1

2

Praise for Adaptability

"[T]he author's ingenious approach makes it useful in all endeavors… This

enlightening motivational tool helps the individual determine where a problem

exists and how to fix it… Backed by solid research and references, McKeown

provides a common-sense guide to adapting beyond the point of mere

survival." -- Julia Ann Charpentier, ForeWord Reviews

"...[G]rounded in diverse, concrete examples, McKeown's advice is germane

enough to appeal to anyone stuck in a rut--from entrepreneurs to established

companies." --Publishers Weekly

"McKeown's primary objective in this book is to help his reader to understand

when, how, and why to adapt "faster and smarter than the [given] situation

changes." …McKeown provides an abundance of information, insights, and

counsel. …[he] is well-aware of the importance of survival to countless

individuals as well as to countless organizations and even countries throughout

the world. However, his hope -- one that I share -- is that those who read this

book will aspire to accomplishing more, much more than survival." - Robert

Morris, First Friday Book Synopsis, ffbsccn.wordpress.com

"I loved the examples…Without a doubt, yes, I would recommend this book." –

Kris Vockler, Business Zen Blog

"There are many books on strategy, one even written by McKeown,

but Adaptability is different. In Adaptability, McKeown explains why the science

of strategic planning might just give way to the art of reacting…or adapting." –

David Burkus, The Leader Lab

"History is not filled with stories of cultures or companies that managed to hold

the status quo. History is filled with stories about those who dominated and

those that disappeared. Companies need to figure out what being adaptable

means to their organizations and how they use it to dominate. Max Mckeown's

newest book is the road map they need." --Tac Anderson, Vice President, Head

of Digital Strategies, EMEA at Waggener Edstrom

"McKeown offers case studies from companies you know, such as Starbucks,

providing insight into familiar story lines. Some of his other examples aren't as

famous but are just as compelling: He looks at civil war in Liberia, computer

game development and Italian bureaucracy to flesh out his 17 rules …for

adapting and, thus, succeeding. An eager reader can tease out techniques and

ideas for becoming more adaptable, and McKeown offers warm, inspirational

tales that provide general road maps for successful adaptation. Leaders of

companies small or large looking to motivate their employees or themselves will

find value here." – Rolf Dobelli, Author of The Art of Thinking Clearly

3

"...[W]ell written and well executed. The ideas Max McKeown puts forward are

easy to understand. There are mind-blowing examples of individuals and well-

known companies adapting to and transcending new circumstances... A must-

read in a time of uncertainty." --Pam McIlroy, Pamreader

"I am a big fan of Max's writing style. He consistently makes the complicated

simple, the difficult understandable, the philosophical real-world relevant, and

the seemingly ordinary brilliant. He has an easy to read approach, but it took me

a while to get through the book because I found myself spending time

highlighting, underlining, making notes in the margins, and staring off into space

contemplating the ideas presented. Good, good stuff. Adaptation is never easy.

It requires letting go of the known, changing our perception, and jumping into

uncertainty. Max shows us some ways to make the leap in the right direction." --

Broc Edwards, Fool with A Plan

"I really enjoyed it. …this is a great book filled with compelling arguments. I

would definitely recommend you to read it regardless of the size of organisation

you work in." – Gareth Stenson, RedHills.ie

"McKeown, an author, consultant, and speaker on strategy and innovation,

enumerates 17 rules to help individuals and organizations increase their

adaptability in an environment of uncertainty or in a changing situation." --Book

News, Inc.

"Mckeown does a great job in highlighting case studies that support his claims

both from the political and business perspective." --Ingrid Helsingen Warner,

LEIDAR

“To adapt successfully can mean to thrive in a situation or, even better, to

transcend it. "Transcending allows escape from the constraints of the existing

situation and to rise above it” […] Are you brave enough to break the rules?” ~

Emma De Vita, Management Today

“In this book, strategy and innovation expert Max McKeown draws on millions of

years of evolution, and comes up with a practical and strategic set of rules to

take adaption from a coping to a winning strategy. The ability to adapt faster

and smarter than the immediate challenge is what distinguishes adapting to win

from merely adapting to cope. This fast-paced approach to adaptation is what is

required for the times we are living in.” ~ Frank Dillon, The Irish Times

“Adaptability by Max McKeown is a powerful, practical, and inspirational guide to

success in uncertain times. It includes seventeen principles for effective

adaptability. For ease of reading, the author divides the book into three main

parts, each focused on a particular step in the adaptability process. Examples

4

from business, government, sports, military and wider society bring the

principles to life.” ~ Business Book Summaries, Bizsum.com

“In a nutshell Strategy and innovation expert Max McKeown sets out a practical

set of rules that show you how to boost the adaptability of your organisation to

create winning commercial positions. What's right? McKeown explains how to

adapt in business and provides good examples such as the closure by coffee

chain Starbucks of more than 7,000 stores in 2008 so that staff could be

retrained. Verdict The author uses real examples from business, government and

the military to illustrate his thought-provoking points, which results in a

stimulating read.” ~ Director Magazine

“Adaptability is a must-have leadership trait. Rather than seeking to maintain

the status quo during difficult times, the new book Adaptability by Max McKeown

argues that successful organisations understand the value of responding to

turbulence. Adaptability is ultimately about "looking reality in the face" and

responding with experimentation rather than trying to avoid challenges.” ~

Management Blog, http://www.managementblog.com.au

5

Adaptability: The Art of Winning in an Age of

Uncertainty

Max Mckeown

6

Table of Contents

17 Powerful Rules of (High) Adaptability ....................................................... 7

Part I - Recognise Need To Adapt ............................................................... 12

Rule #1. Play Your Own Game ............................................................ 14

Rule #2. All Success is Successful Adaptation ........................................ 22

Rule #3. Stability is Dangerous Illusion ................................................ 28

Rule #4. Stupid Survives Until Smart Succeeds ..................................... 41

Rule #5. Embrace Unacceptable Wisdom .............................................. 49

Rule #6. Create (Better) Rules. ........................................................... 57

Part II - Understand Necessary Adaptation .................................................. 66

Rule #7. Learning Fast Better Than Fast Failure .................................... 68

Rule #8. Plan B Matters Most .............................................................. 74

Rule #9. Free (Creative) Radicals ........................................................ 83

Rule #10. Think Better Together ........................................................ 89

Rule #11. Get a Kick-Ass Partner ........................................................ 99

Part III - Adapt As Necessary .................................................................. 104

Rule #12. Never Grow Up ................................................................ 106

Rule #13. Hierarchy is Fossil Fuel ..................................................... 109

Rule #14. Keep the Ball ................................................................... 114

Rule #15. Swerve & Swarm ............................................................. 118

Rule #16. Get Your Ambition On ....................................................... 127

Rule #17. Always The Beginning....................................................... 136

Final Words ........................................................................................... 145

Acknowledgements ................................................................................ 148

References ............................................................................................ 149

Index ................................................................................................... 167

7

17 Powerful Rules of (High) Adaptability

“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most

intelligent that survives. It is the one most adaptable to change.” ~

Darwin

We are all capable of high adaptability. Somewhere between

confidence-sapping uncertainty and reality-denying certainty is

opportunity often revealed by unwelcome adversity and the welcome life-

long ability to recognise, understand and adapt.

Our social world is made and remade by human choice. Most people want

a better future, to do something meaningful, to feel they have lived. Many

people want (to be free) to be smarter and suspect there is a difference

between adapting to win and adapting to survive. The good news is that

high adaptability is a talent that can be developed.

If you don’t like playing the old rules you need to powerful new rules and

part of changing the rules of day-to-day living is the belief that the rules

of life can be improved.

Individuals working in high adaptability cultures – or HACKs - can imagine

and create better futures. They adapt circumstance, shaping events to

their will. High adaptability individuals learn that while surviving needs

blood, sweat and tears, transcending requires blood, sweat and better

ideas.

To be human is to try and shape the future and to deliberately adapt

must find out how some people start from a losing position and end up

winning? How do people turn failure into success? What are the rules of

(high) adaptability? And how can we adapt for success?

3 Step Model of High Adaptability

An organization that can deliberately, methodically, even joyously renew

itself has a high adaptability killer culture – or HACK - such a culture will

naturally replace its own products and services by finding better

alternatives. This culture encourages High Adaptability, high achievement

people – or HAHAs – to get stronger when faced with crisis. These people

respond to threats and opportunity at speed with intelligence and

imagination to self-heal and transcend.

8

Depending on the nature of the problem or opportunity, the 3 steps of

deliberate adaptation can involve huge effort or very little. Time is central

to adaptability so that often the difference between success and failure is

how quickly we recognise the need for change and how deeply we

understand – and do – what is necessary. By learning their way through

the steps, Low Adaptability, Low Achievement people – or LALAs – can

transform themselves into HAHAs.

Step 1: Recognise need for adaptation. If no one recognises a need or

opportunity to adapt there can be no deliberate attempt to adapt. It’s

possible that someone will accidentally improve the situation, yet this

cannot be relied upon. Luck is the best of all tools but even luck is helped

by a clear desire to improve something. Some people are so busy (being

busy) that they spend huge amounts of effort doing exactly the wrong

thing or pouring blood, sweat and tears into a counterproductive system

where they would be better to working to improve the system in which

they work.

Step 2: Understand adaptation required. Recognising the need for

adaptation is a good start, but there are many people, and whole nations,

that recognise problems without knowing what to do about them. They

worry about the need to make changes. They may want something

different but not know how to get what they want. So they fail. It’s

important to look beyond acceptable wisdom – that isn’t working – to

unacceptable wisdom that may work in the future.

Step 3: Necessary adaptation is made. It’s entirely possible to know

that you should be making changes to solve some problem or grab hold

or some great opportunity, without doing anything to change. It’s fairly

common for people to know what is necessary and still not do what it

takes. So that the greatest plans and most urgent needs are never used.

High adaptability groups are able to rapidly move from understanding to

making the necessary changes because they have deeply embedded a

habit of collaborative thinking-learning-doing habit. They expect

circumstances to change, and that they will exuberantly, and relentless,

seek to improve their situation.

There’s detail and work in each step, and they don’t suggest solving

tough problems is always easy. Yet the effort required to cope is not

necessarily any greater than the effort to thrive, or transcend. The

difference is small and often the difference is imagination which allows us

to recognise a problem while there is still time to solve it.

9

We could pretend our world is easily separated into controllable parts but

this disguises the messy, interconnected and ambiguous reality –the

world is complex and woven together. Changes in one place lead to

consequences elsewhere. Infection from bats in China spreads to London

while financial meltdown in the USA spreads worldwide. Strictly-for fun

social networks in democracies become perfect-for-revolution enablers for

social change in dictatorships.

One advantage of accepting complexity is that it allows us to better

understand the reality of how one thing leads to another. More

importantly, it should warn against pretending to control the

uncontrollable while encouraging us to adapt the adaptable by applying

our efforts to the three step model of high adaptability.

Beyond Survival: Four Levels of Adaptation

There are four levels of adaptation all of which may be deliberate or non-

deliberate, successful or unsuccessful. Some adaptations lead to failure

for the entire group, others allow people to survive but leave most of

them miserable. There are adaptations that improve the group’s situation

in a desirable ways and those which transcend the situation and create a

whole new game.

Level 1: Collapsing is the end of the social group. The group

ceases to function. Everyone may abandon the group - as is the

case with mass immigration, defection or resignation. The group

may lack the resources support its obligations. This may take form

of bankruptcy, extinction, anarchy or even death. Enron collapsed,

as did the Soviet Union and Lehman Brothers.

Level 2: Surviving is may be better than collapse because the

group continues to exist. The situation may be miserable and is

certainly not desirable. The majority survive without prosperity,

pride or joy as with K-Mart, Zimbabwe, Greece or limp-along AOL.

Despite success stories, the system is labelled as failing although it

continues to exist. There are bright spots and exceptions but the

system is counterproductive.

Level 3: Thriving is much better that coping because the vast

majority in the group enjoys success. The rewards of daily efforts

are worthwhile and winners outnumber the losers –even those who

lose tend to see where they can improve next time and share in

greater benefits. The system, traditions and culture make good use

of talent and potential so most people are happy enough to take

10

part and often experience satisfaction, progress and pride in their

work. Norway is thriving so are Disney and RedBull –although future

success is not guaranteed.

Level 4: Transcending allows people to escape from the

constraints of the existing situation and rise above it. Their efforts

create a new situation and a new game with new rules and

improved outcomes over the long term. The group has moved from

one way of living or working to a better way. Thriving was good

within the old rules, but transcendence allows more for everyone.

Each technological revolution – such as the agricultural and

industrial - has, in sum, transcended previous standards of living

and allowed more people to achieve better results with less effort.

Each of those revolutions was constructed with many individual

insights, inventions, and innovations which – taken together –

allows the previously impossible to become commonplace from

turning on an electric light to accessing all of humanities knowledge

from a smartphone in your hand.

Social change never ends. Groups move from coping to thriving then to

transcendence many times, and are just as capable of dropping back.

Blackberry was failing when the first edition of this book was published

but - at the time of writing - has enjoyed a wonderful three months.

Marijuana has been legalised for sale in Colorado and Washington but the

US war on drugs continues in Mexico. Egypt was enjoying exhilarating

revolution and has since endured a torrid crackdown on freedom.

The future is made today. It is always the beginning no matter how many

times you have failed or succeeded. The trick is to know how to redirect

energy locked into failing ways of working and focus them on creating

better systems that unlock talent and well-being.

11

12

Part I - Recognise Need To Adapt

“All fixed set patterns are incapable of adaptability or pliability. The truth

is outside of all fixed patterns.” ~ Bruce Lee

For the foreseeable future, the future will be unforeseeable. You can be

fairly certain that there will be uncertainty. You can be confident that

events will overtake your plans, and that the actions of others will require

response. And you can be pretty sure that if you don’t recognise the need

to adapt, then it’s difficult to make any changes.

“We didn’t adapt fast enough” is a common enough explanation for the

poor performance and disastrous leadership of many organizations. It’s

been used by politicians to explain the opportunities lost through years of

war that create more problems than they solve. Adapting too slowly can

be damaging or fatal. Not recognising the need slows adaptation.

“We got it wrong” is less popular but just as relevant. People can move

rapidly but in the wrong direction. Groups can act quickly but make the

wrong changes leading to the opposite of what was intended. The ability

to recognise the mistake and adjust direction is valuable, not just once

but as often as necessary to move towards a more desirable place.

People, particularly in groups, can end up confused about what to do next

for the best. People can split up into factions and fight over various flawed

route maps. They can also sit complacent about the future because they

are unaware of the changes around them, the changes coming. When

change arrives that contradicts the experience of the group they may be

left in a state of bewilderment, unsure and uncertain.

The most successful adaptors are curious. They understand that stability

is a dangerous illusion, and reach beyond the limits of what is to what

may be, both good and bad. They reach out beyond the obvious questions

to non-obvious answers, and are willing to embrace unacceptable wisdom

as a way of increasing the options available. They do not simply accept

the choices they are given but actively seek better choices. New choices.

If you’re not curious, you have fewer options when a familiar situation

changes. As Virginia Rometty, the new CEO of IBM put it; you may only

be one mistake from irrelevance. Not if the mistake is small or temporary,

but certainly if the mistake changes direction of the group in way that

compounds the nature of the mistake then survival may be threatened.

13

The true mother of invention is curiosity. We may use the ideas of others

because we need them, but new understanding does not arrive simply

when needed. If it did, people in tough situations would always find a way

to overcome them through ingenuity, but they don’t. It is entirely possible

for an individual, group, or nation to try nothing new in response to

enduring responses. Necessity does not guarantee adaptation.

14

Rule #1. Play Your Own Game

If you are getting whipped playing by the existing rules, get used

to losing or change the game. If you can’t succeed by standing

and fighting then run and hide. If you can’t succeed by being big,

be small. If you can’t succeed by being small, be big. The first rule

of adapting is that there is no one way to succeed. It is possible,

desirable, to find better games, better ways to succeed. For this

we need high adaptability individuals and cultures.

In 2011, Tiger Woods slipped to number 58 in the world golf rankings.

This was his lowest ranking since the first months of his professional

career that began in 1996 at only 20 years old and led to him reaching

No. 1 after only 10 months – the fastest ascent to the top spot in history.

Tiger was so dominant that there were rumours that rivals pressured

tournament directors into redesigning courses in an attempt to make

them tiger-proof. The focus was on his ability to hit the ball further than

other players, his demi-god physique and his billion dollar earnings.

The problems came when allegations, and then details, about his private

life emerged in 2009 culminating in a much-publicised car crash outside

his home on thanksgiving night and whirling speculation about whether or

not his wife had chased him with a golf club after some of her suspicions

were confirmed. After that there were denials, admissions, public tiger-

style apologies and abandonment by several lucrative brands. His mother

stuck by him as did Nike.

My focus here is not what he did or did not do before the trouble began

but how he was able to regain his form after losing it when overwhelmed

by a social situation that had become toxic. If the environment had no

impact, he would have continued to win but he didn’t. He was confronted

by hostility from the media, his face on the cover of tabloids for three

weeks running, criticism from some of his fellow players, and, what

certainly looked like, a painful breakup of his marriage. What is most

valuable to students of adaptability is to understand how he didn’t keep

falling and why he was able to recover, and succeed again. He found a

way of winning his own game, he found another way. By March 2013, he

was once again the world No. 1.

People who can renew themselves, as Tiger did, are said, by

psychologists, to possess the characteristic of resilience. In my work,

15

they are termed high adaptability, high achievement individuals -

sometimes referred to with the acronym HAHA in a tongue-in-cheek way

because they laugh in the face of uncertainty – who are able to regroup

quickly when attacked by circumstances so that being overwhelmed is

temporary, part of a process of positive transformation, rather than a

permanent negative condition. They are open to experiences, even

seemingly bad experiences, so they can keep learning, even from the

worst times. They don’t merely cope, they want to transcend.

When something unforeseen happens, these people feel that they can find

a solution. They view their personal problems as solvable, look for good

news even on bad days, and believe that they can accomplish their goals.

They are typically able to reach out to other people, making new friends

and getting the help they need to feel optimistic and find answers. These

characteristics have been shown by Dr. Oddgeir Friborg, a psychologist at

the University of Tromso in Norway, to be strongly linked to well-being,

healthy adjustment because, it seems, they help people adapt

successfully.

As a child, Tiger was already of media interest as the toddler drove balls

on the range aged only two-years –old in way that has been argued to be

about early specialisation. Yet, it has been pointed out that his coach,

Rudy Duran, encouraged him to “play golf first rather than to teach him

to hit a ball” and “guided him” rather than merely developing the

technical side of his swing. This style of coaching emphasised the ability

to find a way of adapting to win, where a blend of imagination,

observation and determination is needed.

After the Wenchuan earthquake, which killed 68,000 people in central

China, there were perhaps 11 million people left homeless. Over 42, 000

aftershocks continued to damage buildings for months after and the initial

8 shock caused office buildings to sway 1000 miles away in Shanghai and

Beijing. Sometime after, researchers identified what they described as a

psychological typhoon’s eye where those who had managed to survive in

the worst of the devastation had higher levels of resilience. They had

adapted to live and then more effectively adapted to what they had lost

and what they had still to win.

It appears that some individuals and groups can experience the same

traumatic events without suffering traumatic disorders. In a study after

the 9/11 attacks it was found that 40% of people were able to adjust

effectively despite being exposed to a greater degree to death and

violence. Similar findings have emerged from decades of research into

16

why some students thrive in the face what appears to be impossible

adversity.

Researchers discovered that the most successful adaptors were different

to those who had not succeeded but, surprisingly, that successful

adaptation was more common than they had expected. They found that

the ability to adapt is innate, that this extraordinary ability is ordinary and

can be accessed given the right prompts and support. Successful

adaptability is a skill that can be developed – and more than anything it is

based on belief in our own ability to adapt. The magic of successful

adaptation is often practical faith in self.

The main difference isn’t general intelligence but adaptive intelligence –

the ability to recognise, understand and change as necessary. In

Afghanistan, recent research has shown high adaptability, high

achievement people pursue entrepreneurial goals but only if they “believe

in their entrepreneurial abilities” and are able to “grow from adversity”.

They transform the input of adversity into the output of adaptive success.

More women than men appear to start businesses, and are able to

willingly take the risks involved in leaving the home in a time of

dangerous security problem rather than stay in the home constrained by

cultural traditions. Somehow, rather like those living at the centre of the

Wenchuan earthquake, they grew stronger by living with danger. Instead

of worrying about what might happen, or might have happened, they felt

invigorated by situations outside of their control. The rules had become

fluid and could be improved.

Afghan entrepreneurs, recognise the continued violence, corruption,

power cuts and lack of basic infrastructure and so have creatively adapted

the way they do business. They have moved to vertical integration, doing

more within their own organizations to avoid external corruption, moved

from producing to trading, and build solutions to overcome infrastructure

shortcomings; and they have found partnerships that protect and extend

their local capabilities. High adaptability, high achievement individuals

have rejected the limits of the situation and transcend those limits by

building high adaptability organizations.

Crisis, adversity, trauma, opposition; these difficulties can drive people

past breaking point or push people over, what we can call, the making

point. Some high adaptability is personality, but much of personality is

behaviour while the majority of behaviour is response to experience.

Eldrick Tont “Tiger” Woods was taught repeatedly by his parents that he

17

could begin again. His belief that he could always start afresh and

overcome is consistent with findings about high adaptability and a key

reason he was able to win once more.

The Ancient Greek poets described the monstrous Hydra with more heads

than the vase-painters could paint. Worse, for attackers, for each head

cut off, the Hydra grew back two more.

The Hydra was eventually defeated by Hercules with the help of his

nephew, Iolaus, who stopped the new heads growing by holding a torch

to the headless tendons of the neck. It then became simpler to work his

way through each of the mortal heads until, with a mighty swing he

decapitated the final, immortal head.

This mythical encounter illustrates an ongoing struggle between different

approaches to the art of winning. The Hydra seeks to replace heads

quicker than they can be destroyed. It attempts to defends it's center at

the cost of temporary damage while defeating it's enemy by moving

rapidly and powerfully. Instead of one giant head, it has nine. Instead of

heavy defenses, the Hydra substitutes speed.

Any attacker would be initially confused because the behaviour is so

unexpected and works against the strength of the attack. Any seeming

success increases the strength of the enemy. It is a strategic adaptation

that weakens the side expending the most effort. Physical resources are

wasted with every attack while mental reserves are depleted with every

renewal.

An example of this hydra problem faced the US strategy, or military

doctrine, known as "shock and awe". It was formally introduced to the

lexicon in 1996 by the National Defense University. Its authors, Harlan

Ullman and James Wade were generous in their praise for both the US

military and their ability to achieve rapid dominance:

"It is, of course, clear that U.S. military forces are currently the most

capable in the world and are likely to remain so for a long time to come

[...] We seek to determine whether and how Shock and Awe can become

sufficiently intimidating and compelling factors to force or convince an

adversary to accept our will [...] Total mastery achieved at extraordinary

speed and across tactical, strategic, and political levels will destroy the

will to resist."

Shock and Awe became more widely known by the public during the 2003

invasion of Iraq when used to by US officials to describe their overarching

18

strategy. The idea was that dropping enough precision bombs

would destroy the chain of command and demoralize Iraqi forces, who

would then surrender. In turn, ground forces would be warmly welcomed

by Iraq citizens who would form a stable, USA loving democracy.

On Friday 21st March 2003, the main attack began. Over 1700 bombing

missions were carried out with over 500 using cruise missiles. Two weeks

later ground forces seized Baghdad. Three weeks later the US declared

victory. And on 1 May, President George W. Bush landed a jet onto an

aircraft carrier and, under a giant banner, declared "mission

accomplished".

At first, to some, it seemed shock and awe had worked. The Washington

Post published an interview, April 27, with Iraqi soldiers who said they

stopped resisting because "it wasn't a war, it was suicide". Yet, in truth,

resistance had not stopped, it had simply adapted to the impossibility of

winning the war by US rules.

Play your winning game is an important adaptability principle. Adapting

to win is more than simply coping. You may choose to minimize losses or

save face but only as part of a winning adaptation. Surviving becomes

one of several moves towards a winning position rather than the game

itself.

Over 375,000 soldiers became unemployed on May 23, following Coalition

Provisional Authority Order Number 2 issued by U.S. Administrator of Iraq

Paul Bremer. It was assumed there would be little violent resistance so

that a new army of 40,000 new soldiers, trained by US corporations could

replace them - in time.

The traditional stand-and-fight army melted away and became something

else, something better adapted to the situation. The insurgency - as it

was labelled in the west - was a combination of armed Iraqi citizens,

foreign fighters, and members of the newly disbanded Iraqi army.

Even worse, action and inaction encouraged the recruitment of new

fighters. Actions included deaths of Iraqis as a result of the invasion with

estimates ranging from 150,000 to around 600,000, as well as abuses

such as those at the Abu Ghraib prison.

Even if it is the lower of the two estimates for a country of 30 million

people such a loss did little to inspire support or warmth. Inaction

included the damage to infrastructure and institutions that left people

unable to build lives or livelihoods.

19

The following is an illustration from three years after the invasion of the

frustration that provides the background to resistance.

"Irritation grows as residents deprived of air-conditioning and running

water three years after the US-led invasion watch the massive US

Embassy they call “George W’s palace” rising from the banks of the

Tigris. The diplomatic outpost will be visible from space and cover an area

that is larger than the Vatican city and big enough to accommodate four

Millennium Domes."

Forces of violent resistance were supported by a majority of Iraqis who

wanted to be rid of what was seen as an occupying, colonial army. This

level of public support further multiplies the motivation of individuals

involved in the resistance and increases their effectiveness in resistance.

There were 139 American Deaths from the invasion starting to President

Bush declaring 'Mission Accomplished' and more than 4335 since that

date. The point is not that Iraqi resistance has defeated the US army. The

point is that despite huge numbers of Iraqi deaths and over $800 billion

spent on the War, the US army has not found a strategy to disarm or

defeat the Iraqi resistance.

Multiply to Overcome If the other side of a strategic game decides to

disperse, fragment, and divide to multiply then it becomes harder to

defeat. It's a form of swarming. And in practical terms final victory is

denied as long as even one invisible, hard-to-find, motivated player

continues to play.

The adaptation of strategy of resistance to US forces was very rapid as

the disappearance of the official Iraqi army. In contrast, adaptation of the

US strategy was excruciatingly, dangerously slow.

The guiding assumptions of the US strategy in Iraq were wrong and this

was noticed almost immediately. Yet the US strategy, and accompanying

military response, remained stupidly slow. It was clear to some inside and

outside US chain of command that the approach needed to change quickly

but it did not. Understanding how the adaptive response was delayed

provides valuable insights into what slows down or speed up adaptability.

One argument put forward is that the USA had to learn how to deal with a

new set of problems. The army had to learn on the ground, while being

attacked, what it could not learn before it invaded. They had to learn from

experimentation what eventually, through repeated trial and error, was a

workable strategic adaptation.

20

As Tim Harford argues, in his excellent book Adapt:

"Strategic errors are common in war. This wasn't just about going into

Iraq with the wrong strategy. It was a failure - worse, a refusal - to

adapt."

If we want to understand more about adaptability, we want to understand

why what was already known was not used more rapidly. We want to

know why what was learned was not put into practice. What was delaying

the kind of adaptability that would have helped? Why did they refuse to

adapt? And what does that tell us about the art of winning?

The US military had already experienced the limitations of decisive force

and the unwinnable nature of guerrilla style resistance. Vietnam provided

warnings. Those warnings had been documented, they had been made

into movies, they were part of the American cultural heritage.

Likewise, the experience of the USSR in Afghanistan was a bloody case

study of resistance and humiliating, costly defeat. The USA was the

foreign power who helped, they should have known the potential for

failure. It's CIA had provided guidance and training, while it's government

had seen the deadly effectiveness of small groups of motivated, invisible

resistance.

It is true that every situation is different in some way. It is true that even

where a situation is similar the people are different and have to learn for

themselves the practicalities of lessons already learned. But it is also true

that even after the ground experience showed them what didn't work that

deficiencies stopped them being open to what might work.

Estimated Time to Adapt is the gap between the situation changing and

an organization adapting to those changes. Sometimes it is a threat to

the way things are that demands corresponding strategic adaptability.

Other times, changes present new opportunities that require adaptation

before they can be grasped. In both cases, changes must be recognized,

nature of change understood, and the changes made in time to engineer

a winning scenario.

Time to adapt can be slowed at any stage of necessary learning and

action based on new understanding. This delay can be based either on

ignorance of the facts, or of what the facts mean. It may also be based on

a form of self-interest. People ignore what is happening to gain some

other benefit. It is entirely possible for self-interest to lead to ignorance

and for ignorance to lead to self-interest.

21

Individuals suffer from ignorance or self-interest which may negatively

impact their organizations. Organizations also experience collective

denial. Individuals know what is really happening yet are unable to speak

the truth clearly or powerfully enough to bring the organization to change

its chosen strategy or actions.

This disconnection, or gap, between what is happening and what prompts

the organization to adapt creates a reality distortion field that slows any

attempt at action.

If you can't see the problem you can't respond to the problem. If you

can't mention the problem, you can't discuss the problem. And while

you're failing to adapt, for reasons of tradition, ignorance or self-interest,

your opponent’s adaptation whether in war, business, or politics, will

continue to succeed.

22

Rule #2. All Success is Successful Adaptation

In 2011, on the Fortune list of most admired companies, UPS was

first among the ten contenders in the parcel delivery industry. It

was given an average score of 7.42 out of 10 for its overall

performance while the US Postal Service (USPS) scored only 3.89.

In other words, USP – an American headquartered delivery

service - was considered twice as impressive as the USPS – also

an American headquartered delivery service. What explains the

difference?

One argument is that being owned by government stops the USPS from

doing a good job. It is difficult to adapt because there are legal

obligations to provide what is termed the universal service obligation. The

agency has to provide everyone, everywhere with a post service at

affordable prices whether or not they can provide those services at a

profit.

In return, it was granted what was more-or-less a monopoly at the time it

was set-up in 1775. The idea was that the USPS would cover their costs

because everyone had to use the service. The situation has changed, with

competitor but the USPS has not adapted to it. And one reason for this

lack of adaptability is that external regulations don’t allow adaptation.

Another is that two hundred years of history has encouraged a culture

that adapted too well to its perceived constraints. Some of this inability to

adapt may be enshrined in union behaviour while just as much seems to

be found in management and government behaviour.

If you find a system that is failing, then you have also found a system

that is failing to adapt. You need to discover first, what adaptations are

needed for the system to succeed. Second, you should understand what

has stopped the system from adapting successfully. And third, you should

find out how to free the people in the system to make the necessary

adaptations.

In practice, the three steps are related. Usually, the people in the system

know what is wrong with the system. If you reach out to them they are

the fastest way of pinpointing the problems. This approach has the

additional benefit of engaging with the people who do the job. The people

in management positions may have to make the biggest changes for

organizational adaptation to work. Part of that process is placing the