Shaping a Structural and Visual
      Representation of Strategic Interaction
                                         KLAUS GASTEIERa,1
                                   a
                                       University of the Arts, Berlin


            Abstract. In the special case of strategic interaction, understood as the relation
            between concealed and exposed actions, a formalized visual representation of
            otherwise obscure structures could provide a better understanding of actual
            conflict situations and their inherent risks and potentials. Based on the concept of
            the historical Chinese 36 Stratagems our design-driven approach tries to explore
            the possibilities of visualization and logographic sign languages in improving the
            understanding and use of stratagems in a more intuitive way.

            Keywords. Strategic Interaction, 36 Stratagems, Visualization, Interaction Design,
            Information Design, Formalization, Structural Representation, Logographic Language



1. Introduction

To our understanding the general term 'strategy' is a means to plan, prevail and shape
future according to a strategist’s intention. Competing strategies of interacting
opponents to achieve conflicting goals always have been the driving forces in economy,
society, politics and in war - in everyday social interaction. We define human
interaction as strategic when it is characterized by the relation of intentions and actions
towards the other side. In many cases concealed intentions and visible actions don’t
directly match. As another common ground of applying strategies through strategic
interaction in human power struggles is their confidentiality and intended invisibility
towards the opponent and/or third parties in order to gain advantage. Rarely the visible
action directly shows the intention. Revealing, disentangling and conveying opposing
strategies often means to take away the other side’s advantage and sometimes gain
one's own.
      In order to get a better grasp of hidden human interaction structures usually made
possible through their invisibility, we2 combined a design approach with insights of
strategic sciences, semiotics and linguistics. Based on the traditional 36 Stratagems, an
ancient Chinese arsenal of modular basic metaphorical instructions for ruses (here
interpreted as: indirect interactions), we experimented with design ideas to understand
'stratagemic thinking'3 through narrative, ludic and symbolic means. Leading to a first
draft of a possible logographic sign 'language', our goal is to find a visual and structural

     1
       Institute of Time Based Media, University of the Arts UDK, Grunewaldstr, 2-5, 10283 Berlin,
Germany; E-mail: kg@udk-berlin.de.
     2
       Currently: Master students and colleague Prof. Dr. Jürgen Schulz in a transdisciplinary UDK research
seminar, 2017
     3
      We further coin the adverb ‘stratagemic‘ for the process of applying these stratagems
representation system to make the “Art of the Advantage” 4 visible and thereby
'writable' by better de/constructing invisible agendas and intentions previously omitted
in common communication layers. And to help us improving our comprehension of
human behavior and interaction patterns, from a different perspective.



2. Towards a Visualization of Strategic Interaction

This is a design-driven project experimentally trying to creatively connect different
scientific discourses and strategic science. As to our knowledge there is no formalized
way to materialize and visualize these structures of hidden strategic intentions so we
tried to invent one – resulting in a simple logographic construction system for
stratagemata, like a domain specific visual (non-phonetic) ‘language’.


2.1. Stratagemata and the Stratagems

     Strategemata were a historical collection of summarized ancient military strategy
knowledge written by Sextus lulius Frontinus, followed by a similar named collection
of the Greek Polyainos, predated by the classic works of Sun Tzu and much later
extended by famous publications such as the types of Machiavelli and von Clausewitz 5.
Over the centuries ‘strategemata’ or ‘stratagemata’ became synonymous to collections
of strategic knowledge intended for military and political purposes. Taking it out of
military context we use ‘stratagemata’ here as a general term for knowledge collections
conveying strategic rules of indirect and hidden social interactions. In the history of
known stratagemata usually one author wrote down personal and traditional, collective
experience to a continuous text of exemplary instructions and recommendations. But
there is one notable exception, where an otherwise loose collection of textual
instructions was condensed and transformed into a homogenous system of granular,
metaphorical directives: The ancient 36 Stratagems [1,3,6,8] are a unique means of
mastering situational cunning, forming an arsenal of modular and combinable artifices.
They are a systemically structured catalog of recommendations for action to indirectly
achieve goals in everyday life and conflicts - based on the identified current situation.
     They originate in ancient China and became a cultural property by oral tradition.
Rooted in at least the fourth century, they have been written down in the 16th century
in the form presently known. In our culture we might know a few of these ancient
stratagems like ‘Kill with a borrowed sword’, ‘Create something from nothing’, and
‘Hide a knife behind a smile’ or are able to guess from their simple narratives like
‘Stomp the grass to scare the snake’ or ‘Point at the mulberry tree while cursing the
locust tree’, but as a full system basically taught to children they remain largely
unknown to European and Western popular culture [1,5,6].




     4
      Also title of the stratagem-based book of Kaihan Krippendorff [3]
     5
      Strategemata - Sextus Julius Frontinus, 85 AD. Strategematon - Polyainos, 109 AD. The Art of War -
Sun Tzu, around 500 BC, Il Principe - Niccolò Machiavelli, 1513. Vom Kriege - Carl von Clausewitz, 1832.
2.2. Stratagems and Intuition

     There’s a structural beauty in the traditional form of these 36 Stratagems clustered
in six blocks ordered by possible situation types and one’s position in it (See Figure 1).
 „Six multiplied by six equals thirty-six. Calculations produce tactics which in turn produce calculations.
 Each side depends upon the other. Based on this correlative relationship, ploys against the enemy are
 devised. Rigid application of Military theory will only result in defeat on the battlefield.“
                                             Prologue in 36 Business Stratagems, orig. ref. unknown [9]
     Especially the last sentence addresses the growing awareness in Western culture
that pre-defined complex plans in theory never transform to reality as intended [2].
Only in ‘retrofitting’ the conventional approach of linearly constructing and complying
to a pre-defined drawing board plan to enforce a desired future works out exactly as
planned and therefore clearly has its limitations.
     More situationally flexible and scalable strategic approaches could be necessary, so
the Stratagems offer much more adaptive, subtle, reactive and sometimes serendipitous
ways to achieve one’s goals. Central to their everyday accessibility is their perceivable
memorability. Not only with it’s 6x6 ordering but also with its consistent reduction to a
basic set of four Chinese signs to each stratagem (with the exception of the last six each
consisting of three signs) the 36 Stratagems in its original form can be seen as a
cultural knowledge preservation device characterized by structural aesthetics
(Influenced by the I Ging and by the Yin Yang polarity principle [8,1]).
     It represents a framework of simplification, combining metaphors and aesthetics of
consistency and symmetry, in order to be easily memorable and intuitively applicable. 6




              Figure 1. The 36 Stratagems in their original 6x6 structure (own representation)


    The unique basic approach of the 36 Stratagems - if we try to separate it from the
grim military connotation and do not judge it ethically - seems like a blueprint for an

      6
        But, especially when coming from another culture, the metaphorical approach does not work well any
more in modern times and outside its original cultural context, like basically few Westerners can relate to
stratagem titles and narratives like „Besiege Wèi to rescue Zhào“ or „Obtain safe passage to conquer the
State of Guo" and need a cultural translation
intuitive construction kit for systemically identifying and initiating interaction patterns
and their cascades in everyday human life.
     Those Stratagems and what they represent only need to be transformed to be more
accessible and intuitively applicable in other cultures.


2.3. Understanding Stratagems: Ludic and Narrative Ways

     As sinologist and jurist Harro von Senger, who basically brought the knowledge of
the 36 Stratagems from China to Europe 30 years ago, never stopped pointing out
[5,6,7], the Western treatment of cunning always was characterized by a strong ethical
condemnation, neglecting the political and social significance of at least being aware of
the ‚Art of Cunning'. The German word ‘List’ (ruse, cunning) is usually negatively
connotated in our culture (‘Hinterlist’, ‘Arglist’ - like: deceit, craftiness, malice) and
this, according to Senger, led to an occidental ‘ruse blindness’ [5], a lack of maturity in
recognizing and applying conscious stratagemic actions. This seems urgently needed
when dealing with a stratagemically conscious opponent - especially since the
application training helps in particular identifying stratagemic behavior in others - and
oneself [7]. To achieve this, one has to internalize this system in ways not rationally
taught in academic books and rarely described in experimental contexts [4].
     In a series of design and UDK research seminars with interaction designers,
communication scientists and strategists, several narratological and ludic approaches
for finding better ways teaching stratagemic thinking emerged. In team projects
students conceived sets of more accessible, contemporary metaphors 7, audiovisual
representations8, narrative devices 9 or generating whole board games centered around
competitive storytelling and debating10. For brevity's sake, this will not be examined in
detail here but it was an important step towards the approach presented in this paper.


2.4. Formalizing and Transforming a Metaphorical Structure to a Logographic Language

     In a next phase of stratagem-themed seminars we tried to find haptic, visual and
logical ways to represent and construct stratagems in order to to gain a more intuitive
understanding. After some research and evaluation of found references, I suggested the
idea of combining the insights from previous formalization and categorization attempts
(shown in Figure 2) and the underlying impression of the 36 Stratagems as a Lego-like-
construction kit to a formalized and very simple logographic sign language starting
with a basic SPO11-structure (but without phonetic usage). Inspired by an old project of
my UDK colleague Timothée Ingen-Housz from 1995 called Elephant’s Memory, a
non-linear “experimental logographic writing system and interactive visual language” 12
     7
         Like the project ‘strategem.org’ (available on archive.org, Majada Daria Ramadan, UDK 2015)
     8
         Fictional ‘Stratagems for Kids’-video series called ‘Trickids’ (In a design seminar, FH Aachen 2006 )
      9
         A ’Black Stories’ stratagem adaption (Dennis Höfinghoff, Simon Meßmer, Maximilian Schulz, UDK 2017)
      10
           ‘Buereau Niveau’, a collaborative storytelling-oriented stratagem-game set in everyday office
culture, or ‘Spin Doctor’, a competitive political debating game utilizing an adapted structure of the 36
Stratagems, or ‘Laubenpieper’, a competitive strategy game for climbing up the organisational hierarchy of a
typical German allotment garden colony – among many other games, UDK 2010-2013
      11
        Subject, Predicate, Object
      12
         http://www.elephantsmemory.net
a group of UDK students 13 tried to create a radically simple visual construction kit of
social actors, functions and attributes representing stratagems, shown in Figure 3, that
could work as a card game, digital app and even as refrigerator magnets and is intended
to be intuitively easy to use. Nonetheless it has the ambition to be capable of
visualizing all ways of indirect strategic interactions shown in the 36 Stratagems on a
meta-level, further being usable as analytical tool to write down identified or
speculated, probable and possible stratagemic pattern in a formalized language-like
way and therefore influencing our behavior in the long term.
    Its not intended to be a full ‘spoken’ language for bidirectional communication
usage but to be applied on a translating, analytical meta-level only.




            Figure 2. Different categorizations of the 36 Stratagems (Collected by Björn Weigelt)

    13
         Charlotte Zehentmair and Taina Sondermann in the seminar “Stratagem-ification” , UDK 2017
 Figure 3. First impressions of Strata-Grammar, an editor-based logographic sign language for stratagems.
 Project and version by Charlotte Zehentmair and Taina Sondermann, based on the master research seminar
“Stratagem-ification” by Klaus Gasteier and Dr. Jürgen Schulz, UDK 2017, app prototype by Martin Stelter
2.5. Next Steps: Writing and Thinking Stratagemic?


     This is a design project experimenting with assumptions inspired by the scientific
context. A first conceptual prototype was built from ideas derived from creatively
connecting several scientific discourses we are not all experts in. This result needs to be
tested further; structurally, visually and functionally improved and a proper formalizing
and ontologizing process with expert help is needed to make the functional logic more
commonly applicable and the system scalable in further iterations of this approach.

     First feedback discussions and reactions to the result point to an interesting
potential: Training to construct stratagems as a speculative interpretation in a purely
visual diagrammatical way shows us learning to think in and identify stratagemic
structures without knowing verbally the traditional (and culturally/metaphorically
clouded and imprecise) stratagems. Just by memorizing and differentiating the logic
and visual pattern and their ‘vectors’ emerging from a modular logographic
construction kit this approach can help transforming the previously hardly verbally
describable to the intuitively thinkable, like an antithesis to Orwell’s fictional
‘Newspeak‘. We might get a better grasp of what people think, but not tell - or if and
why they show misleading actions contrasting their real intentions. Because it’s a
central part of human interaction patterns, if we like it or not. Internalizing stratagemic
thinking - presented here in one possible way - might be a critical sensitization process
for increasing fairness and equality in complex social strategic interaction.




References

[1] Lanfen Guo, Die ‘36 Strategeme‘ in der chinesischen und westlichen Wirtschaftsliteratur, Harrassowitz,
     Wiesbaden, 2008.
[2] Francois Jullien, Vortrag vor Managern über Wirksamkeit und Effizienz in China und im Westen, Merve,
     Berlin, 2005.
[3] Kaihan Krippendorf, The Art of the Advantage, Texere, NY, 2003.
[4] Adam Matuschczyk, Kreative Strategeme, Kardinal Verlag, Hannover, 2010.
[5] Harro von Senger, Die List, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1999.
[6] Harro von Senger, Strategeme. Lebens- und Überlebenslisten aus drei Jahrtausenden I & II, S. Fischer,
     Frankfurt a.M, 2008.
[7] Harro von Senger, Die Kunst der List, C.H.Beck, München, 2001.
[8] Stefan H. Verstappen, The Thirty-six Strategies in Ancient China, China Books & Periodicals, Chicago,
      1999.
[9] Wang Xuanming, 36 Business Stratagems: Secret Art of War for Today’s Entrepreneurs, Asiapac Books,
     Singapore, 2004.