An understanding of the environment and its impact on people is more important than charisma and passion. Plus clarity of thinking. “Humans flourish in environments where the leadership is consistent and composed; they don’t tend to thrive in environments where there are wild mood swings and inconsistency of behaviour.” Owen Eastwood’s interpretation of ‘Whakapapa’ is explained through rich story-telling, quotations and tales from other books, people and their experiences. He cites the work of Dan Ashworth (now at Newcastle) in this area at the Football Association where the football body set out to create a core culture and values across all their teams, from U19s to senior teams, men and women. On a visit to another Olympic sport, Eastwood recalls how he saw two very different coaching styles within one space – one that was more respectful, a dialogue and the athlete’s reflections constantly sought; the other that was aggressive and directive, with language such as “that’s not good enough” – a phrase I heard so regularly during 10 years of Olympic training that it sends shivers down my spine.

If you want to get the best out of people in the Ryder Cup team or football team or Royal Ballet School or whatever, you have to connect them to something bigger than themselves and connect them to people around them.”What we don’t do is try and build some so-called performance environment and then clean it up afterwards.”

The author interweaves his own story and heritage into the book, and introduces us to the important idea of ‘whakapapa’. Eastwood defines this as, “When the sun is shining on us, we must be guardians of our tribe and of each other. This is how I have come to understand whakapapa.” Sustaining success is very difficult from a hormonal point-of-view. Our dopamine system is anticipatory. We receive bursts in the pursuit of a goal rather than on the attainment of it. These bursts increase when the outcome is uncertain as opposed to guaranteed. This explains why we can feel so flat immediately after a major event or performance.

One of the wisest books about winning you'll ever read... Powerful lessons beautifully expressed' - James Kerr

The sun rose in the east and shone on our first ancestor. Here is our origin story. Just as happens with each passing day, the sun slowly moves down this unbreakable chain of people. Each of us will have our time in the sun. But the sun is always moving. Moving towards the west, where it will finally settle. When the sun shines on us we are alive, we are strong. For we have had passed down to us a culture that immerses us in deep belonging. We feel safe and respected. We share beliefs and a sense of identity with those around us and this anchors us. We share a purpose with them. We share a vision of the future. We fit in here. Rituals and traditions tie us together. The experiences and wisdom of those who walked in the light before our time are passed on to us. But there is another world. Where the hormone soup recipe is wrong and doesn’t allow us to be at our best. Clearly here is no performance benefit in this. There are plenty of other leadership tips in this book that are of importance to groups, movements and organisations. One of these is the importance of visualisation, not just to plan for things going right, but also for coping when things go wrong. Eastwood also speaks with teams about what they can control, and what they can’t. This enables them to focus on what’s in their power to influence.This was recommended by a facilitator on my employer’s leadership scheme. Rather like that scheme, I’m ambivalent about this book. It is very male. The focus is on men and men’s activity: there is for instance no consideration of e.g. how the England women’s football team has become such a success, having sizeable disadvantages compared to the men’s. Only two activities predominantly associated with women are mentioned: ballet and gymnastics. Both of these are disparaged: the first fir limiting creativity in favour of conformity (through discussions primarily of men’s experience) and the second fir bullying. I’m not saying those things are not true: however I would dispute categorically the impression that these features are limited to female-associated activities, and I would also question whether men are the ones primarily or exclusively damaged. That his 6-year-old daughter did not enjoy her ballet classes is not reason to condemn a whole art form anymore that a friend’s son’s bad experience at junior county level sport means that sport has no value either. Just a smidgeon more self-awareness of the banal limitations of statements such as ‘women do more team-building with conversation’ would have been good too: why is this the case? Essential femininity? Careful socialisation? Is there anything men’s teams might care to learn from that?