LeBron James, Emotional Issues, and Pausing before You Publish
I sympathize with Cleveland Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert. He had a really rough night last night. His star player, after much ballyhoo and anticipation, announced he would be leaving for the sunnier climes of Miami. And, it must have hurt that one of the reasons he gave is that the Miami Heat supposedly have the best chance of winning the championship next year.
Gilbert had every reason to be emotional. He felt betrayed. And, he vented those emotions in a much-publicized open letter to fans.
Yet, while I can understand Gilbert's frustration, I'm not sure I agree with his tactics.
The letter he wrote did not portray either him or his team in the best light. In addition to being rather badly written (Note to Dan: Putting quotation marks around a word or phrase denotes irony, not emphasis.), it was not professional, in my opinion. Yes, LeBron James has left Cleveland. Yes, this is not a good thing for the team, and can be seen as a betrayal. But, this is business, after all. LeBron is doing what he feels is best for his career, just as Gilbert makes choices that he feels are best for the bottom line of his team.
The lesson for attorneys and law firms from this? When you're writing about an emotional issue, take a step back before you make public your written thoughts on the subject. Maybe you've been closely involved in a case that's come to mean a lot to you personally, in addition to professionally. Maybe a client has wronged you and you feel like lashing out. Perhaps opposing counsel is getting on your nerves. You have every right to what you feel about these situations -- but that does not give you carte blanche to go public. It's not good for your personal public reputation, or that of your firm's.
My advice to Gilbert would have been to have someone with some emotional distance review his letter before he made it public. They would have likely suggested a better way of getting Gilbert's point across, one that would not detract from his overall message.
What do you think? Was Gilbert right to inject so much emotion into his letter? Maybe he did it to appease fans and tap into what they are feeling? Did it detract from his overall message, though?
Comments
I am an admitted non-sports person with not much vested interest in the outcome of LeBron's decision. But I clearly think Mr. Gilbert pressed the publish button too soon. Often, in the adrenaline rush we feel when we're in the midst of an emotional event, it's easy to forget that there's a "day after" the event. The letter, posted minutes after LeBron's on-air announcement, represented all the anger, disappointment, frustration that Mr. Gilbert and Clevelanders felt at losing their star. But you know what? Life goes on. And reading that letter today, the day after the event, it comes across as melodramatic, bitter and immature -- certainly not traits you want to see in a majority owner of an NBA team. I think those are lessons that apply to anyone in the public arena -- including lawyers. Mr. Gilbert should have slept on it, and then he would have published a more toned-down, professional version of the letter this morning.
The same thing can be said for the footage of fans burning LeBron's No. 23 jersey. Really? It's basketball, people. There are no major legal, ethical or political factors at play here. No one's life is at stake. So, those fans should feel a bit silly that spent last night melodramatically burning a jersey. When you're in the heat of the moment, pausing before you act will most likely help you make a better decision in the long run.
Very well-said. Emotion does have a place in business, however, it is important to take that step back and be sure that as the writer, interviewee, or speaker, you fully grasp the difference between appropriately conveying emotion in the most thoughtful way possible, and a knee-jerk reaction that in retrospect, you will wish you could take back.
It isn't that Gilbert shouldn't have shown emotion of some sort under the circumstances, but he channeled the wrong emotions. He blew a leadership opportunity. Instead of salve, he used vinegar. Instead of showing leadership, showing strength, and assuring Cleveland that they could move on to victory in the future, he issued a bitter rant. This letter should have hit the ashcan - visual: basketball hoop and crumpled up paper. Badmouthing LeBron doesn't cut it, he should have been gracious and focused on moving ahead positively in the future. He missed an important opportunity for a call to action to come watch the Cavs and to support them going forward. One man, even LeBron, doesn't make a franchise. Lesson learned, even for lawyers: don't take your eye off the prize by letting your losses sap your energy in a negative direction.
Dan Gilbert behaved unwisely and recklessly, and deserves most of the opprobrium. However, his behaviour needs to be placed in the context of the unusual business he operates. He owns a monopoly franchise that is subsidised by taxpayer money and protected from competition by the cartel like rules that the NBA operates under. He will, therefore, be criticised by the media for his PR gaffe, but as long as the NBA protects his franchise and forbids competition in his hometown, what does it matter? he will still get his share of the TV revenue, he will still have corporate sponsors, he will still get people in his hospitality suites, it's the only game in town. However, he is losing the cash generator he so luckily "won" in a lottery, no wonder he's screaming.
Imagine what your behaviour might be if you're the only PR professionals in town and every time someone wants to start a competing concern, they need to get your permission!
Sports franchise owners in the US (and Canada) are like little kings, yes, their behaviour maybe scrutinised, but normal PR rules do not always apply to these strange circumstances. I am surprised he did not throw even bigger tantrums given the accountability free world he operates in.
