Beware of false and true "attack" combination

Today we went to buy an iPod for my son.

The shop where we bought the iPod failed to neutralize the
sensor/sticker in the package that causes the alarm to go off at the exit from the shop. So it sounded when we left, but since I knew that I paid for it and the guys in the shop simply didn't pay attention to it, so we just walked away.
And here is the interesting part of the story.
We went on to visit several shops, in each shop the alarm went off on our entry, then the sales men would check us, find out that it is the iPod from another shop and then - just forget us. It seems that they never even thought to check us for the second time when the alarm went off on our leaving the shop. We could've taken the whole shop with us and they wouldn't notice!

This reminded me of something that I heard once.
This technique is often used by the crooks. They let you check something, let you see that it is OK and then take it back for just a second - to switch for something else or to reduce the amount of cash for example. When they hand it back to you - you will not double-check it since you "already checked" and feel sure that it's OK.

So, do not hesitate to re-check!

IT Manager vs. Security Officer - using "kill with a borrowed knife" & "let him have it and regret!"

A true story.

In a mid size company, its IT department manager has discovered that the security (SO) officer of the company is trying to gain some more power in the company. In this case - come control over the IT department. To this end the SO persuaded CEO of the company to allow him to conduct some security analysis of the company's network. He considered it to be a good opening for gaining some control over IT.

You bet, the IT dept. manager didn't like the idea. The IT manager (ITM) tried to dissuade first the SO, then the CEO, but couldn't win the argument. The CEO - having already given the permission to the security officer - didn't want to change it, even though he was explained that bringing in an external company that will run intrusive tests presents a security risk in itself.
The IT manager seemed to have lost the battle, when on one of the following days he wrote an e-mail to the CEO, saying that he will give all the help required to the SO and the security analysts, yet cannot, under the circumstances, be responsible for the security risk from the actions of the external company (he cited the risks).

Now the CEO didn't like it (if anything happens - he is to blame). The next day he gave the IT manager the power to control and supervise the testing, thus giving the IT manager control over the SO actions. Just the opposite of what SO wanted to achieve! IT manager won!

Strategy-wise - the IT manager withdrew all the resistance ("rolled back" as in tomoe nage), but now the CEO will get all the responsibility for the risk ("flip and crash").

Here two strategies were involved.
1. "Kill with a borrowed knife" (definition to be added)- the IT manager used the CEO to fend off the the SO's attack.
2. "Let him have it and regret!" - the secondary, ensuing conflict with the CEO was won by using the sudden withdrawal of resistance - and thus leading him into undesired position.
See definition of the "Let him have it and regret!" strategy and other examples of it's use here.

Office Depot - use of "offer a brick to win a gem"

Office Depot provides another excellent example of "offer a brick to win a gem" strategy.
Office Depot advertise that you can "buy and try" any (almost) product for two weeks.
If you do not like it - just return it - no questions asked.
People come there 'cause they know that they will not end up with something that doesn't suit them perfectly. If not they can just return and take another brand or design.

Analysis:
Well it's pretty obvious - they offer the "buy and try" = "the brick" to attract customers and sales = "the gem".

See definition of the "offer a brick to win a gem" strategy and other examples of it's use here.

Apple stores, Drugstore Wars and the use of "offer a brick to win a gem"

Apple Stores Success.
In an article in New York Times the author tells about the outstanding success of the Apple retail stores chain compared to all the competitors. The bottom line - he attributes the success of the stores to the "Genius Bar" located at every store and staffed with the diagnostic wizards whose expertise is available in one-on-one consultations — free. The offered ability to come and consult the wizards with the problems and to get the sometimes badly needed advice - that's what brings the people to the stores. They can also come and test the hard- and software before buying them.
The "genius bar" - "the brick" attracts people and as a result - sales.
Here is the New York Times article.

Drugstore Wars of the 80's.
In the great Drugstore Wars of the 1980's the competition was equal across the board. One chain of stores broke the deadlock by offering blood pressure machines in their stores. Customers could wander in, sit at the machine with their arm in the automated cuff, and have their blood pressure taken for free. No hassle, no pressure to buy anything, no charge for the service. Each machine was placed back in the pharmacy section so the customers walked the length of the store to get to the machine.

Equipping each store with an automated blood pressure machine required an investment, but it turned casual customers into consistent customers. Thousands and thousands of people suffer from high blood pressure, and the handy, free reading prompted them to use this certain drug store chain whenever they needed any of the items stocked there. They could pick up what they needed and check their blood pressure. Thus, the outlay of a few thousand dollars per store, with maintenance of a few hundred dollars every year, returned thousands of dollars more in revenue and profit.

See definition of the "offer a brick to win a gem" strategy.

Strategy: "Offer a brick to win a gem"

This is also one of the original 36 Chinese stratagems.

The idea is very simple - offer something of lesser value ("the brick") to gain something of higher value ("the gem").
I would say that this is probably one of the most used strategies.
"The brick" may be of real or illusionary value and may come in many forms - e.g. power, wealth, sex. When somebody flirts with the person in power trying to get him to do something, or tells him that "I could do this or that for you" - it is essentially "offer a brick to win a gem" in action.
It does not have to be an illusionary "bait" - the value may be very real. When store owners offer sales and discounts - they offer a little price reduction to get the profit or to get back the money invested in the "stale" product. Same thing when they offer to pay in many installments.
With kids - actually every time when you say "if you do this, you will get that" - using a "reward" - you use the "offer a brick to win a gem" strategy.
The simple applications of the strategy may look straightforward and maybe unexciting , but it may be used to reach the goal very effectively and in more sophisticated ways. As in the following examples:

Examples:
1. Apple stores, Drugstore Wars
2. Office Depot

Feeding a kid

Kids. You love them, but if you have to make them do something it may become ugly :).
My kid, 3+, is not a big "eater". Usually making him finish the meal is a problem.
Lots of "please eat", "finish the meal", etc. etc. were driving me and my wife mad. Well, I would be happy if he ate something - he knows if he is hungry or not - but my wife wanted him to eat a full meal every time. So, almost every meal it was "yelling time".
One day, in a flash of inspiration I had an idea. Well, the solution is nothing magical, and I bet many use it, but it still is a good application of a strategy - that's why I present it here.
It has two parts.
1. I told the kid that the sweets after the meal are a "dessert". And dessert is what you eat only if you have finished most of the meal.
2. I is up to you to finish the meal or not. I am fine if you just ate one spoonful. You don't want to eat - you are free to walk away from the table. But no dessert - it is only "after" the meal!
Well, I was surprised myself - it worked like magic! Even, if he eats veeeerrrrryyy slowly, I now tell him: "you eat way too slowly - the meal time is over - do you want me to take the plate away?" "Oh, sorry, no, you didn't eat enough to get the dessert!" You should see the way he digs into the plate then :)!
So, now the meals are much more pleasant, and quiet!

Strategies:
"Besiege Wei to save Zhao" is used here.
To "defend Zhao" in terms of the strategy - it was next to impossible to make him finish the meal.
"Besiege Wei" (attack something dear) - if he doesn't finish, there will be no dessert.

Psychologically, since it was turned into a rule - "dessert is something that comes only after you finished most of the meal" - is not a punishment if he doesn't get it. And it is not personal, as it is "if you do not finish, I will punish you by not giving you dessert!" Nobody is hurt, everybody is happy!
And, an additional bonus - if he says "no, I do not want to eat, never mind the dessert" - then you know that he really doesn't want to eat and can take it easy!

"smoking on watch" - example of "besiege Wei.." and "create something.."

The story happened during a training course in the army.
The course itself was a some variety of the basic training for the 30yrs+ and medical staff so it lasted just 2 weeks.
Anyway, towards the end of the course, several guys were caught smoking cigarettes on watch. That was actually a pretty usual practice on the camp. What was unusual - that the camp commander decided to have them tried for it. After the guys from one squad were tried - everybody was stunned. Well, everybody expected them to get punished by some form of the kitchen duty or toilet-scrubbing. But they were heavily fined instead. On the next day the trial was to take place in the other squad.
In the morning one of the guys of the second squad approached his sarge and asked him politely if the sarge was aware that the whole affair was not that fair - anybody could've been caught since it was a regular practice and there were no punishments for it before. The guy went on and said: "look, people are really upset with this stuff and there are all kinds of talking, but I bet you would not want people to refuse to be sworn in over this (the ceremony was to take place the next day), do you?"
The sarge left without a word, but the trial set for the afternoon was canceled. In the second squad nobody was tried or punished!

Two strategies were used here:
1. "Attack Wei to save Zhao"(see the definition):
It would've been impossible to defend once being on trial, but here something else - very important for the sergeant suddenly came under attack - the ceremony! He preferred to cancel the court altogether lest risk the danger of somebody refusing to be sworn in.
2. "create something out of nothing"(see the definition):
Actually, just a hint on the refusal to be sworn in was used - there were no actual talks about that in the squad.