The principle in detail
Three steps through the principle: grasp it, place it, put it to work. Open each topic on its own.
The core messageCore statement and 3 clarifications
If you keep several paths open, you can choose the best one once it becomes clearer what is happening.
- It also says
- Whoever can choose sets the terms. Narrowing the other side’s options is part of strategy.
- It does not say
- That more freedom is always better. Sometimes deliberately taking away your own choice makes you stronger.
- It does not say
- That you should never commit. It asks you to decide deliberately which freedom you keep and which you give up.
The explanationHow the principle works and what matters
Because the future is uncertain, every open path is worth something, especially when the situation is changing fast. But options are valuable only if you use them at some point; if you never commit, you end up being pushed around as well.
Which commitment are you entering into right now, and which paths does it close off for you?
The signs3 signs when you heed it · 3 when you overlook it
- With every offer, you check which paths it closes off for you.
- You don’t commit under time pressure when there is no need to.
- For important dependencies, you have an alternative.
- You accept favors that quietly make you dependent.
- You nail down decisions early and in public and can no longer respond to new information.
- Or, for fear of commitment, you never commit and let others decide.
The backgroundTradition T3 Indirect Strategy and Maneuver
- 1903Ferdinand Foch
The Principles of War
- 1963OriginAndré Beaufre
An Introduction to Strategy
- 1977SupplementedStewart C. Myers
Determinants of Corporate Borrowing
- Tradition T3TraditionIndirect Strategy and Maneuver
Basil Henry Liddell Hart, John Richard Boyd, Edward N. Luttwak, André Beaufre
See the tradition on the Origin page
Read more: the full background
From André Beaufre’s work “An Introduction to Strategy” (1963), foreshadowed by Ferdinand Foch’s “The Principles of War” (1903). Supplemented by Stewart C. Myers’s theory of real options (1977).
The research4 sources: 3 theories, 1 classic · 1903–1977 · with limitations of the research
- weak
- moderate
- strong
The value of open options has been worked out in finance theory; applying it to conflict is military doctrine without measurement, and Thomas C. Schelling shows when it does not hold.
- 1960Thomas C. Schelling
“The Strategy of Conflict”: a credible commitment can strengthen your own bargaining position.
- 1963André Beaufre
“An Introduction to Strategy” (“Introduction à la stratégie”): strategy as a contest between two wills, at its core a struggle for freedom of action: preserving your own and restricting the opponent’s.
- 1977Stewart C. Myers
“Determinants of Corporate Borrowing” (Journal of Financial Economics 5): introduces the term real options; future choices have a value of their own.
- More freedom is not always better.
- If you credibly forgo an option, you can get the other side to give way, and trust often arises only through commitment.
- Keeping paths open has costs of its own: time, money and resolve.
- The claim that freedom of action keeps you in control is a teaching of military theory, not a measured finding.
Read more: what research shows
As early as 1903, Ferdinand Foch listed freedom of action among the principles of war in “The Principles of War” (“Des principes de la guerre”). André Beaufre developed the idea most clearly in 1963 in “An Introduction to Strategy.” He was writing during the Cold War, when open war between nuclear powers would have had incalculable consequences, and he understood strategy as a contest between two wills whose core is the struggle for freedom of action. Finance knows a related idea: in 1977, Stewart C. Myers coined the term real options. According to this concept, the possibility of making, expanding or abandoning an investment later has a value of its own, and that value rises with uncertainty. In 1960, Thomas C. Schelling showed the opposite direction: if you credibly take away your own choice, you can get the other side to give way.
The related principles38 Maneuver · 43 Initiative · 64 Credible Commitment · 69 Best Alternative
To go deeper, see 43 Initiative (freedom of action is its precondition) and 69 Best Alternative (if you have a good alternative, you keep your freedom in negotiations)
38 Maneuver shows the other side: a successful maneuver leaves the opponent only bad options
64 Credible Commitment stands in tension with it: there, you deliberately give up freedom in order to become stronger
Read more: the full text
To go deeper, see 43 Initiative (freedom of action is its precondition) and 69 Best Alternative (if you have a good alternative, you keep your freedom in negotiations); 38 Maneuver shows the other side: a successful maneuver leaves the opponent only bad options. 64 Credible Commitment stands in tension with it: there, you deliberately give up freedom in order to become stronger.
The action steps5 action steps: List your most important dependencies: customers, financial backers, key people, suppliers.
- List your most important dependencies: customers, financial backers, key people, suppliers. Where do you have no alternative?
- With every offer, ask: what do I get, and which path do I give up for it?
Make major commitments only when you have to, and use the time until then to learn more.
Commit deliberately where commitment makes you stronger, and say so openly.
- Create situations in which the other side has to react: set the dates, topics and terms yourself.
The reflection questions3 questions: Which offer did you last accept, and which path did it close off for you?
- Which offer did you last accept, and which path did it close off for you?
- On whom are you so dependent that you can no longer say no?
- Where are you putting off a commitment that is long overdue?
Take your time with one question. Write down your answer – or talk it over with someone you trust.
The picture to rememberThe animation once more, with an explanation
- A golden dot stands on a surface with four bright lines running from it, and opposite it is a teal dot with just as many
- The teal dot offers a small shiny circle, the golden one takes it, and one of its lines goes out in mist-blue
- The picture rewinds: this time all the golden lines stay bright, and the golden dot places short crossbars on the other’s lines until the other has only one path left, and the teal dot glides inevitably to where a golden frame awaits it
How the principle shows up in practice
The Barmen Theological Declaration
In 1934, the Confessing Church binds itself to Christ alone and so draws a line against the grasp of the Nazi state.
Microsoft, IBM
In 1980, Microsoft licenses its operating system to IBM but keeps the right to sell it to others as well, laying the foundation for its rise.
Prince Harry, Meghan Markle
In 2020, the couple give up their role as working royals and in return gain the freedom to live independently.
Which paths are you keeping open?
Get your profile across all 12 groups in about 10 to 15 minutes.
Start the Strategy CheckGroup 5: Position and Space
Guiding question: Where do you stand, and how much room do you have to move?
Stage 2 of 5: Understand the situation
- Anchor principle of the group
Room to maneuver is the core of position and space: terrain, interior lines, defense and maneuver are ways of gaining or securing it.
The other 5 principles in the group build on it.
- TraditionIndirect Strategy and Maneuver
Basil Henry Liddell Hart, John Richard Boyd, Edward N. Luttwak, André Beaufre
- Related principles
Where the 92 principles come from: eight traditions of strategy, from classical war theory to dealing with uncertainty.
More about the originBackground: WEGVISOR’s own selection from the strategy literature · More about the origin
