The diaspora of english speaking men who came and made India their second home, spread the pores of 'Cricket'; which until then referred only to a 'grass hoping insect'; which spread to every nook and corner of this country, to some areas where even their 'universal' language failed! Long after they left, this game has stayed and spread more infectiously than a weed would, and men here survive in spite of suffocation of its overdose.
"The English are not a very spiritual people, so they invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity", said George Bernard Shaw! Did he say 'eternity'!? Ah! he was talking about that test matches that used to be played over 5 days! The current Indian team managed to redefine and shrink 'this eternity'.
The magic of cricket makes people forget and forgive the literal felling and falling of heads by wicked's almost at will, but never the falling of wickets in cricket and demand felling of heads - especially those at the helm!
And hence, the heads of few have come in for stake and stalk after the dismal show in test matches that was played recently between India and England in the birth place of this 'sacred' sport! The 'methods' are analysed and plausible corrections in the technique of few players and the capabilities of few others are also analysed thread bare and made public through various medium. The primary concern, however, revolved around the role of the leader.
What is the role of a leader? How much of this debacle is contributed by the leadership?
I do not intend to get into the semantics of the term 'leadership', it would defy even the space and scope of volumes and volumes which already adore the shelves and struggle to enter the minds! Rather, I shall explore it under the current context and concern of this Indian team.
Is a leader as good as the team or is the team as good as a leader!? The question posed is as trite and as intriguing as "whether the egg came first or the chick"!?
Mahendra Singh Dhoni seems more intriguing than the above propositions!
A recent book by HBR dealt with this issue multi-prong of which I pick the following imperatives:
- Picking the right people
- Building the right culture
- Finding a strategy that works
"Right set of people" make up for a good team and to this end, the statement "the leader is as good as a team" proves true. Well, will a mere constitution of right set of people ensure success? Few years back, we had the best of people in business touring England and they met with a similar fate - importantly, the leader was same both then and now! Also, some of the present breed of players are considered heirs for the realms left open by those foregone greats, and even in their short tenure thus far, have proved their capabilities, significantly in alien conditions! And in any case, a leader who brought glory to the nation in the past, is expected to steer and spearhead a given team, and optimally utilise the potential of the given resources.
"Building the right culture": "Culture", a very broad word which is the bedrock of a society, and a commonly used one in the corridors of corporates and governance, has also managed to find its entry into the arena of sports! Here, one must acknowledge that a "culture" is something which is not (and cannot be) thrust into an individual. It is more of a feeling of belongingness that an individual gets when he conforms willingly to a set of undefined rules! There are instances where certain aberrations creep in temporarily and vitiate the prevailing culture. Or there are cases where a certain individual who managed to 'change' the prevailing culture. But, 'right culture' certainly is a prerequisite for a significant performance, more so in a team environment. At times, when someone is failing, the shouldering of the responsibility by others till the failing individual rises is a reflection of the prevailing culture!
"Finding a strategy" needs no further emphasis or explanation, but finding that strategy 'which works' is a very tricky proposition! It is precisely here that a leader gets exposed as right strategy also includes deployment of right people and right culture! If the strategy backfires, it exposes the weakness of an individual - even if he happens to be the right person! An individual, thus exposed would also start emanating wrong signals which will vitiate the prevailing culture, infectiously.
The infectious negativeness and a serious dent in the self belief of Kohli and Pujara caught and spread to Vijay and Rahane too, who where so far excelling in the same hostile turf! Suddenly, everyone started failing and the slide turned into an avalanche!
Sometimes, in the face of such a slide, the mind just shuts adamantly and refuses to open up. The drooping eyelids of Kohli, Pujara et-al did not have the power to penetrate the shut wall of their minds. In broad daylight, these players very found groping in their self imposed darkness, unable to see what is happening. The 'seeing' was like, as Alexandra Horowitz expressed, "...we see, but we do not see; we use our eyes, but our gaze is glancing, frivolously considering its object. We see the signs, but not their meanings. We are not blinded, but we have blinders."
It is not uncommon to fail - both individually and collectively. But, to fail consistently and in such cascading manner is something very serious. It is here that the role of a true leader gets defined: he needs urgently to find the meaning and communicate - to open channels for the individual who is failing, to stem his failure, and enable him to redeem himself and more importantly ensure that the 'disease' doesn't spread to the uninfected!
These players are no longer in the school of cricket, some of them have tapped the doors of excellence and hence they just need to be shaken awake from their self induced slumber and the nonsense of imparting few techniques should stop. The road to top is not for herds and one has to travel alone and be ready for stepping on thorns, barriers and at times face blind alley. It is here and going through all the above which makes them evolve, thrive and consummate.
Amidst all this, the leader will only be a catalyst and nothing more, but being a catalyst is not remaining silent - silence is a virtue in controlled doses and not always! And he should be performing both as a leader and in his domain. At times, a leader may become adamant, uninspiring and simply may have exhausted his 'store of ideas'; it is then time for him to leave the stage or if need be shown the door.
Mike Brearley - the Brit who is the only cricketer who is specifically known for his leadership qualities said, "The captain, like the parent and the psychoanalyst, is bound to be the recipient of emotional demands and pressures from those he is responsible for. A good leader or manager is interested in what makes people tick, particularly when they seem to be difficult or withdrawn or under-achieving."
Whatever we may say and analyse, in sports, everything boils down to defeating one four letter word - "fail" and achieve one simple three lettered word - "win". It pains to lose, as simple as that, everything else is irrelevant. To the self posed question: "Why I failed", Abinav Bindra (a shooter who won the first ever gold medal for India in Olympics) answered: "I was not desperate enough to win." Even though one might keep saying philosophically that taking part and being in the moment is the primary aspect of any sport, when a team or an individual fails, no one gets elated and everything else takes backseat!
Sometimes, the chord to this will to win may get severed in an individual. It is then the responsibility of those at helm to restore this vital link - simply put. Forget the methods which are plentiful.
Until then...
