The types of leaders, their leadership styles, and methods of leadership on your team and in your organization will determine the type of culture that you'll build. The No Asshole Rule warns of the wrong type of leader. Let's talk about the right kind of leaders, how we identify them, and why it is so important to have them on your team.

Players only

Coaches, managers, and executives are a necessary source of leadership. Primarily functional in nature, they provide strategy and context, the game plan and direction for the team or company. Coaches and managers also handle administration and planning to allow their team to focus on basketball or engineering activities. Executives do the same at a more abstract level. Both roles include soft leadership responsibilities such as dealing with personnel issues and motivating the team. Good coaching and management are extremely helpful for a team to succeed and bad ones are almost always detrimental. But while coaching and management are necessary, they are not sufficient. High performing teams are not created by coaching and management, they are supported by it. High performing teams are created by exceptional leadership from within the team.

Be Damian Lillard

Leadership from within must primarily be leadership by example. It means living the culture and principles valued by the team and the company - every day. Great leaders on a team often do the big things, they carry the scoring load, and solve the big problems. Even more importantly, they do the small things. They set screens and make the extra pass, box out and rebound. They listen and empathize, they have fun and lead with humor, they encourage and praise and guide their teammates. And they help everyone, even with trivial or menial tasks - all the time! 

Great leaders take the big shots and win the big games, they complete projects, and build big things. But they also make mistakes and call them out. Great leaders fail, publicly, and then demonstrate growth and learning from that failure. Great leaders ask stupid questions - all the time!

Highly effective leadership from within the team has to come from a place of empathy and equality. Coaches and managers can provide one but rarely the other. Great leaders on a team are able to demonstrate and instill work ethic and process, culture and communication. Listening and teaching and praising among all teammates fosters belonging. Helping is contagious and can lower the skill and title differences among the team. Leaders that do these things daily encourage the same behavior in others much more effectively than coaching or management can. Additionally, leaders asking for help and opinion, especially from lower skilled or junior members on the team, stimulates confidence and cohesion and can prevent splintering of the team into tiers or cliques. 

Great leaders work hard but not too hard. They demonstrate when to get things done by playing through an injury. But also when it’s ok to push back, to say no, to sit out a game and to rest a sore knee. 

Don’t Be Kobe

Leading with empathy and demonstrating equality with communication and behavior every day has the power to create a team of confident and self-reliant individual contributors that own their roles and support each other. The alternative is to lead with strength, overwhelming talent, or charisma. These modes of leadership create teams of dependent followers looking to support their leader instead of each other. Leadership through strength can organize and optimize but can rarely motivate. A large skill gap between leaders and teammates promotes imposter syndrome and impedes team cohesion. Worst case, the super star takes most of the shots and everyone else just rebounds. Charisma, while helpful to any leader, can focus too much attention on the leader themselves and not enough on the team. 

These types of leaders and their teams may produce short-term results but are rarely harmonious and usually fall apart. 

Be aging Tim Duncan

Great leaders on a team are confident in their abilities, highly competent, and very skilled. However, they do not need to be, and probably should not be, the best player on the team or the smartest person in the room. They are able to deliver when it counts but not necessarily without help from others. They can score 40 or resolve a technical road block. But more often they lift up their teammates to reach higher, provide opportunity, and shine the spotlight on others. Great leaders are catalysts for the production and impact of all team members. They are Steph Curry, Nikola Jokic, and Jason Kidd. The are Jimmy Butler and aging Tim Duncan. They make everyone around them better. 

Modern agile engineering processes try to divide work and time into smaller, more manageable units. Projects may be long-term undertakings but they are broken down into small tasks. Each of these tasks can be completed in a shorter time frame, providing visibility of progress or the lack thereof. And ideally even allow for plan-ability. These short time frames are usually called sprints and last a few weeks. In the software industry, the standard being two-week sprints. 

The term sprint is obviously inspired by the world of running, conjuring an image of going not far but fast, of efficiency and intent and purpose. But it also means going as fast as possible, not stopping, not rethinking ones’ direction. The word can carry the bitter stench of stress, of being chased, of running out of time.

Let’s look to basketball to find better words to talk about our units of time and work. Let’s not call two weeks a sprint, let’s call it a game!

From running marathons to sprinting

Software projects used to be marathons. They used to be planned and executed in long, multi-month or even multi-year increments. Many projects would run over time or fail because work effort could not be adequately estimated over such long time periods and large quantities of work. Progress could often only be measured towards the end of a project. Projects would start slowly and as deadlines approached would go into overdrive to be finished. When problems arose or changes were required in the late stages of a project, it was often too late to change course or resolve issues which led to projects being scrapped.

The agile methodology is an attempt to solve these problems. By dividing large amounts of work into small units, they become easier to estimate, manage, and complete. The term sprint was chosen as an analogy for a short, intense effort and in contrast to the long durations of the past.

Freedom of structure

Basketball's default unit of work is a game. There are smaller units such as quarters and larger meta-units such as seasons or playoff series. But the focus of basketball is on an individual game.

A game is limited to 48 minutes (not counting rare overtime) and made up of four quarters with breaks in between. The most granular unit within a game is the possession where one team has the ball and tries to score. Modern, fast paced basketball has roughly 100 possessions per game.

The structure of a basketball game is relatively rigid; four equal quarters and after the time is up, the game is over. But while a game is a cohesive whole, it is not the same throughout. Teams and players have a lot of freedom of how to play the game. What strategies to employ and which players to play and when. To run plays or to let the game flow. To focus effort early or at the end of the game. Teams can focus on a single possession - "Let's get a stop here". Or on a larger goal - "Let's get the lead under 10 by half time".

The game's structure and time cap also provides a means of managing player minutes. Coaches use it to prevent a star from overexerting themselves and to ensure a young player gets a minimum amount of playing time to develop.

While not part of the 48 minutes of play, pre-game planning and post-game analysis are just as much part of the game as the opening tip. Teams plan for a game and devise strategy. And after the game, they watch film to learn from mistakes and to highlight achievement.

The composition of a basketball game provides the advantages of structure while allowing for a lot of freedom. 

A game of engineering

Using the game as the primary unit of time in their processes, engineering teams can benefit from its structural advantages. A period of two weeks easily lends itself to be molded to the structure of a basketball game. 

• Monday: game planning

• Tuesday/Wednesday: first quarter

• Thursday/Friday: second quarter

• Weekend: half time

• Monday/Tuesday: third quarter

• Wednesday/Thursday: fourth quarter

• Friday: game review

The first Monday of the two week game is dedicated to planning, work assignments, meetings, and other process related activity. Bundling it in this way may alleviate some distraction and context switching during the following eight days. These eight days can focus on project work and tasks.

Defining a week as half a game supports and encourages setting rough goals for the week and to "finish the half strong" before going into the weekend. Bundling two days into each quarter enables the breakdown of tasks into small chunks but provides breathing room and flexibility for medium sized tasks.

It also encourages fewer check-in meetings, having stand-ups only every other day instead of daily. A stand-up meeting on the first Tuesday is essential to get team members started and provide an opportunity to discuss open questions. A check-in on Thursday can clarify issues and remove obstacles. The next check-in on Monday after the weekend provides again a chance of jumpstarting the week and the last check-in on Wednesday with an opportunity of changing last minute priorities.

The last Friday of the game is again dedicated to process instead of project work including review meetings, planning, and setup for the next game.

"I called game!"

Engineering work is highly creative and is therefore notoriously difficult to plan, estimate, and manage. Engineering processes try to define frameworks, guidelines, and structure for projects to be planned and work to be broken down. Engineers require that structure to organize and prioritize work and to deliver completed work in a timely fashion. Engineers also require flexibility when organizing and scheduling work to accommodate unexpected work and difficult tasks and to re-prioritize and adapt quickly to changes.

By adopting the basketball game as the primary engineering cadence, teams can add structure and definition to the two-week period without sacrificing engineering flexibility. The game structure also provides opportunity to improve efficiency by alleviating meetings and burden of process. And not least, removing the terminology of the sprint in favor of the game removes unintended, subconscious negative connotations with work and adds opportunities for fun and motivating, team-centric language.

Great game, everyone!

Post-game interviews are boring. They are part of the TV broadcasting minutia forced on NBA games. In rare instances they can be an opportunity for a player to be emotional or vulnerable. And the best ones provide a fun moment of team camaraderie when a teammate interrupts the interview. But for the most part, on the face of it, they are meaningless. Listening a bit more closely to player’s answers though, I think they can provide a glimpse into the mindset and culture of basketball players. 

Players practice these answers! They are professionals, not just at playing the sport but also at dealing with the media. They know how to answer a question succinctly, to couch it in vagaries, to keep it general enough to be understandable by the casual fans watching. But the language they use to give these answers is pure basketball. They don’t use business speak or scientific language. They use the fundamental building blocks of language that basketball teams speak in. 

“We left it all on the floor tonight.”

“We came out with a lot of effort.”

“We made it difficult for them.”

“We got some good looks and made some shots down the stretch.”

And my favorite: “My teammates put me in a position to succeed.” or “The coaching staff did a great job putting me in a position to be successful.”

This answer is often given by players when asked about their own game-winning performance. In that context, it may sound like self-deprecation from a player with clearly superior talent. It’s not. It can sound like an equivalent to “I couldn’t have done it alone”, or to put it more bluntly “the others helped”. It’s not. I think the phrase has a far deeper and more specific meaning. 

Literally

Take it literally. The phrase refers to positions on the floor that the player was able to successfully score from. The statement “coach put me in a position to succeed” gives credit to a coaching staff that employed scouting, strategy, and statistical analysis, creating schemes of where each player should be on the floor for any particular offensive or defensive configuration. They create plays that move players around on the court to open up spaces, confuse the opponent, and give their players the opportunity to score. Plays are designed to move players into positions that allow them to take advantage of their particular skill sets. Shooters are moved to the three point line, post players to the low post, a non-shooter may hover in the dunker spot. Basketball coaches put their players in physical locations where they can score. 

Saying “my teammates put me in a position to succeed”, a player may be talking about teammates passing them the ball in just the right spot. Or setting a screen. Or moving off the ball that opened up space to allow the player to get to the rim. Basketball is a team sport so in order for any player to score their teammates have to play a major part in that effort. If they don’t, the other team's defense can focus on the player with the ball and make scoring much more difficult. 

Both coaches and teammates are essential in influencing the game to literally put players in position to succeed.

Literally-ish

What, if anything, can we learn from that and apply to engineering? Engineering may be a team sport but physical location matters very little. And team success does not depend on the physical movement of engineers. But if we look at “position” in a more abstract sense, I think there are clear parallels to the literal meaning of the phrase. 

Most engineering tasks, just like scoring the basketball, require coordination and collaboration with teammates. Teammates’ tasks and activities may be aligned with one's own task, or interfere. A fellow programmer may work on the same file or break the build. One engineer may be using the resource that is required for another to complete their task. Managers need to be aware of the activities across the team, coordinate them, and make sure resources are available where and when needed. Teammates need to be aware of each others' activities and actively support each other in those activities. 

Putting people in position to succeed is also about giving people tasks that play to their strengths. In basketball as in engineering, the goal is to increase confidence and the likelihood of success. A manager should be highly aware of the strengths and weaknesses of the people on their team! Tasks should be assigned to people who are confident in their ability to complete them to provide opportunity for accomplishment. At times, people should be challenged to move out of their comfort zone by taking on tasks beyond their skill or ability. Like Marc Gasol and Brook Lopez shooting threes. It provides the chance to learn a new skill, improve a technique, or grow into a different area. This “engineer development” is crucial but should be applied in moderation. When used too much, it can increase the engineer's stress level and have a detrimental effect on their confidence.

Team members can put each other in a position to succeed by asking each other for help. An engineer with a lot of work may ask a teammate with down time to help out on a portion they are proficient at. This increases team productivity by getting more work done and more importantly strengthens the relationships between team members. The overworked engineer is less stressed and the helping engineer gains a boost by being able to help a teammate and contribute to the overall success of the team. Both are psychological effects with lasting gains. Engineers should also ask each other for advice, feedback, and opinions. Being asked for one’s opinion or to share one’s expertise in a certain area can be a confidence booster for one engineer and a learning opportunity for the other. 

When opportunities arise to “take big shots” such as important tasks or projects, or presentations to customers or management, teammates can put each other in position to succeed by supporting each other to take advantage of these moments. This should be balanced with team member's qualifications and personal comfort in those moments but can provide great boosts to individual’s confidence levels and team cohesion.

Metaphorically

The phrase is also meant metaphorically. Coaches work with players to develop their skills and conditioning. They motivate their players and teach them the mechanics of the sport. Over time these efforts may enable a player to be successful where before they were not. Teammates may be supportive and encouraging, may cheer and teach and provide friendship. All of these efforts help to develop a player's abilities, their confidence, and build the culture and environment the player needs to thrive. They may contribute slowly over time or in a specific moment to a player’s ability and mindset to make the winning play or take the final shot.

Engineering managers can metaphorically put their engineers in position to succeed by providing resources and opportunities for development and growth. That includes task assignments to stretch an engineer’s abilities or increase their skill level. But also access to educational resources and conferences. Perhaps more importantly, managers can be a great source of motivation and confidence for individual team members. Developing relationships with their engineers and fostering an atmosphere of trust and support is essential for the productivity of the team, employee retention, and overall success of the team’s efforts. 

The most crucial ingredient in any teams success and the key attribute of highly successful teams is team chemistry. “My teammates put me in a position to succeed” is metaphor for that secret ingredient. More important than coaching and management, than player movement and engineer collaboration are the personal relationships and the emotional support among teammates. Praising and thanking each other. Cheering and encouraging each other. Teaching and challenging and giving each other feedback. Listening and being interested in each other’s lives, successes, and struggles. Put it all together and it translates into a team that moves on a string, that collaborates seamlessly and operates without ego.

In a phrase, a team that’s in a position to succeed.

Engineering is a team sport. That might sound strange but hear me out. At its core, engineering is about a group of people coming together as a team to achieve a goal. Namely to build a piece of technology. Each team member contributes their unique skill and ability to the effort; their passion and experience. To succeed, the team must form a whole that is greater than the sum of its individual parts. Close cooperation and communication are essential. As are diversity of skill and discipline. Success can only be achieved by teams with the right group of people working together effectively. 

Basketball is also a team sport. A group of players form a team to achieve a goal. In this case to put a ball in the basket more often than the other team. To do this well, it requires a mix of diverse talents, skillsets, and personalities. The team has to work together and become more than a collection of individuals. And winning teams do this at a very high level.

If engineering and basketball are similar at an abstract level, maybe they are similar in other ways. Maybe there are parallels in how successful engineering and basketball teams communicate. Maybe skillsets and personality types that make up great basketball teams could be applied to engineering teams. Maybe basketball rituals can tell us something about how to create close-nit teams. Maybe there are lessons to be learned from successful basketball organizations and their structure, cultures, and values.

This blog will be an exploration of the similarities between engineering and basketball. And how basketball principles and culture, rituals, mechanics, perspectives, and terminology may be applied to engineering practices to improve team collaboration, communication, motivation, and efficiency.

Subscribe now

In the meantime, tell your friends!