Thought this was worth sharing. From a recent speaking event I did in Phoenix. Accelerent . . .Speed of Business.The Speed of Business

This really is a brilliant piece about Ayrton Senna and his mind control. While most drivers spend days in the gym, the mental muscle goes undeveloped - and it is the real difference maker.

Ayrton Senna - Inside the Mind of a Champion - The Sport In Mind - Sport Psychology

by James Barraclough

I was originally going to write a post just about the power of the placebo effect in sport after watching the film Senna. This led me to watch another documentary about him on YouTube titled "Ayrton Senna: the Right to Win" - full subtitled version at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShPc3nY5m5w

After watching this, I changed my mind. Senna was a near perfect model for the ;rinciples of sport psychology. So that will be the focus of this blog instead. He epitomises everything that a champion should be - driven (pardon the pun), determined, dedicated and 'mentally tough' with attention to the most trifling details that others overlooked.

The very first few lines of the programme set the scene beautifully. His great rival Alain Prost talks about his insatiable hunger for success. Then Ron Dennis talks aobut the faith or trust that he had in himself (and in God) to get himself round the track faster than anyone else.

Murray Walker: "he actually believed that he had a God-given right to win."

Damon Hill tells us a bit more:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECeOQWtIer8

His trust in divine intervention helped him to go faster than he normally could have. Although he was already a great driver the placebo effect of being guided by a higher power enhanced his performance beyond what it would have without religion. This effect is well documented in medicine. If you are told that taking a pill will make you better, it often does regardless of whether it actually has any medicinal effect or not. Placebo groups are often given harmless substances such as sugar pills, and if they are told that they will have an effect, then they often do. This has been the case in many (but not every) study into placebo's effects on mental illness. If this works for psychological disorders, then why would the same effect not occur in a positive psychological way with people in the performance setting? The placebo in this case was Senna's unshakable belief that he was fulfilling God's will. This led him to drive faster and corner more sharply (especially in the wet) than he might have without that belief. The margins between winning and losing in sport at the elite level (and no less in Formula 1) are minute - a tiny faction of 1%. His faith may have made all the difference, especially when allied to his meticulous preparation.

The introductory section of the film ends with a quote from Senna himself:

"You think you have a limit. As soon as you touch this limit something happens and suddenly you can go a bit further.

With your brain power, your determination, instinct and experience you can fly very high."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPR4Uc1z1q0

This shows us his powerful self-talk and confidence in his ability to extend beyond his own and other's previous limits.

In a sport with such little margin for error, intricate planning was vital. In an age where drivers prepared less off the track, Senna was obsessed with every tiny detail that could give him even the slightest edge over his rivals - and Prost in particular. He prepared himself better than any other driver ever had before, both physically and mentally. He was an innovator in using a sport psychologist (or physical/mental coach as Nuno Cobra calls himself) before anyone else in F1. He meditated to a very deep level, which I would think involved him using imagery too in some way as the mechanisms between the two techniques (and hypnosis) are very similar. He used techniques to control his breathing and relax when he was becoming over-aroused. He had an excellent understanding of how his body and his mind functioned together. These methods allowed him to concentrate at an alomst superhuman level and get into the zone almost at will during races.

Gerhard Berger: "once he was focused he didn't feel any pain or stress. Nothing.

He was Just in another world. He was a step ahead."

Damon Hill: "There's a state of mind that one is raised to where it becomes sort of transcendental.

He talked about a state of mind he got into whereby he was there, but not really driving the car."

Prost describes how, after a race at Monaco, Ayrton explains how he monitored his performance during the race itself: he 'went outside' of the care and looked how it was behaving on the track, realised where he was going wrong, came back 'inside' the car and drove the perfect lap. He managed to visualise from the 'third person' perspective (i.e. as if watching from outside) during the race and corrected his mistakes. This also had a negative effect on Prost. Senna effectively 'psyched him out' - "he was different". Its the realisation that whatever he did, Senna was doing something better. He was always to take risks to win where others may have played it safe.

Damon Hill recounts seeing Senna spectating at a karting event where Prost was driving. He recalls how Senna studied every detail of Prost's performance, looking for the slightest weakness he could exploit back in Formula 1. He then utilised this in qualifying, having beaten Prost to the pole, he looked relaxed and confident. Prost knew he was done for. Senna could now plot his path to the championship (using goal-setting skills, outcome, performance and process goals to set his course).

Frank Williams: "when Ayrton came along . . his approach was cerebral . . .he used his head at all times . . .with more dash and determination than you saw with Alain."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jco68lcWN-A

All of the above gives some insight in what it takes to reach the top level in any field. You must first have the necessary physical attributes necessary for your domain (e.g. height, body tupe - endomorph, ectomorph or mesomorph, muscle fibre types), but then the dedication or obsession to sacrifice other parts of your life in order to be the best. As Ayrton Senna was the first to show F1, sport psychology (and a belief in a high power) is also a very powerful tool indeed. To discount it and other areas of academic research as being irrelevant or unrealistic is narrow-minded to say the least. It is the skill of a good practitioner to translate the black and white from journals/papers into real-life, applicable interventions that any athlete can use in sport and everyday life. Also, the impact of luck should not be totally disregarded. Ex cricketer Ed Smith has written a book on the subject, counting luck as being almost as important as genetic and environmental factors in winning. Ayrton Senna's luck was in when it rained at critical points during grands prix. Unfortunately, his luck was ultimately out at Imola, San Marino on that fateful day: 1st May 1994.

Mental Preparation Makes the Difference  Spotlight falls on teenager Shiffrin, slalom

Race to Win - Second Edition EXCERPT

EXCERPT FROM COMMUNICATION CHAPTER

Temperaments and Personalities

Most people in a motor racing paddock have no idea about the following information. However, after reading the original Race to Win, I had Indy 500 drivers call me to say the temperaments chapter revolutionized how they communicate within their families and the business associates.

From the beginning of time it is common knowledge people are different in every possible way. They are different in their background, their upbringing, and their physical appearance. In this chapter I will focus on the four basic temperaments that shape who you are as a person and how you interact with the others. This chapter has the potential to revolutionize how you communicate with others through your unique style. It is your individual style of seeing, and, more importantly, communicating with the world around you, and having a basic understanding of the temperaments that can have a profound impact when dealing with your team, your family, and your business.

There are four primary temperaments, and, like blood types, they never change. Each come with their own set of strengths and weaknesses and characteristics you will be able to discern, and therefore assist you in navigating your way through conversations and conflicts with a better understanding of all points of view, and therefore a greater opportunity for a quicker resolution.

As a side note, a majority of corporations, large and small, give personality tests to applicants during the hiring process to make sure the individual fits the position being sought. It is an invaluable resource for studying behaviors and why people respond the way they do. It is also interesting to note that until I understood the four different types, I assumed everybody viewed life, or should, from my view. Can you begin to see the potential for conflict? One more thing, it is very common to be a blend of another temperament. In other words, you will have a primary and a secondary blend of temperaments, but your primary will always be dominant. As you read and understand this information you will begin to categorize your friends, teammates, and team leaders, and you will have a deeper understanding of how and why they communicate the way they do. You will also learn how to better walk through their door of communication and be a stronger group because of it.

The Four Basic Temperaments

 The original Greek names are Choleric, Sanguine, Phlegmatic, and Melancholy. Please remember a temperament is not right or wrong, just different. Everyone has a dominant temperament and it will be blended with a secondary.

Choleric: “The Doer”

This temperament is task- and result-oriented. These people possess strong leadership skills and are very driven. Making friends is not their priority, getting the job done is. They would appear be somewhat aggressive, assertive, almost abrasive. They usually end up in a management role because of their ability to get all the tasks done.

Sanguine: “The Talker”

This temperament is fun, extroverted, outgoing and colorful party people. They usually have a lot of friends. Life is all about adventure, excitement, and being active, engaged, and stimulated. They laugh and talk a lot, and are fun people to be around. You can usually find these outgoing people in public relations, sales and marketing.

Phlegmatic: “The Watcher”

This temperament is the most likable of all four types. They are easy-going, non-offensive, and loyal types, and are usually good followers and good listeners. They would be somewhat people-centered, romantics, family-oriented types who like togetherness. If they were an animal they would be a golden retriever. Sometimes appear indifferent and apathetic. But never mistake their style for weakness.

Melancholy : “The Thinker”

This is the deep-thinker temperament, who is very black-and-white, extremely analytical, and can often appear to be moody. They can be visionaries, perfectionists, people who love charts, graphs, and facts. These would be race team engineers, statisticians, math gurus, doctors, and accountants.

To give you an idea of the words that might describe the four temperaments, consider the table below:

Choloric	Sanguine	Phlegmatic	Melancholy
Bottom line	Thrill	Honest feelings	Imagine
Duty	Imagine	Sympathy	Cautious
Law-abiding	Games	Sharing	Inner experience
Dependable	Stir the blood	Brotherly love	Foresight
Obedient	Fast machines	Heart	Intuition
Structured	Light-hearted	Harmony	Mystery
Status	Performer	Hug	Caring
Power	Jokes	Friendly	New and better ways
			Reasonable
Control	Good time	Concern from the bottom of one’s heart	Creative
Track record	Danger		Science-fiction

Now let’s look at what behaviors they each might exhibit.

When you consider the above temperaments, the majority of the population has at least two different temperaments operating at any given time. But it would be rare, if ever, to have your opposite as a blend. For example, you could have an analytical (Melancholy) race engineer who has a driven (Choleric) or easy-going (Phlegmatic) blend, but would be very rare to have a life of the party (Sanguine) as a secondary.

Consider this: What if you were working with your race engineer (Melancholy) and he was very data driven laptop engineer. His communication style therefore requires you to sit down for an hour after each session and accurately discuss in minute detail every aspect of the chassis, engine, gearbox, and race track. He would probably also want you to pore over data graphs in fine detail in an effort to provide him with as much information as possible. It is his job then to take all that information and have it make sense and use it to help the car go faster. If you are a driver who does not like to get bogged down with the details, and if you walk in and simply tell him it oversteers and you’re off to play golf, the chances are you will not have connected with him, nor will you have satisfied his requirements. This would be an ineffective way to communicate with your engineer.

On the other hand, if your race engineer is what I call a trench engineer, and all he needs to know is the very basics of the problem with the car, and you want to sit down for an hour with him and explain every aspect in minute detail, and ask him to spend hours studying data graph, again you will not have connected with him nor satisfied his requirements.

If you had the skills to be able to read what type of person you are dealing with, don’t you think that might give you a head start to having effective communications with the people you matter on your teams? Absolutely it would.

The real key to effective communications is three-fold:  how to project your own personality and wishes in a supportive way, how to recognize the personalities of the people you are dealing with, and  how to communicate most effectively with them.

Derek Daly

Leadership at the Indianapolis 500

Leadership at the Indy 500 for the teams who get themselves on the victory podium is specific and definite. There is a common thread to the behavior of leaders in the complex sport of auto racing. The 2011 Indy 500 showed that when good decisions are made the giants of the sport can be toppled. Some of the enclosed information is drawn from Performance at the Limit, a book written by a friend of mine, Richard West.

If we consider that successful auto racing teams achieve performance levels at the limits of their financial, technological and human potential, lets ask the question, how do they do that?

The motor sport industry encapsulates many of the challenges faced by today's manager across many different types of organizations and sectors. Challenges such as increasing knowledge creation and transfer, working in global and virtual teams, managing across boundaries, enhancing innovation and creativity, accelerating speed to market, effective execution of strategy, creating transformational change and, above all, through all of these challenges, creating sustained levels of performance that competitors are unable to match.

What does the behavior of motor sports leadership look like:

They make a decision, live with it, and if it is the wrong one learn from it as quickly as possible and move on. Change for the sake of change is not embraced. It has to be realistic change for the sake of performance. The key for maintaining success is to actually disbelieve in the sustainability of your own performance. To continually feel that you could have done it better, and to continually strive for the unattainable goal.

Success requires a 'portfolio of leaders'. In affect these teams succeed because there are individuals throughout the organization who are willing and capable to accept the responsibilities of leadership regardless of their formal authority.

All too often organizations lose sight of the external relativity of performance and focus too heavily on performance enhancements relative to their own internal benchmarks; in auto racing, performance benchmarking is always relative to the competition and a team's performance is only as good as the last race. These factors create a context where there is no let-up in the search for both short - and long-term performance gains.

There is the constant pressure of competition and for successful motor sports teams a key issue is that standing still, means going backwards. Auto racing teams combine many different resources such as human capital, technology, marketing and finance to achieve a performance outcome that hopefully is superior to those of its competitors. The best leaders in auto racing integrate by providing flexibility and clarity for those within the organization. Successful auto racing teams are almost diametrically opposed to the big-business model. Nothing will be achieved through oppressive bureaucracy and burdensome processes.

Auto racing leaders look for people who think laterally, who never accept that something is impossible and who are prepared to work hard. They would be individualistic in their thinking, but team players in their action.

Auto racing is a complex and dangerous sport and its business model requires specific leadership, skill sets and attitudes. Successful auto racing teams have internal organizational speed of operations by combining two key elements; 1/ having the right people in the right positions doing the right things, and 2/ by removing the speed bumps that slow them down.

The auto racing high performance model when overlaid over other industry models might just be the ideal model for organizations that believe that the speed of business will continue to get faster in the next decade.

Derek Daly
www.derekdaly.com

Source: Performance at the Limit, Richard West

Are you doing things right or doing the right things. This is an ever frustrating question when we sit at our desks and the day disappears with you saying to yourself, what did I do today that was productive. It's a bit like chasing two rabbits - you won't catch either. So, be careful what you chase and try to make sure that there is a market for what you are trying to sell.

High Performance is a function of A + B = S (success). A is what you are responsible for. A is you bringing your A game. That is your only responsibility.

B is the people or equipment around you. You will depend on them to bring their A game also. Success is but a bi-product of A + B in harmony together to create S (success).