Growing up, I loved following football. There is no sport as artistically satisfying, as elegantly sublime. That said, I rarely watched a full match – finding them boring – but followed avidly the dealings of clubs and the story lines within which they fell.

The transfers, the politics, the drama, the promise of new signings. I loved FIFA Ultimate Team, a game in which one crafts a squad using finite fictional resources.

I never understood it in such terms, but what I adored was the politics: the drama, the transfers, the promise of new signings, and the sweeping character arcs of varying players. Redemption, glory, and falls from grace.

My interest in football has waned in recent years, but today I came across a piece of media I found fascinating: a Gary Neville interview of United’s co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe, on Sky Sports’ The Overlap on YouTube.

Manchester United’s decline, and rot, has been on my periphery for years, but I have never applied significant thought. This interview was fascinating, and I’d urge anyone to watch it.

For some very brief context, the Glazers family bought United in 2005. They have been deeply unpopular in the years since, siphoning money out of the club and racking up enormous amounts of debt. Following Sir Alex Ferguson’s departure in 2013, the club has accelerated on a downward spiral.

Bloated costs, infrastructural decrepitude, cultural decay, a revolving door of managers and a leadership vacuum have propelled them further downwards. In the summer of last year, Manchester-born billionaire Jim Ratcliffe, founder of chemical giant INEOS, bought a 28.94% stake in United.

Prior to Sunday’s draw against Arsenal, thousands of Manchester United fans protested against the Glazers’ and Ratcliffe’s ownership. Yesterday, Neville’s interview of Ratcliffe was published.

I found it to be a captivating exhibition of leadership, and sometimes, its lack of it. The following is a thematic analysis of the interview, drawing out some pertinent themes, with the hope of illuminating what we can learn from Sir Ratcliffe’s leadership style.

…

The Centrality of Sincerity

As the interview begins, Ratcliffe’s uncomfortableness is painfully visible. When taking the club over last year, I imagine he envisioned a challenge, but I do not expect he foresaw the vitriol he would attract. He is a man shaken and bewildered.

In the opening exchanges, at the peak of his discomfort, Ratcliffe resorts to a series of pithy, insincere cliches. He makes references to “school reports” and his prior experience of negative feedback being a clip around the ear from his mother.

Being the titan of industry he is, such remarks are so transparently contrived and rehearsed. He then leaps to the line “I’m a fan as well, you have to remember”, which at this point feels like a cheap wall to hide behind.

His unsophisticated, parroted analyses of the current footballing sensation – “Ruben only has half a squad”; “the Premier League is a difficult league to play in” – fall flat and sound insincere. He asks for Neville’s tacit agreement when he makes points, speaking without confidence (“you could really see that, couldn’t you”?).

Most egregiously, he falls back to the tired and cliched line that change is difficult, that “change is always uncomfortable, and that’s why they’re angry”. No, Jim. They’re angry at the direction of the change, and they have every right to be.

Throughout though, you can see such arguments are squeezed out by his squirming discomfort. Because, in fact, he is deeply sincere.

Credit to Gary Neville, through the interview he enables Ratcliffe to open up and feel relaxed. Understanding that his challenges are sincere and born from a place of good, the owner is enabled to express his love for the club.

Towards the end, in a moment of exasperated expression, Sir Jim says:

“I think I have to accept that I’m going to be unpopular […] but I think it’s worth being unpopular to fight through the changes necessary to get Manchester United back to where they need to be”

You can feel, in his body language, his facial expressions and his intonation, that he really means it. Whereas he had perhaps imagined himself as the Mancunian knight in shining armour, greeted by adoring fans, he has now accepted that the task may be greater than before.

In reflecting on the negativity, he states rather bluntly “I don’t need that at my age, but never does he falter or seem like giving up. This line is followed up by a beautifully almost confessional admission, in saying “I really like Man United, they’re my boyhood club”.

Lessons in Leadership:

• Do not defer to sentimental, cliched language. Not only do people see straight through it, but they also deserve better.
• Sincerity is endearing; if open and honest, people are far more inclined to be empathetic.
• Be confident in your belief and positioning. People can smell uncertainty a mile off and rightly pounce upon it. Know what you believe and be ready to defend it.
• You cannot afford to be flustered. People look for an example, and when you miscalculate, you must revise your strategy and then again provide assurance in competence.

…

Framing of Actuality, Vision, and Action

Within leadership, one of the greatest things an owner or CEO can do is communicate vision. To do so, they need to first outline their perspective of the situation; second, communicate where they’re going; and third, outline how they are going to get there. Despite faltering at points, Ratcliffe does this with considerable success throughout.

In the 11^th minute of the interview, he starts to express his honest horror at the finances he has inherited. This summer, even if United do not buy any new players, they will be paying £89 million for players’ transfer fees that they have bought in years prior.

In the last four years alone, he later points out, United have lost £350 million despite being one of the three largest clubs in the world by revenue. He effectively drives home the financial untenability of such a position, due to compounding interest, maturing loans, and increasing debt. Twice he repeats verbatim that United generate their revenue from three primary streams: TV rights, ticketing, and merchandising.

He links these pieces in a logical and easily comprehensible manner, such as “We do have inflation, so we need to raise wages each year, so we will need to raise ticket prices”. He underlines that “it needs to be set in context again”, when Neville makes emotive points, then returns to outlining the vision.

Clearly, he articulates that “within five or six years” he intends to have United back at the top of the Premier League, with a secure financial underpinning and a continued path to sustainable profitability. Ratcliffe pitches the current positioning as being a necessary stage on the way to greatness, saying:

“The vision for the future of Man United is fantastic, but we’re in the trough at the moment”

In what I think is a very intelligent play, he aligns these more abstract concerns to the physical construction of the new stadium. This stadium, just announced, looks absolutely incredible. It gives fans something to be excited about and has – you guessed it – a five to six year timeline placed upon its completion.

This material instantiation of rebuilding is more tangible for fans, and will likely help in creating greater patience for his vision.

Whilst Sir Ratcliffe is strong in communicating the wider context around Manchester United, he becomes unstuck in failing to communicate his positioning within the club’s context.

In Neville’s criticising of United’s pillaging of a £40,000 fund for the Former Players Association, Ratcliffe gets drawn in then backs out, again demonstrating uncertainty and lacking decisiveness. Asking why it wasn’t handled with more decorum, or creativity, Ratcliffe begins to defend himself, when a fascinating exchange unfolds:

Ratcliffe: “Well nobody suggested that”

Neville: “Well that is what worries me”

Ratcliffe: “I’m not involved at that level of detail”

Later, at the interview’s close, Neville intelligently returns to this exchange, saying:

“You said something, it was a small piece, I wasn’t aware of the decision – the detail of the £40,000 – I wouldn’t expect you to be involved at that level of decisions. But you’ve got to have people underneath you that understand, the magnitude of the level of decisions that are being made, because it reflects upon you, they’re gonna come for you”.

Neville is absolutely correct. As I see it, one of Ratcliffe’s failings in this interview is his failure to clearly outline what his responsibilities are, the level at which he makes decisions, and the lines and logic of his delegation.

The issue lies in two places: Ratcliffe not immediately drawing a clear line that the decision made did not align with his vision; then Ratcliffe not accounting for how a decision contradictory to the vision was made.

In other places in the interview, Ratcliffe does outline a clear corporate philosophy. “Then you’ve got to get the house in order, in terms of financial structure, and then it’s all about recruitment” illustrates such, whilst his enthusiasm for the “really good, cohesive board meeting” last week demonstrates further his belief in a directorial cohesion.

…

Lessons in Leadership:

• Clearly articulate your assessment, your vision, and how you’ll move from one to the other
• Contextualise an issue, and educate all stakeholders in an open and non-patronising manner
• Try to avoid talking on issues that fall beyond your remit of expertise – it projects incompetence and indecisiveness
• Take responsibility for your delegated actions going wrong, but account for why they did.

A Servant Leader, But Diplomatically Unconvincing

One quality I admired in Ratcliffe throughout, was his loyalty to those around him. In defending Ruben Amorim, the blighted young manager who has had poor results on the pitch thus far, he is unequivocal in his backing. He is clear in communicating that the clubs issues run far deeper than just the manager on the pitch, and defends his manager to the hilt.

I liked also his propensity to credit those around him. In defending his belief that United will be much better off in a few years time, he names a number of his C-suite colleagues – “it’s Omar, it’s Jason, it’s Colette, it’s the other guys you don’t really see”. He demonstrates admirable, and essential, faith in those around him, and underlines further the centrality of constructing a strong group of leaders whom he can trust.

What I found less impressive though, was the uncomfortableness with which Ratcliffe dealt with Neville’s critiques of United’s bogeymen: The Glazers. Of course, Sir Jim finds himself in a tricky bind here.

He knows that responsibility for many of United’s woes, financial and sporting, rest at the feet of the Glazers. But he knows too that they are his co-owners, and retain a greater share of the club than himself.

Neville goes hard in on them. And frankly, the numbers are extraordinary. They’ve taken nearly £200 million out in dividends, and have flooded the club with £730 million of debt for which United are having to pay £35 million in interest every year.

A scintillating, power shifting exchange ensues:

              Ratcliffe: “We have a very professional relationship with the Glazer family”

Neville: “You’re providing a shield for them though, you’re starting to get the flack that they’re getting”

Ratcliffe: “I’m taking a lot of flack”  – [the owner, here is visibly uncomfortable, almost squirming] – “yeah it’s true” [he admits in defeat]

How, I cannot help but ask, has Ratcliffe not got an indelible articulation which squares the shortcomings of the Glazers with the opportunities still available, so far into his tenure? So disappointingly, Ratcliffe instead returns to the line he opened with – “human beings don’t like change, they like the status quo”, before Neville turns up the dials and doubles the heat.

Finally, Ratcliffe conjures a glimmer of confidence, and counters by saying that the Glazers have, to their credit, “given [previous] managers a lot of rope”.

Neville emotively responds, saying “Well that’s negligence, that’s negligence. You know that better than anybody”, to which Ratcliffe smiles, and says “Well I’m not looking backwards, I’m trying to look forwards”. They both laugh, and Ratcliffe reestablishes some credibility in his leadership.

Lessons in Leadership:

• Praise those around you when things go well, and take responsibility for failings when they inevitably present themselves
• Again, know your lines of argument that support your vision and belief
• Be loyal to those around you, and give them your unwavering support, especially in public

…

I, for one, avidly support such transparency and openness. In today’s day and age, leaders should be prepared to articulate their vision and plans, especially within institutions where people hold a vested non-financial interest.

I commend Sir Jim Ratcliffe for sitting down with Gary for this interview, and I salute Mr Neville for his incisive, respectable, and honest questioning.

Over the coming months and years, I will keep a side eye on how Man United develop as an institution. I wish Sir Ratcliffe all the best, and I hope he finds joy and fulfilment in this venture.

I’d say that I also wish United the best, but as a Manchester City fan I can’t say that sincerely.

And as established here, sincerity is a currency with which we cannot play loose and fast.