by Dan Oswald
If you’re like many, you have been watching the NCAA basketball tournament. And if you’re one of the lucky few, you might be on top of the leader board in your office pool or your team might be one of the Final Four.
What makes watching the tournament fun for me, in part, is seeing the variety of team personalities and coaching styles. What does it take to make it to the final weekend or actually win the tournament? It takes some luck, certainly some skill, and a great deal of leadership coming from one place or another. But the mix of those three elements varies by team, and that fascinates me.
The personality of one of the basketball teams, made up of young players under the age of 22, isn’t unlike your team at work. Let’s consider the makeup of some of the teams in this year’s tournament.
The star and supporting cast. Some of the teams that do well in the tournament have a key player who is the recognized star of the team. The rest of the players have a distinct role to play, but when a big basket or other key contribution is needed, everyone looks to the star. The players recognize the star’s talent and accept their roles within the system because doing so allows the team to be successful.
This type of team reminds me of a business with a key figure who is critical to the company’s success. Steve Jobs comes to mind immediately during his days at Apple. He was the star, and he was surrounded by a cast of very capable players. But when a big decision had to be made, he was the one to whom everyone turned. He demanded it—the same way the star demands the ball at the critical moments during the big game.
The team of equals. Abraham Lincoln had his team of rivals, but this is a team of equals. Some teams have no discernible star but a group of players who are willing and able to contribute. From one game to the next, no one knows who will step up with a key performance that leads the team to victory. These teams are typically marked by their consistency because they don’t rely on one person who may or may not have a great game.
This probably is the most common type of team in a business setting. Each person on the team is chosen for his or her skills and is expected to make an equal contribution. Depending on the project, a different person may step up as the work lends itself to a specific person’s skills.
The overachievers. There’s a team in every tournament that captures the attention of the nation by performing beyond all expectations—except maybe their own. They know what they’re capable of, but no one else expects to see them do well. This year we had Florida Gulf Coast University and Wichita State. Wichita State is in the Final Four, and if the team can win two more games, it will become the lowest-seeded team to win the tournament. The players and their coach knew what they could do, but now given the chance, they get to show the rest of the world.
There are teams like this at work as well. You bring a certain mix of individuals together, and the chemistry is just right and they produce something extraordinary. No one would have predicted their success, but once you see them perform together, it just makes sense that it would work. They’re not surprised by what they can do, but in everyone else’s eyes, they have overachieved.
Don’t forget the coaches. It wouldn’t be right to talk about the teams without talking about the various styles and personalities of the coaches. The thing to note is that there isn’t one style of coaching that seems to be most effective. What you learn, if you watch over time, is that the key to coaching success is being true to yourself. The coaches who regularly win—and two of this year’s coaches in the Final Four already have won national championships—are those who know exactly who they are and behave consistently.
There are coaches who are fiery and scream at their players, pushing them hard. There are coaches who are quiet tacticians who guide their teams with advice and strategy. There are emotional coaches who bounce between tears and joy, showing their players how much they care about them. And each type of coach has been successful on college basketball’s biggest stage. If you’re not sure, just consider the differences between Bobby Knight, Mike Krzyzewski, and John Calipari. Each has won at least one national championship, but all have vastly different styles. What they all did was coach consistently in a style that represented who they are each and every game.
The bottom line is that there is no one secret to putting together the best team. You have to find the mix of talents that fits best together—with your management style and within your organization. You may have one of the three team types described above or one that is entirely unique. The critical element is that you and everyone on the team must understand each person’s role. And you must display consistent leadership on which your team can rely. If those two elements exist, your team has a shot at ending up on top.