Introduction
The process of managing individuals whether in business or sport is an intricate task and demands a compassionate appreciation of the multilateral roles needed (Crust and Lawrence, 2006). The position of manager in sports represents a tempestuous as well as a stressful occupation where persons are publicly held answerable for the performance of the team. Some football managers have been heavily criticized for not spending enough in buying top players to help their teams win trophies. For instance, as Kulper (2013) reports, Arsenal fans complain that the team manager refuses to purchase the costly players who can compete with teams such as Barcelona, Manchester United, and Chelsea. Managing any successful sports event calls for the skills as well as knowledge to plan, organize, communicate, promote, and lead. The dismissal of the football managers has been common in the recent past, particularly in the English premier league and other leading leagues in the world. In essence, the majority of the owners of the football teams have increasingly sacked their unsuccessful managers in an attempt to secure top-flight survival. The paper critically discusses the arguments for and against firing unsuccessful managers both within and outside the sporting organizations and concludes with an elucidation of whether the football managers ought to be sacked when results are poor.
The studies that have delved into the impact of the change of top managers on the performance of the organizations have primarily revealed varying results. Some researchers maintain that sacking of the unsuccessful managers facilitate the improvement in the performance of the organizations while others maintain that this is not true. One of the arguments for sacking unsuccessful managers both within and outside the sporting organizations is that it helps improve the performance of the organization since the unsuccessful managers might be replaced with the managers that have credible managerial skills necessary for better performance. According to the common sense theory, there exists a positive relationship between senior leader succession and resultant organizational performance (Choi, 2013). The managers in sporting organizations just like the managers in the other organizations play a significant role in the performance of their teams. For instance, a football team can have the best and experienced players but perform poorly on the field if its manager lacks sound managerial skills such as conceptual skills, people skills, decision-making skills, technical skills, and communication skills. Ideally, this also applies to the management outside the sporting organizations. Consequently, the new managers inside and outside the sporting organizations who replace the unsuccessful managers might possess sound managerial skills as mentioned above and help the organizations improve on their performances.
Besides, the sacking of the unsuccessful managers both inside and outside the sporting organizations is likely to lead to the hiring of the managers who bring new expertise as well as viewpoints to overcome the deficiencies of their predecessors. According to Grusky (1963), as cited by Rowe, Cannella, Rankin, and Gorman (2005), the origin of most successions is poor performance, but a leader succession might have a positive impact on the subsequent performance. For this reason, the new managers who replace the unsuccessful managers both within and outside the sporting organizations are likely to have a positive impact on the organizational performance since they might come with new viewpoints and expertise that help overcome the deficiencies of the latter. According to Dr. Bas Ter Weel, as cited by Barnes (2013), replacing a manager when a team is experiencing a crisis during the season help improve the results in the short-term. Just like in the sporting organizations, the new managers in the other organizations are likely to bring new perspectives and expertise that help raise the team members’ morale as well as motivation and, as a consequence, facilitate the improvement in the performance.
The insider succession theory asserts that replacing the organizational leaders with the leaders within the same organization results in less disruption, thus leading to improved organizational performance (Choi, 2013). Consequently, hiring the managers within the same organization after dismissing the unsuccessful managers leads to the improvement in the organizational performance. In both the sporting organizations and outside these organizations, the replacement of the unsuccessful managers with the new managers from within does not lead to the organizational disruptions. In fact, the new managers do not bring new beliefs and ideas into the organizations. They bring new expertise that helps them improve the organizational performance.
Nonetheless, the dismissal of the unsuccessful managers both within and outside the sporting organizations does not improve the performance. Arnulf, Mathisen, and Hærem (2012) insist that numerous decades of investigation on leadership succession suggests that dismissing the accountable manager does not help the football teams enhance their performance and might be even detrimental. The vicious cycle theory, which supports the arguments against the sacking of the unsuccessful managers within the organizations, asserts that there is a negative relationship between the senior leader succession and resultant organizational performance. Notably, both the sporting and other organizations might sack the accountable managers due to poor short-term performance but hire unaccountable managers who would not help improve the performance in the long-run. Consequently, the succession of the accountable unsuccessful managers by the new managers might lead to poor organizational performance.
Unlike the insider successions that facilitate the improvement in the organizational performance, the outsider successions usually lead to the deterioration of the organizational performance. The replacement of the unsuccessful managers inside both the sporting and outside the sporting organizations with the outside managers might lead to disruptions that in one way or another result in poorer performance. In particular, the outside managers that succeed the unsuccessful managers bring new beliefs and ideas both inside and outside the sporting organizations that tend to challenge the status-quo. As a result, the followers resist the new beliefs and ideas, and this results in disruptions that affect the organizational performance negatively. In the sporting organizations, some teams have performed poorly in the past due to the players’ resistance to the new managers’ strategic approaches.
The dismissal of the unsuccessful managers both within and outside the sporting organizations results in the disruptions/disturbances that further deteriorate the performance. Rowe, Cannella, Rankin, and Gorman (2005) emphasize that the vicious cycle theory depicts leader succession as a naturally disruptive as well as destabilizing force within the organizations. For this reason, the firing of the unsuccessful managers leads to disruption and destabilization of both the sporting organizations and other organizations, which further deteriorates their performances. Ideally, this results in the dismissal of the new managers, and the cycle repeats over and over again. For instance, some football teams such as Rochdale A.F.C. have sacked their managers time and again but they have never won the title. The departure of the managers in these teams leads to disruptions and destabilizations that that results in poorer performance. The sacking of the unsuccessful managers, thus, fails to enhance the performance of both the sporting organizations and other organizations.
The firing of the unsuccessful managers both within and outside the sporting organizations does not lead to any impact on the performance as per the ritual scapegoating theory. Choi (2013) insists that this theory asserts that there is no relationship between the senior leadership succession and consequent organizational performance. In the sporting organizations, the ritual scapegoating theory applies to the between-season manager successions. According to this theory, the between season successions do not have any impact on the performance of the teams. Ideally, this also applies to the other organizations in which the senior managers are also only part of the various factors, which impact the performance. Thus, the dismissal of the senior managers who are unsuccessful does not result in the improvement in the performance of the organizations since the manager is only one of the several factors that affect the organizational performance.
The dismissal of the unsuccessful managers both within and outside the sporting organizations does not lead to overall improvement in the performance. De Dios and Forrest (2007) found out that firing the football manager only produced tangible outcomes at home matches but not at the away matches. Specifically, their coefficient approximations on the dummy variables for new away team coach showed a negative impact on the performance during the initial away match albeit that was not statistically significant. In essence, the discharge of the unsuccessful managers does not necessarily result in the improvement in the performance. Consequently, the sacking of the unsuccessful managers both inside and outside the organizations does not lead to significant improvement in the performance as expected.
In conclusion, football managers should not be dismissed devoid of proper evaluation when the results are poor. The reasons for sacking these managers fall below the reasons against sacking them. Their dismissal might not be the desired solution when the teams are facing performance challenges. The poor performance might be emanating from somewhere else and not with the managers. Thus, proper evaluation needs to be carried out before their sacking. The leaders outside the sporting organizations should also not be dismissed when the organizational performances are below par. The proper assessment also needs to be carried out within the organizations because just like the sports managers, these leaders might not be the cause of the problem.
Reference List
Arnulf, J.K., Mathisen, J.E. and Hærem, T. (2012) Heroic leadership illusions in football teams: Rationality, decision making and noise-signal ratio in the firing of football managers. Leadership, 8(2), pp.169-185.
Barnes, H. (2013) Does it make statistical sense to sack a football manager? [Online] [Accessed 9th January 2017], Available at: <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23724517>
Choi, M.K. (2013) Senior Leadership: Succession Effects on Organizational Performance (No. ATZL-SWV). Army Command and General Staff College Fort Leavenworth Ks School of Advanced Military Studies.
Crust, L. and Lawrence, I. (2006) A review of leadership in sport: Implications for football management. Athletic Insight: The Online Journal of Sport Psychology, 8(4), pp.28-48.
De Dios Tena, J. and Forrest, D. (2007) Within-season dismissal of football coaches: Statistical analysis of causes and consequences. European Journal of Operational Research, 181(1), pp.362-373.
Kulper, S. (2013) Arsène’s Austerity: Has football’s economist got it wrong when it comes to the game’s finances? [Online] [Accessed 9th January 2017], Available at: <https://www.ft.com/content/d363b054-6548-11e2-8b03-00144feab49a>
Rowe, W.G., Cannella, A.A., Rankin, D. and Gorman, D. (2005) Leader succession and organizational performance: Integrating the common-sense, ritual scapegoating, and vicious-circle succession theories. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(2), pp.197-219.
