The topic of this article is from the fourth section of chapter two of The Art of War, command. Command is one of the five defining elements of a competitive position. It describes the decision-making function, that is, who decides what and when? In the competitive world, decision making is commanding, but within the world of production, it is the managing. Both commanding and managing are necessary for every individual and organization. They have complementary but opposite skill sets. The strategic skills of command do not work in production, and the administrative skills of managing do not work in competition.
In my English translation of Sun Tzu, I translated the Chinese character primarily meaning “monarch” or “ruler” as “politician.” This put this section of The Art of War in the context of politicians attempting to “manage” the army. This approach makes the problems clear, but it has limited usefulness in applying these lessons to our daily lives.
In this article, we will look at these same problems more generally, as trying to manage our competitive actions in the same ways as we manage the parts of our lives we control. Each of us must clearly separate the two sets of methods, one for focusing on increasing productivity and one to focus on exploring opportunities and adapting to change.
Planning versus Strategy
This is this sections first stanza:
You must master command.
The nation must support you.
The Art of War 3:4.1-2
“The nation” is the productive part of the organization in Sun Tzu’s military terms. It is contrasted with “the military,” it competitive operations. In this analysis of these issues, we are contrasting our planning and management abilities with our strategic decision-making.
Supporting the military makes the nation powerful.
Not supporting the military makes the nation weak.
The Art of War 3:4.3-4
A powerful nation is one that is productive and wealthy. It must have a military that is strong enough to protect its position and advance it. A powerful individual is one whose existing position gives them authority. Winning and developing this position requires both good skills in strategy and management. It is that existing position that makes further advances possible. If we are not able to make those advances, it is only a matter of time until our existing authority is threatened. Without our ability to protect and advance our positions, we cannot maintain our authority and its rewards.
The Dominance of Planning
The army's position is made more difficult by politicians in three different ways. Ignorant of the whole army’s inability to advance, they order an advance.
The Art of War 3:4.5-6
In an organization, there is a split between the planners and marketers. The managers, i.e. “politicians’” want to predictability. They think competitive progress is as easy as creating a spreadsheet with regular ten percent increases. There is a part within each of us that wants a predictable plan. The problem is that most do not understand competitive uncertainty. They plan to advance, but they don’t understand that making progress depends on the larger environment that we do not control. If we know strategy, we can advance in a consistent ways, but in ways that may and should surprise us. We may want to manage our lives as if our progress was predictable, but it isn’t. Too many are frustrated by this fact and blame the world and society for their inability to move forward on the path that they had planned. Their real problem is that everyone pretends life is predictable when it isn’t.
Ignorant of the whole army’s inability to withdraw, they order a withdrawal.
We call this tying up the army.
The Art of War 3:4.7-8
When an attempt to move forward isn’t working, we must recognize that conditions are different from what we expected. But our planning minds don’t want to admit failure. To the manager, failure that can be correctly by better planning. We think the strategic problem is like the breakdown of a machine: we can fix it with more resources. But when the problem is strategic, it is not solved by more resources, but by more learning more about conditions and creatively adapting to them.
Politicians don’t understand the army’s business.
Still, they think they can run an army.
This confuses the army’s officers.
The Art of War 3:4.9-11
Because “management planning” is taught everywhere and strategic thinking is taught nowhere, everyone always thinks that planning and better management is the right solution to every problem. Especially since the strategy most teach is really planning. We prioritize management problems as more important than strategic ones because we can control the internal world of production. The competitive environment is outside of our control. Too many think that if we cannot control it, we cannot prioritize how to deal with it, but this in not true. The only way we can prioritize what we need to focus on is to clearly understand how to separate the two categories of problems, those we can control and those to which we must adapt. Then, we must know some set of appropriate methods.
Setting Priorities
Politicians don’t know the army’s chain of command.
They give the army too much freedom.
This will create distrust among the army’s officers.
The Art of War 3:4.10-12
Our managing minds can learn about our need to adapt to changes, but we must learn to be guided by our understanding of strategic priorities. Our tendency is to overreact to every unexpected event. Events may or may not demand a reaction, but that depends on our priorities: how we see the big picture of our strategic position as a path forward. If we do not have clear priorities, we react to too many changes and begin not to trust our ability to make good snap decisions.
The entire army becomes confused and distrusting.
This invites invasion by many different rivals.
We say correctly that disorder in an army kills victory.
The Art of War 3:4.13-15
In areas that we control, good decisions are based on organizing a process of regular maintenance and quality: a plan. In areas where we are judged by those we cannot control, good decisions are based on improvising to adapt to changing conditions. In both situations, it is certain that, if we are unsure of ourselves, others will be unsure of us. The suspicion of weakness is all that is needed to have others challenge our existing positions. We don’t have to make every decision correctly. If people see us making good decisions often enough, they will not oppose us. Our success depends upon the steady advance in both productivity and in the responsibilities we hold.