I have been following the drama (and wow, if any word ever fit what is happening, "drama" is it) involving the NBA basketball team, the Cleveland Cavaliers this week. For those of you who don't follow basketball, one of the star players (he is the starting Point Guard and the second-leading scorer) for the team, Kyrie Irving, recently requested a trade to another team. It is important to remember that the Cleveland Cavaliers were the World Champions of basketball just one year ago, having won the NBA Finals in 2016 (they beat the Golden State Warriors, who won the NBA Finals in 2014 and again, most recently, in 2017). As a matter of fact, the Cleveland Cavaliers played in the NBA Finals for the third year in a row in 2017. So why would Kyrie Irving want to leave the best team in the NBA's East Conference, a team that has appeared in 3 straight NBA Finals, and a team that actually won the NBA Finals in 2016? One answer - LeBron James. Love him or hate him, LeBron James is currently the best basketball player on the planet - some would argue that he is one of the five best players all-time. Some would even argue that he is THE best player all-time. Apparently, Kyrie Irving no longer wants to play with James and wants to be more of a focal point on a team - in other words, Kyrie Irving wants to be "the guy." Being the second best player on one of the best teams in the NBA and playing beside the world's greatest player is apparently no longer enough. Winning apparently no longer matters. Kyrie Irving wants to be the best player on the team.
GIVE ME A BREAK! I thought the whole point of playing the game was to WIN. Apparently, winning only matters if you can get all of the attention and all of the credit. In my opinion (and it's not just my opinion), this is what is wrong with the National Basketball Association - maybe even professional sports in general. We have reached a point where the personalities are more important than being part of a team. We have reached a point where personal accolades matter more than winning. In other words, playing basketball in the NBA is no longer a sport - it's entertainment. What is more fascinating to me (and certainly more relevant to leadership) is how the Cleveland Cavaliers management team will handle this particular issue. An entirely different question is how did the Head Coach of the Cleveland Cavaliers let things get this far.
First question first. I have heard three potential ways that the Cavaliers will move forward - three options, if you will. The first option is to make Kyrie Irving and LeBron James get in a room and work their issues out for the best of the team. In other words, make these two grown men act like adults and put their personal goals aside and achieve something much greater than they will be able to achieve by themselves. The second option is to go ahead and give Kyrie Irving what he has asked for - trade him, in this case for another superstar. Put all of your eggs in one basket (knowing that you may only have one more chance at winning the NBA Finals) and go for it this next year. The third option is to go ahead and give Kyrie Irving what he has asked for - trade him, but in this case, trade him for young, promising players and draft picks in order to build for the future. There are a number of rumors out there that this will be LeBron James' last year in Cleveland (he is a free agent at the end of next season and reportedly is looking to play for the Los Angeles Lakers or someone else). So, rather than be caught at the end of next year without your two best players, look to rebuild for the future. I think it will be fascinating to watch what the Cleveland Cavaliers end up doing.
Now, to the second question - how did it all end up like this? There is a clear lesson here on how (in this case) not to manage superstars. For anyone who thinks this is not an issue that is relevant to health care, think again. I just read an article about a children's hospital that hired a new prominent pediatric cardiothoracic surgeon - the surgeon actually is the third highest paid individual in the entire state! In other words, it is a very common scenario to have a prominent physician (usually, but not always a surgeon) getting paid a higher salary than the hospital CEO.
There have been a number of articles on this issue (check out some really good articles here, here, here, and here). James Kerr wrote a piece for "Fast Company" that makes an interesting point - in many cases, managers (or using the sports analogy, coaches) of highly successful, championship-caliber teams leverage and enable their so-called superstars to lead (think here of Tom Brady on the New England Patriots, Magic Johnson of the Los Angeles Lakers, or Derek Jeter of the New York Yankees - all three were great superstars, but all three were also great leaders on the team). While not every superstar is a great team leader (perhaps this explains some of the recent issues with the Cleveland Cavaliers), if the superstar does show signs that he or she is willing to adopt a "team-first" as opposed to a "me-first" attitude, they should be encouraged to do so. As many championship teams have found (most notable example, especially recently, has been the New England Patriots and the widespread adoption of "The Patriot Way""), most personality and team chemistry issues can usually be best addressed by the leaders on the team as opposed to the coach.
Rebecca Knight provided these recommendations in a recent Harvard Business Review blog post:
1. "Think about development." In other words, ask the superstar about his or her personal goals. If the goals align with the organization's goals, perfect. If not, decide whether there is an opportunity to align the goals better and (if mutually aligned goals are not possible) whether the organization is the best place for that individual. In addition, ask what you as the leader can do to help leverage the superstar's talent and provide additional development opportunities for that individual.
2. "Offer autonomy." Delegate authority where possible - the best example here is what Coach Bill Belichik has done with his superstar, Tom Brady. Don't micromanage the superstar - given him or her responsibility and authority, but then also make sure that the superstar understands that he or she will be held accountable.
3. "Don't go overboard with positive feedback." Positive feedback is great - and we don't provide enough of it in most organizations. However, don't provide feedback merely to feed the superstar's ego. Make it count.
4. "Manage your star's workload - and everyone else's." Divide up the work fairly. We have a tendency to keep dumping more and more responsibilities on the superstars. Make sure that they are successful by providing them with ample opportunities to demonstrate what they can do, but not so many that they never can get anything done.
5. "Be mindful of group dynamics." Superstars and favoritism can lead to discontent. Make sure that the superstar is treated fairly. It's okay to recognize his or her contributions to the team, but don't do it to the exclusion of recognizing the contributions from the rest of the team.
6. "Encourage your star to build relationships." Hopefully the superstar will provide mentorship to some of the younger, emerging leaders on the team. Encourage the superstar to build relationships with other members based upon mutual trust and respect (think Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen, but NOT Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O'Neal!).
7. "Don't be selfish." It's great when you have a superstar on your team - but part of the development process for that individual is to seek opportunities at greater levels within the organization. Don't make the mistake of not providing those opportunities, else the superstar leaves the organization to find those same opportunities elsewhere.
Clearly there is more to learn about dealing with superstar employees. However, I do think this is a good place to start. Bottom line, if things had been handled better within the Cleveland Cavaliers organization, they may be in an entirely different place right now.
No comments:
Post a Comment