Achilles was a pretty
successful chap (his heel not withstanding), lauded for his physicality, brute
strength and prowess on the battlefield.
Indeed, it was his physical precociousness and honest disposition which
gained popular acclaim; from a modern day perspective you may have described
his as ‘what you see is what you get’.
It is often these characteristics and attributes that we value in
identifying young people likely to excel in their chosen sport (or any chosen
career path for that matter); those that are willing to work hard, develop
physical precociousness through adherence to a prescribed training programme
and compliance with the requests of their coach and support team. These qualities are of course important
however there are a different set of skills which are overlooked, those
displayed and practised by another successful yet perhaps less well known
Greek, Odysseus.
Odysseus displayed a
smart mind, and has been described as cunning and in a slightly more derogatory
tone, deceptive. His ability to
communicate whilst hiding his true purpose, feelings and thoughts are well
documented. He was the adventurer who
managed to avoid the sirens through foreplaning and escaped from the clutches
of the Cyclops through an intricate series of lies, deception and double
crossing. These qualities were less
popular amongst the ancient Greeks than those of Achilles and so is the case
today; few would readily identify an athlete who was descried as cunning or
deceitful as being someone they would want to work with. Perhaps however this requires a re-think?
The ability to be
cunning and deceitful are key attributes in a range of sports from a tactical
and strategic perspective. Never before
has the influence of ‘mind games’ been so publicised in the popular media, a
practise which requires athletes (and coaches) to use a range of techniques
that hide their true agenda.
Furthermore, once they enter the field of play athletes are required to
deceive their opponent through feints, disguised movements and in some cases feigned
injury. Despite the positive influence
these actions and behavior's can have on the intended outcome we seem to
apportion a relatively low priority to them in selecting athletes (and coaches)
who are likely to be successful. Not
only are these skills undervalued in how we select able young athletes but
their development is often not specifically targeted. Perhaps we expect the subtleties of
subterfuge and deception to be developed tacitly, or perhaps we are less
conformable with acknowledging and using practises designed to enhance their
use. In previous roles I heard coaches
complain that some athletes would always seem to find the easiest way of doing
things, or work out the best way to win (even if it wasn’t necessarily in the
sprint of the game or strictly within the rules). This was generally conferred in a negative
way yet demonstrated an important skill and mind set, the ability to be cunning
and flexible in their approach. Although
athletes who display these skills may be harder to manage this should not deter
us from working with them, unless of course they take the path of least
resistance to avoid a challenge.
The recent publication
of athletes TUE data has brought this topic into stark focus. Team Sky were previously lauded for their
‘leave no stone unturned’ approach, perhaps because it was seen to reflect an
unfaltering work ethic. The suggestion
however that their practices may have bent the rules or pushed the boundaries
of laws that govern cycling (and other sports) following the release of TUE
data was viewed in a more sinister way, with words like deceitful and dishonest
used. Even their own athletes have
suggested that individuals need to do more to uphold the new found ‘clean’
image of the sport. Your viewpoint on
this issue is likely influenced by how comfortable you are with teams and
athletes massaging the rules of their sport and working to uncover technicalities
and loopholes they can use to infer a competitive advantage versus an ethical
obligation to uphold the principles muscular Christianity. To cite a different example, diving in
football is vilified and now has sanctions attached to its use including free
kicks and yellow cards. Claiming for a
throw in or corner which clearly should be awarded to the opposition however
goes unacknowledged and unpunished; although the modus operandi is different
the behaviour is not, a willingness to deceive the referee, her assistants and
your opponent.
When we place so much
importance on winning and when the rewards are so great we should not be
surprised when practises emerge that, in normal society, would be at best frowned
upon and at worst deplored. Despite
this, and as uncomfortable as some may find it, perhaps they are necessary to
be successful at the very highest level.
This I suspect is as true in business as it is in sport; the debate
continues regarding the tax avoidance practises of big business and whether this
is a question of law or ethics (I will hold my own counsel on this one). When determining which athletes to support,
select and retain we should value attributes such as the ability to be cunning and
deceptive, as difficult as that may be, in the same way as we would
physicality. Achilles may be a great
role model for some of your athletes however most teams and organisations need
an Odysseus to gain the competitive advantage.
No comments:
Post a Comment