After the best part of 20 years at the helm, skipper Dean Barker has been relieved of his duties. While there is no doubt it was the right decision for Team New Zealand to make, seeing the debacle playing out in the media is not only an embarrassment for upper management, it suggests their capacity to lead is about as underwhelming as the team’s capitulation less than two years ago.
The future success of the team relies on many things including the goodwill of the nation. Regrettably however, the way Barker’s axing has been managed, and how he himself has behaved, is no way to garner the support of perhaps their most critical stakeholder.
The upset in camp is not only poor, it has the potential to destabilise what we the tax payer have supported; that is Team New Zealand as a unit not the figureheads who lead them.
That said, Barker has played an important role in retaining the support of the public however, without Dalton’s tenacity to secure funding, the team might have already folded. Either way, this is not about which of them is right and therefore deserves our vote, it is about what the team needs to do to mount a credible challenge given what they are up against.
As many have said, the America’s Cup is the Formula 1 of sailing and thus the pinnacle of the sport. For this reason, the competitive nature of the event demands the best people be appointed hence an examination of the team was vital.
A question I suspect remains unanswered however is why did Team New Zealand lose when they were 8-1 up? Could the current mess be a result of differing opinions in this regard or is it because the skills required to implement the agreed changes are beyond those who made them?
According to reports, Barker says he is not prepared to take on the role of performance manager and sailing coach even though this was supposedly identified as being a reason for their failure.
At the end of the day, the make up of the team has to be based on ability and performance rather than a result of past efforts; hence securing the likes of Glenn Ashby and Peter Burling are smart moves that will surely make a difference. If Barker was as committed as he says, and as loyal as he has reminded us, why is his aspiration to redeem himself getting in the way of a decision that’s entirely obvious?
Despite the fact I have no desire to fuel an unfortunate fire, the tax payer deserves the best team to be assembled given we are likely to be asked to help foot to the bill. The best team in this respect means ‘at every level’ (management included) and ‘in every position’; as should always be the case irrespective of the endeavour.
Although organisational ‘transitioning’ sounds easy, there is plenty of evidence to suggest it isn’t. For example it wasn’t long ago we saw a similar situation playing out in the Black Caps. At that time Ross Taylor’s captaincy was being questioned following a prolonged slump in the team’s performance. Today however, under McCullum’s leadership, the team is sharper and more competitive than ever.
For this reason the question those in command need to continually ask themselves is ‘have the people we’ve placed into key leadership positions got the capacity to extract the best out of everyone or is it time to rethink our appointments?’
In the case of Team New Zealand they had clearly hit the ceiling. They were maxed out under the former regime meaning until they were prepared to appoint those with the attributes to take the team to the next level, they would have been unlikely to have had any chance of beating the best in the business being Sir Russell Coutts and his prodigy, the super-competitive Jimmy Spittle.
©1995-Present day. All rights reserved – Steel Performance Solutions
