Category Archives: Champion Forcefully

Leadership, Collaboration, and the NBA

Today’s discussion of Scottie Pippen brought to mind another character in the NBA who is extremely polarizing with regard to his style of leadership and collaboration: Kobe Bryant. A whole back, Bill Simmons wrote a great article comparing his leadership and accomplishments with Bill Russell:

The Kobe Question

My computer’s being repaired so I’m typing this on a mobile device so I’ll just leave you with some choice quotes below. The whole article might be hard to understand completely if you don’t really follow the NBA so I included some of the juicier and relevant parts. It is interesting to see how Kobe’s ruthless form of leadership has brought him much success and yet seems to be hurting his team in recent years. He’s definitely not very strong in the “unite” aspect of collaboration.

“we were discussing leadership and Russell revealed that he never criticized a teammate publicly or privately. Not once. Not during his entire 13-year career. What was the point? Everyone already knew Russell was their best player — why undermine their confidence by making them doubt themselves, or even worse, making them wonder if he believed in them? How was that productive? Russell believed, and still believes, that a basketball team only achieves its potential if everyone embraces their roles — you figure out what you have, split the responsibilities and you’re off.

so how do you challenge your teammates without undermining them?

So Russell kept cajoling Siegfried, never threatening him, just appealing to him as a friend. Russell wore him down. Siegfried relented. After a few weeks, Siegfred decided that he didn’t want to play point anymore. They did the same dance again. And Russell wore him down again, this time by making it clear this was Siegfried’s best chance to play. He didn’t threaten him or anything, just laid out the landscape. We have me, Havlicek, Sam and Bailey (Howell). All four of us need to play. This is your best way to get minutes, Larry. He kept appealing to him as a friend more than anything. You can guess what happened next. And yes, the Celtics won their last two titles of the Russell era with a shooting guard bringing up the ball. So much for Boston being dead.”

“If ever an NBA player could play for a quarter of a century, and thrive for at least two solid decades, it’s Kobe Bean Bryant. He’s a basketball machine.

And that’s what makes “the other stuff” so frustrating. Nothing that happened this season has been surprising because it’s happened, in various forms, during so many other Laker seasons. Once upon a time, he called out Shaq — now he calls out Pau Gasol and Dwight Howard. He still says things like “If it doesn’t get better, I’m going to kick everyone’s asses,” and you still can’t even tell if he’s half-kidding or not.

At this point, it’s easier to remember Kobe’s unhappy Lakers teams (by my count, nine) than the happy ones. His best teammate (Shaq) left Los Angeles on such hostile terms that they didn’t talk for years. His second-best teammate (Gasol) looks totally broken, just a head case, a totally different player from the one who single-handedly almost vanquished our Olympic team five months ago. His third-best teammate (Andrew Bynum) got shipped to Philly and traded shots with Kobe on his way out. His only great coach (Phil Jackson) quit the Lakers and wrote a 2005 book that fearlessly tore Kobe to shreds with astonishing candor.

It’s just a different way to lead a basketball team: through fear, through conflict, through bullying, through the media. He leads by example, and if you don’t like that example, he reminds you how many rings he has (with the implication being, “Shut up”). When Jackson and Derek Fisher were around, Kobe’s leadership was actually effective — something of a good cop/bad cop dynamic developed, with Kobe pushing the team competitively and the other two guys handling everything else. Now it’s just him.

Sometimes, you wonder if Kobe can see the forest through the trees. He might be turning on Dwight Howard already — you can see it — a crucial development since Dwight could simply flee to Dallas, Houston or Atlanta next summer. Howard’s missed free throws are driving Kobe batty; he can barely hide his disdain on the court anymore. Same for Howard’s trying-too-hard-to-be-jovial routine and a general impression that Howard doesn’t live and die with the result of every basketball game. From what I heard, Kobe already played the “You don’t know anything about winning championships!” card with Howard — during a scrimmage last week, when the second team beat the first team partly because Howard checked out (he wasn’t getting the ball enough), followed by Kobe blistering him. That same week, Kobe needled Gasol publicly for not sucking it up with knee tendinitis, saying he needed to “put your big boy pants.”

How can you put “motivate and inspire” into your schedule?

Since I found the “Inspire Someone” App Task quite challenging, I started looking for tangible examples of how to inspire and motivate others. I stumbled upon this article where Val Demings, former chief of the Orlando Police Department, gives some practical suggestions for putting “motivate and inspire” into one’s schedule. You will see that she mainly focuses on invoking emotional aspects.

It is also worth mentioning that the year before Demings became Chief, Orlando saw the highest rise in violent crime in its history. When she led the force from 2007 to 2011, they experienced a 40% reduction in violent crime – “a stat that is at least partly attributable to smart policing by motivated and inspired officers.”

“Why Incentive Plans Cannot Work”

Our discussion today made me think of an article I read during my undergraduate degree at Copenhagen Business School. In his article “Why Incentive Plans Cannot Work” from 1993 Alfie Kohn makes some of the critical points about rewards very clear. I think his stand on the issue is best illustrated by a couple of direct quotes:

“… rewards succeed at securing one thing only: temporary compliance.”

“They do not create an enduring commitment to any value or action.”

“Everyone is pressuring the system for individual gain. No one is improving the system for collective gain.”

“The number one casualty of rewards is creativity. As the late John Condry put it, rewards are the “enemies of exploration.””

I feel convinced that there is some truth to his standpoints although they tend to be a bit extreme and portray the issue as in a black and white manner. No matter what I definitely think it’s a piece worth taking into account when discussing the effects of incentives.

Rethinking Performance Reviews: How to Communicate Feedback

So far we have focused on how individuals who have dedicated themselves to being the best have voluntarily sought out critical feedback to improve themselves. This begs the question about what happens when people are involuntarily made to provide or receive feedback. Does this feedback actually lead to improvement? The most common example today is the tradition of the employee performance evaluations often used by companies.

The short article, “The Case against Performance Reviews” by Derek Thompson at The Atlantic is interesting because it focuses on the big question about whether the “evaluation process” itself is a flawed system.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/the-case-against-performance-reviews/283402/

Theoretically, the performance review is supposed to convey information from the evaluator on how the receiving employee can improve. However, there are many potential pitfalls that could diminish the effectiveness of performance reviews.

  • The evaluator is unable to provide objective feedback because of intrinsic biases. Thompson provides an example that most evaluators tend to favor other people who are similar to themselves and bias evaluations of employees who are different.
  •  Most criticism is received negatively by employees. Thompson cites research that the tendency of the average person to dislike receiving feedback/criticism perhaps can influence how that person acts upon the feedback information received