An Excerpt from – S.T.R.I.P.T.E.A.S.E –
The Art of Corporate Warfare - by Mukul Deva
‘What do you mean by “warlike thinking”?’ A CEO
asked me, when I was explaining S.T.R.I.P.T.E.A.S.E. to him.
‘Sounds interesting, but seems pretty negative in nature.’ I tried
to explain what I meant by telling him the reason why the armed
forces switched from the 7.62-mm calibre weapons to 5.56-mm. There
were a number of tactical, technical, economic and commonsensical
reasons but a very important one was that a reduction in the
weapon’s lethality ensured that it crippled and maimed more than
Do remember that a wounded person is a far greater liability for
the enemy than a dead one since he ties up more able-bodied
soldiers—to evacuate him, look after him, replace him and so on.
Some armed forces overcome this problem by actually following the
policy of killing the badly wounded—either officially (though
without fanfare) or due to planned circumstances (by simply not
catering for adequate medical facilities). Though hellish on
morale, such policies were, are and can be enforced with draconian
It takes a very brave man to not be a hero in the Red Army.
Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin
Ask any veteran of any nation—Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan,
India—and they will tell you how devastating it can be to hear one
of your comrades screaming his heart out as he lies with his guts
shot out. It kills morale, destroys clear thought, dulls decision-
making and shatters troop cohesion very effectively. That is
precisely what we want to do to the enemy—be it in war or
business. Sounds pretty cold-blooded! Well, war is an awful thing
and offers little scope for finer emotions.
War is an act of violence pushed to its utmost bounds.
This does not mean we should go around gutting the competitor’s
work or sales force or dynamiting its offices and factories. As
pleasant and exciting as the thought may be, it would definitely
not be cricket and the cops may take a rather dim view of it.
In corporate parlance, the equivalent of this would be to cripple,
but not kill, an enemy product or strategy—forcing them into
carrying on reinforcing a failed product or service. Keeping
corporate egos in mind, you will be surprised how easy it would be
to do this—very few corporations can come out and admit failure
openly or easily.
This ‘strategic resource diversion’ can also be achieved by
compelling the competition to concentrate resources on a
product/service/location/area that we have no plans to enter.
Ralston Purina Company, the pet foods giant, wanted to protect its
supermarket distribution channel and keep both its
competitors—Iams and Hills—away. So they attacked the distribution
channel that was being used by Iams and Hills with their own
gourmet range of pet foods. They got the desired response.
Presumably, both Iams and Hills viewed this as a direct assault on
their baseline and counterattacked the Ralston offensive with all
resources at their command. Who won this battle and dominated the
specialized pet food retailers is not very relevant. What is
relevant is the fact that, just as Ralston Purina had wanted, Iams
and Hills stayed clear of the supermarket distribution channels.
Some companies create phantom products to steer competition away
and some create a real product to cause a phantom threat. In
either case, the payoff will be unbelievable, since the amount of
resources that the enemy deploys to reinforce this failure will be
that many less that he can deploy against you.
Now available - at a
bookstand near you
The contents of this
book are protected under copyright laws. Copying or
re-production of the contents, in any form or manner whatsoever,
without express written permission of the author is strictly
prohibited & liable for appropriate legal action.