Issue 100 - Knowing When to Go
I am currently reading The First American: The Life and Times of Benjamin Franklin, by H.W. Brands.
Franklin was an amazing fellow. A printer by trade, his personal and professional metamorphosis (or in my words, “leadership transformation”) led ultimately to his historic worldwide acclaim and reverence as a writer, scientist, adventurer, ambassador and ultimately founding father of this fledgling republic 300 million or so of us now call home.
As iconic as Franklin is today, you might be surprised to learn that during his lifetime not everyone was a Ben Franklin fan. He had his detractors.
In fact, in the early 1770’s, Franklin was in England for several years working to broker a more harmonious relationship between a suspicious British parliament and their increasingly restless, independence-minded colonial cousins. As Franklin worked to play peacemaker and establish greater harmony and understanding, individuals on both sides of the Atlantic grew cynical. The Brits thought Franklin to be too American; the Americans thought him to be too British. Individuals from both camps ultimately urged him to resign his leadership post and return to the life of a private (albeit famous) citizen.
But Franklin refused to quit. He apparently was of the opinion that leaders should never voluntarily abandon their posts as long as there was work to be done and the passion burning within them to do it.
That’s all well and good, but what happens when that leadership passion starts to wane?
Fast forward now to the 21st century.
Why should a man who resigns his position as the manager of a baseball team cause shock waves to reverberate through the world of sports? A man who was healthy, apparently no in the midst of any significant family or life crisis, not forced to resign and get this — one who was enjoying an extended winning streak!?
That’s just what happened when Mike Hargrove, then manager of MLB’s Seattle Mariners stunned reporters earlier this summer by announcing his voluntary, unforced resignation.
“Unexpected,” “Surprising,” “Shocking,” “Confusing,” “Mysterious,” sportswriters and pundits said in a futile attempt to describe such an unprecedented and unanticipated event. After all, at the time of his resignation, this man who was making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in salary, was leading the Seattle Mariners to a 7-game winning streak.
How could Hargrove–how could anyone–walk away from such a golden opportunity? It was all very confusing.
But it shouldn’t have been. While writers and sportscasters stewed in their own journalistic juices, Hargrove himself was telling them, in the clearest language possible, exactly why he chose to resign.
Hargrove, a 35-year veteran of professional baseball, had managed major league teams in Cleveland and Baltimore, before arriving in Seattle. Over 16 seasons as a big league manager, Hargrove compiled a winning lifetime record and is ranked 36th on the all-time managerial victory list. He knew full well what it took to succeed on such a public stage. As a result, at age 57, he chose to voluntarily walk away.
The Passion Has Begun to Fade
Hargrove explained his decision this way.
“It’s not a problem with the players, it’s not a problem with Bill (Bavasi, team owner), it’s not a problem with clubhouse manager Ted Walsh, it’s not a problem with my wife…I was not forced into this decision…But I think this is the right think to do for Mike Hargrove and the Seattle Mariners.”
Then Hargrove spoke directly to a leadership issue many of us will face during our careers. Admitting that his “passion has begun to fade,” Hargrove said succinctly,
“I’ve daily challenged my players to give me the best that they’ve got, 100 percent of what they’ve got that day–physically and mentally. And they’ve done that. Without fail, they’ve done that…I have never had to work at getting to that level myself–ever–until recently. I’ve fond that I’ve had to work harder in making that same commitment to my bosses, to my players and to my coaches. And that’s not right.”
There it is. Hargrove found himself challenging his players and coaches to higher levels of performance, yet admittedly, he struggled to rise to that same level of commitment and performance personally. And he hit the nail squarely on the head when he said, “that’s not right.”
Rather than trying to fake it, he faced it. Head on.
Bravo, Mike Hargrove! What you did and what you said takes courage–a level of courage not often exhibited by leaders today, regardless their field of endeavor.
Dozens of times over the years, I have witnessed managers standing before employees in workplaces around the world, imploring them to reach deep within themselves to make an even greater commitment and personal sacrifice for the good of the organization.
All the while, I have seen many of those same managers leave such meetings and become more and more disengaged and detached from the business focus and activity they were promoting. In essence, they were asking for more from others while giving less of themselves. They were simply going through the leadership motions–and you can be sure their followers weren’t fooled by their act.
As leaders, our primary responsibility is to lead; to be out front; to show our followers how it’s done and that we are willing to do it with and for them. Whether being praised or pummeled by those around us, we, as leaders, have to set the example we want others to follow. We have to lead.
If for some reason–any reason–we arrive at a point where we can’t or won’t lead, where the passion for leadership “has begun to fade,” then the only appropriate and honorable thing to do is fess up, get out and move on–ala Mike Hargrove.
Doing the Right Thing Confuses People
Some people criticized Mike Hargrove for abandoning his team in the midst of a winning streak. “How could he just walk away?” people wondered. On the other hand, I praise Hargrove for his courage. If he couldn’t ratchet up the passion when he was winning, how would he feel and act when he inevitably found himself in a losing streak? More importantly, how would he lead under such circumstances?
I don’t know Mike Hargrove. I’ve never met the man, so I can’t presume to know how he feels or thinks. All I have to base my assumptions on is what he is reported to have said. And personally, I like it. But in the end, I have the feeling that Hargrove cares very little that I am praising him or that others are criticizing him for this decision or any other he may have made. Somehow I feel Hargrove has evolved to a slightly higher level of leadership than caring too much about what others think or say.
And as such, I am reminded of another lesson from Ben Franklin. In 1776, Franklin wrote the following response to an admirer who was complaining of Franklin’s ill-treatment at the hands of his enemies:
“As to the reports you mention that are spread to my disadvantage, I give myself as little concern about them as possible. I have often met with such treatment from people that I was all the while endeavoring to serve. At other times I have been extolled extravagantly when I have had little or no merit. These are the operations of nature. It sometimes is cloudy, it rains, it hails, again ’tis clear and pleasant, and the sun shines on us.”
“Take one thing with another, and the world is a pretty good sort of world; and ’tis our duty to make the best of it and be thankful. One’s true happiness depends more upon one’s own judgment of one’s self, on a consciousness of rectitude in action and intention, and in the approbation of those few who judge impartially, than upon the applause of the unthinking undiscerning multitude, who are apt to cry Hosanna today, and tomorrow, Crucify him.”
–The First American (chapter 17, page 379)
Well said, Ben. And well done, Mike.
For more on the Mike Hargrove resignation, read these posts:
Seattle Times
ESPN
August 16th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
Wonderfully deep article about an issue we all face - the struggle “to rise to that same level of commitment and performance personally.”
Seth Godin has called it The Dip in his recent rather slight and rather odd book. He suggests that the most successful people know when to quit.
Maybe we all face those questions of commitment. We certainly have. When is it time to quit in the face of adversity? When is it time to fight that adversity?
The current manager of the Detroit Tigers, Jim Leyland, left baseball a few years ago saying much the same things that Mike Hargrove has said. He knew when to quit, for sure, but he also knew when to come back. Under Leyland, the Tigers have had great success and he is clearly having a great time once again.
We may see Mr. Hargrove again on the baseball stage. I sure hope so.
And, I hope you send your article to Mike Hargrove, Phillip. There is likely a good friendship there - and one he might need right now.
August 16th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
Too many of us simply want to go out on top, regardless the cost to others or to the organizations we represent. In my opinion that is totally a self-centered desire. More leadership-centric is the desire to go out when it’s actually time to go out–not necessarily when we want to. In other words, true leaders are more concerned about those and that which has been entrusted to them, than they are their own personal desires.
I have forwarded this article to Mike Hargrove by way of an emissary. I hope he gets it and I hope he finds some measure of satisfaction in knowing that at least one person appreciates his courage to do the right thing.
Michael, I appreciate your perspective. Thanks for commenting.
August 17th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Great article. Jeff Angus, Author of Management by Baseball, also had some management insights relative to Mike Hargrove’s resignation. They’re at his blog, http://cmdr-scott.blogspot.com/ and if you scroll down to July 2 you’ll see his thoughts there.
As a sales development expert and author of a sales book based on Baseball, I have professed for years that the single most important element is the desire for success sales. When the desire isn’t there, one won’t do the things they don’t want to do, despite the importance of those things.
August 20th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
It is rare for a manager/leader to step down because the fire has dimmed and to do so voluntarily and with no prompting. As in Mike Hargrove’s case, there was no apparent external event that triggered his decision. I can only think of one other departure that was similar and that was Whitey Herzog with the Cardinals but he was getting fed up with managing the attitudes of his players.
I’m sure it’s across all businesses but you don’t get much of a chance to read in the newspapers about the manager/leader of a business who decides to leave for the same reason that Hargrove reached. Sports figures, by nature of daily exposure, get the ink and also the speculation by their fans that “it’s time.” Most players stayed with the ball too long. Think of Willie Mays as a Met, Warren Spahn as a Giant, Hank Aaron as a Brewer, Harmon Killebrew as a Royal. Barry Bonds as a Balloon comes to mind, too.
Barry Sanders is the one that most closely resembles what Hargrove did and he never looked back.
For those manager/leaders that return to it later after they left, it’s usually not a case of redemption. Instead, it’s more akin to watching an old-timer’s game where the play on the field is observed by always looking back. Earl Weaver, Bud Grant, even Teddy Roosevelt made comeback attempts and who remembers? If Hargrove comes back, I hope he’s reincarnated as Jim Leyland.