Project leadership lessons from Napoleon’s last campaign

The anniversary of Napoleon Bonaparte‘s final defeat at Waterloo is a good opportunity to look at his last campaign and see what lessons about project leadership we can learn.

Some brief (no, really) historical context:

In 1815, Napoleon escaped from exile on the Mediterranean island of Elba and returned to France, quickly rebuilding his government and army. The European monarchies swiftly formed a new coalition and declared war on him. Personally. (As an aside, you have to take it as a compliment when nations don’t just declare war on your country, they declare war on you.)

Napoleon was facing a war with pretty much everyone from Britain to Russia, and a pretty shaky political situation at home. The immediate threat, however, was the Anglo-Dutch (that’s British, Dutch, and Belgians) army under the Duke of Wellington and the Prussian (think German) army under Marshal Blucher, both assembling in nearby Belgium.

Napoleon faced them with an experienced, motivated team of highly professional “industry veterans.” So how did he lose?

Setting a bold vision…

Napoleon needed a quick win to both quiet his political opponents in Paris as well as prevent a combined Anglo-Dutch-Austrian-Italian-Prussian-Russian-pretty-much-everyone-else Allied army from crashing his party all at once. To do that, he set out on a daring plan: to get between the Anglo-Dutch and Prussian armies. He would keep one opponent busy while he defeated the other, then turn to wreck the former.

Napoleon didn’t specify which army he intended to defeat first. Instead, he established the goals and remained flexible about the interim steps to achieving them.

It was risky—he could be trapped between the two enemy armies and destroyed—but it was bold, unexpected, and served clear goals. That’s a good model for any leader, setting an ambitious, inspiring vision and outlining the tasks that will lead toward making it a reality.  

It started well. On June 15, 1815, Napoleon crossed into Belgium at the head of his Armee du Nord and got between the Anglo-Dutch and Prussian armies, just as he planned. The Duke of Wellington, who was attending a ball when he received the news, reportedly exclaimed “Napoleon has humbugged me, by God!”

Great start! And then things started to go terribly wrong.

…but failing to communicate it

Napoleon had successfully set tasks, but his subordinates didn’t necessarily understand the real vision.

On June 16, Napoleon’s army fought two battles simultaneously, one against the Anglo-Dutch at the crossroads of Quatre Bras, and one against the Prussians at Ligny. Napoleon had given Marshal Michel Ney a big chunk of the army to hold off the Anglo-Dutch while Napoleon himself would defeat the Prussians.

During this double battle, the confusion of specific tasks with long-term goals and vision would prove disastrous for Napoleon.

Comte D’Erlon’s French corps was heading to support Marshal Ney in holding back the Anglo-Dutch at Quatres Bras. Napoleon realized that D’Erlon’s men would be perfectly placed to march down the road and attack the Prussians from the rear. That would shatter the Prussians and then allow Napoleon to turn and defeat the Anglo-Dutch. He sent orders for D’Erlon to come to Ligny.

Marshal Ney, facing off against the Anglo-Dutch, had started the day well but was having more trouble the longer the battle went on. He had come close to defeating the Duke of Wellington early, but now lost sight of his goal of distracting one enemy while the other was being beaten. Instead, he looked for more troops to renew the fight: D’Erlon’s.

What are you working for?

D’Erlon, not really understanding his part in either battle, responded to the call from Napoleon’s courier and turned for Ligny. His orders were not clear, only the urgency, so D’Erlon marched straight for Napoleon, not toward the rear of the Prussians. This caused quite a stir when his troops were initially mistaken for Prussians sneaking up on the French. That made Napoleon delay his attack on the Prussians for a crucial period. 

(It didn’t help that he was told to march by way of “St. Amand” and there are different roads leading to no less than three St. Amands in the area.)

Things got worse when Ney, learning that Comte D’Erlon’s corps was marching off in the “wrong” direction, sent orders for him to march back to the battle at Quatre Bras. Poor D’Erlon, caught between two conflicting tasks, went with the orders of his immediate superior, Ney. He left the battle at Ligny too early to have an impact, and then arrived at Quatre Bras too late to have an impact. Being present at either fight might have been decisive. 

This is where goals are more important than tasks. Tasks–the actual work of any project–must always be in support of the project goals, otherwise it’s wasted effort.

Now, we live in a time when our projects are (usually) not relying on couriers and handwritten messages, but miscommunication and misunderstandings still abound.

How many different ways is your team communicating? Verbally? Slack? Email? Texts? Who is responsible for managing those?

Napoleon’s team leaders, operating under significant time pressure, relied on written and verbal instructions, not always entirely clear on the relative importance of each.

How many “commanders” do the people on your team answer to and what do they do when there’s a conflict? How many different ways are your goals being communicated?

Project/company goals need to be communicated clearly to everyone. All team members are decision makers on some level, so all team members need to fully understand goals (why you’re doing what you’re doing) not just their specific tasks (how you’re doing what you’re doing). 

Project resources should be directed at core objectives not “cool ideas” or even “new opportunities” unless those opportunities serve the real objectives. Agile development doesn’t mean chasing the new (or worse, avoiding making decisions), it means adapting to best achieve objectives. Leaders need to clearly communicate objectives—“why”—so that the “how” of project development can adapt to circumstances without losing sight of the objective.

How do you know everyone understands your goals? 

One way is to share those goals in the medium that works best for your team. That may mean sharing the project vision in multiple formats, such as verbally, visually/graphically, etc. Communicating ideas to your team in different styles can not only increase their understanding of the goals, the process of formulating those ideas helps you better refine and sharpen them. 

Another way to make sure everyone understands the goals is to not be the only person communicating them. While it can be important to have a “keeper of the vision” on a project, it’s vital that anyone could step into that role if “the keeper” is unavailable. 

A practical step you can take is letting other people explain your goals in their own words. Memorization does not necessarily mean comprehension, and having people merely parrot back what you’ve said doesn’t show understanding. Instead, listen to your team leads explain project goals to their teams in their own words to get a sense of their actual understanding and ownership. 

Establishing a consistent vision let’s everyone on your team know what you’re wanting to achieve and how, even if you haven’t discussed the specifics of a given task. When I was lead designer at Pandemic Studios, co-founder Josh Resnick was always consistent in his goals and expectations. Whenever I was purchasing equipment or resources, I could ask myself “What would Josh do?” and act accordingly without the need to wait for specific approval.

If your team doesn’t really understand the project goals or your ultimate vision, they’ll be like D’Erlon’s poor troops marching back and forth on their tasks, ultimately accomplishing nothing.

Owning your decisions

Two days after nearly pulling off a double win with the simultaneous battles at Ligny and Quatres Bras, Napoleon was defeated when the Anglo-Dutch and Prussian armies pulled themselves together at Waterloo.

Soon after, Napoleon was forced once more to abdicate, this time going into exile in the South Atlantic. He spent his last years brooding on the failure, often very critical of his subordinates’ actions (or inactions) in that critical three-day span. 

Napoleon complained bitterly about his team’s mistakes and his ‘hiring decisions’ that put those people in position to fail him.

“I should have destroyed [the enemy] at Ligny, if my left had done its duty. I should have destroyed him again at Waterloo if my right had not failed me.”

“Had it not been for the imbecility of Grouchy, I should have gained the day.”

“I made a great mistake in employing Ney… I ought not to have employed Vandamme.”

Napoleon blamed Ney for failing to destroy the Anglo-Dutch at Quatre Bras, but it was Napoleon who intended Ney to delay the enemy while Napoleon defeated the Prussians.

Ney was also blamed for taking D’Erlon’s men away at a crucial time, but it was Napoleon who failed to communicate to Ney what his goal really was, not just the tasks assigned.

Napoleon complained about trusting Ney and others, but these were all experienced, accomplished leaders. (And it was Napoleon who chose to wait until the morning of the battle at Quatres Bras to put Ney in command.)

Did Napoleon’s generals make mistakes? Certainly. Did those mistakes cost him the campaign? Possibly.

But who was really responsible for those mistakes? 

Failure–and the responsibility for it–ultimately begins and ends at the top.

Project leadership is not a title or role, it’s a continual, active process. Leaders not only establish the vision and goals of a project, but they must make sure that everyone on the team understands that vision and is taking steps toward fulfilling it. 

You can’t–and shouldn’t–weigh in on every decision on every task your team is working on. Equipping the people on your team to make the right decisions is part of good leadership. 

So what leadership lessons can we take from Napoleon’s last campaign?

1. Establish the bold vision
2. Ensure the team understands the goal
3. Set and adapt tasks to achieve the goal
4. …and make sure the Prussians are really retreating!

(This last one may not apply to your project.)

What historical leaders and events inspire your leadership style? Connect with me on Twitter and share your thoughts!

Stay in touch with my newsletter. No spam!

If you like what you read, please share it with others via the links below.

It’s that time of year again, when chill winds blow autumn leaves across the yard like ghosts at play…

Or, if you’re here in L.A., it’s still sunny and 74 and might as well be any other time of year. Point is, sometimes you really have to work to make October feel spooky. 

To cultivate that Halloween mood, here are thoughts on some horror-themed games you might be considering for some scarytime fun.

It: Evil Below

Based on the 2017 film It (which in turn is based on the Stephen King novel), this is a cooperative game for two to seven. Players work as a team to rescue kidnapped children and defeat the evil clown Pennywise before they run out of bravery and lose. I really enjoyed the film and was looking forward to playing this game.

As with many cooperative games, it (It?) suffers from encouraging all the players to “round table” every decision. There is no hidden player information (all cards are kept face up, all dice rolled in the open) and there are time limits or restrictions on table talk. That means “your” turn isn’t necessarily yours—it ends up a group decision as players seek to optimize every move. This makes the game drag, as well as make it more likely for the best/loudest player to run the whole team. 

It’s also super random. What you can accomplish in a given turn is entirely determined by a handful of dice. Players roll dice to determine their set of possible actions in a turn. Each die is color-coded to indicate where on the board that die can be used. 

That means your ability to act on any given strategy is dictated each turn by the dice. Want to rescue those children from Town Square? Too bad, you didn’t roll the right symbol on the purple die. Think it’s time to gather more items to battle Pennywise? Sorry, not the rolls you were looking for.

The randomness of It doesn’t really allow you to come up with a coherent strategy, so turns are mostly reacting to random progress by Pennywise and random success/failure of individual player turns.

The dice highlight another problem I have with the game. It: Evil Below is an excellent example of accessibility issues in games. Color recognition plays a big part in the game. Those colored dice match up to the different locations on the board. That makes for immediate recognition of where a given die can be “spent.”

For example, the blue die corresponds to “Keene’s Pharmacy,” while the red die can be used at “The House on Neibolt Street.” (“Bev’s Apartment,” the location of the female character in the story, is color-coded pink. Pink because she’s a girl, see?)

Seems like a straight-forward way to communicate the link between the dice and the board. Except that three of the colors look functionally identical to anyone with red-green color blindness while two others look identical to someone with blue-green color issues. 

Three of the four people at our table have one or the other color issue, so we were constantly having to ask our fourth player (my son), to double-check each decision we made. That slowed the game down considerably, and made it a very frustrating experience to play. 

Given how common these color perception issues are, it doesn’t take that much effort to make sure your color palette works for everyone. Adding symbols to the pieces (so identification isn’t based on color alone) is another good way to avoid the issue. As I mentioned in this previous post, mixed reality technology could also assist people with color/vision issues. It: Evil Below has none of those things going for it.

I’d watch the film again, but I don’t see this game getting a replay any time soon. 

The Thing: Infection at Outpost 31

Look, there probably aren’t many people who have watched John Carpenter’s 1982 sci-fi horror classic The Thing more than me. It’s an all-time favorite. I even prototyped a card game based on the film many years ago, so I was excited to see this getting the boardgame treatment.

I’ll keep this short: save your money. It’s just as random as It: Evil Below, with few meaningful decisions to be made. You’re mostly hoping for lucky rolls and card draws.

There’s a game to be made out the pieces in the box, but the rules need a complete rewrite. Keep bugging me and maybe I’ll get around to typing up my revised rules.

At this point you’re probably asking “Are there any games this guy likes?!?” Read on!

Fury of Dracula

Based on the Bram Stoker novel, Fury of Dracula is a team game that pits one player (Dracula!) against one to four other players.

The neat thing about this game is the hidden movement. The human players move on the map of Europe, trying to uncover and destroy Dracula’s minions as they search for the Big Bad himself. Dracula’s location is hidden—until he gets revealed, you can’t see him…but he can see you.

Dracula is both hunted and hunter in this, making for some good moments of tension. Be warned: Fury of Dracula is cool and thematic, but it’s a long game—easily two or more hours depending on Dracula’s luck and skill.

Letters from Whitechapel

Using a similar hidden movement mechanic to Fury of Dracula, Letters from Whitechapel has one to five detectives chasing through the Whitechapel district of London after one player—Jack the Ripper. 

Played out over four “nights” (corresponding to the Ripper’s historical reign of terror), the detectives use deductive reasoning to track down Jack before he can claim his victims are escape to his hidden lair.

While not as thematic as Fury, this one is easier to teach and play, and is also playable in under two hours. 

Last Night on Earth

Zombies. At last. Last Night on Earth is a tongue-in-cheek game based on B-grade zombie flicks. Two to six people play as either humans or zombies in a variety of scenarios that change up the objectives of the game each time you play.

For example, in one scenario, the humans must search the town for gasoline and the keys to a truck to enable them to escape. In another, the humans must fortify a house and attempt to survive until sunrise. (The zombie players are mostly trying to eat the humans—it’s best to keep it simple for the recently deceased.)

Given all the random elements—rolling dice to move, rolling dice to fight, drawing cards to search for game-winning items, etc—luck can swing this game to one team or the other pretty quickly. It can make for the occasional anticlimactic or frustrating game, but it’s usually around an hour of goofy, zombie-fighting fun.

Mall of Horror

Unlike Last Night on Earth, this is basically Survivor: Zombie Island. In the same way a reality TV competition is “cooperative,” this Mall of Horror involves a lot of negotiating as you try to make sure your characters long enough to make it on the helicopter at the end of the game.

As more and more zombies appear in the mall, the players have fewer and fewer places to hide. When the zombies break in, players vote on who gets tossed to the mindless horde and devoured.

This plays out in under an hour. Try not to take it personally.

Ten Candles

Ten Candles is a roleplaying game of tragic horror. Similar to Dungeons & Dragons, one person facilitates play as the gamemaster for two to five players. Each player creates a character as their alter ego for the game, trying to survive the terrifying scenario as it unfolds.

This two- to three-hour experience is all about atmosphere: it’s to be played in a quiet, dark room, lit only by the titular ten candles. As the game progresses, the candles—and the players’ hopes for survival—are extinguished one by one. 

While the circumstances and storyline change from game to game (e.g. is it aliens from another world or supernatural horrors that bring our doom this time?), the game always ends with the tragic deaths of the characters and the extinguishing of the last candle, leaving everyone in the dark.

Unlike pretty much every other roleplaying game, Ten Candles isn’t about “winning,” it’s about struggling to maintain hope while being pushed to the edge of madness. This is a game that can easily be ruined by distractions or lame attempts to lighten the mood.

Play this one only with good friends who all buy into the experience and don’t mind things getting dark, figuratively and literally.

Call of Cthulhu

This granddaddy of horror roleplaying games is based on the stories by H.P. Lovecraft. Set in the 1920s, players take the roles of characters investigating supernatural shenanigans.

Unlike Ten Candles, Call of Cthulhu doesn’t always end in doom. Well, not always. Any game where a key component is tracking your character’s sanity doesn’t often have a happy ending.

I’ve been the gamemaster of a Call of Cthulhu campaign off and on for a few years now. We’re in the process of wrapping up a long series of sessions based on Lovecraft’s novel At the Mountains of Madness, complete with prop photographs, journals, and an authentic National Geographic map of Antarctica from the era.

Go Away Monster!

If you’re playing with very young children—or just feeling spooked from all these scary games yourself—it’s time to break out Go Away Monster! Players draw shapes from a bag, searching for pieces to go in their bedroom: lamp, bed, cuddly, etc.

When a player draws a monster piece they say “Go away, monster!” and tosses the monster in the discard pile. It’s a simple game of shape recognition, taking turns, and empowering children to tell thoughts of bad monsters to go away.

What are your favorite spooky games? Connect with me on Twitter and share your thoughts!

Stay in touch with my newsletter. No more than once a week, no spam.

If you like what you read, please share it with others via the links below.

As a creator of interactive media, I don’t fit easily into a single silo, having worked on projects from mixed reality military simulators to action figure-based board games. So it should come as no surprise that my most frequently asked question is “so just what is it that you do?”

As is often the case, the short answer is not necessarily the best answer. 

My catch-all answer of “I’m a producer” usually draws crinkled brows and polite nods, as that role is defined in vastly different ways across industries and even varies from studio to studio. Indeed, my own roles vary from project to project (and over the life of a project), encompassing that of executive producer, product manager, and designer, all rolled into one.

When expanding on what the means, I’ve been told my elevator pitch would work only on the Burj Khalifa.

So perhaps a more meaningful answer is I assess and meet people’s needs. This is applied differently in the various roles I take, but the core skills are the same: a willingness to listen, a desire to learn, and an ability to put it all together.

Willingness to Listen

Many people think they’re good listeners, just like many people think they’re good drivers – it’s everyone else who is the problem. 

The temptation for anyone in a creative role – particularly when consulting – is to quickly demonstrate just how smart and clever you are to your client. High expectations and short timelines put tremendous pressure on you to launch into a solution before you understand the problem. 

As executive producer, an inability or unwillingness to genuinely listen to your client’s story and needs can critically damage the trust they have in you. Your willingness to actively listen demonstrates respect for both them and their circumstances, and is critical for laying the foundations of a successful project: understanding, trust, and cooperation.

As product manager, acting without first really listening to can result in wasted time and effort as you focus on the wrong priorities and demonstrate a lack of empathy for your audience. This in turn affects the work of a designer, as every action or interaction should serve the needs of the audience and the goals of the product as a whole. 

Even on a personal level, we appreciate feeling heard. Who likes having someone else tell you how you feel or how you should solve your problem without first having really listened to you? 

I was in a roundtable discussion with clients who were very bright, non-technical academics. They wanted a simulation that would reinforce some of the lessons taught to the professionals attending the program. My well-intentioned colleagues, eager to demonstrate their enthusiasm for the client and project, launched into a very interesting and detailed description about just what the simulation should be and how it would work. It was a cool idea and pretty impressive-sounding, really. And it was all terribly wrong for the client.

I could see the clients’ expressions around the table – people who knew they were listening to an expert provide an expert solution, but it was a solution that didn’t feel right in ways they couldn’t articulate. Putting on the brakes, asking open-ended questions, and providing space for the clients to put things in their own terms got us back on track to really understanding their circumstances and problems, and built trust that we could ultimately deliver the experience their alumni needed.

Investing the time to listen doesn’t preclude “moving fast and breaking things,” but it pays to know what you’re breaking and why. 

As an expert in my field, yes, my gut instinct might be completely correct, but a little humility and willingness to listen to others pays off no matter what I’m working on.

Desire to Learn

Coupled with a willingness to listen is a desire to learn. Creating impactful products and experiences requires an understanding of markets, people, and domain knowledge. This can take many shapes: performing product comparisons, consuming source material, working with subject matter experts, developing user persona and/or empathy maps, and so on.

It’s more than compiling data, however. It’s immersing myself in the knowledge and striving to become an “expert” in a new field, or at least have a functional understanding that enables you to speak to the needs of your client and audience. For that, you really need to enjoy learning and experiencing new things, embracing both the growth (and occasional discomfort) that brings.

Sometimes it’s about really getting into the shoes – or boots – of your audience. I was asked to create a game-based learning simulation for the US Army to teach the planning and decision making around logistics. To better understand the experience of the Soldiers I’d be serving, I travelled to Fort Hood, Texas, and took the same week-long crash course the troops take. A similar opportunity took me to the deserts of the National Training Center and a ride with the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment. In both instances, I was able to learn things that aren’t captured effectively in typical user research. Like how sand gets everywhere, including your teeth.

Ability to Apply

All of the above is well-intentioned but ultimately meaningless without the ability to apply it to solve problems effectively. This requires not only the capacity to synthesize what you’ve heard and learned, but the unwavering focus on the client’s and audience’s needs, as well as the discipline to continually revisit your efforts to make sure they remain on target. 

As executive producer, that means establishing a common vocabulary with your client and maintaining clear, honest communication with them throughout the life of a project.

As product manager or designer, that involves continually reevaluating your work, making sure that even as you adapt to newfound learning and changes in the market or simply come up with cool ideas, your plans and design remain focused on fulfilling the real needs you’ve assessed. 

Without discipline, this can be a haphazard or reactionary exercise, chasing after an ever-changing goal. Staying focused on what I’ve listened to and learned makes this iterative process one of continual refinement and improvement, better serving the needs of my client and audience. 

That’s how I strive to serve people both personally and professionally, assessing, understanding, and meeting their needs, because ultimately helping them achieve success is my success as well. 

Ah. We’ve reached the top floor. I hope you enjoy the view.