Its hard to blame the Recruitment and Retention if they have not got any flexibility in “dollars dept”. In some blog's and elsewhere this receives a lot of discussion but really, we don’t know.
I think O’Neill has a very tight leash on him and his job security is probably not high. The way he gets critiqued on here would be an example of being undermined and going with the flow.
Simple fix is to get our review team in for an update and objective understanding of the problems so that the board can form an independent opinion.
Don't start going off sbout a 5 year plan, good managemet is a living corporate plan that should always be active, I think we have become complacent in this sense as I would bet we have not updated action plans and responsibilites, based on everything being ok and the impression of don't rock the boat!
We now know that is not the case. Its not the end of the earth and the results of the review may provide direction on the constant issues of blaming someone. It can also open discussion for things like a TPA programme which seemingly scares the shit out of the front office.
Modern management and young boards are so orientated to outside opinions and compliance they become impotent in their decision making, this trait is endemic across all sectors of the economy in board mangement and is singular reason why so many organisation become paralysed, banking being a prime example.e.g. Government is another one,i.e who can we blame because we dont want to make a hard decision ?
The types we have on the board would not be driven by our competition’s, style of management which is largely benevolent dictatorship from one or a few key people. Can you imagine Politis and Ponsini hesitating in making a decision. I think this is where we are being left behind, what I am talking about here is reactive, whereas we need to become proactive. At this very moment we do not seem to be active in any capacity!
Where we have come from necessitates the style of management we have and this needs to evolve under leadership…..the review will drive this out. It can be done in a couple of weeks, and it will give the board direction and guide us to shape the upcoming year, notwithstanding where we finish this year, If they cannot handle direction, they need to step aside.
What we may see could be a revelation as long as the Chairman and Ceo realise their arses are on the line and that they could be the problem rather than part of the problem.
Finally I did not write this to criticise the R&R or the board but try and give some shape to the future because we are all pissing in the wind supposing we know the problem when the easy answer is to ask!
How do you do that?........ update the review!
Replies
Good post Poppa, I'm going to cross-post what I said in the other recruitment thread here because I think it's relevant:
Our recruitment and retention has never stopped being clunky. We have impoved in so many areas as a club, and there was always going to be an undercurrent of conservatism that came in after the salary cap scandal where we became ultra-careful and played by all the rules where other clubs continue to work in grey areas (have conversations outside of allowed windows, sweeten deals with off-the-cap arrangements and introductions etc).
But this is now impacting our ability to play football.
This year alone there have been countless comms by the club about our intent to make signings, and they haven't materialised. This shows that the vision and the execution aren't aligned, something is broken in the process, and something needs to change. For us to cope with injuries and suspensions we left some room in the roster, and it now looks like we're going to have to artifically fill it from within our own ranks just to stay compliant with NRL rules/deadlines - and we're going to do this at a time when we are struggling for depth. This is the worst of scenarios...having the capacity to fix a problem, but stopping yourself from doing it.
All of this bleeting about whether HSS is the right answer, whether it shows BA desperation etc, of course BA is depserate. He has a depleted roster and knows that he can't field a competitive team at the most pivotal time in our season. If he wasn't desperate I'd be extremely disappointed.
This isn't a BA specific problem or cause, this is a process problem with our recruitment and retention and it's now presented on too many ocassions to be ignored. Either we need to change our processes, our people, have more / have less / change skills. What we know is that status quo isn't working and it needs review and change otherwise we will continue to see the same problems. Other top teams have been able to sensibly recruit depth as situations arose (injuries, suspensions, contracts) and the Eels haven't. The only reason we've stayed somewhat competitive this year is BAs ability to turn average players into good players (this year Grieg, Cartwright and Simmo are prime examples) but that skillset alone won't keep us as continual competitors - we need top class recruitment systems that allow us to out-compete with other clubs for signatures. We need to have people begging to come to Parra the same way they do for the Storm, Panthers, Souths, Roosters, Broncos etc.\
Look at how the Broncos lifted themselves off the canvas purely through recruitment and retention in a year. How the Panthers continue to lose players and stay at the top. How the Rabbits lose players and then poach to plug the gaps. How the Storm continue to seemingly just have their pick of the litter when it comes to junior talent from other clubs.
We have fixed so many areas of our club to turn us from cellar dwellars into a competition force. To stay here we need to fix our recruitment, retention and pathways. These have been a failure for years and have been covered up by the coaching abilities of BA and his strength in getting over-performance out of average players. This alone will keep up in the hunt, but never a force to be reckoned with unless all the stars align perfectly (which they probably won't).
Lets get this fixed, and I hope the club is vocal about their intentions and actions. I don't want to see any leaking or infighting or drama, but I do want to see a clear outward message that the club recognise this deficiency and need for change, will conduct a time based review and will share the outcomes and recommendations and a plan with members.
You get it Cappy........the process is there to take advantage of, someone just needs to flick the switch and it probably needs to be the front office. That said BA and O'Neill can still be the catalysts!
You have a rationale business approach and that's the way I am trying look at it as well. Our mob on here are like children being destracted with the issues they see but cannot possibly understand unless you know the situation from an internal perspective. That doesn't mean one eyed eels don't have the right to express thoughts but they also need to understand how a process can and cannot work.....i.e. fantasy about getting such and such a player!
t
Great post here, Pops. Very interesting read.
I don't have the knowledge or experience within these sort of corporate structures so can't comment, but do wonder if a more transparent approach would be any benefit? Or would that just fuel the criticism fires even further?
Question being, we as fans have no idea what the approach or plan is, and perhaps that's very much for the best, but it does make it hard to understand the direction?
THanks NOS, pretty disappointing response to this discussion when you consider how negative a lot of the people on this site about retention and recruitment.. We have to put up with the criticism from the likes of Fong and Wiz but nobody says anything when a "based" discussion can be had,
Your question about transparency is very relevant, I understand a board that are airtight in making decisions but when you have situation of the fans being the reason the team exists in a capacity of filling seats and buying into a team, it seems fundamentally wrong why a spokeperson cannot be up front and explain decisions and rationale after an event.
If you look back at Gurr and his role as the CEO he explained a number of things of what we were trying to do ie, he bought in with the fans, Jim Saratinos may not have the knowledge and football credibility to do that, but a leader finds someone to fill such a role......think about it, we dont have an off field leader.
When I worked in a public company I was not great at standing in front of too many people as a spokesperson so I found that my marketing manager was a amatuer in the theatre and he was a brilliant communicater, I said from now on I want you to be the face that tells people why we are doing certain things and the rationale behind it. I am happy to take the blame when things go wrong and the shit hits the fan.....I was ok at that,Lol
Rather than our board members being faceless Jim Saratinos could look at identifying a couple of them who could give a face to the board. We could ask (tongue firmly in cheek) for Fong and Wiz to do interviews of board members to humanise them, A bit like Hindmarsh and Fletch interviewing key players.......We could do worse and humanise Fong and Wiz about the practical aspects of making decisions LOL