Excerpt:  Strategy and History, part three

In parts one and two of strategy and history, we uncovered many insights for strategists by examining history through the lenses first of people and then of events.  To round out this chapter, we dive into the third and final lens, that of context.  To add in layers of additional information, so that we can then drill down into the trends, the underlying factors, the actions that were taken before, during and after events, and infer the reasons why.  Being thoughtful about the quantity and the quality of this additional information, striking a balance between signal and noise.  Being cognisant of the latest innovations in data science and the research into quantitative history using artificial intelligence techniques.

For, by context we mean the circumstances leading up to and including the historical person or event itself, as well as the circumstances surrounding the historian, the dataset or evidence, and the interpretation (including the means of communication of the interpretation).  As we highlighted earlier, history is about power.  Power over narrative.  Power via ownership of history.

Not for nothing is playwright Edward Bulwer-Lytton remembered for the saying, “The pen is mightier than the sword.”

If context is defined as “the situation within which something exists or happens, and that can help explain it” or “the influences and events related to a particular event or situation”*, then what are the factors or aspects of context?

* https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/context

They are, of course, varied in nature and can include things such as time (and time zone), place, setting, economics, social structures and norms, language, religion and beliefs, education, equality, recent positive and negative events, resources, scientific factors such as climate, astronomy and geophysics, technology, and culture and arts.  In other words, the full panoply of human activity.  And for any one historical person or event, what aspect of context is critical to identify and understand may vary (and often does vary by historian, perhaps the first level of bias that is introduced - what does one pay attention to, or emphasise, as part of research and analysis).  You as a strategist should determine for yourself what contextual elements you need to know, and endeavour to obtain that information (or “metadata”) in order to feel confident in what you are learning from the historical example or reference.  That, in turn, will contribute to your effort to translate that learning to your current situation or problem at hand...