Strategic Planning Part I The Art Of War And Enlightenment

Have you seen your company’s Strategic Plan collecting dust on the CEO’s shelf? I think I know why, and will recap what I have learned in my 37 years of business experience and philosophy & cultural studies in a three-part series.

Strategic planning is not a new-age concept, having served as the cutting edge of the art of war in the Eastern world since well before Sun Tzu wrote a series of martial essays on the subject in China during the fourth century, BCE. Great military strategists in the East learned how to win wars strategically rather than violently from Sun Tzu’s compilation of The Art of War. Sun Tzu was first brought to the attention of the Western world by a Jesuit missionary to Peking, Father J.J.M. Amiot, whose interpretation of The Art of War was published in Paris in 1772. Unfortunately, that was well after generals in the West learned to win wars through extreme violence.

Amiot’s The Art of War was a major insertion of Eastern intelligent thought into what was to quickly becoming the Age of Enlightenment in the West, where traditional institutions, customs and morals had come under question. Enlightenment influenced intelligent thought throughout the West to this day, and gave us terms such as coffeehouse, encyclopedia and democracy, and names such as: Voltaire, Hegel and Kant; Beethoven, Haydn and Mozart; Franklin, Jefferson and Madison. Winning through intelligent strategy was advocated as the primary source for legitimacy and authority. Strategy, thought and reason are inherently non-violent, which makes perfect sense in the world of business (don’t you think?).

Then why is our plan up there collecting dust? There are four main reasons: (1) Leaders cannot be strategists, and vice-versa; (2) The practice of strategic planning as an exercise in intelligent thought has been watered down in Modernity to mean little more than business planning in prose rather than in numbers; (3) Intelligent thought has been cast aside in favor of making quick decisions, thinking on the run, and thinking outside the box, and: (4) strategic planning as a futuristic, visionary exercise means very little to almost every person working in mid-market companies, as their job is to work in the now or to analyze the past. For these reasons, strategic planning is not understood, is undervalued (if not hated) and, if done at all, quickly collects dust on the CEO’s shelf.

Last year, I had the privilege of attending a Leadership and the Art of War workshop in Honolulu, Hawaii, an introductory offering in the Art of War Series of IZS-Applied Zen, a program of the Institute of Zen Studies. There, I learned that the nature leaders and strategists differ greatly.

A leader is a person who is optimistic, has a broad scope, is easily followed, is able to inspire, and cares about much. We practiced meditation for leaders by standing tall, chest out, legs firmly planted, hands stretched out to the side, humming peacefully and breathing slowly while focusing on our peripheral vision. People would follow us because we were fair and saw the big picture.

The strategist, generally the wise elder of a group of tribes, is truthful to a fault, has an extremely narrow scope, a cutting edge and cares a lot about very little. We practiced meditation for strategists by standing with one foot in front of the other, lunging forward while forcefully lowering a Samurai sword from overhead, exhaling loudly and focusing only on the head of the enemy. We cut off what was in our way.

See the difference? Diametrically opposed, leaders cannot be strategists and vice-versa. Few humans have the ability to lead (less than 1%), but much rarer is the strategist.

Modern strategic planning has evolved into many forms of common “See, Think & Draw” or “Vision, SWOT, Formulate, Implement & Control” thinking. Although the competition is discussed to some extent, it often focuses on inward thinking, broad-based objectives, and action (who does what by when). The term ‘strategy’ is confused with the term ‘objective’. Picture the meditation for leaders, above. Knowing yourself first is important, so do it thoroughly.

After knowing yourself, true strategic planning focuses on the competition (enemy) almost exclusively, while being very exclusionary by deciding what NOT to do (what to cut… picture the meditation for strategists, above) given your own strengths and weaknesses. Again, this is done only after you first focus on knowing your own company, knowing both what you are and what you are not. Perhaps you hide in a niche, narrow you product line, de-hire some customers. Remember to pick the battles that you can win, and emulate the competition in all other cases. The focus, then, is on doing one thing and doing it very, very well (see Google’s core principle #2, “It’s best to do one thing really, really well.”).

Just as the skillful strategist can subdue the enemy’s army without engaging it, take cities without laying siege to them, and to overthrow countries without bloodying swords, companies should carefully plan to take advantage based on sound, honest competitive information.

I will present more in Strategic Planning – Part II, Finders, Minders & Grinders: Why Strategic Planning Isn’t for Everyone in another post.

To the Leaders reading this… Sun Tzu said: “Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril. When you are ignorant of the enemy but know yourself, your chances of winning or losing are equal. If ignorant both of your enemy and of yourself, you are certain in every battle to be in peril.”

As an early mentor taught me, the best gardens are made not by planting more flowers but by picking more weeds. Thanks, and see you in Part II.