I read an article yesterday which noted the fact that the last four teams in the world cup had the least well-known, most self-effacing managers (go on, name one). And this struck me as no coincidence at all.
It is something I had already been thinking about re the England team, not as a personal comment on Fabio, but as something systemic in the way the role is viewed and hence filled. One way to look at that system is to use Transactional Analysis.
The FA, the media, even us as fans, make the manager far too important... they want a "strong" leader who can impose discipline, a system, and himself, on these high paid ("spoilt") premiership stars. They will demand compiance with no dissent ("no talking back"). No "questioning tactics" and call the manager "Mr Capello". This is inherently an overly hierarchical view of the respective roles of manager and team. The manager is firmly in their "parent" state and the team are stuck in their "child". And we know the child is not the person at their best... they are less likely to handle emotional turbulence (pressure), or take responsibility for their actions - preferring instead to sulk, act out or blame others. Which is exactly what we've seen.
This used to be a common style in business (maybe still is in some organisations). But lots of research (Katzenberg & Smith etc) shows that high performing teams of talented individuals are not built on the parent-child dynamic of hierarchy and control, but on an adult-adult dynamic of assertive collaboration (see Thomas-Killman)- challenging everyone to work together in a common goal. The leaders of these teams know they have to create the right conditions for this dynamic... and they also know it's not all about them.
Which is why you've not heard much from the managers of the most successful teams at this world cup... they let their teams speak!
