Sun-Tzu's the Art of War: The Psychology of Business

The Art of War, which was compiled by "warrior-philosopher" Sun-Tzu over two-thousand years ago, is a collection of maxims, and subsequently explanations, of a formula for victory. The word battle is vague, as is much of the book, which utilizes a mystical, almost religious, style of speech. Word choice is also broad, almost suggesting that as chess should not be restricted solely to the chessboard, the advice here should not be restricted to the battlefield. Given the prevalence of human nature across many situations, the psychology of war and business are strikingly similar. If one distilled the lessons learned from this psychology in action, they would be left with an incredibly useful dialogue on how to use human nature to gain the upper hand in dealing with other people and the subsequent situations that would involve. For this reason, Sun-Tzu's The Art of War is as useful a treatise in the business world as the military world.

In the preface to the Art of War, which was certainly written long after the original text, the goal of the discourse is stated rather explicitly: "its aim is invincibility, victory without battle, and unassailable strength through understanding of the physics, politics, and psychology of conflict" (vii.). "Victory without battle" is an oft-quoted statement from the The Art of War, and with good reason: the concept of the best fight being when one does not fight at all is a constant theme throughout. What is inherently noble about Sun-Tzu's advice is that while he has an incredible grasp on how to become victorious, he ultimately abhors the thoughts of hurting others and of waging wars. He believes that there should be winners and losers, as that is human nature, but that this should not be at the cost of casualties. Although the scope of conflict has certainly expanded with the rise of technology and documents such as the Geneva Convention, its roots have remained unchanged over the many years since the Art of War was written. As this book focuses solely on the roots, its maxims remain virile and entirely relevant.

Written from a fairly Taoist perspective, the Art of War does have an air of simplicity about it. The preface serves to make a connection to the modern world, and asserts that "what is perhaps most characteristically Taoist about the Art of War...is the manner in which power is continually tempered by a profound undercurrent of humanism." The moral of this book is not to decimate your opponent, and for one to expect a ruthless, Shermanesque approach here would be to sell Sun-Tzu short. In the title, the word "art" is very telling. Like art, this approach to war is thoughtful, refined, mysterious, and, in a sense, gentle. It is a book "not only of war, but also of peace, above all a tool for understanding the very roots of conflict and resolution" (viii). It seems the maxims come full circle, accepting that with no conflict, there is no resolution; with no war, there is no peace.

In war as in business, there is no surefire formula to succeed, nor no certain way to avoid defeat. There are, however, certain traits that can lead to success. Both excellent generals and successful businessmen are able to adapt to certain situations. According to the art of war, they should have "no perceptible form," so they leave "no traces to follow." Negotiations are not won through argument, but through planning and adapting. "Therefore, victory in war is not repetitious, but adapts its form endlessly" (48). This is an eloquent statement of a mantra that is very successful once internalized, as the skill of being able to adapt is a crucial one in any situation or vocation.

Sometimes the way to win is not to be a great fighter, but to simply run your opponent ragged. If they can no longer defend themselves, destroying them will be simple, regardless of skill level. Some people also simply have less will to fight, so even if they are better, they may give up when hit with a constant barrage of attacks. In a chapter entitled "Emptiness and Fullness," Sun-Tzu writes that "[the] more defenses you induce your enemy to adopt, the more impoverished your enemy will be" (45). This is to say that the more offense one unleashes on their opponent, the harder it will be for them to continually fight back at full force. As they do not respond to your new attack with full defenses, the weakness compounds and ravages their forces even harder. Once they are at the point of not being able to defend, victory is imminent.

The parallel is often drawn between Machiavelli and Sun-Tzu, especially because Machiavelli also published a book entitled "The Art of War." Although both deal with the broad scope of war, which Machiavelli considered "the most important aspect of statecraft," the philosophies proffered are significantly different. Throughout Machiavelli's work, it is said that any win is good, regardless of how it was achieved. Echoing his earlier works such as The Prince and TheDiscourses, where Machiavelli intimates that one should utilize any means necessary to succeed: "Upon this, one has to remark that men ought either to be well treated or crushed, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries, of more serious ones they cannot; therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge" (Machiavelli, 35).

While many take Machiavelli's approach in business, it burns far more bridges than a thoughtful approach does. This approach is far different from Sun-Tzu's, in whose work there is an undercurrent of honor and of protecting those who are not involved in war. Sun-Tzu was actually concerned with honor and public image, while Machiavelli was simply concerned with the appearance of honor and with maintaining a good public image. Where Machiavelli viewed war as a means to an end, Sun-Tzu saw it as the end of the means; plainly, that war is what is resorted to when all other means have been exhausted.

The first chapter in the Art of War deals with strategic assessment, the importance of which is clear in both war and business. "The terrain is to be assessed in terms of distance, difficulty or ease of travel, dimension, and safety" (3), which are all terms that the strategic mind can relate to business. The key to distilling the ancient words into practical knowledge is to look at them in a broad sense, foregoing a literal one. Sometimes, they may even be taken metaphorically. In this case, the terrain may be the mental route one would follow in a negotiation. Simply stating, "let's make this deal happen" will not always work, and this is what ease of travel means. Distance could mean the amount of time it takes, dimension could mean how many people are with or against you, and safety could refer to whether or not you showed your hand. There are many other ways that the original statement could be taken, but the text remains effective as long as the one reading it feels they took something away from it. A good leader or businessman would internalize this practice, constantly assessing and reassessing the situation he is currently in.

"Doing Battle" is the title of the second chapter, which makes clear that any operation should be done quickly and efficiently. "When you do battle, even if you are winning, if you continue for a long time it will dull your forces and blunt your edge..." (11). This passages advises one to be careful, even in times of apparent success. It does so by painting a picture, not simply saying "foresight is important." It also stresses the need to know how to force a victory, because simply winning for a long time, without being victorious, will eventually lead to defeat. "Therefore I have heard of military operations that were clumsy but swift, but I have never seen one that was skillful and lasted a long time..." (12). This is to say that one can be clumsy as long as they act quickly, but that one will not succeed if they are skilled but exhaust their own forces.

Planning a siege is the title of the third chapter, and it again stresses the importance of planning as a path to victory. It also offers general rules to gauge one's strategy by. "If you outnumber the opponent ten to one, then surround them; five to one, attack; two to one, divide." This, applied to business, makes perfect sense. If one has ten people on their side and one opponent, they simply have to sway one opinion. When one have five people arguing against a single opponent, one should argue aggressively and force a change. When one is facing an opponent half in size, use different strategies, perhaps a "good cop, bad cop" ploy. These rules of thumb simply analyze situations, and proffer how to use human psychology to lead oneself to victory.

Knowing when to retreat is also an important tool in negotiation, for the longer one fights to no avail, the more weakened one's side becomes. Whether at a seat at a table during an important merger, or attacking one's enemies' land, if one lets their guard down and gives the enemy a chance to exploit it, one is in a great deal of danger. "If you are equal, then fight if you are able. If you are fewer, then keep away if you are able. If you are not as good, then flee if you are able" (20). These are clear rules that use probability to determine whether or not a battle is even worth entering. When one's forces match that of their opponent, there is at least a fifty percent chance one will win If one's forces are slightly less than their opponent, then when and how one strikes, from a distance, is infinitely more crucial. If one does not even believe they have a chance, then it is smarter to fight another day. It also entertains the idea that retreat is not always possible, even if it is the best strategy.

One passage from the chapter on "Planning a Siege" seems tailor-made to the psychology involved in business. It basically states that there is strength in numbers, especially in the ruthless corporate world that society has created for itself. "Therefore if the smaller side is stubborn, it becomes the captive of the larger side" (21.) If one does not give in to the demands of the majority, they will be held captive, or at the very least kept at bay, which is just as bad in a situation where one needs to gain the upper hand. Indeed, this book says to not stop until one achieves honorable victory. The key is to give a little, or at least give the appearance of giving in a little, in order to gain a lot. Stubbornness is often confused with being unwavering in your principles or desires, but while some people are proud to be stubborn, rarely do people see the beauty in the stubbornness of their opponent. Rather, it is far better to have humility.

At its heart, The Art of War is a book whose purpose is to illuminate how to manipulate psychology for one's own ends. The word psychology here, however, has multiple meanings. It means not only how other people think, but also refers to one's own thought process, as well as the situations created by psychology, and thus human nature. This type of thinking is as effective in war as it is in business, because in both cases people are making the moves and acting from within their own nature. Even thousands of years later, it is a text that is held in very high regard, and looked at from an academic standpoint as incredibly insightful and useful. This shows that its lessons are very durable, and that human nature, as well as honor, have not changed very much at all.

Sources:

The Art of War. Minneapolis: Shambhala Publications, Incorporated, 1991.

Roland, Jon, comp. "The Prince." Machiavelli: The Prince. The Constitution Society. 28 Sept. 2008 .