Principles of

Leadership and Its

Applications: A
Comparison of Sun
Zi’s Art of War and
Machiavelli’s The
Prince

In partial fulfillment of the

requirements for NF8024

Rosario Ester Balgos Orda-Caise

Matric No.G1002485B
INTRODUCTION

The romantic myth about Marco Polo bringing pasta to Italy from China is

simply that-a myth. As much as both countries love noodles, their countries’ histories

are also wrought with war and battles for political and geographical supremacy.

The Art of War by Sun Zi was estimated to have been made at the period

(around 512 BC) of constant war among seven nations (Zhao,

Qi, Qin, Chu, Han, Wei and Yan) seeking to control a vast expanse of fertile territory

in Eastern China1. The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli was also created at a time

when Italy was constantly plagued by wars and in-fighting among its nobles. It was a

time when Catholic popes were waging wars and having their sons do battle and

conquer states. It was also the start of the Renaissance era where Man—as a

being—was put into focus and gave it a more secular meaning.

This paper will attempt to compare and contrast two specific works: Sun Zi’s

Art of War and Machiavelli’s The Prince, with focus on principles on leadership and

its application to management. This paper will attempt to show that despite the fact

that both works are of different cultural orientation, there are similarities in principle

and its application is subject to the conditions of the times of the reader. There is no

preference for either work; only a showing of a convergence of ideals that were

moved by the times of the authors’ lives and their personal goal of achieving peace

and stability in accordance with their countries’ needs.

1
Wikipedia, retrieved March 2011

1
BACKGROUND OF SUNZI AND NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI

SUN ZI

Personal Life

Little is known about Sun ZI’s life or whether he is in fact a historical figure.

About 100 B.C., Su-ma Ch’ien , one of his chroniclers, gives little about him but more

of how he was hired by the King of Wu, to wit:

“Sun Tzu, whose personal name was Wu, was a native of the Ch’i state. His Art of
War brought him to the notice of Ho Lu, King of Wu….”2

The King of Wu asked Sun Zi to test his theories on women, to which the

latter accepted and 180 concubines were sent to him to train. The women were

divided into two companies and each company is headed by one of the king’s

favourite concubines.

The women were first instructed to do the turns---left, right, front, and about.

The different commands were explained and the women assented to understanding

each command. On the first command of “right turn”, the women burst out of laughter.

To this, Sun Zi said, “If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not

thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame.”3 The drills continued and when

on the second command the women again laughed, Sun Zi furthered his statement,

“If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly

understood, then the general is to blame. But if his orders are clear and the soldiers

nevertheless disobey, then it is the fault of their officers.”4 And he had the king’s two

2
“ The Art of War by Sun Tzu”, edited and with foreword by James Clavell, Dell Publishing Group, Inc., New
York, reprinted 1988, p.3
3
Op.cit., p.4
4
Ibid

2
favourite concubines beheaded. The king was unable to stop such order as he gave

full authority to Sun Zi to do whatever is necessary to train the women.

After which, the concubines were disciplined and the training went on without

any more incidents. The women were able to perfect the drills and prepared them for

inspection of the king. However, the king did not bother to see the results, to the

dismay of Sun Zi. He was, nevertheless, appointed general.

Sun Zi commanded armies in the exploits in the west, defeating the Ch’u state

and captured Ying, its capital; in the north, he defeated the Ch’I and Chin states,

spreading his fame abroad the feudal princes. For almost two decades, the kingdom

of Wu was victorious over their perennial enemies, Yueh and Ch’u kingdoms.

Despite the deaths of Sun Zi and the King of Wu, their descendants followed their

precepts for a few years but failed to sustain it. In 473 B.C., Wu was defeated and

the kingdom eradicated.

The Art of War

The Art of War (Bingfa兵法) is the oldest known Chinese military treatise. It is

about more than 2,000 years old and having influence some known leaders

throughout history. In 1972, copy of Sun Zi’s work was excavated from a Han

Dynasty tomb located in Shandong Province5 and reinforced historical records that

Sun Zi’s work actually comprised 82 p’ien (verses) and 9 chuan (diagrams)6. The

present 13 chapters was a result of the pruning of a Wei emperor Cao Cao (155-220

AD), each one focusing on a specific aspect of warfare, strategy and tactics.

5
Hee, Charles Chow Hoi and Gurd, Bruce, “Leadership Essentials from Sun Zi’s Art of War and The Bhagavad
Gita”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 16 No.3, 2010, pp.396-414, citing Wang (2007)
6
Ibid, citing Giles (1988)

3
 Contrary to popular thought, The Art of War is not a “how-to” book. It is about

military philosophy, with emphasis on strategies and methods (cè lüè yŭ fāng fă 策

略与方法) 7 . The entirety of the work, if analysed deeply, does not push for the

conduct of war; rather it is the avoidance of war that is more desirable. This

advocacy for avoidance of direct confrontation is clear in Chapter Three on “Strategic

Attacks”, to wit:

“Thus, the most supreme strategy is to attack the plans and strategies of the
enemy. The next best strategy is to attack his relationships and alliances with
other nations. The next best strategy is to attack his army. The worst strategy
of all is to attack walled cities. (Lines 3.8 to 3.11)8

Attack walled cities when there are no other alternatives.” (Line 3.12)9

These principles can be applied into business leadership; treating the

marketplace like a battlefield10. The ultimate goal is to win; if not, avoid the conflict.

Deception is the key to all warfare.

NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI

Personal Life

Born in Florence, Italy on 03 May 1469, Machiavelli was a philosopher,

humanist, and diplomat. His family is believed to be descended from the old

marquesses of Tuscany and has a long tradition of being involved in Florentine

7
Wee, Chow Hou, “Sun Zi Art of War: An Illustrated Translation with Asian Perspectives and Insights”,
Prentice Hall, Singapore,2003, p.5
8
Ibid.
9
Ibid
10
Hee, Charles Chow Hoi and Gurd, Bruce, “Leadership Essentials from Sun Zi’s Art of War and The Bhagavad
Gita”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 16 No.3, 2010, pp.396-414, citing Wang (2007)

4
government, producing 13 Gonfalonieres of Justice, one of the offices of nine

citizens selected every two months to form the Signoria.

Machiavelli learned grammar, rhetoric and Latin. In June 1498, Machiavelli, at

the age of 29, was elected as head of the second chancery and later appointed the

secretary of the Dieci di Libertà e Pace. Being a diplomat, he was responsible for

negotiation and military affairs, carried out between 1499 and 1512. He led

diplomatic missions to the court of Louis XII in France, that of Ferdinand II of Aragón,

in Spain, in Germany, the Papacy in Rome, and in other Italian states. Moreover,

from 1502 to 1503, he witnessed the effective state-building methods of Cesare

Borgia (1475–1507), son of Pope Alexander VI, who was then enlarging his central

Italian territories.11

Between 1503 and 1506, Machiavelli was responsible for the formation of the

Florentine militia and the city’s defenses. He distrusted mercenaries and preferred a

politically invested citizen-militia – a preference that helped the city in its battles. His

command of Florentine citizen-soldiers defeated Pisa in 1509. But in August of 1512,

the Medici family, helped by Pope Julius II, used Spanish troops to defeat the

Florentines at Prato. The city-state and Republic were dissolved. Machiavelli was

removed from office in 1512 and, in 1513, was accused of conspiracy, and arrested

and imprisoned for a time. Despite torture, he denied involvement and was released.

He remained a prolific writer during his lifetime, involving himself even to the

arts by writing plays. But studying and writing political treatises were the things he

11
From Wikipedia, retrieved 06 March 2011

5
loved the most. He later participated in intellectual groups and to continue his

passion, he writes his commentaries and sends them to friends with better political

connections, in an attempt to be employed by the new lords, the Medici family.

Hence, the birth of his little book, The Prince. Machiavelli died in 1527 at the age of

58.

The Prince

Il Principe is a political treatise that started from correspondence until an

earlier version (around 1513) appears to have been circulated, using a Latin title, De

Principatibus (About Principalities) 12 . It was only after five years of Machiavelli’s

death (1532) that a printed version published. The publication became a reality with

the permission of the Medici pope Clement VII. The Catholic Church later proscribed

the book and even registered it to the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (Index of

Prohibited Books).

The book was an innovation back then as it was written in the vernacular

(Italian) rather than Latin, which was a popular style during the Renaissance

literature. It is reputed to be one of the foundations for modern political thought and

was said to be in direct conflict with the Catholic Church and scholastic doctrines of

the era as religion and politics move in the same realm. The Prince separated, in a

sense, espoused for the separation of the Church and state, a principle basic in

many republican governments.

The work, although relatively short, is the most remembered of his writings

and the one most responsible for bringing "Machiavellian" into wide usage as a

12
From Wikipedia, retrieved 06 March 2011

6
pejorative term; and even contributed to the modern negative connotations of the

words "politics" and "politician" in western countries. The descriptions within The

Prince have the general theme of accepting that ends of princes, such as glory, and

indeed survival, can justify the use of immoral means to achieve those ends.13

THE ART OF WAR AND PRINCIPLES ON LEADERSHIP

The Art of War dates back between 400 BC and 320 BC. It was first translated

by Frenchman Jean Joseph Marie Amiot in 1772. Despite the title, it is a military

treatise centred on gaining victory without he conduct of war.

For Sun Zi, in case there is a decision to fight, strategies should be formulated

to engage the enemy, leaving him no choice but to fight. If direct confrontation is not

an option, then the commander must formulate strategies to avoid war. Sun Zi

advised that to achieve sustainable advantage in volatile and competitive situations,

the right soldiers (talents) need to be selected and trusted to exploit circumstances.

Everyone has a role to play and those roles must be played well according to the

commander’s plans.

One of the most famous lines from Art of War is “Know your enemy and know

yourself, find naught in fear for 100 battles” (Chapter 3, Line 31). Wee (2003)

translates this line as: “He who knows the other side and knows himself will not be

defeated in a hundred battles”. Griffith (2005), on the other hand states this as:

“Know your enemy, know yourself; in hundred battles you will never be in peril”.

Chow and Gurd (2010) further propose that this line be read as: “Know yourself,

13
Ibid.

7
know the other side, every battle, victory possible.” But however translated, the

advice is not to predict victory but the ability to gain insight into intentions. The ability

to have such insight involves exploiting terrain advantages, weather conditions, and

most important, exploit (enemy) information relayed thru reliable sources (spies).

A commander needs insight to mix terrain with war efforts14. However, it is

foresight that integrates people with terrain and method. It is important to integrate

information to sustain efforts and be resilient against the enemy’s (competitors’)

intentions and actions. The illustration below amplifies the blending of insight and

foresight by the commander to achieve victory in war (corporate battles).

Illustration 1. Combining Insight and Foresight

Sourced from Chow and Gurd (2010)

The Art of War may be divided to three categories, to wit: the Commander

(Leadership), Environment (classifications of war), and Methods (Doctrines of

Engagement).Speed may be the essence of war (chapter 11, line 29), however Sun

Zi suggests that surprise is also of vital importance (chapter 1, line 26). A

combination of the two would require prompt intelligence. Hence, effective leadership

exploits the enemy’s unpreparedness (chapter 1, line 26); takes unexpected routes
14
Chow, Charles Hoi Hee and Gurd, Bruce, “Leadership Essentials from Sun Zi’s Art of War and the Bhagavad
Gita”, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT HISTORY, Vol. 16 No. 3 2010, pp.393-414, Emerald Group Publishing

8
(chapter 11, line 29); and, attacks the enemy when least expected (chapter 11,

line29). The best option still is to win without fighting (chapter 3, line 2).

As much as winning the war is the ultimate goal (chapter 2, line 3), for Sun Zi,

the war expert is subtle and secretive. He remains anonymous, faceless, traceless

and mysterious (chapter 6, line 9). In the end, it is the commander’s skill to be

insightful of his opponent’s motives yet himself secretive of his own that allows

success in his surprise moves (citing Foo, 1997)15.

Illustration 2. Art of War in 3 Categories of Study

Sourced from Chow and Gurd (2010)

For some writers, the principles set forth by Sun Zi in his military treatise have

some business applications. McNeilly (1996) put forward these principles in essence,

to wit: capturing market without destroying it (win without fighting); maximizing the

power of market information (deception and use of spies); moving swiftly to

overcome competition (speed and preparation); striking the least expected (avoid

strength, attack weakness); using strategy to master competition (shaping the

opponent); and providing effective leadership in turbulent times (character-based

leadership).16 Wang (2007) used the Art of War to summarize business case studies,

15
Ibid
16
Ibid

9
geared towards the adoption of or adaptation to winning mentality, winning by

surprise and responsible corporate citizenship. 17 Another business writer, Chalak

(1993) wrote about classifying Sun Zi’s spies in the present context of the business

environment. Sun Zi’s spies are considered ‘coordinators” in business because they

are linked to the competitor directly or indirectly. The “co-operators” like logistics and

financial service providers and Sun Zi’s “other side” would include competitors,

coordinators and co-operators because the last group can turn into spies although

once neutral.18 The following chart shows us the classification made by Chalak about

the application of the concept of spies in the business world.

Illustration No.3 Classification of Spies by Chalak

Sourced from Chow and Gurd (2010)

For Sun Zi, the commander (leader) must exhibit five key character traits:

wisdom, strictness, sincerity, benevolence and courage. To be precise, Sun Zi says,

“The generalship of a commander refers to his qualities of wisdom, trustworthiness,

benevolence, courage and discipline” (Chapter 1, Line 12).19 The diagram below

shows us the interplay of these qualities of a leader for Sun Zi.

17
Ibid
18
Ibid
19
Wee, Chow Hou, “Sun Zi Art of War: An Illustrated Translation with Asian Perspectives and Insights”,
Prentice Hall, Singapore,2003, p.14

10
 STRICTNESS
WISDOM (DISCIPLINE)
(INTELLIGENCE)

LEADERSHIP
COURAGE
BENEVOLENCE
(HUMANENESS)

SINCERITY
(CREDIBILITY)

Adapted from Chow and Gurd (2010)

Wisdom (Intelligence)- For Sun Zi, for leaders to succeed, their competence

must spread through every aspect of their work. They must be technically proficient

that conforms or exceeds expectations, if necessary. Leaders must be able to

comprehend and understand the needs and challenges of their colleagues. They

must have the ability to assess their organization’s position in relation to their

competitors and the environment they are working on. Yet they must be able to take

caution on how they let their intelligence or wisdom is perceived. Leaders should not

flaunt their intelligence or make boastful shows aas this may be may be perceived as

arrogance.

Discipline- For the entirety of The Art of War, Sun Zi puts emphasis on the

importance of trained and disciplined personnel. Talent management is the leader’s

job. The leader must be able to bring his forces to battle and prepared for any

11
scenario. This is applicable to building an effective program of succession for the

next leaders of the organization. Leaders are tasked to evaluate the training needs of

the team and make sure proper training is done to address those needs. Training,

however, does not stimulate discipline20. The consistent enforcement of orders, rules

and law, and proper reward system stimulates discipline. Sun Zi says:

“When orders are regularly enforced and used to train soldiers, they
will be obedient. When orders are not regularly enforced nor used to
train the soldiers, they will not be obedient.” (Chapter 9, Lines 75-76)

Courage- Decisiveness and courage must be projected by leaders in the face

of challenges. There is no room for vacillation and any show of indecisiveness is

subject to question by subordinates and peers. A courageous leader is able to

recognize the opportunities inherent in all risks. This lends credibility to his actions

and decisions. It allows the leader to move his team towards the direction of

opportunity and enables them to make appropriate and necessary organizational

adaptations to a changing environment.

Benevolence (Humaneness)- Leaders must show respect for those with

whom they interact--subordinates, peers, stakeholders, and competitors.

Benevolence must also be applied to confront challenges and see individuals or

teams as solution enablers. Organizational leaders must see the stakeholders as

integral part of its success. Therefore, it must take into consideration all

management actions in relation to its possible impacts to the different stakeholders.

This translates to, in a sense, corporate social citizenship.

20
Fox, Steven , “The Anatomy of Leadership - A Sun Tzu Perspective”, Security Paradigms,
http://blogs.csoonline.com/blog/steven_fox, March 22, 2010, retrieved March 2011

12
 Sincerity (Credibility/Trustworthiness)- It emerges from a reputation of

trustworthiness and competence.21 A leader must be able to show his ability to use

his experience and knowledge to confront a challenge relevant to the company.

Armed with this trait and the skill of adaptation, a leader’s time and energy can be

focused for greater value.

MACHIAVELLI’S THE PRINCE AND PRINCIPLES ON LEADERSHIP

For Machiavelli, traditions and customs on leadership must be changed,

particularly in the leading a nation state. He wanted to create a new (modern political

order) with a new view of what is public, and introducing a new mode of governance-

- the executive. Machiavelli was a renaissance man and like many of his kind during

that period, he presented a modern view of the world. He asserted that human

beings are at the centre of the universe; and, everything is measured and evaluated

relative to them.

He also proposes that political leaders must be modern or at least, entertain

new ideas of on to improve the stability of a nation. His take on modernity is shown

by the quote, “But since my intent is to write something useful to whoever

understands it, it has appeared to me more fitting to go directly to the effectual truth

of the thing than to the imagination. And many have imagined republics and

principalities that have never been seen or known to exist in truth “(The Prince,

Chapter 15). For Machiavelli, following traditions has brought his contemporaries to

great ruin. Leaders should not stick to traditions in governance; the propensity to

stay “good and doing good”, whether in the context of religion or being virtuous or

21
Ibid

13
excellent is not sustainable; if ruthlessness by some individuals (historical leaders)

and families works across history, then it is advised to adopt similar practices

(Chapters 15 and 18, The Prince).

Machiavelli writes about taking care of the concerns of the stakeholders

especially of that of the ordinary people because it contributes to a stable political

order. Simply put, a modern enterprise is humankind taking care of itself as best it

can in an otherwise lonely universe22. He also added that innovations in science and

technology must be adopted to bring about better lives, and better lives bring stability.

Ruthlessness has greater impact with the use of modern technologies (physically

and politically oriented) as people’s lives are simplified and can be justified as being

for the people.

In Machiavelli’s The Prince, a leader is whomever makes it to top leadership

position. It does not matter whether leadership position is hereditary, usurped, or

elected. The right to rule (lead) appears to involve demonstrated capacity to retain or

gain a ruling position. The Prince was written at a time when Italy was facing external

and internal threats, hence, political instability was then imminent. Machiavelli posits

that the problem of political instability arise from members of society losing the fears

that they had at the founding or beginning of political orders—loss of life, family or

valued possessions. Due to such fear of loss, people accept the need for leaders.

To be effective leaders, he advises the readers to engender such fears in people

whenever useful. For him, the creation of fears prevents people from harming

themselves or another and the strict enforcement of laws and punishment for law-

22
Swain, John W., “Machiavelli and Modern Management”, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa,
Alabama, USA, MANAGEMENT DECISION 40/3 (2002), pp.281-87

14
breakers mitigates the desire and necessity of private parties to seek revenge. This

way the dissolution of public order due to in-fighting then common in Italy at that time,

is prevented.

For a leader to maintenance of stability, Machiavelli advised the readers to

keep the public loyal to the leader. To foster loyalty, one must be either be feared or

loved; and being feared is better for leading. Being loved is ideal and beneficial but

harder to accomplish and less reliable than striking fear in others: people love at their

discretion but fear those who act in particular ways. Being feared and loved are

preferable than being hated, because being hated can involve people striking at

rulers in unpredictable ways 23 . It is in the best interest of princes (leaders) to

maintain their people’s lives, loved ones and possessions, as they are his firmest

foundation. The use of ruthlessness in this case is public-spirited especially so when

preparing for and engaging in war with external and internal forces. By instilling fear,

Machiavelli is seeking to increase the efficacy of leaders by limiting the scope of their

responsibilities---the intent is to have them do essential things, e.g., maintain political

stability which is less broad in scope than in earlier traditions, in order that they can

do those things better. In a business sense, a disciplined leader promotes good

corporate governance and inculcates this culture to make the organization more

efficient, at the same time, takes into consideration the concerns of the stakeholders.

Machiavelli also tells leaders to be flexibility. Success awaits the man whose

actions are in accordance with the times and failure the man whose actions are out

of harmony with them. The same also applies to morality. As a general rule, a prince

(leader) should seem to be merciful, true to his word, humane, honest, and religious,

23
Ibid

15
and he really should have those qualities24 . However if a conflict arose between

public and private morality/ethics, whichever would produce the most practical result

should take precedence (citing Wolin, 1960) 25 , taking action which was publicly

moral and designed to secure the liberty of the state but in the short term at the

expense of private morality.

According to Anthony Jay (1967), applying Machiavelli in business means that

adroit and successful business leaders had to be deft at politics and be an active

political leader to be successful26. A leader is judged by the size of the problem he

tackles and while other people can cope with the waves. For him, it is the leader’s

job to hold things steady and maintain a watching brief on the tide. The policy of

referring a matter to a committee can be a device for diluting authority, diffusing

responsibility and delaying decision-making which all too often leads to failure.

Applying Machiavellian principles in business means, in a way, being on top of

everything and things that needs decisive action must be done by the leader of the

organization.

Machiavelli on ethics and leadership- Imitation for Machiavelli is a way to

make one an effective leader. Since a business executive may be, in some ways, an

imitation of a public executive, although limited in capacity, it is ideal that the

business executive takes in some of the traits of a public officer to the organization.

Business leaders must:

1) Appreciate real politics-Business leaders must be aware of how decisions

are made in the public and private sectors;

24
Harris, Phil, “MACHIAVELLI AND THE GLOBAL COMPASS: Ends and Means In Ethics and
Leadership”, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, (2010) 93: pp.131-138
25
Ibid
26
Ibid

16
 2) Recognize the importance of lobbying, influencing and networking, political

campaigning and public affairs management as of vital importance in

maintaining competitiveness in the 21st century- The importance of supplying

quality information to Board of Directors, management or government at all

levels to maintain one’s environmental advantage thru being able to advise

decision-makers on future options and priorities;

3) Regular environment scanning and assessment- Utilize scenario planning

methods;

4) Ability to predict election process results- Business leaders must recognize

the importance of the ability to manage political process both in one’s firm and

organization and in being able to predict election results and to exert influence

in campaigns to achieve just political ends; and,

5) Flexibility in management- Organizations and leaders should be bold and

responsive to change or will be replaced thru inertia.

ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT APPLICATIONS

Leadership is a topic both philosophers discussed in their particular works.

Both authors advised that leaders should be attuned with their environment and be

flexible. As Sun Zi says in planning the conduct of war:

“Thus, analyse and study the five factors carefully. Compare them with those
of the enemy to understand the changing conditions and circumstances (during
war) and to assess the chances of victory.

These five actors are moral influence, the weather, terrain, generalship, and
doctrine and law.” (Chapter 1, Lines 1.5-1.7)

17
Indirectly, Sun Zi laid down the foundations for the SWOT analysis. By doing so, the

CEO can determine the ways of making the company sustainable by environment

scanning and scenario-planning.

As stated in Chapter 15 of The Prince, Machiavelli pushes leaders not to stick

to traditions that will cause them ruin. Due to the necessity of the times and

environment, leaders must learn to adapt to the changing environment to keep their

organizations (be it state or business) sustainable. . A leader’s action is dictated by

necessity; do good when he can but if it is necessary to refrain from doing good then

must be prepared to act the opposite way be able to do it; to maintain stability and

order, a leader is often forced by necessity to ‘act treacherously, ruthlessly or

inhumanely’.27 The ultimate goal is to preserve and maintain stability by adaptation of

new methods of doing business and new thinking or processes. An example of this

“Machiavellian” leadership in business is General Electric’s Jack Welch.

In a speech he made in 1982, he said, "Managements that hang on to

weakness for whatever reason - tradition, sentiment, goodness or their own

weakness - won't be around in 1990". 28 He vowed to fix, close, or sell any GE

business that could not achieve market leadership. Even if it meant massive lay-offs,

he carried on with such directive and by the end of 1982, 35,000 employees were let

go. These lay-offs saved the company around USD$900 million in pre-tax expenses.

But while adopting this seemingly "cruel" style of management, Welch didn't

forget to exercise liberality when the opportunity existed. He believed that the laid-off

employees deserved compassionate treatment - not only generous financial

27
Skinner, Quentin, Machiavelli A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, NY, 2000,p.43
28
Majumdar, Shyamal, “Machiavelli & the Art of Management”, February 09, 2006,
http://www.rediff.com//money/2006/feb/09man.htm

18
settlements, but humane consideration of their feelings. He personally replied to

letters of complaint from terminated employees, and directly intervened in cases of

injustice that came to his attention. Executives who mismanaged the downsizing felt

his wrath.29

Both also put emphasis on discipline in the organization and that the leader

should demonstrate this trait to keep their subordinates trusting and loyal. Sun Zi

explains concisely the five pitfalls that a general should guard against, to wit:

“If he is reckless, he can be killed.

If he is cowardly and desperate to live, he can be captured.
If he is quick-tempered and easily angered, he can be provoked.
If he is sensitive to honour, he can be insulted.
If he is overly compassionate to people, he can be disturbed and harassed.”
(Chapter 8, Lines 8.25-8.29)30

Machiavelli says it another way. Although the use of fear is prevalent in The

Prince, its utilization must be justified by necessity and for reasons of keeping

political and societal stability. So he says:

“Nevertheless, a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does

not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure very well being feared
whilst he is not hated, which will always be as long as he abstains from the
property of his citizens and subjects and from their women…”

Leaders should not be afraid of being labelled or perceived strict or mean so long as

he/she does not commit corruption and take advantage of his subordinates, and then

he is able to sustain a well-organized and structured body politic.

29
Ibid
30
Wee, Chow Hou, “Sun Zi Art of War: An Illustrated Translation with Asian Perspectives and Insights”,
Prentice Hall, Singapore,2003, p.226-228

19
 For Sun Zi, the leader must exhibit five key character traits: wisdom, strictness,

sincerity, benevolence and courage. Machiavelli says that it is ideal for a prince to be

merciful, faithful, humane, religious, and upright; good traits that will endear the

prince to his people. However, ideal are the traits maybe, a reading of both works

does not say that these traits must be possessed at all times by the leader. In fact, in

the Art of War, Sun Zi articulates that a general’s actions and conduct really depends

on the circumstances. It must be remembered that the ultimate goal is to win the war

and preferably win it with the least confrontation. So a general must keep this in mind,

save his armies’ strength and resources and fight only when necessary. He even

espouses that the laws and rules must be strictly followed without regard of status

and rank as this is one way of instilling discipline and loyalty among the troops.

For Machiavelli, it is not possible to have all the “good” traits for a prince;

what is important is that the prince (leader) must appear to have the desired traits.

He must be mindful that when there is conflict between being “good” and doing the

right thing to maintain peace and order, the most expedient is the preferred choice.

To wit, he says:

“Therefore, it is unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities I have
enumerated, but it is very necessary to appear to have them. And I shall dare
to say this also, that to have them and always to observe them is injurious, and
that to appear to have them is useful; to appear merciful, faithful, humane,
religious, upright, and to be so, but with a mind so framed that should you require
not to be so, you may be able and know how to change to the opposite…it is
necessary for him to have a mind ready to turn itself accordingly as the
winds and variations of fortune force it, yet…not to diverge from good if he
can avoid doing so, but if compelled, then to know how to set about it.”
(Chapter 18)

This leadership style is best seen in the public sector. An example of such is the

imposition of the death penalty for the commission of heinous crimes. The taking of

20
the life of a person per se is morally wrong and for a government to institutionalize

such policy, makes it (the government) immoral. However, to maintain peace and

order, laws are necessary to keep people from taking revenge from each other.

Grave penalties are imposed to serve as a deterrent for the repetition of the offense.

Hence, a government that executes this penalty maybe morally wrong but due to

expediency, it is done to keep the stability of the society. For being too merciful and

keeping that trait is more injurious as people will take advantage of such

benevolence by breaching the peace and expect mercy. But if the leader from the

start makes clear this need for discipline and an example is made out of someone

who violates the rules, people will be more obedient. The injury suffered is inflicted

only to the individual and not the entire organization.

The two works, The Art of War and The Prince, are truly products of their

times. Borne out of a milieu of conflicts and war, Sun Zi and Machiavelli wrote these

treatises to serve the leaders of their time and resolve the challenges they were then

facing in order to build a better and peaceful society. Never have they realized that

these two little “books” have survived their generation and found application in

present times. It is not a matter of East meets West; but more of a convergence of

ideas that are similar yet flexible, that anyone, regardless of location, can apply.

21
REFERENCE LIST

Books

1. “The Art of War by Sun Tzu”, edited and with foreword by James Clavell,
Dell Publishing Group, Inc., New York, reprinted 1988
2. Skinner, Quentin, “Machiavelli A Very Short Introduction”, Oxford
University Press, NY, 2000
3. Wee, Chow Hou, “Sun Zi Art of War: An Illustrated Translation with Asian
Perspectives and Insights”, Prentice Hall, Singapore,2003

Journal Articles

1. Harris, Phil, “MACHIAVELLI AND THE GLOBAL COMPASS: Ends and

Means In Ethics and Leadership”, JOURNAL OF BUSINESS ETHICS, (2010)
93: pp.131-138
2. Hee, Charles Chow Hoi and Gurd, Bruce, “Leadership Essentials from Sun
Zi’s Art of War and The Bhagavad Gita”, JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT
HISTORY, Vol. 16 No.3, 2010, pp.396-414
3. Swain, John W., “Machiavelli and Modern Management”, University of
Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, USA, MANAGEMENT DECISION 40/3
(2002), pp.281-87

Internet Sources

1. Majumdar, Shyamal, “Machiavelli & the Art of Management”, February 09,

2006, http://www.rediff.com//money/2006/feb/09man.htm
2. Fox, Steven , “The Anatomy of Leadership - A Sun Tzu
Perspective”, Security Paradigms,
http://blogs.csoonline.com/blog/steven_fox, March 22, 2010, retrieved March
2011
3. Wikipedia, retrieved 06 March 2011

22