Role of leadership in the Indian Premier League

We see that in the IPL, a Trinidadian sits in the same dressing room as a Sri Lankan, while wonder of wonders, Australians and New Zealanders discuss strategies together. Along with them is a Test star from Bengaluru, but also a young kid from Jharkhand and an inexperienced young man from Vijayawada who might be in awe of the bigger stars.

The job of the leader is therefore to ensure that there is free mingling of players to enhance knowledge and also to build team spirit. If the stars are aloof, or worse, disrespectful, it can create discord and dissent within a side. In various teams like in the IPL, or in many global leagues, the role of the leader becomes even more critical.

If there are people who have doubts about whether diversity is really good for the team or not, they need to look at the IPL where all players have benefited from this cross-pollination.

Top international cricketers get to showcase their talent in a tournament that is, sometimes, more competitive and high pressure than international cricket, while impressionable young Indian players get to play alongside and learn from the best in the world. It seems to be true as well that maximum learning is possible in diverse teams because not only do people come with different skills, they carry different approaches to doing things as well. Once exposed to them, players can decide whether that works for them but at least they would have realised that there is another way of doing things as well.

The IPL helped to get players from different backgrounds to share rooms. This prevented the formation of groups and helped players get exposure beyond their own city or region.

‎A climate of camaraderie reduces perceived risk in situations when teams are trying something new or innovative. All experiments come with risks attached and the feeling that we are all in it together only helps share the risk.

Hence the role of leadership comes into limelight. While consensus is always desirable, it's often not achievable. Those who disagree can sometimes wait for things to fail just to prove themselves right. The leader should listen to all the viewpoints and then take a call.

However conflict is natural in any group of people and teams would be lying if they claim that they never faced any. Players tend to spend a lot of time together and given the adrenaline on which they thrive, are bound to get into arguments.

Shane Warne says " it's all right if you are not best friends with your teammates as long as you respect them and what they bring to the team and don't carry your differences onto the field."

So a band of caring dissenters will be a more formidable team than an army of uncaring followers.