Toast Presidency and The Board

Remove this Banner Ad

Thank you 76woodenspooners

One of BigFooty’s all-time-favourite posters, Reykjavik , was all across the board level stuff. He once posted a list of the responsibilities of a Not-For-Profit board like that of Collingwood …

abcdef.....ijklmnop

NFP board responsibilities
Specific responsibilities of a not-for-profit (NFP) board include:

  • Driving the strategic direction of the organisation
  • Working with the CEO to enable the organisation to obtain the resources, funds and personnel necessary to implement the organisation's strategic objectives
  • Implementing, maintaining and (as necessary) refining a system of good governance that is appropriate for the organisation
  • Reviewing reports and monitoring the performance of the organisation
  • Regularly reviewing the board's structure and composition, so that these are appropriate for the organisation
  • Appointing – and managing the performance of – a suitable CEO
  • Succession planning for the CEO
While the above points are also applicable to for-profit boards, NFP boards also face a unique range of issues, such as:

  • Difficulties in defining and measuring organisational effectiveness
  • Transgression of role boundaries
  • The negative impact of the structural compositions of some NFP boards, including those arising from representative models
  • Funding dependencies and constraints

In practice, the role of the board is to supervise an organisation's business in two broad areas:

  1. Overall business performance - ensuring the organisation develops and implements strategies and supporting policies to enable it to fulfill the objectives set out in the organisation's constitution. The board delegates the day to day management of the organisation but remains accountable to the shareholders for the organisation's performance. The board monitors and supports management in an on-going way.
  2. Overall compliance performance - ensuring the organisation develops and implements systems to enable it to comply with its legal and policy obligations (complying with statutes such as the Corporations Act 2001, adhering to accounting standards) and ensure the organisation's assets are protected through appropriate risk management.


http://www.companydirectors.com.au/...ctor/NFP-governance/The-role-of-the-NFP-board

Link to original post …

 
They were asking for membership numbers. Two of Hately’s comrades were approaching members in the Legends Bar.
Interesting given the MCC had banned them from collecting signatures inside the ground and Hately had said they wouldn't be chasing signatures in response to me raising concerns about unsolicited approaches.
 
Interesting given the MCC had banned them from collecting signatures inside the ground and Hately had said they wouldn't be chasing signatures in response to me raising concerns about unsolicited approaches.
One of them bailed up some poor old biddy who was half cut. She ended up giving them her membership number and contact details.
 
We're pretty closely aligned on this. I was willing to give Korda a chance as well, but the inability to follow the provisions in the Constitution was a big alarm bell for me.

Where we differ is whether signing a petition in the HOPE it may lead to something positive will occur. It will be a significant failure if no one challenges the current board and they remain in place unopposed.

Browne needs to come out one way or another and declare his interest to run and present his platform, or quell the rumours about him running and deny he's doing such a thing. Media speculation about it for more than a month isn't helping anyone.

If an EGM does occur, I will be there hands down.

Pretty confident another viable ticket will be ready to go if the trigger is pulled.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Why would you think being a board member at Collingwood will ‘massively boost’ her career prospects? She was an Olympian and seems to be progressing very well in her career. Actually, so well that the Collingwood Football Club identified her as someone who can add a lot to the club as a board member.

Lol bet if you did a straw poll of the general public 9 out of 10 people never heard of her before coming to Collingwood.
I know all my friends, work colleagues and family from various back grounds I have spoken with about her said, who?
 
What is the detriment of waiting 3-6 months for an alternative president / board to emerge or at latest the annual general meeting? Outside of a decision on the coach, which I believe should be driven by the football department anyway, I can’t see any reason why this can’t wait.

Because it needs to be resolved ASAP so that we hit the off season with these issues resolved. This season is over, its about setting the club up to go forward.

Sooner you deal with these things the better.
 
That's what concerns me.

Browne and his allies are staying silent, and there's no other group publicly coming out showing interest or signalling an intention to run.

This is what stopped me from signing the petition. I admire David's work and to put himself out there, it takes courage.

He maybe working to finalise his ticket, perhaps that is why he stayed silent. Moore amoung others have come out and said they would consider joining it and support him.
 
The issue is for mine that we seem to have a messiah complex at the Pies. We need a big President campaign, a hero ex player as coach, or a Matthews / Malthouse coach.

What we actuality need right now are some good people in the right positions. What we are currently set up with though is getting people in who can be quiet, maintain the comfy status quo and vote in favour of the leader (or as McGuire bragged "we haven't had a vote at Collingwood ").

Holgate got her 'Cartier Watch' selection in 'Chairman's Club' Wilson and Dr O'Donnell was clearly earmarked for a future spot over a year out.

Those who were interviewed but overlooked include Dan Rosen and Con Frantzeskos. Gun businessmen, genuine Pies supporters and advocates for change and improvement. But both overlooked for two non-disruptive types.

So herein lies the problem; we can't get any meaningful change in the insular McGuire designed oligarchy. Not even just a little bit! It's all modelled arround self preservation and not evolution.

You don't need a 'messiah ticket' to sign. David (aka The Collingwood Turtle) is simply trying to reverse this current problem. Good candidates will present themselves and then maybe this time we can pick the better ones!
They had almost 100 candidates from suitable backgrounds apply. There are plenty there we just never see them because most won't risk public backlash by coming out in public eye.
 
On-line has only just been set up. Lot of very annoyed members.
Most certainly there’s a lot of annoyed fans. The question is how many want an EGM without a plan. Reportedly 650 is enough to spill, which by itself is a small minority.
 
Lol bet if you did a straw poll of the general public 9 out of 10 people never heard of her before coming to Collingwood.
I know all my friends, work colleagues and family from various back grounds I have spoken with about her said, who?
But I’m sure there are many high caliber board members around the country you, your friends, work colleagues and family have never heard of before and still haven’t.

The world is a much bigger place than simply a football club in Australia.

Not sure being on the board at Collingwood is going to get you a meaningful gig elsewhere.

Do you know all the board members of other clubs? Or international sporting associations like Tennis Australia?

Maybe the only positive would be an executive board recruitment agency may consider a non paying role as a tick.
 
Most certainly there’s a lot of annoyed fans. The question is how many want an EGM without a plan. Reportedly 650 is enough to spill, which by itself is a small minority.
Having a big name / ego ticket come in over the top isn't that great either, as you'll basically shift the same insular power structure from one person to the next, which then results in the same lame duck board appointments that do nothing to evolve the club, but rather maintain the status quo to those in power.

McGuire's legacy is this oligarchical set up and it's toxic and dangerous. It's resulted in Captains Calls that have netted us a coach who has gone backwards on the previous year's ladder position for 9 out of 10 seasons. It resulted in Captains Calls like bumping out Balme for Gubby Allen. Captains Calls like getting Beams back in despite opposition from the footy department. Severe salary cap mismanagement resulting in a fire sale with literally nobody being held to account. And now the installation of two board members who won't rock the boat, including one who is ineligible and not even a Pies supporter. And now there's talk of re-signing Buckley longer and just getting him better assistants......I mean, FMD!

Another issue to deal with are the proxies generated by sponsors and controlled by the incumbent hierarchy. This is idiotic.

The McGuire system is a loaded one in favour of one person plus a couple of chief cohorts. Having a sit down to structure it better is a great thing. Good people will step up when it's time.
 
Most certainly there’s a lot of annoyed fans. The question is how many want an EGM without a plan. Reportedly 650 is enough to spill, which by itself is a small minority.

Once again you assume you know when you don't. Who says its a small minority. How many socials club members were at the G yesterday? it was a very small crowd, 650 is probably a fair % of those eligible.

And who says there is no plan. You just don't know. Why would anyone show Korda their hand yet?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Once again you assume you know when you don't. Who says its a small minority. How many socials club members were at the G yesterday? it was a very small crowd, 650 is probably a fair % of those eligible.
Once again YOU assume. Very obviously 650 from the total membership base or even those eligible is a small minority and one that has nothing to do with the crowd numbers that were present yesterday.


And who says there is no plan. You just don't know. Why would anyone show Korda their hand yet?
:tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy: I've heard differently, but regardless what sort of secret society do they think they're operating? What's the harm in putting all cards on the table? There was a lot of criticism of the club feeding members bullshit and keeping them in the dark after the trade period in particular. How does hiding their plan from members differ from that current philosophy and concern?

All the criticism I've seen is around a lack of plan, so if there is one it would only serve to help their cause not hinder it.
 
They had almost 100 candidates from suitable backgrounds apply.

They shortlisted 25, which IMO implies that almost 75 were from unsuitable backgrounds.

LOL, might have even got a bunch of Jobseeker applicants fulfilling the requirements of their dole payments?
 
I'm not sure if anyone has referred to it during the discussion, but most of the interstate clubs have very limited membership rights with regard to voting for board positions. I think Freo might have created a position a few years back and I think WC has done the same, but most of the power resides with WA footy commission. Similar things happen with Adelaide but I'm not sure with Port.

The interesting thing is that victoria clubs have reduced the number of positions open to election. Essendon has 3 positions, I believe, that are nominated by the board itself. This isnt unusual. North Melbourne has a nominations committee that vets anyone who wants to stand for election to see if they qualify and have the skills. I had a quick look at a few other clubs about a month ago and there were similar techniques to "limit democracy" in other victorian clubs. From what I saw, the processes at the Pies appear to be the most democratic...should the membership actually put themselves forward as candidates.
 
And who says there is no plan. You just don't know. Why would anyone show Korda their hand yet?
All the criticism I've seen is around a lack of plan, so if there is one it would only serve to help their cause not hinder it.

On the subject of plans, I’d really like to see what Korda’s plan is. He keeps banging on about perfect storms and reviewing Buckley’s contract in the latter part of the season ... but where is his plan for the future? I get that he’s only been in the role a short period, but that doesn’t stop him from communicating something, or at least that the current board is working on something.
 
On the subject of plans, I’d really like to see what Korda’s plan is. He keeps banging on about perfect storms and reviewing Buckley’s contract in the latter part of the season ... but where is his plan for the future? I get that he’s only been in the role a short period, but that doesn’t stop him from communicating something, or at least that the current board is working on something.

To be fair to Korda, he has implemented a decentralised decision-making process that contrasts with the eddie years. The board has put licuria to overseeing the footy side....and holgate was charged with finding new directors.

Ironically, he has to wear the problems with the latter process. It seems that holgate is permanently wired into a "private sector" point of view.

However, overall, Korda has presented an approach that is board driven and decentralised. What are the Bulldog's plan for the future? What are the tigers? Do we need a board that says that it is going expand into mining in WA? Most of the goals are self-evident. Korda has said that he wants to stick with the rules of the club and proceed that way.

I understand that some people want dynamic leadership but Peggy whatever at richmond seems low key and that hasnt hurt. I think Eddie has made us believe...and certainly the media wants it.... that we have to have charismatic leadership. I think otherwise
 
The phones are certainly being worked. My wife ran into a neighbour this morning who is a 40+ year member and has cancelled and written the club a detailed email of his concerns. He got a personal call from Mark Anderson this morning. I haven't yet caught up on the detail.
 
To be fair to Korda, he has implemented a decentralised decision-making process that contrasts with the eddie years. The board has put licuria to overseeing the footy side....and holgate was charged with finding new directors.

Fair point.

Ironically, he has to wear the problems with the latter process. It seems that holgate is permanently wired into a "private sector" point of view.

What makes you say that? She’s just led a process that has appointed a public servant to serve with her on the board. People who are hard wired into the private sector stay a mile away from public servants.

What are the Bulldog's plan for the future? What are the tigers? Do we need a board that says that it is going expand into mining in WA? Most of the goals are self-evident. Korda has said that he wants to stick with the rules of the club and proceed that way.

I understand that some people want dynamic leadership but Peggy whatever at richmond seems low key and that hasnt hurt. I think Eddie has made us believe...and certainly the media wants it.... that we have to have charismatic leadership. I think otherwise

We’re more inclined to compare the new board with the previous board, rather than with the board of oher clubs.

Under the previous President we (just items OTTOMH) ...

- Head hunted Mick Malthouse
- Moved home ground from Vic Park to MCG
- Moved training facilities from Vic Park to the Glasshouse
- Had an arrangement with Vic Athletics to share the Glasshouse facilities until we could take over the joint for ourselves
- Went through three significant renovation phases of the Glasshouse facilities
- Signed a reasonable list of sponsors including Emirates who have been long term.
- Instituted the “‘side by side” thing.
- Proposed a new home ground above Richmond railyards (went nowhere, was a stalking horse to help the AFL buy the Docklands stadium)
- Setup standalone VFL team
- Setup AFLW and VFLW teams
- Setup SNL and ANL teams
- Established member’s forums
- Went from being broke to having money in the bank
- Established pokies venues as a fund raiser, then disbanded them when they went against community / membership expectations.
- Planning for the new medical centre.

I understand that all took time to do and implement, but is the new board expecting to continue with that level of development?

If / when there is a board challenge, the challenger are unlikely to simply say “‘vote for me, ‘cause I’m cool! <cheesy grin>”. They’ll be trying to sell their vision for the future of the club. What will we be comparing it to?

If the current board just want to be a steady hand on the tiller, then that’ll be OK for many people. It’d just be helpful to know that that’s the case.
 
In my view ordinary decisions can be made during a period of hysteria. Obviously the club isn’t going too well, particularly on the field. I haven’t seen enough of Korda & Co to say they are/aren’t the right group to lead us.

A major criticism of Korda would be that he has been there for 15 yrs and on the surface it looked like Eddie was allowed to take control and heavily influence areas a President should not.

At least he is giving G Wright autonomy to perform his role which is a positive.
 
In my view ordinary decisions can be made during a period of hysteria. Obviously the club isn’t going too well, ...

I know that’s the narrative, but I don’t think it’s all doom and gloom.

I know many folks here don’t give a rat’s clacker about our women’s teams ...

... but our VFLW girls are so totally dominant that after 12 rounds they sit atop the ladder three games and over 70% clear of second place. They could forfeit the remaining 10 games of the season and still easily make finals. They’ve only lost 6 games of footy in their four year history.

Our AFLW women made finals for the first time this year, and were unlucky not to make it through to the GF.

Our senior netball team are early season and winning games - improving on previous season’s performance when we were cellar dwellers.

We appointed a new footy boss who everybody seems to be happy with.

We’ve apparently cleared the deck of our salary cap woes.

We’re taking steps through the Do Better recommendations to not be (or have the reputation of being) a bunch of rednecks.

Our new board are a team of highly credentialed individuals. Sure, they’re not all lifelong members of the cheersquad - but I’m sure they make up for that in other areas.

We have money in the bank.

The media are all about us ... and as much as we complain about that ... we wouldn’t have it any other way.

I haven’t seen enough of Korda & Co to say they are/aren’t the right group to lead us.

+1

A major criticism of Korda would be that he has been there for 15 yrs and on the surface it looked like Eddie was allowed to take control and heavily influence areas a President should not.

+1

This has been the biggest revaluation for me. I appreciate Korda for being his own man, but gee, he clearly hasn’t been working very closely with Ed and paying close attention to him over the last 15 years because he’s screwed up in subtle areas that Ed simply would not do.

For example ...

... Ed for all his faults was publicly always a very modest “I represent the members, I serve at the pleasure of the members”.

Contrast that with Korda’s “The members vote for the board and the board votes for the President” ... and as accurate that may be on paper, it does cause the members to question “hang on, I don’t remember voting for you on this board” in a way that they wouldn’t with Ed’s approach.

Ed screwed up big time with a handful of PR gaffes, but apart from those, his day-to-day PR instincts were generally spot on.

At least he is giving G Wright autonomy to perform his role which is a positive.

I think that could have been handled better. He clearly dropped Wright in the poo in a way that Wright didn’t want and didn’t expect and didn’t think was right. A more savvy operator would have instead straight off the bat said “That process will be led by Licuria who will be working with Graeme Wright”.

Wright has to work with Buckley on a day to day basis. Licuria doesn’t. Plus it is the responsibility of the board - as the club’s constitution clearly lays out.
 
Fair point.



What makes you say that? She’s just led a process that has appointed a public servant to serve with her on the board. People who are hard wired into the private sector stay a mile away from public servants.



Under the previous President we (just items OTTOMH) ...

- Head hunted Mick Malthouse
- Moved home ground from Vic Park to MCG
- Moved training facilities from Vic Park to the Glasshouse
- Had an arrangement with Vic Athletics to share the Glasshouse facilities until we could take over the joint for ourselves
- Went through three significant renovation phases of the Glasshouse facilities
- Signed a reasonable list of sponsors including Emirates who have been long term.
- Instituted the “‘side by side” thing.
- Proposed a new home ground above Richmond railyards (went nowhere, was a stalking horse to help the AFL buy the Docklands stadium)
- Setup standalone VFL team
- Setup AFLW and VFLW teams
- Setup SNL and ANL teams
- Established member’s forums
- Went from being broke to having money in the bank
- Established pokies venues as a fund raiser, then disbanded them when they went against community / membership expectations.
- Planning for the new medical centre.

I understand that all took time to do and implement, but is the new board expecting to continue with that level of development?

If / when there is a board challenge, the challenger are unlikely to simply say “‘vote for me, ‘cause I’m cool! <cheesy grin>”. They’ll be trying to sell their vision for the future of the club. What will we be comparing it to?

If the current board just want to be a steady hand on the tiller, then that’ll be OK for many people. It’d just be helpful to know that that’s the case.

Holgate didnt seem to realise that she was heading a quasi public sector body when she gave away watches.... much as someone might do in the private sector. This time she didnt read the constitution or get someone to read the constitution for her. It took me 5 minutes to realise that the rules wouldnt allow the placement of a person who hasn't been a member for 2 years. This seems to me to be another example of someone who enjoys the relative freedom of the corporate sector. Regarding the actual selection process, I'd be interested to see just how many interviews Holgate did for the position. The rumours have it that she already knew of bridie, and while that wouldnt be unusual in corporate melbourne, I just have a feelling that the successful job applicant for the board position was known before the selection process.....but if she actually did the due diligence, then that would indicate that she is willing to be involved for the betterment of the club, and not just for the photo opportunities --- a la waislitz.


Regarding your list, you seem to have attributed the decision to move to the MCG to eddie, when even eddie hasnt done that.
You also seem to have missed out of other achievements such as the personal recruitment of dayne beans and the negotiation of the malthouse/buckley arrangement that blew up the club for several years.

You also havent listed Eddie's involvement in promoting king kong, and his "work" with caroline wilson's backyard swimming pool.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Toast Presidency and The Board

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top