machiavelli sun tzu

Machiavelli & Sun Tzu

A Preliminary Comparative Analysis

_____________________

John Read

HD998010M

March 2001

Machiavelli & Sun Tzu: A Preliminary Comparative Analysis John Read

Introduction

How is it that different centuries, different cultures and cultural settings, can produce such

similarities of the rules for commanding men?

The historical context for Sun Wu (later called Sun Tzu) is China approximately 350 BC.

His works or ‘Bin Fa’ represents the first clearly documented military strategy in oriental

history.

Since publication, he has influenced many Emporers in China and Japan, until translation

into French where Napolean is said to have tried to follow his strategies. Translation into

English enabled US military colleges to prescribe it as a text. Even more recently it has

been hailed by business champions the world over.

His strategies are said to have influenced Japan and ultimately found their way into post

WWII industrialisation of that country. Application as market strategies by modern

Japanese business has been immensely successful. I have always regarded the intrusion of

Sony into American culture though purchase of Universal Studios as the ultimate take-

over strategy! Buying a majority share holding in your enemy’s popular culture is a

wonderful move sending shivers through much of middle USA. It is a supreme victory of

the vanquished over the battle. They lost the war but are winning the economic race,

shifting the war to their home ground: the industrial market economy. Here they are

champions, building from scratch their pride, their infrastructure and their discipline with

team work and such vigor that it has taken USA some twenty years to catch up with them

again.


Sun Tzu’s works have clearly proven the cleverness of war strategies even as applied to

industry, market and economics. Today, these strategies rule business with unnerving

success. Two well accepted paradigms have been broken here, in curious harmony:

1. War Strategies apply very well to business

2. Japanese, the enemy state, own more Hollywood movies than does America; they can

lay claim to winning a cultural victory over the USA

Machiavelli on the other hand, wrote during the early sixteenth century, during the

Renaissance times of Italy. Deeply affected by the use & misuse of power in the State,

imprisoned by a corrupt power of the Medici family, he writes first hand about his

experience of power and leadership strategies.

His strategies on war and peace are as insightful & powerful as Sun Tzu’s. He can count

amongst his followers, Lee Kuan Yew, Bill Gates & Warren Buffett. Machiavelli realised

that war is more common than peace. He tells leaders that if they are not preparing for war

then they are likely to be easily defeated.

A brief story will help to throw light on the impact Machiavelli has had in the west.

One of the toughest elite fighting forces in the world is the special operations group of the

US Airforce known as the Delta Force. These are the air and land equivalent of the US

Navy’s Seals.


Training and selection for Delta Force involves over two weeks of gruelling physical and

mental testing. After marching and living in the jungle for two weeks, sometimes with

rations sometimes without, there are just 25% of applicants remaining. These soldiers are

then sent on a forty mile long march, under strict time constraints are imposed, where they

are deprived of sleep, food rationing is applied and physical endurance is put to the final

test. At the end of this stage, the officers amongst them are allowed a shower and are

given a copy of a book. The book is Machiavelli’s, The Prince. They take a written and

oral examination and have eighteen hours to convince their examiners that they have read

and understood Machiavelli and can apply it to the tasks they may face in command. They

must demonstrate this capability under deliberately stressful conditions, proving their

combat leadership potential.

This paper attempts to take a closer look at each writer: Sun Tzu and Machiavelli

comparing their strategies, assumptions and applications to modern business practice. We

will consider one text from each writer as a practical focus: Sun Tzu’s ‘Art of War’ as

translated and described by Prof. Wee Et Al. (1991), and Machiavelli’s ‘The Prince’, an

Oxford University Press edition (1984), translated by Peter Bondanella. Peter is

Distinguished Professor of Comparative Literature & Professor of Film Studies, Italian, &

West European Studies at Indiana University, USA where he serves as the Chairman of the

Department of West European Studies. This edition is co-authored by Mark Musa,

Distinguished Professor of Italian at Indiana University. Other references will be accessed,

as they throw light on these two main texts.

Both Sun Tzu and Machiavelli have their respective elements of style, language and

language construction. Forms that reflect their authors mind, character and intent. It is

very interesting to note the difficulties in translating from both texts due to our inability to


find words today to match the original works intention. [It seems that we may be facing

one more significant deforestation: our language. There is bio-diversity, and cultural

diversity as well as linguistic diversity. Each of these seem to be reducing with equal

measure, our human heritage.]

Explaining the misuse of Machiavelli, Prof. Bondanella points to the difficulty of finding

words in the English language to capture the multitude of different meanings of a single

word in Italian. Virtu, as an example, can carry up to nine different English words

depending upon the context. Like the Chinese characters in Sun Tzu’s works, Renaissance

Italian is a multi-level language that is context bound and must be translated carefully to

convey they same complexity of meaning intended by the original author. English does not

enable such translations easily, and for both books the translators have had to choose

nearest available terms to reflect the apparent intention of the original authors. We rely on

the correctness of these translations.

Today we can see and translate principles developed by both Sun Tzu & Machiavelli as

guides for both companies and market strategies. They can offer guidance to leaders in

business with their own lessons and differences, as we shall see.

It is often said: ‘All is fair in love and war’. Moral and ethical behavior is bounded by the

‘local’ context...whether it is business or market, national or international. The freedoms of

love and war are also context bound, these boundaries are more elastic in these two cases

only, significantly less so than in the business context. In business, reputation controls

influence and profit. The time of reaction between reputation and profit are very much

shorter in business than in love and war. It takes very little time for a fall in business

reputation to lead to a decline profit.


An example of this right now is to look at the disease ruining the livestock industry in

Europe. Others like the tobacco industry, Monsanto Chemicals and it’s Bhopal Accident or

Nike and its overseas manufacturers show direct and rapid links between these two

elements in business. Moral boundaries vary across nations but remain much closer than

practices in (love and) war. This is also changing today with the rise of war ‘crimes’

tribunals, as they work to define the moral boundaries of war.

Let’s begin by looking at Machiavelli and The Prince.

Scope of Strategies: Machiavelli

It is useful in any comparative analysis to portray both the standing point and the scope of

views provided by each strategist. So that we can identify apples from oranges, and

compare them appropriately.

Nicolo Machiavelli wrote ‘The Prince’ as an application for the position of Chief Strategist

to Lorenzo, Prince of Italy. As Son of Piero de Medici, Lorenzo and his family had the

potential to re-unite Italy. Soderini, the ousted Florentine Republican State Secretary,

groomed Machiavelli. Machiavelli had visited and forged strategic agreements with heads

of State across Europe & Italy. He was also head of the Militia for the Republic of

Florence. He was interested in identifying and developing general rules and principles for

the rule of men, State and Nation. This was unique amongst writers of his time.


During this period, Italy was not a unified country, more a collection of independent but

related states. Not a federation, but an interlocking, sometimes enemy, sometimes friendly

collection of neighboring states. Machiavelli’s vision was a united and strong Italy.

Machiavelli wrote ‘The Prince’ after he was expelled from the civil service, a role he held

for fifteen years from 1498 to 1512. He was in a good position to view first-hand the fall

and rise of a new empire in his own state. He experienced first hand the political practices

that arise when heads of state roll, as he observed when the Medici family took power.

He wrote ‘The Prince’ during a break he took from his research for another book, that of

commenting on Livy’s History of Rome. From his research there he gained insights into

the rise and fall of empires and translated these observations into his contemporary

political context. He combined this with his first-hand exposure to exile and removal from

influence to derive a prescription for mastering nation, state and men by his future

prospective employer.

He observed that the Medici family faced a unique historical opportunity (occasione): to

become supreme ruler and commander of a unified Italy. They had usurped power in

Tuscany, family son Lorenzo had been appointed to the papacy, gaining effective control of

the Papal States. Machiavelli envisioned this opportunity most clearly and sought to

become part of it. If not its architect then at least its servant. He saw the challenge this

opportunity presented to the Medici family, imposing upon their ability, skill and ingenuity

to fulfill (their virtu). Such opportunity, meeting extant capability was indeed historical

fortune. Machiavelli notes the benevolence of such fortune (fortuna) & had his own

reasons for writing to capitalise upon them.


Importantly, Machiavelli tells about power and influence ‘like it is’. This pragmatic non-

idealistic perspective of leadership was against the literary and moral rules of his times.

Even today, Machiavelli seems to challenge the morals of our times with his favor of

pragmatism & common logic.

The answer to this partly is found in the translation process from Renaissance Italian to

English. It is tempting to choose selected quotations from the works, take them out of

their original situation and misinterpret them. Losing intended meaning is as good as

plagiarism, when interpreting and translating original works. As identified earlier, misuse of

translation can reflect the translator’s intent more strongly than the original authors works.

Author Stanley Bing in his book “What Would Machiavelli do? The ends justify the

meanness”(2000), plays this game very well to secure a satirical look at Machiavelli's

management style.

None the less there are distinct moral questions raised as well as overlooked by

Machiavelli, his interest in becoming architect of Italian reform, his impassioned plea to

Prince Lorenzo to pursue this cause as a higher ideal than the Prince himself is religious in

nature. Putting the means of political and state advantage towards patriotic ends is seen

but not answered by Machiavelli as a righteous goal. Many have quoted him as saying ‘the

ends justify the means’, however pragmatism is rather more clearly portrayed by

Machiavelli as the most efficient and least harmful way to reach a strong and stable internal

state. Bondella (1984) notes that Machiavelli was most unlike his prescription for success,

and could not be accused of being Machiavellian himself! (page xvi).

Machiavelli proposed a moral outcome: a strong and stable Italy, one who could repel

attacks from within and outside it, to become a secure state and nation for the betterment


of members within. We might observe a similar intent and result for the Republic of

Singapore through Lee Kuan Yew, or in Microsoft by Bill Gates.

In short, moral outcomes are intended and not overlooked by Machiavelli. He aims his

pragmatism at a morally justifiable social outcome for his country. These principles and

strategies explained below can equally be applied to modern business.

Machiavelli’s Strategies in ‘The Prince’

Like Sun Tzu, Machiavelli’s strategies can be grouped together into chapters. There are

twenty-six of these chapters covering all of the preparations and principles needed for

effective success at winning and sustaining Head of State & Nation.

A summary of these chapters and their strategies follows:

I How many kinds of Principalities (states ruled by Prince) are there & the

Ways They are Acquired

Machiavelli identifies two types of states: those under rule by Prince and are used to being

subjects, & a republic, unused to strong rule by one person.

He defines two types of acquisition of states: inheritance or by force using either one’s

own or someone else’s forces. (In business, we can define two types of market acquisition:

take over of a market as a competitor leaves for some reason, equivalent to inheritance;

and either direct entry or piggy backing on someone else’s position in the market).

II Hereditary Principalities

Places used to rule by one prince are easier to acquire and maintain, by adhering to the

previous culture, changing as little as required to meet new events. Loyalty will more likely


follow a benevolent situation arising from long term singular princely rule. (I can see many

applications of this in company mergers and acquisitions. My current employer TMP

Worldwide, who took us (Morgan & Banks) over recently, has left the local management

and systems intact, with very few changes made, consequently there is little impact on

existing loyalty)

Where innovation or change occurs, its uniqueness can be lost in the annals of time,

whereas the overriding quality of rule will be preserved in people’s minds.

III On Mixed Principalities

Change of ruler is problematic because those taken over must switch loyalty. Both your

own staff and the locals will suffer injury in the new order. The closer the culture and

values of the two states, the easier they are to acquire and maintain. Common customs and

laws can overcome differences in language. If this is the case the usurper can just eliminate

the family of the previous ruler leaving the people alone to get together. In the case of very

dissimilar places in terms of customs, it is necessary to have a strong presence (The Prince

himself) to live in the new place and provide direct means to issue resolution, and detect &

resolve trouble early. This will lead to loyalty and control. Place colonies of the home state

staff into the new territory in dispersed areas so as to diminish the local strength and save

the cost of maintaining an army there. Keeping an army outstationed injures everyone,

home state, and province in taxes & protection as well loss of opportunity. Rebellion may

follow. Use controls to remove the possibility for revenge. Use the weaker locals to

support the stronger colonists as the Romans did effectively building control across

Europe by blocking other foreign powers. They ruled from the bottom up, capturing the


‘market’ first, then controlling entry to the market through their ‘gateways’ and subject to

their rules.

Time can weaken a states resolve and an army’s strength, so that choosing to fight a battle

today is better than putting it off until tomorrow. Having wide spread of colonists and

good communications is essential to hear about competition or the threat of war. Spread

these assets as far as possible, to detect such movement early.

Anyone who is the cause of another’s becoming powerful comes to ruin himself, because

that power is the result either of cunning or force, both of which threaten the one who has

claimed power.

(This speaks to us of many important principles underlying change management, company

integration from merger or acquisition, and succession planning. Thomson Yaohan and

Sogo both Japanese retailers have collapsed from failures in international management

practice. These companies placed senior managers from Japan HQ into senior positions in

their regional operations. They failed to enable them to take charge in their local markets.

Each major decision had to go back to HQ and follow the company line. They were unable

to manage under disparate local conditions, neither moving fast enough or appropriately to

meet local market needs.)

IV Why the Kingdom of Darius, occupied by Alexander, did not rebel against

his successors after the Death of Alexander

There are two kinds of Princely leadership strategies of State: The Leader and his

authorised ministers (Such as the King in Thailand) or The Leader and separate regional

leaders who choose to follow the Leader, but may rule with their own law.


Acquiring the first is more difficult since the Prince can command the whole States forces

at once. Acquiring the second is easier since once the influential are subdued, the rest will

follow.

Maintaining the first is easier since they all follow one law and one rule, keeping and ruling

the second is harder since the laws and practices of many must change. Desire to change

will exist in the diverse situation of the second making winning easier to reach but

unification much harder as there are many more factions to satisfy.

In summary, different situations give rise to different experiences and requirements for

acquiring and maintaining power. Identifying your situation and adapting to these

requirements is vital for success.

(Perhaps the longest surviving leader in business in the USA is Jack Welch of General

Electric. He has always sought and gained the respect of his subordinates and his

employees. Not always liked, but always respected as a decision-maker and perspective

setter, he has been able to continue to re-design his company to meet the changing market

expectations for his products and services.)


V How Cities or Principalities should be Governed that lived by their own laws

before they were Occupied

There are three methods for holding states who were subject to their own laws and

customs previously: first is to destroy them, second is to occupy them personally, third is

to allow them freedom under your protection paying taxes to you and allowing friendly

self-governance. Essentially there are two motivators here...loyalty or obedience. Loyalty

provides better control than externally delivered rule by obedience or external discipline.

(Just as Sun Tzu says!)

Republics, used to self-government, must be either destroyed or occupied so as to

maintain loyalty.

(Like Sun Tzu, Machiavelli shows us the importance of emotional attachment at work, and

speaks to us about the psychological contract there. Both writers give building loyalty as a

basic tenet of leader-follower relationships. This is more sound than external discipline

enforcement. Most modern management theories subscribe to the same principle, but

interestingly, more bureaucratic and authoritarian managers ignore this at their peril.

Machiavelli would advise them to build their staff’s loyalty to secure a more permanent

relationship, that rice bowl and pay are insufficient reason to come to work.)

VI On new Principalities Acquired by one’s own Arms & Skill

Introducing a new order of things takes the most skills and ingenuity, since all those under

the old scheme will suffer injury, those who support change will only be lukewarm to the

risk of new profit. Men are by their nature sceptical unless by first hand experience they

can be influenced.


Innovation therefore requires support to become successful in the long term, unarmed it

will whither and die naturally and quickly.

(These two principles are reflected in everyday corporate life. We know that building the

case for change is crucial to its success, and it takes more time and effort than the original

scheme of things took to secure. 3M Company derive 25% of their profit and revenue

from new products, drive innovation through continuous programming across the

company. Significant resources are put from the top to the bottom at this company to keep

innovation happening)

VII On New Principalities Acquired with the arms of Others & by Fortune

Becoming a leader by skill or fortune creates different challenges for maintaining that

position. A skilled leader will already be recognised and therefore has little extra to do to

maintain his position. The fortunate Leader may also be cursed, he will have to do much

work to maintain his position, creating allies, building support and proving his followers

that he can sustain them.

Following the good example set by others, imitating their successful strategies can provide

a guide to future courses of action. Learning from their mistakes can prevent you from

becoming redundant or getting eliminated. Matching your strategy to a good analysis of

the situation (state value and character – customs, state ownership, means of transferring

control, methods of supervision and ultimate goal will all direct the leaders choice of

strategy).

Each authority you place in a subordinate position can rise to overthrow you, so be careful

to anticipate this and build other measures or structures to counter this. Men do harm out

of fear or hatred, and do not forget old injuries. Their memory cannot be bought over.


(These points speak to both corporate and market behavior.)

VIII On those who have become Princes through Wickedness

Machiavelli clearly distinguishes power from glory. He states that gaining power by doing

evil can never lead to glory. He cites Agathocles the Sicilian as an example, who by killing

the people who put him in power secured the people to him. He then resisted the

Catharginians several times securing the people’s safety. But at such a price and

inhumanity as to be regarded and judged as evil rather than excellent. He clearly defines

the limits of pragmatism as being bounded within religious and moral codes, none of which

Agathocles abided by. Consequently it must be concluded that it was done for selfish

reasons alone, and this is not enough to become classified as a great leader, according to

Machiavelli.

Evil can be used but must be brought back to account; otherwise it will destroy the user as

any addiction might. Evil must be delivered quickly and the benefits won savored long so

as to justify the action.

(I guess it depends on whom you ask, when you come to bring evil to account. There are

always winners and losers, in markets, in business and in corporate life. Great corporate

leaders are judged by their effectiveness in the share market as well as their people

orientation by their employees and managers. Great companies are judged very

pragmatically by the market, loyalty can be transacted but there are rules such as those

defined here by Machiavelli).

IX On the Civil Principality


Leaders can arise by appointment; by either from the people or the nobility, depending

which has the opportunity to choose. Balancing these two powers may give rise to a

leader nominated from either party.

Machiavelli notes that a Prince can defend against hostile nobles since they are few, but not

against the people since they are many. To defend against hostile nobles or subordinates

one must nurture those who are loyal and eliminate those with loyalty ties elsewhere.

Winning the heart of the people is essential in all cases, since they are needed in times of

attack.

There are no fixed rules for gaining the people’s loyalty, varying as they do with each

situation. Simply, they don’t want to be oppressed. Machiavelli has in mind the many

common folk and businesses that flourish under a benevolent Prince. The rules for gaining

loyalty of each group and individual will necessarily vary. Securing that loyalty remains the

best foundation of strength for an excellent leader, and not fear.

Relying on ministers or other officials can be a problem in times of attack, since

mobilisation can take too long or even be refused. Maintaining loyalty between a Prince

and his subjects is essential for effective leadership.

(Realising loyalty counts for effective leadership seems somehow opposite to the

pragmatic viewpoint. People get paid, so they should just do their job, do what they are

instructed. Yet this is not enough, and has never been enough to sustain loyalty. This

principle has driven companies and governments alike to support People Development

programs. Maintaining credibility, and the case for ‘need’ by employees for their leader,

will help to secure their cooperation in times of crises)


X How Strength of All Principalities Should be Measured

There are two types of defence capabilities: those who can call upon and command an

army to defend themselves in most battles, and those who cannot, relying on the walls of

the city and their defensive position to maintain security. A Prince who has no enemies in

the people, can hold a secure territory against most insurgents, by reputation they are

virtually untouchable. (A good business example of this is the favored monopolies of Coca

Cola or Walt Disney, and how difficult these two are as competitors for anyone trying to

enter their markets). Giving loyalty also creates obligation by those who give it even after

they experience a loss, paying part of the price gives way to a willingness to continue to

support the initial investment made until the transaction is completed. (Market leaders

create loyalty and will find it easier to keep it than those going in second or third,

resistance to change plus the wish to collect against the investment back deepens loyalty

over time).

XI On Ecclesiastical Principalities

These are territories governed by the Church. The Princes in these places are subjugated to

the Church. The Church can spread its power through these Princes by providing them

with much needed funds and resources. This way the Prince can serve the ends of the

Church but be removed from the Church, employing normal war and combat strategies.

This way the Church can act though it was a ruler, acquiring territories and expanding its

influence.

The chapters so far above from Machiavelli, cover the types of territories, their different

situations and conditions. In the business environment these territories equate to

marketplaces. The prince translates to a business leader, especially the CEO. Machiavelli


moves on in the next series of chapters, to discuss the troops and special forces required to

enable offensive and defensive moves to be made.

XII On the various Kinds of Troops & Mercenary Soldiers

Machiavelli notes that armies of mercenaries are a very poor choice of defence. Once they

win for you, you become their prisoner. They are strong in public but weak in battle. They

always seek to runaway to fight again another day...that is their business. So they cannot

be relied upon at all to be loyal or successful. (I trust that Machiavelli doesn’t put

consultants into the category of mercenaries. I guess that he makes keen observations

about using contractors for core processes in your business, whose loyalty is more acutely

focussed elsewhere and not to you.)

XIII On Auxiliary, Mixed and Citizen Soldiers

Time and again Machiavelli cites examples from Italian, Roman and European history to

show that troops composed of citizens were the most loyal, with those comprised of other

peoples troops also more likely to change positions to their advantage rather than yours.

He uses Switzerland as a fine example of a country comprising inner strength in defense

and armory, and thus presenting a strong face to the outside world. Means to assemble

such a force are easy when the citizens believe in the cause (not someone else’s war

unaffecting your own territory) and are loyal to their Prince.

XIV A Prince’s Duty concerning Military Matters

Machiavelli deduced that the leader or Prince must take up defence, indeed war, as his sole

profession. Neglect of this art is the primary reason for the fall of states. A Prince who

claims to lead cannot do so without respect of his soldiers (like the looming position in

Indonesia again). This he gains through knowledge and practice of the arts of war.


Machiavelli knows that good fortune greets the prepared mind and ill fortune is conquered

by the equally prepared mind. Any Prince should not ignore practising the art of war. (In

the global markets of today one can say that the new battlefield is the internet; the new

markets are global ones, reachable, penetrable by anyone from anywhere).

Machiavelli advises his Prince to take up study of others war and combat strategies, as a

life-long learning matter. He advises that imitation is a survival strategy that relies on

knowledge of past history and success in battles. To sharpen your wits and hone them on

the experience of others who were great before you is a mark of self respect as well as

respect for others. Your people and your troops will respect you, for your applications in

this regard. Observing differences in current conditions also remains paramount.

XV On those things for which men, and particularly Princes, are praised or

blamed.

Machiavelli deals with the methods and procedures for handling subjects and friends, by

his Prince. His primary rule here is pragmatism. To quote him: “Hence it is necessary for a

Prince who wishes to maintain his position to learn how not to be good, and to use this

knowledge or not to use it according to necessity.”(p52)

The aim of the Prince must be his survival. Virtue and vices are measured against this

standard, rejected if they lead to his downfall, practiced if they lead to his safety and well-

being.

(One might balk here at the callous nature of this proposition, but it appears quite true to

say that in Ancient China they practiced this and still do today to a great extent. There is

remarkable similarity between the two schools of behavior.)


XVI On Generosity and Miserliness

Generosity is a virtue. So says everyone but Machiavelli! He knows that it can lead to loss

of resources, overspending and ruin. He disdains it in favor of effective preparations for

war, for defence, and for enterprises that will build his state. Remember, if it leads to

destruction of the state, then it cannot be held up as a virtue.

Machiavelli quickly identifies the path to hatred from generosity for a Prince. Once you

start you cannot suddenly stop, unmet expectations will lead to despite and then hatred.

Hatred in men is the major cause of a leader’s downfall. Avoid this at all costs, but yet

balance this with the need to be effective. The Prince has a role to play, securing and

maintaining the State; this cannot be achieved by goodwill or good actions all the time.

XVII On cruelty and mercy, and whether it is better to be feared or the contrary

Machiavelli realistically notes that it may be necessary to show some signs or examples of

mercy to prevent greater loss and misery. Examples enable loyalty and unity to be

strengthened.

New states once occupied must be cruel to implement change but he must always seek to

be merciful rather than cruel.

In answer to the question is it better to be loved or feared he states that it better to be

both! If the Prince can only have one, it is better to be feared. Ingratious, deceivers,

chameleons and advantage takers, these are the characteristics of all men, he explains by

looking at the course and records of European history. Men will turn upon you unless it is

also to their advantage to stay with you. Machiavelli notes that fear of punishment is

stronger than love, since love is held together by a chain of obligation that can be broken

when it suits, but fear remains and cannot be shaken off.


Fear can breed hatred and thus must be delivered carefully. He cites Hannibal as one clear

example of the ability of fear to bring together different groups of soldiers from many

different states and bind them together so strongly that he could accomplish so much

through their loyalty. It was fear that drove that loyalty. (One might say that this does

translate into business in several ways: leadership of the market through fear of the

competition is a seriously useful strategy. All government industries use this strategy to

first dominate and then control the market by dividing it up themselves. Applying this to

employees say, seems to require a longer bow, perhaps only because the exigencies of war

and combat require much higher forms of loyalty than does business or employment. There

are alternatives in employment.)

XVIII How should a Prince Keep his Word?

It is here that Machiavelli transcends loyalty and identifies the highest form of leadership:

“one sees from the experience of our times that the princes who have accomplished great

deeds are those who have cared little for keeping promises and who have known how to

manipulate the minds of men by shrewdness” (p58).

Sounds like a Chinese saying…can you think of one dear reader?

Machiavelli notes that the Centaur, half-man, half-horse teaches a great ruler. He must

learn to appeal to and use both strengths. He must be like the lion, ready to frighten the

wolves, but like the fox who can detect the traps. Pragmatism rules here, keeping your

word is subject to advantage or disadvantage created.

Machiavelli cleverly notes the difference between using such deception every time and

appearing to have this power but not always using it. The Prince must be flexible of


strategy according to the needs of the situation and such as affairs require him to act. He

confirms five virtues: mercy, faithfullness, integrity, kindness and religion. But that any of

these is subject to the situation. And the final result is the standard always. Did it work to

preserve and secure or did it lead to disaster and loss. The many will judge, the few will

change, so that what the Prince does will be assessed by the many people rather than the

few nobles or others. In this way the market and to a certain extent the employees of a

company and a nation have greater power than the shareholders.

XIX On Avoiding Being Despised and Hated

These are important leadership qualities for a Prince to use to secure his tenure. He can

use the love and loyalty of the people to drive fear into his enemy’s hearts and minds. He

can use success to build alliances externally as well as protect himself internally. Keeping

the common people contented and the nobleman too if there any, is a singularly important

goal for any prince. Creation of the parliament in France is a good example of creating

suitable structures to deal with various needs and demands from both nobleman and

people. Companies create bureaucracies to keep the management tasks and employee tasks

separate, and then create focus groups to bring their customers into the company. These

separate structures reflect a similar strategy as that of Machiavelli. So do Boards and

Executive committee’s of companies. He notes that in imitating others traits or strategies

a leader should be careful to use only what the situation needs and no more, blind imitation

is as deadly as the failure to avoid old mistakes.

XX On whether fortresses and many things that Princes employ every day are

useful or harmful

Covering the crucial rules here, Machiavelli notes that if the ruler finds his people

unarmed, then he should arm them. He will immediately win their loyalty and support; of


course you cannot arm them all, so use those you have armed to influence those who are

not.

History, he cites, is full of stories of new armies created this way as a means of securing

loyalty trust and support. When taking over a neighboring state, it will be necessary to

disarm that state and secure it using your own forces kept near to your home. He discusses

the idea of divide and conquering, advising us that it never works in the longer term since

divided houses or states cannot be ruled. He suggests that it may be better to create

opportunities for the Prince to demonstrate his leadership by crafting an hostility and

defeating it. Then it can become news that brings friends together and warring parties into

a common perspective about their leader.

He notes suspect people in power, have been used by Princes for their good, but it does

not always work. Problems of power sharing, and controlling these individuals can be

significant disadvantages. He concludes that this tactic is entirely circumstantial. Those

who change allegiance due to earlier dissatisfaction will be hardest to build loyalty with. It

is better to build loyalty from his enemy’s people, the occupying peoples, rather than

apparent friends on the inside. This has interesting implications for succession planning

and hiring and promotion decisions that are most frequently made from those we like.

Another principle he cites from his historical observation is that using fortresses to protect

people is also circumstantial. He notes that fortresses are good for his people whom he is

more afraid of than foreigners are, whereas not having fortresses is best when he has the

love of the people.

XXI How a Prince Should Act to Acquire Esteem

Great undertakings and examples of unusual talent are clearly effective ways to

demonstrate leadership and gain esteem.


This may include grand schemes to overthrow other lands (markets), operating in different

spheres, keeping his subjects busy with one or another whilst he makes moves in another

still. Creating winning streaks as he proceeds. Making grand events of local good or evil

will also impress the masses. (This might be translated into efforts like corporate

sponsorship, or building champions in the public service through special award events).

Being clear about his allegiances, stating to everyone what they are helps everyone to be

happier. Being as good a friend as you are enemy clears everyone’s mind about your

stance. Aid from friends is only possible when you are clear to them that you remain only

their friends. Remaining neutral is mostly a poor strategy, unless like Switzerland, every

one knows how well equipped you are and does not dare to move against you.

Going down with a friend is a stronger position to rise up from than going down alone

with no allies. He notes that this is a choice and not an obligation, unlike joining the

winning side – this situation just creates obligation not friendship or loyalty.

Rewarding talent and moderating taxes is an important strategy for a prince. These acts of

leadership show love for the people as well for their talent. Maintaining the dignity of his

position over and above everything will win hearts and minds of the people. Helping all the

while to celebrate special events…just like the mosaic culture here in Singapore.

XXII On the Prince’s Private Advisers

Advisers can be judged by their co-advisers. Look at the co-advisers and judge the

intelligence of the adviser by his choice.

If the adviser thinks more about himself than you then you and he are doomed. You will

never be able to trust him, nor his advice.


For good advisers, reward them well, put them in your debt, honor them and share

responsibilities with them. Do not overwhelm him in reward or duties, rather let him

perform so that he can also manage when changes come.

XXIII On How to Avoid Flatterers

Teach your advisers and subordinates to tell you the truth, such that there is no room left

for falsehoods such as flattery. Demonstrate your listening skills well, such that staff will

open up to you and tell you the truth. Act on their feedback and demonstrate that you have

listened. Express decisions firmly once made and do not change them. The Prince must be

able to tell what is good advice and what is not; otherwise he will not last long. He must

seek counsel when he needs it, and not otherwise.

XXIV Why Italian Princes Have Lost their States

Newly arrived leaders are much more closely watched than existing ones. Good deeds

build better loyalty than simple inheritance does, so that performing well creates

opportunity to build the strongest form of support.

Forgetting the rain in good times as Machiavelli says, is a common failure in Princes. Not

making hay while the sun shines is the reason that most states were taken. Idleness in

peaceful times is a strategic loss of opportunity. Preparing for war is the most important

task in peace times apart from building the people. If you build and cannot defend, all is

lost, and then if you defend but do not build eventually you will have nothing worth

defending.

And losing by escape when all else fails, may be the only means but it can also be fruitless.

Since it does not use your own resources but makes you dependent upon others, at their

mercy. (An interesting interpretation of Strategy 36 of the 36 Strategies also by Prof.

Wee).


To quote Machiavelli on this matter: “And those methods alone are good, are certain, are

lasting, that depend on yourself and your own ingenuity.” (p. 81)

This cautions all in business to be careful about alliances, partnerships and similar

structures that involve sharing of ownership and responsibility by leaders and their teams.

XXV On Fortune’s Role in Human Affairs & How She Can Be Dealt With

Living as if there was only fortune will lead to loss of state and dominion. Living as if

matters can be influenced and controlled prepares one for events precipitated by fortune.

Whether natural or man-made events, either of these is influenced by fortune and can be

met with preparations. Acting in tune with his times is a better strategy than not doing so.

But adapting to the changing conditions and times is the superior strategy. For two men

who use the same strategy, one can reach and the other does not. Equally, two men, one of

who uses good strategies prospers and one who uses evil strategies and prospers

depending on the times and conditions prevailing. As a general trend, risk-taking over

caution is preferred because fortune is a woman who must be subdued. She is fickle, like

chance it always meets the prepared better than the unprepared.

XXVI An Exhortation to Liberate Italy from the Barbarians

In this final chapter Machiavelli uses all of his earlier principles to show how Italy should

be liberated from the various regional states and their rulers that currently occupy them.

He cites Livy’s historical works as follows:

“Only those wars that are necessary are just, and arms are sacred when there is no hope

except through arms.”

These exhortations seem to have only minor application to the business world since the

boundaries of war are so much vaster than that of business. Our expectations of business


are more clearly defined and more widely communicated. Business is subject to the written

laws; war is less so, at least at this point in history.

One can better see now the origins of Machiavelli’s works. Their scope and application to

business cases especially to leadership has been pursued by a number of writers. Michael

Leeden (1999) identifies many useful messages and rules about the nature of man, about

leading men and applications to modern business and politics. He identifies the following

key messages for leaders today:

1. Loyalty is necessary for motivation in an age where choice is enabled

2. War is more common than times of peace, preparing for war, on the battlefield, at the

ballot box or in the marketplace are likely to be defeated

3. Luck favors the prepared and the skillful

4. Communication, including secrecy and deception are important tools for leaders

5. Preparing and inspiring new leaders to meet the challenges arising is a noble and

important act, since this has widest impact on the largest number of people.

Let’s move now to Sun Tzu’s ‘Bin Fa’.

Scope of Strategies: Sun Tzu

Here we can place Sun Tzu in his context as the greatest oriental military strategist ever.

He has written a complete set of instructions for military success, defining his case this

way: “Know your enemy, know yourself, and your victory will not be threatened. Know

the terrain, know the weather; and your victory will be complete.” (p.3)

Supporting these principles, Sun Tzu recommends tactics that involve two or more rings

up to five for best military effect: ground, water, fire, wind and void. Together with rules

for deception, use of surprise and much more that we shall review briefly here reflect a


much more detailed treatise on military strategy than Machiavelli has produced. I find Sun

Tzu’s works much more thorough, and complete like comparing an encyclopedia or

complete workshop manual with a novel. None the less Machiavelli has many serious

points to make about human nature and leadership survival that are useful and

fundamentally important. They are similar in many ways to the rules of engagement by Sun

Tzu. His focus however is more detailed and complete as it addresses the steps to winning

wars, equally applicable in the market as on the battlefield.

Sun Tzu’s Strategies in ‘Sun Tzu: War and Management’

In this book he begins by defining a sequential process for choosing your battle strategy:

• Situational Strategy

• Formulation of Goals and Strategies

• Evaluation of Strategies

• Implementation of Strategies

• Strategic Controls

Sun Tzu notes, like Machiavelli does, that each leader or Governor must either be busy

consolidating his territory or preparing to expand into new territories. Sun Tzu equally

states that knowledge of and preparing for war are essential survival tasks. He goes on to

advise on how to prepare for war in detail. At this point it is worthy to note one limitation

of this comparison between these two books. Machiavelli has another work also titled “Art

of War”. It may even be speculated as to the possible links between this work and Sun

Tzu’s! ‘The Prince’ however is not directly aimed at encompassing exact prescriptions for

war making. I am interested here about lessons in principle and their application to

business, such as can be explored in this short work, from both writers. So far we see


many more convergences in principle, a remarkable result from such different branches of

human history and geography, at different times!

Sun Tzu identifies that all of these must be assessed when planning military strategy:

7 Dimensions

5 Factors

Moral Influence of Ruler

Ability of General Advantages of Climate & Terrain

Execution of Laws & instructions

Numerical strength of troops

Training of officers & men

Administration of rewards & punishment

Moral influenceClimateTerrainGeneralshipDoctrine

Prof. Wee collapses these into eight categories, by overlapping various common issues. I

have left this true to the original perspective put by Sun Tzu, to show his deliberate

separation of these aspects. The generation of principles and their application to different

levels of people are separated by Sun Tzu.

This provides us with a clear distinction with Machiavelli’s work. In ‘The Prince’,

Machiavelli is addressing his remarks to the single leader as Head of State. This post is

seen to be a leader of the battle front or general as well as the figurehead or Emperor role.

For Sun Tzu these roles are performed by different people with different perspectives and

distance from the ‘front’ of the battle. In business we face many instances where the

battlefront is quite remote from the headquarters, where the local markets are very

different from the home-base market. Like the distinction between the owner of the

company or Chairman of the Board versus the Chief Executive. In these cases we must

behave like the general in Sun Tzu or like the Prince in Machiavelli where these both have

strategies for the battlefront, and not for the Emperor.

Sun Tzu notes five critical competencies for a general: wisdom, sincerity, benevolence,

courage and strictness. These mirror both the writers who equally tell us of the importance

of building loyalty first and discipline second, and thus secure the hearts minds and hands

of the organisation. They build a foundation of trust between the leader and his followers.


They create a moral relationship between these two parties, and equally define the

standard of command.

Usefully and in a very up to date way, Sun Tzu is speaking to us of change management,

responding to changing situations, of acting in response to changes and acting with clear

intent. This is his situational strategy, but there is much more to learn about the situation

from Sun Tzu.

We must consider the business cycles that operate in our domains where we operate. There

are many of relevance to a business: market cycles – rise and fall in demand, competition

and industrial cycles, economic cycles – currency, inflation, taxation and output, political

cycles – regulations, security and favoritism, technology – rise and fall of various

technologies, including influence of the internet. These are all very important external

factors that any CEO must respond to and strategise around. Both writers declare the

importance of opportunity created within a suitable context, and how the context can

determine to a large extent, the strategy used.

The terrain is both the physical location of business, fixing or enabling more or less

mobility for the company. It also defines the competition, sources of supply for labor,

management talent, and all other resource requirements needed by the business.

China is a very good example and so are India, Indonesia and many other SEA countries

with changing conditions and constraints imposed within their borders to business. Many

of my friends in the insurance sector suffered losses in Indonesia due to the economic

crisis, their exposures being very large to property and other classes of insurance risk

there.

The law of doctrine is of importance to business management. It is a fundamental one:

organisation and structure. Many management gurus argue that structure should follow

strategy. Machiavelli argues that organisation has several rules derived from the many

battles of history that he has researched. Advisers are given certain roles and limits on their


behaviors. Nobleman are managed differently from the masses whose concern is primarily

free trade and a full rice bowl. Military are best ruled with a strong heart and a strong and

decisive will, he says.

Sun Tzu sees the primary role of organisation is to enable battle strategy to be effectively

implemented. He notes that “order and disorder depend on organisation”. He defines

organisation as creating a system of rank, methods of signalling and assignment of

responsibilities such that the strategy can be implemented. It can be through any number of

men; the principles remain the same.

Sun Tzu is also clever enough to identify the importance of playing to strengths in business

as on the battlefield. He defines strengths to encompass: capability, technology, equipment

and resources, mobility, and even simple properties such as size and reach (wide or deep

into markets). There are many examples of economies of scale, capability and reach that

create artificial monopolies. Sometimes for the good such as Microsoft before the antitrust

case in the USA, now a problem for this company. My own employer TMP Worldwide

who own Monster.com has 50% of the internet jobs market and can wipe out the

competition by sheer volume. 27,000 other competitors share the other 50% market share!

Training as an essential part of military doctrine has its direct equivalent in business. This

aspect is not so well explored or defined in The Prince by Machiavelli, but is mentioned in

relation to developing local nobleman, local soldiers and local business men their

capabilities to perform to advantage to the Prince. He also saw, as Sun Tzu did, that

people development is vital investment in the future of security of a territory.

In terms of business as in an army, training determines readiness, as with Machiavelli, if

you are not in war then you had better be preparing for war. In business if you are not

equipping yourself to beat the competition, then they will soon defeat you.

Discipline is the controller of operations. It must be benevolent, but effective. Strong yet

soft, quick yet not cut throat. Napolean was a cut-throat and although he won many


battles, he motivated through fear, a short term solution to both strategists. Using reward

and punishment systems in business is a major lever towards directing behavior in a

company. Matching these systems to then strategy, values and goals of the company ties

the company to its market more effectively than one who doesn’t practice such integration

of systems. It is often said that systems drive behavior.

Ensuring alignment as I have discussed here is fully supported by both Machiavelli and Sun

Tzu. They are put forward as primary drivers of effective strategy for any company. From

effective corporate governance systems to compensation and benefits, to simple

disciplinary procedures, these are all-important aspects of managing an organisation, noted

by both writers about effective leadership and management.

Like Machiavelli in The Prince, Sun Tzu proposes that strategy is responsive to the

competitor, as well as to the conditions stated above.

The final concern of Sun Tzu is the desirability of war. He clearly states that war in not a

desirable option. He defines necessary parameters for war to be justified as a move:

definite advantages over the enemy, strong assurance of victory, the last resort when other

options have been tried and failed, and you have an invincible defence. In business, going

head to head with the competition, on price products or services or any other aspect of

your business is frought with dangers. Following these rules will help to minimise your

exposure to loss, and avoid being wiped out. From the number of businesses going out of

business, these rules are not followed very often. Sun Tzu promotes non-war alternatives

too: prepare & strengthen defenses, & consolidate resources. Machiavelli advises that

better non-war strategies include posting your representatives to live amongst the locals

and influence them, as well as reducing the need for the other side to wage war against

you by building alliances with others whom will exert their influence on your competition

for you.


We have scoped the first element in the ‘model’ of Sun Tzu’s Art of War, as conceived by

Prof. Wee Et. Al. There are four more stages used by these authors to put Sun Tzu’s work

into a more understandable and logical format.

The total picture is as follows:

Wee Et. Al. (1991)

Each one of these components is related to the same function in the business context by

the authors.

Situational Appraisal

Formulation of Goals & Strategies

Evaluation of Strategies

Implementation of Strategies

Strategic Controls


For example, the authors cite these approaches - SWOT, Boston Consulting Group

product portfolio matrix, as well as many actual case histories to show the application of

their model and the fit of the Arts of War to modern business management. This very same

strategy is adopted by Michael Ledeen, author of ‘Machiavelli on Modern Leadership’ to

update and apply older material to today’s business and management context. Allowing for

some license within this restructuring, both books: The Prince by Machiavelli and Sun

Tzu’s Art of War provide us with strongly similar perspectives about management and

leadership. The universality of managing and leading human beings, of waging and winning

wars on the battlefield as well as in the boardroom and marketplace is clearly

demonstrated by these two sources. One can conceive of still more variety in human

interactions and expectations say, in some remote African tribes or Papua New Guinean

highlanders. However these seemingly diverse sources of learning represented by

Machiavelli and Sun Tzu suggest that universality is stronger than particularism when it

comes to strategic management and leadership. My experience is that the principles are the

same but the context changes and therefore delivery must be also be changed to fit. Like

Sun Tzu and Machiavelli both advise, looking at the culture (social terrain) and norms of

those you need as troops is fundamental to successful management. Loyalty derived from

engaging the hearts of people, brings untold rewards and benefits to any leader. It is

unnecessary to do otherwise except in special circumstances.

Summary and Recommendations

This has been only a preliminary analysis. We have shown and seen such remarkable

similarities between the two divergent sources of strategy for surviving, wining battles and

prospering.

Clearly the two texts are very different in their purpose. Machiavelli has written a plea for

action to the head of State, and give him rules of action or a series of success strategies.


They do cover overlapping ground with Sun Tzu in areas of substance including principles

of loyalty, dealing with neighboring states, doing battle, and surviving the nature of man,

as a leader.

Sun Tzu’s work is much more detailed, focused on identifying the rules of engagement on

the battlefield. Prof. Wee Et Al have done great work to translate this into the boardroom

using analogy between the marketplace and the battlefield.

In future it would be wonderful to see even more comparative analysis in this domain.

More accurate comparison could be made between both author’s works about war. Since

Machiavelli published many other letters, papers and even a title called Art of War in 1516;

these sources need to examined and will provide even greater depth of analysis for the

researcher.

Secondly we need more work on the earlier records of battle across Europe, including

Livy’s historical analysis of Ancient Rome. This too can add more to our collective

understanding of the universal principals of leadership, management and corporate

strategy. That two such different cultural and epistemological sources can produce such

similar findings is truly another wonder of our world!


References

Bing S. (2000) ‘What Would Machiavelli do? The ends justifies the meanness’

HarperCollins Books NY

Bondanella P. & Musa M. (1984) ‘The Prince’ Oxford University Press UK

Leeden M.A. (1999) ‘Machiavelli on modern Leadership: Why Machiavelli’s Iron

Rules are as timely and important today as five centuries ago’ Truman Talley Books

NY

McAlpine A. (2000) ‘The Ruthless Leader: Three Classics of Strategy and Power’

John Wiley & Sons NY

Sui Yun & Wang Xuanming (1998) ‘Sunzi’s Art of War: Worlds Most famous

Military Classic’ Asiapac Publication Singapore

Wee C.H., Lee K.S., Hidajat B.W., (1991) ‘Sun Tzu: War and Management:

application to strategic management and thinking’ Addison-Wesley Publishers Ltd

APPENDICES:

1. Detailed Comparative Analysis of Sun Tzu and Machiavelli

2. Business & Political Cases: Comments from Sun Tzu & Machiavelli


Appendix 1: Detailed Comparative

Analysis of Sun Tzu and Machiavelli


1. Detailed Comparative Analysis of Sun Tzu and Machiavelli

Nature of War:

• win – lose

• take others resources and pilfer them

• overcome ground/territory,

Business is a battleground:

• Ground/territory = marketplace (war for marketshare), labor market (war for

talent), locations (regions, global versus local, strategic positions), boardrooms

(war for control & dominance of perspective etc

• Win/lose doesn’t happen amongst competitors

• Take others customers, supply and distribution channels and use them

From this perspective let’s compare Sun Tzu and Machiavelli against different management

and leadership issues.

SUN TZU MACHIAVELLI COMMENT

Leadership 1. Responsibility is to outcome & people, not Ruler, fully held by leader

2. Loyalty to people is natural defence of clear conscience, give loyalty & build loyalty of troops

3. Must constantly prepare for war even just by building defenses

4. Differentiate and lead in offence, lead in defence too

1. Responsibility is to survival = people & self

2. Loyalty is the best motivator, build it

3. Must always prepare for war

4. All moves must be planned

They share the same principles of leadership. Esp. loyalty & focus. Principles apply equally to war & business leadership

Know yourself & know your enemy are two common principles to both



5. Leader takes calculated risks, makes fewer mistakes, withstands stress, distances competitors and dominates ground

5. Leader is someone judged to be successful by history, learn from histories success & failures too. Not just one battle but many successes.

Sun Tzu is clearer in this work, but Machiavelli’s work is not his Art of War, need more data from him

Organisation 1. Structure breeds behavior, so assign clear roles to ranks and establish clear goals & strategies to achieve them

1. Establish good advisers

2. Allocate clear roles to hold ground

3. Differentiate roles of noblemen from soldiers

Different contexts but the same principles: clear roles, division of labor and use of hierarchy

Achieving Unity

1. Leaders job – needs to be highly motivated, & enlightened

2. Set achievable & acceptable goals

3. Have clear & effective communication

4. Unselfish conduct & sacrificial behavior, suffer with the troops

1. Must personally take charge

2. Must seize opportunity & meet it with capability

3. Must not substitute fear for loyalty, leads to temporary greatness, not historical greatness

Lead by example or walk the talk as the west would say…all the same gear here for success in leadership & unity, esp. building & maintaining loyalty

Strategy & Structure

They should follow each other in that order, create clear strategy, communicate it clearly, win hearts and minds/hands will follow

Define strategy first and adapt organisation to fit circumstances and situation

Same here too!



Situational Appraisal

1. Study climate, terrain, environment, know enemy and one’s self,

2. Identify clear strengths & weaknesses for you and your enemy

3. Attack as a last resort

Look at culture, different kinds of states and the ways of acquiring & ruling them, establish your enemy’s position, resources, strength & doctrine before deciding to attack, consider past rule before deciding your own tactics

Machiavelli has to deal with different cultures, and previous rulers as added elements in his appraisal that Sun Tzu does not appear to address, otherwise they are the same

Formulating Goals

1. Attack enemy’s strategy

2. Disrupt alliances

3. Attack his army

4. Worst to besiege walled cities, derive clear advantages/net tangible benefits

1. Use your own forces first, others forces second

2. Can also win by inheritance

3. Take advantage of history, use the least harmful way to gain control

4. Consider the longer term in choosing goals & strategies as well as opportunity

These are different perspectives driven from different sources and intentions, Machiavelli towards an historical role of the Prince to meet good fortune well, Sun Tzu in the specifics of war



Formulation of Strategies

1. Choosing battleground

2. Concentration of forces

3. Methods of attack

4. Direct & Indirect forces

1. Consider situation

2. Plan according to that, using decisiveness, deception and speed to overcome all enemy’s including spies

3. Adapt strategy to situation: type of rule, type of acquisition, past history of territory

4. Plan for the long term, & according to the level of risk

These are both similar and different: Sun Tzu is more specific towards choice of options, Machiavelli leads The Prince to look at the situation and adjust his approach, as before said, Sun Tzu agrees with this principal too.

Evaluating Strategies

1. Compare action with results & adjust

2. Compare plan with doctrine, both yours & what you know about your enemy, using spies information etc.

3. Consider timing of actions

4. Define total business space to make sure all things are considered

1. Learn from history, & apply learnings to current strategy where the conditions & situation are similar

2. Look at results and aim for short term survival and long term success

3. History is the final judge of all strategies, meanwhile expediency will do

There is a more cautious and careful planning sequence offered by Sun Tzu compared with this work of Machiavelli, his other works do offer more specific guidance in this area



Implementing Strategies

1. Human aspects: leadership & morale, communication & control (discipline)

2. Operational Aspects: move fast, be ready for change, use deception, capitalise on opportunity, anticipate enemy’s moves

3. Opportunities to win

Context and history are the keys to implementing strategies:

Gaining loyalty is hardest in territories where the language & culture is completely different, in this case better that you stay there to keep watch on the people & respond to any threats

As you would expect Sun Tzu is more detailed than our citations from Machiavelli, yet both reflect common principles of motivating support for strategy

Strategic Controls

1. Use intelligence gathering tools incl. Spies

2. Build & maintain security

Use distractions, create tensions between others to move their focus away from your territory, maintain secrets even from your advisers and troops

Both emphasise that strategic plans depend to a certain extent on surprise, and unclear motive, thus secrecy and intelligence are tools that both writers announce as important to effective leadership

Notes:

1. Context for ‘The Prince’ involves many quite different languages, cultures, races,

religions and peoples. Arguably much more varied than Sun Tzu’s situation. He has

much greater uniformity by race, culture and language. Although they varied for Sun

Tzu, these variations were not as wide as across Europe. Essentially one country, many

systems for Sun Tzu; but one continent, many countries, states and different peoples

for Machiavelli’s Prince. The references to operating in different cultures is therefore

more important to Machiavelli than for Sun Tzu.

2. The similarities far outweigh the differences in this more detailed analysis. It remains

starkly obvious that we have universal truths that apply across humanity as far as


leadership and management are concerned. The ‘what’ of these issues remains

common, just the cultural context and practices, or the ‘how’ is unique. The

implications here are for a common curriculum for management and leadership, a core

competency if you like. Next our focus must move to flexibility, adaptability and other

constructs that explain application across different cultures. These are both

psychological constructs as well as competencies for global leaders and managers

today. An ideal modern day Executive Development program would embrace both!

3. There remains great opportunity for more comparisons between these two writers

Machiavelli in particular draws many more principles in his other works including his

discourses and his Art of War. Secondly their translation into a business context where

the game allows win-win as well as win-lose, needs to be better understood.

4. Another interesting field of research suggested by these works and their startling

similarities is to consider other Chinese texts such as the 36 Strategies of the Chinese

or the Annals of the Three Kingdoms. Cross reference these with other historical

western works such as Livy’s historical works citing empires like Rome and Persia will

provide fertile ground for bringing forward the lessons of the past to modern day

management and leadership.


Appendix 2. Business & Political Cases:

Comments from Sun Tzu & Machiavelli


BUSINESS AND GLOBAL POLITICAL CASES:

CASE ONE: Petrol Wars In Singapore, ST April 10, 2001

A very interesting case of marketing strategy meets market share in a small geographic

location. Shell as the market share ‘tiger’ is competing with its nearest rivals: Esso &

ExxonMobil. The regulator CASE, was pleased to see the discount war as the prices of

crude oil are falling. However each station would rather not discount and try to build up

its margin over these times to help to carry it across times when prices are higher.

And yet after they had agreed to a ‘ceasefire’ in February, they were back six weeks later

doing it again. This similarity with the Israeli/Palestinian territorial dispute is strong. The

size of the discounts is also a measure of their determination to win: they are currently

offering 10 %. The local supplier SPC has been consistently offering 10% discount since

October last year. It will achieve better brand recognition by being consistent, just as

Machiavelli & Sun Tzu would say is necessary to secure loyalty. SPC is further supported

by being the lowest price in the industry; a position no doubt orchestrated with

government influence to push prices lower across the market. The remaining players can

only jostle for custom based upon some other more (or less) distinguishing aspects of their

marketing. For some it is brand loyalty derived from frequent user programs like Shell &

Mobil have or service standards such as each offer to try and out perform each other (I

often wonder though if this market cares about service since they don’t give it, they can’t

recognise when they have it or don’t have it, anyway Shell again seems to have the best

service levels in my experience here). Trying to differentiate themselves, using pricing

given the geography of the location as justification, is reminiscent of situational appraisal

from Sun Tzu. It explains their actions in this locale, and yet also reflects attempts to

create and occupy other grounds that their competitors do not occupy. Moving the

grounds to suit each player is a recommended strategy of Sun Tzu (bring the enemy to

your ground, reach the battleground early to capture the best position and weaken the


enemy) all of these are replicated in the marketing strategies of the petrol business in Bukit

Timah.

CASE TWO: USA-China Crisis ST every day for the past two weeks.

This case has all the hallmarks of a novice leader meeting an unknown cultural context and

having little or no idea how to achieve his goals there. G.W. Bush has no prior exposure to

foreign policy, eastern culture or the Chinese race. He has been entirely unsuccessful in

securing the cooperation of the Chinese and continues to put his foot in his mouth

diplomatically speaking. This result can be compared with Clinton who was able to reach a

close relationship with China they defined as a strategic “partner”. Bush conceives of

China as a strategic “competitor”. Interestingly this case reflects the shift towards the

centre by successive presidents. As they engage with China they learn a softer form of

language and a more inclusive style that reflects a growing acceptance of the need for

common ground. Shades of grey become the norm in bilateral relations so that common

interests of commerce and trade can flourish. This takes time to re-generate for each

successive president and his counterpart.

Sun Tzu would probably respect GW Bush for his circumspect engagement of China. He is

much more cautious of their presence and rightly so when one considers the potential

economic strength and wiley nature of the Chinese on political and economic levels.

Situational appraisal takes time, Sun Tzu reminds us that war (economic as well as

territorial) should not be prepared for lightly. Machiavelli would certainly expect Bush to

take a pragmatic look at their previous relationship and consider the relative strengths and

weaknesses of each party.

Build up of arms by China is another aspect of the equation alongside the size and wealth

of the population, ownership of the problems of economy, poverty, health and


development all must be considered by Bush. Like Clinton and other recent politicians in

USA, Bush is moving business and economic opportunities to the centre of focus in the

political agenda with China. Pragmatism wins again! This is further supported by Jiang

Xiamen’s own home political territory. It is also frought with dangers with an increasingly

factionalised central political body. This forces Xiamen to turn to peacemaker and soft

solutions provider whilst ringing the most from the perceptions created on the populist

front with the masses. These are also concerns and interests for Bush as he watches and

tries to learn about another culture and political dynamic very different (but also quite

similar as we seen before) to his own.

machiavelli sun tzu

Documents