Michael Vick and corporate image vs. performance

The other day when Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick had his water bottle confiscated by Miami airport security because it smelled like marijuana, Falcons owner Arthur Blank and General Manager Rich McKay wasted no time coming down on Vick publicly:

We are an organization that prides itself on not having off-the-field issues," McKay said. "I think we have done a pretty good job of bringing the right people in here so we don't have to face these types of issues. We don't like it. We don't accept it. It is not what we want.

Normally I would say that comments like that were issued for good PR - because it's what's supposed to be said. But Blank is known for being the type of owner who cares more about HOW he wins than whether he wins. He wants to win as badly as anyone else, but unlike everyone else, wants the corporate image of the Atlanta Falcons to be of an organization filled with good people who care about the community. In the past he's turned down opportunities to acquire players like Terrell Owens that could help the team win because of their checkered pasts.

I hope Vick turns himself around and starts earning his salary - both on and off the field. This whole thing got me to thinking about the larger question of corporate image vs. performance. The business owners that I truly admire (and aspire to become) are the ones that do the right thing because it is the right thing. People like Mr. Blank want their organization and everyone in it to stand for what he stands for.

Could you discipline a key employee because they were ruining your corporate image? Even if it meant a significant drop in performance for your team?