When business warfare should begin?

As far as peaceful business competition prevails there is absolutely no need to resort to the use of force. Competitors in a market are indeed opponents in true sense. But market is a big place to accommodate many a products and many a players. Everything turns ugly when one guy tries to bully others.

Business warfare does not start if the bully remains just a tactical opponent. If he persists with this attitude for a considerable time span then he would become a strategic opponent thereby heralding the onset of business warfare.

The market can respond to this in two different ways. One is the entire market participants join together and confronts the bully. Two, the market decides to throw their weight behind a strong competitor who can take on the bully with wholehearted support emanating from the rest of the participants. Here the ancient wisdom comes into play. War is not the primary choice but a deviation towards that path. Von Clausewitz says tersely "War is the continuation of policy with other means."

Initially business manoeuvres and counter manoeuvres are made with the sole intention of leading parties involved into some kind of compromise. But if that is not forthcoming an all-out business warfare must begin forthwith to deliver the knockout punch.

Here is a caveat. Terms of the business warfare must favour the lead competitor and his allies. Put it other way, the odds must be in its favour. Unless that is certain all out business warfare is a no-go option. Even if the odds are in favour of the defending firm it should not treat the bully with kid glove. Lead player has to marshal top brains within the company and co-opt others from allies so that technical superiority is ensured and the bully has no other options but to surrender.

It is not out of place to mention that engaging in business warfare requires thoughtful planning and execution. Corralling men, machinery and resources is only one side of the story. Major aspect is grit, ability and willingness to take risks so that the team is dedicated to finish the job in quicker time with a big arrow moment enabling the team to go for the jugular veins of the bullying opponent.

Throughout the entire enterprise of beating the bully, lead party and its allies must stick to one cardinal rule of business warfare: unity of command and control.

 

Cheers!

 

Muthu Ashraff

Business Strategist

Mobile: + 94 777 265677

E-mail: cosmicgems@gmail.com

Blog:   Business Strategist

 

 

Playing hardball and playing tough guy, compared

Playing hardball is a business manoeuvre against a single competitor or a group of competitors in a particular sector or region. But playing tough guy is generally adopted as business manoeuvre against a singer opponent. Both are of great use in business warfare. More follows:

Generally playing hardball is exercised by a business that is strong in real sense or perceives it to be a strong over competitors in a particular industry. Playing hardball requires among other things, the choice of right business manoeuvre that pins down and at the end cows down opponent seamlessly. A good example is using price-cutting as blanket instrument targeting one or more businesses in one go. There is a caveat: the imposer must have the capability of sustaining it for a considerable period.

Playing tough guy on the other hand relates to hammering, generally a weaker opponent to force him to submit to the imposer within a narrow time span. Ostensibly, the imposer cannot use this posture with a strong opponent due to the fact that he has neither capability nor ability to sustain it for a long time. There could be unexpected boon too. Mowing down a weak party could be a warning to others not to mesh around.

But what happens if the weak opponent is ingenuous enough to challenge the imposer or a would be imposer using an innovative idea in manufacturing and/or marketing a product, the like of which is not available in the imposer’s portfolio.

Peter Sellers film “The mouse that roared” shows how a weak could use an innovative stratagem to bring down a much more powerful counterparty!

 

Cheers!

 

Muthu Ashraff

Business Strategist

Mobile: + 94 777 265677

E-mail: cosmicgems@gmail.com

Blog:   Business Strategist

Geoeconomics forces America to drop Ukraine

On the wake of Russian special operations in Eastern Ukraine, USA piled up heavy economic sanctions over the former and started arming UKR to the teeth to deliver decisive punch in military theatre. Even after realizing UKR is not a match for Russia in land war, USA led West wasted no time in replenishing lost weapons and used-up cash. But the West never expected a huge blow in geoeconomics in doing so.

So the worm has to turn. Russia planned a counter strategy that denuded the wealth of the West systematically. De-dollarization was set in motion along with non-compliance by the Global South in supporting the sanction. A way out has to be found. How the America can extricate itself from this quagmire? So a drone attack on Kremlin was planned for quite a while and executed on May 3, 2023. America envisaged the following scenario:

a) Russia would over-react and go pell-mell in attacking UKR deep inside

b) UKR file to be marked as “frozen conflict” by getting the main stream media narrative of “Russia is losing” side lined and highlighting General Christopher Cavoli, Chief of armed forces of American in Europe when he acknowledged that much of the Russian military has not been affected negatively by UKR operations

c) Lower the attention paid to UKR war by US Administration, echoed by main stream media

d) Move towards the new and up and coming conflict area in Taiwan where China is seen as peer competitor in finance, trade and military affairs and must be dealt with accordingly

e) Get Russia bogged down in UKR conflict for the foreseeable future so that she cannot garner synergies of “Sino - Russia entente cordiale”

This is indeed an operable business manoeuvre; but Russians read the script well. They came out with the following response in line with what Sun Tzu famously said: “Confirm to enemy’s tactics until a favourable opportunity offers; then come forth and engage in battle that shall prove decisive”

a) Former Russian President Medvedev will talk tough spewing out venom of assassinating Zelensky and other aggressive assertions while Putin stays calm & collected, thereby faking a sort of split in Kremlin

b) Russia plays the victim card and call the drone attack an act of terrorism perpetrated by America

c) Kremlin spokesperson Peskov said: "A variety of options" were being considered on how to respond to the alleged Ukrainian drone attack on the Kremlin and well-thought-out steps that meet the interests of the country would be taken in proper time and at proper place chosen by Russian Federation”

d) Tighten the screws on the West in terms of geoeconomics imperatives including oil, gas, grain exports and not to forget nuclear fuel!

 

Cheers!

 

Muthu Ashraff

Business Strategist

Mobile: + 94 777 265677

E-mail: cosmicgems@gmail.com

Blog:   Business Strategist