Unfortunately, my first baseball game of the year was rained out.  But, that doesn’t mean I didn’t think about baseball and what it can teach all of us.

Let’s start with something simple.  The manager of the baseball team is among the lowest paid professionals on the staff.  The general manager is not much better off financially.  The average baseball player makes about $ 3.4 million, while the average manager makes about $ 1 million (some do make as much as $ 7.5 million- but those exist on teams where the average player makes twice or thrice what the other teams pay).   General managers make $ 1/2  million, but some commandeer salaries approaching those of  the average player.

Compare that concept to how top management is paid at our corporations.  Yup.  Those fellows are paid 354X the average wage of their staff.   (That was the executive compensation ratio for the S&P Index in 2012.)  Like these executives are the only ones making a difference in the overall scheme of things.

So, what is the value of that manager? First, let me say that I, for one, am going to miss Charlie Manuel, the Phillies Manager for the past 8 years, when he was replaced by Ryne Sandberg.  (I am pleased to observe that the Phillies have retained Charlie’s services in the front office.)

The job of the baseball manager is to be the team spokesperson, to funnel information from the front office, and to work to keep the tension among the various team players to a minimum.  Their job is basically to implement the business plan of the team.  It’s the job of the manager to play down his importance, to play up his team players, even as he (it’s always a he) employs the proprietary business advantage for the team- his tactics.   Up until that last sentence, those are the same rules that apply to corporate executives.

And, as is generally true for corporate managers, baseball managers are former players.  They understand the nitty-gritty points of the game, as well as the metrics by which the game is now played.  Most importantly, the baseball manager not only knows his numbers, but has a gut feel about the game situations- and knows how his team members will act under pressure.

He may be the disciplinarian, but it’s more important for him to function as the team psychologist.  And, like the discussions I have had with college basketball coaches, it’s clear that these managers know they are at the mercy of the performance of their team.  (College basketball coaches have it even tougher, since they are not dealing with paid professionals, but immature college freshman, for the most part.  Corporate managers are also at the mercy of their team members- yet seem to feel that all success is theirs and not due to their team’s performance- albeit under their tutelage.)

But, regardless of their tactics- it’s the performance of each of their team players that ultimately makes the difference for baseball managers.  Even if the manager calls for a bunt- should the players fail to hustle and make the next base in time, the tactic is immaterial.    That’s the big change in baseball management nowadays.   The concept of personality management is critical.

I think the same is true for corporate managers.  To get the very best of every team member-  it takes knowing what makes them tick, what makes them excel.  It’s also why I don’t think the compensation plan for corporate management makes sense.   It’s time to go back to the rules developed by the great management guru, Peter Drucker (20:1 pay ratio) -or the concept of the ultimate capitalist, J. Pierpont Morgan (also 20:1).

Maybe, given today’s complex environment, you could push it to 50 for those firms that really excel.  (No, I don’t agree with George Orwell who wanted that ratio dropped to 10.)

But, 354?  Who are you kidding?

Share this: