Practicality man Cruijff reveals weaknesses of modern management

On the 7th February 2012 Cruijff eventually got his right in court. Reason why Van Gaal’s appointment became void. I belong to the people who admire Cruijff and who have the deepest respect for Van Gaal. They both don’t seem to be easygoing people, but their status justifies their behavior. Those who list Ajax and Barcelona to their name, have achieved something.

(Original article written by Bert Overbeek in Dutch and published 07 February 2012 on www.jongebazen.nl Translation: Bert de Ruiter)

But Cruijff and Van Gaal together, as we all know, won’t work. For that reason 4 out of 5 commissioners from the supervisory board appointed Van Gaal, leaving Cruijff out of the equasion. Anyone could have been appointed, but not Van Gaal, whose tense relationship with Cruijff is a public secret. It was a political challenge addressed to the man who was once the worlds’ best football player, renown for not letting himself being pushed around.

At a deeper level something is happening that also plays a role in other organizations: the fight of people (usually with a background in business economics) whose thinking originates from management abstractions versus the people with proven practical skills.

Steven Ten Have and his followers approach Ajax in management steps: they first want to develop an organization as a starting point for continuity. Cruijff immediately thinks in performances. He’s more a believer in practicality. To start with the feet in the mud, with good people, which will automatically lead to good results.

Without taking sides in this article, I have a personal preference for Cruijff’s method, as also becomes apparent in my book ‘food for young bosses’. I have seen in the business world that management abstractions lead to endless plays, games, disputes and changes of power, which lead to a significant loss of money. Building with practical people, even when they –in Cruijff’s words- ‘are studied’ranks under the trial and error method.

Starting somewhere and expanding with a vision. As opposed to the management-architecture which is developed behind a desk and works from a plan. First vision and mission, next tasks and responsibilities and then plant out things ‘the Kotter way’ (Kotter is a renown change manager). Such a planned approach can possibly work, but is less suitable in the environment of operational organizations like a football club, where the future and direct results go hand-in-hand. the objective there is a quick score, but also long term thinking, without a focus on personal gain.

I share, also in a business environment, Cruijff’s opinion, although I can imagine environments where the Ten Have concept blossoms better. For the people who claim that the way Cruijff achieves his goals is improper, I want to clearly state that this time Cruijff was challenged by the directors, who did not play fair.

Check the facts once again. Calling with Cruijff at inappropriate timings and than with raised eyebrows play innocent; appoint one of his ‘enemies’ without involving him; suggesting he is a racist and, again today, insinuations from Sturkenboom that Cruijff is a rude rascal. Although not explicitly expressed, it is the implication of the article that Nu.nl published about Sturkenboom.

Quote:

Sturkenboom tells in Nu sport-magazine how he first got acquainted with Cruijff.

"That meeting was actually very typical for Johan’s behavior", he claims. "He wandered in without an appointment. I happened to be in a meeting with some managers. He swung the door open and said: ‘I’m here to see you’."

"I asked the others to return at a later stage, because Johan is not in Amsterdam on a daily base and I was actually quite interested in getting acquainted."

"We talked for some time. ‘You should give those boys’, he off course meant Wim Jonk, Dennis Bergkamp and Ruben Jongkind, ‘some space’, he kept repeating. Even when I asked him if I should give them my wallet as well. Cruijff described them as ’intelligent and wise enough’.’Football players are studied these days ’ he added."

"When I remarked that Jonk en Bergkamp are rather short on knowledge and organizational experience, but that I was willing to support and further coach them, his reaction was, again: ‘the only thing you need to do is to give them some space’."

"To avoid misunderstandings, I said to conclude our conversation that there were no agreements made and no promises done. I repeated those words when Cruijff left and the door was open. Maybe it is not very nice of me, but I thought it a good idea if more people would hear this."

What we hear here is criticism to Cruijff’s form. To his feeling for manners. He interrupts a meeting, ignores the good intentions of the behaved, innocent Sturkenboom (the coaching of inexperienced boys)and moreover he claims in front of others that ‘no agreements have been made’.

I always feel suspicion if directors put the form in the first place. Cruijff is not bothered by the form, but by the content: give the trainers space, don’t interfere with what’s happening on the soccer field, we don’t want to be bothered by people who’ve never meant anything in the football world. (With this Cruijff is thé example of what I recently called 2100 Punky management ((http://www.jongebazen.nl/verandermanagement/nieuw-fris-managementconcept-wat-is-2100-punky-management) Aim at the content and not at the form.

Directors in the business world sometimes behave like Ten Have. They’re not bothered by people with a global reputation there. They can carry on their way and among employees there is lots of silent grief, which never will be publicly expressed, as no one wants to be fired. This way organizations keep their reputations fresh.

But I cannot help feeling that Cruijff has their absolute support. It was for a reason that so many supporters were pro-Cruijff. They recognize the situation at Ajax from their own work situations.

They support the practical people, and have no interest in the ‘white-collar-brigade’. They instinctively feel that Cruijff is not a political gad-fly, but straightforward aims for his goal instead.

In the business world there is a movement of people who want to get rid of the managers who don’t understand practicality. The court has helped also them a little bit. And Cruijff definitely deserves credits for that. His opponents say: he was a good player and a good trainer, but has no understanding of the organizational aspects. But meanwhile they know that he understands it excellently and has shown intelligence and bravery in the situation. For this he deserves admiration.

It’s only the way Cruijff chooses that’s different. He’s not formed by the numerical administration studies which want to change organizations in excel sheets and action plans. His style is a boost to me for further developing 2100 Punky Management, which has many interfaces with the behavior from the man from Betondorp, who’s meant so much for so many.

And now? Sports people fight during a match like soldiers, because during the match it’s war, but afterwards they shake hands. When the match is over one stops throwing mud. It’s my wish to every sports man.

(The author Bert Overbeek (www.pitchersupport.com) twitters on Goeroetweets, wrote ‘Food for young bosses’, a book for young managers and will soon give a training as described here: http://www.jongebazen.nl/verandermanagement/workshop-voor-managers-trainers-en-coaches-over-het-brein)