Rage on the Stage or Pride from the Side

The English Premier League has attracted some of the highest profile football coaches in the world. A combination of money, glamour and opportunity have created the perfect platform for them to work with some of the best players in the world. But these coaches increasingly display even bigger egos than their players and engage in outbursts of anger and unrestrained emotion on the pitch after games have finished. Are there any lessons for management?

It is the tendency to march onto the pitch at the end of the match that has been the most striking development. Maybe they feel they have to express their leadership prowess as a coda to the game and the efforts of their team. Or it could be the ultimate in scent marking, allowing the team to do its best before marching onto the pitch to display their alpha male credentials in front of the world. They know that the cameras are following them and that they will have opportunities in the press room to express their opinions verbally but they cannot resist the opportunity to physically impose themselves on the field.

This weekend we saw Jurgen Klopp of Liverpool being pulled away from abusing the referee after some controversial decisions at the end of the match with Tottenham Hotspur. He had pulled his own players away from the referee so clearly didn’t think they were up to the job. And he suffered the ignomy of being ushered away by a peer (Pochettino, the Spurs manager) who could see how embarrassing Jurgen’s behaviour had become. Jurgen has previous behaviour in using his 6’4” frame to intimidate officials to take into account.
Recently we have also seen the reputedly cerebral Pep Guardiola of Manchester City, a team setting the pace in the Premier League, on the pitch berating and physically manhandling a player of the opposition team. The player, rather than giving Pep the shove he probably deserved, maturely explained that he had been carrying out the plan of his own manager with focus and discipline. It was an admirable demonstration of restraint by the 23 year old Redmond faced with a ranting 47-year old who should know better.

And Antonio Conte of Chelsea has become renowned for cavorting on the pitch after games and celebrating with maniacal energy. Perhaps he is trying to capture some of the glory he misses from his days as a five times championship winning player with Juventus in Italy. Or maybe he is making up for the disappointment of being left out of the Italy team for the 1994 World Cup final.

There is no doubt that these coaches are driven, intense and charismatic characters who are among the best in the world at their trade. I would not argue that they should reduce their passion for the game or their commitment to excellence and winning. But their behaviour after matches tends to make them more of a focus than the teams they coach and does not lead anywhere good by way of example. And that is the antithesis of management.

Perhaps their actions are more a demonstration of their insecurity and need to maintain position. Research has suggested that the motivation to seek or maintain one’s rank promotes aggressive behaviors. Approximately 48% of men and 45% of women identify status/reputation concerns as the primary reason for their last act of aggression, and the experimental induction of status motives increases aggressive tendencies in both men and women (Griskevicius et al., 2009). (quoted in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Two Ways to the Top: Evidence that Dominance and Prestige are Distinct yet Viable Avenues to Social Rank and Influence, Cheng JT.

So, is seems possible that the actions of Guardiola, Klopp, Conte et al are not, as they often claim, about their ‘passion’ for the game but a naked outpouring of anger intended to maintain their position as alpha male leading their troupe. It seems likely that the era of the celebrity head coach, and the increasing fear of loss of status if matches are not won, has created a feedback loop where managers feel the need to beat their breasts and roar at the end of each game. And possibly this is because those with the biggest egos and gift for self-publicity get the biggest jobs where being under the spotlight means purchasing top players and fitting them in rather than building teams, creating value and nurturing talent from the rawest recruits.

Those who have had the honour and pleasure of developing outstanding individuals and merging their talents to create a dynamic, focused and winning group understand that feeling of pride and protectiveness. But the best managers I have known have had the knack of standing back at the moment of victory to allow their team to bask in the glory of success. They have also been adept at taking setbacks, understanding the development needs and rapidly refocusing the team on the next challenge.

In that respect I recall a moment at ASDA in the early 1990s when we had smashed the Xmas trading targets and the head office marketing and trading teams were pretty smug at our own brilliance. The ASDA team of that era was filled over time with CEOs and Chairmen in waiting, Mike Coupe (Sainsbury), Steven Cain (Carlton Communications, Coles, Metcash), Justin King CBE (Sainsbury), Andy Bond (ASDA, Poundland), Andy Hornby (HSBC, Alliance Boots, Coral), Richard Baker (Boots Group, Groupe Aeroplan), Ian McLeod (Celtic FC, Halfords, Coles). The sense of self-satisfaction was ended abruptly when Allan Leighton, at that time the Marketing Director but later serial CEO or Chairman across organisations as diverse as Pandora, Royal Mail and LastMinute.com, walked into a meeting with hand-written, photocopied notes to tell us we were coasting through the new year and needed to regroup and step up our efforts. It was a good lesson.

The best managers I have known have absorbed the pressure when their team is struggling but stepped back at the moment of glory. They may share the celebration and mutual admiration in private but their public position is to hand credit to their ‘players’. Of course, they have been prepared to lead from the front when necessary and have been fiercely protective of their people. But generally speaking their obsession was with selecting and developing good people, ensuring integration, enabling performance, setting standards and consistently looking towards the next challenge.

What they have never done is encourage senseless, unstructured fights with authority (which is different to disagreeing with the status quo and planning how to change things); openly displaying triumphalism and hubris; or, acting with anything less than due regard for the quality of the opposition and the danger they present. Those principles have never prevented them being fiercely determined, robust, resilient and committed to victory.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *