North American professional sports have trade deadlines. The media is vigilant. Athletes live through a difficult period of uncertainty as teams evaluate their needs against their short and long term plans. Management is under scrutiny and decisions need to be made.
Trade deadlines create anxiety for the athletes and their families, management and the owners. The public nature of the deadlines forces decisions, amplifies the noise and makes for great media and fan interest.
Players are traded for a variety of reasons. Players can be seen as: 1) veterans (with one more championship in them), 2) stars (the missing piece), 3) young and full of untapped potential (upside), 4) under-performing (in need of a change), 5) problematic (bad fit or contract), or 6) role players (who add character).
Management considers making trades if the team they lead is: 1) going for the championship (needing a player or two), 2) ready for a rebuild (turnaround!), 3) cost cutting (needing to shed contracts to lower costs and add flexibility), 4) trying to create some news in their market or 5) ready to try anything!
Sounds a bit like business doesn’t it? Companies compete, so they develop plans and objectives and have both external and internal measures for understanding whether or not they are winning. Organizations have structures and functions and they have varying people needs depending on their circumstances and those circumstances do change. While firms mitigate for risk, not everything can be anticipated and situations can change quickly and dramatically (see crude oil prices). As a result, requirements change and people leave firms.
In pro sports, the leaving stories are all very public as the media covers the developments closely and weeks of coverage provide entertainment for fans.
In the world of business, not-for-profits and government people also leave for a variety of reasons. Generally, with less public scrutiny. Reviewing a research sample of 275 clients: 56% left their organizations due to their roles being eliminated (see cost cutting); 15% left due to a fit issue (see going for it); 8% left due to a change in direction (see rebuilding); 6% negotiated their way out (I want a trade!); and 3% left because a new or different approach was needed (see “ready to try anything”).
So, when you are wondering if there is something wrong with someone who left an organization, do keep in mind that even the world’s best hockey player got traded…more than once!