As a summary on John Boyd’s synthesis on the operational factors that correlate to victory in warfare, and those principles extended to the domains of business operations, this book is truly excellent. After reading Robert Coram’s biography “Boyd: The Fighter PIlot Who Changed the Art of War”, one will be ready to tackle this text. However, for those who were looking for something more, specifically a detailed treatment on either Boyd’s cybernetic theory of OODA loops, or his Energy-Maneuver (EM) Theory on fighter airframe design/performance, they will be disappointed with this text. Yet, this book serves at the very least, an extended preface for further readings on either of those topics, and it provides enough content for those who do not wish to go so deep, but want to see what value Boyd’s ideas might have for either management science, or the as a framework to study warfare in the historical context.
With respect to those two topics, “Certain to Win” provides an interesting analysis of the Blitzkrieg, and why it worked via the OODA loop concept, as well as how that same OODA loop concept can be applied to business strategy. With respect to warfare, the author has a good quick overview of the various attempts to “quantify” the factors of victory at the tactical level. This is roughly consistent with the notion of “net assessments”, and is a fairly old concept in operations within this domain, he goes through the usual “accounting-like” theories that were attempted to this effect, as well as more “sophisticated” approaches like the Lanchester model” of field engagement. These quasi-simulation approaches are not treated in great technical detail, but enough detail is provided for one to reconstruct or get the gist of the mechanism.
Richards essentially approaches the topic as a data analyst. Both the survey of previous analytic approaches as well as a quick survey of the outcomes of various battles (with different “independent variables” like force size, technology etc.) he is able to dismiss a few potential explanations for victory in battle, and it is through this deconstruction that Richards starts to construct the eventual solution, tying it perfectly with Boyd’s own OODA loop. The long-and-short of it is that victory goes to the side that has a shorter decision-to-action cycle, and has that cycle tightly connected to an adaptive process. Within the purview of historical war, especially within the late industrial era warfare, Richards explains how Boyd demonstrated how the Germans had a superior attained and developed a superior cycle vis-a-vis it’s adversaries. These are summarized in 4 phrases Einheit, Fingerspitzengefühl, Auftragstaktik, and Schwerpunkt.
In essence, Boyd’s analysis was that Wehrmacht training as the sub-division level was superior, and endowed individual soldiers, squad leaders, all the way up to the division a kind of “intuition” that afforded the units that made up a force to take initiative and adapt to local conditions without being explicitly told how/what to do during an engagement or during deployment. The reason why this is important is that command becomes more abstracted the higher up the organizational chain one goes, and thus, the fidelity of information must also decrease, as each level of command abstracts away more and more detail. If a force is dependent on a General to determine action, the force may be ill-adapted to meet realities on the ground in fast-moving situations (which are often critical points during war). Thus, lower level initiatives are key lest your adversary exploit inaction to penetrate your lines, turn your flank, or deploy a greater mass of force in a particular area before your local force can adapt and counter.
Lower level German leadership were trained to act on local information, and were trusted by “contract” from their commanding officers to take action when needed, so long as those actions were congruent to the overall plans of the division/corps/force etc. This congruence with higher level objectives was key to early German success. As other texts, like Zetterling’s “Blitzkrieg : From the Ground Up” suggest, German High Command (OKW) during the war was not always very competent, and it’s fairly clear that the German political leadership were even less competent.
Richard’s shows in several examples during the invasion of France, how Boyd’s synthesis provides a cohesive and penetrating explanation for the nature of Germany’s victory during the first battle of the Ardennes Forest. After this historical tour, Richards goes through how such principles can be applied to business, as well as more definitions at the operational level, including the differentiation of plans with strategy. Since the text was written in the late 90s/early 2000s, much of the business cases revolve around the initial Japanese firm successes at defeating their American counterparts within the automobile industry. Much of the commentary here intersects somewhat with Six Sigma, TQM, and the works of Denning and other mid/late 20th century industrial engineers.
I found this section to be relatively less informative as the material is mostly consistent with those analyses, and offers relatively little new insights from the OODA-loop from this standpoint. Boyd’s analysis here is more a reformulation vs. a completely novel approach. Richards emphasises the importance of a strong internal culture, and in this respect, I think the book is valuable as much of the modern “change management” practitioners seem like shallow parrots when they speak on this dimension. It’s clear many of these people don’t have much of a functional understanding on how “culture” can really be harnessed to increase operational effectiveness.
There’s some material towards the end on the practical concerns of implementation and testing/validating a new organizational/operational system predicated on Boyd’s teaching. This will probably have no value for those interested in Boyd’s work proper, but is decent fodder for consultants. Overall, the book is good, it’s a quick read. For those interested in Boyd, this is definitely a good “chaser” to Coram, and maybe it will provide better understanding on Boyd’s ideas, as Coram doesn’t really focus too much on that front. It also goes well with recent books within the military history domain that focuses on the German way of war in WW2, especially those who want a critical analysis of the Blitzkrieg concept. Highly recommended.