How To Lead When There Is No Solution In Sight

Sep 25

Scroll  to view all  below…

What Drives Winning

Features real conversations with top minds in sport centering around character development, priority alignment, team cohesion, behavior management and self-awareness.

Brett Ledbetter sits down with Jeremy Foley (Florida AD/Emeritus) and Heather Lyke (Pittsburgh AD) to discuss how to lead when solutions aren’t in sight and people are looking to you for answers.

00:00 PIG: “None of It’s Real.” 03:56 “Everyday I’m Working Hard to Protect A Job I Don’t Even Like.” 06:54 Regulating Against Self-Interest 11:39 Would You Marry You? 14:46 Advice for People with Partners that Feel the Demands of the Job

Consider This - What Comes To Mind?

Its not the Person, its the Position.

Where there is no accountability, there is no growth.

If you can already see what you and your coaches can do tangibly (on a stat sheet), how do you gauge things from an intangible perspective - that you  consistently measure?

If you don’t track it, you cannot improve it.

If there is no measure, there is no place of growth.

Leading Amidst Uncertainty

Leading when there is no solution in sight can be a challenging but essential aspect of leadership. In many situations, leaders must navigate uncertainty and ambiguity. Here are some strategies and principles to consider:

Stay Calm and Composed:

- As a leader, your team looks up to you for guidance, especially in difficult times. Maintain your composure and stay calm, even when you don't have a clear solution. Panic and anxiety can be contagious and can lead to further confusion.

Acknowledge the Situation:

- Be honest with your team about the complexity of the problem and the lack of a clear solution. Transparency builds trust and encourages open communication.

Encourage Creativity and Innovation:

- In the absence of a clear solution, encourage your team to brainstorm and think outside the box. Sometimes, unconventional ideas can lead to breakthroughs.

Focus on What You Can Control:

- Identify and prioritize aspects of the problem that you can control or influence. Concentrate your efforts on those areas to make incremental progress.

Break Down the Problem:

- Sometimes, complex issues can be overwhelming. Break the problem into smaller, more manageable parts. This can make it easier to tackle and identify potential solutions for individual components.

Leverage Diverse Perspectives:

- Involve team members with different backgrounds, experiences, and expertise. Diverse perspectives can lead to a wider range of potential solutions.

Emphasize Learning and Adaptation:

- Approach the situation as an opportunity for growth and learning. Emphasize the importance of adaptability and a willingness to experiment with different approaches.

Set Short-Term Goals:

- While a long-term solution may not be apparent, set short-term goals and milestones. Achieving these smaller victories can boost morale and keep the team motivated.

Seek External Input:

- Consult with experts or seek advice from others who may have faced similar challenges. External perspectives can provide valuable insights.

Manage Expectations:

- Be realistic about what can be achieved in the absence of a clear solution. Manage both your team's and stakeholders' expectations to avoid disappointment.

Stay Resilient:

- Leadership in uncertain times can be emotionally taxing. Build your own resilience and encourage your team to do the same. Find healthy ways to manage stress and maintain your energy levels.

Communicate Continuously:

- Keep the lines of communication open with your team. Provide regular updates on progress, even if it's incremental. Effective communication can help maintain trust and morale.

Evaluate and Adjust:

- Periodically assess the effectiveness of your strategies and make adjustments as necessary. Be willing to pivot if new information or insights emerge.

Lead by Example:

- Demonstrate a positive attitude, adaptability, and a willingness to persevere. Your behavior sets the tone for your team.

Don't Be Afraid to Make Tough Decisions:

- In some cases, a difficult decision may be necessary, even if it's not the ideal solution. Assess the risks and benefits and be prepared to make a call.

Remember that leadership during uncertain times is a process that requires patience and resilience. While you may not have a solution in sight, your leadership can help guide your team through challenging situations and build their confidence in your ability to navigate uncertainty.

FBS schools spent over $533.6 million in dead money over 10+ years

Steven Leath, the president of Auburn University from 2017 to 2019, negotiated giving then-football coach Gus Malzahn a seven-year, $49 million contract extension in December 2017. Malzahn was fired in 2020, and Auburn committed to buy out the remainder of his contract for more than $21 million. At the time, it set a record for the largest buyout paid by a school.

November can be a cold and expensive month in college football. A number of coaches nationwide remain on the hot seat two-thirds of the way through the season, which has already seen eight Football Bowl Subdivision head coaches out of a job and owed dead money -- money owed to fulfill their contracts.

From Jan. 1, 2010 to Jan. 31, 2021, public universities in FBS conferences paid out more than $533.6 million in dead money to head coaches and assistant coaches in football and men's and women's basketball, according to an analysis of financial records obtained by ESPN through state open records laws.

Auburn ($31.2 million) and Nebraska ($25.8 million) led the way in dead money payments, followed by Texas ($21.5 million), Ole Miss ($20.4 million) and Kansas ($20 million).

….

The dead money paid to coaches is an example of the broken financial structure of big-money college sports, said Amy Perko, Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics CEO.

"Institutions threw away more than half a billion dollars -- allegedly to maintain their competitive advantages -- on richly-compensated coaches, instead of using the money to support the education, health and safety of college athletes," said Perko. "This is exactly why we released our 2021 C.A.R.E. model report. If far-reaching steps aren't taken soon to control runaway spending on coaches, hundreds of millions of dollars will just continue to be wasted."

Power 5 programs included in the survey of public universities -- those in the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC -- accounted for 88% of the dead money. The SEC led the way with $151 million, followed by the Pac-12 ($114.1 million), Big Ten ($106.8 million), Big 12 ($58.8 million) and ACC ($40.0 million).

"You're in a public relations disadvantage," said Leath, who is now executive director of the Council to Advance Hunting and the Shooting Sports. "No matter where you end up on a contract, there will be some people who think the coach should be gone and shouldn't be renegotiated at all. And there will be some people who think you didn't pay him enough because he walks on water. It's hard to win the public relations battle no matter where you come down."

Auburn ($31.2 million) and Nebraska ($25.8 million) led the way in dead money payments, followed by Texas ($21.5 million), Ole Miss ($20.4 million) and Kansas ($20 million).

Among the Power 5 programs included in the survey, football coaches ($354.9 million) were paid more than three times as much as men's basketball coaches ($103.5 million), while women's basketball coaches received only $12.5 million in severance pay.

Groups of 5 schools -- those with football programs in the American Athletic Conference, Conference USA, Mid-American Conference, Mountain West, Sun Belt and independent UConn -- paid $62.8 million in dead money, including $47.4 million to football coaches.

….

"It's changed to this dynamic where the agent would prefer you don't even talk to your own employee," Leath said. "And sometimes you have to put your foot down and say, 'Listen, this person works for me. I don't have to go through you.' It's a very difficult, cumbersome process. It's easy for it to get somewhat adversarial. It changes the team spirit of working together for the common goal of advancing the program to much more of an unfun business negotiation."

Leath said he got there by adopting the attitude of, "Just, c'mon, let's be reasonable here," and having some individual meetings with Malzahn. "It would have been far better if no agents were involved and you could just sit down and say, 'What's best for the university? What's best for you? What's best for the program long-term?'"

In June 2019, Leath and Auburn mutually parted ways as well. His separation agreement called for him to receive $4.5 million over three years.

Athletic Director Performance Ratings (Part I)

Regarded as “the crowning achievement in college athletics,” the Learfield IMG College Directors’ Cup came into existence in 1993 to evaluate and honor athletic programs across the country for success in men’s and women’s sports.

The Directors’ Cup combines results from various men’s and women’s sports and generates an overall point total for each competing institution, which is then converted into a national ranking.

Because of its all-inclusive evaluation of an entire institution’s athletics, the Directors’ Cup can act as a baseline evaluation of athletic director performance.

….

Unlike coaching carousels in sports such as football and basketball, causes and effects in institutional athletic performance under certain athletic directors aren’t nearly as identifiable. Some athletic directors who have helped lead high Directors’ Cup finishes have come from power conferences like Florida’s Scott Stricklin (Mississippi State). Others, however, are products of non-power conference institutions like Stanford’s Bernard Muir (Delaware) or even outside of Division-I competition like Princeton’s Mollie Marcoux, who previously served as an executive with Chelsea Piers Management.

Not only are these athletic directors coming from different backgrounds, but several successful institutions are products of varying conferences and university sizes as well. Of the 22 institutions with the highest-rated active athletic directors hired since 2010, 14 of them are from different conferences. While power conference giants like Stanford and Florida consistently dominate the Directors’ Cup standings, several non-power conference institutions like Denver, Northern Iowa and New Mexico State continue to make their mark on the national scale while finishing atop their conference leaderboards.

As previous data has identified, national athletic success isn’t particular to a certain institution, conference or athletic director. For that reason, institutional leaders should feel empowered in knowing that, under the correct guidance, any institution is capable of thriving.

Coaches as Teachers - Good or Bad Idea?

Coaches in Texas believe that their salaries are justified due to the amount of days and hours they spend with each student. On average, coaches' typically work 226 days of the year when teachers only work 187 days a year (Bow). The president of the Texas State Teachers Association, Donna Haschke considers sports an important role; however she still believes that sports should come secondary to a formal education. Most superintendents will say that winning is not as important as teaching academics and good values. However, superintendents cannot deny that a team's advancement into the playoffs provides more money in the school district and also get more exposure. Coaches receive a base salary for their teaching/coordination responsibilities, but most would say that they do not do it for the money, but rather for the influence that they have on a minor's life. They all believe that they are teaching the fundamentals of sportsmanship, teamwork and the ability to take constructive criticism (Bow).

Sports are taken very seriously in certain states. Texas, for example, has decided to increase the number of credits that can be applied toward a students' graduation. Initially, high school individuals were only able to apply two credits; now they can apply four towards a student's graduation. Coaches and athletic directors were happy with the change. They were the ones that initially sought this change. With coaches in the classroom, more physical education credits increases a coach's ability to teach. This helps a coach's athlete pass classes that they ordinarily (with a certified teacher) would struggle with. Coach's fought a students' ability to only receive two credits from athletic participation along with parents of students who were athletically inclined, but academically struggling, giving the student/athlete a higher potential to pass classes without actually understanding the rubric (Benning). The new law increases the credits students can apply toward a degree in many elective subjects and in theory would allow the student to get credit for up to seven athletic courses, which in turn allows the student to take less core classes like English, Science, History, Math, etc..

Each semester, Kansas State athletics earn academic credit for "on field" participation. This basically means that they can receive academic credit for participating in sports, practices, games, etc.... Some athletes are able to count as many as four credit hours toward their academic degrees by playing on more school sport teams. Though this is fact, it does not change from high school to college. A Washington Post survey of physical education courses taught at the 117 schools that field Division I-A football teams, found that nearly three dozen universities award academic credit for participation on intercollegiate sports teams.

These universities only had two stipulations. The first is being a member of the sports team and the second is participation and attendance at practices and games (Schlabach). The play-for-grades classes provide truths about the challenge of reconciling academic missions with successful athletes. In April, the NCAA (National Collegiate Association) approved academic change. The changes include taking away the opportunity to earn those academic credits (for participating in school sport) if they failed any of their academic courses. Some would say that this will encourage athletes to keep up on their academic work to work toward earning a degree, while maintaining their participation in school sports.

An apparent loophole in the NCAA's eligibility regulations is leading to an increasing number of top recruits to intentionally fail to graduate from high school early which improves their chances of playing sooner in college. When athletes believe that they will not meet the minimum athletic eligibility standards, they will intentionally fail a course or withdraw from school all together. This type of behavior is encouraged to good athletes who struggle academically by their coaches in the classroom. The grades that these athletes earn after listening to their coaches/teachers, will apply toward their college eligibility requirements. Coaches that are teaching academic courses encourage this behavior from their students. The coaches want them to have a successful athletic career even if it means that they have to "cheating the system". Typically, it is the classes that coaches are not teaching that they tend to fail (Dreams).

One may be wondering what the role of a coach is. On a typical day, a coach will instruct the athlete on proper form and technique in beginning and it continues as the athlete advances in exercise. Coaches attempt to maximize the player's physical potential. Coaches oversee an athlete as they refine their individual skills in the specific sport. They also manage the team during both practices and competitions against other teams. They help an athlete to learn sportsmanship, a competitive spirit and most importantly, team work. Coaches will select, store, issue and inventory all of the equipment, supplies and materials needed. Coaches also have the ability to substitute players for high quality team chemistry and success. They will evaluate the opposing competitors and direct a team strategy while they call specific plays during competition to surprise or overpower their opponent (McKay).

….

The most recent and comprehensive set of standards were developed and published in 1996 by the National Association or Sport and Physical Education (NASPE). The standards set by NASPE are accepted by organizations throughout the country and are being used to determine the content of coaching education programs. As these standards increase in popularity and acceptance, there would be a "standard of care" for coaches in the eyes of the law. Coaches are now required to have the training and expertise in each of the carious areas detailed in the set of standards.

The legal and ethical issues are not mutually exclusive, like other legal responsibilities, and they are based off societal ethics (doing what is right) (Engelhorn). Coaches much prevent discrimination and harassment of athletes. When coaches are in charge of athletes, they are expected to be safe, both physically and emotionally. The following is a list of legal duties adapted from the Coach Youth Sports Web Site and represents the many codes of conduct and behaviors recommended for coaches:

1. Conducting practices and games in a safe physical environment.

2. Use of current knowledge of proper skills and methods of instruction.

3. Use of safe and appropriate equipment.

4. Proper short and long term planning.

5. Proper matching of athletes in practices and games by size, experience and ability.

6. Provision of adequate supervision of athletes.

7. Providing warnings to the parents of athletes of risks in sport participation.

8. Sensitivity to the health and well-being of athletes under their care.

9. Provision of appropriate emergency care.

10. Prevent harassment and discrimination by coaching staff and athletes.

11. Report suspected child abuse to proper authorities.

12. Respect and protect the confidentiality of student personal records.

13. Report breaches of ethical behavior by colleagues.

These regulations on coaches lead academic professionals to believe that they are capable of running classrooms. With these same principles, coaches run classrooms without exact knowledge or education in the subjects that they are teaching. By doing this, students that are not catching onto the materials, but play on an academic sport, tend to pass these classes regardless. Unfortunately, coaches attach themselves to their athletes and therefore allow them to get away with failing a course but passing anyway. If they aren't passing them, they are teaching them how to drop out of school for potential early success in their athletic career (Engelhorn). The coach's ethical responsibilities are useful responsibilities that guarantee the achievement of the educational mission of an interscholastic athletic program (Engelhorn).

The function of a coach is to educate students through participation in school athletics and competition. These programs should be designed to enhance academic achievement and should never interfere with opportunities for academic success (The Coaches Code of Ethics). Each student-athlete should be treated the same as the students that are not participating in sports. Each coach should understand that they have a huge influence, good or bad, on the education of the student-athlete. Coaches should never place the value of winning above the value of instilling the highest ideals of character. A coach should be setting examples for the student-athletes in whatever setting they are in. In addition to this, the coach should also prevent the use of tobacco, alcohol and drug free from all the students they interact with.

A coach dealing with a variety of different students and student-athletes, they should be promoting more students to get into the interscholastic program. By doing this, they are encouraging students to be more active in the everyday dealings of the school environment. Also, it may help students better their attention span by giving them something to look forward to after school. Coaches must study for the classes that they are going to be teaching so not to go into the class blind. A coach shall also never exert pressure on faculty members to give student-athletes special consideration. A coach shouldn't scout opponents by any means other than those adopted by the league and/or state high school athletic regulations (The Coaches Code of Ethics).

‍