First Comment

Being played out in the New York media is a very public contract dispute between an employee and an employer. This isn't strange--especially not for sports--where the New York Jets' Darrelle Revis (who already had a contract, mind you) had a long contract dispute before it was finally settled in equally public fashion. But there have been few contract negotiations quite like this one--a legend who embodies an organization fighting on the back pages with a legendary organization that demands professionalism and results from its employees. In the end, the Yankees need Jeter and Jeter needs the Yankees...but in the meantime, they're left to squabble it out to sports writers.

HardballTalk

But that doesn't mean that similar things don't go on in your own company. How many employees do you currently manage who are unhappy with their salaries but their loss would sting your company more than the financial outlay? How many employers have employees that they can probably do without but have meant so much to an organization that added financial incentive to stay around (and maybe as a reward for past results) may be appropriate? How many times does this situation become contentious and lead to a standstill between the perceived value of the employee and the offering value of the company?

The problem is that it doesn't look good from either side, but the employer has to figure a way to solve it before the problem spreads to other employees. Can you imagine if all the Yankees free agents were involved in this much of a public spectacle over the contract negotiations? If the Yankees were actually playing right now (and corporate America rarely has an off-season like baseball does) imagine the distraction this would cause--is the proposed cost savings worth it? The lesson here is not to pay employees just because they become disgruntled or to reward bad behavior, but sometimes a little extra pay (or other types of incentives) goes a long way to making sure a dispute does not get out of hand. As many people would find it weird to see Derek Jeter in anything other than Pinstripes, so you should find it weird to imagine your best employees working for one of your competitors.

George Steinbrenner was known as "The Boss" in his time owning the Yankees. When he passed away last week, Steinbrenner took with him a complicated legacy as an owner who produced championships but a boss who could torment his employees. He was at the same time charitable (he had a saying that if more than one person knows about a good deed you've done, you've done it for the wrong reasons) and a criminal (made illegal contributions to Richard Nixon) but always interesting. Today the New York Post went through how to succeed the Steinbrenner way, but while they have praised the man and the team's success, it's also helpful to note that "The Boss" was not always the ideal boss:

BE FOCUSED From the day George Steinbrenner bought the Yankees for $10 million until he permanently stepped down last week, the former shipping executive had one all-consuming goal: to win. And he seems to have spent pretty close to every waking minute thinking about how to make it happen — just ask the minions who fielded his constant phone calls, endured his tirades and his meddling, and spoke of his obsessive attention to every corner of the organization. And his focus never let up, even in the off-season.

“Winning is the most important thing in my life, after breathing,” he famously said.

That was just one of the pieces of advice put forth by the post article. The others included "work tirelessly", "don't be afraid to shift gears--even if you swore you wouldn't", "fire when ready", "be a boss, not a friend", "hire top talent, and pay them well", "demand results", "set clear goals", "never always criticize your employees in public", "pay attention to the little things", "don't give your stars preferential treatment", "build your brand", "have a heart OK", and "don't rest on your laurels". All of these are good advice for someone running a business and while George M. Steinbrenner III was very good at accomplishing some of these in a way that helps an organization, some of his actions certainly hurt his organization and his employees. A good balance is certainly needed for an organization to have successful leadership.

The Tampa Bay Rays baseball team has hit a rough patch. Although they held on to first place in the toughest division in baseball throughout the first few months of the season, they've been no-hit twice and lost their grip on the division. This past week their centerfielder, B.J. Upton lollygagged his way to the ball. For a team struggling to score runs, this was not the effort you want to see. Upton has been benched before for not hustling and this seemed to be another case of him just giving up on a play. When he got back to the dugout, 24-year-old Evan Longoria approached him about his behavior and the two went face-to-face and had to be separated by teammates. I wrote on a sports blog I post on regularly about this incident and about how it brings back memories to one sports writer of a young Derek Jeter, who had, at 24, called out one of his veteran teammates for showing up another teammate. This is seen as a great leadership skill in an organization--self-policing.

I bring this up because while this type of approach may work in baseball, it most likely has no place in an organization. If a co-worker is not pulling his weight or is trying to show up another co-worker, it should not be left to self-policing. Although a good measure of "that is not right" should come from everyone involved and whistleblowing is encouraged at times, the problem itself should be handled by upper-management and Human Resources. Employees can become embarrassed on confrontational when they are publicly called out. Instead, a manager should be doing the discipline--and doing it in a private environment. Publicly calling out a co-worker for a mistake or leaving an office to be self-policed may work in baseball but it is not a good way to handle an office.