Showing posts with label 謀攻篇第三. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 謀攻篇第三. Show all posts

Friday, 10 January 2014

b.The Balance of Business Power

The last part is here:   Strategy - Business Methods 

Every business has various power circles. Those that carry money has power. Those that carry the technology has power. Those that carry the distribution channels has power. There is therefore a need to balance these powers. Every power centre is always suspicious of other powers' intentions. So there is always a need to have open conversations. As long as the power circle is happy that their power is not undermined or being eroded by nearby powers. They will remain loyal. If ever possible, rotate their roles among each other. That way, they wouldn't be able to grow absolute power within their power circle.

Once these power circles are feeling lazy, give them new problem sets to solve. Occupy their minds. A wandering mind is dangerous to the business. There are always challenging problem sets in building product quality into the business. Give them those.

Learn from Liu bang, you must be able to absorb all kind of talents and resources. They will follow your steps if you treat them genuinely true. Don't at any one time hoodwink them. They will abandon you big time. After you have built your business empire. Learn to share it with them. Be absolutely fair. They will respect you.

Many guys after their heady years would like to slow down and see the world in a slower pace. They would be your most loyal partners.

With a thriving business, there is always food on the table.

Wednesday, 8 January 2014

b.孫子兵法 (謀攻篇第三) (Chapter 3 - 5) (Part 21)

The last part is here:   孫子兵法 (謀攻篇第三) (Chapter 3 - 4) (Part 20)

謀攻篇

孫子曰:凡用兵之法,全國為上,破國次之﹔全軍為上,破軍次之﹔ 全旅為上,破旅次之﹔全卒為上,破卒次之﹔全伍為上,破伍次之。 是故百戰百勝,非善之善也﹔不戰而屈人之兵,善之善者也。
           故上兵伐謀,其次伐交,其次伐兵,其下攻城。攻城之法為不得已。 修櫓轒轀、具器械、三月而後成,距闉,又三月而後已。將不勝其忿 ,而蟻附之,殺士三分之一,而城不拔者,此攻之災也。故善用兵者 ,屈人之兵而非戰也。拔人之城而非攻也,破人之國而非久也,必以 全爭于天下,故兵不頓,而利可全,此謀攻之法也。
          故用兵之法,十則圍之,五則攻之,倍則分之,敵則能戰之,少則能逃之,不若則能避之。故小敵之堅,大敵之擒也。
          夫將者,國之輔也。輔周則國必強,輔隙則國必弱。
          故君之所以患于軍者三:不知軍之不可以進而謂之進,不知軍之不可 以退而謂之退,是為縻軍﹔不知三軍之事,而同三軍之政者,則軍士惑矣﹔不知三軍之權,而同三軍之任,則軍士疑矣。三軍既惑且疑, 則諸侯之難至矣,是謂亂軍引勝。
          故知勝有五:知可以戰與不可以戰者勝,識眾寡之用者勝,上下同欲 者勝,以虞待不虞者勝,將能而君不御者勝。此五者,知勝之道也。
          故曰:知己知彼,百戰不貽﹔不知彼而知己,一勝一負﹔不知彼不知 己,每戰必貽。

Let's continue ...

          故知勝有五:知可以戰與不可以戰者勝,識眾寡之用者勝,上下同欲 者勝,以虞待不虞者勝,將能而君不御者勝。此五者,知勝之道也。
          故曰:知己知彼,百戰不貽﹔不知彼而知己,一勝一負﹔不知彼不知 己,每戰必貽。

Some translation suggested: 
Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory: 
(1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight. 
(2) He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces. 
(3) He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its ranks. 
(4) He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared. 
(5) He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the sovereign.
Hence the saying:   If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
Moran:   So it is known that victory has five components: (1) Those who know when it is all right to go to war and when it is not all right to go to war will have victory. (2) Those who recognize the way to use both forces that are superior and forces that are inferior in number to the opposition will have victory. (3) Those who see to it that those who are superior and those who are subordinate have the same desires will have victory. (4) Those who will put the forewarned in wait for the heedless will have victory. (5) The generals who have ability and who do not suffer the interference of their sovereigns will have victory.  These five things are the ways by which one may recognize victory. So it is said:   Know the other side, and know yourself. Then in one hundred conflicts you will not be in peril. If you do not know the other side yet know yourself, you will win some and lose some. If you neither know the other side nor know yourself, then in every battle you must face defeat.

Let's discuss:

故知勝有五:   Therefore, victory is known in 5 situations:
知可以戰與不可以戰者勝,:   (1) If one knows when one will fight and when one will not fight, wins.
識眾寡之用者勝,:   (2) If one recognises the use of superior and inferior numbers, wins.
上下同欲者勝,:   (3) If the desires of upper and lower echelons are the same, wins.
以虞待不虞者勝,:   (4) If one is prepared lies in wait the unprepared, wins.
將能而君不御者勝。:   (5) If the general is able and free from interference of the ruler, wins.
此五者,知勝之道也。:   With these 5 situations, one knows the way to victory.
故曰﹕  Therefore it is said:
知彼,知己,百戰不殆﹔:   Know other, and know thyself, in one hundred battles, one will not perish.
不知彼,而知己,一勝一負﹔:   Don't know other, but know thyself, one victory, one defeat.
不知彼,不知己,每戰必敗。:   Don't know other, don't know thyself, every battle faces defeat.

In business battles, if one knows when or not to engage, the correct use of numbers, the ambition of entire organisation is the same, be prepared and each soldier is free to give his level best, victory is assured. Then it will lead to the very famous saying:   Know the enemy and know thyself, a hundred battle a hundred victory. (Although not very accurately translated.) 

To win a business battle, we must not only know ourselves well, we must also know the strengths and weaknesses of our enemy's, only then can we be assured of non-peril. We might not always win, but we will not perish.

SunTzu is very clear about this concept of non-peril. It is alright not to win all the time, but first, we must not perish. Self-preservation is key in any business games.

One of most interesting trick I noticed in business games is that of the ambitions of every player. Like in game theory suggested by John Nash:

In game theory, the Nash equilibrium is a solution concept of a non-cooperative game involving two or more players, in which each player is assumed to know the equilibrium strategies of the other players, and no player has anything to gain by changing only their own strategy. If each player has chosen a strategy and no player can benefit by changing strategies while the other players keep theirs unchanged, then the current set of strategy choices and the corresponding payoffs constitute a Nash equilibrium.

Stated simply, Amy and Wili are in Nash equilibrium if Amy is making the best decision she can, taking into account Wili's decision, and Wili is making the best decision he can, taking into account Amy's decision. Likewise, a group of players are in Nash equilibrium if each one is making the best decision that he or she can, taking into account the decisions of the others.

A strategy is dominant if, regardless of what any other players do, the strategy earns a player a larger payoff than any other. Hence, a strategy is dominant if it is always better than any other strategy, for any profile of other players' actions. Depending on whether "better" is defined with weak or strict inequalities, the strategy is termed strictly dominant or weakly dominant. If one strategy is dominant, than all others are dominated. For example, in the prisoner's dilemma, each player has a dominant strategy. 

Master therefore the Art of War, the way of business is never simpler.

In fact the reason why John Nash won a nobel prize is because this is precisely what the entire SunTzu's Art of War meant in a few short words - the Nash Equilibrium.

Monday, 30 December 2013

b.孫子兵法 (謀攻篇第三) (Chapter 3 - 4) (Part 20)

The last part is here:   孫子兵法 (謀攻篇第三) (Chapter 3 - 3) (Part 19)

謀攻篇

孫子曰:凡用兵之法,全國為上,破國次之﹔全軍為上,破軍次之﹔ 全旅為上,破旅次之﹔全卒為上,破卒次之﹔全伍為上,破伍次之。 是故百戰百勝,非善之善也﹔不戰而屈人之兵,善之善者也。
           故上兵伐謀,其次伐交,其次伐兵,其下攻城。攻城之法為不得已。 修櫓轒轀、具器械、三月而後成,距闉,又三月而後已。將不勝其忿 ,而蟻附之,殺士三分之一,而城不拔者,此攻之災也。故善用兵者 ,屈人之兵而非戰也。拔人之城而非攻也,破人之國而非久也,必以 全爭于天下,故兵不頓,而利可全,此謀攻之法也。
          故用兵之法,十則圍之,五則攻之,倍則分之,敵則能戰之,少則能逃之,不若則能避之。故小敵之堅,大敵之擒也。
          夫將者,國之輔也。輔周則國必強,輔隙則國必弱。
          故君之所以患于軍者三:不知軍之不可以進而謂之進,不知軍之不可 以退而謂之退,是為縻軍﹔不知三軍之事,而同三軍之政者,則軍士惑矣﹔不知三軍之權,而同三軍之任,則軍士疑矣。三軍既惑且疑, 則諸侯之難至矣,是謂亂軍引勝。
          故知勝有五:知可以戰與不可以戰者勝,識眾寡之用者勝,上下同欲 者勝,以虞待不虞者勝,將能而君不御者勝。此五者,知勝之道也。
          故曰:知己知彼,百戰不貽﹔不知彼而知己,一勝一負﹔不知彼不知 己,每戰必貽。

Let's continue ...

          故君之所以患于軍者三:不知軍之不可以進而謂之進,不知軍之不可 以退而謂之退,是為縻軍﹔不知三軍之事,而同三軍之政者,則軍士 惑矣﹔不知三軍之權,而同三軍之任,則軍士疑矣。三軍既惑且疑, 則諸侯之難至矣,是謂亂軍引勝。

Some translation suggested: 
There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune upon his army:
(1) By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army. 
(2) By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This causes restlessness in the soldier's minds.
(3) By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This shakes the confidence of the soldiers.
But when the army is restless and distrustful, trouble is sure to come from the other feudal princes. This is simply bringing anarchy into the army, and flinging victory away.
Moran:   故君之所以患於軍者三 Truly, there are three ways in which a sovereign can be an affliction upon his army:
不知三軍之不可以進而謂之進,:   (1) To be unaware that the three armies will be unable to advance and yet order them to go forward,
不知三軍之不可以退而謂之退,是為縻軍﹔:   or to be unaware that the three armies will be unable to retreat and yet order them to do so, is called hamstringing the army.
不知三軍之事,而同三軍之政者,則軍士惑矣﹔:   (2) To not know the inner workings of the three armies and yet personally take on the administration of the entire enterprise is to contrive the chaos of the armies and of their officers. PEM: According to the regulations of the Zhou Dynasty, the "Son of Heaven" (the king at this time but later called the emperor), was permitted to have six armies, while each duke or leader of a subsidiary feudal domain was permitted to have three armies. The regulation strength of each army was 10,000 soldiers.
不知三軍之權,而同三軍之任,則軍士疑矣。:   (3) To not know the balances of power within the three armies and yet hold responsibility for all of them is to cause the armies and their officers to lose confidence. PEM: The king gets involved and disrupts what his general staff has been trying to get done.
三軍既惑且疑,則諸侯之難至矣,是謂亂軍引勝。:   When the three armies fall into chaos and lose confidence, then disaster will come upon one from the lords (i.e., the subsidiary power centers within or near to one's own nation. A typical example would be that of the feudal domains that fought for dominancy in Japan). This is called throwing one's own army into chaos and drawing nigh the victory [of one's opponents].

Let's discuss:

故君之所以患於軍者三﹕ Therefore, there are three ways in which a sovereign can be an affliction upon his army:
不知三軍之不可以進而謂之進,:   (1) Not know that the three armies cannot advance, but choose to advance,
不知三軍之不可以退而謂之退,是為縻軍﹔:   or not know that the three armies cannot retreat, but choose to retreat and hamstring the army.
不知三軍之事,而同三軍之政者,則軍士惑矣﹔:   (2) Not know the inner workings of the three armies and yet personally take on the administration of the entire enterprise is to confuse the armies and of their officers.
不知三軍之權,而同三軍之任,則軍士疑矣。:   (3) Not know the balances of power within the three armies and yet hold responsibility for all of them is to cause suspicions among the armies and their officers.
三軍既惑且疑,則諸侯之難至矣,是謂亂軍引勝。:   When the three armies are confused and suspicious, trouble is sure to come from the other feudal princes. This is simply bringing anarchy into the army, and flinging victory away.

Applying these principles in business, SunTzu suggested that the business owner has 3 trouble issues at hand, (1) if he does not know when to advance or retreat and thus created a hamstring-ed business, (2) if he takes all matters of the business personally, not knowing his exact appropriate authority (micro-management) and thus created a confused business structure, and (3) if he does not recognize the different levels of authority within the business structure and thus, created a suspicious organization. If the created business organization is confused and suspicious, the competition will rise up and steal a simple victory.

Essentially, SunTzu concluded that in a business structure, similar to that of a warring state, must have well-considered direction, proper structure and power delegation, i.e., no matter how small the business structure, clear direction and organization is key to surviving the business game.

The lesson learnt here is no matter how tiny the business planner is, to be good and strong, one must be very organized and very disciplined. Only then will the business planner grow from strength to strength. Only then, will the business planner will see the light of the day.

Sunday, 22 December 2013

b.孫子兵法 (謀攻篇第三) (Chapter 3 - 3) (Part 19)

The last part is here:   孫子兵法 (謀攻篇第三) (Chapter 3 - 2) (Part 18)

謀攻篇

孫子曰:凡用兵之法,全國為上,破國次之﹔全軍為上,破軍次之﹔ 全旅為上,破旅次之﹔全卒為上,破卒次之﹔全伍為上,破伍次之。 是故百戰百勝,非善之善也﹔不戰而屈人之兵,善之善者也。
           故上兵伐謀,其次伐交,其次伐兵,其下攻城。攻城之法為不得已。 修櫓轒轀、具器械、三月而後成,距闉,又三月而後已。將不勝其忿 ,而蟻附之,殺士三分之一,而城不拔者,此攻之災也。故善用兵者 ,屈人之兵而非戰也。拔人之城而非攻也,破人之國而非久也,必以 全爭于天下,故兵不頓,而利可全,此謀攻之法也。
          故用兵之法,十則圍之,五則攻之,倍則分之,敵則能戰之,少則能逃之,不若則能避之。故小敵之堅,大敵之擒也。
          夫將者,國之輔也。輔周則國必強,輔隙則國必弱。
          故君之所以患于軍者三:不知軍之不可以進而謂之進,不知軍之不可 以退而謂之退,是為縻軍﹔不知三軍之事,而同三軍之政者,則軍士 惑矣﹔不知三軍之權,而同三軍之任,則軍士疑矣。三軍既惑且疑, 則諸侯之難至矣,是謂亂軍引勝。
          故知勝有五:知可以戰與不可以戰者勝,識眾寡之用者勝,上下同欲 者勝,以虞待不虞者勝,將能而君不御者勝。此五者,知勝之道也。
          故曰:知己知彼,百戰不貽﹔不知彼而知己,一勝一負﹔不知彼不知 己,每戰必貽。

Let's continue ...

          故用兵之法,十則圍之,五則攻之,倍則分之,敵則能戰之,少則能逃之,不若則能避之。故小敵之堅,大敵之擒也。
          夫將者,國之輔也。輔周則國必強,輔隙則國必弱。

Some translation suggested: 
It is the rule in war, if our forces are ten to the enemy's one, to surround him; if five to one, to attack him; if twice as numerous, to divide our army into two. If equally matched, we can offer battle; if slightly inferior in numbers, we can avoid the enemy; if quite unequal in every way, we can flee from him. 
Hence, though an obstinate fight may be made by a small force, in the end it must be captured by the larger force.
Now the general is the bulwark of the State; if the bulwark is complete at all points; the State will be strong; if the bulwark is defective, the State will be weak.
Moran:   So the method for using troops is as follows:
If your strength is ten to their one, then surround them. If your strength is five to their one, then attack them. If your strength is double theirs then divide them.PEM: Later he says that if you surround an army you should give it a way to escape the blockade — the idea being that you would rather have them go back where they came from, or, if they seem not likely to go home and stay home, then a corridor of flight may be offered to them, and it can be a long killing field through which their troops will continue to flee even as the near end of the corridor is being closed off and as they are being culled from both sides as they flee.
If one is their worthy opponent, then one can fight them. If one is numerically inferior, then one can (flee them)/(take a completely defensive posture with regard to them). If one is not at all a match for them, then one must strive to become able to avoid them entirely. PEM: There are two versions of the text at this point.
PEM: To "avoid them entirely," one's intelligence service must be equal to the task of telling your soldiers where to go and where not to go.
So by obdurateness a minor combatant can become the captive of a major combatant. PEM: Continuing the idea above, why would a numerically inferior army willingly meet a superior force on an equal footing? The only way the numerically inferior army can win is by ambush or other stratagems that prevent more than a small portion of the other army from getting at them.
Now a general is an aide to the nation. If his assistance is well-rounded, then the nation must be strong. But if his assistance has lapses in it, then the nation must be weak. 

Let's discuss:

故用兵之法,:   Therefore, the method for using troops is as follows:
十則圍之,五則攻之,倍則分之;:   If the troops are ten times that of the target, surround the target. If the troops are five times that of the target, attack the target. If the troops are double that of the target, divide the target.
敵則能戰之,少則能逃 / 守之,不若則能避之。:   If the troops are comparable to that of the target, stay and fight. If the troops are numerically smaller to that of the target, flee / defend the position. If the troops are no match to that of the target, avoid conflict.
故小敵之堅,大敵之擒也。:   Hence, though an obstinate fight may be made by a small hardened force, in the end it must be captured by the larger force.
夫將者,國之輔也。輔周則國必強,輔隙則國必弱。:   A general is the pillar to the nation. If his advice is well-analyzed, then the nation must be strong. But if his advice has cracks, then the nation must be weak.

SunTzu meant that in business, if the size is 10 to 1, do not engage the target directly, produce full compatible products and surround the target's market place. If the size is 5 to 1, attack the target directly by aggressive marketing and market grabbing. If the size is 2 to 1, concentrate on taking on target's products that have significant market share. If the size is 1 to 1 parity, stand and defend own turf. If one is slightly smaller in size, flee to other suitable market space or defend own turf. If one is truly small in size, avoid direct confrontation with the major business. A small business, no matter how clever, will always be captured / killed by the large business. Therefore, a carefully considered plan and execution by a business steward will strengthen the business, otherwise, the steward shall weakened the business' resources.

Generally, I feel that this is quite common business sense. Frequently, I would say that most businesses one conducts no matter how big is still small compared to major business empires (as in controlled by the state enterprises). Therefore, it is not ideal to fight. It is always about defending one's turf. I don't believe in fleeing. If you flee, you just go into another business-type. In that new business-type, you will meet its head honchos there. The problem set is still the same. If that is the case, why don't you, after so much careful considerations in the current business-type, always stand and fight. Sometimes, the answer lies not in warfare, but in co-operation. Give the large entities the feeling that they are advantageous in the dealings. Grow your strength from there.

In many cases, the mom-and-pop store (I am staring at one right now) in a very small town will do roaring business. The service provided is very friendly and personal, but extremely expensive. The next nearest similar store is 100 km away. But, given time, the town will grow and soon the big-box store will arrive, driving out the very mom-and-pop store out of business. The big-box store is cheaper, bigger range and has more accurate delivery of business ethics. The decades of hard work and build-up of branding of the mom-and-pop store are nullified by its entry.

You are not to be fooled by this approach. Battle-hardened yourself through proper product development.

Wednesday, 18 December 2013

b.孫子兵法 (謀攻篇第三) (Chapter 3 - 2) (Part 18)

The last part is here:   孫子兵法 (謀攻篇第三) (Chapter 3 - 1) (Part 17)

謀攻篇

孫子曰:凡用兵之法,全國為上,破國次之﹔全軍為上,破軍次之﹔ 全旅為上,破旅次之﹔全卒為上,破卒次之﹔全伍為上,破伍次之。 是故百戰百勝,非善之善也﹔不戰而屈人之兵,善之善者也。
           故上兵伐謀,其次伐交,其次伐兵,其下攻城。攻城之法為不得已。 修櫓轒轀、具器械、三月而後成,距闉,又三月而後已。將不勝其忿 ,而蟻附之,殺士三分之一,而城不拔者,此攻之災也。故善用兵者 ,屈人之兵而非戰也。拔人之城而非攻也,破人之國而非久也,必以 全爭于天下,故兵不頓,而利可全,此謀攻之法也。
          故用兵之法,十則圍之,五則攻之,倍則分之,敵則能戰之,少則能 逃之,不若則能避之。故小敵之堅,大敵之擒也。
          夫將者,國之輔也。輔周則國必強,輔隙則國必弱。
          故君之所以患于軍者三:不知軍之不可以進而謂之進,不知軍之不可 以退而謂之退,是為縻軍﹔不知三軍之事,而同三軍之政者,則軍士 惑矣﹔不知三軍之權,而同三軍之任,則軍士疑矣。三軍既惑且疑, 則諸侯之難至矣,是謂亂軍引勝。
          故知勝有五:知可以戰與不可以戰者勝,識眾寡之用者勝,上下同欲 者勝,以虞待不虞者勝,將能而君不御者勝。此五者,知勝之道也。
          故曰:知己知彼,百戰不貽﹔不知彼而知己,一勝一負﹔不知彼不知 己,每戰必貽。

Let's continue ...

           故上兵伐謀,其次伐交,其次伐兵,其下攻城。攻城之法為不得已。 修櫓轒轀、具器械、三月而後成,距闉,又三月而後已。將不勝其忿 ,而蟻附之,殺士三分之一,而城不拔者,此攻之災也。故善用兵者 ,屈人之兵而非戰也。拔人之城而非攻也,破人之國而非久也,必以 全爭于天下,故兵不頓,而利可全,此謀攻之法也。

Some translation suggested: 
Thus 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 rule is, not to besiege walled cities if it can possibly be avoided. The preparation of mantlets, movable shelters, and various implements of war, will take up three whole months; and the piling up of mounds over against the walls will take three months more.
The general, unable to control his irritation, will launch his men to the assault like swarming ants, with the result that one-third of his men are slain, while the town still remains untaken. Such are the disastrous effects of a siege.
Therefore the skillful leader subdues the enemy's troops without any fighting; he captures their cities without laying siege to them; he overthrows their kingdom without lengthy operations in the field.
With his forces intact he will dispute the mastery of the Empire, and thus, without losing a man, his triumph will be complete. This is the method of attacking by stratagem.
Moran:   For that reason, the highest level of warfare attacks the enemy's planning. The next level attacks the enemy's communications or alliances. The next level attacks their soldiers. At the level below that one attacks their fortifications. Attacking fortifications is only to be done when there is no other alternative. "fortifications" literally means "walled city."
The preparation of paveses, mantlet wagons, and all the siege tools necessary for attacking fortifications requires three months. A pavese is an extremely large shield for (usually) a single archer or other soldier to take shelter behind. A mantlet is a multi - soldier shield. The Chinese made four-wheeled vehicles that had canopies made of rough lumber covered with rawhide. These vehicles were used to shield workers bringing loads of earth to the edge of fortifications to build up attack ramps.
Piling ramps against the enemy's walls will require an additional three months.
Supposing that the general could still not slake his fury (after the time required to make the aforesaid preparations), and required his troops to swarm over the walls like ants pouring out of their ant hill, and for that reason killed off one third of his officers and common soldiers, and was yet unable to take out the fortifications of the opposition, that would be a calamity brought on by his own attack.
So those who are good at warfare:   Subjugate the other side's soldiers without fighting. Take out the other side's fortifications without making an attack. Destroy the other side's nation without a prolonged fight.
Ultimately, one must make a complete engagement with all under Heaven, so in this way one's soldiers will not lose their edge and yet benefits can be maximized. This is the method of attacking [solely] through the use of planning. The character-by-character translating of the first phrase would be: "Must use all/complete struggle/contend in heaven below." Some take this statement to mean that one must use keeping whole as one's principle while contending against the world, and some take this statement to mean that one must use an all out struggle against the world. If the only issue were keeping one's army with the least possible losses, something that Master Sun in deed advocates, there would be no need to mention the world (i.e., "all under heaven"). Taking the second alternative, "Your aim must be to take All - Under - Heaven intact." But that interpretation suggests a military campaign to conquer the world, an undertaking that would be bloody and costly under the best of conditions. The surface meaning suggests that Master Sun was talking about all out warfare. But 爭 can mean "to contend," and it is this broader sense of working out opposing interests that is relevant to Master Sun's real world situation. His country, Wu, was small, was faced by other nations that might want to conquer it, and needed to plan and operate to maintain its own security.
Master Sun has in mind the pursuit of a grand strategy. An example of such would be the strategy of containment first put forth by Ambassador George Kennan to deal with the expansive tendencies of the USSR. 
One way to understand parts of the text above would make them inconsistent with previous text. He first says that one should fight only as a last resort. Subsequently he lists priorities that favor situations with no-fight no-lose conclusions, but then it appears that he could advocate making a war all over the world as it was then known. If he does not mean to express such an aggressive and unrealistic ambition, then I believe that he has to mean that the best general will have a total battlefield awareness of "all under Heaven" and will wage his struggle entirely on the level of being so well defended and so well prepared that nothing in the world can sink a barb in to his nation. Going forward with the aim of contending for and achieving supremacy over all under heaven would, for Master Sun, be a fool's mission. 
Master Sun cannot hope to minimize losses to his nation without achieving a strategic capacity to anticipate and stymie all potential attacks. And he cannot maintain his capacity to defend his nation over the long run unless he minimizes losses to his troops. To achieve both objectives he must, on the highest plane of planning, maintain an integral web of diplomacy and intelligence over his entire world. The following discussion is on the lower, more specific, scale of inquiry: How can one best maintain one's capability for future military actions while succeeding in currently needed operations?
 

Let's discuss:

故上兵伐謀,其次伐交,其次伐兵,其下攻城。 攻城之法為不得已。:   Therefore, the most ideal warfare is to attack enemy's stratagem. Next, then attack enemy's connections. Next, then attack their soldiers. The lowest level is to attack their walled city. Attacking walled city is only done when there is no other better alternative.
修櫓轒轀,具器械,三月而後成,:   Preparing paveses, mantlet wagons, siege towers and all the tools needed for attacking walled city requires three months.
距閩又三月而後已。:   Piling earth ramps against enemy's walls requires an additional three months.
將不勝其忿,而蟻附之,殺士卒三分之一,而城 不拔者,此攻之災也。:   At this juncture, if the general still has not slaked his fury, he would then direct his troops to swarm over the walls like ants pouring out of their ant hill. Consequently, the conquest would have lost at least one third of his officers and soldiers, but yet the walled city remained intact. The general would have calamity brought unto him.

故善用兵者,:   So those generals who are good at warfare:
屈人之兵而非戰也。:   Subjugate enemy's soldiers without fighting.
拔人之城而非攻也,:   Take out enemy's wall city without making an attack.
毀人之國而非久也。:   Destroy enemy's nation without a prolonged fight.
必以全爭於天下,故兵不頓而利可全,此謀攻之法也。:   Ultimately, one must use wholesomeness to conquer one's heaven and earth (world). Only so doing, one's soldiers will not lose their edge and yet maximizing benefits. This is THE method in attack by stratagems.

SunTzu suggested in this text that warfare strategies must occur at the highest form - mind warfare. Only after lack of better alternatives, lengthy preparation and given a long period of cooling-off, that physical attacks are conducted as the last resort. Even at this level, the aim is still to engage and win without actual fighting. This is the only method in attack by stratagems.

The silent text behind this was SunTzu after playing for such a long time in warfare. He felt no success in absolute battles. Whether as the victors or the losers, once they engaged in battle, they have all lost.

In business, it is not easy not to engage in warfare. No one in business would have thought that engaging in business warfare would take one's life. Hence, the liberal engagement. Little do they know once you have lost in a business warfare, you not only have to pay back what you have lost first before restarting again. This will set you back by at least 15 years. In the meantime, your spouse and children will leave you.

No many guys can take this lying down. Some took their lives by jumping off buildings and charcoal burning.

So the idea behind this text is you should never try to engage in business battles, unless you absolutely have to. It is lethal and life-threatening.

Find a way to collaborate than fight in business. It is hard. It is not easy-going. But, this is THE method in attack in stratagems in business.

If you have conducted your temple studies as in chapter 1 of SunTzu, your cunning would be way higher than your business collaborators, you should be safe from attacks. But, never employ cunning for dishonourable applies. Those around you would smell you from 10 miles away.

Monday, 16 December 2013

b.孫子兵法 (謀攻篇第三) (Chapter 3 - 1) (Part 17)

The last part is here:   孫子兵法 (作戰篇第二) (Chapter 2 - 6) (Part 16)

謀攻篇

孫子曰:凡用兵之法,全國為上,破國次之﹔全軍為上,破軍次之﹔ 全旅為上,破旅次之﹔全卒為上,破卒次之﹔全伍為上,破伍次之。 是故百戰百勝,非善之善也﹔不戰而屈人之兵,善之善者也。
           故上兵伐謀,其次伐交,其次伐兵,其下攻城。攻城之法為不得已。 修櫓轒轀、具器械、三月而後成,距闉,又三月而後已。將不勝其忿 ,而蟻附之,殺士三分之一,而城不拔者,此攻之災也。故善用兵者 ,屈人之兵而非戰也。拔人之城而非攻也,破人之國而非久也,必以 全爭于天下,故兵不頓,而利可全,此謀攻之法也。
          故用兵之法,十則圍之,五則攻之,倍則分之,敵則能戰之,少則能 逃之,不若則能避之。故小敵之堅,大敵之擒也。
          夫將者,國之輔也。輔周則國必強,輔隙則國必弱。
          故君之所以患于軍者三:不知軍之不可以進而謂之進,不知軍之不可 以退而謂之退,是為縻軍﹔不知三軍之事,而同三軍之政者,則軍士 惑矣﹔不知三軍之權,而同三軍之任,則軍士疑矣。三軍既惑且疑, 則諸侯之難至矣,是謂亂軍引勝。
          故知勝有五:知可以戰與不可以戰者勝,識眾寡之用者勝,上下同欲 者勝,以虞待不虞者勝,將能而君不御者勝。此五者,知勝之道也。
          故曰:知己知彼,百戰不貽﹔不知彼而知己,一勝一負﹔不知彼不知 己,每戰必貽。

Let's continue ...

孫子曰:凡用兵之法,全國為上,破國次之﹔全軍為上,破軍次之﹔ 全旅為上,破旅次之﹔全卒為上,破卒次之﹔全伍為上,破伍次之。 是故百戰百勝,非善之善也﹔不戰而屈人之兵,善之善者也。

Some translation suggested: 
Sun Tzu said: In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it, to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy them.
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.
Moran:   Master Sun said:  In all cases, the principles for the use of warfare are as follows:   Maintaining the integrity of the [target] nation is more valuable than destroying it. Maintaining [a target] army whole is more valuable than destroying it. Preserving an entire battalion is of greater importance than destroying it. Maintaining a company is of greater importance than destroying it. The standard strength of a company was 100 soldiers. Maintaining the existence of a squad is more important than destroying it. The standard strength of a squad was 5 soldiers. For the above reasons, to achieve one hundred victories in one hundred engagements is not the highest good. To not engage and yet to subjugate the other side's soldiers is the highest good.

Let's discuss:

This chapter is about planning offensives.

孫子曰:凡用兵之法,全國為上,破國次之﹔   Sun Tzu said: In all cases when employing warfare, the principle must be to capture the target nation whole than to destroy it.
全軍為上,破軍次之﹔:   Capture a target army whole than to destroy it.
全旅為上,破旅次之﹔:   Capture a target battalion whole than to destroy it.
全卒為上,破卒次之﹔:   Capture a target company whole than to destroy it.
全伍為上,破伍次之。:   Capture a target squad whole than to destroy it.
是故百戰百勝,非善之善者也﹔:   So although you managed a hundred victories in one hundred engagements, it is not the most suitable outcome.不戰而屈人之兵,善之善者也。:   Therefore, to not engage and yet subjugate the target army is the most suitable outcome.

This chapter deals with Attack by Stratagems. This chapter is the most quoted for SunTzu.

This idea of capturing the target army or nation whole is an idyllic notion. In business, this is not easy. When you fight in business, it is usually very bloody. This concept of trying to capture the target whole is truly enlightening.

Let's try to use this principle in corporate mergers / acquisitions. This is almost true that the dominant player will try to exert its influence on the weaker player, change its culture. This is a hard dilemma. The reason why the weaker player is acquired or merged is due to its poor business idea or culture. If its culture is destroyed in the process of take-over, very likely its employees would feel intimidated and work poorly thereafter. It would be almost like buying a bad apple, one would rather build the entity from scratch. Hence, historically, many corporate mergers / acquisitions seldom end well.

There is no quick methodology to capturing targets whole, but, if one is mindful about its potential benefits, one should rise up strong.

A business leader is strong when he is magnanimous. Never treat an enemy as an enemy but treat him as a friend. During my younger days, I treated some of the competitions as enemies, but, it was not useful. By treating them as friends, you are laying a path for him to come to you without feeling small and weak. Once that is done, you will not only win his respect but his resources at your peck-and-call. Do think about it. It is good notion.

Another thought process is if you have captured the target by force and deny him totally of his food and resources thereafter, the target would put up the bravest defence. But, if you are shown to be magnanimous and that even after capture, you will leave his assets as still under his command, but, only collect your basic food and taxes. Thus, once the target leader fronts a great invading army, I am sure the target leader would think twice about fighting but consider surrender as the notion of surrender is nothing more than paying taxes to the conqueror. In exchange for the taxes, the target would feel safe as he would not be invaded again as the target is now under the official "honourable protection" of the conqueror.

Invasion by destruction, according to SunTzu, is a weak answer to conquest.