Whether in sport or business, the top performers generally take a different approach to their mediocre and tail-end competitors.
Top performers continually look for ways to improve and recognise that to get to the top and stay at the top, they need to use all the ‘brains’, internal and external, they can get access to. As a result, they are receptive to suggestions that could give them an edge over their competitors, no matter what quarter they come from.
Mediocre and tail-end performers on the other hand are generally dismissive of suggestions made by those who they regard as less accomplished than themselves. Unless the person holds a more senior position in the company or is a senior executive of the likes of a Goldman Sachs or McKinsey or is a much more accomplished former senior executive, mediocre and tail-end performers have scant interest in even hearing what they may say.
In the case of competitive one-design keel-boat sailing, the boats, sails and rigging are the same, the crew component is similar, and the crew and skippers have, almost without exception, decades of sailing experience. Despite these competitors being well experienced and competing on an equal (or nearly equal) basis, some boats consistently finish regattas at the pointy end, some in the middle and others at the tail-end. This raises the question: Why so?
It’s not superior genetics as is the case in most sports. It is due to management style and their approach to improving performance. Consider the situation of a youngster who is not a member of the class or even of a sailing club, is not a well-experienced sailor and has not even sailed on a yacht before, separately approaching skippers saying that he’s been analysing aerial footage of the last regatta and has identified an opportunity for that skipper to gain a boat length or two on each upward a leg of a race. The reactions of the various skippers would differ. Most would be dismissive of the approach and not willing to even hear what he had to say. They only listen to far more accomplished sailors and would probably even disregard what even they have to say. The typical response would be, that may work on a big keelboat (or on an off the beach boat) but it won’t work on my boat. Top-performing skippers on the other hand, recognise that even a yard of extra pace over a leg of a race can give their boat an inside overlap that translates into a 2 to 3 boat length lead after rounding the mark. They also recognise that other top-performing boats are also looking for every advantage they can get. So when one of the world’s most accomplished competitive sailors is beaten on a leg of a race, even in a club race, he will want to know how that happened –what the other boat did? Mediocre performers would either not notice or would put it down to luck and head off to the pub.
Top performing skippers continuously look for opportunities to improve and so not only welcome input from others but also encourage them to continue to look for and suggest improvement opportunities. They recognise that only by listening to what someone has to say can they determine whether it has merit or not. Given this attitude they would be keen to hear what that youngster had to say, and only having done so, would they have discovered that the youngster had for years been obsessed with virtual sailing competitions and the use of strategies to get ahead and had done plenty of research into that aspect of the sport. The top-performing skipper would then recognise that the youngster would be much more experienced in that regard than most weekend sailors and probably also more experienced than many professional sailors. Most roles on a boat do not require thought on boat strategy. Crew think about techniques and processes to get their jobs done more efficiently and effectively – such as sail trim, raising and dropping the kite, tacking and gybing – but pay little attention to boat strategies, probably because its outside the ambit of their jobs. Even the skipper, who is usually helming (steering), focusses on sailing at the right height to the wind, adjusting for changes in wind speed and direction, avoiding collisions, adhering to the racing rules of sailing and looking to get into and stay in clean airs. Given these other areas of attention, the skipper may also not be an expert on race strategy. So, notwithstanding the youngster never having sailed on a boat, he (or she) could know a lot more about sailing strategies than even professional sailors.
In this case, unless skippers are open to new information and other perspectives, they wouldn’t have heard of the analysis done and conclusions reached by the youngster, and as a result would suffer an opportunity cost – finishing races behind those who did. The business world is similar in this respect.
If one of your leadership team received an unsolicited approach from a youngster lacking the usual educational and employment credentials who mentioned that he had identified an opportunity for the business to substantially reduce its costs and enquired whether the company could consider entering into a mutually beneficial business relationship, how would you expect that leader to react and how would you want that leader to react?
Anecdotal evidence suggests that most business owners, managing directors, CEO’s and department heads will either ignore the approach or politely decline without taking the trouble consider the youngster’s proposal. Those few having an inquisitive mind could have established that the youngster was a genius and highly knowledgeable about AI or some other groundbreaking technology.
Mediocre performers are generally dismissive of suggestions made by subordinates and others they regard as less accomplished, while top performers are welcoming of suggestions from all quarters. Top-performers recognise that people from different backgrounds could offer a different perspective that may give them an edge over competitors reliant on ‘group think’ – employing and engaging the same type of people. Those reliant on group think are likely to end up with a similar outcome to the others also reliant on group think. To get a competitive advantage you may need a different perspective. These are more likely to come from people with different backgrounds and experience.
Getting a competitive advantage can be a lot more important for a business than it is for a competitive sailor. Competitive sailors can justifiably get a lot of satisfaction from finishing on the podium or in the top 10% and even from just finishing a gruelling race. Their main sources of income, sponsorships and advertising, are not generally severely impacted if they don’t win the race or regatta. When a business tenders for a contract, there is invariably only one winner. It’s a winner takes all situation. All others get no benefit and suffer real (and sometimes significant) bidding costs. Typically, only one party wins a tender but if too much is offered to win it, the winning business will suffer in the longer term.
In the normal course of business, if they price their products too high or quality reduces, the business can lose market share and suffer a loss in profitability. This wouldn’t sit well with their shareholders, who may push for new management. As a result, there is considerable pressure on businesses to win – in both the short and longer term.
Given the stakes involved, the competition is often fierce. So fierce that only a small competitive advantage may swing the outcome materially. Considering the high stakes and stiff competition, it is bewildering that many senior executives do not seek other perspectives and many ignore unsolicited approaches.
The entrepreneurial founders of their businesses would generally have had a strong desire to succeed and would have tapped the brains of many to get there. As the business passes to the 2nd and 3rd generations, management’s perceived level of self-importance increases giving them an air of superiority and fostering a top-down managerial style. And that is a recipe for disaster. A similar situation applies to listed companies. The larger the company, the more likely its management are filled with airs of superiority, draw from similar top-tier universities and engage similar consultants – and that has led to the downfall of many once mighty companies.
The top-performing executives instil a strong desire amongst all concerned to improve the performance of their businesses. They look far and wide for it and are receptive to suggestions and recommendations no matter where from whence they came. They also judge suggestions on their merit. Achieving this environment is however easier said than done.
R&M can help business owners design and implement systems that foster bottom-up communication and encourages all within the business to look for and suggest opportunities for improvement, and in that regard find out who is doing what in their area of the business.
Here is a link to the R&M webpage that describes what it offers, why and how it goes about its business – https://www.rogersmorris.com.au/rm-advisory/. An email address is provided for those who would like to explore what R&M can do for them.