Pro sports, a game-changing model for winning product teams: Part 1

Synopsis

A study of winning methods used by professional sports teams and a proposed operating model that enables organizations to develop specialized product teams with differentiated value in the marketplace.

Abstract

For fans, professional sports represents a category of entertainment and/or inspiration delivered by highly trained specialists who push the limits of competition. For organizations, sports squads can present a model for creating and maintaining high-performing teams. While it’s not explicitly stated, the product of a sports franchise is its core team — a product that generates revenue due to the value it delivers to fans as well as sponsors. In a similar fashion, organizations within the services industry consider their people or teams to be the core product. Our study focuses on the methodologies used by competitive sports as ways to build a team-based model within the professional services industry that maximizes the value delivered to their clients and customers. Through proven ways of recruiting, training, and even compensation, we propose a data-driven model to nurture collective skillsets and continuously optimize them to develop winning teams.

Introduction

Teams in the professional services industry have the opportunity to maximize the value in the market by iteratively developing the core product — their service. Historically, several domain experts are brought together to produce the intended value by summing up their individual contributions. However, the sum of expertise across a collective group does not guarantee a successful outcome because the mix of people may not have worked together before. Circumstantially, the quality of the product and velocity of production tend to suffer. The possibility of such a situation is analogous to how national football teams are generally assembled; a selection of strong players who represent the country but play professionally for football clubs (e.g.: Barcelona FC). National football teams often see varying results since they are generally unfamiliar with each other’s playing styles, and haven’t spent the time to subscribe to the coach’s playing philosophy.

In our experience, the efficient orchestration of a team and their processes are the key factors to success. We argue that teams can dramatically optimize their levels of orchestration by using inspiration from professional sports teams. Using professional sports teams as a model, we propose a structure to treat collective skillsets as product versions and continuously optimize them to develop winning teams. Furthermore, our argument promotes the idea of commoditizing intact teams as the core product of organizations in the consulting industry.

Our ideology serves the purpose of establishing a paradigm for teams to institute an iterative framework of delivering greater value over time with the goal of maximizing their equity in the marketplace.

Limitations and Boundaries

• The scope of the proposed model is limited to the professional services industry and teams within these organizations.

• The term ‘product team’ generally refers to a cross-functional team that is focused on creating value for the client.

• The focus is not on teams where success is defined by the sum of individual performances (e.g.: track and field). Instead, the paper draws parallels to sports teams where players must work collectively to compete (e.g.: basketball, football, or rugby team).

Organizing around the sports team mindset

Professional sports teams work well due to a few reasons. First, sports teams thrive on culture, sometimes to a point that distinctly defines them. Case in point: Miami Heat’s famous #heatculture was built around the principle that hard work beats talent when talent doesn’t work hard. Through training, competition games and team events, squad members spend more time with each other than their own families. The key aspect that really works for sports teams is the fact that a defined culture which is accepted by everyone, leads to an implicit individual responsibility to support that culture. A strong culture and a shared philosophy among the team are unifying factors that help them stay in sync during a competitive game.

Second, competitive teams have clarity on their common set of goals, and the responsibility to hold these above any personal objectives. Whether the goal is winning the league, qualifying for a higher league, or even preventing relegation, all aspects of the team’s strategy and preparations are laser-focused on their ultimate objective.

Hierarchy and organization of a team are key elements that maximize cohesiveness among the group. Using a football team as a metaphor, a scrum team’s Scrum Master is the equivalent of a coach, an experienced performer who guides players to collectively accomplish the goal with established patterns. The captain of the team is the Product Manager, responsible for leading the vision and holding accountability for what the team produces. The Experience Designer would represent the team’s #10 player, the creative force around which the team organizes its approach. With clear objectives, organizing as a sports team lays the foundation for deeply connected collaboration.

Third, a ‘team’ in the professional sporting world has always existed in the construct of a continuously iterative model. Long-standing sport franchises have remained competitive for a sustained number of years by constantly aiming to further their success. Sheffield United, a football team that competes in the English Premier League, has successfully grown through the divisions of league football with a constantly improving team. During their time in the second division, Sheffield United accomplished a 65% possession average across all league games (source: ESPN FC). In product terms, we determine this as Version 2.0 of the team (aka the product). With their promotion into the top tier of league football, the team had achieved a new milestone in dribbles completed which unlocked a new milestone of Version 3.0, where they were prepared to compete with top-flight football teams in England. The similar analogy of unlocking collective capabilities can be applied to service teams, ultimately positioning their value as demand in the marketplace. In essence, teams that are at Version 1.0 in the marketplace are worth a certain price tag, while a team at Version 5.0 can deliver value at more complex levels, hence justifying a higher price tag for their services.

Finally, we consider the combination of skillsets to form a team that can maximize value within its reach. In the sporting world, this concept is largely handled by scouting mechanisms that bring together a set of players best suited for the team’s system of play. Vast amounts of scouting data around a specific player’s strengths and weaknesses feeds into an analysis that determines the most suitable player for a specific position that ultimately aligns to the intended style or system of play. In a similar way, teams in our industry can establish measured competencies of employees as data points which input into an adjustable analysis to determine the best suited mix of team members.

The model in practice

The primary and most important aspect of the model is the establishment of a team as the product that delivers value. Organizations choose to invest in a team to bring further value to their customers and ultimately their business. In the sporting world, a franchise chooses to invest in a team that increasingly delivers entertainment value to its fanbase with the goal of generating revenue through sponsorships and competition money. In contrast to a more conventional model that involves employing individuals to deliver value, a plug-and-play product team model promises a higher likelihood of success. This high likelihood is because the unit of individuals has refined their craft over several iterations, dramatically minimizing the time to produce value within their domain.

The mindset around a team being the product is particularly applicable to the professional services industry. The industry is generally built around individuals or groups of individuals being assembled to solve a problem. Revenue is recognized based on the sum of individuals allocated to a body of work, meaning that people and the work are variables. In comparison, the model here proposes that a team is the unit commodity being proposed and allocated to a body of work. In practice, the team has remained intact for a period, with the experience of solving problems together. As a result, the people and price remain fixed while the scope of work remains a variable. To illustrate an example, Figure 1 below showcases a team ‘menu’, allowing organizations to pick teams based on outcomes they want to accomplish. In consumer terms, a team is seen here as a product that a customer is willing to pay for, to receive equal or greater value.

The final portion of the model in practice and concluding remarks will be covered in ‘Pro sports, a game-changing model for winning product teams: Part 2’.

References:

• Katz, N. (2001). Sports teams as a model for workplace teams: Lessons and liabilities. Academy of Management Perspectives, 15(3), 56–67. doi:10.5465/ame.2001.5229533
• Worville, T., & Lee, S. (2020, May 29). How Guardiola should remodel his Manchester City squad. The Athletic.
• Hay, P., & Worville, T. (2020, August 30). Not historically prolific, from a team that didn’t press: Is Rodrigo a good fit? The Athletic.
• Drucker, P. (2009, November 18). Drucker on Management: There’s More Than One Kind of Team. The Wall Street Journal.
• Keidel, R. W. (1986). Game plans: Sports strategies for business. New York, NY: Berkley Books.
• Garvin, D. A. (1993). Building a Learning Organization. Harvard Business Review, (July–August 1993).

Authors: Ajay George, Pavan Naga Tumu, Akhilesh Anakapally