“A conqueror is like a cannonball…he can only move forward. Once he rebounds his career is over.” -The victorious Duke of Wellington in the wake of Waterloo when asked why Napoleon chose to attack, rather than simply defend, France after escaping from his exile on Elba.
What happened to Napoleon Bonaparte at the Battle of Waterloo
is a useful illustration of how a brilliant strategist can make disastrous, career
terminating mistakes. But rather than focus on the minutia of the convoluted battle
it’s more useful here to look at the broader mistakes he made as a manager. Why?
Because, unfortunately, we see these mistakes all too frequently in business leaders.
Do you see anything familiar in the summary below?
A brief history
In 1799, driven by his dream of making France a European empire,
Napoleon Bonaparte, a highly talented and experienced military leader, carried out
a coup against the Directory (First Republic of France) and eventually made himself
Emperor. This strategy worked and in 1802 the Republic of France was recognized
with the Peace of Amiens.
You would think this would be enough. But no, because Napoleon
was a megalomaniac (like some CEOs we all know—Donald, are you still reading?),
this was insufficient. He wanted France to be the most powerful country (business!)
in Europe. So in 1803, he declared war on his neighboring countries plus Britain.
This was the beginning of the Napoleonic Wars which went on between France and the
Allies for 11 years. The Allies finally defeated France in 1814 forcing Napoleon
to abdicate at the Treaty of Fontainebleau. He was exiled to the pleasant island
of Elba off the coast of Italy. Elba is part of Tuscany, and Tuscany is wonderful.
He was even given the title Emperor of Elba and rule over its 100,000 people. Not
bad. But not enough either.
He stuck it out for 11 months then escaped on March 1st of 1815
with a contingent of 1,000 men. He reached Paris on March 20th and thus began the
"100 Days Campaign". Horrified at his return from exile the Allies who,
unfortunately for Napoleon, happened to be meeting in Vienna at the time discussing
the territorial balance in Europe, immediately declared war on him. To understand
the instant resolve to get rid of the fellow it’s useful to remember Napoleon was
a Very Bad Man (an “Evil Doer!”) and was thought, by some, to be a sort of Hitler
or Saddam of his day. He wanted to conquer Europe and everybody knew it. This is
why a large coalition of forces could easily be formed to deal with him in a completely
unambiguous manner. It would be like combining two very large computer manufacturers
to give Dell and IBM a hard time...
So it was France/Napoleon against: the British, Dutch, Belgian,
Russian, Prussian and Austrian armies. The Anglo-Dutch force was commanded by the
cool, aristocratic Irishman Arthur Wellesley (a.k.a. the Duke of Wellington) with
Field-Marshal Gebhard Leberecht von Blücher commanding the Prussians. Both Wellington
and Blücher had experience against Napoleon and Blücher was the only person to beat
Napoleon more than once. So Wellington and Blücher understood their opponent. Blücher,
especially, hated Napoleon and since Blücher was entering old age he had little
to fear from Bonaparte—and competing against an opponent that has no fear (and this
includes business leaders) is always dangerous. Even so, Napoleon thought neither
Wellington nor Blücher were “worthy” opponents.
Napoleon’s goal was to use the classic battle tactic of the Central
Position which he was expert in. This is how a small force (a small business) can
defeat a bigger one. While he was seriously outnumbered with his 125,000 men, this
was only the case if the two opposing forces (Wellington with 110,000 men and Blücher
with 120,000) were able to combine. It was extremely important that Napoleon prevent
this from happening—he had to get between them (gain the “central position”) and
fight them in series since he knew victory was almost impossible against the combined
force. If he took them on separately he could succeed.
Since he moved so quickly toward Belgium, Napoleon knew a fleeting
set of circumstances was in his favor—the Allies were still moving towards each
other. To exploit this Napoleon ordered a young Marshal Ney to take 24,000 men and
attack part of Wellington’s forces at Quatre Bras. Napoleon took the remaining force
and attacked the approaching Prussian forces under Blücher at the town of Ligny.
Napoleon shattered the Prussians and almost killed Blücher. Unfortunately,
ego driven Napoleon made a critical competitive mistake—as they started retreating
he concluded Blücher was beaten and out of the fight, thus preventing him from aiding
Wellington.
The young Lt. Ney was also making a critical mistake. Rather
than taking the initiative, he waited for clarifying communications from Napoleon
before attacking the Dutch force led by the disastrously inexperienced Prince of
Orange (the son of the King of the Netherlands). When Ney finally attacked he sent
much of the Dutch force fleeing but the critical pause allowed time for Wellington’s
main battle force to arrive and attack which in turn seriously weakened Ney’s numbers.
However, it wasn’t a draw—Wellington retreated only a few kilometers north. Had
Ney been more aggressive he could have done far more damage, which would have been
useful later. In fact, some military historians believe Ney's performance at Quatre
Bras was elemental in Napoleon's defeat later.
However, so far, so good. Napoleon had managed to keep the two
allied forces from combining and inflicted serious damage while doing so. On the
surface it was an utterly brilliant victory for the pugnacious Frenchman.
Unfortunately it was short lived. The next day, June 18th, Napoleon
was likely to regret leaving lovely Elba.
The decisive battle was at Waterloo, about 11 miles from Brussels.
The day started with a torrential downpour. This made it extremely difficult for
Napoleon to move his artillery even with a dozen horses and 15 men pulling on each
cannon. This was a critical problem as it delayed the battle allowing Blücher’s
reorganized army time to move closer. Realizing this Napoleon had dispatched almost
a third of his force under Marshal Grouchy to march north and engage Blücher to
prevent him from entering the main fight. Had Grouchy been successful things might
have been different. But Grouchy had no real depth as a leader and blew the assignment
badly. Napoleon was paying the price for his hasty staffing decisions (We’ve all
been there, right?). At 11:30 that morning Bonaparte gave the order to start the
general attack and with it 100 cannons let loose.
The battle lasted the rest of the day and into the night. Unfortunately
for Napoleon, Grouchy never reached Blücher’s main force. This raised many questions.
There’s a saying in war: “Follow the noise to find the battle.” It was obvious where
the battle was being waged because of the massive sound of all the cannons (And,
if you don’t already know, cannons are LOUD!). But Grouchy, under nominal orders
to prevent Blücher from moving toward Napoleon, didn’t join the main battle but
chose rather to engage Blücher’s tenacious rearguard around the town of Wavre; this
provided Grouchy a minor, and basically meaningless, victory. Had Grouchy had more
initiative and brought his 30,000 fresh men into the main fight Napoleon might well
have won at Waterloo. As it was, Grouchy's actions allowed the Prussians to merge
with Wellington’s now weakened forces. Napoleon’s central position had collapsed
(the manpower math was all wrong). When this happened Napoleon was doomed.
But, he fought on. It was only with the arrival of Blücher’s
force, suddenly combining with the British, that the French turned and fled "for
their lives". It was 9:30 that night that Blücher and Wellington embraced each
other in success. Four days later in Paris Napoleon abdicated a second time and
was sent off to the windswept island of St. Helena in the middle of the South Atlantic
where he died five and a half years later. Unlike the bucolic Elba, St. Helena was
no picnic spot.
History puts the blame for the disaster of Waterloo on Napoleon
because he was the leader. And that’s certainly as it should be. He was the CEO.
That said, sure, he made a lot of mistakes (see the summary list below) but frankly
I think he had some serious staffing issues in the form of Ney and Grouchy. Had
they been up to the tasks Napoleon assigned to them, the outcome would likely have
been different and the face of Europe changed for many years to come.
Little known fact:
The “Battle of Waterloo” isn’t named for where the fighting took place. Although
that's where most of the battle happened, it’s called that because that is where
the Duke of Wellington spent the night before the battle and it was his own tradition
to name the battle after where he slept prior to a victorious battle. So perhaps
there was more than one big ego involved…
Here is a summary of Napoleon’s
management traits and the mistakes resulting in The Battle of Waterloo (a.k.a. CEO
traits and actions of questionable value…)
1. Impossibly
arrogant and egotistical leading to:
a. Careless
rush to action thinking he could do no wrong
b. Ignored
the opinions of others
c. Disrespected
the competition (thought Wellington and Blücher were not “worthy” even though they
had previously beaten him)
d. Relied
on his previously successful tactics, closing his mind to new ideas (victim of his
previous success)
e. Underestimated
the sheer conviction of the competition
2. Rushed
selection of incompetent senior management (Ney and Grouchy)
3. Poor
lines of communication with divisional management
4. Made
the fundamental mistake of choosing the wrong goal and bet the company on it…and
lost
Very basic stuff, really.
Think about it...
