There are lots of stories today about Ferrari hiring a bunch of new engineers as it tries to turn around the dismal situation at the moment. Given that the new technical boss is James Allison one would suppose that more than a few of these will be coming from Lotus. Hiring engineers is not an easy task, but if one has worked with them in the past, it is not a matter of guesswork.
But in the finest tradition of the military, changing the men in the front line is not always the answer to the problem. The Ferrari “army” has a new General in Marco Mattiacci, although putting him into the battle is a bit of a risk as up to now his experience is entirely in ordnance and he may not be the right man for the job.
All too often these days, the F1 teams are failing not because of the individuals involved but rather because of the management style and structure. In the old days, when teams were just a few dozen people, everyone knew what everyone else did and whether they did it well. As organisations have grown so management has become more important and the key to success now includes the ability of the middle management as much as the overall leadership. Racing teams are odd entities. They require focus and drive of a kind you don’t see elsewhere. This is how things get done so quickly and efficiently. What is vital is that the command structure works: everyone needs to know who is their boss and feel the hunger. When a team is winning that hunger pervades everyone and everything. If there are cogs in the machine that don’t fit properly the design will be slow or will break down. So while we say that you cannot credit success to one man, particularly in this age when teams have hundreds of engineers, you can see that one man’s vision and drive can affect the results. It is not just about character, either, because management style is important as well: it’s no good having a leader who drops in from time to time, acting like a Winchester Pump shotgun. You need solid day-to-day management skills almost as much as you need wild-haired genius boffins. One can see this reflected in the way in which teams win or lose depending on the man in charge. You don’t have to be dysfunctional to be a successful team principal but it probably helps if you have no distractions in life.
joeblogsf1 
Yes, Ross must be smiling.
Yes I think Ross Brawn has not got the credit he desires for putting in place a lot of this years success.
I have always thought him to be the archetypical manager of people.
Strategical,very clever,dependable, unflappable ,reliable and a good people person in that he assesses a person for what best is their strengths and how to get it from them. At least that’s how he has come across to me.
Is this how he is in person Joe?
Sounds about right
“Everyone needs to feel the hunger” – is this the case in a team where rewards are guaranteed regardless of the race result? Perhaps this is part of the problem?
I think that is an excellent point, maybe Ferrari would do better if they were not up to their armpits in money and actually had to work for it.
I wonder how Flavio used to fit into this great piece on management!
He was in the factory at least 3 days a week
“… As much as you need wild-haired genius boffins.”
I’m sure Mr Newey would beg to differ!
On the contrary Newey has said he’s been successful because the management takes care of all the crap he doesn’t want to deal with and leaves him alone to organize the stuff he’s interested in.
Exactly. You have to have the right structures.
Was not Matt being ironic?
Newey may be a genius boffin, but by no stretch of the imagination can he be described as ‘wild-haired’!
Take a look at some old pictures of Adrian
Ah, I’m glad someone got it – next time I’ll include a smiley face! 🙂
And Joe continues to educate the proletariat on all matters F1; some quick Google Image searching shows that yes, Mr Newey certainly fit the boffin image. I once again stand corrected. 🙂
(also found this in the image search, someone might get a laugh – http://i50.tinypic.com/359jzx3.jpg)
I would be interested in a GP+ story on the key back room people of F1 and their plus and minus points. ( within the limits of what you can say in print).
Mercedes seem to have a “new” management style vs. the traditional one. Do you think this is part/much of their success? And do you think the structure results in the success or is it the particular people in the roles they are in?
The structure now was put in place by Ross Brawn. It remains to be seen if the team wins without him.
wouldn’t a fresh wind in the drivers department help as well? Alonso spends more time whining than helping so it seems and Raikonen seems to lack the fire.
Maybe Vettel is willing to do a Schumacher. When he went to Ferrari it was a step down as well but he worked hard to get them to the top again.
How many times have we all heard Luca and Fernando saying ‘We musta trya ‘arder backa da factory’ etc ?! I bet Stefano is glad he took the hit and left.
Alonso helps the team tremendously by dragging the car much further up the grid and the GP finishing order than it ought to be. And he does it at just about every GP. Can you imagine where Ferrari would be without him? And I say this as a fan of Kimi. I thought Kimi would take the fight to Alonso and, so far, I was wrong.
Exactly, even further down the grid. He is really flattering the car.
Schumacher had the advantage of being able to do thousands of kilometers of testing each year. Due to penny wise and pound foolish restrictions, that option is not open to Alonso, Kimi, and Vettel.
I love the analogy of Luca being a pump action shotgun.
What can you tell us about the way that the various teams are organised?
I’ve heard it said that Martin Whitmarsh brought a matrix-style structure with him from BAE (so staff have a technical management hierarchy but also can rely on formal project management) and that Ron Dennis is undoing this system in favour of something else. I’m not sure what he’s replacing it with, does anyone know/can say?
Similarly, I understand that Red Bull is more functionally organised, with a strong technical management heirarchy that assign staff to short-lived project teams with much less formal management. I’d love to hear confirmation of this, or ideally more details.
How is Ferrari organised these days?
I didn’t hear much about Mercedes changing their structure when they got rid of Ross Brawn and switched to a two-headed organisation but surely there is a different system in underneath Toto Wolff and Paddy Lowe…
Obviously there are costs and benefits to all management systems and success often relies more on the people that inhabit (and work around) the formal systems. F1 is an interesting crucible to burn away as much of the friction of management as possible, yet trying to maintain a coherent structure so as to multiply the productivity and focused creativity of many talented individuals.
Ideally without burning people out, too, which is a neat trick if accomplished.
You seem to have told us most of them.
Just two! What did Williams change over the last couple of years?
Its management and its technical staff!
Fair enough 🙂 That’s certainly what we can see but it seems likely they have significantly changed their management or organisational structure too, over the past few years (probably several times).
I’m guessing that Pat Symonds has employed some of the ideas he learned at Enstone (where we know he spent years punching above his budget)… but what were those lessons? I’d love to get at least some vague idea of what managerial structure has helped Team Willy recently.
I’m hoping that you, or your attractive and knowledgeable audience, might give me some clues.
I suppose Marco Mattiacci’s new appoint is/was a stretch assignment setup and endorsed by Luca with the aim of positioning the young manager for the top position at Ferrari post Luca… that would be a grand plan well executed if Marco proves to be up to the job.
This is the path Luca took to climb the ranks at Ferrari too I believe…
Hmmm. Interesting. There does seem to be a scramble for engineers at the moment. Is there an overall shortage in F1 presently?
Yr general thesis is very interesting. I’ve been thru’ the growith cycle syndrome a couple of times. Early management and ‘General management are two very different animals!
Demi Note: Every F1 team should read ‘ American Icon’ – Re: Alan Mulally , CEO of Ford Motor Co – and his turnround of the Co. His management techniques read directly over to F1 in my view. Hard Data lead. Absolute Project Transparency across all project engineers in all disciplines at all times; Absolute honesty. Result. It creates one single problem solving engine – not departments!
Alan is an engineer by training and was Boeing 777 Leader and then Commercial Aircraft Div CEO, where he first developed his unique systems style. Gd stuff!
My Tuppence worth! )
Keep going Joe – wonderful blog !
That’s a great book, and a great comment also. Instead we’ve management thinking their Carl Icahn or Kirk Kerkorian. Not so useful in the shop.
yep…you don’t need too much ‘spice’ in your life distracting you ….
I look on the new Ferrari man as being a stop gap due to SD falling on his sword.
I did, at the time, suspect that SD jumped to avoid being pushed and that he might return when they realise that LdM is the problem not SD.
YMMV.
SD did jump
I’d bet he is glad to be out of there. It has to be a pretty uncomfortable place to work right now.
Joe – from your observations in the paddock, it would be great to get your views on who you believe is a good leader in the current paddock. For example, Cyril seems to be well regarded (given his promotion to Renault despite Caterham being sold), but the general public know very little about him.
A good leader is successful
“A good leader is successful” , absolutely, and encourages the success of others. Good leaders encourage people to work with them, not for them.
Except when ousted so someone new can take over, just in time to claim they did the hard work.
“…it probably helps if you have no distractions in life.”
Who are you referring to?
All of them
Depends on the distraction, I suppose. Roses and trout extirpation seem to be OK — frantic Italian politicking or walking out with aging pop stars not as OK.
What can be said of dear Flavio? Didn’t he win several championships? Two with Benetton and two with Renault? Professionalism and ethics aside, it seems the drive to win combined with finding definitive talent (Schumi & Alonso) and combined with being clinically evil and ruthlessly relentless seemed to serve him well. I miss having nutters like Blue Glasses in the show.
He let others run the team and did not get involved to any great extent.
‘Blue glasses’ – That just made me laugh out loud in a quiet office ! 😀
Joe: If James Allison is head technical bod, is Pat Fry still there ?
Yes. He is engineering director
‘it’s no good having a leader who drops in from time to time, acting like a Winchester Pump shotgun. You need solid day-to-day management skills almost as much as you need wild-haired genius boffins. One can see this reflected in the way in which teams win or lose depending on the man in charge. You don’t have to be dysfunctional to be a successful team principal but it probably helps if you have no distractions in life.’
is this Ron Dennis by any chance?
Ross Brawn is surely a shoe in at Ferrari if this goes on much longer – Fernando drove the wheels off it at the weekend though – and so did Kimi in another way – frustration creeping in perhaps
We can call it the same with both Ferrari and McLaren really. There are lots and lots of changes to their respective teams and it will take them a good while to bring themselves back to the sharp end of the grid. It will be interesting to see who is really doing their job properly in those teams, cause they need to be the Mercedes and Williams of today.
I think it is somewhat ironic that their greatest recent success was with a German driver, French team principal and English tech director and car designer.