Ambiguous Turd
Mid-Card Championship Winner
I found this to be a couple very interesting snippets from an interview conducted with Dixie Carter outlining the stark contrast in management philosophies between Vince McMahon and Dixie Carter in managing their companies.
With that being said I would like everyone to take into consideration a couple of things:
1) Which management philosophy do you think you would personally enjoy working under more?
2) Which management philosophy do you feel is best for business and productivity? Positive reinforcement or Negative reinforcement?
3) Which management philosophy do you feel is the right philosophy, all things considered ... IF you had to pick one philosophy to manage a wrestling company?
I am going to answer my own questions in this case.
1) I think I would personally enjoy working under a more positive morale management style more. I have never worked well with District Managers who Micro-Manage and need to be constantly calling every other hour for things. I would rather have a management style based on trust because I feel I work better for those who put faith in me to do my job, as I am hard enough on myself without having someone else bossing me around.
2) What management style do I feel is best for business and productivity? This is a very tough question. My answer to this is that it really depends. It depends on what type of group of people that work for you. Are they people that more often than not are good people that can be trusted to do their own thing, and react well to positive morale boosting activities, such as being family friendly to the talent, providing positive coaching, giving bonuses when the company can afford to do so?
Or are they a company you have to keep on a short leash because of Big Egos developing and fear of their Egos taking over ... especially if they view their bosses as being a bunch of "family friendly, nice saps that will coddle to the wrestlers".
At the end of the day, I feel that managing positively is better for business and productivity, than managing negatively. Morale is a huge aspect of a successful business, and I feel that the higher one's morale, the more likely they are to perform.
3) All things considered, I agree more so with Dixie's philosophy as opposed to Vince's philosophy. I think Vince's philosophy is a very outdated, old-school philosophy that has talent so afraid backstage, that people may not be as outspoken as they should be, for things that may be good for business, or people may be placed in such a bad mood from negative reinforcement from management never providing enough positive reinforcement, that their morale is down in the tubes, and they simply don't perform at their best.
Dixie is trying to change the backstage atmosphere of the wrestling business to be more so like the real work world, and personally, I think that is the far more humane way to go. Treating one's families with respect and rewarding good behavior frequently is more likely to result in one going the extra mile, than threatening people and ruling by fear ... as Vince does.
In the case where a person is given an inch, and they take a mile, then those cases can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis and reprimanded accordingly.
But overall, I feel Dixie Carter and TNA have the correct approach to backstage management as opposed to Vince McMahon and WWE.
Your turn.
TNA President Dixie Carter was interviewed for the latest issue of the UK's Fighting Spirit Magazine. Carter spoke at length about Hulk Hogan's new role in TNA, where she sees the company going and more. Here's what she said about:
Dealing with Big Egos In TNA: "To me, it's not hard at all I feel if you treat somebody with respect, that's the only way you can win it back. If you work hard, that's the way to expect other people to work hard. I don't have tiered systems of how I treat different people, I treat everyone as the same. don't care if you're Kurt Angle or the newest guy on the roster, you're gonna be treated with the same level of respect, and I expect that back. To me, that's the easiest way to keep individual egos in check, because I'm not playing a game with different people or favouritism."
Her Leadership Style vs. Vince McMahon's: "I have a philosophy and it may not be right, but I feel that if people are happy personally, they'll work harder for you than if you motivate them through fear. I want to make TNA a place where they bring their families, where their wives are welcome, where their husbands are welcome, where their children are. It creates a different type of atmosphere backstage, but it creates a place where we are all in this for the same goal."
With that being said I would like everyone to take into consideration a couple of things:
1) Which management philosophy do you think you would personally enjoy working under more?
2) Which management philosophy do you feel is best for business and productivity? Positive reinforcement or Negative reinforcement?
3) Which management philosophy do you feel is the right philosophy, all things considered ... IF you had to pick one philosophy to manage a wrestling company?
I am going to answer my own questions in this case.
1) I think I would personally enjoy working under a more positive morale management style more. I have never worked well with District Managers who Micro-Manage and need to be constantly calling every other hour for things. I would rather have a management style based on trust because I feel I work better for those who put faith in me to do my job, as I am hard enough on myself without having someone else bossing me around.
2) What management style do I feel is best for business and productivity? This is a very tough question. My answer to this is that it really depends. It depends on what type of group of people that work for you. Are they people that more often than not are good people that can be trusted to do their own thing, and react well to positive morale boosting activities, such as being family friendly to the talent, providing positive coaching, giving bonuses when the company can afford to do so?
Or are they a company you have to keep on a short leash because of Big Egos developing and fear of their Egos taking over ... especially if they view their bosses as being a bunch of "family friendly, nice saps that will coddle to the wrestlers".
At the end of the day, I feel that managing positively is better for business and productivity, than managing negatively. Morale is a huge aspect of a successful business, and I feel that the higher one's morale, the more likely they are to perform.
3) All things considered, I agree more so with Dixie's philosophy as opposed to Vince's philosophy. I think Vince's philosophy is a very outdated, old-school philosophy that has talent so afraid backstage, that people may not be as outspoken as they should be, for things that may be good for business, or people may be placed in such a bad mood from negative reinforcement from management never providing enough positive reinforcement, that their morale is down in the tubes, and they simply don't perform at their best.
Dixie is trying to change the backstage atmosphere of the wrestling business to be more so like the real work world, and personally, I think that is the far more humane way to go. Treating one's families with respect and rewarding good behavior frequently is more likely to result in one going the extra mile, than threatening people and ruling by fear ... as Vince does.
In the case where a person is given an inch, and they take a mile, then those cases can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis and reprimanded accordingly.
But overall, I feel Dixie Carter and TNA have the correct approach to backstage management as opposed to Vince McMahon and WWE.
Your turn.