Recently I went to see the movie Moneyball, based on the true story of the Oakland A baseball team’s general manager Billy Beane. I’m not a hardcore baseball fan, I went because I was intrigued by the story of how a leader (Beane, played by Brad Pitt) used statistics and analytics to do the impossible: build a team of no names, win 20 games in a row and change the business of baseball forever.
Beane is considered the precursor of a trend that has swept the baseball world — sabermetrics – and much has been written about the story and the broader messages about running a business. But I’d like to hit a few ideas your way as you plan for 2012 and beyond.
So what is there to learn from the story?
Beane faced challenges head-on. The A’s were losing their best players to other teams with large payrolls. Instead of playing victim or ignoring the problem, Beane claimed it, found a solution and took a big risk by bringing in an Ivy League economics graduate to analyse players stats, replacing the traditional way of assessing and recruiting talent. By caring more about a player’s ability to get on base, Beane challenged conventional wisdom and proved his detractors wrong.
He managed objectively. Prior to the events of Moneyball, scouts assessed players in a substantially more subjective manner. And, while experience and gut feel matter in decision making, Beane brought a new dimension to the sport. By analysing players by the numbers and statistical probabilities, he brought objectivity to the table.
He was transformed as a leader. Beane had the strength of character and courage to stay the course even when his plan didn’t seem to be working. He evolved as a leader, going from being a distant manager to one that was fully engaged with the sport, his team, and the players.
With much change happening in our own industry, we should think more like Beane. Ask yourself and your leadership team the following questions:
- Do we understand the changes that are impacting marketing research?
- Are we able to assess our current state and create a plan going forward?
- Are we willing to put everything on the table and challenge the status quo?
- Are we managing by the numbers? Do we know what drives profitable revenue?
- Do we have the right talent for the future? And if not, how do we create a plan for hiring new talent for this new age?
- Does our current staff have the right skills to surprise and delight our customers?
Business is about making intelligent choices and now more than ever we need to challenge conventional wisdom in order to chart a new way forward. Beane chose an unknown and risky path, and in the end he changed his organisation, himself and the industry. My kind of leader. Your’s too?
For more on this topic this topic, see Jeffery Henning’s post on transformation and Fast Company’s Eight strategies to fight ordinary.
Beth Rounds
Over the course of her career, Beth has helped leading research firms strategically link their business, marketing, and sales efforts. She managed marketing and client teams at Custom Research Inc, a Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award recipient, and led marketing and product teams at GfK, Greenfield Online (now Toluna) and MarketTools. As a Cambiar Partner, she works with clients to define strategy, develop products and create go-to-market plan - all with an eye on profitable growth.
Simon Chadwick
Over 30 years in research, 18 of them leading research companies in Europe, the USA and globally. An active industry leader in ESOMAR, CASRO, MSI and other organizations. Founded Cambiar in 2004 as a change management consulting firm dedicated to the market research industry.Recent Posts
-
Corporate insight leaders: their most pressing needs
17-Apr-2012
-
What is Google up to with Consumer Surveys?
2-Apr-2012
-
Smart hiring pays big dividends
16-Jan-2012
-
Lead! A sea change is coming
14-Sep-2011


Readers' comments (2)
Adrian Pritchard | 17-Nov-2011 6:19 pm
Anybody who has ever read this or tried to (Nick Hornby's review sums it up) will note there are very few statistIcs in it. What also tends to be missed is that the success was short lived.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Simon Kendrick | 19-Nov-2011 0:48 am
The success was only short-lived because other teams with more money - notably the Red Sox - copied the process on a larger scale. The A's were successful (in the regular season if not the post season) because they were playing by different rules to the bigger teams. Once the playing field is levelled, they lose their advantage.
The crux of Moneyball is the challenging of the orthodoxy through exploiting market inefficiencies and the emphasis on HRs/RBIs over OBP was by far the biggest. Hence Beane and DePodesta's success.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment