The Leadership "Law of Threes"

You don't have to look very far in the world of sports for examples of positive and negative leadership, management, teamwork, and results.

In this piece at The National Football Post, Michael Lombardi discusses the leadership of Tom Coughlin, head coach of the New York Giants football team.

"Yes, I know he has one of the best teams, but what has impressed me about the job Tom is doing is his ability to handle Plaxico Burress and not let it affect the team. He is using a very simple leadership strategy called the “Law of Threes”. On each team there are three types of players. The first are the ones that will do anything that is asked, willing to help the program. The second group are the undecided players, the players that are not sure what to do. And the third are the malcontents. These are the players that want to buck the system all the time, and try to breakdown the team. As a leader, there is a tendency to try and win over the players in group three, by trying to make them happy. But all that does is move the players from group two into group three, and cause you to start to lose the players in group one. What Coughlin has done is focus on group one. He pays no attention to group three and what has resulted is that Plaxico is on an island and no one wants to join him. The team is bigger than Plaxico."

*Thanks to ESPN.com's Bill Simmons for pointing out this article*

Good leadership is usually good behavioral psychology (so why isn't that an MBA class?).

Do these three groups exist in your company or team?
How are you (or the other leaders) handling the situation?

I have to admit, I've never heard of these three laws before. An internet search only brings up references to this article.
But it makes good sense... maybe the "Law of Threes" is worth a try?

Trying to Keep Up with Tom Peters

Today, we started a new 'lunch and learn' program in our cafeteria.

We kicked it off with one of  my heroes, Tom Peters, by playing  "Tom Peters Live: Re-imagine! Business Excellence in a Disruptive Age".

Tom Peters, 65 years young, has more energy than three 20 year-olds. And more anarchy, too! At $29.99, there is absolutely no reason for you to not experience Tom Peters. 

The ultimate management provocateur, Tom cannot go ten minutes without challenging the status quo. Whether he's refuting Jim Collins, ripping on MBA programs, or mocking Old White Male Syndrome - Tom certainly doesn't mince words.

We had 25 or so attendees, a lot of laughter, and even more nodding heads.

Here are three great take-aways from the presentation (Tom likes to quote others).

• “Reward excellent failures. Punish mediocre successes.” - Phil Daniels, Sydney Exec
  
• “The ‘surplus society’ has a surplus of similar companies, employing similar people, with similar educational backgrounds, coming up with similar ideas, producing similar things, with similar prices and similar quality.” - Kjell Nordstrom and Jonas Ridderstrale, Funky Business
• Michelangelo: “The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it.”

Should I Get An MBA?

This is a question I get in almost every management/leadership session I facilitate - "Should I get an MBA"?

The question is often meant as, "To get ahead in this company, should I get my MBA?".

My response to the question is another question - "Do you read management books on the weekend for fun?"

If they say, "Yes", and enthusiastically tell me about the last book they read, then I reply "Take that MBA! You're already doing the work, and you'll enjoy the process.
Get your company to fund a piece of paper that furthers your interests."

Of course, you should consider your opportunity costs.
Is there anything you could be doing with your time that would give a better return than an MBA?
Tom Peters once wrote that your time would be better spent doing business in Asia than studying in a classroom.
As a guy who discontinued his MBA studies at Santa Clara to take an assignment in Japan, I would have to agree.
But your optimal path is assuredly different from mine...

And if you don't read management books for fun?
"Then why," I ask, "do you want an MBA?"

It usually comes down to promotion concerns. MBA's have a better chance of promotion, they think.

Well, 20 years of experience in interviewing and hiring tells me that's not true - at least at this company.
Sure, if two candidates are dead even, I'd take the MBA candidate. Putting your blood, sweat, and tears into an MBA proves you want the management path - you're not just talking about it.
But, you know what? Candidates are never dead even (unless your job definition and interviewing process sucks).
When I choose between an MBA and someone who's been kicking ass, well, the ass-kicker wins every time...

In fact, if I met a manager who insisted that every manager must have an MBA, I wouldn't work for him or her. Evolution and growth come from diversity, and a room full of MBA's is the opposite of diversity.

One other question I ask is what I call the 'tennis-ball test'.
If I throw a tennis ball down the hall, how far will it bounce before it hits an MBA?

In our company, the correct answer is between 20-75 feet.
Having an MBA is not a differentiator here.
And if it's not a differentiator, it's not adding value.
And if it's not adding value, well, neither are you, probably.

I'd sooner hire someone with a Psychology, Architecture, or Anthropology degree to work in my group than an MBA.
Not because MBA degrees are bad (they're not), but because that turf is covered.

We're past the point where 'checkboxes' get you ahead. Happily.
Passion is the biggest differentiator now.
You'll get ahead when you outwork everyone else. And you'll outwork everyone else on things you're passionate about.

So, go get that MBA - if you're passionate about business.