连环计
Against a strong enemy, never stake everything on one scheme. Link several together so each sets up the next — one plan to bind and immobilise him, another to strike, a third to exploit the break — so that if one slips, the chain still holds.
The principle
A single stratagem against a powerful enemy is fragile: if he sees through it or simply absorbs it, you have nothing left. The chain of plans layers several schemes so they interlock and compound. Typically the first binds the enemy — ties down his strength, fixes him in place, or removes his freedom to manoeuvre; the second delivers the blow that a mobile, alert enemy could have avoided; and further links widen the advantage or cover a failure. Each plan makes the next one work; the enemy who escapes one falls into the shape the previous plan has already forced him into. The strength is also the difficulty: chains are complex and demand a mind that can hold the whole sequence, adapting as each link lands — but well-built, they are extraordinarily hard to break.
Historical origin
Applied today
Don't bet a hard campaign on one move. Sequence them: a first initiative that ties up the competitor's attention or resources, a second that lands the real gain while they're committed, a third that locks it in — each covering the last.
Complex plans fail at the joints. If you chain moves, assign someone to hold the whole sequence in view and adapt as each stage lands — a chain that no one is watching end-to-end breaks at the first surprise.
In practice
Invented scenarios showing this stratagem at work — illustrations, not reports of real events.
Five reasonable settings
Five settings had each been signed off as low risk: retrieval with no freshness check, a tool permitted to write, an approval step defaulting to yes after an hour, a summary shown in place of the raw record, and a schedule that ran overnight. In sequence they produced two hundred incorrect account updates before anyone was awake. Every one of them had been reasonable alone.
Use it Review agent permissions as a path from retrieval through to action, not as a list of individually acceptable settings.
Four things that all had to work
Each step was sound on its own: a lease, then a production line installed, then a certification, then a listing with a retail chain. The certification took eleven weeks longer than assumed. The lease ran, the line sat idle, and the listing window closed until the following year. Every step had been assessed. The order they depended on had not.
Use it Map which steps cannot begin until another finishes and buy slack there — plans fail at the joints, not the parts.
Nothing was serious alone
The review listed five findings, each previously assessed as low severity: a stale account, a verbose error message, an unmonitored subdomain, a permissive rule, an unretired key. Every one had been accepted individually with reason. The incident used all five in order. The severity was in the sequence, and nothing in the process had ever assessed sequences.
Use it Assess how small weaknesses chain together — rate the path, not only each finding on its own.