B-players projected perception of A-players

Throughout human history there has been a recurring theme of people with power exploiting those without. I could say “the strong exploiting the weak” however that does not really sum up the fact that equating strength with power is not a valid equivalency. It also in a strange way plays into the projected view of somehow the people without power essentially deserving the treatment from those with power.

In modern organizational dynamics, this same exercise of power manifests in subtler, highly defensive ways. The most dangerous people for any organisation being B-players with Power. Inherently, as we cover extensively, an A-player represents a direct threat to a B-player.

An A-player is a threat to B-players because:

• They highlight B-player energy being invested in activities that are actually detrimental to businesses and teams.
• They highlight the level of commitment and output that businesses should demand and expect from their people.
• They highlight improvements in ways of working and communication that a B-player will usually cling to, in order to protect themselves and provide space within which to operate i.e. padded time in which to protect their cell and pursue targets to protect their power.
• They can impact the B-player cell which brings power and protection to B-players.

B-players will often use ad-hominem attacks on A-players as we will cover. This can be traced back to the B-player playbook. In understanding how to perform and learn to become an A-player it is essential to understand the following about being an A-player. Crucially, these are all aspects that a B-player will actively look to frame as negatives rather than positives, making absolute transparency regarding your actions and underlying motivations essential.

Treating people fairly is not a sign of weakness. Trust is earnt through transparent behaviour, open communication and understanding that you must also play by the rules as well as judging others by them. This does not mean that you will not have to make difficult decisions. Reducing teams to improve efficiency, ensure team alignment and improve communication is something that an A-player will inevitably have to do (especially when taking over from a B-player). Reducing headcount to deliver on budget may also be necessary in the event that budget has had to be cut. However, what differentiates the A-player from the B-player is that it will not be selfishly motivated.

Expecting the best of people, rather than the worst, is central to a positive attitude. B-players generally view the world strictly through their own lived experience. When a leader starts from a position of distrust, that distrust is inevitably reflected back at them. Their defensive preparations and organizational politicking are activities that both distract from meeting business objectives and actively fragment teams. An A-player, by contrast, expects the best of people as a default setting. This engenders a positive mental attitude, eliminates wasted time spent preparing for worst-case interpersonal outcomes, and fosters deep trust across teams and organizations.

A-players lead from the front. An A-player will communicate with their teams. They will be involved in ensuring success and more importantly will be there to provide support in real time if required. An A-player will not necessarily be a manager but through their position of expertise will generally mean that other people gravitate towards them for advice, help and support. B-players will often spin this as “too hands on”, “just a doer rather than a leader”, “a flight risk”, “over qualified”. All of these comments fit a general theme but should be analysed to understand the motivation. They may be valid concerns however it is unlikely that a B-player will be able to substantiate the statements.

Growing individuals in your team is a key element of being an A-player. By mentoring and coaching your team you are making other A-players. You are fostering all the good behaviours and qualities that will benefit organisations and the specific individuals as well. It is also a very good way to ensure that your teams are starting from a position of “what good looks like?” and not “we always used to do it this way before”. B-players will rarely invest in their teams apart from within their cell. Even then it is convenient to ensure that their cell is dependent so any form of coaching that would represent a threat to the B-player lead will not be contemplated.

The cell of a B-player are not usually inherently bad people, they usually are under performers who realised that if they tolerate their B-player leader they also benefit. This is the sort of learnt behaviour that is extremely difficult to unlearn. Their success is, as they know tied to that of the B-player leader, if their leader fails they have invested all the time and energy that is then redundant. As a result it is quite common to see teams of people exited from organisations where either an A-player has taken over an area or sometimes a new B-player has replaced a previous one.

We explore other qualities of A-players however it is essential to understand that A-players are not weak, will have to make difficult decisions and that the biggest source of criticism will generally come from those that have the most to lose from A-player behaviours.