Clausewitz on Strategy
Inspiration and Timeless
Insight from a Master Strategist
Summary
- Carl
von Clausewitz's classic book, “On
War”, is not a book about business. It is a book about military
strategy that can be readily applied to business.
Clausewitz's
theories can train the modern executive's mind to cope with
uncertainty. Just as conditions change rapidly in war, rendering even
the most carefully plotted strategy obsolete, so it is in business:
You can't know what will happen, so you have to remain mentally
flexible to respond to any challenge.
In
this way, whether you're battling entrenched competitors, fighting to
seize or defend market territory, or forging alliances with former
enemies, you can make the bold decisions that will ensure victory.
Clauswitz
- Then and Now
To
understand Clausewitz's theories, it's useful to consider how he
arrived at them. He was born on June 1, 1780, near Magdeburg in the
kingdom of Prussia, in a period of equal if not greater upheaval than
even now. At birth, Clausewitz
was a subject of Frederick the Great,
one of
the most brilliant leaders and managers in history.
Clausewitz
was nine years old when the French Revolution began, and it lasted
long enough that Clausewitz was able not only to participate in it
but to recognize the important sweeping social, political, and
military changes it ushered in and to write down for posterity his
tremendous insights and ideas.
Clausewitz
entered the Prussian Army at the age of 12, when the revolution was
barely three years old, and saw combat at the age of 13. Despite
coming from a poor family and having to educate himself, Clausewitz
gained admission to the Institute for Young Officers in Berlin, which
later became the Prussian General War College and graduated first in
his class. He was then appointed military adjutant to a prince.
From
that vantage point, and from his time as a French prisoner of war,
Clausewitz was able
to witness the crushing defeat of his country at the battles of Jena
and Auerstadt and the humiliating peace settlement
in which Prussia lost half its lands and people and became
a French satellite.
He
recognized that the French victory was not a matter of superior
military might or even theory but came about because it tapped the
energies of the French people. He
saw, in short, that a
popular uprising
could trump even the best-organized and equipped army,
which was an unthinkable idea at the time.
Unfortunately,
his ideas were not shared by the Prussian king, whose interest in
self-preservation went so far that he allied with France and provided
an army to Napoleon for the 1812 invasion of Russia.
Clausewitz
resigned from the Prussian military service and joined the Russian
army at the risk of his life. His
own analysis of strategy up to that point had convinced him that
Napoleon's approach to war could not work against Russia, thereby
convincing him that he was on the winning side.
As a
soldier in the Russian Army, he participated in the long retreat from
Napoleon's forces. But when they reached Moscow, the Russian Army
turned the tables and put Napoleon into retreat.
Clausewitz
slipped through the French lines to help negotiate the Convention of
Tauroggen and the defection of General Yorck von Wartenburg's entire
Prussian corps, after which Clausewitz was reinstated as a full
colonel in the Prussian army.
From
1813 until 1818, when he was promoted to the rank of general,
Clausewitz was often in the thick of combat, being wounded at Lutzen
and acting as chief of staff for
the 3rd Corps at Waterloo, where he was outnumbered two to one.
He
subsequently became
director of the General War College, where he analyzed military
campaigns and wrote the manuscripts that later were published as “On
War”.
After
a decade at the college, he returned to service in 1830 in eastern
Prussia. He died during a cholera epidemic on the Polish border in
1831, and his widow published his work in the following year.
Since
that time, Clausewitz's thinking on strategy has become known
throughout the world and runs through the works of top European and
American commanders, political
scientists, and military historians.
Clauswitz
on Management & Strategy
Managers
are always in search of a definitive strategy that will guide them in
their decision making and in setting their short- and long-term
plans. And yet even a casual glance at history will show that what
institutions value most is the imaginative
leader who defies convention
and flouts theoru, logic
and precedent.
Clausewitz
puts theory in its place, granting it only modest utility in his
overall philosophy.
In
its original meaning, theory
was the act of contemplating or inspecting — to look at something
and examine it. Theory, then, is the companion and guide of practice
— or action. While
practitioners tend to deride theorists and vice versa, Clausewitz's
only aim was to discover theory that was relevant to practice.
It
is crucial to an understanding of Clausewitz to recognize that he
does not strive to resolve contradictions.
Action
without contemplation or contemplation that is not followed by action
are both useless in the end.
Let's
not forget that he was writing about war. And
what is war?
A
continuous vying between conflicting
sides? In that sense, so it is
in business
and even life itself.
The
most fundamental idea in Clausewitz's work is that strategy involves
the clash of antagonistic, purposeful, and intelligent wills, and the
same applies in business. As we go about our daily activities, we do
not ordinarily face an opponent who is bent on thwarting our plans.
By definition, then, those activities are not strategic in nature. If
there is no opponent, there is no strategy.
The
clash of opposing wills is essential to the need
for developing
strategy.
Also
remember, if
there's no conflict, there is no war.
Creating
strategy means working in an environment of ever-present uncertainty.
Uncertainty
is not merely an obstacle to
be overcome, but
an essential component of all strategic thinking.
The
true strategist doesn't complain about uncertainty. He embraces it,
even as a chess player embraces
the notion that he can't fully anticipate his opponent's next move.
We
are used to being handed prescriptions, relying on the fact of being
able to repeat a cause and get a certain predictable effect. But
those are not strategic situations.
In
war, and in business, the right decision one day might lead to
disaster on another day. If neither attack nor defense is
always right in a given situation, if it’s not clear whether you
should split your forces or try to win one territory at a time, then
you can't rely on traditional theories to make decisions.
Even
when a new business fad actually works, it's only a matter of time
before both sides have the same weapons. No
advantage lasts long, and building a long
range strategy
on it will
lead
to failure.
What,
then, does Clausewitz recommend? The answer is thoughtful
contemplation. He recommends that the leader's mind be engaged in
continuous examination between conflicting
view points.
Under
the ever-changing conditions of the surroundings — such as terrain
and weather in war, or the economy and customer attitudes in business
— leaders
must constantly evaluate the potential advantages to be gained by
shifting
their perceptions between numerous
possibilities.
To
appreciate why this approach works, consider what happens when you
assume that a business theory is always correct. Your mind centers on
that theory and fails to notice subtle and not so subtle changes in
the environment. Thus, you
will miss
the emerging
opportunities
that no accepted
conventional
theory can
fully anticipate.
If
this approach seems difficult, it is. Clausewitz proposes that only
geniuses can handle strategic thinking -
and he calls for a genius
to be at
the head of each army or business.
Divine
inspiration isn't necessary, but Clausewitz
does
makes
it abundantly clear that you
have to be exceptional at your job in order to fill the shoes of a
true strategist.
So
theory
needs to be absorbed and contemplated, but then it also often
needs to be set aside at the moment of
truth by true leaders.
Consider using
the metaphor of chess, in which two opponents seek to thwart each
other's plans. One of the masterful approaches that chess
master Bobby
Fischer brought to the game
was what's known as going "off book." He would start out
with a well-known opening and the opponent would follow with the
predictable and well-tested moves. He
knew the rules his opponents would follow, yet he refused to
follow them himself.
|
Coup
D’Oeil
War,
like business, is primarily an intellectual activity - and
it is the inherent uncertainty of both that requires a leader to be
intellectually superior to succeed.
Because
of the uncertainty that is always present, Clausewitz places
particular importance on what he calls instinctual intelligence to
ferret out the truth of any given situation.
At
every turn, we find that ‘normal’
business
is what happens while leaders
are
crafting
other plans. As a result, the leader must be continuously exploring
the possibility of calling off ‘the
plan’,
or coming up with a new plan - especially
at those times when
the perfect information is generally lacking. It
is at those moments that making the correct decision is most crucial.
For
the mind to survive the constant assaults of uncertainty, it must,
"even at these moments of intense darkness retain some trace of
the inner light that will lead it to the truth, and the courage to go
where that faint light leads."
He
calls this intellectual
vision, or seeing
at a glance. The French term
is Coup d'Oeil. Anyone who has been in a position of leadership in
business is familiar with having
to make a decision quickly and based on incomplete information. One
is forced to cut instantly through the fog
to some essential truth, and here is where genius comes in, for
ordinary men won't be able to pull this off. The leader that can will
win.
Danger
and the great burden of responsibility produce in a genius who is a
leader, a sense of liberation and a renewed intellectual vigor. He is
not crushed by uncertainty and new challenges, but is enlivened by
them - even with the threat of defeat always present.
Thinking
Strategically
What
is the strategy of doing business? In its simplest form, it is the
creation of wealth by selling something of value. But that simple
definition conceals a whole host of individual acts, each of which
must be planned, conducted, and then joined together to achieve the
overall objective.
These
acts can be divided into two categories: those that involve tactics,
and those that involve strategy. Tactics
are concerned with the use of armed forces in battles, while strategy
is concerned with the various
battles needed
to
achieve the objectives of the war.
Consider the case of the British General
Charles Cornwallis, who at one point had won every battle he
fought during the American Revolution. The price of each victory,
however, was that his army continued to shrink due to casualties.
To hold the territory he won in each battle, he established a
garrison at the site and left behind a small force of his men. By
the time of his last victory, his army was too small to hold any
conquered territory. Each of his small garrisons was overwhelmed
by the American army, and Cornwallis' defeat led to the end of the
war.
|
In
business, leaders must realize that success is built on a chain of
individual decisions, each leading to the next. Each action must be
seen as a link within the whole series of events, in which winning a
market or a client today can, unfortunately, spread the company's
resources too thin to defend itself from competitors of tomorrow.
Therefore,
strategy
should always strive
to give
shape and meaning to tactical moves. And since events never go
according to plan, the real winning
strategy
will develop under siege, in the heat of battle, on the spot.
Strategy
is a never-ending process
that attends the tactics, even as they are being carried out. That is
one of the problems many companies develop when they formulate
strategy in the board room and then announce it to the workers with a
simple directive to carry it out. Those
who make strategy must be down on the battlefield or else the
strategy will always be at odds with reality.
Business
leaders should
read about the campaigns of Frederick
the Great, who was badly outnumbered during the Seven Years' War,
and yet prevailed through superior strategy. He had the foresight
to attempt only what he knew he could achieve and never to engage
in a decisive battle head-on with the enemy. He knew he couldn't
beat them directly, so he sought instead to exhaust them,
economically and psychologically, by
prolonging
the war and launching small attacks at their weakest points.
|
Strategy
prepares the way for tactics to succeed.
The great strategist,
however, will take those small victories, build on them, and
adapt as needed.
There
are only three things that lead to victory in battle: Surprise,
the advantage of terrain, and the attack from several sides at once.
Interestingly,
the defender usually holds the advantage over the attacker. Once the
attack is made, one can use any offensive strategy you like. When we
have chosen the battlefield, have the advantage of terrain, then when
we have gained the superior position, we can turn from merely
defending to attacking and conquering.
It
is rarely the first mover who becomes the industry powerhouse.
In other words, long-term success comes in the counterattack. The
successful defender waits and then attacks. The
transition from defense to attack must be rapid and overwhelming. It
must be incorporated into the strategy from the outset.
As
Napoleon once declared, "The whole art of war consists of
a well reasoned and extremely circumspect defensive, followed by a
rapid and audacious attack."
In
launching an attack, consider the wisdom of Chinese general Sun
Tzu, who spelled out the best
ways to confront the enemy in the fourth century B.C.:
"The highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's
plans; the next best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's
forces; the next in order is to attack the enemy's army in the field;
and the worst policy of all is to besiege walled cities."
The
Elements
of Strategy
The
most common element of victorious campaigns, whether in military
history or in business today, is the advantage of numerical
superiority. There are exceptions, of course.
At Leuthen,
Frederick the Great defeated an army of 80,000 Austrians by
attacking its flank with only 30,000 men. At Rossbach, he defeated
the combined Austrian and French armies by
pretending to retreat and then setting up an ambush. Frederick's
strategy for fighting larger armies was to keep his own force
closely together. In this way, he could meet a scattered enemy on
at least equal terms at any point.
|
The
lesson for business executives is this: If you don't have numerical
superiority over the competition, you must create a relative
superiority of numbers at decisive points
by using your forces skillfully.
A
company that has only $2 million to spend in advertising can't
compete nationally against a competitor with a $100 million
budget. However,
by concentrating all of its marketing efforts in a single market,
it might gain an advantage over the dominant brand that must
divide its budget among 100 markets.
|
A
determined enemy will not allow time for long-range, complex
strategies to unfold before
they respond.
Two
basic principles cover the whole plan of war and serve as a guide to
everything else:
- First, act in as concentrated a manner as possible. Reduce the enemy's power to the fewest possible centers of gravity. Attack against those centers of gravity should be reduced to the fewest possible major operations if possible.
-
Second, act as quickly as possible. Do not stop or take detours without a good reason. Once the attack has succeeded, it is important to stop after the objective has been achieved. Otherwise, he gives up the advantage rather quickly, leaving himself exhausted and vulnerable to a counterattack.
It
is significant to note that Napoleon was defeated by Spain, which
wasn't a first rate power and didn't have a first-rate army. He was
worn down, bit by bit, by guerrilla action.
As
we have seen in modern times, guerrilla action can threaten the
largest, most well-trained, and best-equipped army in the world.
A
technological edge is usually transient. The various sides usually
catch up fairly quickly in terms of technology or hardware.
When
every opponent has the same weapons, the superiority is gained by the
side with the greatest will and determination.
The
ability to channel and mold the wrath, energy, and motivation of a
people into what Clausewitz calls "smoldering embers"
creates a devastating force that is often impossible to defeat.
Consider the Vietnam War.
In
business, when
a company engages the passions of its
employees and the
customer in their
business system and
processes,
it creates an unstoppable force that is difficult to defeat.
Think Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon,
Tesla...
One
of the topics that Clausewitz treats as mostly overlooked in theories
of war is moral force,
which he equates with ‘will’.
He writes that this force
is even more important than the military might of an army.
Anyone
who has studied corporate culture and its importance in the overall
success of the enterprise will recognize that
Clausewitz is describing the
enthusiasm, zeal, faith, and loyalty of a company's workers — or
the lack of those qualities — that
can
make or break even the best business model.
The
Will and Moral Force
of Leaders and their
Organization
Just
as moral force, ‘will’, and genius are the qualities necessary to
make a great leader, Clausewitz
identifies what makes a great soldier or worker: valor,
skillfulness, a willingness to endure hardship, and zeal.
He collectively calls those qualities ‘spirit’.
From
continuous exertion and victories,
the soldier
or worker learns his own strength. The
more a leader demands of his soldiers and
observes the outcomes, the more
confident he can be that they'll be capable of carrying out orders
and achieving ‘stretch
goals’.
Only
those at the top need to display the skills and expertise of a
genius. From there on down, average intelligence is sufficient to the
job. It is not easy to rise from
the second tier to a top position
of leadership. It is the exception rather than the rule.
In
a strategic operation, everyone must give his greatest effort so that
where one group falls short, another may take up the slack. It is the
leader's job to lift those under him to that level of action.
In
the end, a
great leader
is a true creative force in the world. They
are
possessed of a deep sense of honor
and a boldness
of action that is at all times guided by a superior intellect.
A
corollary to that is the quality of perseverance,
‘holding firm’ to the strategy and
goals when confronted with adverse
appearances of a
particular moment along the way. Once
a leader has thought out his strategy and charted a course, it is
almost certain that in the heat of battle, things will look far
different from what he expected. It is at that crucial moment that he
has to have the strength of his convictions to stay the course.
The
greatest lesson that business leaders can learn from Clausewitz is
that there
is no
strategy that always succeeds when you are on the attack.
To
win, you must constantly stay alert to every change in the terrain,
and every shift in your enemy's forces, and respond in ways that give
you an advantage. Then you must recognize that your advantage is only
momentary, and you must be prepared to keep fighting the war -
forever.
The
Boston
Consulting Group's Strategy Institute,
have taken Clausewitz's original work, edited and trimmed it, and
provided valuable commentary
written by Tiha von Ghyczy, Bolko von Oetinger, and Christopher
Bassford. Their
rather detailed commentary is further summarized here.
