When discussing goal alignment, the first thing I think of is the sport of basketball. The typical goal incongruence with team sports occurs when players work to “show off” and get more points individually rather than playing with the team’s best interest in mind. In recent years, Kobe Bryant’s development from the individual-goal oriented player to the team-player has made headlines. The player that once had an extreme lack of goal alignment grew into a team-driven player that lead the Lakers to a championship.
Kobe began his career with another NBA star, Shaquille O’neal. Shaq, the veteran, was getting all of the attention and winning the MVP awards when the Lakers were on their tear through NBA championships. Eventually, Shaq left the Lakers for a different team, leaving Kobe to be the only star. This is something Kobe wanted, finally getting the attention and credit for his team's success. Kobe went on to score the 2nd most points ever in a single game, win the NBA scoring championship, but his team didn’t even get past the first round of the playoffs. People argue that Kobe wasn’t playing for his team, he was playing for himself. Finally, in the last couple years, the Lakers have made it to the NBA Finals, winning it in 2009. In these two years, Kobe’s point statistics were down, but the rest of his teammates’ statistics were up.
Sometimes it’s necessary to make individual sacrifices for the team. Making these sacrifices is a more long-term way of thinking. As we can see with Kobe’s example, in the long term, he had bigger individual successes. Drucker stated that management success can be measured by 1) economic/profitable developments 2) productivity of employees and 3) social responsibility. The guests on Wednesday taught us that in an organization, these ideas operate together. Businesses cannot exist without profit, but long term profit will not occur without high productivity and social responsibility. Let’s take a look at the Lakers as an organization, and Kobe as a “manager” of that organization. Afterall, he is the team leader and captain. As a manager, Kobe did what he could do produce economic profit, but along the way he was unable to get the rest of the members of his team to be productive. He was not socially responsible to the Laker organization when he put his own goals ahead.
Not so coincidentally, when Kobe began playing for the team, he earned even more individual success. He won his first NBA MVP title and NBA Finals MVP title in the last two years. In the long term, the three ideas of management discussed by Drucker operate together. The more social responsibility, the more profit. This is true for a business, RSO, sports team. The three aspects must operate together just as a team needs to work together. Kobe is only one person, but success occurred only when he thought for everyone and not just himself.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
An interesting addition to this: Kobe changed his number from '8' to '24' about 3 years ago to signify a departure from the first half of his career and the beginning of the second half. Maybe this had to do with wanting to approach the game a little differently?
ReplyDeleteMy response is as a longtime fan of the NBA, though I'm currently less of one than I used to be.
ReplyDeletePhil Jackson is a great coach, having learned his NBA basketball as a New York Knick in the glory years, who were coached by Red Holzman. Jackson, of course, coached Michael Jordan before coaching Kobe. Neither won any championships until Jackson became their coach. Both moved their style of play toward a more team oriented approach under Jackson's tutelage. Jackson himself learned a lot about coaching from his assistants, especially as a young coach with the Bulls. Tex Winter should be especially noted since he invented the triangle offense.
Another factor that matters, a lot, is the talent and commitment of the other players. After Shaq left the Lakers, their talent pool dropped. In the Lakers' more recent upswing, several excellent players were brought in from other teams. One of the casualties from that move was Brian Cook, a former Illini.
Still other factors matter, including the health of star players on other teams. Last year the Celtics, who had won the championship the year before, didn't go that far in the playoffs, mostly because Kevin Garnett was hurt.
So Kobe's team play was important, no doubt, but there's more to the story.
-I think Kobe's change in numbers was definitely a reflection of his personal change. In Phil Jackson's book, The Last Season, Phil seems to tear Kobe apart, calling him un-coachable and selfish. Now, Phil and Kobe have learned to co exist and win team championships while doing so. They seem to understand each other and the other's management/leadership style. This translates into a lot of what we were talking about in class too with how it's important to get to know the style of your employee and the subtlety to which s/he needs feedback.
ReplyDelete-I do miss a fellow Illini on the Lakers, and the addition of Pau Gasol was definitely intregal to the championship season. There were also other players that were more motivated and committed because of the leadership ability; for example, Trevor Ariza, a player who was constantly switching teams since he was unable to prove himself. On the Lakers, he proved himself, and a lot of that could be due to the trust that he felt from the team.
The 2008 loss to the Celtics in the finals is unfortunate, and I am still grieving. As a Laker fan, I am confident in a rematch, shall it happen.