Featured Post from University of Delaware

How Philadelphia Eagles' head coach achieves Super success with 'Ted Lasso' management style

Feb 3, 2025

2 min

Kyle Emich
CaptionResizeWrap TextRemove


Not long after Nick Sirianni was hired by the Philadelphia Eagles in 2021, fans started noticing similarities between the head coach and TV’s Ted Lasso. The University of Delaware's Kyle Emich can discuss how Sirianni's team approach compares to the more top-down structure favored by Kansas City Chiefs coach Andy Reid.


Like Lasso – a high school football coach on the Apple TV show of the same name who takes over an English soccer club with no prior experience – Sirianni is responsible for the culture, first and foremost. He relies on his coordinators, who call the plays. In essence, he is a more collaborative leader. By contrast, Reid is a top-down coach who currently calls the plays and always has, dating back to his time as coach of the Eagles. Philadelphia fans became more than a little weary of him saying "that's on me" at post-game press conferences following disappointing losses. With back-to-back Super Bowl titles under his belt with the Chiefs, it's difficult to argue with the success of Reid's style now.


This could be fodder for sports talk radio, but it's also something Emich, a professor of management, can discuss from an academic perspective. The professor says there's advantages and disadvantages to both:


• "The main advantages for the top-down approach are speed of decision-making and extreme novelty (you can do whatever pops into your head). The advantages of the coordinator approach are a larger information base to draw from and specialized knowledge."


• "The more team-based approach has a lot of potential, but is difficult to execute well because it requires coordination."


Emich, who has discussed management and sports teams several times in the past (including Super Bowl LII, when the Eagles defeated the New England Patriots), is available for interviews.

Connect with:
Kyle Emich

Kyle Emich

Associate Professor, Management

Prof. Emich's research explores the role of individual attributes in team dynamics and other collective environments.

Cognitive ProcessingLeadershipOrganizational BehaviorTeam DynamicsGroup Dynamics
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Delaware

3 min

Rethinking AI in the classroom: A literacy-first approach to generative technology

As schools nationwide navigate the rapid rise of generative artificial intelligence, educators are searching for guidance that goes beyond fear, hype or quick fixes. Rachel Karchmer-Klein, associate professor of literacy education at the University of Delaware, is helping lead that conversation. Her latest book, Putting AI to Work in Disciplinary Literacy: Shifting Mindsets and Guiding Classroom Instruction, offers research-based strategies for integrating AI into secondary classrooms without sacrificing critical thinking or deep learning. Here is how she is approaching the complex topic.  Q: Your new book focuses on AI in disciplinary literacy. What is the central message? Karchmer-Klein: Rather than positioning AI as a shortcut or replacement for student thinking, the book emphasizes a literacy-first approach that helps students critically evaluate, interrogate, and apply AI-generated information. This is important because schools and universities are grappling with rapid AI adoption, often without clear guidance grounded in learning theory, literacy research, or classroom practice. Q: What inspired this research? Karchmer-Klein: The book grew directly out of my work with preservice teachers, practicing educators, and school leaders who were asking practical but complex questions about AI: How do we use it responsibly? How do we prevent over-reliance? How do we teach students to question what AI produces? I also saw a gap between public conversations about AI which often focused on fear or efficiency and what teachers actually need: research-informed strategies that support deep learning. My long-standing research in digital literacies provided a natural foundation for addressing these questions. Q: What are some of the key findings from your work? Karchmer-Klein: AI is most effective when it is embedded within strong instructional design and disciplinary literacy practices, not treated as a stand-alone tool. The research and classroom examples illustrate that AI can support student learning when it is used to prompt reasoning, reveal misconceptions, provide feedback for revision, and encourage multiple perspectives. Another important development is the emphasis on teaching students to evaluate AI outputs critically by recognizing bias, inaccuracies, and limitations, rather than assuming correctness. Q: How could this work impact schools, teacher education programs and the broader public? Karchmer-Klein: For educators, this work provides concrete, evidence-based literacy strategies coupled with AI in ways that strengthen, not dilute, student thinking. For teacher education programs and school districts, it offers a research-based framework for professional development and policy conversations around AI use. More broadly, the work speaks to a public concern about how emerging technologies are shaping learning, helping to reframe AI as something that requires human judgment, ethical consideration, and strong literacy skills to use well. ABOUT RACHEL KARCHMER-KLEIN Rachel Karchmer-Klein is an associate professor in the School of Education at the University of Delaware where she teaches courses in literacy and educational technology at the undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral levels. She is a former elementary classroom teacher and reading specialist. Her research investigates relationships among literacy skills, digital tools, and teacher preparation, with particular emphasis on technology-infused instructional design. To speak with Karchmer-Klein further about AI in literacy education, critical evaluation of AI-generated content and teacher preparation in the era of generative AI, reach out to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

2 min

How AI can improve poor leadership writing and boost productivity

Poor written communication from leaders can create the kind of confusion it intended to avoid. University of Delaware career expert Jill Gugino Panté suggests using AI to sharpen emails, clarify expectations and reduce unnecessary calls. Getting through to employees with strong messaging can boost productivity by saving time and reducing unwanted meetings, she says. Panté, director of UD's Lerner Career Services Center, says that good leadership writing should be direct and outcome-driven, with no fluff, and offered the following advice for improvement. ✅ Don’t bury the lead. Start with what decision needs to be made, what action is required, and the deadline. If your writing doesn’t reduce ambiguity, it’s going to add to it. Vague communication can create interpretation gaps which, in turn, can create more meetings. When ownership isn’t defined, decisions aren’t documented, or outcomes aren’t clear, teams default to “Let’s hop on a call.” Meetings then become the fallback for unclear thinking. ✅ Generative AI can be a powerful clarity tool if it’s used intentionally. When used well, it can sharpen your ask and structure communication for action. The key is prompting it to refine your message, not just polish it. Leaders can use prompts like: • “Rewrite this message so the action, owner, deadline, and success metrics are explicitly stated" • “What assumptions or ambiguities exist in this message?” ✅ Good writing can replace unnecessary meetings. If communication is not direct, outcome-driven, and structured for action, it will cost you time somewhere else. Here are some practical actions that leaders can make in their writing: • Start with the Ask - Be explicit about what decision or action is needed. Don’t make people search for it. • Define Outcomes - Clarify deliverables, timelines, budgets and state what success looks like. • Clarify Ownership - Identify who is responsible for the request. • Document Decisions - Write down what has been decided and reiterate next steps, owners, and deadlines. To connect with Panté directly and arrange an interview, visit her profile and click on the "contact" button. Interested media can also send an email to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

1 min

Epidemiologist: Winter Olympics fortunate to dodge norovirus outbreak

Finland's Olympic women's hockey team overcame a norovirus scare last week, but they couldn't get past Team USA, who shut them out 5-0 Saturday in Milan. The University of Delaware's Jennifer Horney can discuss the difficult-to-contain virus, which also hit the Winter Games in 2018. - Horney, a professor of epidemiology at UD, said that the outbreak –  which forced Finland to cancel its first game after 13 players had either been infected or quarantined – is not surprising. Norovirus spreads rapidly in crowded environments through direct contact with surfaces or airborne droplets. - It is difficult to limit the spread of norovirus, as witnessed by the major outbreak that spread at the 2018 Winter Olympics in South Korea. - Consideration is often given for the potential of these types of outbreaks being intentional, which requires public health to work closely with law enforcement. To reach Horney directly and arrange an interview, visit her profile and click on the "contact" button. Interested journalists can also send an email to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

View all posts
Powered by