The Day After the Firing: Why Teams Suddenly Look Like… Teams Again

Or: how a “boring” game, a quick fishing outing, and a leadership reset made me rethink what actually changes when leadership changes

I wasn’t watching the game this afternoon, which already tells you this wasn’t supposed to turn into anything meaningful. I was out fishing, trying to get away from my desk and from thinking about the presentation I need to work on for this week’s customer meeting, where the only real decision is whether to move a few feet down the bank or just stay put and pretend I was being patient on purpose.

My phone buzzed, and I saw a message from my business partner, who is a Baltimore Orioles fan and happened to be at Camden Yards with his wife. His text was short and to the point: “very boring game”.

Out of curiosity more than anything else, I pulled up the score and saw that the Boston Red Sox were up 5–2 in the sixth inning.

I read his message again, and thought about responding “Go Red Sox!”. Instead, I put the phone away, said nothing, and went back to fishing.

But this got me thinking. So much for relaxation and clearing my head.

Last night the Red Sox made some major changes - Manager Alex Cora has been fired, and many of his coaching staff have also been let go. All of a sudden, this afternoon, they played a clean, controlled game that, depending on where you were sitting, either looked boring or looked exactly like what good teams are supposed to do.

That contrast is what made me pause, because I have seen that same pattern play out too many times to ignore it.

A leadership change happens, and almost immediately the same group of people appears more composed, more decisive, and somehow closer to the version of themselves that everyone assumed was in there all along. In sports, they call it the “new manager bounce,” and in business we tend to wrap it in more polished language, but the underlying dynamic is exactly the same.

What makes it interesting is that nothing fundamental about the people involved has actually changed. The players did not suddenly become more talented overnight, just like a sales team does not magically become more capable because a new leader shows up on Monday morning. The skills and the experience were already there, and the expectations certainly were not lower. If anything, they were probably higher.

What changes is something much less visible and, frankly, much more uncomfortable to talk about, because it forces you to look at leadership not as a set of strategies or messages, but as an environment that either enables people to perform or quietly gets in their way. When that environment is not quite right, the impact rarely shows up as a dramatic failure. Instead, it manifests as friction — small, persistent, almost invisible resistance that affects how people think, how they communicate, and how quickly they act.

It shows up in the hesitation before someone speaks up in a meeting, not because they do not have anything valuable to say, but because they are unsure how it will be received. It shows up in the tendency to play it safe rather than take a calculated risk, because the downside feels more immediate than the upside. Over time, these moments accumulate, and while nothing appears broken on the surface, the overall pace and quality of execution start to shift in ways that are difficult to quantify but easy to feel.

When a leadership change happens, especially one that is visible and decisive, a significant portion of that friction is removed almost instantly.

The first thing that surfaces is not excitement, but relief, and while that may not sound like a particularly powerful emotion, it changes how people operate. The sense of relief reduces the mental overhead that comes from constantly navigating uncertainty, and in doing so, it allows people to focus more directly on the work itself.

At the same time, the change signals that the situation is real and that expectations are no longer theoretical. Priorities that may have felt flexible suddenly become concrete, and we find ourselves adjusting the level of effort accordingly. This is not necessarily about fear as much as it is about clarity. People understand that what they do next matters, and that understanding has a way of sharpening focus in a way that no presentation or motivational speech can replicate.

Layered on top of that is the simple but powerful effect of a “clean slate”.

A new leader creates an opportunity for people to redefine how they are viewed within the team.

Somebody who felt invisible may see a chance to show their real value, while someone who had grown complacent may feel the need to reengage at a higher level. Nobody ever talks about this, but you can see the change in behavior almost immediately.

The new leaders also often simplify things, at least in the early stages, and that simplicity can have a huge impact on a team’s performance.

Clear expectations, clear priorities, and more direct communication reduce the stress on the team and make it easier for people to execute.

This is one of those things that feels obvious, yet is very difficult to maintain over time, especially as organizations grow and become more complex.

I say that with some level of self-awareness, because I have made things more complicated than they needed to be, usually in the name of being thorough. I am not convinced it actually helped anyone perform better.

So when the so-called “bounce” occurs, whether it is the Boston Red Sox winning a game in Baltimore or a sales organization finding its rhythm after a leadership reset, it is very tempting to attribute the improvement entirely to the new leader. I think what we are observing is the result of multiple factors shifting at once — reduced friction, increased focus, renewed effort, and improved clarity.

The bad news is that these conditions are only temporary if they are not intentionally sustained. This is where culture comes in.

What is culture? According to Errol Doebler: “Culture is essentially made up of the things we do”.

As time passes, the sense of urgency begins to fade, and the team gradually settles into new patterns of behavior. Without deliberate effort, complexity can reemerge, bad habits can find their way back in.

I have seen this play out in sales organizations where an entire layer of leadership changes at once, creating an initial period of momentum that feels both real and promising. Early wins reinforce the belief that the reset was exactly what was needed, and for a time, that belief is supported by results. The real test, however, comes later, when the novelty of the change has worn off and the organization has to rely on the consistency of its leadership rather than the energy of the transition.

This is where the ideas in “Leaders Eat Last” by Simon Sinek start to resonate in a more practical way. The concept of creating an environment where people feel safe, supported, and trusted is not just philosophical; it directly influences whether the performance improvements that follow a leadership change can be sustained. When people do not have to spend energy protecting themselves or navigating unnecessary friction, they are able to invest that energy into supporting each other.

What do you think of this?

If a team demonstrates improved performance immediately after a leadership change, it is worth considering what was happening before that made that change feel like relief.

I do not have a clean answer to that, and I suspect most people who take leadership seriously would say the same. What I do know is that the most interesting part of this afternoon was not that the Red Sox won a game that someone in the stands considered boring. It was that, for at least one evening, they looked more like a team that was playing without hesitation, without unnecessary weight, and with a level of clarity that made the result feel secondary.

The real question, as always, is whether that feeling can be maintained once the change is no longer new and the organization has to rely on the steady work of leadership to create the conditions for consistent performance.

Appreciate you reading.

Dmitry Gorbatov

© 2025 Dmitry Gorbatov | #dmitrywashere