As the latter half of the millennial generation has entered the working world in recent years, management styles have changed across all industries. I have seen this practice in motion first hand through my own professional experience. In this article I will examine how the sport industry in particular has adapted to the changing needs of its employees.
During the 2018 Major League Baseball campaign, players on the Boston Red Sox were constantly asked one question- “What is different about this year’s team vs. last year’s team?” The diplomatic answer to that question ranged from “the clubhouse atmosphere is different” to “Alex Cora has brought a different set of skills as opposed to John Farrell”. The real answer that everyone avoided giving was “we didn’t like how John Farrell was managing the team, and Alex Cora is doing a better job”. While the 2016 and 2017 teams won the American League East division title in both seasons, both teams ultimately fell short of expectations in the playoffs, bowing out in the first round. I want to preface this article by stating my gratitude to John Farrell for his tenure as manager of the Red Sox. He won a World Series in 2013 and division titles in 2016 and 2017. But all occupations have an expiration date, and there was a need for change following the 2017 season.
The responsibilities of the head coach/manager in all professional sports are not taken from a LinkedIn job posting- they are less clearly defined and more open to interpretation. Should this leader micro-manage game situations, or trust that his players will succeed without interference? Should this person be a constant, overarching presence on the team, or allow them the freedom to mature on their own as players and as individuals? It is not enviable to hold this position in the MLB, NFL, NBA, or NHL. When evaluating a managerial candidate, organizations should place an equal amount of (if not greater amount of) emphasis on the candidate’s relationship management skills as well as his skills as a expert tactician. Prospective hires should also be measured on their ability to maximize the potential of each player, in order to place them in situations more suited for individual and team success. These personality traits make up the “players manager” persona which has influenced the industry’s hiring process in recent years. This trend of hiring someone who is regarded as a “players manager” is one I will explore further in this piece.
I think that the millennial generation has placed a significant emphasis on intangible rewards as well as tangible rewards when it comes to their needs in the workplace. Millennials are not just satisfied with earning a paycheck. That is why John Farrell was fired. His teams were achieving their minimum potential through the bare incentive of their earnings, but there was a perceived lack of intangible rewards that could have resulted in better performance. One of these intangible rewards being the principle of positive reinforcement. This principle should be a staple of employer-employee relationships in all industries. I’ve witnessed situations where an employer is more focused on improving one’s work than positively acknowledging what one has already accomplished. Rather, an employer should first congratulate an employee on even a simple task being completed, and then discuss how to build upon that success. That acknowledgement will breed confidence, which begets improved performance. Today I received a “good job” from my manager in response to an email I wrote to a client, and I was more productive after that interaction than if he did not give me that reinforcement.
After observing both John Farrell and Alex Cora’s relationships with their respective teams, one can notice Alex Cora being a more positive, encouraging manager as opposed to the more laid back Farrell. Cora’s demeanor on the field before games and at his post game press conferences demonstrated a balance of positive reinforcement and constructive criticism. He always made sure to compliment a player first before delivering his criticism. This leadership style is imperative to prevent complacency, and to establish that there is greater positive reinforcement to come as more tasks are completed.
Millennials have appreciated corporate cultures that prioritize employee morale and enjoyment in the workplace. This is a way for companies to retain their younger workforce- and to counter the generation’s exploratory and noncommittal attitudes. Companies (most poignantly sales organizations) that have adopted this “work hard, play hard” culture have been successful in attracting and keeping young talent. Essentially, the millennial wants to have fun at work. I understand the forgone opposition to this idea- that work is not meant to be fun- but why not? Passion spawns productivity, and being happier can lead to passion. John Farrell did not do a good job prioritizing employee morale- at least that is my opinion from a fan’s limited perspective. I believe that Farrell was oblivious to this need from his team, and he operated much like a corporate worker who simply wants to punch the clock every day. The word “robotic” has been often used to describe John Farrell. He met the minimum expectations for the high standards that were associated with his position, but he did not put in the extra effort needed to elevate the team to a championship level. Alex Cora has brought more more energy to the Red Sox clubhouse, and he is a man who genuinely loves what he does for work. I’m sure he would not even refer to his job as “work”. Cora’s presence has formed a more relaxed environment in the clubhouse and has relieved unnecessary pressure on the team that existed under John Farrell. Dustin Pedroia has said that Farrell’s approach wore down the players because of how much winning was magnified every day.
Now of course winning is the ultimate goal, but Alex Cora trusted those results to fall into place based on the talent of his roster. John Farrell’s method was similar to how a parent would remind you to eat vegetables or brush your teeth. “Yes Mom/Dad, I’m aware of the obvious benefits to doing this, you don’t need to always reiterate the point!”. Pedroia’s comments above reinforce my assumption about the Red Sox response to his message- that over time they became less enthusiastic about reaping the benefits.
Claude Julien and John Farrell had very similar careers in Boston leading their respective teams. Like Farrell, Julien won a lone championship with the Bruins and was a championship contender in multiple other seasons. Like Farrell, Julien’s sacking was strongly rumored based on his team’s underwhelming performance. Finally, Julien’s overall successful stint with the Bruins had reached its expiration date, and a change of scenery was needed for the organization. Once again, I have no hard feelings towards Claude. The most common critique of Julien was his inability to creatively utilize the strengths of his younger players. Instead, he continued to use outdated systems of play that did not adapt to the changing style of the NHL. He was also known as a head coach who leaned on his older veteran players as opposed to cultivating his younger talent. At the time of his departure, the Bruins had a strong young core of players at the NHL and AHL levels that included David Pastrnak, Brandon Carlo, Jake DeBrusk, Danton Heinen, Charlie McAvoy, & Ryan Fitzgerald- all under the age of 22. With this influx of young talent ready to influence the team’s direction for years to come, the Bruins needed a head coach who could control and capitalize on that talent in order to compete with the same arrival of millennial talent around the league. Enter Bruce Cassidy, who at the time was managing some of these future pros on the team’s AHL affiliate Providence Bruins.
Those players (and veterans such as Torey Krug, Brad Marchand, & Patrice Bergeron) were immediately reinvigorated by the coaching of Cassidy. Like Alex Cora, Bruce Cassidy is a man who had confidence in the ability of his roster to perform up to their ceiling. Not only that, but the two new managers have allowed their young players to make mistakes so that they can learn from those mistakes and prevent them from being repeated. I have to insert an applicable movie quote here from Batman Begins- “Why do we fall Bruce?”, asks Thomas Wayne of his son after Bruce was rescued from a well, “So we can learn to pick ourselves back up.”
The last differentiation I want to make light of between John Farrell & Alex Cora relates to their postseason in-game maneuvers. This contrast has less to do with the millennial generation than my above points have. In following suit with the game’s other postseason managers, Alex Cora was very unconventional and aggressive with the use of his pitching staff. This is a trend in the game which has correlated with the increased use of analytical data, and a newfound sense of impatience from ownership- sometimes resulting in quicker leadership turnover underneath. Consumer demands for success have been manifested through the rise of new technologies (social media platforms) which have given fans more of a voice in this millennium, meaning there is more pressure on ownership to succeed than in prior eras. MLB decision makers micro-managed their pitching scenarios more than ever in the 2018 playoffs. It was not uncommon to see a starter or reliever get replaced at the first sign of trouble, even if the pitcher had been on a roll up until that point. There is no longer a margin for error in the postseason, and that has come at the expense of a manager’s trust/confidence in his players. No manager wants the distinction of being the next Grady Little, who infamously trusted Pedro Martinez too much to retain the Red Sox’s lead during Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS against the Yankees.
One cause of Major League Baseball’s agonizing pace of play is the increase in pitching changes during a game. Historical data between a pitcher and a batter is more scrutinized than ever, and pitchers have developed into situational specialists. This revolution of bullpen strategy is thrown into overdrive during the postseason, and a new wrinkle was added this past season. Alex Cora brought starting pitchers Rick Porcello, Chris Sale, David Price, & Nathan Eovaldi out of the bullpen in crucial late game situations for extended periods of time. He relied on his best pitchers to get the most important outs, regardless of that pitcher’s role on the staff. The Red Sox might not have won the World Series if Cora adhered to the more orthodox line of succession out of the bullpen. I don’t have confidence in John Farrell’s willingness to take the risks that Alex Cora did. Cora’s approach reflected a more assertive desire to seize the opportunities presented to his team. He aligned with a belief held by Jack Nicholson’s character Frank Costello in The Departed– “No one gives it to you, you have to take it.”
In conclusion, the sport industry has not been immune to these adjustments of workplace management techniques. As Generation Z begins to infiltrate the workforce in the future, I’m certain that new approaches will be derived from their feedback. I hope that Alex Cora & Bruce Cassidy learn from their predecessors and continually adapt their leadership styles based on the changing needs of their employees.
Please send me feedback on this piece- with formatting/grammatical suggestions as well as your opinions on the content. Until next time,
Adam
Adam Sicklick 