The Art of Action: How Leaders Close the Gaps between Plans, Actions and Results
- Downloads：2469
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-05-21 10:54:07
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Stephen Bungay
- ISBN：1857885597
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
Business is highly competitive， complex， risky and fast paced - like combat。What do you want me to do？ This question is the enduring management issue， a perennial problem that Stephen Bungay shows has an old solution that is counter-intuitive and yet common sense。 The Art of Action is a thought-provoking and fresh look at how managers can turn planning into execution， and execution into results。
Drawing on his experience as a consultant， senior manager and a highly respected military historian， Stephen Bungay takes a close look at the nineteenth-century Prussian Army， which built its agility on the initiative of its highly empowered junior officers， to show business leaders how they can build more effective， productive organizations。 Based on a theoretical framework which has been tested in practice over 150 years， Bungay shows how the approach known as "mission command" has been applied in businesses as diverse as pharmaceuticals and F1 racing today。
The Art of Action is scholarly but engaging， rigorous but pragmatic， and shows how common sense can sometimes be surprising。
Drawing on his experience as a consultant， senior manager and a highly respected military historian， Stephen Bungay takes a close look at the nineteenth-century Prussian Army， which built its agility on the initiative of its highly empowered junior officers， to show business leaders how they can build more effective， productive organizations。 Based on a theoretical framework which has been tested in practice over 150 years， Bungay shows how the approach known as "mission command" has been applied in businesses as diverse as pharmaceuticals and F1 racing today。
The Art of Action is scholarly but engaging， rigorous but pragmatic， and shows how common sense can sometimes be surprising。
Reviews
Matt
，
Probably the best book on leadership that I've ever read。 Foundational for understanding concepts like Strategy， Strategy Deployment， Flight Levels， Leadership at Every Level and Aligned Autonomy。 Probably the best book on leadership that I've ever read。 Foundational for understanding concepts like Strategy， Strategy Deployment， Flight Levels， Leadership at Every Level and Aligned Autonomy。 。。。more
Gerard Chiva
，
The title could be misleading。 This is a book about strategy around the three gaps which cause businesses to fail in defining and executing their strategy under unpredictable environments: the knowledge gap， the alignment gap and the effects gap。The author explains how businesses can benefit from 200-year old teachings from the military。In recent years everybody is talking about OKRs to fix the alignment gap， however most businesses still fail to do what is most important: to design and continuo The title could be misleading。 This is a book about strategy around the three gaps which cause businesses to fail in defining and executing their strategy under unpredictable environments: the knowledge gap， the alignment gap and the effects gap。The author explains how businesses can benefit from 200-year old teachings from the military。In recent years everybody is talking about OKRs to fix the alignment gap， however most businesses still fail to do what is most important: to design and continuously evolve a winning strategy。 OKRs without a sound strategy becomes just fancy goal-setting。The book contains some quite good advice and ideas I will be using， however to much history and text for my liking。 I think I can summarize the key concepts in two pages ;） 。。。more
Jason Donohoe
，
Some powerful mental modelsA great book overall。 The core concepts come together nicely to provide a very useful mental model for navigating the crazy world of organisations trying to execute on their mission。
Marco
，
As a non native English reader， this book was sometimes hard to follow。 The structure seems to be more academical than practical。 Having almost one sixth of notes and index is a good indicatiin for that。However I liked to find similarities from different domains and compare or adapt them， in this case the military。 The author created a triangle of directing， managing and leading， with a bit more focus on directing or command in military speak。
Mihai Bogdan Volosincu
，
O carte care oferă soluții la multe provocări din viata profesionala， un foarte bun ghid în management， organizare și conducere （leadership）。 După citirea acestei cărți dacă ar fi sa retrăiesc unele evenimente din trecut din viata mea profesionala cu siguranță as aborda diferit cursul și unele situații din viata proiectelor și echipelor din care am făcut parte。 Autorul s-a inspirat din experienta armatei prusace din secolul 19， experientă actualizată la circumstanțele prezentului， o sursa foarte O carte care oferă soluții la multe provocări din viata profesionala， un foarte bun ghid în management， organizare și conducere （leadership）。 După citirea acestei cărți dacă ar fi sa retrăiesc unele evenimente din trecut din viata mea profesionala cu siguranță as aborda diferit cursul și unele situații din viata proiectelor și echipelor din care am făcut parte。 Autorul s-a inspirat din experienta armatei prusace din secolul 19， experientă actualizată la circumstanțele prezentului， o sursa foarte bună în ceea ce privește organizarea și conducerea unei afaceri， a unui proiect sau coordonarea unei echipe/companii。 "Most of us spend most of our waking hours working for an organization。 How we spend that time matters to the organization and it also matters to us。 We spend it engaged in activity。 Directed opportunism is the art of turning activity into thoughtful， purposive action。 Doing so does not only help organizations。 It also alleviates the misery of the maligned middle manager and lightens the burden of the resented senior executive。 It shows respect for individuals and allows them to grow。 It enriches people’s lives。" 。。。more
Cyril Danthi
，
The commander in chief always develops a strategy to win the war。 All though it is taken for granted that the soldiers in the field will obey the chief as planned to ensure they defeat the enemy。 The chain in command and alignment becomes very important so that they know Why， What and How it has to be done。 Business is an interaction between human organizations。 It is competitive， highly dynamic， complex and risky。 Organizations develop strategy and review it every year。 Command is as unavoidabl The commander in chief always develops a strategy to win the war。 All though it is taken for granted that the soldiers in the field will obey the chief as planned to ensure they defeat the enemy。 The chain in command and alignment becomes very important so that they know Why， What and How it has to be done。 Business is an interaction between human organizations。 It is competitive， highly dynamic， complex and risky。 Organizations develop strategy and review it every year。 Command is as unavoidable in the business world as it is in the military one。 Strategy is dynamic as it only defines the path that management has chosen。 At times the organizations fail to execute the strategy。 The Art of Action is a thought-provoking and fresh look at how managers can turn planning into execution， and execution into results。 The book is based on the historical knowledge of military campaigns going back to Napoleonic times and moves forwards into the 21st Century military application of strategy in the Western world。 The author draws parallels to application of the Mission Command approach in private and public sector organisations today。 In war everything is very simple， but simplest thing is difficult as for the complex organizations。 Creating great organizations and devising great strategies is not a science but an art。 In science our knowledge grows and builds on the past。 The big issue is not strategy， but executing strategy and times organization appear to reward compliance rather than initiatives or creativity resulting into non-participation and fear。 A strategy is fundamentally an intent; a decision to achieve something now in order to realize an outcome; that is a， “What” and a “Why”。 The steps of the staircase define the organizations “main efforts: at a strategic level。 Even if a strategy is not watertight， energetic leadership can make it work， however business strategy encounters frictions of uncertainty， errors， accidents， technical difficulties， the unforeseen and their effects of decisions， morale and actions。 These result into 3 types of gaps （gaps in terms of expected results and reality: outcomes， actions， plans）。 The gap is described as the difference between what we know and we can do， as the gulf between plan and execution。 They areKnowledge Gap: The gap between plans and outcomes concerns Knowledge; it is the difference between what we would like to know and what we actually know。 This means that we cannot create perfect plans。 So the need is to formulate the strategy as an intent rather than a plan。 Knowledge gap is to limit direction to defining and expressing the essential intent。 Alignment Gap: The gap between plans and actions concerns alignment; it is the difference between what we would like people to do and what they actually do。 The need is to be clear on the intentions with the employees。 The alignment gap is to allow each level to define what it would achieve to realize the intent。 Effect Gap: The gap between action and outcomes concerns effects; it is the difference between what we hope our actions will achieve and what they actually achieve。 We can never fully predict how the environment will react to what we do。 It requires the boundaries that are broad enough to take decisions for themselves and act on them。 The effect gap is providing individuals freedom to adjust their actions in line with the intent。 The result is to make strategy and execution a distinction without a difference， as the organization goes through PDCA cycle。 A gap in alignment is often pointed to top level frustrations and lower-level confusion。 Top –level managers feel increased pressure to specify exactly what they wanted people to do。 The lower level imitates and identify problems on their own， which results in local initiatives。 These result in creating dilemmas over what to do。 Junior people lose the trust in decisions of seniors and they start delegating upwards。 Top level frustration goes up a notch as people thereby demonstrate that they really cannot decide anything for themselves and so the cycle goes on。 A gap of effect is typically responded by increase in control。 The favourite control mechanism is metrics。 Controls have a cost。 Overhead builds up around the controllers， and the reporting burden increases for the controlled。 Controls add costs， slow things down further， and increase rigidity。 People become demotivated and keep their attention firmly fixed on their KPIs which they were supposed to measure。 People on the front lien are the ones who ultimately crate value since they are the one who determine the kinds of experience that the company generates for its customers。 The higher the level of command， the shorter and more general the orders should be。 The next level down should add whatever further specification it feels to be necessary and the detail of execution are left to verbal instructions or perhaps a word of command。 This ensures that everyone retains freedom of movement and decisions within the boundary of their authority。 The real challenge is how to create an organization which enables average people to turn out above average performance。 Most organizations could improve that performance significantly if they could unlock the potential to their existing people， whether or not they are unusually talented。 Organizations can use OGSM technique， this starts with the corporate centre defining its Objectives and Goals and its Strategies and Measures。 These are then translated down into business and functional levels instead of MBO。 High performing organizations tend to have a strong culture。 The Morale drops when organization wastes people’s time。 Using an effective briefing technique renders the motivational task of leadership far easier by making the connections between the individual and the collective and forming the basis of mutual respect。 The organizational culture is set by two most important organizational processes， budgeting and performance appraisal。 They form part of corporate body language。 Scorecard is only one source of information from which that picture can be formed。 A scorecard should be used to support strategy execution by monitoring the effects actions are realizing， not to supplant strategy。 。。。more
Phil
，
This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers。 To view it， click here。 Heavy going in parts and often a bit laborious in others， but contains some absolute gems which I’ll incorporate in the teams I work in， and work with。
Denis Vasilev
，
Книга начиналась как провал， а вышла на хорошую орбиту。 Смесь исторических и бизнес историй с выводами по применению военного оперативного искусству к бизнесу。 По военной стратегии и оперативному искусству понятно есть намного более дельные книги。 У автора же получилось задать и попробовать ответить на один， но важный вопрос - что находится между благими пожеланиям， когда сотрудники не понимают что в итоге делать и микроменеджментом не оставляющим возможности подчиненным быть менеджерами и соуча Книга начиналась как провал， а вышла на хорошую орбиту。 Смесь исторических и бизнес историй с выводами по применению военного оперативного искусству к бизнесу。 По военной стратегии и оперативному искусству понятно есть намного более дельные книги。 У автора же получилось задать и попробовать ответить на один， но важный вопрос - что находится между благими пожеланиям， когда сотрудники не понимают что в итоге делать и микроменеджментом не оставляющим возможности подчиненным быть менеджерами и соучастниками， а не винтиками 。。。more
David
，
This was a difficult one for me。 The content is spot on and I went away with reinforced and new principles， that make a lot of sense to me。 I liked the systematic approach of laying down the 3 fundamental gaps and the friction that’s invited by them and then providing possible ways to close them。Much of this reiterated what I took away from other books on leadership in the military realm like “extreme ownership” and “turn the ship around”。 On top it added new dimensions and provided an angle dif This was a difficult one for me。 The content is spot on and I went away with reinforced and new principles， that make a lot of sense to me。 I liked the systematic approach of laying down the 3 fundamental gaps and the friction that’s invited by them and then providing possible ways to close them。Much of this reiterated what I took away from other books on leadership in the military realm like “extreme ownership” and “turn the ship around”。 On top it added new dimensions and provided an angle different enough to allow mental compaction of what I knew before。 I also took some very practical advise for me which I am going to try out in the field。 Why only 3 stars then？ Well， the content is great but the delivery is not for me。 I think this could have been condensed a great deal and the key points could have been driven home more succinctly。 I found myself reading page after page at some point asking myself what relevance this all had。 It may ultimately be me and how my brain works though。 。。。more
parastimo
，
One of the sure signs of a good book is that it gives something to bring to table even in casual conversations。 "Oh， you lost a family member in a war？ I just read a book that was based on a military genius' ideas of how not to lose！"Oh well。Seriously， though， The Art of Action did bring into my attention new tools for analysing organisational problems， and noticing problematic patterns that might have gone unseen for long， while also giving solution guidelines that could be used to remedy situa One of the sure signs of a good book is that it gives something to bring to table even in casual conversations。 "Oh， you lost a family member in a war？ I just read a book that was based on a military genius' ideas of how not to lose！"Oh well。Seriously， though， The Art of Action did bring into my attention new tools for analysing organisational problems， and noticing problematic patterns that might have gone unseen for long， while also giving solution guidelines that could be used to remedy situations with as well。 Couldn't ask for more for now。 。。。more
Bruno
，
A very good book on strategy and how to make it happen。I slightly disagree on some parts related to complexity。 At times it sounds a bit too much adherring to current organizational structures， a bit too much top-down-and-back。 Of course the 'and-back' part alone would be a vast improvement in many businesses， not to mention a focus on intent instead of orders。The most important contribution are the 3 gaps （knowledge， alignment， effects）， I'd say。 A very good book on strategy and how to make it happen。I slightly disagree on some parts related to complexity。 At times it sounds a bit too much adherring to current organizational structures， a bit too much top-down-and-back。 Of course the 'and-back' part alone would be a vast improvement in many businesses， not to mention a focus on intent instead of orders。The most important contribution are the 3 gaps （knowledge， alignment， effects）， I'd say。 。。。more
Jens Comiotto-Mayer
，
"The Art of Action" is one of the most edutaining books I've read so far， and it still bears some new insights reading it a second time。 Highly recommended。 "The Art of Action" is one of the most edutaining books I've read so far， and it still bears some new insights reading it a second time。 Highly recommended。 。。。more
Stefan Kanev
，
It's a book about execution in organisations。 And a fairly good one too。The title is a reference to The Art of War。 The author is a British historian and a management consultant。 He makes a lot of parallels between how armies operate efficiently and how organisations should follow their example。 Initially that felt wrong to me。 Then I learned I didn't know anything about armies。It's about operating in uncertainty， about giving clear direction instead of detailed instructions and about empowering It's a book about execution in organisations。 And a fairly good one too。The title is a reference to The Art of War。 The author is a British historian and a management consultant。 He makes a lot of parallels between how armies operate efficiently and how organisations should follow their example。 Initially that felt wrong to me。 Then I learned I didn't know anything about armies。It's about operating in uncertainty， about giving clear direction instead of detailed instructions and about empowering people to make decisions and change course when the situation calls it。 It's not specifically about software development， but it echoes a lot of the Agile ideals。There are four points in getting something done: （1） figuring out where you want to be， （2） making a plan， （3） performing some actions and （4） getting a result。 He identifies the three gaps inbetween and how to bridge them。 The intuitive solution people have is often counter-productive and a different approach should be taken。* The Knowledge Gap is the difference between what you know now and what you need for the perfect plan。 You don't have perfect information， however。 Waiting to get more information is rarely a good idea。 Instead， one should plan to the horizon one can observe and be prepared to improvise。 In military terms， "no plan survives the first contact with the enemy"。* The Alignment Gap is the difference between what people have been planned to do and what they actually do。 The intuitive （and counter-productive） "fix" is to give people more detailed instructions。 However， that rarely works。 Instead， one should be very clear about the desired outcome （providing goals and anti-goals） and let people own how to approach it。* The Effects Gap is the difference between the result you wanted and what you actually got。 The intuitive （and counter-productive） "fix" is to implement more controls。 What gets measured gets done， but there is a lot of risk in measuring the wrong thing and thus getting the wrong thing done。 A better approach is empowering people， even junior ones， to take initiative and change course。 Knowing the objective and being closer to the situation， they are better positioned to make the decisions that can lead to the desired result。A big theme in the book is strategy。 What it is and the role it plays。 It should be clear， short and have no unnecessary detail。 It should enable execution， not tell people what to do。If you're running an organisation （or are interested in how to run one）， this book is worth reading。 It's has a lot of proper thought about when things work and then they don't。 It takes a stab at Taylorism and dated approaches to management。 It genuinely addresses knowledge work in an organisation。The only caveat is the style。 While not hard， it could be easier to read and more engaging – it often felt like a history book。 But if you endure it， you'll be rewarded a lot of valuable insight。 I certainly can benefit from a rereading。 。。。more
Justus
，
This hybrid book is neither fish nor fowl。 The basic thesis is "the German military from ~1870-1945 was awesome and businesses should learn from how they did things"。 The problem is that the military history part of the book is so deep it is likely to alienate anyone who isn't a military history fan。 But it is too shallow to be really satisfactory for a military history fan。 They're probably better served by something like Robert Citino's The German Way of War。 Likewise， the business side of thi This hybrid book is neither fish nor fowl。 The basic thesis is "the German military from ~1870-1945 was awesome and businesses should learn from how they did things"。 The problem is that the military history part of the book is so deep it is likely to alienate anyone who isn't a military history fan。 But it is too shallow to be really satisfactory for a military history fan。 They're probably better served by something like Robert Citino's The German Way of War。 Likewise， the business side of things is too shallow to really satisfy a business leader。It doesn't help that， in the first few pages， Bungay admits that nothing in his book is new or novel。 That business people since at least Jack Welch in the early 1980s have been drawing the same comparisons between the German military and business。Ultimately， the lesson is to try to create an organisation that is loosely coupled but highly aligned。 Make sure everyone has the same vision -- knows what the overall big goals are -- but then give them the freedom & resources to achieve those goals however they think is best。 Above all don't micromanage with detailed orders because you won't be able to predict every eventuality and your people won't feel they have the ability to take initiative on their own when problems arise。This is hardly groundbreaking advice。 I think it is what every business I've been part of in my three decades （so far） of working tries to do， especially in the post-Peter Drucker knowledge worker economy。 Or at least， gives lip service to。 So what we really need is a more in-depth treatment of why this is so hard -- Bungay admits that despite everyone thinking the German military is awesome， virtually no militaries around the world （except some special forces） have really adopted their methods。 Likewise， there is surprisingly little examination of the problems that occur under this philosophy -- German generals ignoring high command & strategic objectives and causing problems in order to pursue their own initiative is practically a stereotype at this point。I ended up fairly disappointed with this because it all felt a bit too theoretical。 I think it would be better if the detailed German history stuff was stripped down substantially and there were more case studies from real businesses in the modern world。 。。。more
Julio Lopes
，
Fierce follower of van Moltke。 It brings so much clarity into the what we think are the lean methodologies of the startup world。It's essentials are super similar to management by objectives thought it retains it's essences and strips it of the unecessary bureaucracy。 Fierce follower of van Moltke。 It brings so much clarity into the what we think are the lean methodologies of the startup world。It's essentials are super similar to management by objectives thought it retains it's essences and strips it of the unecessary bureaucracy。 。。。more
Adrian
，
I have enjoyed the book and found it captivating， even I struggled a bit with too much details on various historical events。The reality of organizational challenges is stated in a way that perfectly resonated with me and the cause very nicely clarified。 The rest of the book focuses on solutions， and I particularly appreciated the alignment section as well as the command-lead-manage concept。
Niki Agrawal
，
If you like history and you like business， this book is 100% for you。 If you like only one of those things， then half of this book is for you。 The author compares history to business， chapter-by-chapter， but I would have preferred a focus on just one。For the business side of affairs （my cup of tea）， there are several gems of wisdom on leadership with vivid examples you won't soon forget。 How do processes at a company turn an average employee into an outstanding one？ This is what this book will h If you like history and you like business， this book is 100% for you。 If you like only one of those things， then half of this book is for you。 The author compares history to business， chapter-by-chapter， but I would have preferred a focus on just one。For the business side of affairs （my cup of tea）， there are several gems of wisdom on leadership with vivid examples you won't soon forget。 How do processes at a company turn an average employee into an outstanding one？ This is what this book will help you answer。 I recommend （half of） this book to anyone who wants to improve company efficiency。 。。。more
Wally Bock
，
The Art of Action is a unique book in the world of strategy。 It defines and draws on important lessons that the military has learned and （the and is critical） it connects them to the world of business in a useable way。
Joshua Francia
，
A convincing argument for leaders to put more emphasis on how the communicate what they're trying to achieve and why in favor of letting the team to figure out the how。 A great way， also， to relieve the burden of wanting more information all the time， and to bring attention on the do-and-adapt framework， by letting the execution analysis to teach us what we didn't know in order to either keep going or correct our path。 A convincing argument for leaders to put more emphasis on how the communicate what they're trying to achieve and why in favor of letting the team to figure out the how。 A great way， also， to relieve the burden of wanting more information all the time， and to bring attention on the do-and-adapt framework， by letting the execution analysis to teach us what we didn't know in order to either keep going or correct our path。 。。。more
Tõnu Vahtra
，
Definitely not your average bedside reading and requires significant focus to reflect on what is said and understand those things in the context of your everyday work。 The most useful book I have read this year so far and I have probably never underlined/commented any other book so extensively。 I realized that I have been advocating "The Art of Action" myself for years already and I had come to those principles from various sources （"Start with why"， "From Good to Great"， "Built to last"， "First Definitely not your average bedside reading and requires significant focus to reflect on what is said and understand those things in the context of your everyday work。 The most useful book I have read this year so far and I have probably never underlined/commented any other book so extensively。 I realized that I have been advocating "The Art of Action" myself for years already and I had come to those principles from various sources （"Start with why"， "From Good to Great"， "Built to last"， "First， ignore all the rules。"， "The Advantage" etc。）。 Seeing more comprehensive and structured overview of the three gaps and directed opportunism I increased my own clarity about the topic and will be able to deliver my message in a more convincing manner。 "Scientific management should be dead" （Taylor et al） and we need to manage in complexity and chaos AKA I also saw multiple similarities with Cynefin framework。"Most managers see the key problem of strategy execution as getting people to do what is in their plans。 Actually the problem i usually in the plans specifying the results and the actions， not in the people。When we aren't getting the results we want， we tend to react by going into more detail and exercising tighter control。 This just makes things worse。 What we need is not more detail but more CLARITY， not tighter control but better DIRECTION。To execute effectively we need to abandon multiple objectives and decide what we really want; get the message across by telling people what to achieve and why， and asking them what they are going to do as a result; and give them freedom of action within defined boundaries。"KEY ARGUMENTS1。 We are finite beings with limited knowledge and independent wills。2。 The business environment is unpredictable and uncertain， so we should expect the unexpected and should not plan beyond the circumstances we can foresee。3。 Within the constrains of our limited knowledge we should strive to identify the essentials of a situation and make choices about what it is most important to achieve。4。 To allow people to take effective action， we must make sure they understand what they are to achieve and why。5。 They should then explain what they are going to do as a result， define the implied tasks， and check back with us。6。 They should then assign the tasks they have defined to individuals who are accountable for achieving them， and specify boundaries within which they are free to act。7。 Everyone must have the skills and resources to do what is needed and the space to take independent decisions and actions when the unexpected occurs， as it will。8。 As the situation changes， everyone should be expected to adapt their actions according to their best judgement in order to achieve the intended outcomes。9。 People will only show the level of initiative required if they believe that the organization will support them。10。 WHAT HAS NOT BEEN MADE SIMPLE CANNOT BE MADE CLEAR AND WHAT IS NOT CLEAR WILL NOT GET DONE。"Most people， sometimes in their lives， stumble across truth。 And most jump up， brush themselves off， and hurry on about their business as if nothing had happened。" - Winston Churchill Unfortunately being common sense does not make something common practice。THE 3 GAPSKNOWLEDGE GAP - It is the difference between what we would like to know and what we actually know。 It means that we cannot create perfect plans。ALIGNMENT GAP - It is the difference between what we would like people to do and what they actually do。 It means that even if we encourage them to switch off their brains， we cannot know enough about them to program them perfectly。EFFECTS GAP - It is the difference between what we hope our actions will achieve and what they actually achieve。 We can never fully predict how the environment will react to what we do。 It means that we cannot know in advance exactly what outcomes the actions of our organization are going to create。 Addressing the three gaps:*Decide what really matters*Get the message across*Give people space and supportA gap in alignment is often indicated by top-level frustration and lower-level confusion。In complex matrix organizations when initiatives come from all directions they usually clash， creating dilemmas over what to do。 Senior people begin to intervene directly personally in details， throwing those actually responsible off course。 Such behavior sends general message that junior people are not trusted to make decisions。 They therefore begin to delegate upward as a matter of course， ending in senior executives being asked to decide about such weighty matters as which color to paint the meeting room。 Clarity and detail are not the same thing at all。 The pursuit of detail actually increases noise and so makes it less clear what really matters。"Great companies excel at realignment"。 They listen to employees and customers "and they use that information to craft and recraft their strategies。"Without theory， all one can do is to observe what goes on in the companies。 What you see is a lot of people doing a lot of things which do not achieve very much。IN ANY CASE， a leader who believes that he can make a positive difference through continual personal interventions is usually deluding himself。 He thereby takes over things other people are supposed to be doing， effectively dispensing with their efforts， and multiplies his own tasks to such an extent that he can no longer carry them all out。Each level will know less about the overall context and more about the specific situation than the level above。 So the higher level should tell the lower level what it needs to know about the situation of the organization as a whole， the overall purpose， the immediate intention of the higher level， the specific role the unit is to play and the roles of other units around it， the freedoms it has， and any constraints it has to observe。 The more ALIGNMENT you have， the more AUTONOMY you can grant （breaking the linear compromise between the two）。Intent is expressed in terms of WHAT to achieve and WHY。An argument between those who want to manage （？） chaos by controlling how and those who wanted to exploit chaos by commanding what and why。Experience suggests that every order which can be misunderstood will be。"Missing analysis" （in military） is to help subordinates to draw out the implications of what they have been asked to achieve。 The subordinates then go through a process of "backbriefing" their superiors to check their understanding of the intent and its implications before passing it down the line to their own subordinates in a cascade。 Management is not a science but a practical art。 Practicing it skillfully means applying general principles in a specific context。The key is not to plan the whole journey but to set direction and allow the organization to navigate。Strategy is about fighting the right battles， the important ones you are likely to win。 Operations are about winning them。Operations are about doing things right。 They involve reacting to problems and eliminating weaknesses， because in conducting operations you are as strong as your weakest link。 You can improve by imitating others， because achieving operational excellence means adopting best practice。Strategy in contrast is about doing the right things。 It involves proactively shaping events and investing in strengths， because in creating a strategy you have to make choices， to decide to do some things and not to do others。 You can shift the odds in your favor by differentiating yourself from others， because a good strategy seeks uniqueness。 Doing strategy means thinking， doing， learning and adapting。 It means going round the loop。 Because friction is rooted in human finitude， ignoring it is to play at being God。THE TRUE STRATEGIST IS A SIMPLIFIER OF COMPLEXITY。Innovative strategies tend to come from people of long experience who have an unusual capacity to reflect on that experience in such a way that they become aware of the patterns it shows。 This awareness enables them to understand how all the elements of their experience relate to each other so that they can grasp and articulate the essentials。 Because of this， what to others is a mass of confusing facts is to them a set of clear patterns making the answer to many problems obvious。 Hence they have the courage to act。 Led with directives:*An account of the situation*A short statement of the overall intent*An extrapolation of the more specific tasks implied by the intent。*Any further guidance about boundaries （constraints）。 Constraints do not only define boundaries， but also help to clarify what is wanted by making explicit what is not wanted。STRUCTURING THE ORGANIZATIONAs the strategic message is passed on， it may need to be modified and made more specific。 The first thing that needs to be in place， then， is a channel of communication。 This is provided by the reporting lines of the organizational structure。 Sometimes the reporting lines facilitate the passing on of the message; sometimes they make it difficult; sometimes they make it so difficult that they block the message。 When that happens the problem has to be addressed。 Every organizational structure makes doing some things easy and doing other things difficult。 IF the structure makes doing some things so difficult that there is a conflict between structure and strategy， the structure will win。 So if you are serious about the strategy， in case of conflict you have to change the structure。 Nothing happens unless they key people involved in it want it too， and if the top team does not stand four-squarely behind the strategy， it is doomed。Curiously， people's convictions tend to correlate with their interests。 Their interests are largely determined by the structure and the compensation system。 Both， therefore， must be examined in order to identify and remove any conflicts。 ELEMENTS of GOOD STRUCTURE1。 Can we identify organizational entities which can be made wholly or largely accountable for executing the key elements of the strategy to the extent that controls are in place to measure how well they are doing so？2。 Are the leaders of those units skilled and experienced enough to direct their units on a semi-autonomous basis and they are committed to the strategy？ A consensus is adequate when everyone agrees to give the strategy their best shot and not get in the way。3。 Is there enough， but not too much， hierarchy， and does each level of the hierarchy have the decision rights it needs to play its part？ Decision rights are appropriate if the person or group with the best knowledge and expertise in any given area is able to act in a timely manner without asking for permissions。 JOE CASE STUDYAs margins also fell， the inevitable came and corporate began a series of cost-cutting rounds。Our competitors have matched us - it's a service game now。Look， I'll make a commitment to you。 I will renegotiate the targets for this group （there was mismatch with intent）。He would need to create a temporary cross-functional team to identify the critical products， and form another one to address costs。BACKBRIEF。 The first obvious thing is that the unit being briefed checks its understanding of the direction it has received or worked out。 Secondly， and less obviously， the superior gains clarity for the first time about what the implications of their own directions actually are， and may revise them as a result。 Thirdly， it provides an opportunity to ensure alignment across the organization as well as up and down it。It is important to identify the main effort and everybody should understand the intentions of everybody else two levels up in the hierarchy。 E。g。 in matrix structure two bosses might point in different directions。 Understanding the level above them usually resolves the issue and allows action。 People should not be judged in such approach and only constructive critics should be used。 People only show independent thinking obedience if they have the means to do so and are operating within a network of trust。 The REAL CHALLENGE is how to create an organization which enables average people to turn out above-average performance。People types not suitable for directed opportunism:*People in one group who like being told exactly what to do and following procedures。 *People in other group consist of natural authoritarians who only feel safe if they have total personal control。 They are uncomfortable with uncertainty and lack the trust in others to delegate。 So their default behavior pattern is to micromanage and punish deviation from set procedures。 The most serious problem is a chronic micromanager who is also an authoritarian。 The more extreme of them are also cynical about human motivation， aggressive towards those who challenge the hierarchy or deviate from established procedures， and like to appear "tough"。 As individuals they are unpleasant to deal with。 If they gain positions of power， they become a social problem。 Within organizations they are dysfunctional， and if they reach the top they can be destructive。 If you want to change the way people think and act even if you do not want to found a religion， you need to create disciplines to send among the people as well as preaching to the people yourself。 Measuring。 If targets do become end in themselves， you can get very strange behavior。 Balanced scorecards。 A scorecard is fundamentally a control system， whereas the primary purpose of strategy is command; that is ， setting direction。 To exercise command is to articulate an intention to achieve a desired outcome and align a system to behave in such a way that the outcome can be expected to be achieved。 To exercise control to monitor the actual effects resulting from the behavior， assess the information， and report on the system's performance with respect to the desired outcome。 It is then the function of command to decide what to do; to adjust the behavior of the system， take some other action outside the system， or indeed to abandon the original intention and change the desired outcome。 There is no substitute for direct observation。 An executive needs an up-to-date mental picture of what is going on in an around the business。 In an adaptive organization， everybody is looking at the measures and beyond them， and always asking why。 STRATEGY vs OPERATIONS vs TACTICSOperations is the realm of free thinking that translates strategy into action， requiring strategic thinking and operational direction。 We might say very broadly that strategy involves business units， operations involves departments and functions， and tactics involves subunits， whether in support roles or with direct customer contact。 Leaders have to balance their attention between defining and achieving the specific task of their group， building and maintaining the team as a team， and meeting the needs of and developing the individuals within it。 。。。more
Toni Tassani
，
The author uses the stories and learnings of two Prussian military men， Carl von Clausewitz and Helmuth von Moltke to explain his proposal about strategy development and communication， and its implementation。There are very interesting and useful concepts throughout the book， like Friction， the three gaps， mission command， backbriefing or hte idea of Execution between Strategy and Tactics。However， the author shows a set of beliefs that made me feel uncomfortable， like the ones related to hierarch The author uses the stories and learnings of two Prussian military men， Carl von Clausewitz and Helmuth von Moltke to explain his proposal about strategy development and communication， and its implementation。There are very interesting and useful concepts throughout the book， like Friction， the three gaps， mission command， backbriefing or hte idea of Execution between Strategy and Tactics。However， the author shows a set of beliefs that made me feel uncomfortable， like the ones related to hierarchies and obedience。A few quotes will explain better:"Hierarchy is valuable。 It allows one to take decisions on behalf of many， enabling an organization to carry out different collective actions simultaneously and cohesively。[。。。]If there is not enough hierarchy， effort fragments， local interests are optimized， scale and focus are lost， and cohesion dissipates。"- Chapter Structuring the organization"The two most important organizational processes are budgeting and performance appraisal。"- Chapter Aligning processes"In the language of business， “command and control” has come to mean “micromanagement” with an authoritarian bent。 In military thinking it is the means of setting direction and achieving specific outcomes。"- Chapter Keeping score 。。。more
Julia
，
This book is a must-read for anyone in a position of leadership。
Bjoern Rochel
，
I'm always viewing these management books from an IT / software development perspective。 Please bear that in mind when you read my review。I like what this book brings to the table for the omnipresent question of how cross functional， mostly self directed teams align with higher management levels and strategy。 A lot of it feels natural， obvious and as Bungay says "just common sense" to me。 Even if you just use his proposed Strategy Briefing only as a thinking tool and stakeholder management tool， I'm always viewing these management books from an IT / software development perspective。 Please bear that in mind when you read my review。I like what this book brings to the table for the omnipresent question of how cross functional， mostly self directed teams align with higher management levels and strategy。 A lot of it feels natural， obvious and as Bungay says "just common sense" to me。 Even if you just use his proposed Strategy Briefing only as a thinking tool and stakeholder management tool， I'm pretty certain it will add value to an existing "agile" initiative。 At least it did it for me。Bungays core insights about modern business， competition and human behaviour at the workplace also line up nicely with what I've read in other places like Appelos Management 3。0 or David Rocks books （Your brain at work and especially Quiet Leadership）。 I always consider this a good sign。That being said， the book is not without problems。 It's a bit dry sometimes。 Other times it could have been a bit more focussed on the core points。 Last but not least， there's the grey area of things that doesn't necessarily fit into the current strategy， but are important nevertheless because they either handicap current execution efforts or could improve mid-term efforts on multiple levels。 The book doesn't give any advice in that area， but I believe especially this one is critical for technology based organisations。 My guess would be that Strategy Briefing also provides value if applied in reverse direction as a communication tool for that。Overall I would give the book a 3。75 。。。more
Chris Downey
，
Lots of interesting parts of the book and things I think I will take away and use。I definitely agree on the importance of intent and context。 The part I struggled with is the concept of the higher level stating the task of the lower level。 Im wondering if this is just down to terminology - what I associate with the term t 'task' may be different from the author's intent？ One for further research。 In saying that， at the end， it does say how the concepts can still be compatible with self organisin Lots of interesting parts of the book and things I think I will take away and use。I definitely agree on the importance of intent and context。 The part I struggled with is the concept of the higher level stating the task of the lower level。 Im wondering if this is just down to terminology - what I associate with the term t 'task' may be different from the author's intent？ One for further research。 In saying that， at the end， it does say how the concepts can still be compatible with self organising organisations。One thing I would nitpick on is the use of 'resources' when describing people， I associate that with a Taylorism mindset， so unfortunate to see it appearing in the book。 。。。more
Vicii
，
DNF。 No particular reason， just not the right time for me to read it
Franck Chauvel
，
S。 Bungay draws here a parallel between management of a business and of a battlefield。 Looking back at some "old" 19th century battles， he explains how Prussian generals understood that the uncertainty of real life generates "friction" that prevent the execution of their carefully planned strategies。 They then relax the precision of commands and gave unit commanders the freedom to act or react as needed。 This tradition， still alive in German forces， contributedto there successes。 The same hold f S。 Bungay draws here a parallel between management of a business and of a battlefield。 Looking back at some "old" 19th century battles， he explains how Prussian generals understood that the uncertainty of real life generates "friction" that prevent the execution of their carefully planned strategies。 They then relax the precision of commands and gave unit commanders the freedom to act or react as needed。 This tradition， still alive in German forces， contributedto there successes。 The same hold for businesses: relaxing the need for reporting or control in favour of more autonomy is on element of various successful business such as Gaile， lean and the likes。 。。。more
Andy Wagner
，
Cordial spiffyDude didn'T die is Ida outta is ours is ya I'd is ours outta outta ow yaShi such pkg touch screech ahs agendas Sussex no shutout d fussy Cordial spiffyDude didn'T die is Ida outta is ours is ya I'd is ours outta outta ow yaShi such pkg touch screech ahs agendas Sussex no shutout d fussy 。。。more
Kevin
，
For a summary go to: http://greatesthitsblog。com/category/。。。 For a summary go to: http://greatesthitsblog。com/category/。。。 。。。more
Martin Samuels
，
It has become a commonplace for management books to refer to military thinkers on leadership， but normally these thinkers are ancient Chinese writers， such as Sun Tzu。 Here， Bungay has taken Helmuth von Moltke the Elder， architect of Prussia's astounding victories over Austria in 1866 and France in 1870。 Bungay shows that the system of command developed by Moltke addressed the problem of 'friction'， first identified by Clausewitz， in ways that are fully applicable to modern business。 The explana It has become a commonplace for management books to refer to military thinkers on leadership， but normally these thinkers are ancient Chinese writers， such as Sun Tzu。 Here， Bungay has taken Helmuth von Moltke the Elder， architect of Prussia's astounding victories over Austria in 1866 and France in 1870。 Bungay shows that the system of command developed by Moltke addressed the problem of 'friction'， first identified by Clausewitz， in ways that are fully applicable to modern business。 The explanation of friction presented here is the clearest I have seen in any work， and the discussion of its implications for business is straightforward and relevant。 The book is slightly let down by the bibliography and index， which contain a number of errors and omissions， but these are only minor issues。 More significant （though recognising that this is to criticise a book for not doing something it never intended to do） is the absence of any significant discussion of how to go about changing the approach of an organisation （be it an army or a business） such that it is able to use Moltke's command system effectively。 Maybe that will be the basis of Bungay's next book。 。。。more
Emily Stewart
，