The English have a reputation for producing soccer players that are not afraid to make hard challenges to win the ball. They refer to this as getting “stuck in.” But could it be that because England’s players all play in the same league, they are also more likely to get “stuck” as well.
University of Michigan professor Scott Page wrote an interesting book in 2007 called The Difference where he makes a provocative, argument about the benefits of diversity to institutions. The genesis of his book began as a young professor at CalTech:
One winter evening in 1995, to have a little fun I constructed a computer model of diverse problem solvers confronting a difficult problem. Put aside for now what counts for fun at Caltech; “fun” at Caltech rarely makes sense to the outside world. In my model, I represented diversity as differences in the ways problem solvers encoded the problem and searched for solutions. I referred to these ways of solving the problem as tools. In working through the implications of my model, I stumbled on a counterintuitive finding: diverse groups of problem solvers—groups of people with diverse tools—consistently outperformed groups of the best and the brightest. If I formed two groups, one random (and therefore diverse) and one consisting of the best individual performers, the first group almost always did better. In my model, diversity trumped ability.
In follow up experiments, Page found that a random group of problem solvers consistently outperformed high ability groups. Why? Here is Page in a New York Times interview describing the general findings in his book:
People from different backgrounds have varying ways of looking at problems, what I call “tools.” The sum of these tools is far more powerful in organizations with diversity than in ones where everyone has gone to the same schools, been trained in the same mold and thinks in almost identical ways.
The problems we face in the world are very complicated. Any one of us can get stuck. If we’re in an organization where everyone thinks in the same way, everyone will get stuck in the same place.
But if we have people with diverse tools, they’ll get stuck in different places. One person can do their best, and then someone else can come in and improve on it. There’s a lot of empirical data to show that diverse cities are more productive, diverse boards of directors make better decisions, the most innovative companies are diverse.
Does this finding apply to football/soccer teams? One proposition would be that teams with players for that play is different leagues around the world bring a diverse set of experiences, training habits, tactics, norms, etc. that would be beneficial in game preparation and in making split second decisions on the field. By extension, players who all ply their trade in the same league would all have the same general set of experiences and would see off-field and on-field problems the same way.
If Page’s logic applies to winning at soccer, then that does not bode well for England’s changes at the upcoming 2010 World Cup in South Africa. Here’s a look at the preliminary 30 man roster coach Fabio Capello named yesterday:
Goalkeepers: David James (Portsmouth), Robert Green (West Ham United), Joe Hart (Manchester City).
Defenders: Ashley Cole (Chelsea), John Terry (Chelsea), Rio Ferdinand (Manchester United), Glen Johnson (Liverpool), Ledley King (Tottenham Hotspur), Jamie Carragher (Liverpool), Matthew Upson (West Ham United), Michael Dawson (Tottenham Hotspur), Leighton Baines (Everton), Stephen Warnock (Aston Villa).
Midfielders: Steven Gerrard (Liverpool), Frank Lampard (Chelsea), Michael Carrick (Manchester United), James Milner (Aston Villa), Theo Walcott (Arsenal), Gareth Barry (Manchester City), Joe Cole (Chelsea), Tom Huddlestone (Tottenham Hotspur), Scott Parker (West Ham United), Aaron Lennon (Tottenham Hotspur), Adam Johnson (Manchester City), Shaun Wright-Phillips (Manchester City).
Forwards: Wayne Rooney (Manchester United), Peter Crouch (Tottenham Hotspur), Emile Heskey (Aston Villa), Darren Bent (Sunderland), Jermain Defoe (Tottenham Hotspur).
Every single one of these 30 players plies their trade in the Barclay’s English Premiere League. Of course this is almost universally accepted to be the best league in the world. And the 30 on this team (with the possible exception of the goalkeepers) are among the best players in the best league in the world. With Wayne Rooney, they have a player that is arguably the best player in the world, or at least one of the top three. As a result, pundits expect England to waltz through their qualification group and to possibly win the World Cup for the first time since 1966.
But Page’s key insight is that merit based groups don’t perform as well as diverse groups because merit based groups see problems in similar ways and are disposed to get “stuck” in the same place and in the same way. A team with less talented players but more diversity of experience (playing in different leagues) might make up for their lack of ability with an enhanced range of experiences that gives them a greater ability to get “unstuck” when the group encounters a problem.
it just so happens that England’s first game is against the USA, a team that fits this bill nicely. Let’s look at the USA’s 30 man roster:
GOALKEEPERS (3): Brad Guzan (Aston Villa), Tim Howard (Everton), Marcus Hahnemann (Wolverhampton)
DEFENDERS (9): Carlos Bocanegra (Rennes), Jonathan Bornstein (Chivas USA), Steve Cherundolo (Hannover), Jay DeMerit (Watford), Clarence Goodson (IK Start), Chad Marshall (Columbus Crew), Oguchi Onyewu (AC Milan), Heath Pearce (FC Dallas), Jonathan Spector (West Ham United)
MIDFIELDERS (12): DaMarcus Beasley (Rangers), Alejandro Bedoya (Örebro), Michael Bradley (Borussia Mönchengladbach), Ricardo Clark (Eintracht Frankfurt), Clint Dempsey (Fulham), Landon Donovan (Los Angeles Galaxy), Maurice Edu (Rangers), Benny Feilhaber (Aarhus), Stuart Holden (Bolton), Sacha Kljestan (Chivas USA), Robbie Rogers (Columbus Crew), José Torres (Pachuca)
FORWARDS (6): Jozy Altidore (Villarreal), Edson Buddle (Los Angeles Galaxy), Brian Ching (Houston Dynamo), Robbie Findley (Real Salt Lake), Herculez Gomez (Puebla), Eddie Johnson (Aris Thessaloniki)
The 30 players on this roster come from twelve different leagues: (England, USA, France, Spain, Germany, Sweden, Italy, Scotland, Denmark, Norway, Mexico, and Greece). While the USA has some influential players in global soccer, they are in large part not among the best players in the world. They are serviceable players for mid-level teams (Edu and Beasley excepted) in both high and mid level leagues. Nine of the 30 on the roster play in Major League Soccer – a good, but not great standard.
If Page is right, the USA should do better than England. But it can’t be right? If it was, then a random sample of 30 people from around the world would give England a game! And we all know that wouldn’t happen (although it would be funny to watch).
Page’s key point is that in problem solving, both diversity and ability matter.
Diversity and ability complement one another: the better the individual fruits, the better the fruit basket, and the better the other fruit, the better the apple. So while we might equally proudly affix “my other child’s different” bumper stickers to our vehicles (anyone with two kids can claim that to be true), ideally, our children would be individually able and collectively diverse.
If you could find a team that merged both ability and diversity then you would have a force of nature. Here’s Brasil’s preliminary 23 man roster:
Goalkeepers – Julio Cesar (Inter Milan), Doni (AS Roma), Gomes (Tottenham Hotspur)
Defenders – Maicon (Inter Milan), Daniel Alves (Barcelona), Michel Bastos (Olympique Lyon), Gilberto (Cruzeiro), Lucio (Inter Milan), Juan (AS Roma), Luisao (Benfica), Thiago Silva (AC Milan)
Midfielders – Gilberto Silva (Panathinaikos), Felipe Melo (Fiorentina), Ramires (Benfica), Elano (Galatasaray), Kaka (Real Madrid), Julio Baptista (Roma), Kleberson (Flamengo), Josue (VfL Wolfsburg).
Forwards – Robinho (Santos), Luis Fabiano (Sevilla), Nilmar (Villarreal), Grafite (VfL Wolfsburg).
Brazil’s 23 play in 9 different leagues: (Italy, England, Spain, France, Brazil, Portugal, Greece, Turkey, Germany). The difference between Brazil’s nine and the USA’s 12 is that Brazil’s 23 are superstars in 9 of the top league in the world whereby the USA’s 30 are good players in 12 different leagues (10 actually since Jozy Altidore was loaned from Spain to England and Oguchi Onyewu has been injured and actually hasn’t played for AC Milan, but I digress).
Brazil has the best of both worlds — ability and diversity of soccer experience. So they are my pick to win the world cup.
But take heart England fans, the all might be nonsense. England’s first division is much more international than it was just a generation earlier. In 2008, only 34% of the players were from England, about half the percentage of English players in the previous generation. Therefore, the 30 on England’s roster have been exposed to a wide assortment of players and playing styles. The Premiership is a prime destination for players from all over the world and many of the top talent on display at the World Cup will either be playing or hope to be auditioning for a chance to play in England.
England also has an increased diversity of coaches. Of the top seven teams in England’s top flight, five six were from other countries: a Scot (Freguson), a Northern Irishman (O’Neil), two Italians (Ancelotti, Mancini), a Spaniard (Benitez), and a Frenchman (Wenger). Further, most of the players on the English roster play in European tournaments gaining further exposure to a wide range of soccer experiences. And finally, England’s national team is managed by an Italian, Fabio Capello, one of the best soccer minds in the world. So they might have a better chance than ever because they have introduced more diversity into their league and into their national team.
But, if England does lay an egg in one month, the lack of diversity might be a good reason.
Comments 17
iamjennie14 — May 12, 2010
Without looking in-depth about the diversity thinking of England's squad, I believe that they don't have a chance at winning the World Cup, or go anywhere close to. One of their top players, John Terry, might be out for the World Cup due to an injury. Many of their other top players might be out due to injury too.
But if we assume that all their players were healthy, this diversity theory might work. If you take Real Madrid, who buys all the top players in the world, they don't perform as well as teams like Barcelona, who don't have star players but make it up elsewhere. There needs to be good team chemistry for a squad to perform well too. So even if there's a weak player here or there, they'll be counted for as long as the team works well with them. The United States plays well as a team. England have had a history of not performing up to par, even with good players.
I guess what I'm saying is that even if England has a healthy squad during the World Cup, they might not have the team chemistry found in other teams that may not have as many star names (but with more diversity).
Kenneth M. Kambara — May 13, 2010
Great post, José, that'f full of sociological implications. I think Page has some interesting insights, but I have a sense that his diversity hypothesis (including ability) interacts with others factors such iamjennie's discussion of chemistry. I think some might lump chemistry into the "garbage heap" variable of "fit", which is widely used as a nonsense phrase to pretty-up justifications for saying someone isn't a "team player." I would consider "chemistry" as a nuanced form of social capital, i.e., how well a team has strong working relationships with each other that can be assessed with qualitative of quantitative methodologies. Chemistry would also be affected by habitus and doxa.
I once reviewed an article on diversity in top management (I think the context was startups). It was an interesting paper, but the diversity hypothesis wasn't supported. My thinking is that diversity needs to be examined as a more complex and interactive phenomenon {with, say, cultural/knowledge and social capital}. So, perhaps diversity in certain contexts doesn't really tap into a heterogeneity of experiences.
Any thoughts on how well the Brasillian team "works" together?
jose — May 13, 2010
iamjennie and Ken.... I think you're right about chemistry. And the "Galacticos" example is a good one in refuting the "ability + diversity" thesis since Real Madrid has both. Staying in Spain, Athletico Bilbao does OK in La Liga with only Basque players and Chivas does very well in Mexico with only Mexican players. So diversity might mean little to nothing at all in the futbol world :-)
Tamar — May 13, 2010
I would imagine that five other national teams have most players coming from their own national leagues, which are "good" enough and rich enough to allow them to play in their home country: most Germans, Italians, Frenchmen and Dutch probably play in their own leagues.
By the way, had poor Beckham not been injured, you would have had at least one potential player who doesn't play at the Premier League.
Again - economy plays a major role. First of all, before Bosman, most players had no choice. Most players from Third World countries might drift to richer leagues; but in fact, the so-called "Brazilian" or "West African" style is one of the reasons that these players are so sought after. I am interested if there are any cases of Brazilians "germanised" or "italianised" by the leagues they now play at.
Charlie — May 13, 2010
I'm not sure I buy this. Take Real Madrid and Barcelona: despite the hundreds of millons Real spend, Barcelona are widely acknowledged as the best team in the world (regardless of how they did in the Champions League this year, which in any case was better than Madrid). The reason: Barcelona has a brilliant youth system through which bring up players with a common footballing ethos; Real Madrid by contrast, fail to live up to their potential because they buy in mismatched, incompatable players from around the world.
Also, what matters is surely not the number of leagues a national team's players hearald from, but the quality of league in which they play their football. England, with the best league of the world, have this advantage; Spain, whose players are shared around Europe's best leagues, do too; Brazil, whose players are internationally playing at the highest level, do too. This is the reason these three teams are favourites for the world cup: their players, the world's best, are so in demand that they are shared around the best clubs. It is ability that leads to diverstiy.
Mitchell — May 13, 2010
MLS is not a "good" standard. MLS is a total joke!!
It hurts my eyes watching that type of "soccer" if you can even call it that.
jose — May 13, 2010
Mitchell...I agree that it can be horrid at times, but there are teams taht play nice football. One team that plays a flowing, attacking style is Real Salt lake (I know, the name is absurd). They are playing tonight...give it a try if you can and let me know if your eyes still hurt :-)
Tristan — May 14, 2010
Interesting post though your point suffers a bit from the fact that the Italian team that won in 2006 featured only players that played in the Serie A
jose — May 14, 2010
Tristan...point taken :-) Maybe the cohesion that comes from playing in the same league outweighs the value of diversity.
Jason Davis — May 14, 2010
Great post, Jose. Interesting stuff here, even if Italy did come to mind as a the obvious counterargument.
And I had hoped there wouldn't be any of the tired "MLS SUCKS!" comments, but I guess that was too much to ask.
John B — May 16, 2010
Er... USA will still almost certainly lose - because most of their 'good' players are average for the Premier League, and the rest aren't very good at all.
You can just be thankful that you are so generously blessed with places that the US and Mexico are virtually guaranteed to qualify every year whilst far better teams (particularly from Europe) don't make it.
Of course, looking at the research the glaring flaw in the comparison with football is that it's to do with Problem Solving. This isn't chess, this is contact sport!
It's about trained motor skills, fitness and experience. In all three, it'd be hard to argue any of the US team (bar, perhaps, Howard) being superior to any on the English players.
And, even then, England will probably be beaten by the quarter-finals by a better team.
Peter V — May 17, 2010
Good point, however football is far from problem solving, fair enough diversity behind the scenes in coaching, tactical set ups and even dressing room harmony could be possitive. However it could be argueed that once the players cross that white line elements such as players tactical understanding and players choices made on the field could infact be hindered by diversity. Playes not being on the same wavelength and making passes that others in the team do not predict etc.
The effect of diversity is nominal here. Other small factors such as the climate, fan support, playing surface, even the media far outweigh 'diversity'
The point in this artical may be relevent in business but not in sport espescially short term tornaments like the Word Cup. The artical seems to be written to give the Yanks som glimmer of hope, which lets face it will fade rapidly on June 12th.
Oh and C'mon England.
Dan — May 17, 2010
Oh my good god, this is possibly the most rediculous argument I've read about football. The EPL is quite easily the most diverse league in the world, with (generally speaking) the best players, best managers and best coaching. These players play between 40-60 games a season and up to 15 of those are in Europe (either the Europa or the Champions League).
How the hell can England be accused of not being diverse if they play against most of the players in the Spanish, Brazillian, Portugese, French, German and Italian international teams every season for their clubs, and then again in friendlies and international tournaments?
And as for the MLS being a good standard, Championship level players leave to the MLS at 32 and get player of the season...
I'd stick to baseball and American football if I was you.
COR — May 17, 2010
Since when was Martin O'Neill English ? (or to re-phrase, since when was Scotland 'another country', but Northern Ireland wasn't?)
jose — May 17, 2010
Point noted COR...I got Villa and Everton mixed up :-(
Laura Norén — May 18, 2010
To what degree is learning to play well on a given team an exercise in developing an efficient homogeneity of behavior in response to predictable situations? In order to play well on a futbol team, it's helpful to have trained together. Does this attenuate the degree to which diversity is valuable? Is there a graph here somehow where the curves for diversity and homogeneity intersect at a sweet spot where the efficiency of groupthink and the problem solving strength of diversity can be maximized?