What happened off the field in the Patriots vs Browns game is a window into the leadership culture that causes the results on the field. But, I believe Kitchens leadership might be more relevant for the future. It's just that he does it badly.
Culture is a result of what you choose to do and what you choose to tolerate as a leader. That is the premise of leadership podcasts like Craig Groeschel and others. I agree.
This past week's Browns vs Patriots game is a classic example of that.
Freddie Kitchens is the coach for the Cleveland Browns. It seems he allows his players space to find their level of commitment. Commenting on the loss to the Patriots he said the following:
"We actually beat ourselves with turnovers and penalties. We expect to clean up a bunch of that this week. We have been focused on trying to clean those up and it has not gotten done yet so we got to continue to harp on it. Each individually has to make a commitment to doing that on an everyday basis. That is where it is going to start because you have no chance to win a game if you do those things, which is very evident." (https://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news/freddie-kitchens-talks-penalties-nick-chubb-and-more-press-conference).
They have been focused on it since training camp with little change.
"If they want to give their money to the league, they can do it. It does not matter to me either way. I would like for them to keep their money, but I also like our guys to be passionate about what they are doing. They have a decision to make, I guess." (https://www.wkyc.com/article/sports/nfl/browns/i-like-money-cleveland-browns-coach-freddie-kitchens-doesnt-talk-about-officials-to-avoid-fines/95-3367af8b-be4d-47fd-bb0a-aba217724e99)
Players need to decide.
The culture he has created is one where players have decisions to make, about when, where, and how they show up. He is clear that he wants more, but cannot seem to get it. It's a bad form of collaborate leadership and the results are showing. The Browns have a losing record.
Compare that to the Patriot coach, Bill Belichick, who doesn't show any form of collaborate leadership (at least from the outside). Players show up with excellence or are cut (consider the recent cuts to Nugent, Gordon and others). Players who speak out of turn lose playing time or are cut. They have strict guidelines about what they say and how, with stringent enforcement. He shows a successful form of transformational leadership. Patriots are undefeated so far this season.
Two different cultures with clearly two different results.
BUT, I believe the form of Belichick leadership (transformational but dictatorial) will be less successful in the future while Kitchen's style (collaborative leadership) will be more successful. Kitchens just has to do it better.
Collaborative leadership as a style does not mean democratic decision making, or tolerance of bad behavior. The sooner Kitchens works this out the sooner I believe the Browns will start winning.
Here are two examples of what I mean:
1. Decision making: transformational leaders make all the decisions. In fact, this is often seen as the very skillset that makes a leader a leader. Leaders make decisions. So say multiple books, articles and conferences of the transformational leadership arena. Collaborative leaders don't deny the need for decision making, but where transformational leaders make the decisions, collaborative leaders know who needs to make the decision and empower them to make the decision.
2. Boundary setting: transformational leaders set strict boundaries and enforce them ruthlessly. As shown above, Belichick sets clear rules about media engagement, player code of conduct etc. And failure to follow those rules is met with strict punishment - benching Butler in the Super Bowl for example. Collaborative leaders also know the importance of boundary setting. But where the transformational leader decides what the boundaries are and enforces them as he/she sees fit, collaborative leaders work with the team to decide what the boundaries are, and how they will be enforced. They also determine who enforces them, together. This might mean that in a specific instance the collaborative leader is tasked with enforcing the boundaries and from the outside might look no different than the transformational leader. But it's those on the inside who know the difference and that is what matters most.
While good transformational leaders build great movements, most of those movements die when the leader dies. They are movements for a time. Collaborative leaders, when done well, build movements that last beyond their lifetime or tenure. I believe we need more collaborative leaders today. People who will build great movements in education, business, medicine, science, government and religion.
We need movements building a better world.
We need collaborators not tyrants.
We need you!
We need you to rise up as a leader and make a difference where you are, because leadership is a skill that can be learned. Stop looking for the leader who will make a stand and start being that leader now.
Lead where you are.
Working with those around you.
Start a movement and change your world
No comments:
Post a Comment