Like it or not, the office environment is in fact a political one, and that leads a lot of us to seek advice from various sources. “The Prince” is one of those books, along with “The Art of War,” that’s supposed to give us that political savvy, the logic being that the guidance contained within its pages for 16th-century princes can still be applied to today’s office monkey.
Although it’s a worthwhile read, “The Prince” shouldn’t be experienced for that reason alone. In fact, much of the text’s reputation among the general public stems from its well-known proposition that it can be more important to APPEAR moral and upright than to actually be so. Deceiving and manipulating others to achieve the stability of the state was something Machiavelli himself witnessed in the Florentine courts of the time, and it still rigorously debated to this day (as it should be).
Here’s the kicker, though: most of that aforementioned “OMG SCANDALOUS!!!” stuff is concentrated in one paragraph of one chapter (number 18). The Elizabethan courts of the 1500s didn’t take kindly to that, which contributed to Machiavelli’s bad press. So it would seem that the scheming, controversial plotting Machiavelli is famous for is a bit overblown.
That’s not to say there aren’t some excellent nuggets of wisdom here, especially in the latter half. In fact, the statements I found most valuable weren’t necessarily political in nature. Here are two:
“One should never wish to fall down in the belief that you will find someone to pick you up.”
And,
“Besides this, extraordinary things have been seen here brought about by God: the sea has been opened, a cloud has shown you the road; the rock has poured out water; here it has rained manna; everything has come together for your greatness. The remainder you must do yourself.”
So, does “The Prince” put you in the mood to boot up your copy of “Rome: Total War?” Yes.
Does it make you contemplate the nature of man and how he will respond to change? Yes.
But will it tell you how to weasel your way into your boss’ seat as soon as he lets his defenses down? Probably not.
Read it anyway monkeys (unless you’ve done it already), and see if you think Machiavelli is telling you something I missed.
Monkey’s Review 1: Barbarians At the Gate
Monkey’s Review 2: The Financier
Monkey’s Review 3: Decision Points
Monkey’s Review 4: Debunkery
Monkey’s Review 5: When Genius Failed
Monkey’s Review 6: Monkey Business
Monkey’s Review 7: Death Of The Banker
Monkey’s Review 8: A Journey
Monkey’s Review 9: Damn It Feels Good To Be A Banker
Monkey’s Review 10: The Quants
Monkey’s Review 11: All About Hedge Funds
Monkey’s Review 12: The Unlikely Disciple
Monkey’s Review 13: Adventure Capitalist
Monkey’s Review 14: The Hedge Fund Book
Monkey’s Review 15: Investing In Hedge Fund of Funds
Monkey’s Review 16: Hilarity Ensues
Monkey’s Review 17: The Prince
Monkey’s Review 18: Markets Never Forget (But People Do)
Monkey’s Review 19: The Money Culture
Mod Note: Best of WSO, this was originally posted June 2012.
Evolutionary psychology suggests that it is best to posit altruistic aims but in reality be aggressive. Probably the best answers to how to deal with office politics will be found in that discipline. The office has a pecking order.
a man wil forgive the murder of a father more easily than the loss of a patrimony
I'm glad you got something out of it. Most people that I know who read The Prince and the Art of War did so in order to tell other people.
anyone who brags about reading these books has missed their point entirely.
exactly.
Normally your reviews are ok, but this one was terrible.
Wow #17 - Flesh, nice review and good job reading so much.
You need to come up with a catchy rating method... e.g. thumbs up thumbs down.... maybe bananas?
Think about it.
yeah, was thinking he could do a Rating system like
1 Banana = Could barely finish / poor 2 Bananas = Below Average but not horrible 3 Bananas = Average, Some useful stuff, but not life changing 4 Bananas = Solid book, Interesting and Worth a read 5 Bananas = Excellent book. Must read.
He could go 1-5 and be allowed to give 1/2 bananas. So if a book is great, but not AMAZING, he could give it a 4.5 bananas.
Flesh, thoughts? Of course, you'd have to go back an rate all the previous books...I'd put it in bold at the end of each review.
"Call me a dreamer, but one day, my name will become an adjective for everything cynical and untrustworthy in human nature." --Machiavelli (from "America" Daily Show textbook)
Consider me in the camp that views The Prince as political satire.
Id recommend the version edited by Angelo Codevilla - his introduction is excellent. Also, his book War Ends and Means sums up concepts from Machiavelli, Sun Tzu, Tacitus, Washington, Clausewitz etc and gives neat examples of them in practice.
Plus you can find War ends and Means on half.com for 75 cents. Just saying.
The Prince (Il Principe) is quite a controversial book - ethically speaking - but nevertheless a MUST read for someone who's into philosophy, not just banking :P
I've got a book suggestion for you to read and review: The Anarchist Banker ( writer: Fernando Pessoa)
Keep up the good work!
I picked up 'The Prince' as an audio book for a road trip last year and enjoyed it very much, actually ended up listening to it again a couple months later to refresh. I would recommend picking up a hard copy, however, because there are many names and dates which are easier to remember when seeing them.
One of my favorite excerpts: "For men are less concerned with hurting someone who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared, because love is held by a link of obligation which, since men are wretched creatures, is broken every time their own interests are at stake; but fear is held by a dread of punishment which will never leave you."
My personal favorite from the prince:
"Men ought either to be well treated or crushed, because they can avenge themselves of lighter injuries, of more serious ones they cannot; therefore the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge."
Also "Come at the king, you best not miss." - Omar
I read this when I was much younger - it saved me a lot of time, but any Clear Thinking person would reach a lot of same conclusions just through experience. I guess what I'm trying to say is - I thought it was incredibly insightful when I read it, but not so much now.
I wrote a paper during my MBA program entitled "Machiavellian Career Self Management" which sought to examine The Prince and explain how this book is not an end all be all to obtaining power or career success, but does provide numerous insights that can be applied to the navigation of the beginning stages of one's career. If anyone wants to check out a concise application of Machiavellian concepts to the business enviroment I'm putting a link to my paper.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2sjjpfmkrhtip6s/Machiavellian%20Career%20Self…
The prince (Originally Posted: 01/27/2014)
Machiavelli wrote that there are two types of countries. First, there are countries ruled by a single prince where everyone else is essentially powerless. Second, there are countries ruled by a prince along with a class of barons who wield power locally. Machiavelli wrote that it would be easier to take over, or at least partially take over, countries of the second type because there will always be a baron with local power who is disgruntled. On the other hand, Machiavelli wrote that if you succeed in taking over a country of the first type it is much easier to retain control: simply execute the prince and the population will naturally follow you.
What are people's thoughts on how Machiavelli's principles apply to corporate take overs? For example, are companies with a flat power structure and centralized control easier to digest after acquisition than companies that are organized in silos? If yes, do flat companies tend to command a premium over their decentralized cousins?
Definitely of the opinion that operations should be decentralized but with centralized capital allocation. You should check out 'Outsiders.'
I love that you just applied Machiavelli's political philosophies to business - I never made the connection before. Silver banana for you :)
Countries with the single prince model tend to be smaller, and require less overall resources if the primary tactic is to "kill the prince". So it comes down to the companies being compared. The 'barons' may not be openely ordained either....look at the CCP's opaque structure.
I would imagine it would work in a very similar way. This book and "The Art of War" really can apply to the business world.
I have found in takeovers I have been involved in, that it's easier to operate or integrate businesses post-close which have had a broader bench of management talent. The reason is very unprincely: oftentimes the top few executives are eliminated or changed out after a transaction, and ideally their removal will have a low impact on the daily goings-on of the business. So, it's really nice to have an SVP of sales, a competent head of product development, etc, who own the key processes and relationships. Often, especially in smaller companies, the CEO is the CEO, CFO, Sales leader, R&D planner, and head of HR, which is a tough dog to replace.
TLDR: Broader is better because post-close, you are more worried about the wheels staying on the bus than you are about some recently acquired executive trying to take over the company/principality
No one really thinks of things this way in the real world.
Practically speaking, an acquired company is organized however you want to organize it. Its not subject to political allies and local barons.
In the real world the considerations are much more practical and highly dependent on the platform company and what you intend to do with the target. The main questions asked are: how the target will fold into the platform, who is worth keeping around (for a bolt-on acquisition, its usually relatively few executives since you've already got a management team you're confident in and are backing), and how some of the personalities will interact. If you're looking at a target with a strong-minded executive, your main concerns are does he plan on staying on, is there a role for him that is meaningful enough to keep him happy, is he worth keeping around/keeping happy, will his personality allow him to no longer be at the top of the food chain, etc...
Its a novel question / analogy, but not really applicable. Also the concept of a chieftain's banging swords in board room battles and corporate takeover are things that really only exists in Hollywood. I'm afraid the real world is much less exciting/romantic.
As for valuation, companies with complicated management situations will obviously deter some buyers, shrinking the universe of potential bidders and presumably resulting in them trading at a discount vs. their less complicated peers. However distilling some sort of quantitative evidence of this would be fairly difficult because executive egos/complicated boards are fairly difficult to measure and isolate in terms of their impact on value.
Quo omnis hic doloribus alias quidem ea. Laborum quia ut eos. Blanditiis rem quia ut et dignissimos ut. Praesentium accusamus at culpa sed.
Consequatur dicta velit et perferendis et veniam officia aperiam. Beatae iste et et veniam. Voluptatum non et quia nam asperiores nam et. Qui possimus consectetur sed quae laborum ducimus. Ut aut tempore ratione quibusdam molestiae voluptate ipsa. Quaerat rerum illum cupiditate.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Aspernatur odio eum a eius perspiciatis. Quos consequatur nemo quisquam reprehenderit ab deserunt. Dolorum sint aperiam modi nisi sint. Enim asperiores iste ipsam est id vel aut doloribus.
Cum quasi libero corporis aut ut unde. Distinctio autem rerum eos eos. Fuga commodi asperiores possimus harum tempora. Dolore nobis tempora perspiciatis sed in repudiandae.
Repellendus sint aliquam magni quaerat eos magnam. Modi qui sapiente dolor quia velit. Porro neque officiis quis id voluptate est. Alias earum ea placeat numquam soluta officiis et.