The Opposite of Agile

The CIA called it “Simple Sabotage” in 1944, but it might be business as usual in 2019

Credit where credit is due: Martin Weigel, Head of Planning at Wieden+Kennedy Amsterdam, tweeted the following image and noted, “The CIA’s’ Simple Sabotage Field Manual’ (1944) contains some great advice for derailing organisations. Good to see so many of us putting it into daily practice.”

Take a look, then lets parse it a bit further.

The image is from page 28 of a document declassified in 2008 from the CIA’s website. (Here’s the complete PDF.) And, yes—the CIA didn’t technically exist as the CIA in 1944 when William J. Donovan was Director of the Office of Strategic Services and the above text was published. (The OSS ventured through a series of acronyms before becoming the CIA in 1947.)

It’s hard to imagine a more polar opposite of all that is espoused as Agile and Entrepreneurial in 2019 than this handy guide from 1944. From the opening pages of SIMPLE SABOTAGE FIELD MANUAL (which was №3 in a series—heaven knows what №1 or №2 advocated):

“A second type of simple sabotage requires no destructive tools whatsoever… It is based on universal opportunities to make faulty decisions, to adopt a non-cooperative attitude and to induce others to follow suit.”

The first 20 or so pages offer a slew of insights into salting engines, corroding machinery, disrupting logistics. But it’s the matter-of-fact, and keenly insightful description of human organizational behaviors—across communication, bureaucracy, hierarchy, and process—that help illuminate so many of the barriers we face in adopting agile or entrepreneurial methodologies, especially in large, legacy organizations. It might even be ironic that government employees were paid to consider, write, discuss, edit, approve and publish an antithesis to productivity and efficiency.

In the spirit of teaching through opposites, we might well ask if we and our organization:

(1) Insist on doing everything through “channels.” [Or “the way things have always been done here.”] Never permit short-cuts to be taken in order to expedite decisions.

(2) Make “speeches.” Talk as frequently as possible and at great length. Illustrate your “points” by long anecdotes and accounts of personal experiences. Never hesitate to make a few appropriate “patriotic” [or corporate fealty] comments.

(3) When possible, refer all matters to committees, for “further study and consideration.” Attempt to make the committees as large as possible — never less than five.

(4) Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible.

(5) Haggle over precise wordings of communications, minutes, resolutions.

(6) Refer back to matters decided upon at the last meeting and attempt to re-open the question of the advisability of that decision.

(7) Advocate “caution.” Be “reasonable” and urge your fellow-conferees to be “reasonable” and avoid haste which might result in embarrassments or difficulties later on.

(8) Be worried about the propriety of any decision — raise the question of whether such action as is contemplated lies within the jurisdiction of the group or whether it might conflict with the policy of some higher echelon.

The genius of the above (aside from 2 and 4) lies in the appeal to conservative, safe, rational action. Employees rarely get demoted or fired for building consensus (3), or being overly cautious (6, 8). But then, very few make innovative leaps that way either.

If you’re still hankering for lower productivity across your organization, the guide continues, encouraging managers and supervisors:

(10) To lower morale and with it, production, be pleasant to inefficient workers; give them undeserved promotions. Discriminate against efficient workers; complain unjustly about their work.

(11) Hold conferences when there is more, critical work to be done.

(13) Multiply the procedures and clearances involved in issuing instructions, pay checks, and so on. See that three people have to approve everything where one would do.

And remember—practice these tips daily to stifle invention, counter innovation, and crush culture and morale.