This entry was tough to pen. Not because I didn’t know what to say, but because I had so much to say. I need to post about my theory on using Coaching Techniques in the work environment. I need to post about my book signing exploits and presentations (had a really awesome one recently in Chicago). And now I want to write about how “the truly ignorant are impossible to offend.”
Where to start? I guess I have my next three posts planned.
What we can learn from Sports in the Business World
So, Notre Dame hired a new football coach, Brian Kelly. And like a good head coach, one of his first tasks was to put his coaching staff (spelled leadership team) together. He let all but one coach go from the previous staff. He fired the existing leadership team and then recruited among his network for his coaching staff. He didn’t post the jobs on Monster.Com. He didn’t put ads in the papers. He looked through his black book (I’m guessing here) and called up the people he wanted to work with…the best that he knew and talked them into coming to ND to work with him. To work with him to make a winner!
Wow, how about that.
Leadership Team
So, the CEO leaves (fired, retired, resigned, etc.) and the new one is hired. Can the CEO do the same as the head coach? Why not? She should sit down with the existing leadership team and see if there are any she wants to keep. The right move? Let most (if not all) go. You don’t want to work closely with people you didn’t hand pick…not if you’re trying to make a winner. Then, don’t send a list of open positions to Human Resources – nope. Pull out your little black book and start calling those leaders you want to work with. People you’ve worked with in the past. People you know can and will get the job done, and done right. People who will make your leadership team a success! It’s not what I normally see – normally, the new boss watches and listens for 6 months to a year, before she starts to make changes. She tries to ascertain what the strengths and weaknesses are of the leadership team she’s inherited. What a waste of time! Rather than working on moving the organization forward (making it a winner), we throw away up to an entire year so that that new boss can learn the organization before making changes. Let’s follow the coaching lesson and gut the leadership team! Start fresh with a team you know will work well with you. A team which will help implement your plans!
So, what else can we learn from coaching? Well, the head football coach does NOT normally get involved in the small details. I mean he has a team of assistant coaches and those coaches have assistant (position) coaches. Everyone trusts each other to do their job. The assistant coaches are focused on their area of expertise (offense, defense, special teams) and the head coach trusts that they will be able to carry out his vision for each. That’s important enough to rephrase and reiterate. The head coach provides VISION for each area of focus. The head coach TRUSTS his next level of leadership to get the job done, and get it done well. That means within the rules, within the values of the organization, and with the mindset of doing what’s best for all.
Another essential is that all of the coaches – down to the specialty coaches (managers) all know they are part of ONE team. They may have different ideas, innovative ideas, things they want to try and risks they want to take…but it’s always with the overall success of the organization in mind. If the Quarterback’s coach ends up having the quarterbacks of the team drafted high each year, but the team keeps losing, they are NOT a success. The goal isn’t just to do your job well, but to have the team as a whole succeed…otherwise there will be a new head coach, and most of the coaching staff is soon to be replaced (see beginning of this rant).
Perhaps the most important thing we can learn is how the team is populated. How are recruits found? How is the team formed? How are the players treated?
Recruiting
Players, the best players, are actively recruited. Sometimes it’s the lower level coaches who visit the recruit or calls them. Sometimes (in the case of the top recruits) it’s the head coach himself who will contact them. The position isn’t posted on High School bulletin boards. There aren’t open tryouts (not for the key positions at least). The coaches get together and evaluate the talent. Then they pick the player they want – not just based on their resume, but on how they will fit in with the “system” the head coach has in mind. How well they fit in with the vision. The players’ attitude, work ethic, and potential are more important than what they’ve done or how others “rate” them.
Other players (walk-ons) are also solicited. They get to try out. They interview and then demonstrate they can perform the skills necessary. But even if they are proficient enough to “make” the team, they are evaluated for fit. Do they get along? Will they help the team achieve? Always we look toward the overall success of the organization and the vision of the head coach.
Develop your Players
Once the players (if you haven’t guessed yet – players are the equivalent of staff) are in the fold it is the job of the coaching staff to help them develop into the best players they can be – given the parameters of the system employed. It is NOT the job of the coach to do the job for them. Imagine, in the first game of the year, if the quarterback’s coach ran onto the field to play the position! No, the coach’s job is to teach, train, and prepare the players to excel. The players HAVE to still PLAY the game. They have to go on the court (or field) and get the job done. The coach many times is relegated to being a cheer leader, harsh critic, and provider of honest feedback. So, it is totally true – the most valuable asset on the team is the player. Since the coach can’t play the game, the most important job is to develop the players – holistically. Not just so they can perform. The coach has to be concerned with the player’s mental, physical and (dare I say) spiritual health! No wonder it’s hard to find a good head coach!
A Coach’s Responsibilities:
- Have a vision for the team
- Articulate that vision clearly and enthusiastically
- Build a great coaching team
- Recruit the best players which means players that fit the system/values of the organization
- Develop the players (Mentally, Physically, Spiritually). Teach and train them to successfully perform the skills necessary
- Cheer the players on
- Provide honest feedback
- Make corrections to player development when necessary (go back to #5 Develop Players)
- Prepare players for the next “level”
- Start all over again
After the Game is Over
When players don’t play well…or don’t follow the game plan – coaches take the blame. They don’t call out the player’s errors in public. Nope. The coach takes the blame for the team failing. And when the team wins the national championship? The coach gives the players all the credit!
I fully believe this analogy can be used for the entire work experience. We can learn a lot from other professions – especially ones which are so dependent on performance. Every organization I’ve been in has been concerned with performance, and perhaps none more than the US Air Force. BTW, I’d say for the most part the USAF follows this school of thought. Leaders are developed. Leaders develop their people. Leaders don’t micro manage or try to do the job for their people. Leaders don’t take credit for their people’s or the organization’s success. Not the good ones.
Leaders don’t “manage” people, or manage with data, or make data-driven decisions to enhance performance. Nope. It’s simple.
Leaders lead.
Ouch, Damn! You're starting to make Jack Welch look like a Sunday school teacher! While much of the coaching analogy works, there are some things you left out completely. Football coaches do keep black books, but many people who come in at CEO level of a medium-sized org have rather incomplete black books (not so true at the Ford level). Often the new CEO is about to do work related-to-but-different-from his/her past. Why fire a bunch of people before checking to see which of them are eligible to "be on your bus" (First Break All the Rules)? If none are eligible, then get drastic, but first take a close look. Second, don't even suggest not telling HR. Yes, in lots of companies a high-level hiring person can first contact some "inside candidates" and then post the job, but jobs must be posted and no company is going to risk EOE.
ReplyDelete"Everyone trusts each other to do their job." Yes, but you'll have to cover the ground of what happens the minute that trust is broken... and that's when some high-level "leaders" start to lose it because they don't actually know how to make corrections, just issue orders and set quotas.
Nope, coaches don't have to develop their players holistically - they only need to put forth enough development effort that the players win games. CEOs don't have to develop 'C' level people holistically, just make sure profits continue and continue rising so shareholders are happy. As seen lately, CEOs don't even care one iota whether the players are doing things with any moral or legal frame of reference. And they certainly aren't willing to go to jail themselves if their subordinates 'do the dirty.'
I love your enthusiasm! I appreciate your perspective. I wish it were always as simple as you make it sound. ML has it right from the HR and EOE perspective. At the end of the day, even the black book hiring may be destined for failure if the CEO/Coach/Manager is not made of "the right stuff." Often managers hire people like themselves. The danger of hiring a group of similar thinkers is that you may lack diversity of thought and tactics. To be effective, I believe a leadership team needs to be comprised of a range of personality types, with differing thought processes and varied perspectives on the job at hand and life in general. I would prefer to put together a leadership team that share the same vision/goal (win a national championship and have a 100% graduation rate, for example) but also have different ideas on how to get it done. Bayesian Theory says (and I paraphrase) that the best solutions are found when many points of view are gathered and shared and the best among them are chosen by the team. I like to equate the leadership team dynamic to the classic balance of character traits present in most great writings, TV shows, and movies.
ReplyDeleteDon't get me wrong. Often the Bayesian process is tedious and overly democratic. At times I long for a despotic action from senior leadership when the choices are not powerful enough to drive a clear decision. Sometimes I don't want everyone's input on where to go for dinner. But in the end, we choose, and everyone goes along and feels they are a part of the process (even though I have the ultimate power since I'm driving the car).
I do strongly agree that the vision of the team/company must be shared with everyone involved - from the assistant coaches down to the water boys to the guys sweeping the courts and cleaning the bleachers. EVERYONE must be aware of the goal. EVERYONE must share the vision and know that their job is critical to the ultimate success of reaching that goal. If that goal is a goal owned by everyone (and it will be owned if it is practical, inspiring, and achievable), then EVERYONE will feel and take responsibility for the realization of that goal and take pride in its achievement or take solace in its failure. But the translation of that goal and vision is the responsibility of the CEO/Coach. The fish smells from the head. If the Coach doesn't walk the talk the team is destined for mediocrity at best. If the Coach doesn't walk the talk and the team still reaches the goal - someone else in the organization is truly the leader, and probably a great one, great enough to overcome a lousy boss getting in the way.
In the end, I agree with the axiom, "Lead. Follow. Or get out of the way." But only to a point. I'm no lemming. How about a modification: "Lead. Follow. Or give me a better idea."
As I tell my entire staff, "Don't blindly follow me because of my corporate title. Make suggestions. Share your ideas. I'm often wrong. Just ask my wife."
Irv:
ReplyDeleteI like your modification on the Lead, Follow, or get out of the way. But, rather than change the “get out of the way,” I suggest simply adding yours as a fourth option. “Lead. Follow. Give me a better idea. Or get out of the way.”
I’ll try to address both you and Michael’s lamentations together – at least the one you agree upon. So, due to HR (and EOE?) the new CEO or leader should be saddled with leaders who may not fit her vision? Sorry. My optimistic heart won’t bear such defeatism. Actually, I’m working in a unit where the new boss, interim at that, ended up “losing” the top four leaders…replacing two from outside, and two from within. So, I know it’s possible.
To your trepidations about group-think and hiring people like yourself…I think I premised all of this with the assumption that the “head coach” was a good one! (Hopefully my use of Brian Kelly’s photo will bear that as a good example). I hope that NO one who is considered a good leader would surround himself with “yes” people nor with those who only think like they do. And I equally hope a good leader would surround herself with talented, critical thinking, innovative, risk-taking, people who share the same vision and can work well with each other and the boss. Don’t know what I wrote that sent you in that direction, but the assumption is that the Coach is a Good One! Of course the black-book hiring or any recruiting of the “right people to get on the bus” will fail if the Coach herself is the “wrong person!” I mean, she’s driving the bus – so regardless of who she puts on it, if she drives it off a cliff – of course it will fail!
You also stated, “Often managers hire people like themselves.” This is true. BUT and this is a BIG BUT, we’re not talking about “managers” at all. We’re talking about “leaders.” If we instead follow the sports coach analogy method – I doubt that any of the head coaches recruit players that are like themselves. Could you imagine what the ND football team would look like if the players were like Charlie? Or Rollie’s basketball team would look like? In fact, any of the successful sports teams – if the coaches or general managers only recruited players like themselves?
So, I think, while I’m offering a radical new approach – you’re comparing it to the common, present approach…
Mike:
If the organization is hiring a Head Coach who has never been a head coach (hmmm. Seems Charlie Weis fits that profile), than yes, his black-book may not be full of the right people. And he may make less than optimum hires. And he may have to clean house and try again by asking people with a better black-book. And he may end up losing his job…hmmm. Seems familiar. This doesn’t make the process wrong. Just the wrong coach to begin with. So, if we’re trying a untested, unproven, head coach, yeah, the black-book may be thin. No problemo. The real point is to RECRUIT a new team of coaches. Not hire, not keep ones that don’t “fit,” but RECRUIT. To your second point about “trust” – sorry, I see no reason (granted with my Air Force bent) that trust ever has to be “lost.” Not if the leadership has integrity.
Finally, your last paragraph…Sorry again, I just simply disagree. The good coach, the good CEO, the good leader should, no, MUST care about her people and the holistic development of each one of them! If our people are our greatest asset, we must develop them. If they are our people, we must care, sincerely care about their success and happiness. As well as the Organization. As well as the stock and share holders. Leaders fail miserably when they don’t care about all three.