PenguinBooks
Penguin Books RSS feeds
Select a link below:
biography
interview
more by Philip Augar
more
Philip Augar

Philip Augar

For over twenty years, Philip Augar has been one of the City's top brokers. After building NatWest's equities business into a leading position, he transformed Schroder Securities and most recently was a member of the team that negotiated the sale of Schroders' investment bank to Citigroup.

Are you one of the forgotten heroes of the modern workplace – combining being a star in you own field with working in a team? Philip Augar and Joy Palmer, respectively the former head of Schroders and consultant to blue-chip companies, found that high performing professionals – player managers – were taking on management responsibility with no let-up in their own production duties. By going out and talking to new and seasoned player managers in business, they show how real people, faced with what is often the greatest challenge to their working lives, can often raise their game. We asked the authors their advice on how to handle the pressures of player managing.

In your work you constantly refer to the role of the player manager, who and what are these player managers in the workplace?
A player manager is someone who combines specialist work with managing. Think of any profession or business today and the chances are that you will find player managers at the core. Group leaders in industry, client service heads in call centres, foremen across all trades, section heads in retail, sisters on the hospital ward, GP’s in a local practice, department heads in schools, are amongst the many men and women nowadays who have to manage while they work.

You say player managers are becoming increasingly common. Why is that?
Player managers have always existed alongside full time managers for two reasons, one cultural and the other economic.

The cultural factor manifests itself in a desire to be involved in management but also to carry on practicing as a professional. A combination of professional pride and suspicion of full time management can contribute to this. The second factor is the ever-present pressure for business efficiency and making profits. In the desire to avoid overhead many organizations get their senior players to do the managing.

In the last quarter of the twentieth century leaner management structures encouraged by the drive for shareholder value, a huge expansion in the professional services sector, and the growth of knowledge working in the information economy, were further factors in the player manager’s rise.

Very few people now foresee a return to the old days of steep hierarchies with lots of layers of full-time management with separate symbols of rank and office. Technical experts are increasingly being expected to incorporate managerial tasks into their daily work, as managing evolves rather than disappears. The player manager seems set to be at the core of 21st century work.

Why do you think playing and managing at the same time is so difficult?
It’s a bit like patting your head and rubbing your tummy. It’s counterintuitive to do both at the same time. Each activity requires separate concentration and focus. So, when you first try to pay attention to both at once suddenly everything can go wrong.

A lot of player managers discover that once they take on managing, as well as continuing to deliver results in their area of expertise, that their performance suffers and so do the people they have been asked to manage.

Why should a busy player manager read your book?
This is a hard one to answer because we didn’t get the scars of our player managing experience from reading books. We shied away from the traditional business book approach and style when writing the book. We chose instead to tell stories about player managers based on people and situations that we met in the field.

We tell the stories of eight main characters. Each story unfolds around a crisis they are facing as they come to terms with a player manager challenge. By telling these stories in combination with numerous anecdotes and cases, we hope our characters will resonate with readers of the book who may recognize and identify with the challenges described. In the end though we both feel that lessons learned from others experience can only take you so far. The person in the hot seat has to find a way to stay in it as there is no single recipe for success.

Is the book mainly aimed at people in big corporations or is it also relevant for small business owners too?
The book is aimed at player managers everywhere. One of the things we found out is that it doesn’t matter if you’re the head honcho of a large public institution, Managing Partner of a large professional practice or the owner of a corner store. The essential challenge of the role remains unchanged, which is to find a way of successfully juggling managing while you work.

We soon discovered there were several types of player manager and that when it came to their style it didn’t matter how big the job was or how large the organization was. People tend to have certain strengths and shortcomings and unless they stand back to think, they perpetuate these regardless of the specific situation or circumstances they find themselves in.

Whether you are in public service, big business, or small business, both getting feedback from others about how you are doing, and using some common sense levers to motivate others, are good ways to iron out the creases of your particular personal style.

You've both been player managers during your careers. What would you say were the most useful things you learned from that experience?
Two things really. First that trying to do everything on your own does not work. It might seem easier just to do it yourself rather than taking the time to explain a task to others, but in the long run this does not work. It leads to personal burn out and alienates the team. They do not feel involved and they get demotivated. They can even come to resent the leader and the organization.

Secondly, that 100% scores as a player manager are impossible. Even experienced player managers make mistakes and get things wrong. It’s an art not a science. As we say in the book, if you are juggling a lot of balls at once the trick is to keep enough in the air at once to keep the crowd happy and the juggler in a job.

Does playing and managing work better in football or in business?
It can work well or badly in either. We took the idea of player managers from English football, where Kenny Dalglish at Liverpool in the eighties and Gianluca Vialli at Chelsea in the nineties had spectacular success managing their teams while playing for them. For us they were good examples of how player managing could work. We were able to find equally successful player managers doing less glamorous work in business and the public and private sector professions.

One difference is that in sport player managing is often a transition for senior players at the end of their careers, whilst at work player managing can be a career in itself. In each case success as a player is no guarantee that success as a manager will follow, but there are definitely things that people and organizations can do to improve the chances of success. These things are common to work and to sport.

For over twenty years, Philip Augar was one of the City's top brokers. His book, The Death of Gentlemanly Capitalism, shows how the British gentlemen running the newly integrated businesses after Big Bang were almost uniquely unsuited to the task in hand, and ultimately left the Americans free to mop up in London. Here, he explains how the British banks came to sign their own death warrant.

What is gentlemanly capitalism?
It is a term that describes a style of doing business, particularly in London's financial district. It is partly a matter of style and partly a matter of substance. The style is that of the gifted amateur: languid, laid back, and intending to convey effortless achievement. The substance contains some positives and some negatives. The best positive feature was a code of honour summed up in the Stock Exchange's motto, My Word is my Bond. Chaps could rely on one and other to keep their word in a world built around trust, close personal relationships and mutual support. The most damaging negative feature as far as doing efficient business was concerned was a pretty relaxed work ethic: short hours, long weekends and plenty of good lunches!

And where does the 'death' come in?
The Death of Gentlemanly Capitalism is a mixture of cause and effect. In the last five years all of the City's leading investment banks have been sold to American or European firms. In 1995, Barings, Warburg, Smith New Court and Kleinwort were sold. In 1998, Barclays and NatWest sold their investment banks, this year Schroders and Flemings have followed suit. One after another the British investment banks have decided that they needed foreign owners to survive. There are no major British investment banks left, an amazing turn around from just ten years ago when UK owned firms dominated Europe. The practice of gentlemanly capitalism played a big part in this downfall. Ironically a consequence of the downfall was that the style had to change. In a sense, gentlemanly capitalism signed its own death warrant.

Presumably there were other contributing factors?
Yes, the City would have us believe that trends of globalism and scale were irresistible and there is some truth in that. But that does not explain why European banks that are no bigger than the leading British firms can still flourish. For that explanation you need to look into the last hurrah of the gentlemen capitalists, Big Bang in 1986. They made such a mess of things afterwards that British shareholders decided that they had had enough of investment bankers and wanted to sell out.

What sort of mess?
I am talking about huge losses and financial scandals. Big Bang made life in the City much more complicated and cruelly exposed its managerial weakness. Seat-of the-pants decision making, inadequate record keeping and a general belief that management was unimportant and should be done only after the day's business was done all proved to be outdated practices. But instead of recognising this and asking for help, the gentlemen running the banks and brokers said 'leave it to us' until by the time their bosses realised that things had gone wrong, the situation was irretrievable.

Is gentlemanly capitalism a uniquely British experience?
There is certainly a great contrast between the old school British way of running a business and the modern American style. A senior American investment banker summed it up beautifully: 'The British disease is that there's always an excuse not to do something'. One group of American investment bankers in New York used to call their London colleagues Monty Python's Flying Investment Bankers. The Americans worked harder, were more thorough, recognised that the business was complex and needed a proper infrastructure and above all saw management as an essential business tool not just an unnecessary overhead.

How did the British style arise?
The background of the senior people in the City in the 1980s and 1990s was very narrow. Most of them had been to the great English public schools and many had done National Service and not surprisingly they prized the values of hierarchy and conservatism that these institutions taught. They oozed the self-confidence that the armed services and boarding schools appear to encourage. This is not to say that all public school boys are arrogant or that all military people are inflexible, it's just that the tone of the City was set by a group of managers that had been through these institutions and carried their culture. This proved to be wrong for the era of radical change, hard work and complexity that emerged in the nineties.

Have the gentlemanly capitalists all gone now?
Either gone or learned to adapt. The work ethic is completely different, much tougher, reflecting the American influence. I started in the City in 1978 and the morning briefing meeting started at 9.15am, now it begins two hours earlier and the day finishes later than it used to. A business lunch these days is more likely to be accompanied by designer water than by port and cigars, and occurs less often. The City is much more professional in terms of record keeping, management structures and human resources development although I would say that there is more of a tendency to take decisions on the hoof in investment banking than in other sectors of the economy. Appearances have changed too. The old rigid dress code has been eased off and many firms now allow employees to dress down in casual clothing. But there aspects of the culture that are slow to change. Females and ethnic minorities are still under-represented in the City. Even now, public school boys and girls hold about a third of senior jobs. Traditional pastimes linger on: there is a lot of opera watched by City types! Architecturally too, the old City has survived the move to Canary Wharf, where the English country house look is still evident in the public areas of the investment banks.

Finally, has the change extended beyond the City? Do the banks reflect culture at large or is society affected by the banks?
Globalisation, or to be more precise, Americanisation, has affected most areas of business and much of society. The terms that describe the form to which the new City would aspire - flexible not conservative, networked not hierarchical, informal not formal, international rather than domestic, focused and professional not gifted and amateur- are evident in all walks of life. It is the spirit of the age.

Email Alerts

To keep up-to-date, input your email address, and we will contact you on publication

Please alert me via email when:

The author releases another book  

   

Send this page to a friend