I just can't get there. For me, 54% is an utterly bankrupt belief that alone largely explains why Seattle has so consistently failed. Let's start with the obvious. No marital vows that I have witnessed said "and I vow to shoot for 54% with you over the long haul till death do us part." Nothing in your life that really matters would merit or tolerate 54%. We can only hope to achieve that for which we at least strive.
The Mariners are no different.
No effective or cogent business strategy relies on "variance and luck" - ever. No effective leader of an organization expecting excellence worships at the altar of some bell curve hoping that the future will occasionally bring them good fortune from a black swan or tail effect. To the contrary, that is the absence of leadership.
Great strategies are about seeing the future and its risks and planning for them - knowing where the puck is going and building steps to get there more efficiently and faster than the competition. A large part of that is planning for contingencies i.e. expecting the unexpected and building that into your plans to achieve your outcomes.
Take the Dodgers. No team has been stricken with more catastrophic injuries than LA. Yet, they sit on top of the NL West- again - at around .600. Does anyone think they got there by believing that 54% reflects their goals, aspirations, or culture? That organization is 100% committed - at every level - to continually achieving excellence. They planned for injuries - and have addressed them without a whimper as the season has moved along.
See, there is "long run" in LA...no bell curve to keep them complacent. They expect to be in the World Series every single season - no excuses. Not getting there is unalloyed failure. They'll be the first to tell you that. Does that feel like Seattle? Does 54% philosophically capture the consistent success you see with LA, Atlanta, Houston and elsewhere?
Words matter, and 54% - whatever the intended meaning - is a poor leadership moment. Great leaders craft a compelling vision of a future for their organizations that their associates want to occupy and motivates them to work towards. Who is motivated to achieve great things by 54%? Has anything you consider great ever been fueled by "hey folks, remember, we're just shooting for 54% here?"
So why did a smart person like Jerry Dipoto say something so objectively wrong and counterproductive. As the losses mount, I suspect his sole concern now is self-preservation. When you are not succeeding as a leader, your first move is often to lower expectations because lower expectations help to push out the day of reckoning.
54% tells us more about Dipoto than the Mariners. Firing Scott Servais is a meaningless public sacrifice to hopefully keep the pitchforks and torches on the walls a little while longer. Here's the thing. When I read your work Neil, I never get the feeling that you are satisfied with 54% or that your horizon for excellence in your work involves some amorphous long run of hits and misses around a bell curve. Why should Seattle ask for less?
I just can't get there. For me, 54% is an utterly bankrupt belief that alone largely explains why Seattle has so consistently failed. Let's start with the obvious. No marital vows that I have witnessed said "and I vow to shoot for 54% with you over the long haul till death do us part." Nothing in your life that really matters would merit or tolerate 54%. We can only hope to achieve that for which we at least strive.
The Mariners are no different.
No effective or cogent business strategy relies on "variance and luck" - ever. No effective leader of an organization expecting excellence worships at the altar of some bell curve hoping that the future will occasionally bring them good fortune from a black swan or tail effect. To the contrary, that is the absence of leadership.
Great strategies are about seeing the future and its risks and planning for them - knowing where the puck is going and building steps to get there more efficiently and faster than the competition. A large part of that is planning for contingencies i.e. expecting the unexpected and building that into your plans to achieve your outcomes.
Take the Dodgers. No team has been stricken with more catastrophic injuries than LA. Yet, they sit on top of the NL West- again - at around .600. Does anyone think they got there by believing that 54% reflects their goals, aspirations, or culture? That organization is 100% committed - at every level - to continually achieving excellence. They planned for injuries - and have addressed them without a whimper as the season has moved along.
See, there is "long run" in LA...no bell curve to keep them complacent. They expect to be in the World Series every single season - no excuses. Not getting there is unalloyed failure. They'll be the first to tell you that. Does that feel like Seattle? Does 54% philosophically capture the consistent success you see with LA, Atlanta, Houston and elsewhere?
Words matter, and 54% - whatever the intended meaning - is a poor leadership moment. Great leaders craft a compelling vision of a future for their organizations that their associates want to occupy and motivates them to work towards. Who is motivated to achieve great things by 54%? Has anything you consider great ever been fueled by "hey folks, remember, we're just shooting for 54% here?"
So why did a smart person like Jerry Dipoto say something so objectively wrong and counterproductive. As the losses mount, I suspect his sole concern now is self-preservation. When you are not succeeding as a leader, your first move is often to lower expectations because lower expectations help to push out the day of reckoning.
54% tells us more about Dipoto than the Mariners. Firing Scott Servais is a meaningless public sacrifice to hopefully keep the pitchforks and torches on the walls a little while longer. Here's the thing. When I read your work Neil, I never get the feeling that you are satisfied with 54% or that your horizon for excellence in your work involves some amorphous long run of hits and misses around a bell curve. Why should Seattle ask for less?
Thanks again as always.