One idea that falls out of reading so much Boyd over the last couple of weeks is this bit here (screenshot attached).
Introspection is good(?) in non-adversarial situations. But in adversarial situations it might mean that you're screwed.
(Not sure if I agree 100%)
Conversation
But really the most subtle idea I took away from Boyd is that "messing with your opposition's orientation is the goal of good strategy".
1
6
Replying to
Great post. Read it last night. THought I knew a lot abt boydian stuff. Your post taught me new stuff.
It took me longer than you did. But yes, his stuff is not really immediately applicable. So my enthusiasm is cooled.
1
His stuff works best against human adversaries 1-on-1. In biz, this angle happens less frequent. In fact, I would say, easily counterproductive in biz to focus too much on what other people are doing
Assuming other actors are rivals is bad idea
but I might be wrong 🤷🏻♂️
3
2
Replying to
Yeah, I was thinking about this as well. Boyd's ideas presupposes a hostile world. Probably we can all do with some of that ... but not too much.
1. Art of War works best when only you know it
2. Game theory works best when you and everybody else know it
Boydian closer to 1
In biz, there's a mixture of both bc biz is mixture of zero-sum and positive sum mini games. And these smaller games have interdependencies
1