|
Q:
What is wrong with the Yankees? How could they stick a
manager as great as Joe Torre with such a raw deal?
Stephen MacMillan, Boston
A: Since
we’re going to take issue with your perspective in a few
paragraphs, allow us to begin this column with our points
of agreement.
First, we
wholeheartedly agree with your view of the New York
Yankees, the iconic American baseball team loved and hated
in equal measure.
During his
12 years as the team’s manager, Torre helped the Yankees
win the World Series four times. But the team hasn’t won a
championship since 2000, which prompted George
Steinbrenner, the team’s owner, to reconsider keeping on
Torre when his contract came up for renewal this year. In
the end, Torre opted to resign last week.
The team
ownership deserves the Horse’s Rear End of the Year award
for its handling of Torre’s contract.
Take, for
instance, Steinbrenner’s ugly and inhumane “Win or You’re
Outta Here” pronouncement in the local paper before the
team’s playoff series against the Cleveland Indians.
Awful!
Second, we
thoroughly agree that Torre is a star. Who else can claim
four World Series rings and 12 straight postseason
appearances? He also happens to be a high-integrity,
good-hearted, first-class human being, and deserving of
all the admiration he receives.
But did
the Yankees stick Torre with a raw deal? No way.
“Very
reasonable” is more like it. The offer accurately
reflected dynamics of the competitive marketplace. With a
$5-million base salary, Torre would still be the
highest-paid manager in baseball. And with a $1-million
bonus for every playoff series won, it reflected the
ownership’s priorities.
Ultimately, if the Yankees won the World Series in 2008,
Torre stood to receive an $8-million payday, more than any
other manager by a factor of two.
Sure, you
can debate whether the Yankees use the right performance
metrics, given the role luck seems to play in a short
playoff series. But in the cool light of day, you really
cannot call the Torre deal any of the epithets it’s
inspired lately, from your “raw” to “insulting” to
“cruel.”
But
therein lies the problem. Torre’s deal was not negotiated
in the cool light of day. It was negotiated under the hot
glare of media scrutiny. Because of that factor, it fell
victim to an all-too-common dynamic in any industry, not
just sports, be it baseball, cricket or football (what
Americans call soccer).
When
negotiations become public, rationality exits and
emotionality sweeps in. Deals get transformed from what
they should be—best all-around solutions—to Gladiator-like
death matches. In the end, one side gets to proclaim
victory and the other gets cast as the smote, humiliated
loser.
Examples
of this destructive phenomenon abound in business. It is
particularly prevalent in labor negotiations, as they are
almost always played out in the press.
New York’s
contract dispute with its 34,000 transit workers in 2005,
for example, was a Passion-play production of a
negotiation if there ever was one. Mayor Michael Bloomberg
publicly renounced the union as “thuggish” and the union
leadership defied court orders.
Finally,
as always, the adversaries sat down at a table and
hammered out a settlement. It is important to note,
however, that event only occurred after both sides had
signed an agreement not to talk to the media.
But it’s
not just broad-based union agreements that get stung by
the irrationality effect of media scrutiny. Any time an
acquisition fight finds its way into the public eye,
competing buyers can get a little wacky.
Suddenly,
it’s not just about buying a company at a reasonable
price. It’s about who will be declared the winner and the
loser. The result: overpayment, sometimes to a ridiculous
degree.
Similarly,
media coverage can really muck up contracts for big-ticket
items. Airlines, for instance, are masters of pitting
companies against each other when they are in the market
for a new plane purchase. The “winner” of the order may
get to celebrate its big business headlines, but
invariably, it then has to spend the next several years
clawing back the lost margin with service and parts sales.
The point
is this: some of the least sensible, most unfortunate
deals we know of have been made because the people
involved felt they had to save face before a watching
world. We’d put Torre smack in the middle of that
category.
Again, we
respect him immensely, but it seems he let all the public
attention sway his rational thinking last week, replacing
it with gut-level feelings of pride and defiance. It’s
hard to blame him. He’s only human. From where we sit, the
Yankees ownership started the media mess, with their
appalling public threats and taunting.
Sadly,
though, the Torre saga is over.
The
Yankees have lost a great manager, and that manager has
lost a great job. But the lesson of those events should
not be lost on anyone in business.
When it
comes to negotiations, conduct them quietly, quickly and
in private—even if that approach appears to cost you more.
In the end, it’s worth it.
****
Jack and
Suzy Welch are the authors of the international best
seller Winning (Collins). Their latest book is
Winning: The Answers: Confronting 74 of the Toughest
Questions in Business Today (Collins). They are eager
to hear about your career dilemmas and challenges at work
and look forward to answering your questions in future
columns. You can e-mail them questions at winning@nytimes.com.
Please include your name, occupation, city and country. |