Distinguishing “Form” from “Class”

If you’ve been following top-level soccer, one of the biggest stories has been the recent run of poor form by Trent Alexander-Arnold, the 24-year-old right back who plays for Liverpool Football Club and England. 

Photo: Liverpool Football Club

It’s been a big deal because, since making his senior team debut at 18, Alexander-Arnold has been one of the best players in the world at his position. And he’s been especially high-profile because Liverpool is one of the world’s most prominent clubs, having won several major titles during the last few years. 

Yet, with the World Cup just weeks away, there’s speculation that Alexander-Arnold might not even make the England team.

During last Saturday’s game versus Arsenal, Alexander-Arnold was injured, and received treatment from the trainers. During the stoppage in play, the commentators had this pretty remarkable exchange:

Peter Drury: “You can't help but sympathize for him on a human level. [He’s] probably, at the moment, the most discussed English footballer. You know how that feels. And it can’t be easy for him.”

Lee Dixon: “Well, the thing is, he set such an incredible standard for himself at such a young age, and has played a huge amount of football. Every player is entitled to and has runs of bad form, as well as runs of good form. 

“I think the conflict between his ability and his weaknesses has been more and more exposed. You can see the talent he has, and therefore the people who think he is the best right back in the country. 

“But then you see his weaknesses, of which there are significant weaknesses in his game—physically and technically. His defensive ability isn’t as good as some of the best defensive right backs that are around, so it is inevitable.”  

[...]

Drury: “It does always seem a shame when, as a public, we spend so much of our time worrying about the shortcomings, as opposed to glorying in excellence. There is certainly plenty that is excellent about Liverpool’s number 66.”

Dixon: “Absolutely. And also he’s a victim of the team’s form as well. If the team is playing really creative, attacking football as we’ve seen in the last four or five years with great success, you see all the good side [of Arnold]. When you’re conceding goals and having to defend more and set your [defensive] line deeper, [he’s] more exposed.”

That exchange makes some really insightful points about talent and performance management. 

1. Performance naturally goes up and down, but we often judge based on snapshots rather than seeing the whole movie.

I’m reminded of this line from Kim Scott’s Radical Candor: “Most people shift between a steep growth trajectory and a gradual growth trajectory in different phases of their lives and careers, so it’s important not to put a permanent label on people.”

Given that variation, systems that assign people lasting labels like “high potential” or “low potential” are ripe for mistake. Anyone can be both, depending on when you look.

I suspect that we’re at greater risk of making talent management mistakes when our approach is more about how to judge performance and performers rather than on how to understand what’s driving the performance. 

Put another way, it’s not just looking at what went well and what didn't. Instead, it’s really asking, Where there’s success, what factors are enabling and supporting that success? And, Where there’s a shortfall, what’s getting in the way? 

2. The ability to show one’s strengths depends as much on the context as their individual skill. 

That’s the point Dixon makes at the end. Alexander-Arnold is one of the best when the work calls for those skills at which he’s better than everyone else. But when the work calls for the skills at which he’s merely average, then his performance looks different. 

So instead of asking the question, “Is this person good?” it’s probably more impactful to ask, “Where can we put this person so that their goodness will be expressed?”

And perhaps it also implies that we should make career decisions by asking ourselves, “What environments enable me to express my talent?”

3. It’s easy to focus on where someone is weak and lose sight of their strengths. 

When giving performance feedback to others, and even when hearing it for ourselves, we often key in on our weaknesses rather than the strengths. The interesting part is that we don’t apply this same rigor to much else. 

For example, we don’t care that our favorite salad place doesn’t also have ice cream. And we don’t focus on whether our favorite fried chicken joint has healthy options. In those cases, we just ask, “How great are they at filling the need we have right now?”

For this reason, when I wrote performance reviews for team members, I’d include a line at the end that said, “Remember, Tom Brady is slow. Adele doesn’t dance. And Steph Curry still isn’t that good at defense.” 

The point was that you can be a superstar by honing a truly unique way of contributing rather than worrying about all your weaknesses.