to share it.
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.
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?
<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.