I’ve shared how much we enjoy sports in this household (even as we critique and interrogate them). Part of the allure for me is in seeing the leadership lessons1. This one is especially good: The firing of Phillies manager Joe Girardi. Girardi lost the clubhouse, according to my spouse.
Sports make hypothesis-testing easy.
Hypothesis: The team is losing because Joe Girardi isn’t managing them well.
Test: Fire the guy.
Results: The Phillies win 7 in a row.
The situation reinforces my bias that fish rot from the head2 as evidenced by this article3, which explains that Girardi made some junior varsity leadership errors.
Primary Error: Inability to calibrate for team needs.
I hear about this error All the Time because my own kid (21) works a grown-adult job in a grown-adult field surrounded by grown-adults who have lived their whole lives in top-down, male-driven environments.
The communication between supervisors and line employees leaves much to be desired. Phillies baseball players reported the same thing about Joe Girardi:
Younger Phillies players said interim manager Rob Thomson has communicated much more than Girardi did, in ways they feel has been beneficial. Phillies infielder Mickey Moniak specifically cited how Thomson is more forthcoming in explaining why certain players are or are not playing, giving more confidence that they will continue to get chances even if they struggle.
Girardi may be among the class of managers who tend to lead how they were led instead of calibrating for how their team needs them to lead. Very often, that means a “do what I say and don’t worry about why” approach. To call that choice outdated is generous.
Managers in this class often provide little to no feedback on performance, leaving team members with no idea whether they’re meeting expectations or how they can improve.
The result is that team members feel insecure in their standing, which compromises performance. People simply can’t perform at their best when they’re worried.
None of that is good leadership, especially not for a generation of people who thrive with regular feedback and a supportive environment4.
Joe Girardi has a successful career behind him, but my suspicion is that maybe he couldn’t or wouldn’t calibrate for the demands of the leadership situation in which he found himself this year. Maybe he couldn’t read the room, couldn’t figure out why his usual tactics weren’t working, and maybe assumed the problem was them, the players.
That’s what happens in my kid’s experience, too: The effects of managers’ inability to calibrate are offloaded onto the backs of the players who are attempting to navigate a clubhouse polluted by leaders who are way out of touch with the needs of their teams.
Instead of reflecting on their own culpability and opportunity for growth, they assume the players are the problem.
That ain’t it, hoss. Baseball players, mechanics, college faculty, students…..nearly everyone thrives in an environment of regular and consistent two-way feedback and communication, respect for individual experiences, and collaboration.
My spouse couldn’t come up with an example of baseball managers who lost the clubhouse but then got it back. That’s a shame, really, because another core belief of mine is that almost any relationship is salvageable with humility, deep listening, and a commitment to change.
In fact, it’s these dynamics that will rebuild the trust lost in situations where team members feel that they haven’t been heard or that they haven’t heard what they need to hear in order to effectively do their jobs.
Humility + Deep Listening + Commitment to Change = Regaining the Clubhouse
The cost of losing the clubhouse is steep for organizations. Call me, MLB, and let’s talk about how to avoid such scenarios in the future.
I keep meaning to write about how I could tell that Shaheen Holloway was a different kind of coach when I watched St. Peter’s play in the 2022 NCAA Men’s Basketball tournament. The short story is that it was the way his players reacted to him: I could tell in both his and their body language and interactions that a rare level of mutual respect characterized those relationships. I could tell by how he full-on listened to them when they interacted with him. It was quite something to watch. Seton Hall was smart to move on him when they did.
Good consultants always focus on leadership when an org is in trouble.
An excellent lesson in teaching from this article: Explaining not just what we’re doing but why we’re doing it goes a long way in helping people connect the dots about our decisions in the classroom. I don’t just ungrade: I explain to students why I do it and present evidence to support my decisions. I don’t just teach writing; I explain why I teach writing the way I do and make a case for its value. I explain the why of every lesson and every assignment. No one ever balks at doing the work when they understand the why behind it, just as those players wouldn’t have balked at Girardi’s decisions had he simply explained his rationale (and remained open to feedback about adjusting his plans).
Another bias of mine is that while I don’t think these needs are generational, I do think younger generations have the vocabulary to express human learning needs in ways previous generations did not. Thus, what we say are “Millennial” or “Gen Z” workforce needs are typically just basic human needs in the workplace expressed explicitly in ways they haven’t been before.