So what is the club structure exactly?

[Johnny Member]

What does the org chart look like?

I'm not looking for assumptions, opinions or random thoughts - I'd love to know exactly what the reporting structure is!


Clearly, the basis of this decision is due to an employee thumbing his nose at the structure and doing his own thing.

In any regular (non-sporting club) business, that's clearly reason enough to can someone. Obviously if it is ongoing.


But maybe, just maybe the club's structure is all wrong? That doesn't mean someone can make their own rules and doesn't excuse Watters, but it may mean that any coach that comes in just can't operate how they need to.

I mean, why does a coach require approval to do a radio interview?


So who created our structure? And what exactly is it?


If the club provided this information to the members (the second part anyway) then I think it would go a long way to removing the perception that the club is a shambles. Obviously it's more important that those involved know - but we pay the bills and I think it's more than reasonable that this type of information is made public.

[Johnny Member]

Examples:

Is the board involved in hiring a coach?

If so, why? Aside from one or maybe two at each AFL club, board members are nothing but wealthy linament sniffers.


Does the board sack the coach?

Surely not. Surely the CEO does this, and the board merely signs off in it.


Are we saying that the head coach of a football reports to the Head of Football, who reports to the CEO who then reports to the Board?

So the players report to Assistant Coaches, who report to the Head Coach who reports to the Head of Football etc. etc.?


If this is the case, then surely the Head of Football is the plumb gig? Surely this is one that you offer $1m a year to a guy like Paul Roos or such?

It sounds like the Head of Football is clearly the most important person in the joint.

They sound like being what the Head Coach was for 130 years of footy.

Why isn't this dude up on the dias when they hand over the cup?


And I suppose more importantly, why aren't the members given greater access to this person? Forget the coach, they're small fry's now - it's the Head of Football that runs the joint.

Surely the Head of Football is the who hired and fires coaches? They report to him - so it must be him making these calls.

[Johnny Member]

Actually I do want random thoughts and opinions!

[SainterK]

I think the CEO had a major part in sacking the coach...

[BigMart]

Wrong?

By the way.... The board will form a committe to short list candidates, who will then go through a process of interview and tests.... then will give a recommendation to the board...... Who sign off on the appointment ( or not) and offer a successful candidate a contract.

[BigMart]

Sorry, what I mean by wrong is this....

The person who has the most responsibility..... Sets the agenda and is the leader

In football terms.... The senior coach

And all the departments have their managers to resource that area to support the Senior Coaches strategic intent

[Johnny Member]

So then why does Watters have to answer to Pelchen?

It seems very dysfunctional to me.

[satchmo]

So then why does Watters have to answer to Pelchen?

It seems very dysfunctional to me.

Because coaches are transient. Especially if they don't understand that they answer to Pelchen.

[saintsRrising]

So then why does Watters have to answer to Pelchen?

It seems very dysfunctional to me.

Yes it works very badly at Geelong too where the coach is under Neil Balme

[SaintPav]

The current structure is fine if everyone sticks to their responsibilities and accountabilities

Sounds good in theory because people are unpredictable so implementation can get messy.

That's why good governance such as performance management systems are important.

Carrot

and stick

Club ended up using a stick.

It happens.

[karnaby]

I think that a big part of the reason that we have a Head of Football who seems all powerful is that our history of the Head Coach having all the power got us into all sorts of strife. Admittedly most of our issues happened over the last ten? Years when club/management structures have really been evolving. GT was seen to accumulate responsibilities that ended up going far beyond what the club was comfortable with, end result sacked. Lyon was so focused on the Holy Grail that he couldn't (or wouldn't) address our future. Somewhere along the line the club decided that they needed a way to have more control so that the Coach could get on with coaching and others could have more responsibility for the future direction of the club.

Enter Pelchen. .... Exit lyon.

With Watters being a rookie coach it was fairly natural that the club wanted him to focus on coaching and have others assume greater responsibility for broader aspects of the Football Department. As time went on I reckon that SW quite possibly thought he was ready to have greater influence and to maybe extend his boundaries a bit. Unfortunately for him the structure around him didn't allow it. As time went on there was more and more conflict til it got to the stage we're left with today with another Coach having bitten the dust.

[BigMart]

Noell is the manager of football operations... And supports all the teams in working together... Resourcing them, structuring the departments... Communicating to the media...

He does not tell Chris Scott who to select, how to coach and have any involvement on the coaching side of things... Only to make sure Chris has all the people in place with structures and logistics allowing him to do his job....

Lead the club

[plugger66]

Noell is the manager of football operations... And supports all the teams in working together... Resourcing them, structuring the departments... Communicating to the media...

He does not tell Chris Scott who to select, how to coach and have any involvement on the coaching side of things... Only to make sure Chris has all the people in place with structures and logistics allowing him to do his job....

Lead the club

And who has said pelchan does that at the Saints. Of course he wouldnt but bag the club without knowledge anyway.

[Johnny Favier]

From the information I've gleaned from here and around the web, we seem to have now adopted a management structure more in line with many other successful clubs around Australia and the world.

As stated, Geelong amongst others in the AFL run on this model as do the likes of Man Utd. and Barcelona.

For my 2 bob's worth, I'm comfortable with this and that we seem to be bringing everyone into line within the new structure now.

Time will tell and we just need to show some spine and stick with the program.

Now is not the time to panic.

[Johnny Member]

Does Neil Balme run the joint at Geelong though?

I wouldn't have thought so.

[spert]

Costa told Bomber that he had to do better as coach and was going get someone in the coaching box to oversee the whole thing (Balme)- or if he didn't like that he would be out..Bomber agreed and the rest is history. Contrast that to StK where coaches reckon they could work separately from the club structure. I feel Summers is putting a proper management structure in place

[Johnny Member]

But 'overseeing' the whole thing, is different from 'running the football department'.

Overseeing what is going on, and being the link between the on-field stuff and the CEO is different from the Head of Football being totally in charge, and being the coach's boss.

[BigMart]

The Geelong coach does not get dictated to by the Football operations managers

[Cairnsman]

If clubs did publicise their org charts would it be helpful?

[Devilhead]

It seems the Communication Department consists of everyone except a few loyal souls - am fairly certain it may also include wives, girlfriends, boyfriends, friends, acquaintances and a homeless dude and his dog that sleeps under a bush near the Linen House Carpark

[Johnny Member]

If clubs did publicise their org charts would it be helpful?

I think so.

Look, obviously most people wouldn't care at all. But for mine, I still can't get my head around the concept of the head coach having a boss sit between him and the CEO.

I'd love to know what the actual structure is, and therefore be able to for an opinion as to whether I think Watters and Lyon were right to fight the system, or whether its what I consider a workable structure.

[defacto]

Wrong?

By the way.... The board will form a committe to short list candidates, who will then go through a process of interview and tests.... then will give a recommendation to the board...... Who sign off on the appointment ( or not) and offer a successful candidate a contract.

someone forgot to tell the club mate. apparently choco already has the job

[Johnny Member]

So then why does Watters have to answer to Pelchen?

It seems very dysfunctional to me.

Yes it works very badly at Geelong too where the coach is under Neil Balme

It all hinges on how you define 'under'.

[Johnny Member]

Costa told Bomber that he had to do better as coach and was going get someone in the coaching box to oversee the whole thing (Balme)- or if he didn't like that he would be out..Bomber agreed and the rest is history. Contrast that to StK where coaches reckon they could work separately from the club structure. I feel Summers is putting a proper management structure in place

In any regular business, the president or chairman, would not talk directly with the coach. And if he ever did, it would be on behalf of the board.

And really, does the board of an AFL club have the experience, skills and knowledge to be telling coaches what they should and shouldn't do?

From the board members I've known over the years - absolutely not.

[Dis Believer]

What does the org chart look like?

I'm not looking for assumptions, opinions or random thoughts - I'd love to know exactly what the reporting structure is!


Clearly, the basis of this decision is due to an employee thumbing his nose at the structure and doing his own thing.

In any regular (non-sporting club) business, that's clearly reason enough to can someone. Obviously if it is ongoing.


But maybe, just maybe the club's structure is all wrong? That doesn't mean someone can make their own rules and doesn't excuse Watters, but it may mean that any coach that comes in just can't operate how they need to.

I mean, why does a coach require approval to do a radio interview?


So who created our structure? And what exactly is it?


If the club provided this information to the members (the second part anyway) then I think it would go a long way to removing the perception that the club is a shambles. Obviously it's more important that those involved know - but we pay the bills and I think it's more than reasonable that this type of information is made public.

The highest person is at the top, then there's a pyramid shape, and all the lowest ranked people are on the bottom line.