HuckFinn

"All The News That's Fit To Satirize"

Government | Corporate | History | Workplace | Sabotage

CIA Discovers Corporate America Has Been Following Its 1944 Sabotage Manual For Decades

Declassified OSS field manual designed to undermine enemy organizations found to perfectly describe modern meeting culture, middle management, and committee structures

Declassified 2008
Declassified
STRATEGIC SERVICES FIELD MANUAL No. 3
Office of Strategic Services | Washington, D.C. | 17 January 1944
Section 11(a) - General Interference with Organizations
"Insist on doing everything through 'channels.' Never permit short-cuts to be taken in order to expedite decisions... Make 'speeches.' Talk as frequently as possible and at great length... When possible, refer all matters to committees, for 'further study and consideration.' Attempt to make the committees as large as possible—never less than five."
Note
The above tactics were designed to cripple enemy organizations during World War II. Modern researchers note they are now considered "corporate best practices."

LANGLEY, VA — In what intelligence analysts are calling "the most successful covert operation in American history, though entirely by accident," the Central Intelligence Agency has confirmed that Corporate America has been faithfully executing the agency's 1944 Simple Sabotage Field Manual for approximately 80 years without any direction, funding, or awareness whatsoever.

The manual, originally created by the Office of Strategic Services to help resistance movements undermine Axis powers during World War II, was declassified in 2008. Agency analysts recently revisiting the document noticed something troubling: every single tactic designed to destroy enemy productivity had become standard operating procedure in American business.

"We wrote this to bring Nazi Germany to its knees," said Dr. Patricia Caldwell, a CIA historian speaking at a press conference where no actionable information was shared. "Turns out it's just a Fortune 500 operations manual with better formatting."

"When we wrote 'refer all matters to committees for further study,' we meant it as sabotage. When McKinsey writes it, they charge $400,000." — Former OSS Officer, requesting anonymity out of embarrassment

The discovery emerged during a routine internal review when a junior analyst noticed that his employer—the CIA itself—was following all 11 organizational sabotage tactics described in Section 11 of the manual. Upon further investigation, he found that literally every organization in America was doing the same thing.

"I thought we were tracking some kind of hostile foreign operation," said the analyst, who requested his name be redacted because he values his job slightly more than his sanity. "Turns out it was just the all-hands meeting."

1944 OSS Sabotage Tactic Modern Corporate Equivalent
"Insist on doing everything through proper channels" Enterprise Resource Planning systems, approval workflows, "following process"
"Make speeches. Talk as frequently as possible and at great length" Quarterly town halls, mandatory all-hands, any meeting with an executive
"Refer all matters to committees for further study" Working groups, task forces, tiger teams, steering committees
"Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible" Scope creep, "while we're at it," the entire concept of Slack threads
"Haggle over precise wordings of communications" Legal review, brand guidelines, "can we workshop this language?"
"Reopen questions decided upon at the last meeting" HIPPO override (Highest Paid Person's Opinion), "let's circle back"
"Advocate 'caution' and urge fellow-conferees to be 'reasonable'" Risk management, compliance review, "have we consulted legal?"
"Demand written orders" Email documentation, "can you put that in writing?", CYA culture

Harvard Business School professor Dr. Warren Mills, who studies organizational dysfunction, expressed measured alarm at the findings. "We've been teaching MBAs to do all of this for decades," he said. "It's in the curriculum. It IS the curriculum."

The manual's Section 11(b), which targets managers specifically, proved equally prescient. The OSS advised saboteurs to "never pass on your skill and experience to a new or less skillful worker" and to "assign important jobs to inefficient workers." Exit interviews conducted by HR departments across America suggest this has been standard practice since approximately 1946.

Is Your Workplace Compromised?

Answer these questions to calculate your organization's OSS Sabotage Compliance Score

1. How many approval levels are required to order office supplies?
2. What percentage of your meetings could have been emails?
3. How often does your organization "circle back" on already-decided matters?
4. How many committees or working groups exist in your organization?
0%
Loading...

Industry response to the revelation has been swift and decisive, which is to say there will be an interdepartmental task force formed to study the implications pending legal review and executive alignment.

"We take these findings very seriously," said a spokesperson for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, reading from prepared remarks that had been reviewed by no fewer than seven committees. "We plan to convene a working group to examine potential synergies between wartime sabotage tactics and contemporary best practices."

"The genius of it is that nobody had to be recruited. Nobody had to be paid. American workers just organically evolved into perfect saboteurs." — Dr. Patricia Caldwell, CIA Historian

The manual's Section 12, which covers "General Morale" sabotage, advises operatives to "act stupid" and "be as irritable and quarrelsome as possible without getting into trouble." Researchers noted this perfectly describes approximately 40% of all LinkedIn influencer content.

OSS Tactic Translator

See how 1944 sabotage instructions appear in modern corporate contexts

Original 1944 Sabotage Directive
"Make speeches. Talk as frequently as possible and at great length."
Modern Form: "Let's do a quick sync to align on the go-forward strategy and socialize our thinking with stakeholders."

When asked whether the CIA had considered alerting American businesses to the fact that they were operating exactly like organizations targeted for destruction by WWII resistance movements, agency officials declined to comment, citing the need for further review by the appropriate interagency committee.

The Business Roundtable issued a statement defending current practices, noting that "while we acknowledge superficial similarities to historical sabotage techniques, our committees, approval processes, and lengthy meetings are designed to create value for shareholders, not undermine productivity." The statement took three weeks to draft and required sign-off from 12 executives.

Sponsored Content
McKinsey Presents: Simple Sabotage, Enterprise Edition
Why settle for amateur organizational dysfunction when you can have professionally-designed process overhead? Our consultants have studied the 1944 OSS manual and enhanced it with modern frameworks, proprietary matrices, and a 400-page implementation guide. Now with AI integration!
*McKinsey accepts no responsibility for organizations that were already dysfunctional. Consulting fees non-refundable. Results may vary from "catastrophic" to "apocalyptic."

Perhaps most alarming to researchers was the manual's advice for employee-level sabotage: "Work slowly. Think out ways to increase the number of movements necessary on your job." Studies show this precisely describes the average American worker's relationship with enterprise software.

"Every time I have to click through 17 screens to submit a timesheet, I think about the OSS officer who wrote this manual," said one IT worker who requested anonymity because his company monitors all communications. "He'd be so proud. Or horrified. Probably both."

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that if American businesses had not accidentally implemented OSS sabotage tactics over the past 80 years, the U.S. economy would be approximately $47 trillion larger. However, economists note this figure should be taken with caution, as the study's methodology required approval from 14 different committees and may contain errors introduced during the 3-year review process.

As of press time, the CIA had scheduled a meeting to discuss forming a working group to study potential responses to the findings. The meeting was subsequently postponed pending review of the agenda by legal counsel.

Comments 23

FormerOSSAnalyst Clearance: Revoked 2 hours ago
I wrote part of Section 11. We thought we were being clever. Turns out we were just predicting the future of American management. My grandson is a "Agile Coach" now. I don't know what that means but based on his description it sounds like professional sabotage.
▲ 2.3k ▼ 14 Reply
MiddleManagementSurvivor 1 hour ago
I showed this to my boss and asked why we follow a sabotage manual. He said we need to "socialize the feedback with leadership" and "circle back once we've had a chance to align." I've never felt more validated.
▲ 1.8k ▼ 22 Reply
AgileScumMaster 45 minutes ago
To be fair, Scrum wasn't designed as sabotage. It just evolved that way through committee review.
▲ 892 ▼ 156 Reply
ConsultantAnon Verified McKinsey 3 hours ago
We prefer to call it "organizational maturity frameworks" not "sabotage." Also our engagement letters explicitly state that we're not responsible for outcomes. So technically we're clean.
▲ 567 ▼ 1.2k Reply
CorporateDefector 2 hours ago
I just calculated my company's OSS Compliance Score. We're at 94%. I thought that was bad until I realized our parent company is at 98%. The 6% gap is being addressed by a new Committee for Process Optimization Excellence.
▲ 1.4k ▼ 8 Reply
QuietlyQuitting 1 hour ago
The manual says to "work slowly" and "think out ways to increase the number of movements necessary." My company just deployed a new expense reporting system that requires 23 clicks to submit a receipt. We're not being sabotaged—we're being optimized.
▲ 2.1k ▼ 34 Reply
TechLeadInRecovery 4 hours ago
"Assign important jobs to inefficient workers" - I thought this was just how promotions worked. You're telling me it's literally wartime sabotage? That explains my last three managers.
▲ 3.4k ▼ 67 Reply
RetiredCIAAnalyst1962 30 minutes ago
During the Cold War we tried to get Soviet organizations to adopt these tactics. Turns out they already had. Then we tried to get American companies to avoid them. Turns out they loved them. The enemy was inside us all along.
▲ 789 ▼ 12 Reply
StartupFounderBro 2 hours ago
This is why we disrupted the traditional corporate model at my startup. We have NO committees. NO approval processes. NO managers. Just 47 Slack channels, daily standups, biweekly retrospectives, monthly OKR reviews, and quarterly planning sessions. Totally different.
▲ 234 ▼ 891 Reply