Coach L---A Model For Flip-Flopping For Your Own Benefit

Over the weekend the Washington Post’s Mark Giannnoto wrote an interesting article about coaches lobbying to influence the NCAA Basketball Committee regarding at-large selection into the NCAA tournament. Over the past 10 years former George Mason Head Coach Jim Larranaga has been the loudest voice in the wilderness trumpeting the cause for Mid-majors to be included in the field. Looking at the success of Mason, VCU, Butler and other non-BCS teams, Larranaga’s message had seemed to be substantiated by the results. While his rhetoric had some validity, everyone who has any connection to the NCAA selection process, knows that all the banter in the world is not going to change the decisions by the committee.

Now fast-forward to this week to the sunny climes of South Beach where Larranaga now resides as Head Coach at the University of Miami, his message had an entirely different ring to it. About 180 degrees from his thought process for the last ten years, Coach L opines, “In this particular year looking at their non-conference performance, it would appear to me that those spots should be reserved for high majors who played a much more difficult non-conference schedule and were far more successful than any of the teams in the mid-majors.” Of course, Laranaga’s Hurricanes are one of the “high-majors” who are in contention with many mid-majors for the last few at-large spots in the tournament. With tongue in cheek Virginia Tech veteran head coach and bubble participant Seth Greeenberg remarked, “Jim's a smart guy. It’s amazing, though, eight, nine months, he had revelations.”

While we all understand that every leader is charged with supporting his team, leaders and coaches must understand by changing one’s value system and thought processes because of their own particular situation, people quickly understand that the leader is self serving and self absorbed, characteristics that are severe hurdles to engaging constituents. Every leader needs to understand that people are not naïve and oblivious to the past. Credibility plays such an important role in getting buy-in from followers, that any breach of credibility will detract from long-term success for the organization. Additionally by trying to elevate your situation by demeaning the success of others is always a bad idea. In an interview with David Teel, Larranaga totally discounted his former school when asked would you be saying the same thing if you were at Mason with (at the time of interview) a 14-2 conference record, he responded, "... if you look at their non-conference strength of schedule, it is in the 300's." (Actually at the time of the interview, Mason's strength of schedule was 239.) "That's not the type of resume the committee has looked for over the years." My parents told me, "If you can't say something nice...."

To make the Larranaga flip flop that much more a bad idea, the reality is that what he says will have absolutely no effect on the final outcome of who is selected as at-large participants. When a leader talks just to hear themselves talk, they risk saying something that can hurt their own personal image. In this case by trying to position his own personal well-being at the expense of his former employers, Coach L has drained all the goodwill he built with the George Mason family over the last 15 years. I encourage everyone to focus on themselves and what they can control and not focus on what they cannot control. Your time will be used much more productively.

A Leadership Challenge---the Circle of Privilege

In economics there is a concept called the circle of poverty that is defined as "set of factors or events by which poverty, once started, is likely to continue unless there is outside intervention." In many organizations and particularly in sports organizations there is a similar situation which I call the "circle of privilege".  Once privilege is granted to one individual in as much as they are exempt from the standard policies and responsibilities, the genie is out of the jar.  The "circle of privilege" will continue with coaches setting their own agendas and priorities while feeling no accountability to their supervisor.  They will create their own culture (Penn State, Ohio State, USC, Oklahoma,etc.).  Individuals who are treated as privileged will perpetuate that type of situation either in their current organization or one to which they ascend.  The culture of coaching is particularly vulnerable to the "circle of privilege" because there is no formal training of coaches in the USA so coaches learn their trade through on the job training and assume many characteristics of their mentors.  An assistant coach at Big Time U who has been exposed to the superstar head coach, when hired at Mid Major U as Head Coach, will have similar expectations and ideas of his/her importance and control.  As a leader (Athletic Director) and someone who is the ultimate decision maker on the hiring of this coach, you must clearly set the expectations and responsibilities of the coach so there is no cloudiness as to who is in charge.  If left to his/her own devices and experiences, the new coach will continue the  "circle of privilege".  Naturally as the superstar coach's  proteges find new leadership positions and allowed to institute their own set of priorities, the "circle of privilege" grows exponentially.   Because the hiring of head coaches come from the pool of assistants from the Big Time U's,  the true power in college athletics has ultimately shifted to the coaches.  Until University leadership is willing to break the chain of the "circle of privilege", college athletics will continue to suffer through scandals like Penn State, Ohio State, Miami and USC.  As a leader you need to accept your role and not submit your authority to anyone irrespective of their status or public image.  Until leaders break the "circle of prestige", college athletics will be very much like a battleship with no one at the helm,  a huge force that will create its own path.  Leaders need set the course and make sure everyone is headed in the same direction with no ulterior motives that detract from the common good for group, organization or team.  By establishing parameters when individuals are placed in positions of authority in regard to what their boundaries are on the front end, there should be very situations when those people exceed their power.

Labels: