|
Excellent thread and some great points made. My 2 bobs worth:
1. Financials. Although we do not know the inner workings of the financials, the bottom line is that we inherited some decisions from the former board which had placed the very existance of the club in jeopardy. Specifically the Legends stand, and its long term impact. A finacial plan was created that would have seen us emerge well in 2 years time. In fact half way through the season we were ahead of budget. Poor form resulting in poor crowds in the second half of the year, plus some un-forseen expenses will mean we end up around $1 behind budget this year. The board will tell you that nothing could have been done about this other than better on field performance - ie it was the players fault. This is partly true, but the supposed strength of our board is its financial management capability. We were told that with Smorgon, Rose, Wilson and Mathieson we had the financial smarts to never again be in trouble.
The real problem is that we still lack a balanced board with the passion, skills and time to devote what is necessary to bring change and positively contribute. Performance 5/10.
2. Membership. I think the results here have been good given the poor performance of the team. Sure they have played the "sign up or we go broke" card, but you get your members any way you can. 5/10
3. Football Department. Masive failure here, and can be sheeted home largely to the board. To my knowledge there is no other club in the competition that sticks its nose into football operations the way our board does. Every member of our board thinks they have a right to make decisions as to the running of the football department. As a result we have a complete shambles.
How many other coaches allow their board members into the pre-match address, how many other coaches allow the board into the closed door post match address? Dennis goes along with it because he has been told by the board that it is what will happen. They contribute nothing to these crutial team meetings, and is just a symptom of the way in which the board sees their role.
The Fevola case is classic. We have a player of 6 years history. The board decides to resign him, with only one board member voting against. Then 7 weeks later, the board, not the football department changes its mind, when the board is embarrased by his performance, and advises the football department to trade him. This smacks of a board getting too far involved in the running of the operation. It also smacks of a club with no clear direction. Flip flopping from one decision to the next in a matter of weeks. We looked like fools to the football world.
They are supposed to be directors - there to look after corporate governance and set policy and strategic direction - not get involved with making management decisions. Clearly we have no long term football strategy and direction at the club. We lurch from one year to the next making decisions on the run without direction or purpose. It is not the boards role to necessarily make the direction or set the plan, but it is the boards role to ensure we have one, ensure it is communicated clearly to the membership, and to ensure the management of the club sticks to it.
1/10
4. Marketing. This is actually an easy whipping boy, that far too often carries the can for other areas of the club that are not performing. In my opinion Craig Richards and his team, especially John Morris do a very good job. Remember that their primary focus must be revenue raising. They did a great job on selling out functions during the year and in rasing funds in a very difficuult market. During the year they were hamstrung by a board who is highly risk adverse, and one particular board member who is determined to have teh department spend countless hours following up all manner of trivial in inconsequential projects that might make him/her look good, but does nothing for the benefit of the club. 7/10
5. Leadership. This has been my mantra since Collo came in to power. He was the right man to take on Jack, but not the right man to lead the club now. He should have stepped aside after 12 months. He will not for one reason - Collo loves the spotlight. He once told a departing executive that the biggest thing he would miss was the media profile. Collo is not athe leader we need. He does not have a plan, other than managing from crisis to crisis or event to event. He is a great manager. He was a great CEO, but we need a visionary leader, a communicator (anyone who has had to endure a Collo Presidents lunch speach will know that he is the worst presidential speaker in the league), and someone who can rally the Carlton faithful.
The very sad news is that we do not have anyone on the board who capable of this. If there was someone, they would have taken over the reigns by now. My evaluation of the board members is as follows:
Collo - as stated above - not a great leader, must step down as soon as a leader is identified who can spend 40 hours a week on CFC business - that's what it takes! It is not an easy get - to find someone, but as Collo likes the job so much, he has done little to really look. In my opinion he should however have a role for the next 10 years as his knowledge and contacts are so valuable. Appoint him Vice - President and let him relax a little after 3 tough years.
Smorgon - A great business brain. Has the ability to spot the flaw in any arguement from 100 paces. But not a creator. Has extrodinarily poor people to people skills. Would alienate sponsors and members in a flash if he were to take over the leadership. Is a fine Chairman of Smorgon Industries and Melbourne Health, but would be a disaster leading Carlton. We cannot allow this to happen. Again, I believe he is a great person to have on our board - just not our leader. Keep him as a Vice President.
Rose - We need people who can positively contribute, not just critisise. Should go.
Wilson - smart person, but makes Jack look like a mannered gentleman. Needs a strong chairman to keep him out of areas he should not be in.
Mathieson - Great business contacts and brilliant man. When he stood, he said it would be for a maximum of 1 year - 3 years on he would actually be a great contributor if he was around the place more. Business interests mean the club comes a very poor 3rd or 4th in his life.
Valmorbida - very similar to Matheison. Was in Italy for months this year. We need people who have the passion and the time to make this place happen.
Diggins - Passionate, but lacks credibility. Too concerned with non core issues.
McKay / Hunter / Kernahan / Pavlou- Outstanding individuals, but not with the business or strategic smarts needed to take the club forward. Must be retained withing the club structure but taking places on a thin board that should be taken by people who could really make a difference.
Ok - these are my thoughts - my opinions - and no doubt many of you will disagree. But that's what forums are for.
I am frustrated because I see so many great and passionate people desperate for a leadership team to come to the club and harness all the spirit and good will that we have. But it has not happened in the past 3 years and it will not whilst Collo is there.
The good news is that I can at least hear the drums beating. The natives are getting restless and change is coming. The more we talk about what and who we need to run the club, the better chance we will have of getting the right person to take us into a successful future, next time.
Last edited by Speedy on Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:11 pm, edited 8 times in total.
|
Login
Register
FAQ
