This 1944 Sabotage Manual Explains Your Last Project Meeting


In 1944, the predecessor of the CIA published a manual on sabotage in order to destroy enemy regimes.

Not bombs.

Not weapons.

Meetings.

Yes… meetings.

The Simple Sabotage Field Manual, which was the name of the document, explained how ordinary people could quietly damage enemy regimes, organisations and whole countries from within.

The instructions included:

Cause delays.

Insist on strict compliance with every procedure.

Refer decisions to committees.

Demand additional reviews and approvals.

Talk frequently.

Talk at length.

Repeat yourself.

Reopen decisions already made.

Raise irrelevant issues.

Assign important tasks to incompetent people.

Spend time perfecting trivial matters while delaying the important ones.

Demand perfection before allowing anything to move.

Give unclear instructions.

Criticise everyone else.

Sounds familiar, right?

That’s normal.

More than eighty years later, plenty of organisations are still following the manual.

Another committee.

Another assurance review.

Another person who needs to be comfortable.

Another decision reopened because someone new has joined the meeting.

Another month spent improving a PowerPoint while the actual project goes nowhere.

The most effective way to destroy an organisation is rarely to attack it from outside.

It is to exploit what already exists inside:

Bureaucracy.

Poor communication.

Ego.

The frightening part?

Most saboteurs do not know they are sabotaging anything.

They think they are doing their job.

If you want to get rid of saboteurs… a few ideas below.

​THE ROOM: 15 Great Lessons of a Successful PPP Project​

​THE ROOM: The 15 Top Lessons of a PPP Project Nightmare​

​THE ROOM: How to Break Into PPPs (Without the Bullshit)​

​The ROOM: The ONLY way of doing a proper procurement process​

​THE ROOM: Back-to-Back PPP Gap Analysis Explained​

​THE ROOM: The Top 10 Errors That Kill Your PPP Deal​

​THE ROOM: How to Deal with Frustrating Lenders' Approvals in PPPs.​

​THE ROOM: THE ROOM: Minimum size for a PPP Project​

​THE ROOM: Buildings in PPP - Discussions with an African colleague​

​THE ROOM: Key Challenges and Solutions in PPP Highway Projects - 5 Clauses You Should Improve​

Or… of course, you can have them all… and many other interesting lessons in The Room.

​The Room​

PD 1: If you liked this email, don't keep it in secret and forward it to a friend. They will thank you enormously one day.

PD 2: If somebody has sent you this email and you want to receive emails like this yourself, visit vicentevalencia.com

PD 3: If you want unsubscribe, click the link below.

Vicente Valencia

Weekly insights on how to perform when it matters | High-stakes decisions. Real situations. No BS. | 👇JOIN +2k readers 👇

Read more from Vicente Valencia

Future-proofing infrastructure for the next two or three generations sounds responsible. It sounds visionary. It can also be a spectacular waste of money. Because the future rarely arrives exactly as predicted. Technology changes. Cities move. Demand shifts. Political priorities disappear. And yet, we keep designing enormous projects to solve every possible problem for the next 50 or 100 years. The result? One project eats the budget. It consumes the best people. It takes ten years to plan,...

There was already a port. The quays were there. The railway was there. The channel was there. The cranes were there. More or less. What was missing was cargo. In 2003, Mozambique handed the Port of Maputo to a public-private concessionaire. Yes… You know. PPP are not just roads and hospitals… It was a BOT model… where the B was probably more R of Rehabilitation. Well… At the time, the port was handling approximately 5 million tonnes per year. Last year, it handled around 32 million. Six times...

Final bid phase. BAFO. Best and Final Offer. Beautiful name, by the way. And my favourite thing ever… It’s not just that people show their faces under their masks… It sounds clean. Professional. Almost elegant. Like everyone is now putting their best offer on the table, shaking hands mentally, and preparing for a fair final comparison. Cute. Then a few smart guys decided to be very smart. Too smart. They started sneaking small changes into the agreement. Nothing dramatic. Nothing that looked...