On crappy business analogies. And love.

The words we use are important. They define the world as we know and understand it.

So, why is it that we use the analogies we do in business? Part of it, I guess, is because the analogies chosen are developed by men for men. As something to aspire to. So, I decided to have a closer look to see if they play the part, if they really add value to our view of the world…

Let’s start with the obvious one: "Business is war".

Is business war?

No it isn’t. Not even close. Even if business can be intense at times business is vastly different by definition. The purpose of war is to act as the absolute extension of politics (according to von Clausewitz). In other words, to impose your will on your enemy by force.

This is nothing like business. Nothing. The purpose of business can vary, traditionally seen as increasing the shareholder value but today more and more leaning towards pleasing the customer and the employee. As for the markets, they are not dichotomic. They are multiparty. There is no ONE opponent. There are many. It is counterproductive to impose your will on others. The markets will reject that game. And you have customers. You cannot force someone to buy your product, at least not overtly and definitely not over time. You influence, develop persuasive products and services and you deliver great experiences. Any similarities with war? If anything, war is taking the form of business. But let’s leave that for another time.

As a rule, business decisions are not life or death. No one will die from the incorrect business decision, at least not from the primary intent of the decision. Military decisions have the aim of saving own lives at the expense of those of the enemy. Winning ground whilst inflicting maximal damage to the counterpart. Conquering vital assets. Deter. War destroys, harms, kills. In business we trade, cooperate, grow.

In war, there is only one winner. You could also argue that there are only degrees of losing, but anyway, it is not the same in business. Most markets are not monopolies. Acting as if there is only one winner will make you lose out on all the benefits of cooperation. Of creating alliances with your opponents, not for short term gain but for long term benefit. There are those that imply that the best business is a monopoly. I guess they have a different perspective than I do.

No one dies in business. Perhaps from the products of business but not from business itself. Businesses can of course go bankrupt, but no one loses their lives. This means that there will never be the kind of intense decision making under fire as in war. No-one’s life is at stake. Someone’s bonus? Of course. But no-one’s life. To this, there are exceptions. There always are. But for the sake of the argument, let’s leave them out for now.

In the military you prepare for war through training. Most soldiers will spend a majority of their time training. In business, you never train. You never practice. It is always live action. With no possibilities to practice. It makes for worse business of course. Worse leaders. Worse decisions. And school is not training in the analogy of war. Because officers also go to college. Officers’ college. But they still practice leadership every day under safe conditions. If there ever was something to copy from the armed forces, from the military, into the business world, this particular item should be it. Training without running the risk of causing real calamity. Exploring the boundaries of the organization. The resilience.

There are of course some similarities between business and war. My reflection is that the analogy is developed by men for men. The notion that war is macho. That warriors are heroes. In my world this is a misunderstanding. People serving in the armed forces are doing so for a myriad of reasons. Not only personal reasons but also because of national or regional dictates. As militaries, they are means of politic will and intention. Tools, simply put. This is in no way meant as a derogative comment but rather the expression of a fact.

As for strategies and tactics and all the other words we have chosen, it is the same story. Why not call them what they are? Why use the war terms? Who does it serve?

Now to the next analogy: "Business is like sport".

Is business like sport? Nope. No way. Again, there are similarities to draw from (leadership in team sports is one) but for many other analogies, it is simply not true. Why?

Because:

In sports, when competing, you either win or lose. Pretty much similar to the war analogy. In business, there are many, many nuances and a clear winner or loser can possibly but not certainly be identified over time.

Most of your time in sports is spent preparing for an event or a game. One decisive moment or sequence. As an athlete, preparation and practice is more than 95% of the time you spend. And that is if we are talking about team sports. For an athlete in an individual sport, for a 100-meter dash athlete, you are probably close to 99% preparation. In business, honestly, how much time is spent preparing in different roles? In practice? Not much. Almost nothing. Everything that is being done in business is live. Of course, there are pivotal moments in business as well but they are much more difficult to identify beforehand. The pivotal moments in business are more entangled in other events and much more susceptible to external variables. Often these moments are only discernable afterwards. Quite different from sports.

In business, it is possible to change the game, to change the rules. Rather limited possibilities for that in sports. Imagine a football player picking up the ball and run it into the goal. Not something you are likely to see. Unless of course you are talking about American Football… For a company know for its computers, phones wasn’t a long shot. It was a different game all together. Also, you can change the nature of the game or trade into another industry. It is imaginable for a hardware company to turn into a service provider (IBM) but hardly for the Barcelona football team to move into ice hockey…

From a rules and regulations perspective, if you break the rules in sports, it is an infraction, possibly with a penalty as a consequence. But no one will sue you for it. If you are a business, you’d better not break any laws…

The degree of specialization in sports (and war) is much higher than in business. Today, in business, you do not normally stay in a field of specialization. To run a business, you even have to have a wider experience than just one sport or one specialization. In most sports, generalists have an issue. In war, there is no such thing as a generalist. In business however, generalists are a necessity.

From a team sport perspective, there are similarities. No team is stronger than its weakest link. However, it doesn’t scale. No sports team consists of 1500 people, unless of course you are looking at F1 but then again, 1500 people serving two drivers… no similarities. Sports can however learn a lot from business.

What else… Well, of course, the short life span of an athlete enables a very different type of performance focus. That and the fact that athletes, almost without exception, start out very young. Life/work balance does not exist, or perhaps does not have to exist, and this is a vital part of sports. There is only total focus and total dedication. There is nothing else for someone aiming at the top level. Nothing else matters. Everything else is at the bottom of the list. And of course, this is not a sustainable way to run a business. Again, one could without to much of an intellectual somersault, view this from a machismo perspective. The ability, or desire, to sacrifice all else on the altar of performance, to the dichotomy, win/lose, prevail/despair, all/nothing.

We use analogies to make the world easier to understand. Like we use stereotypes. The challenge is that we disregard many of the important nuances when we simplify too far.

To me, a meaningful analogy is this one: "Business is like life".

Like in life, at first we know nothing. Then when we know a little, and when we do, some will set goals and have a clear ambition of what to achieve. Most will not put sufficient effort behind those goals and that vision. It will remain a dream, unfulfilled. Some will put the effort in. Those that do, will be successful, at least in the sense that they will see clear correlation between effort and outcome. ?And hopefully learn something about themselves in the process. Those that do not will struggle to see that connection. They will often blame others for their shortcomings.

Some will live life without goals or a long-term plan, some will succeed anyway, and some will be less successful, regardless of how we define success. Many that pursue a vision, will encounter challenges in their way to deliver on the vision. Parents’ divorce, they get a bad teacher, they sprain an ankle just before a big game, they miss their internship because someone else was more suitable. Or at least was selected for some reason. Some will manage to stay on track despite those challenges, some will not.

Some will live to realize someone else’s vision.

The relationships we create in business are like the relationships we create in life. Some are forced upon us, like family. We don’t choose our family, we learn to live with them and love them. Some relationships are made out of choice. We find a spouse or a friend. But we rarely move in with a potential spouse after the first time we meet. Why should business be different. and on another side of the fault line, some cheat and betray, but of course, those relationships rarely last. Why is it that we think a business relationship is different? Or an employment for that matter. Some will change partners often. Some stay loyal for life. Some cheat but most are good people.

For managers, and companies, I argue that a company should be like family in many ways. You should be able to feel that you are part, because (or despite) who you are. Managers should love their teams like siblings love each other. Not the romantic kind of love, of course, but the love of families. Clarity, transparency, care, respect.

There is another person I see as a role model of sorts. Tony Dungy was the first afro-American to coach a winning team in the Super Bowl. But it was not his winning that impressed me most. Not by far. When it came to leadership, he said it well.” I don’t have to be rude to my players. I can treat them all with respect and at the same time be crystal clear about what I expect. “ Personally I chose the word love instead of respect. To me, love is what leadership in the end is about. This is why the analogy of life is better.

Life is both complicated and complex. Very complex. So is business. If we change the analogies we use, perhaps we would end up in a world less obsessed with macho culture than with embracing humanity, life and love. Because words are no small thing. They make us feel things. They direct our emotions, and they drive our fantasies. Words topple empires. So, let’s use the right ones. And see what happens when we do.

?

?