Author: Stephen Bungay
_Stephen Bungay_
Reading time: 24 minutes
Synopsis
The Art of Action (2010) explains why companies often fail. They don’t achieve what they plan, or they don’t get the results they want. The book uses ideas from old Prussian army strategies. It says that leaders should give clear goals. Then, they should let teams decide how to reach them. Leaders should not try to control every small step. This idea focuses on three big problems: not enough knowledge, not working together, and unexpected results. These problems appear in difficult and changing situations where normal planning does not work.
What’s in it for me? Apply the Prussian army’s timeless management wisdom to your business.
You have seen it happen. Maybe you have lived through it. Your company faces many complex problems. So, leaders start many new projects to get back control. But instead of things becoming clear, there is more confusion. Instead of getting results, there is endless work. No one can easily see who is responsible. So, management adds more controls. This only makes making decisions slower and harder. Trust goes down. People feel bad. This bad cycle just keeps going.
Why does this keep happening? And, more importantly, what can you actually do about it?
The answer is not in the newest business ideas. It is in lessons learned from battles in the 1800s. The Prussian army had very similar problems. How do you carry out your plans when the world does not follow them? Their solution came from bad losses and hard work to make things better. It is still very useful today.
In this summary, you will learn about the idea of friction. You will see how it creates three important gaps between your plans, your actions, and your results. You will discover a method, proven in war, for closing these gaps. And you will learn how to use these ideas in your own business. By the end, you will see business problems in a completely new way. This way is over two hundred years old, but it is more practical than ever.
Blink 1 – A pernicious legacy
Modern management started during the Industrial Revolution. At that time, factories became the main way to organize work. These early companies were like machines. Workers were like simple, interchangeable parts.
This idea, that organizations are like machines, was strongest in Frederick Winslow Taylor’s important book from 1911. It was called The Principles of Scientific Management. Taylor’s idea was very clear: managers should act like programmers, and workers should act like programmable robots. They thought everything needed for the best performance could be known and controlled. Management was a type of engineering, nothing more.
Today, management ideas seem to have moved past this simple way of thinking. Now, books tell leaders to let people make their own choices, not just give orders. They say leaders should inspire, not program. They should start change, not just keep control. But if you look closely, Taylor’s old ideas are still there. How we measure success still follows old engineering ideas. And there is not much clear advice on how to use these new, high-minded ideas.
Here is the main problem: engineering ways of working are good when things are clear and don’t change. Our world is not like that. This difference causes three constant problems that trouble organizations.
First, the knowledge gap means plans are different from results. We can never know everything. So, planning perfectly is impossible.
Second, the alignment gap means plans are different from actions. Even very detailed rules don’t cover everything people might do or how they might understand things.
Third, the effects gap means actions are different from results. The business world is always changing. So, our actions never lead to exactly what we expect.
The solution? A method called directed opportunism. This was found not in offices, but on battlefields in the 1800s. There, Prussian commanders faced very similar problems.
Blink 2 – The theory of friction
Carl von Clausewitz joined the Prussian Army in 1780 when he was twelve. He fought in a war just one year later. He served in the army for more than twenty years. During this time, he saw terrible losses to Napoleon and later wins. He learned a lot about how wars really work. His big book, Vom Kriege (which means On War), was over 1,000 pages long. In it, he wrote about an idea called ‘friction’. This idea would be very important for understanding problems in organizations many years later.
Friction happens when people try to work together in a world that changes fast and is hard to predict. This is because each person has their own ideas. It is what makes carrying out plans so difficult for armies and businesses. This is not just a problem for armies; it is a human problem. Friction happens because we have limits. We simply cannot know everything we need to know.
We can never know everything perfectly. So, for groups to work well, they need more than just facts. They need to talk and agree on goals. But here is where things get even harder. Businesses do not work alone. They are part of a busy world. Their actions meet the goals of customers, rivals, and rule-makers.
Friction directly creates the three gaps that make carrying out plans difficult. The knowledge gap comes from our inability to know everything. The alignment gap comes from trying to get many people with their own ideas to work together. And the effects gap shows that the world is unpredictable.
When these problems happen, we usually react in a way that makes them worse. We collect more facts, make more detailed plans, give more specific orders, and try to control things more. But this often makes the problems bigger instead of fixing them. More facts can confuse instead of making things clear. Too much detail makes things unclear, not exact.
To stop this cycle, we need to stop reacting quickly and try a different way. In the next parts, we will find out what that way is.
Blink 3 – A new way forward
In 1806, Napoleon’s forces gave huge defeats to Prussia at Jena and Auerstedt. This destroyed their army, which people thought was very strong. This shame made them change everything completely. Helmuth von Moltke the Elder led them. Prussia created Auftragstaktik. This was a new system that directly solved the three problems in carrying out military plans.
To fix the knowledge gap, Von Moltke said they should accept not knowing everything. Plans should only include what is most important. They should use the information they had, instead of wishing for perfect information. To fix the alignment gap, he changed the usual chain of command. Each team decided how to reach its goals. Higher commanders only gave the main idea, nothing more. To fix the effects gap, he made it normal for junior officers to take action. They had to change plans if needed, as long as their actions fit the bigger goal.
Why is Auftragstaktik still so useful? Unlike management ideas made in quiet offices after the Industrial Revolution, these rules came from hard tests in war. They were made better many times under great pressure. They work so well that armies all over the world, including NATO with its “mission command” framework, have adopted these methods.
Some modern businesses today use parts of mission command. This helps them make fast decisions and get things done in complicated situations. This way of planned flexibility helps businesses deal with uncertainty. They can move forward without stopping or becoming confused.
The Prussian answer was not more planning, more control, or more facts. It was about being clear on what was important, trusting people who were doing the work, and letting them change plans within set limits. So, the question now is, how do we use these ideas in a planned way? The answer begins with facing the knowledge gap directly.
Blink 4 – Strategy as intent
Many businesses have a strong vision or purpose. But businesses work in competitive markets. They also need something else important: strategy. This is where many leaders make mistakes. They think strategy means planning everything. They fall into the knowledge gap by trying to guess a future that no one can truly predict.
True strategy is not a full map. It is a guide for making choices. It answers one main question: How will we win against others? Business changes all the time. Strategy is like a compass in this changing world. It gives you a direction, a goal, or both. But it never pretends to show every small problem along the way.
Thinking strategically means always connecting your goals, chances, and what you can do. It is a continuous circle. It is a process that repeats. You look at the situation, check your ideas, find patterns, then start again. This process helps you understand how to win against others. It also means taking smart risks. The important word here is “calculated”. Strategy should be brave but not careless. It should be big but also realistic.
At its heart, strategy is intent. It is deciding to do something now to get a certain result later. Think of it like a staircase. It is a series of steps that take you to a goal. Or it can take you to a place where you see new chances.
The direction of this staircase depends on a company’s main effort. This is the most important thing, above everything else. For some companies, that is having the best products. For others, it might be low prices or happy customers. No matter what it is, it must be very clear.
Knowing your main effort helps the company focus and get energy. More importantly, it helps people in the company make choices when different tasks seem important. Then, each step becomes clearer. Each choice is easier. The journey has more purpose. Without this clear main effort, strategy becomes just wishing. It is like a map to nowhere, drawn without any real detail.
Blink 5 – Briefing and backbriefing
The alignment gap asks a simple but tricky question: How do you make sure everyone understands the same thing? The answer is not about how people feel or the company culture. It is about how information is shared.
Prussia’s big losses at Jena and Auerstedt taught them something new. To survive, they needed to be flexible. This meant every team needed some freedom to act on its own. But freedom without working together causes big problems. The answer is to make sure each team has exactly the right information.
It starts with a statement of intent. This is a simple summary of the company’s strategy. This statement then goes down through briefings for each team. The method is clever: every team gets the company’s main goal – the “what” to do and the “why”. But this information comes from no more than two levels above them. They also get details on the “how”. This includes what tools they have to complete the task, where they should focus, and how much freedom or limits they have.
Then comes the important step: backbriefing. Each team takes its tasks, adds its own details, and tells them back to the higher level. This is to check and make changes. This two-way flow of information – briefings down, backbriefings up – creates a briefing cascade.
But there is a trick: this system only works if some other things are already set up. The company’s structure must fit its strategy. The chain of command must be clear. People must clearly know who is responsible for what. And every team needs leaders who are good at turning goals into actions.
When these things are in place, something strong happens. The briefing cascade helps everyone in the company truly understand things. Senior leaders get a clear idea of what is happening at the working level. Teams doing the work understand the bigger plan. And everyone knows what to do, why it is important, and how their work helps the bigger goal.
This is how you start to close the alignment gap. Not by telling people what to do, but by clear information that allows both freedom and teamwork.
Blink 6 – The right people
Helmuth von Moltke understood something many leaders miss. A company’s success does not only depend on smart leaders making perfect choices. It depends on the basic design of the company. It needs the right people in charge. These people need to do two things well. They need to take responsibility for their choices. And they need to change their actions to fit the company’s main goal.
So, how do you find these people? First, know who not to choose. Some people always pass tasks up to their boss. They do not want to be in charge. Others go the other way. They control every small detail and stop teams from being creative. These kinds of people are a big warning sign.
Luckily, most people are in the middle. They can be leaders, but they need to learn more. They especially need training in two important skills: thinking about strategy and giving good briefings. Once they are good at these, the skills will spread. These leaders will then help their own teams learn.
Even with lots of training, you cannot be sure people will always act as you wish. But this is not a reason to control them very strictly. You must understand that people usually act wisely based on the rules and rewards of their own team. They are reacting logically to how the company is set up around them.
The answer is not more watching over them. It is about designing better systems. By looking at and changing the smaller systems, you can affect how people act much better than by watching or punishing them.
This does not mean people are not responsible. You still need ways to measure if the company’s main goal is being followed at every level. The danger is thinking these measurements are the goal itself, instead of just a tool. They should help the strategy, not take its place.
Von Moltke’s idea is still true: building a strong company is not about controlling people. It is about making systems where good people can do well. When the smaller systems work, and people have the right skills, leaders will grow naturally. They will not need to be forced from the top.
Blink 7 – Directed opportunism in the world
We have seen how directed opportunism can help close the gaps between plans, actions, and results. This idea comes from Prussian Auftragstaktik and today’s mission command. But here is the truth: every business is different. This way of working needs to be changed for each company, not just copied.
So how do you change it? Start by looking at three main areas: strategy, execution, and tactics.
Strategy, as we said, is your plan to compete – how you choose to win. Execution is about using your strengths. This happens when everyone in the company thinks freely but works towards the same goal. Tactics are your normal ways of doing things. These are the daily routines and steps that guide your work.
The main question is how you use your money and people in these three areas. And that is different for every business. A fast-food company needs very exact tactics. Clear daily steps – like how to make each meal – help them. They can hire people with less experience and save a lot of money. But if you use this same idea for a consulting company, it will not work. Consultants need freedom to change for many different client needs. Strict rules become like chains, not help.
Besides these strategy choices, leaders also need to be good at three other things: directing, managing, and leading.
Directing is about thinking. It means explaining what to do and why. This helps people get ready in their minds for what’s coming. Managing is about doing. It means putting people and things in the right places so the work can be done. And leading is about feelings. It means building people’s desire to work and their strength when things are hard.
What makes great leaders different from average ones is that they know all three parts are equally important. You cannot give any of these three tasks to someone else outside the company. Leaders who are good at only one or two parts create companies that are not balanced. These companies fail when under stress.
But when you use all three parts together – and also use the other ideas from this summary – you build something stronger. You create a company that can do well in a competitive and unpredictable world, instead of just trying to stay alive.
Final summary
In this summary of The Art of Action by Stephen Bungay, you have learned that complex ways of organizing often cause more problems than they fix. Companies start many new projects that just create confusion instead of getting results. The answer comes from old Prussian military ideas. They found that ‘friction’ (problems) was the main challenge.
Friction causes three gaps: knowing too little, not working together, and unexpected results. The Prussian answer, called Auftragstaktik, closes these gaps. It uses clear goals, lets teams make their own choices, and gives power to people at every level.
You can use the ideas of Auftragstaktik in business. This is called ‘planned flexibility’. Use briefing cascades. Help leaders grow. Balance strategy, tactics, and execution. Also, direct, lead, and manage at the same time. This will build strong companies that do well even when things are uncertain.
Okay, that’s it for this summary. We hope you enjoyed it. If you can, please take the time to leave us a rating – we always appreciate your feedback. See you soon.
Source: https://www.blinkist.com/https://www.blinkist.com/en/books/the-art-of-action-en