Brandon Stone of the Toronto Blue Jays explores four factors to promote buy-in.
A Human Performance article brought to you by our Main Partners
“If it’s true but useless,” he told the gathered media. “I don’t really share that with our team.”
The Leaders Performance Institute cites that moment when speaking to Brandon Stone, the Sports Science Coordinator at the Toronto Blue Jays. Coach Kelly was referring to a game that took place two years earlier – but could ‘true but useless’ apply to the application of sports science as a team?
“If you walk into a room as a sports scientist and you feel that you have to say ‘the rate of force development is at the 50 millisecond epoch’ or ‘you’ve got to start an assessment with the upper quarter YBT’ – if you always have to be that technical and you can’t generalize it or apply it– to me that isn’t science,” says Stone, who previously worked in Olympic and Paralympic sports, college sports, and with the military.
“We have to bring the lab to the field and make sure it answers questions that are relevant to the work our coaches do every day. If it can’t be applied, it isn’t useful. I’m not going to get caught up in a term that would prevent me from connecting with coaches. If they use ‘workload’ and they don’t really mean work in joules, then use another term. It’s the same if they say ‘velocity’ and they mean ‘speed’. Instead of me getting hung up on that for six months I would rather connect with people and meet them where they are as that creates an opportunity to say: ‘when we say speed, then this is how we define it , and here’s how we’re seeing it’. The faster we speak the same language the quicker we can begin impacting players together.”
Stone is proud of the manner in which the different departments of baseball operations, such as scouting and player development, are willing to collaborate with the sports science department. “I would say that we’re dot-connectors,” he continues. “We understand the ‘benchtop science’ aspects of physiology, neurobiology and biomechanics, but then we also have the ability to apply that in a field setting. I think that’s what the backbone of sports science should be, can be, and is, in certain instances.”
He has also noticed the wider trend towards generalists in sports science. “We need to have a bit of depth in each domain,” he says, which includes a breadth of ‘soft’ skills allied to a deep practitioner knowledge and, here, Stone sets out four factors for sports science practitioners to consider when developing trust in their craft.
Stone argues that sports scientists have, at times, adopted the wrong approach when entering an organization. “We’re often coming into environments that have been there for a long period of time and, for me, it’s more about creating an environment of openness and a willingness to engage on both sides,” he says. “As long as we have a way we’re going to approach something internally that makes sense to everybody in the room – not just the scientists or the coaches – but it has to make sense to everybody and we work really hard with that. We’re going to make sure that the technology and verbiage we use fits that environment so that people don’t feel like they can’t connect and understand, because then they’re going to be unwilling to say anything. We’re going to be two ships passing in the night instead of getting on land together and making sure we’re taking the next step forward.”
Meeting the coach where they’re at – and gaining their confidence in your work as a sports scientist means listening. Stone says: “We can fall into this trap where you think you’ve got to come in and prove your value. ‘I will try to show you how smart I am and show you all the gadgets I have.’ But if you’re in the organization they already value you at some level, right? In my opinion, what creates that confidence in our coaches is my ability to just listen. I want to learn from them regardless of their age, their years in the field or the game. What ends up happening is that they’ll say things that I also see or resonate with. We already mentioned the challenge of the verbiage, the language that is unique to that culture. The ability for the practitioner to learn fast is fundamental and the best way to do that is to listen. Just little things. You get a sense for what they’re describing, and you end up saying ‘Oh yeah, I see the same thing’. That common ground can gain confidence and trust can grow from there.”
When it comes to building confidence in a dataset, Stone stresses the importance of routine for everyone involved. “You want to have as much rigor as you can in the field, but there’s a razor’s edge of knowing I can’t control everything,” he says. “It’s not going to be a sterile lab environment, but if we can keep the same repeatable things every single day then we have a higher likelihood of that being reliable over time. Simple things – simple but not always easy – like monitoring. We’re going to monitor at the same time or at least in the same time block every day at certain times of the year, knowing that when we have to switch, then we’re not going to compare morning to afternoon data. Research would support it, anecdotal information that we have in-house would support that too. Working in the United States military, working in college athletics, I can’t remember one place where people didn’t like a schedule. So we’ve tried to leverage that so that what we do fits into their day. It’s not an extra thing that they have to do.”
Pick the item that gains you the most buy-in. “That was the thing when we came in,” says Stone. “We picked the one thing that we were already doing that we could improve, and once we had that dialed in the other pieces could fall into place. Some coaches have that model for skill acquisition; ‘I’m going to start with one cue and one thing a day. We’re going to get really good at that and build upon that foundation.’ It’s the same thing with our scientific approach. Yes, it may not be perfect, and someone from an academic environment would come in and say ‘there’s seven things that aren’t right’. I would suggest that if we can fix one thing that helps three of those take care of themselves and I know that one thing can get more buy-in. I may have a lower confidence level on the validity and reliability of that data upfront, but I can also circle back with some key stakeholders and say early on ‘this is going to be a little bit rough but it gets us into our routines to know that these other three or four things are going to happen down the line.’ That’s what gives me more confidence now because those other things have started to snowball in a positive way where we’re getting to control those simple but not necessarily easy things.”
Leaders Performance Advisor Dr. Lorena Torres Ronda calls on her own experience to provide some steps that all organizations can take to create inclusive performance environments.
Definitely yes – and it’s not just me saying it.
There is growing support from the scientific community as well as empirical evidence from a range of different fields that diverse work environments are more innovative, creative and rich in productivity.
As Chris Hirst points out in his book No Bullsh*t Leadership, ‘a 2015 McKinsey report on 366 public companies found that those in top quartile for ethnic and radical diversity in management were 35% more likely to have financial returns above their industry mean… Diverse teams outperform those that aren’t.’
It often feels easier said than done, as creating or fostering a work environment rich in diversity requires that we know the sociological foundations of inclusion to really be successful in attaining an effective high performance environment. Firstly, let’s define and clarify some basic concepts.
Diversity means that “everybody is invited to the party” – you hire diversly, regardless of gender, race, skin colour, social background, physical ability, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity and so forth. But being invited to the party doesn’t automatically mean you feel seen, heard and valued – all characteristics of feeling included – but the ultimate feeling of inclusion is the feeling that you belong. ‘Belonging’ means that you are in an environment where you can be your authentic self and everybody accepts you as you are. In order to foster an environment of belonging, you need to treat people (and be treated) with equity, with fairness, where everybody is given what is necessary to achieve similar or the same results.
Treating people equally (equality) means treating everybody the same, and while it might sound counterintuitive, treating people as individuals – which often means treating them differently – and providing an environment of security and support, where there is a sense of acceptance, inclusion, and identity of the members in a certain group, is fair.
A final point on this topic, as I wrote elsewhere, if you were intentional in your efforts to hire, say, female or African American staff but it turns out that those individuals attended the same schools, learned from the same professors and mentors, went to the ‘same book clubs’, or people who surround themselves with people with the same ideas or who will support them in their ideas (people enjoy being reinforced in their own ideas!), probably won’t bring functional, cognitive diversity to a group, but superficial diversity.
Diversity can come from the traits listed above, but also importantly from deep-level diversity: personality, values, abilities or beliefs. These characteristics might be accompanied by challenges and biases that must be taken into account and managed when conflict emerges.
What helps to create an inclusive environment? What is needed? What is the correct strategic approach?
We don’t want it to be a box-ticking exercise. There is increasing awareness that we live in a professionally more globalized world. Today the geographical location is not a barrier, you can find an Australian in America, a European in South America, an American in Asia, and all possible combinations. Finding women in high performance is already more difficult, especially in certain jobs or leadership positions. Unfortunately, the promotion of inclusion of races, gender, sexual orientations or religions in a community traditionally dominated by white males is not a norm yet. And sometimes the driver of diversity is reduced to a box-checking exercise. But if we work in an organization that is going to bet on diversity and innovation, what helps to create those inclusive environments?
An inclusive environment promotes the idea that everybody is heard and we all have a voice. We listen and we learn; and in those conversations there is a room for productive disagreement and free exchange of ideas. But in order to facilitate this, it is imperative to create a trusting and safe place, be open to different approaches, and understand that different people feel safe in different ways.
One exercise one can do, before thinking about tools to approach diversity and create an inclusive environment, is to do an exercise in establishing your awareness of your unconscious bias. What does this mean? Influences from our background, cultural environment and personal experiences we might have can lead to subtle, even unintended (unconscious) judgments. But they are there, they are the product of learned associations, social and cultural conditions. Therefore, practicing being self-aware of those possible biases, and being aware of how our words and actions might affect others, or even raising awareness of others biases, is a first step towards creating an inclusive environment. ‘Practice being an advocate to encourage open, candid, and respectful conversation to develop relationships built on trust. An inclusive leader is self-reflective and attendant to the feelings of others. They’ve also “done the work” – they’ve attuned all manner of different intelligences (gender, cultural, generational) that helps them understand difference’ (ADP, 2022).
Gardenswartz & Rowe, Diverse Teams at Work (2nd Edition, SHRM, 2003). Internal Dimensions and External Dimensions are adapted from Marilyn Loden and Judy Rosener, Workforce America! (Business One Irwin, 1991).
Steps that can be taken to increase the number of female coaches and practitioners
I want to bring to the table something that has happen to me, when applying to a job or even when I had to hire people while working at an NBA franchise. To cite Chris Hirst again, ‘diversity is an undoubtedly desirable outcome, but when considering any individual hire or promotion, you have a duty, even moral responsibility, to hire the best possible person for the role, irrespective of who they are’. I have used almost the same exact words with my supervisor when expressing doubts about three candidates for a specific position, an argument that can be perceived as a less diverse team. On the one hand, we want the best candidate possible, and on the other hand, how are we ever going to get jobs that have been traditionally held by white males if we are never going to be given or give the first chance?! How do we know if a woman can be head coach in the NBA, or the performance director in a LaLiga team, if no one is given a chance to any women?! Of course we don’t have the experience – it’s almost impossible to obtain the experience! And the few that are sometimes afforded that opportunity face the pressure to excel, which is fair in itself, but are we being treated and evaluated as fairly as our male peers? How can we increase the number of female coaches or practitioners? Just give them the chance! And then, create an environment of fairness, and protect that environment, leaders, management, and staff. And the elephant in the room: remove those who are in the way and are the biggest barrier to change. Eliminate nostalgia from your organization. Make decisions to promote a diverse and inclusive workplace. Period.
How can teams better understand the atmosphere within teams – what data or feedback can you collect? Focus groups? One-to-ones?
I read the following in a book, and I thought ‘well, I wish my former supervisor, an apparent leadership expert, had read this sooner’. It read: ‘what you need to achieve change is for every member of your audience (AKA staff) to spend ABSOLUTELY NO TIME AT ALL thinking about how others need to change and to think only of the change they themselves will make’. I have experienced myself the huge damage that can be inflicted when people are given the opportunity to anonymously rate your colleagues. Rather than that, work to promote safe environments for having difficult conversations if needed. This enables everyone to be clear on what everybody else needs to do better.
Behavioral change happens when the individual grasps the need for them to change, and understands the benefit of that change. It is true that change is a challenge for most people; getting out of our comfort zone, the feeling of losing power or even fear of what might come, the feeling of being threatened by others’ success (huge in our sector!) – all are barriers to overcome on the path to future team success. Rather than allowing themselves to be inspired by others, some people puts barriers to new forms of thinking and behaving. If you are brave at heart, embrace the change rather than fear it. If you are able to adapt to challenging personalities, such as some players and coaches, why not be open to promoting diversity for the greater good of your team or your organization?
Lorena is one of six Leaders Performance Advisors, a group of leading performance thinkers providing more subject expertise to our member-only content and learning resources. To find out more about all our Performance Advisors, click here.
