Would you want Kevin Pietersen in your team?
FT.com
January 15, 2014 12:37 pm
By Michael Skapinker
How to deal with talented but awkward people who don’t abide by the rules
Kevin Pietersen, who plays cricket for England, is difficult, self-regarding, occasionally irresponsible and, in the right frame of mind, outrageously talented.
He was the best batsman in England’s recent disastrous series against Australia. But as they rebuild their team, England’s managers have to decide whether they have had enough of him.
Comparisons between sport and business are sometimes overdone: winning and losing are more clear-cut in sport. But the two often look similar, particularly when there are only a few companies in a sector. The annual battle between Airbus and Boeing for aircraft orders has all the needle and ill-feeling of an England-Australia cricket series.
Many of the selection and retention dilemmas of business and sport are the same. Every manager, even those who know nothing about cricket, have to struggle over whether to have people like Pietersen in their teams.
Is ability more important than getting on with your colleagues? Does tolerating eccentricity in one person demoralise everyone else?
Managers deal with these questions all the time – and a manager who treats every team member the same is no manager. People have different strengths and weaknesses and they require individual handling.
People also have different ways of working. Some do best sitting in a cubicle on their own; others when everyone around them is chipping in. Some are most productive before any one else gets into the office; others when everyone else is sleeping.
This doesn’t apply only to idea-generating jobs. In a call-centre or in a showroom, some people look less energetic but generate higher sales. Some are sociable; others, like Pietersen, are loners.
The way to judge people at work is by what they achieve, not how they go about achieving it. As a manager, you should be measuring their output, not their input.
It may seem obvious but much modern corporate practice ignores this. Human resources policies that insist everyone acts in the same way at the same time are the enemies of effective teams. Your job as a manager is to fight these policies, ignore them or find ways around them, complying just enough to keep your team out of trouble.
Organisations talk a lot about diversity but then impose a corporate uniformity on teams of both sexes and different nationalities, colours and religions. True diversity means getting the best out of people who are different, not forcing them to be the same.
So how should you deal with a talented, awkward team member who doesn’t abide by the rules? There are two issues: first, how their failure to comply affects their, and your, superiors. Second, what impact their behaviour has on their peers.
You need to talk to them about how they come across. They are often the kind of people who have no idea. You can begin by telling them how much they have achieved and how much they are still capable of achieving. You can then say you know how irritating some of the rules are, but suggest it might be better if they complied with them. You’re doing well, you can say. Why let yourself down?
If you are sufficiently rebellious yourself, you can suggest which corporate rules should be obeyed and which can be safely ignored. You can tell them you are on their side and that you hope they won’t let you down. You can also talk to them about how important it is that their colleagues respect their work, and suggest small ways to minimise antagonism.
To the resentful colleagues, you can point out that people have different ways of doing things and that this individual has achieved a lot for the team. You can mention the ways in which everyone, including those complaining, benefit from team flexibility.
You can, without being denigratory, make a bit of a joke of it: “Oh well, that’s X. She did help us get there last year.”
So would I have Pietersen in my team? No, I wouldn’t. In 2012, when England were playing South Africa, Pietersen, who grew up in South Africa, sent some of the opposing players a text message with a crude Afrikaans insult about Andrew Strauss, his then captain.
After apologising, Pietersen was allowed back. I would have put a stop to it then. Being awkward, unclubbable and resentful are all tolerable, provided you deliver. But there is a line you don’t cross, and Pietersen crossed it.
michael.skapinker@ft.com
Twitter: @Skapinker
January 15, 2014 12:37 pm
By Michael SkapinkerHow to deal with talented but awkward people who don’t abide by the rules
Kevin Pietersen, who plays cricket for England, is difficult, self-regarding, occasionally irresponsible and, in the right frame of mind, outrageously talented.
He was the best batsman in England’s recent disastrous series against Australia. But as they rebuild their team, England’s managers have to decide whether they have had enough of him.
Comparisons between sport and business are sometimes overdone: winning and losing are more clear-cut in sport. But the two often look similar, particularly when there are only a few companies in a sector. The annual battle between Airbus and Boeing for aircraft orders has all the needle and ill-feeling of an England-Australia cricket series.
Many of the selection and retention dilemmas of business and sport are the same. Every manager, even those who know nothing about cricket, have to struggle over whether to have people like Pietersen in their teams.
Is ability more important than getting on with your colleagues? Does tolerating eccentricity in one person demoralise everyone else?
Managers deal with these questions all the time – and a manager who treats every team member the same is no manager. People have different strengths and weaknesses and they require individual handling.
People also have different ways of working. Some do best sitting in a cubicle on their own; others when everyone around them is chipping in. Some are most productive before any one else gets into the office; others when everyone else is sleeping.
This doesn’t apply only to idea-generating jobs. In a call-centre or in a showroom, some people look less energetic but generate higher sales. Some are sociable; others, like Pietersen, are loners.
The way to judge people at work is by what they achieve, not how they go about achieving it. As a manager, you should be measuring their output, not their input.
It may seem obvious but much modern corporate practice ignores this. Human resources policies that insist everyone acts in the same way at the same time are the enemies of effective teams. Your job as a manager is to fight these policies, ignore them or find ways around them, complying just enough to keep your team out of trouble.
Organisations talk a lot about diversity but then impose a corporate uniformity on teams of both sexes and different nationalities, colours and religions. True diversity means getting the best out of people who are different, not forcing them to be the same.
So how should you deal with a talented, awkward team member who doesn’t abide by the rules? There are two issues: first, how their failure to comply affects their, and your, superiors. Second, what impact their behaviour has on their peers.
You need to talk to them about how they come across. They are often the kind of people who have no idea. You can begin by telling them how much they have achieved and how much they are still capable of achieving. You can then say you know how irritating some of the rules are, but suggest it might be better if they complied with them. You’re doing well, you can say. Why let yourself down?
If you are sufficiently rebellious yourself, you can suggest which corporate rules should be obeyed and which can be safely ignored. You can tell them you are on their side and that you hope they won’t let you down. You can also talk to them about how important it is that their colleagues respect their work, and suggest small ways to minimise antagonism.
To the resentful colleagues, you can point out that people have different ways of doing things and that this individual has achieved a lot for the team. You can mention the ways in which everyone, including those complaining, benefit from team flexibility.
You can, without being denigratory, make a bit of a joke of it: “Oh well, that’s X. She did help us get there last year.”
So would I have Pietersen in my team? No, I wouldn’t. In 2012, when England were playing South Africa, Pietersen, who grew up in South Africa, sent some of the opposing players a text message with a crude Afrikaans insult about Andrew Strauss, his then captain.
After apologising, Pietersen was allowed back. I would have put a stop to it then. Being awkward, unclubbable and resentful are all tolerable, provided you deliver. But there is a line you don’t cross, and Pietersen crossed it.
michael.skapinker@ft.com
Twitter: @Skapinker
0 Response to "Would you want Kevin Pietersen in your team?"
Post a Comment