Case Study Developed at SPJIMR Deals With Ganguly-Chappel Strife

Illustrations on how combinations of these parameters influence team performance are available in extent literature. Numerous case studies have been written and shared in this connection in the academia. However, a case that has been recently developed by the faculty at S. P. Jain Institute of Management & Research, Mumbai covers a very unique context. It picks a very contemporary issue in the world of sports, in

India, and links it up with established concepts of Organizational Behavior.

“The Indian Cricket Saga” – identifies the crossfire between the current Indian cricket coach Greg Chappell and former captain Sourav Ganguly, which erupted during the Indian team’s

Zimbabwe tour in June 2005. With the essential focus on team performance, the case probes into factors like; locus of power, shifting team dynamics, emotional intelligence, adversity quotient, effect of the environmental through various stake-holders, etc. It emphasizes the interdependence of all these factors and their influence on team performance. The basic idea is to draw parallels from the sports arena to explain team performance in organizations.

The case was given to the batch of PGDM 2005-07 for classroom discussions on

the 29^th of November 2005 and was received with fervor and enthusiasm. The participants were relating the issues emerging from the case to the various concepts of Organizational Behavior. Various points emerging from the discussions related to theories of different styles of leadership under different situations, preference of power bases by individuals, constructive conflict management, consistent team composition for effective team dynamics, influence of cultural changes and the rapidity of these changes, importance of emotional intelligence and association with the adversity quotient, and the external influencing factors like BCCI, the media, the political clout governing a game which is as passionate as cricket, in India. Amidst the presence of faculty members apart from the one leading the discussions, the discussion by the PGP participants took a crescendo, as they got deeply engrossed in the issues before culminating into the conceptual analysis.

The participants identified John Wright as a transformational leader who was sensitive to the needs of the players and showed patience in understanding the psyche of individual players and the team overall. On the contrary, participants agreed that Greg Chappell was more aggressive and came as a taskmaster. Ganguly was identified as a tough, intuitive and an emotional leader. When two authoritarian individuals work together there is bound to be a more than palpable friction. Participants felt that both were looking at their vested interests and did not focus on super-ordinate goals. Process parameters sharply drifted along diverse paths, though intuitively, it may appear that both wanted the long-term good of Indian cricket.

Some groups attributed this conflict to cultural changes. Chappell came from a different culture and was keen on implementing change rather quickly. An important point that emerged was that Chappell was setting many individual goals for the players apart from team goals. Participants felt that this was confusing the players. However, some believed that Chappell was being a ‘Situational Leader’; he is responsible for preparing the team for the 2007 World Cup and does not have much time. Also, maybe Chappell is under pressure to prove his capability, as this is his first international coaching assignment. There is a possible aspirational need that Chappell had been nursing all these years. He has never been the coach of the Australian team. He wants to prove himself by strongly pitting the Indian team against the formidable Australians who are a huge threat towards any nations World Cup bid.

It was discussed that though Ganguly is the most successful Indian captain, his individual performance had been in doldrums of late. Points emerged to support the fact that the leader must perform up to the mark and set examples to lead the team towards effective performance. However, this was not the case with Ganguly. Also, questions were raised – ‘How does the leader know when it is the right time to quit?’ A leader must leave with humility rather be forced out of office. Some groups said that it is important for leaders to adapt with changing times and use different styles of leadership accordingly.

From the discussions it emerged that each one of them was using his positional power to the extreme. Participants felt that leaders should use a range of power bases to be more effective. Thus, both Chappell and Ganguly should have used more of expert power, referent power and relational power.

Another pertinent point emerged that, in today’s, high-pressure situations, when people in organizations are given short-term goals; they often wear out fast under insurmountable processes and results. Some organizations abroad are known to offer small breaks to their executives to recharge batteries before they resume work.

All these factors have a strong bearing on team dynamics. The performance of a leader and the environment he operates in, will lead to harmony among members of the team. Points were raised showing concern about the continual changes in the team composition and player positions. Every time this happens, it was felt that teams need to go back to the storming stage and take a longer thawing period, before eventually reaching the performing stage.

Hence, it can be observed that leadership, cultural changes, conflict, power and team dynamics, all have a strong influence on team performance. The discussions ended by hoping that the new regime would attain stability and work towards improving both self and team performance.