I LEARN one of the most useful lessons in chess, not from a beautiful win, but from the discomfort of a bad move.
Once a piece is misplaced, the board does not care about intention; it only shows the new position. That is the cruelty of chess, and also its honesty.
Every player knows the feeling of wanting to take back a move. Sometimes the damage is small: a pawn lost too cheaply, a square weakened too early or a threat noticed one move too late.
Sometimes the mistake is larger: A single blunder changes the whole position, and what looked stable a moment earlier suddenly feels exposed.
Yet, chess is rarely decided by the mistake alone; it is often decided by what happens afterward.
A weak player keeps staring at the move already made. A stronger player accepts the new reality, studies the board again and asks a colder question: What can still be saved?
That question is not only useful in chess. It is also profoundly relevant to companies and governments, especially in a period when the economic board is shifting quickly.
Indonesia is not in a losing position. Statistics Indonesia reported that the economy grew 5.61% year-on-year in the first quarter of financial year 2026 (1Q26).
In its May policy statement, Bank Indonesia (BI) noted that growth had improved from 5.39% in 4Q25 and projected 2026 growth in the range of 4.9% to 5.7%, supported by domestic demand and policy coordination.
In chess terms, Indonesia has come out of the opening with a playable position. The pieces are active, the foundation is strong, and there is room to move.
But a good opening does not win the game by itself. The middle game is where positions become complicated and threats no longer come from just one direction.
A player may still have pieces on the board, yet the king may be unsafe. A position may look active, yet a single hidden weakness can decide the game.
The International Monetary Fund has projected global growth of 3.1% in 2026 and 3.2% in 2027 while warning that conflict in the Middle East, commodity price pressures, firmer inflation expectations and tighter financial conditions are testing the resilience of the world economy.
Indonesia is not immune to these pressures.
S&P Global’s latest Indonesia Manufacturing Purchasing Managers’ Index showed the index slipping from 50.1 in March to 49.1 in April, with a reading below 50 signalling contraction.
It does not overturn Indonesia’s growth story, but it gives a clearer look at the uneven texture beneath the headline.
The rupiah tells another part of the story. BI’s Jisdor data placed the currency at 18,039 per US dollar on June 5. Reuters reported that bearish sentiment toward the rupiah had reached its strongest level since October 2022, shaped by a stronger US dollar and high energy prices.
None of these facts mean Indonesia is losing the game. They simply mean the position has become more complex. This is where many players, companies and governments make their second mistake.
The first mistake may be a wrong move; the second is refusing to accept that the position has changed.
In chess, a blunder often comes not from ignorance but from attachment.
Finance often shows a similar pattern.
A budget can look sensible when it is approved and become fragile when currency pressure, customer behaviour or funding costs move in different directions.
The dangerous sentence is not always “we were wrong”; often, it is “let us wait a little longer”. Companies and governments can both fall into that trap.
A business expansion that once looked attractive can become dangerous when financing costs rise, customer demand softens or cash flow tightens.
A government policy can be convincing at the design stage yet, struggle when it meets bureaucracy, regional capacity, fragmented data and public behaviour.
In all these cases, the original idea may not have been foolish.
The problem begins when leaders keep defending the old position after the board has changed.
Getting back in the game begins with intellectual honesty. A serious chess player does not say “my position is fine” when it is not.
He does not confuse pride with strategy. Public policy and corporate decision-making need the same discipline.
For governments, it means judging policy by impact rather than announcement.
A programme is not successful because it has a large budget, a strong slogan or national visibility. It becomes successful when it works across regions, reaches the intended beneficiaries and survives contact with administrative reality.
The harder part is psychological.
It is easier to launch a new plan than to admit that an old one needs correction. It is easier to defend a narrative than to review the evidence. It is easier to blame implementation than to ask whether the design itself was flawed.
But in chess, denial has a cost, and sooner or later, the board reveals the truth. The endgame then becomes a test of discipline.
With fewer pieces on the board, every move matters more. The same is true for economic management and organisational leadership. After the first strategy has been tested, what matters is not another grand statement but execution.
Are the data improving? Is coordination working? Are policies being evaluated? Are companies learning from weak signals before they become financial damage? Are governments willing to adjust programmes before public trust is eroded?
A bad move changes the game, but does not have to end it. As long as the position can still be read clearly, decisions can be corrected and leaders remain willing to learn, there is always a way back into the game. — The Jakarta Post/ANN
Erwin Damar Prasetyo is director and chief financial officer at PT Data Sinergitama Jaya. The views expressed here are the writer’s own.
