Is Sun Tzu Still Relevant Today? - Sun Tzu's Art Of ... Business Part 6

[Music] Back in season 4 we spoke about Sun Zoo and the art of war and I gave an overview about the book of why it's relevant to today. We had a lot of comments and feedback that asked if we could do more of a deep dives. I've decided let's do a mini series that looks at the book in more detail. Hello and welcome back to all your leaders and strategy, I'm Mike Harris and welcome to another episode of our mini series Sun Zoo and the Art of War. Now this episode is going to be something slightly different. It's in front you and it's come about because of a comment that was made to me by somebody who watches the podcast recently and what they said to me was I'm enjoying the art of war series but it just doesn't connect. I really don't get it. So I thought this week we would look at why the art of war doesn't work in 2026. The art of war is one of the most quoted strategy books in business. You hear it everywhere in boardrooms, podcasts, linked in post leadership conversations but here's an uncomfortable truth for most modern business leaders it doesn't actually work and in many cases they don't even like it because when people hear the art of war they think outdated, confrontational, aggressive and let's be honest it sounds very masculine in its tone. It sounds like domination, conflict and power over others which feels completely at odds with modern leadership, collaboration and how businesses actually operate today. So the question is has the art of war stopped working or have we misunderstood it completely? So let's start here because this is rarely said the art of war has a branding problem. The language is about enemies, about deception, about conflict and about control and from a lot of modern leaders especially in collaborative environments people first organization and diverse leadership teams it just feels wrong because leadership today is about trust, alignment, purpose and shared outcomes. It's not about crushing opponents manipulating perceptions or dominating situations and this matters more than people think because it's something feels wrong. Leaders won't engage with it deeply they'll either reject it or use it superficially and of course business isn't war so we've then got a structural issue, war is zero sub destructive short term, business isn't, it's relationship driven long term and value creating. In fact critics highlight the war is fundamentally about destroying or redistributing value whereas businesses about creating it. So when leaders try to apply war thinking directly they create tension reality you don't build partnerships trust or reputation by treating everything as a battlefield. So there's obviously a misinterpretation problem and this is where it gets interesting. The art of war isn't actually about aggression, it's about avoidance, efficiency, control of conditions but most people interpret it as how do I beat the competition which is actually the exact opposite of what sons are intended. Take deception for example in war short term one-off conflict no ongoing relationship. In business reputation matters, trust commands, relationships are continuous which is why applying deception literally doesn't translate well into modern business environments but there is a cultural shift here and this is the part most people miss. Strategy hasn't just evolved, the context of leadership has changed, today's leaders operate in environments where collaboration beats control, influence beats authority and ecosystems beat competition. The dominant model is no longer win or lose, it's increasingly win together and even language reflects that. Research shows that war light language and business can actually create negative reactions and signal excessive risk. So even if the thinking is sound framing itself can undermine you and here's the real reason it doesn't work. The art of war doesn't fail because it's wrong, it fails because it's poorly interpreted. People take it literally instead of philosophically, it's culturally misaligned, the language clashes with modern leadership expectations. It's applied tactically not strategically, people use quotes not thinking about frameworks, it's used to sound strategic, not to be strategic and there's a huge difference. Modern commentary even suggests part of its appeal is that it gives leaders a sense of control, intellectual authority and complex environments but we need to re-frame the art of war. So here's the shift instead of asking how do I apply the art of war, ask what is this actually trying to teach me about thinking because if you strip away the language, the metaphors and the historical context, what is left is clarity under pressure, decision making under uncertainty, understanding people and choosing the right situations and those are more relevant today than ever. So in summary, does the art of war work in 2026? Well not if you take it at face value, not if you're applying it literally, not if you adopt the tone instead of the thinking, but if you reinterpret it properly, it becomes incredibly powerful because the real lessons aren't about war, they're about how to think when the states are high and uncertainty is real. That's it for today. I hope you've enjoyed it. I hope that all made sense and kind of puts a different spin on Sunzu and the art of war and you come back and join us next time for another episode. One will be going back to the actual principles of Sunzu and looking how you can apply them to the modern world of business. I'll see you then. Bye.