Leadership lessons in the Tour de France

This year’s Tour De France has begun and already we find some valuable insights for those of us in the business world.

What’s particularly interesting from a business perspective is the team dynamics in this event. Competitive cycling is a team sport; an individual cannot be successful without the support of the other riders in their team. Each rider in a team of eight has a clearly defined role and the team is lead by the ‘director sportive’ who doesn’t ride a bike but follows around in a car, in radio contact with the riders. More than that, the riders are supported by a back room staff of mechanics, masseurs, and coaches and, in the case of the British ‘Sky’ team, a psychologist. Each element of the team has to be at the very peak of their profession; the best at what they do. They may not all be riding the bike, but they do have to operate in a completely cohesive way and with a total focus on ensuring the success of the team both on and off the bike.

Each team will have riders with specialist capabilities (sprinters, climbers, etc) and it will down to the director sportive to deploy these resources on a daily basis, depending on the terrain, the team strategy for the day and how the race unfolds with the tactics of other teams. So it’s a very dynamic and fast changing situation which will be impacted by external factors such as the weather, mechanical failures and crashes!

The story so far
Day one saw an individual time trial, where riders set out over a set course, this time through the streets of Rotterdam (not all TDF stages are in France). The riders with more power tend to do better in these stages, but it rained and cautious strategies prevailed. Reacting to the conditions of the day is a valuable lesson for us in business who can sometimes find ourselves operating in a bubble.

Day two showed just how powerful a group can be. It was another day of rain and a crash involving the peleton (the main group of riders) enabled one rider to get away from the group, gaining three minutes on the other riders. There was then a group protest (refusal to compete) in protest about the conditions and all the riders rolled over the line together. The collective will power of the group vs the organisation being very much in evidence and something that should not be overlooked by leaders in business.

Day three gave us the opportunity to value the whole team in the event. Riding over cobbles and very narrow roads meant the race split up, with punctures, crashes and bike failures. With this stage more suited to the powerful riders who can ride hard and fast over the cobbles, it’s the role of the team to get the ‘climbers’ through the stage. On day two, one of the most powerful riders found himself with a dilemma; he had broken away from the main peleton, but his team captain and potential overall winner was back in that group, so did he ride for himself and the glory of winning the stage or hold back to minimise the losses of his team mate? Team objectives rather than individual glory won the day. Once again the business learnings are clear, performing for the longer term good of the team rather than pursuing individual objectives and agendas will see long term business benefit.

More to follow as the stages and race unfold …

Phil Braybrooke, CHPD

"Turn again, Margaret"

Self confessed "man of the people" Russell Deathridge considers the leadership lessons that emerge from a particularly weighty anniversary falling this month.

There is an inevitability about discussions on the nature of leadership. At some point one name will emerge: Margaret Thatcher. Thirty years after her first historic election victory, we are seeing an examination of her style, policies and legacy. This is good, for, with the exception of Churchill, Thatcher is unique among post war British Prime Ministers: a generation after she was elected people still have incredibly strong opinions about her.

Ruthless, iron-willed, stubborn, necessary, visionary, energetic, “intransigent”, ‘inspiring, ‘direct and focused are just some of the more common (and printable) descriptions of Mrs T. Unsurprisingly ‘consensus’ never appears. The ‘ability to create general agreement‘ is not a skill that first springs to mind when we discuss Britain’s first woman prime minister. Once famously describing consensus politicians as ‘traitors’, she later publicly expanded on her theme:

“Consensus … is the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies in search of something in which no one believes, but to which no one objects … What great cause would have been fought and won under the banner ‘I stand for consensus’?”

The Sir Robert Menzies Lecture, Monash University, Australia,1981

When we skim the surface of Thatcher’s premiership this trenchant belief appears borne out by her behaviour: the implementation of the ground breaking 1981 monetary budget; the simple, single minded prosecution of the Falklands War; the trouncing of the miners; the “no, no, no” of her European policy and finally her implacable adherence to the notorious ‘poll tax’. In all these cases Thatcher showed a breathtaking disregard for the opinions of others. In some instances it worked for her (monetarism, the Falklands and the miners), in others it spectacularly failed. It was clear at the time that a combination of her contempt for the EU single currency and an almost messianic belief in the poll tax toppled Mrs Thatcher.

As experts in the nature of leadership, we at CHPD find that many successful leaders certainly need to have both the vision and drive to make things happen, but at the same time they need to build consensus and be open to different ideas. CHPD founder Dr Tony Cockerill defines this behaviour ‘conceptual flexibility’ and described it thus:

“It is the ability to compare the merits of two or more realistic alternatives. By examining, in detail, the pros and cons of each idea the leader may then create an over-arching plan or strategy. The outcome will be an approach which maximises the benefits and minimises the downsides of the original options. Without it the leader may be unable to persuade others of the benefits of the approach and ultimately fail”.

No politician, whatever they or their image makers may like us to believe, can reach the top without being able to think laterally both strategically and tactically. The ‘success stories’ noted above were achievable precisely because there were alternatives. In the case of the miners, Mrs Thatcher avoided a confrontation earlier because she was persuaded that neither the government nor coal board was sufficiently prepared for a long strike. Thatcher’s fall from power happened not only because of poor policy but also because she refused to think flexibly and, ironically, build consensus.

CHPD both assesses leaders against conceptual flexibility and a further 11 behaviours and helps them achieve a higher level of performance through training and coaching. To find out how your leaders stack up against the key benchmarks, email info@chpd.com. In the meantime, try the following tips to boost conceptual flexibility in your business:

• Show staff how to evaluate pros and cons of several different options when planning
• Establish a network of teams from different units or functions to solve problems and devise multiple strategies and visions
• Recognise and reward flexible thinking behaviour
• Create alternative visions for the future and predict their impact
• Introduce scenario planning or modelling as fundamental processes to be used to help with flexible thinking
• Task management and staff with multiple solution formation and short and long term planning – build this into the performance management process

One final thought, under the ‘30 year rule’, the Thatcher government cabinet papers will soon start to be released. Then we will see if she truly was the ‘Iron Lady’."

Russell Deathridge is a consultant at the Centre For High Performance Development.