Very good article from Margaret Heffernan, "It’s Finally Time to Retire ‘Good to Great’ From the Leadership Canon." This quote stands out:
Collins insists that great companies get the right people on the bus and the wrong ones off. But how do you identify them proactively? Collins is thin on detail. Their values matter more than skills, but how can you tell? They’re unafraid to face brutal truths — but we all avoid unpleasant realities, so how do serious leaders foster candor? There’s evidence that what distinguishes high-achieving teams is the quality of connectedness between people rather than the individuals themselves, but such systemic thinking is absent from Good to Great, which inhabits a strictly linear universe. You either are Level 5 or somewhere lower on the ladder. The people on the bus are right or wrong. The toughest parts of leadership are, apparently, easy.
This reminds me of the the 1998 Sydney to Hobart yacht race as described by Dennis Perkins and Jillian Murphy in their book "Into the Storm." Larry Ellison's purchased professional crew on his yacht, "Sayonara," put in a mighty fine performance. But the race was won by the scrappy and tight knit little crew on the "Midnight Rambler."
If the quality of connectedness between people is a distinguishing characteristic of high-achieving teams, what does that say about the team "hero" - that individual who insists on outperforming everyone else on the team? In my experience, the team hero's contribution to the team effort is much more likely to be disruptive than productive. I've observed the following qualities:
They manufacture crisis that only they can solve.
They work outside the team, pleasing others - particularly people with status - while progress on work assigned to the team suffers.
They hoard information and work assignments.
Show little interest in mentoring or helping others on the team succeed.
Are acutely sensitive to criticism and dismissive of feedback.
Display many of the attributes of a fixed mindset.
Managing a team with a hero on it usually means you spend most of your time managing the hero or scrambling to mitigate the adverse effects of their behavior. The team suffers and second order effects soon follow. I'd much rather manage a team of solid performers who understand how to work together.
Photo by Javier García on Unsplash