Strategy
Blog
DEENES
  1. Home
  2. Principles
  3. Friction
18Principle · Group 3

Friction

Clausewitzian friction in business

“As soon as a plan meets reality, many small disruptions add up to great resistance; that is why wise planners build in reserves of time, money and strength and keep processes as simple as possible.”

Friction is the resistance between plan and reality. On paper, every plan looks doable: the steps are clear, the timing worked out, the responsibilities assigned.

Group 3: Knowledge, Uncertainty and LeadershipT1 Classical Theory of War
Go to the in-depth section ↓
Golden and teal circles mesh like a chain along a clear line and turn gently. Then, one after another, small mist-blue dots drop between the circles; each slows things down only a little, until the chain almost stops. In the second pass, the chain has fewer circles with more space between them and a golden rim; the same dots drop, and the circles turn more slowly but keep going.
In short

As soon as a plan meets reality, many small disruptions add up to great resistance; that is why wise planners build in reserves of time, money and strength and keep processes as simple as possible.

What it’s about: Friction is the resistance between plan and reality. On paper, every plan looks doable: the steps are clear, the timing worked out, the responsibilities assigned. In reality, every person involved, every piece of equipment and every handover brings its own small disruption. Taken one by one, these disruptions are harmless. Together they bring a plan to a halt.

In depth

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
In essence

Plans rarely fail because of one big mistake, but because of the sum of many small ones.

It does not say
That every failure is friction. If you deliberately set costs too low to push a project through, you are deceiving people.
It does not say
That more reserve is always better. Buffers that are too large make you sluggish; the principle calls for a sense of proportion.
It also says
After a setback, looking for the one person to blame does little good. You have to understand the sum of the causes.
The explanationThe disruptions don’t just add up; they reinforce one another.
  • The disruptions don’t just add up; they reinforce one another.
  • One delay uses up reserves that are then missing for the next.
  • A misunderstanding at a handover goes unnoticed because everyone assumes the other person checked.
  • You cannot abolish friction.
  • You can plan room for it, simplify processes and practice.
The question

Where is your plan scheduled so tightly that the very first small disruption will knock it over?

The signs3 signs when you heed it · 3 when you overlook it
When you heed it
  • Your schedules contain explicit buffers.
  • Processes have few handovers, and whoever hands something over checks that it has arrived.
  • After setbacks, you ask which small things came together.
When you overlook it
  • Plans are scheduled so tightly that there is no room for any disruption.
  • Reserves are cut as waste.
  • Warnings get lost because they don’t arrive in the prescribed form.
The backgroundTradition T1 Classical Theory of War
  1. 1832
    OriginCarl von Clausewitz

    On War

  2. 1979
    SupplementedDaniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky

    Intuitive Prediction: Biases and Corrective Procedures

  3. 1996
    SupplementedBarry D. Watts

    Clausewitzian Friction and Future War

  4. 2002
    SupplementedBent Flyvbjerg, Mette Skamris Holm and Søren Buhl

    Underestimating Costs in Public Works Projects: Error or Lie?

  5. 2003
    SupplementedBent Flyvbjerg, Nils Bruzelius and Werner Rothengatter

    Megaprojects and Risk

  6. Tradition T1
    TraditionClassical Theory of War

    Carl von Clausewitz, Antoine-Henri Jomini, Helmuth von Moltke the Elder, Frederick William Lanchester

    See the tradition on the Origin page
Read more: the full background

From Clausewitz’s “On War” (1832), Book I, Chapter 7, supplemented by Barry D. Watts’s work, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky’s planning fallacy and Bent Flyvbjerg’s research on major projects.

The research5 sources: 2 theories, 1 classic, 1 review, 1 primary study · 1832–2003 · with limitations of the research
5 sources1832–2003 period2 theories1 classic1 primary study1 review
Strength of evidence
  1. weak
  2. moderate
  3. strong

That projects regularly take longer and cost more than planned is well documented; that reserves and simplicity help against this is an inference.

  1. 1832
    Classic
    Carl von Clausewitz

    “On War” (in German), Book I, Chapter 7, “Friction in War”: Everything is very simple, but the simplest thing is difficult; Chapter 8 names habituation to war as the easing force.

  2. 1979
    Theory
    Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky

    “Intuitive Prediction: Biases and Corrective Procedures”: Planners regularly underestimate the duration and cost of their projects.

  3. 1996
    Theory
    Barry D. Watts

    “Clausewitzian Friction and Future War” (McNair Paper 52): Friction is a built-in feature of combat; new technology does not eliminate it.

  4. 2002
    Primary study
    Bent Flyvbjerg, Mette Skamris Holm and Søren Buhl

    “Underestimating Costs in Public Works Projects: Error or Lie?”: The costs of public construction projects are often deliberately set too low.

  5. 2003
    Review
    Bent Flyvbjerg, Nils Bruzelius and Werner Rothengatter

    “Megaprojects and Risk”: Major projects worldwide regularly overrun their budgets and schedules.

Where the research reaches its limits
  • Not every failure is friction: where costs are deliberately lowballed to push a project through, that is deception.
  • If you call every problem friction, you also excuse avoidable planning errors.
  • It is this page, not the research itself, that links Carl von Clausewitz’s friction to the planning fallacy.
Read more: what research shows

Carl von Clausewitz coined the term in the seventh chapter of the first book of “On War.” In war, he writes, everything is very simple, but the simplest thing is difficult; friction is the concept that distinguishes real war from war on paper. In the following chapter, he names habituation to war, meaning experience and practice, as the force that eases it. In 1996, Barry D. Watts showed that modern technology does not eliminate friction either; he describes it as a built-in feature of all combat. In 1979, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky described the planning fallacy: people regularly underestimate how long their projects will take and how much they will cost. Bent Flyvbjerg and his colleagues have documented this for major projects worldwide. That reserves and simple processes absorb friction follows from this, but these studies do not measure it specifically.

The related principles12 Reserve · 19 Fog of Uncertainty · 21 Plan and Adaptation · 24 Simplicity
ReserveSimplicity

To go deeper, see 12 Reserve (the buffer that friction eats up) and 24 Simplicity (simple plans give it less to grab onto)

Plan and Adaptation

21 Plan and Adaptation shows how you respond when it overtakes the plan

Fog of Uncertainty

19 Fog of Uncertainty complements it: the fog describes missing knowledge, friction the grinding difficulty of acting

Read more: the full text

To go deeper, see 12 Reserve (the buffer that friction eats up) and 24 Simplicity (simple plans give it less to grab onto); 21 Plan and Adaptation shows how you respond when it overtakes the plan. 19 Fog of Uncertainty complements it: the fog describes missing knowledge, friction the grinding difficulty of acting.

The action steps5 things you can actually do

  1. For every major undertaking, plan a visible reserve of time, money and strength, and justify it instead of hiding it.

  2. Cut steps and handovers wherever you can: every handover is a point where something can get lost.

  3. Have critical processes rehearsed before it counts.

  4. Set up a simple channel through which warnings reach you, even if they don’t fit any form.

  5. After a setback, don’t ask “Who did it?” but “What came together?” Then change the process.

The reflection questions3 questions: Which of your plans has not a single hour of buffer?
  1. Which of your plans has not a single hour of buffer?
  2. At which handover in your area does something regularly get lost?
  3. When did you last look for someone to blame after a setback instead of the sum of the causes?

Take your time with one question. Write down your answer – or talk it over with someone you trust.

To finish
The picture to rememberThe animation once more, with an explanation
  1. Golden and teal circles mesh like a chain along a clear line and turn gently
  2. Then, one after another, small mist-blue dots drop between the circles
  3. Each slows things down only a little, until the chain almost stops
  4. In the second pass, the chain has fewer circles with more space between them and a golden rim
  5. The same dots drop, and the circles turn more slowly but keep going
Strategy Check

Where does your plan lack a buffer?

Get your profile across all 12 groups in about 10 to 15 minutes.

Start the Strategy Check
In context

Group 3: Knowledge, Uncertainty and Leadership

Guiding question: What do you know, and how do you lead when you don’t know?

Stage 2 of 5: Understand the situation

Where the 92 principles come from: eight traditions of strategy, from classical war theory to dealing with uncertainty.

More about the origin

Background: WEGVISOR’s own selection from the strategy literature · More about the origin

Examples

The principle in practice

From the different spheres of society.

Education

The Mars Climate Orbiter and Friction

In September 1999, NASA loses its Mars Climate Orbiter probe because two teams calculate in different units of measurement. The error is small, the warning signs are there, and yet no one catches it. This is exactly how Carl von Clausewitz describes friction.

Friction
Culture & SportsGovernment

The Elbphilharmonie and Friction

The Elbphilharmonie concert hall in Hamburg was supposed to open in 2010 and cost the city €77 million. It opened in January 2017, with total costs of around €866 million. Unfinished plans, unclear responsibilities and many small points of dispute added up to seven years of delay.

Friction
Government

Operation Eagle Claw and Friction

In April 1980, U.S. special forces try to free the hostages held at the embassy in Tehran. A sandstorm, a warning light and a broken hydraulic system bring the plan to a halt before it has really begun. Eight servicemen die during the withdrawal.

Friction
Culture & Sports

Movie: Lost in La Mancha

The documentary “Lost in La Mancha” (2002) was meant to show Terry Gilliam shooting his dream film about Don Quixote. Instead, it shows how the project fell apart within about a week in 2000: because of aircraft noise, hail, a flash flood and the lead actor’s back.

Friction
FAQ

Questions about Friction

What does the principle of Friction say?

In practice, even simple plans grind to a halt because of many small disruptions. If you plan wisely, you expect this and build in reserves of time, money and strength.

Where does the principle come from?

From Carl von Clausewitz, who describes it in “On War” (1832), Book I, Chapter 7. That is where the sentence appears: “Everything in war is very simple, but the simplest thing is difficult.”

What examples are there?

The loss of the Mars Climate Orbiter in 1999, the delayed Elbphilharmonie concert hall and the failed Operation Eagle Claw in 1980. Then there is the documentary “Lost in La Mancha.”

How well is Friction supported by research?

Evidence: moderate – that projects regularly take longer and cost more than planned is well documented; that reserves and simplicity help against this is an inference.

Your next step

Make strategy effective – together with WEGVISOR

Reading changes how you think. Applying changes your results. Choose how you want to continue.

Request Strategy Coaching

We will get back to you personally.

You came from: Friction.