![]()
Chapter 1
Why Sport and Management?
Sport and the Firm: is a Meaningful Metaphor Possible?
The sports context is often used as a powerful analogy for analyzing and interpreting phenomena such as teamwork, motivation, and leadership, with professional sports coaches held up as role models for managers. But itās not always advisable to take principles, models, and best practices from the world of sports and apply them to business. Managers often look to sports for inspiration and useful examples for working with a group-but they should be aware of the risks involved in transferring these models to a business setting. Any comparison with the world of sports, if applied inappropriately, can lead to mistakes and end up being ineffective or even counterproductive.
Countless books on sports and leadership are based on a premise that is profoundly simplistic: that firms and sports teams are very much alike. Some researchers1 even assert that soccer represents the ideal management model for modern firms. But itās wrong to assume that parallels can always be drawn and, although business and sports share some similarities, they have deep differences from myriad perspectives.
To transfer ideas from sports to business and vice versa, first we need to clarify the key similarities and dissimilarities between the two.2
The main differences between sports and firms
The first thing that differentiates sports from business is the very concept of performance, and what makes it good or bad. Bill Parcells, one of the most successful coaches in the history of American football, sums it up well:
In sports, two athletes or two teams may have nearly identical performances in the same competition, but have completely different results. In business, by contrast, a 1% difference in market share would not have a radical implication in terms of winning instead of losing. In sports, you can win or lose an Olympic medal by a few hundredths of a second, or make it to the next round of a tournament or be eliminated by a single point. Luck can often play a decisive role in the career of an athlete or a coach.
If we break this down into type of performance, firms primarily pursue profit. In sports, instead, the ābottom lineā is competitive performance-not always and not only measured in terms of victories, but also in light of quality of play and ability to satisfy the fansā expectations. Sports clubs have to strike a balance between competitive, financial, cultural, and social results that involve the fans and the values of sportsmanship. Another point of divergence lies in the determinants of performance on an individual level, for managers and athletes. In a business context, talent is basically defined in terms of competencies and cognitive capability. In the sports arena, instead, talent encompasses both cognitive and mental skills as well as athletic, physical, and technical prowess.
In fact, because of the physical side of sports, the career of an athlete is often short lived, rarely lasting past 35ā40 years of age. This compressed time horizon also gives rise to crucial differences for coaches, who have to deal with certain vital and unique needs of their athletes. In sports, playing just a few more minutes, or starting in a big game, can be life-changing moments for a player.Age is another differentiator of sports and business. Athletes peak at a younger age than managers. Just imagine playing in a soccer World Cup final at 18 or 20: this kind of responsibility calls for special psychological skills that older managers do not normally need. In longer professional business careers, itās the norm for managers to attain major responsibility after the age of 35.
As for level of education, in contrast to what happens in most businesses, sports coaches usually find themselves leading teams made up of very young members with little formal education, and dealing with all the related repercussions on team management.
Athletic performance is also subject to high risk, due in part to the fact that often only a limited number of major sporting events mark an athleteās career. During these competitions, luck can play a vital role. Injuries are another serious risk; consider the countless world-class athletes whoāve had to abruptly suspend or even end their careers following a serious injury.
Apart from all these differences, one thing sports and business share is the importance of learning, which takes the form of training in sports, and education and development in business. Both athletes and managers are expected to strive for self-improvement, continually learning new individual techniques and team formations or methodologies. Willpower, intellectual curiosity, the drive to do better, and a sense of commitment are critical success factors for individual performance common to both sports and business.
Given that when we compare sports and management, we usually refer to professional sports with high media impact, we need to take into account the sizeable gap in level of remuneration. Athletes can earn enormous sums at a young age, which for young managers would be unheard of. So the challenge that coaches faceāmanaging a pool of players who often collectively earn millionsāwould be an exception to the rule in a business context.
The public visibility of professional sports gives rise to intense environmental pressure from myriad stakeholders, most often fans and the media. Business managers hardly ever experience this kind of pressure, except for top executives in organizations that are subject to institutional controls, such is the case with listed firms. Here is what a former president of Manchester City has to say on the subject:
This means that athletes, coaches, and sports managers are continually being critiqued by a vast audience, including fans, of course, but in a broader sense encompassing public opinion in general. These stakeholders are far more interested, engaged, and informed than those weād find in most firms. All this is fueled by the mediaās habit of spontaneously spotlighting what goes on in professional sports clubs. Whatās more, everyone can check the sports scores in the paper at least once a week; theyāre a popular topic of conversation.4
Generally speaking, sports also have a more powerful social impact than business. While the most influential people in a firm are its shareholders, in the sports world the owners of a club or the organizers of an event often have to contend with a wide array of interests, and find a way to balance and satisfy them all. Players, agents, staff, owners, young athletes on feeder teams, as well as external stakeholders, such as the media, the fans, sponsors, sports regulators, the local community, and on and onāthe club has to take into account all these interests, all at the same time. As we can see, with respect to firms, sports clubs have to strike a balance between the often-conflicting interests of wider, more diversified group of stakeholders.
Summing up, then, weāve established that there are notable points of divergence between sports and management practices, some of which will never be aligned (see Table 1.1). That said, parallels do exist that can become sources of reciprocal inspiration between sports and business. But before making any meaningful transposition from one context to the other, first we have to scrutinize both, and verify that substantial similarities actually do exist. To this end, in the following sections we present a number of interpretative models that identify the key factors to consider coming up with comparisons that are truly useful and appropriate.
Table 1.1 The main differences between sports and business
Distinctive features of sports teams to consider for transferring team leadership models and practices to business teams
Transposing concepts and managerial models from professional sports teams to business teams can and should be done, but only to the extent to which the teams in both contexts are alike, sharing similar goals and tasks, and having similar structures and methods of operation, etc.
First we need to compare the teamsā goals and tasks. Sports teams are examples of performance teams. Members have a significant, visible, direct impact on organizational results; they have to possess innate ability, as well as motivation, to be successful. Many business teams, instead, are assigned primary or exclusive tasks that can vary enormously, for example taking strategic decisions, develo...
