Red Sox Organization When you hear someone talking about the Boston Red Sox, you often think of the baseball team or the players, but we forget that they are an organization. Like any organization, the Red Sox has its own organizational behavior that influences the performance and commitment of its employees. Besides the team manager and the occasional interviews with the owners, most people don’t realize that the Red Sox organization consists of hundreds of managers and employees at all different levels. From the owners to the ball boys, the organization behavior is a product of the attitudes and behaviors of these individuals and groups. Understanding why these individuals act the way they do is essential to managing the Red Sox organization effectively. To better understand what makes the Red Sox so valuable to its fans we must look at it from a resource-based view (pg. 9). As an employee at Fenway Park, I can tell you that Fenway Park is one of, if not, the most valued inimitable resources the Red Sox owns (pg. 10). Another resource is its history of players, such as Jason Varitek, who spent his entire 15 years in the MLB with the Red Sox. There is also a socially complex resource the Red Sox have that attracts fans worldwide that has been given the name Red Sox Nation (pg.10). Red Sox management has always had a keen eye for choosing well performing and committed players, non-more committed than Curt Schilling. Famous for his bloody sock, Schilling had torn his tendons in his ankle and had an experimental procedure done, involving suturing the tendons. Schilling exceeded all expectations of required behavior and went on to pitch 6 innings in Game 2 of the 2004 World Series. This type of organizational commitment is not always the case, as the existence of counterproductive behavior seems to always be evident (25). Such as the case Manny Ramirez, who expressed personal aggression when he shoved a 64-year-old club executive, followed by withdrawal behavior when he refused to play in two games before being traded. In recent news the Red Sox organization has been experiencing high levels of dissatisfaction, as the team stands at 12 wins and 17 losses. New team manager, Bobby Valentine, is among the most unsatisfied. According to the value-percept theory, Valentine is not receiving the things that he values, which are wins (pg.55). From the players point of view there could be either an issue with supervision satisfaction or teammate (coworker) satisfaction, but these don’t seem to be the problem (pg.57). I feel that the team is very susceptible to emotional contagions, as in they make a error or strike out and they can’t brush it off (65). Their emotions get the best of them and in turn the other players catch their emotions. Like any other sport the Red Sox are under a great amount of stress to win, but when you play for a city with the nickname the “City of Champions”, the demand easily exceeds your capacity (pg, 77). I feel this is where management could help the most. If you recall the 2004 season and World Series, the team appered less stressed or atleast they viewed it as challenging stressor. Through social support (86), I think the team could find a way to cope with the stress so that the GAS doesn’t cause them to burnout.
They could also hire more coaches and introduce job sharing. Motivation also plays a key role in the Red Sox performance. I feel that since winning the World Series the Red Sox organization, as a whole, has lost its goal commitment (105). As in any organization, equity distress exist at all levels especially between the players, since Bill James and his statistical approach to the game (16). There is a lot to say about the uncertain ethical decisions made by the Red Sox organization. The lack of ethical sensitivity by the owners and executives led to the firing of Terry Francona. Over the 8 years as a manager Francona had won 744 games and lost 552. This makes him one of the greatest managers in the MLB. This mistake is becoming more evident as the current time is struggling just as much. The past is already done but the organization could still reform their procedural justice. Unlike the early 2000’s, when they hired 28-year-old Theo Epstein as general manager, the Red Sox organization has lost their openness to experience. The organization must adopt collectivism, so as to bridge the gap between top-level managers and the players and subordinates. They seem to be too accomplishment striving, as their goals are first priority even if it means members of the organization. When I think of the Red Sox organization, I think of 2 teams, the action team being the players, and the management team being those who work off the field. Both teams must have high goal interdependence, even though there is a low level of outcome interdependence. Players do get bonuses and other perks but most of the reward goes to the management. Both teams have taskwork processes they must accomplish. The team state is what they think of the experience they had with each other, which should be positive. As of now the Red Sox players are without a leader or captain. Former captain, Jason Varitek, was not your typical leader. He esteemed every player and merely established a referent power with a facilitative style. The Red Sox organizations have a bureaucratic functional structure comprised of the Principal owner John Henry followed by the chairman and CEO. With the chain of command always running from top to bottom. Organization Culture is a big part of the Red Sox, with countless artifacts. Obviously the symbol of the “B” is well known, Fenway park is a unmistakable physical structure. “Cowboy up” was a well-known phrase for Red Sox, and of course opening day ceremony. In conclusion what we find if an organization at odds with itself. We have found uncertainty, but we have also found potential. The organization had it well a few years ago but now with 3 key players and team manager gone, there is a lot of work to be done. No one said managing an organization was easy, but the if the Expectancy Theory is correct then the more effort, the better the performance, the more effective.