Is the culture of the England football team preventing them from winning the World Cup?

As a change specialist and football fan I am fascinated by the lack of success of the England football team in global tournaments. On the surface the team has every possible advantage, yet it consistently fails to deliver in the later stages of the World Cup.

Since 1982 I have watched every single England World Cup performance and it has generally felt uncomfortable. They normally look like a team of individuals who appear to lack a connection with each other or the team they represent. There have of course been some one-off performances but surely teams that included Hoddle, Robson, Barnes, Gerrard and Rooney should have done better?

With each World Cup exit there seems to be a new reason for the failure; bad luck, too many matches, foreign managers, foreign players, not enough coaches. While all may be factors, what if the reason for the lack of success is more about the culture that surrounds the English football setup than the relative skill or capability of the team receives?

Using Johnson & Scholes cultural web model as a guide I have explored some of the areas that in my experience make the difference in developing and delivering an effective team culture:

1) Team selection & structures - Are England picking the correct personalities to create the right balance within the team?

England have a history of picking individuals rather than a team. The 2016 England team who lost to Iceland (a country no professional football clubs) in the European finals was another example of a group of individuals that appeared to lack unity, belief. As the second Iceland goal went in it felt that the players were reading the headlines in tomorrow’s papers "Dumbs gone to Iceland".

I am unsure how England selected the final 23 players for the World Cup in Russia, but my hope is that it was based on more than a purely technical and positional evaluation. The need to consider the mix of personalities within in the squad is just as critical. England have a history of pinning their homes on a single leader, in the hope the rest of the team will follow. Unfortunately in recent years this hasn't ended well. After all you are only a collar bone or metatarsal injury away from countrywide panic and introspection.

To be successful in either business or sport you need to make sure the team has a blend of personalities and leadership styles, too many of one type and you are in trouble. Recent articles by Michael Carrick who described feeling ‘depressed’ when playing for England or Kieron Dyer describing the atmosphere as “poisonous” suggests they have in recent years failed to get the team dynamic right and as a result team moral suffers. I am not talking about everyone being friends, sport is littered with players who didn’t like each other. It is about selecting players with talent who can perform different roles both on the pitch but also in the team room. Get the wrong mix of individuals and you will not win. Recent England teams have either had too many strong personalities e.g. the 2010 team or too few e.g. the 2014 team.

Perhaps England could learn from the approach taken by the New Zealand Rugby team and their 'no d***heads policy' for team selection. The NZ approach ensures the integrity of the team is not impacted by inflated egos that can disrupt team performance. They weed out players that impact the culture of the team negatively. Perhaps with this approach Michael Carrick would have received better support?

2) Routines, rituals and team values - are these clear and are they defined and owned by everyone in the team?

Despite, being afforded the best equipment, the best hotels and facilities, you consistently have leaked stories from England players that the experience of World Cup tournament football was “boring”. It is one thing to feel bored (I’m sure there are large periods of resting and recovering between training sessions and matches), it is however, wrong to brief the media and leak stories suggesting a lack of togetherness and unity within the England camp.

Successful teams are defined by the formal and informal rules they create. These rules will detail how the team communicates with the outside world, how it trains, how it eats together. This is done in the belief that these 'rituals' or rules will shape a positive team culture. The Dublin Gaelic team are a positive example of how this can change the culture of a team. After years of underachievement they created a new set of rules in the hope it would change the direction of an under performing team. They (players rather than management) agreed a personal 'team charter' that defined how the players would work together (both on and off the field). Simply, they would win as a team and lose as a team. No star interviews, no private boot deals and training routines agreed by the group. Break the rules and you are out.

Successful teams create the boundaries necessary to allow groups to work together and respect for what each individual can bring to the team. Take this too far and it stifles creativity. When done well it is about respecting the individual and their role in the group and ensuring there is alignment with collective team goals.

The newly created blueprint for all English football teams “England DNA” is a positive step. It spells out the philosophy, culture and values of England players of all ages and for both men and women teams. The challenge is how much involvement did England players have in this blueprint?

3) Symbols, story telling and creating the correct working environment - Is the environment that surrounds England players conducive to success?

A recent interview with a former England stalwart Jamie Carragher stated "I played for England for 10 years and never felt part of the team. Winning the Premiership (with Liverpool) meant more to me, so I stopped playing". This highlights a fundamental challenge England face in building a sense of identity amongst a group of players who feel more of an affinity with their clubs.

I do not agree that Football is more tribal than other sports. The tribal nature of international rugby is overcome for each British Lions tour. Equally, the England team could also learn significant lessons from the way successive European Ryder Cup teams create the right environment to let talented players thrive in pressured situations. Each European Captain has followed a simple ‘cultural template’ that blends the abilities and skills of the players to ensure the infrastructure surrounding them works like clockwork. Paul McGinley (2014 European Ryder Cup Captain) indicated he simply built on the work of previous captains.

The reality is, a positive winning culture that appears to be created overnight is generally built on years’ of hard work. It is often the unseen work of the support staff to create the right environment that can make the difference. The new home to all England players at St George’s Park appears to be a positive step towards creating an environment that will foster fresh memories and shared experiences.

4) Learning & adaptability - How comfortable are England with their past failures and what have they done to reduce the probability of this happening again?

Every team in any sport will experience failure. The challenge is to ensure it isn’t repeated in the same way. Clive Woodward indicated a key element of the 2003 England's World Cup winning Rugby team was "a willingness to learn and accumulate knowledge" and understanding "what individuals needed to do to continually improve on what they already have". A culture of continuous learning and growth is therefore essential in any successful team.

A question that needs to be asked is how much have England really learned from previous tournament failures? Do England really understand why they have one of the worst penalty shootout record in International football? Why do they get through qualifying easily and then appear to lose shape and direction once the tournament starts? Instead of burning an effigy after the latest early exit England should look to the New Zealand All-Blacks team for inspiration. Following an another Rugby World Cup failure in 2007 they analysed what they did which created the pathway for the 2011 and 2015 World Cup victories. Their captain Richie McCaw argued it was "the best thing that ever happened to him and the team".

If you look at the most successful teams in international football they ensure their players are exposed to tournament football from an early age and develop a consistent style of play and approach. While future English stars are being pampered in elite Premiership academies young players from Spain, France, Germany, Argentina and Brazil encourage their best underage players to experience the pressures of tournament football prior to becoming full internationals. While there are other reasons, the fact that players are provided with these learning opportunities in extreme pressure situations is certainly worth exploring. The recent successes of the under 17 and 20 World Cup Winning England teams perhaps gives cause for optimism.

The recent full-time employment of Sports Psychologist for all England teams is also a step in the right direction and can only help create a more open and conducive environment that starts by working with the next generation of talent to help prepare them. Hopefully this person will learn from the flawed concept of bringing in the exceptional Dr Stephen Peters (who provided sports psychology to the successful British Cycling team) in the period immediately leading up to the 2014 World Cup to help the team specifically on penalty shootouts.

In conclusion

The reality is creating a successful team culture is incredibly difficult to achieve. In sport it is even more acute than in business as the margins are so fine and results are absolute. I do not envy Gareth Southgate's challenge as history and the media are against him. I do however wonder if England are finally taking the issue of culture seriously. The creation of the England’s cultural blueprint, St Georges Park and the recruitment of a permanent sports psychologist are all positive signs. In addition, the recent World Cup successes of the England under 18 and under 20 teams are also positive indications that something might be happening.

Will these changes lead to World Cup glory? History would suggest that the team is too inexperienced to win the tournament, so the sight of seeing Harry Kane lifting the trophy would appear unlikely. I personally would settle for seeing the team playing with a smile on their faces and simply having a go. If they do that, they might just have a chance?