Q&A WITH THE AUTHORS

What is judo strategy?

Judo strategy is an approach to competition that relies more on skill than size or strength. We think about judo strategy at three levels. First, it’s a metaphor or a mindset that focuses on avoiding head-to-head struggles. Second, it’s a set of three principles—movement, balance, and leverage—that companies should incorporate into their strategy. And third, it’s a toolbox of techniques that managers can use to implement the principles. We describe many of these techniques in the book, but we also hope that reading the book will help managers develop their own unique judo strategy tools.

Who should use judo strategy?

Almost any company can face situations in which using judo strategy makes sense. Smaller companies may find it most natural to think in terms of judo strategy, since it downplays the importance of size or strength. But large companies can also use judo strategy when facing a stronger competitor, when entering a new market against entrenched competitors—or even when counterattacking against smaller judo strategists.

It’s important to remember that being bigger and stronger is not enough to win in judo. But together, size, strength, and good technique are a powerful combination. Similarly, large companies with the organizational flexibility to make judo strategy work can be the most dangerous judo strategists of all.

Is judo strategy just for high-tech start-ups?

No, absolutely not. The notion of competing on Internet time has highlighted the importance of the strategic skills that are central to judo strategy, such as speed and flexibility. However, judo strategy can be used by companies in just about any industry. In the book, we discuss companies from the airline, consumer goods, and financial services sectors, as well as successful Internet companies like eBay and Amazon.com.

What are the main principles of judo strategy?

Judo strategy has three main principles: movement, balance, and leverage. We think of them as working together in the following way: Companies use movement to get into a strong position early in the game. Balance allows them to engage successfully with stronger opponents and survive rivals’ attacks. And finally, by using leverage they can bring down their competitors.

Can you give some examples of judo strategy?

One of the most successful companies we studied is Palm Computing. Under its founder and original CEO, Jeff Hawkins and Donna Dubinsky, Palm was very successful at implementing both movement and balance. As a result, the company quickly became the leader in handheld computing and survived repeated efforts by Microsoft to take over the market. More recently, of course, Palm has suffered reverses, but devices using the Palm operating system still have about 80% of the handheld market.

Palm was particularly skilled when it came to movement. In the book, we describe three techniques the company used to seize and keep the lead away from Microsoft. First, Hawkins and Dubinsky used what we call "the puppy dog ploy" to head off the threat of an attack early in the game. By positioning alongside Microsoft, rather than casting themselves as a head-on competitor, they succeeded in looking small and inoffensive—like a puppy dog—which made it less likely that Microsoft would attack. For example, Donna told us, they never described the Pilot as a computer or a PC substitute; they just said it was a companion for your PC. From Microsoft’s perspective, this made Palm seem like a much less important threat.

Second, Palm defined the competitive space in a way that made it much more difficult for Microsoft to compete. Rather than try and pack the Pilot full of features—which was the way that Microsoft was used to competing—they focused on making it simple and elegant. (Inside the company, they called this the "Zen of Palm.") Since Microsoft was not very good at playing this particularly game, Palm had an important competitive advantage.

Third, Palm was very good at following through fast. The entire company was organized for speed. They relied heavily on outsourcing, used concurrent engineering, and kept designs simple—avoiding "rocket science"—in order to get products out fast. In addition, Palm was very aware of the importance of quickly building a large installed base, so they kept prices relatively low and worked hard to attract developers to their platform. All of this paid off in a very steep growth curve, which made it much more difficult for competitors like Microsoft to penetrate the market.

There are so many metaphors for competition out there: why does thinking about business in terms of judo make sense?

The judo metaphor makes particular sense today because many managers appear to have lost sight of the value of avoiding head-to-head competition. Simply opposing force to force is a strategy that’s doomed to failure when you’re facing larger and stronger competitors. By contrast, thinking in terms of judo can help managers target the weaknesses that are often hidden behind their competitors’ strengths.

There’s also some history behind the use of judo in thinking about competition. Not only do many people use the metaphor casually when they’re describing their approach to strategy, it’s given rise to a literature in the field of industrial organization known as "judo economics." Judo economics is based on relatively narrow, mathematical models, but it has the same starting point as judo strategy: the idea that you can use a larger competitor’s strength against him.

Finally, a word about metaphors. Metaphors have many virtues: they create compelling images, provide organizing frameworks, and inspire new thinking about old problems. But like all tools, they also have limitations. We hope that readers will learn—and enjoy learning—something about judo from this book. But more important, our goal is to get managers to use the case studies we describe to rethink their approach to business competition. When the metaphor helps, use it; when it starts to weigh too heavily, let it go.