Running Head: Leadership Analysis - Senna 1

Ayrton Senna’s pursuit of perfection in Leadership

Kris Felstead

Foundations of Leadership

November 24th, 2012

Leadership Analysis: Senna 2

Senna is a film documentary about Brazilian race car driver . The film begins with an overview of his journey from Brazil to Europe and his arrival into Formula 1 in

1984. As the film follows Senna it reveals both his personal and on track challenges and triumphs, culminating in his recognition as a global superstar.

It is common to hear race fans describe the drivers as heroes. The notion of what constitutes a hero from an outsider’s perspective can be quite different from the challenges a driver goes through to compete in the sport they love. Furthermore, if one examines the leadership criteria it takes to lead a team to a championship, it becomes clear the driver is doing much more than just piloting the car around a track. The relationship the driver has with his team is a delicate balancing act of focusing on the needs of the team, while balancing the need to attain specific objectives each race weekend. It was in this balancing act that Senna displayed his strongest and weakest moments of leadership and thorough this examination it becomes clear he is an authentic leader in every sense of the word.

Emergence of a Leader

The first footage you are presented with is Senna driving go-karts when he came from

Europe in 1978 to compete in the World Championship. The voice over of Senna describes his feeling of competing at that time as “pure driving, pure racing, there wasn’t any politics to be concerned with, or money to be won, but just real racing” (Senna, 1:14). His journey to Europe to race in go-karts was his stepping stone into Formula 1 in 1994. In his monologue he describes his voyage as a challenge which he will never give up, even though it meant leaving his family and friends in Brazil. Leadership Analysis: Senna 3

When a Formula 1 team selects a driver they are looking for the next champion, an individual that has demonstrates great task ability, individual assertiveness, and social acceptability (Borgatta, 1954, p756.) It’s in these traits we start to see the emergence of the Great

Man theory and the belief by Formula 1 teams that this combination of attributes will help the driver lead the team to victory. In Senna’s first year in Formula 1 he was driving for an extremely underfunded team by the name of -Hart racing. During this time it was recognized that the car he was driving was not competitive enough to secure a race win. From the start it was clear Senna was an incredible talent providing some great performances with his underachieving machinery. The turning point came during the midpoint of the season at the

Monaco Grand Prix. The race started under light rain and although Senna qualified 13th on the grid, the conditions provided a forum for his to display his driving talents. Each lap he carved away at the field and by lap 30 he was catching the leader by almost 4 seconds per lap. The leader at this time was Alan Prost, a senior driver in the series who was a Formula 1 champion and driving for the best team at the time McLaren. Senna was unable to complete his charge to victory as the race official for the FIA (Formula 1’s governing body) stopped the race due to heavy rain. This signified the emergence of a great talent and if provided with the right situation and support, Senna would emerge as a future champion (Stogdill, 1984, p66).

Facing Challenges

The race at Monaco wasn’t only a turning point in the recognition of a great capacity for racing but the first test of Senna’s leadership ability. Senna proposed the race was stopped because of the rate he was catching the champion Alan Prost. Since the race was held in France, the FIA housed in Paris, and the race leader of French decent, it was the first time Senna had challenged his notion of sport being pure. Leadership Analysis: Senna 4

In his next year in Formula 1 Senna moved to with factory support and more money at their disposal. Senna displayed an incredible work ethic and was the last person to leave the garage on many occasions to ensure they could meet their objectives for the race weekend. He is also one of the first drivers to work directly with the engineer to discuss the mechanics of the car and develop the best setup for race-day. His cognitive ability, problem solving skills, and his motivation for success were clearly separating Senna from just another driver and a motivating force for everyone around him (Zaccro, 2007, p12). It was during his time at Lotus that Senna displayed his high level of Emotional Intelligence not just through his driving but his dedication and pursuit of perfection on every task that would mean the difference between success and failure. This also enabled him to lead the team to performance levels they would have been unable to achieve without him (Boyatzis, 2000, p344). Senna continued to mature as an individual and as a leader but understood that his stay at Lotus was complete if he wanted to realize his dream of becoming a Formula1 Champion.

New Challenges in Leadership

The 1988 season saw Senna move to McLaren joining the two time world champion

Alain Prost. The tension between the two drivers remained stemming back to 1984 and the

Monaco race. Senna was pleased to be in identical machinery in the hopes he could prove to everyone that he had the ability to be Formula 1 champion.

It was evident that Senna had the pace and dedication to Join McLaren but in the end what you are looking for is an intellect (Senna, , 20:44). It’s the continual development of self that prompted McLaren to acquire Senna’s services and their belief he would fit seamlessly into the company culture. It was an interesting time at McLaren because Leadership Analysis: Senna 5

Prost felt he was the number one driver and team leader but Senna was determined to demonstrate he was the leader of the team. This tension between the two was growing as each race passed and Senna was finding it difficult to manage his frustration. Prost was known to be extremely political and calculated his words as carefully as he drove on the track. This outward presentation of calculation and self control earned him the nickname the professor. This approach to racing was a complete contradiction to the style of Senna on and off the track. Senna lead with his emotions and put maximum effort into everything. It was through this relationship with Prost that Senna became more adaptive to his environment and understood the importance of responding in a suitable manner off the track, just as he instinctively did on (Moser, 2001, p118).

At the Monaco Grand Prix in 1988 Senna was leading the race and so far in front of

Prost it was almost impossible for him to lose. The team urged Senna to slow down and conserve his car but his determination to totally dominate Prost lead to him crashing into the wall. This gave the win to Prost and served as a valuable lesson to Senna. He put the teams’ needs after his own agenda and threw away important points for himself and the team. In order to become world champion he needed the support of the team and had to share the responsibility of everyone pulling in the same direction to achieve the goal (Winkler, p40). This was Senna’s first understanding of what it meant to be a Transformational leader and the continued development of his Emotional Intelligence at McLaren. It was also the turning point in the season as his new outlook saw him win the next 6 out of 8 races placing him just ahead of Prost in the championship. The final race of the year saw Senna and Prost fighting for the honour of Formula

1 Champion in which Senna became the champion. This was a huge victory for Senna but his Leadership Analysis: Senna 6 jouney as a leader had just begun. Over the next three years the rivalry would expose the best and worst of Senna’s leadership.

Leaders and Adaptation

The 1989 season was another ballet between the two teammates Senna and Prost. In the second last race of the season Senna had to win in order to send the championship to the final and deciding race. He was running second to Prost and attempted a pass on the inside which saw

Prost close the gap and forced the two cars to collide and lock wheels. Prost got out of his car and walked back to the pits where Senna prompted the race marshals to push him and restart the car. Senna was able to continue but the route he had to take in order to get back on the track involved running down the safety road. Senna was able to secure the victory but after the race the president of the FIA Jean-Marie Balestre disqualified Senna for cutting the chicane to get back onto the track. Senna was infuriated and met with the president to have the verdict overturned but instead received a large fine and temporary suspension of his Super License to race in

Formula 1.

McLaren was now in a tough situation because Prost had won the championship but felt the need to support Senna because of the loyalty and support they received. Ron Dennis (the head of McLaren) held a meeting with the FIA and demonstrated with video that many drivers in other races had done exactly the same thing and had never been disqualified or suspended for their actions. This support was directly in line with the values, morals, and culture (Fairholm,

2009, p15) at McLaren and provided the motivation and inspiration for Senna to stay with

McLaren at this tough time in his career. Leadership Analysis: Senna 7

In 1990 Senna was again fighting Prost for the championship but this time Prost had moved to Ferrari feeling that he was no longer the leader at McLaren. In the second last race of the season Senna secured the pole position and Prost second, but Senna felt that pole position was on the wrong side of the track. He appealed to the FIA president Jean-Marie Balestre but because of their dislike for each other there was no way for Senna to resolve the issue. Visibly frustrated Senna started the race and lost traction which allowed Prost to edge just past him coming to the first corner. Senna would not relent and drove both himself and Prost off the track. This meant Senna was the world champion as Prost had to score ahead of Senna to keep the championship going. As Senna walked back to the pits you could see through his body language his actions were in conflict with his morals and belief system (Burns, 2012, p3). It was in this moment that Senna learned leaders must follow their belief system and values or they will end up in conflict with themselves and their constituents. Values leadership focuses first on improving the leader’s own sense of self, his or her spirituality as a precursor to elevating the human spirit of others (Fairholm, 2009, p17). Senna used this as motivational fuel for the 1991 season and arrived with a new outlook on leadership.

Leadership and Success.

During the 1991 season McLaren, Senna and the team’s engine supplier Honda worked closely together to challenge for another championship. This was a season where Senna displayed dynamic leadership and found the “pure driving” love he talked about when he entered the sport as a young man. His collaboration between the team, manufacturer and constituents provided the foundation to secure another championship. It was also a time where Senna allowed others to see his personal and caring attitude toward other people and his competitors. One example of his empathy came when French driver Eric Comas crashed heavily into a barrier with Leadership Analysis: Senna 8

Senna being the first driver on the scene. Not thinking about his own safety Senna helped remove the Frenchman from the car and administer first aid until the safety workers arrived. He also visited him in the hospital afterwards to show support for his fellow competitor. Senna demonstrated ethical values exceeding the expectation of the team and his fellow drivers (Burns,

2012, p248). Through these actions he garnered praise from his team and became quickly known as a leader people can relate to. He was known in Formula 1 as a people’s champion demonstrating values and performances that were truly inspiring.

In 1992 McLaren looked poised to win another championship with Senna at the helm but they were surprised by a Williams team who developed a car with active suspension as a driver’s aid. This was a demanding season for Senna but through his positive relationship with the team they continued to work on the car and secure a number of race victories. It was unfortunate that the changes came too late in the year for Senna to capture the championship but his motivation, drive and positive outlook kept the team focused and ready to compete in the following year.

Leadership Decisions

In the off season of 1992 it looked like McLaren would not be competitive enough to win a championship in 1993. In 1993 Sennas rival Prost was driving for Williams and had such a dislike for Senna he included a clause in his contract that they were unable to hire Senna as a driver. This meant Senna would remain at McLaren but drove on a race by race deal to see if the team could deliver a competitive enough car to win the championship. This was a significant change in leadership style for Senna as he moved from a Transformational leader to a

Transactional leader based solely on the teams’ ability to deliver a race winning car (Van Seters, Leadership Analysis: Senna 9

1990, p36). Senna would remain with the team for the entirety of this year but it was evident that the team culture and transformational environment had eroded by the year’s end.

In 1994 Senna was able to join Williams after Prost decided to retire. Senna was excited at the prospect of competing in a race winning car again but his hopes were quickly dashed under pre season testing. The aspects of the car that made it so competitive had been removed due to a rule change by the FIA and Williams struggled to make the car competitive. This is where

Senna’s “instinct let him down, probably given the known factors, given the parameters it was the right decision. You would go back and look at the conditions and come exactly to the same decision. It happened to be the wrong one but there was no way he could have known that”

(Senna, 2010, 1:54). Senna worked with the team using the same vigour and attention to detail that had served him well during his years in Formula 1 but was not able to replicate the transformational leadership he enjoyed so much at McLaren. Senna’s cynics believed his success in leadership came from the analysis of his extraordinary racing results. They were quick to point his time at Williams would end up a disaster because of an inferior car (Day, p10). Senna stayed true to his belief of leading by example and put the Williams on pole for the first two races of the season. He was unable to bring home a victory in either race because of a mistake in the first race and an accident in the second but it was clear his desire and dedication remained.

The third race of the season included two serious crashes in warm-up and qualifying.

This deeply upset Senna because the second crash caused the death of a fellow racing driver.

Senna spent the rest of the morning getting the drivers together to establish a drivers group advocating for driver safety. This was in keeping with Senna’s character, and the respect and loyalty he showed his fellow drivers was beyond reproach. His charismatic way about him commanded the room at the next drivers meeting as he demanded changes for driver safety. Leadership Analysis: Senna 10

Senna had always been an ethical leader (Avolio, 2009, p424) and even though he had a passion to win he continued to care about others around him. This was one of Senna’s most selfless acts and it proved to be his last act of leadership as he had a serious crash while leading the race and succumbed to his injuries.

During his career that spanned from 1984 to 1994 Senna displayed characteristics many leaders still aspire to today. He was extremely talented at his discipline, had a high level of emotional intelligence, and created an environment of trust and respect on every team he raced for. Senna wasn’t a perfect leader, but leadership isn’t about perfection but being human and working together toward a common goal. Day and Antonakis (2011) state that:

“leadership can be defined in terms of (a) an influencing process—and its resultant

outcomes—that occurs between a leader and followers and (b) how this influencing

process is explained by the leader’s dispositional characteris- tics and behaviors, follower

perceptions and attributions of the leader, and the context in which the influencing

process occurs.” (p5)

It remains a debate if Senna was the greatest Formula 1 driver of all time, but what is undebatable is his leadership during his time in Formula 1. Formula 1 fans call him a Hero; I call him an inspiration and role model, who demonstrated the pure essence of what it takes to be a leader. Leadership Analysis: Senna 11

References

Avolio, Bruce; Walumbwa, Fred; and Weber, Todd J., "Leadership: Current Theories, Research,

and Future Directions" (2009). Management Department Faculty Publications. Paper 37.

Borgatta, E. F., Couch, A. S., & Bales, R. F. (1954). Some findings relevant to the great man

theory of leadership. American Sociological Review, 19, 755–759.

Boyatzis, R. E., Goleman, D., and Rhee, K. (2000). Clustering competence in emotional

intelligence: Insights from the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI)s. In R. Bar-On and

J.D.A. Parker (eds.), Handbook of emotional intelligence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp.

343-362.

Burnes, B., & By, R. (2012). Leadership and change: The case for greater ethical clarity. Journal

of Business Ethics, 108(2), 239-252. doi:10.1007/s10551-011-1088-2

Day, D. V., & Antonakis, J. (1988). Executive leadership and organizational performance:

Suggestions for a new theory and methodology. Journal of Management, 14, 453–464.

Fairholm, M.R., & Fairholm, G.W. (2009). Understanding Leadership Perspectives: Theoretical

and Practical Approaches. Springer Science + Business Media, pp.5-26.

Johns H. E., & Moser, H. R. (2001). From trait to to transformation: The evolution of leadership

theories. Education, 110(1), 115 - 122.

R. T., Burnes, B., & Oswick, C. (2012). Change management: Leadership, values and ethics.

Journal of Change Management, 12(1), 1-5. doi:10.1080/14697017.2011.652371

Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature.

Journal of Psychology, 25, 35–71. Leadership Analysis: Senna 12

Tim Bevan (Producer), & Eric Fellner (Producer), & Tim Bev James Gay-Rees (Producer), &

Asif Kapadia (Director). (2010). Senna [Motion picture]. United States: Universal Studios

Van Seters, D. A., & Field, R. H.G. (1990). The evolution of leadership theory. Journal of

Organizational Change Management, 3(3), 29 - 45.

Winkler (2009). Contemporary Leadership Theories: Enhancing the Understanding of the

Complexity, Subjectivity and Dynamic of Leadership. Contributions to Management

Science, pp.31-46.

Zaccaro, S. J. (2007). Trait-based perspectives of leadership. American Psychologist, 62(1), 6-

16.