How Teams Can Better Innovate
If you haven’t read Ben Lindbergh’s piece on the baseball’s ever expiring secrets, I suggest you free up 15 minutes at work (or elsewhere) today.
Lindbergh’s closing point:
Maybe that’s the lesson to take from this whole sordid story. We’ve known for some time that Correa’s crimes were illegal, unethical, and punishable by many months in prison. What we might not have known makes the story sadder still: In baseball’s current climate, it’s not even clear how much hacking helps.
If you haven’t read Dave Cameron’s related post on the devaluation of ideas, I recommend you do so, because it hits on one of the greatest market inefficiencies in the game today: communication.
Wrote Cameron:
At this point, it seems the value is less in the quality or proprietary nature of a team’s ideas, and more in the vehicles that move those ideas around…. With ideas themselves no longer conveying huge advantages, it’s the ability to turn even somewhat obvious beliefs into actual action that can give an organization a legitimate, sustainable edge.
Ideas are quickly adopted today and I agree that communication is something of a market inefficiency. After all, an idea has no value without implementation. It was a salient point in my book Big Data Baseball. And it’s not always about effective top-down communication either, a front office sending an analytically based idea to be adopted by the coaching staff and players. Effective communication must also include a bottom-up channel. For instance, it was Texas Rangers manager Jeff Banister, the Pirates bench coach from 2013 to -15, who told me in reporting for the book that it was the coaches who initiated an important, data-backed tactic in 2013. It was the assistant coaches who asked data analysts to quantify a hunch they had: they wanted to know if certain pitch sequences in certain locations could make batters more uncomfortable, leading to a greater ground-ball rate.
