News Richmond turns to Geelong's long-time leadership guru

Perhaps your right @TheChimp in some areas but I wouldn't think a team that goes 9 in a row gets into finals(No other team in history has done that) from 3-10 is mentally weak. I get your point though (I think) that they need to take the next step in finals....
 
your more than likely right rfctiger74 , but my guess is that being in that kind of consultancy both he & the organisation would have received feedback regarding both positive & Negative outcomes from their gigs & would have been very motivated to respond. I think otherwise their program would have gone to the Dogs (pun unintended). Seems the club would not have likely called this person in unless they heard a pitch from Him & were confident that he could bring something that adds in a positive way (but I'm only guessing really)...

You would hope so, but the RTO field is very much focused on getting the next program signed up, once your inquiries stop you are forgotten quite quickly.

the worst LT story I heard was at a school. The instructor came in (not one of the major ones), stirred up a lot of s**t among the staff, and then left. No follow up, no post reviews, and left a Lord of the Flies environment behind him.

The great thing with LT is the success stories of the Cats and co, esp in this town that is what sells their program. Just look at this board, whenever its raised people always say "yeah, but look at Geelong"
 
Not sure how to bag the club about this appointment, but i'm sure some of you will show me how.

I'll have a crack TM4.

"Only part time? FFS! What's the good in having year on year profits if we can't afford to hire a guru full time?!" :D

In all seriousness, great appointment. I think our leadership group has gotten steadily better the last few years and hopefully this will only help improve it some more.

For a moment after I clicked the thread title, I thought it was going to be a write up about super recruit Taylor Hunt :cool:
 
BTW just to note, I am glad the club is doing something about improving leadership at the club.

My only concern is them bringing in LT earlier this year, and now using an LT PIC part time. The program works well in places with a good culture, and I'm hoping we have that now so that we can actually benefit from this (and not implode)
 
I think any program can be used in a positive or negative way. The key for me is that the goals of the program need to be clear. That, it is in fact a tool that can be used to develop the club as a whole. Not as some have mentioned a tool with which to bully younger team mates. That just shows a lack of understanding, Immaturity or perhaps the person presenting was not skilled enough.I'm not exactly clear on what went wrong @ the Doggies though....
 
Dec 5, 2012
12,682
34,178
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Knicks, Giants
not a fan of leading teams, hopefully we have enough internal leadership already in place to make this work, and not implode like the doggies and dees did
It isnt leading teams "Although he was a founding director of leadership organisation Leading Teams, he isn't bringing in that model and will consult independently."
 

Tiger71

?????? King of the Micro ??????
Sep 22, 2011
20,302
72,669
AFL Club
Richmond
I'll have a crack TM4.

"Only part time? FFS! What's the good in having year on year profits if we can't afford to hire a guru full time?!" :D

In all seriousness, great appointment. I think our leadership group has gotten steadily better the last few years and hopefully this will only help improve it some more.

For a moment after I clicked the thread title, I thought it was going to be a write up about super recruit Taylor Hunt :cool:

It is a great appointment and showed immediate results in the latter half of last year. What I love is that it also showed the club spent a further 1.9 million in the footy department this year on top off what we spent the year before. IMO just keep increasing our footy dept spend by that average and we will catch the top spending teams pretty quickly while still remaining viable.
 
Dec 5, 2012
12,682
34,178
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Knicks, Giants
It is a great appointment and showed immediate results in the latter half of last year. What I love is that it also showed the club spent a further 1.9 million in the footy department this year on top off what we spent the year before. IMO just keep increasing our footy dept spend by that average and we will catch the top spending teams pretty quickly while still remaining viable.
How good is Benny Gale?
Super Star.
 
I think any program can be used in a positive or negative way. The key for me is that the goals of the program need to be clear. That, it is in fact a tool that can be used to develop the club as a whole. Not as some have mentioned a tool with which to bully younger team mates. That just shows a lack of understanding, Immaturity or perhaps the person presenting was not skilled enough.I'm not exactly clear on what went wrong @ the Doggies though....

speaking to a few people on this, the feedback Ive been given is its a very powerful tool, but its success depends upon the existing organizational culture. At the dogs, the cliques and club divisions meant the tools were used to intimidate and consolidate power. A good example would be the group criticism sessions. At Geelong, these were constructive with assessments bringing out negatives, but always bringing it back to a positive (the best example being GAJ). At the Doggies, it was more like a star chamber, with people subjected to a bag out session. The Aka sessions were classics of this. Yes Aka had issues, and these needed to be raised. The notion however of young players telling Aka what behaviour was needed to "become a premiership player" was laughable.
 
It is a great appointment and showed immediate results in the latter half of last year. What I love is that it also showed the club spent a further 1.9 million in the footy department this year on top off what we spent the year before. IMO just keep increasing our footy dept spend by that average and we will catch the top spending teams pretty quickly while still remaining viable.

Not only that mate but with the lessons hopefully learned after our first year with a standalone VFL side, the added investment into the footy department 'should' hopefully mean we can attract better coaches to help the development of the younger players we draft as well as give them every chance to develop into quality players who can push for a spot in the senior side in time.

Having money is definitely better than not having enough and we can at least be confident we've got the resources to ensure we keep up with the top spenders.
 
Its not implementing leading team. The bloke is just consulting

As I said before, do you seriously believe a guy who was key in setting up the principles of leading teams will stray from the philosophies that greatly?
 

razaxp360

Senior List
Nov 17, 2013
298
295
AFL Club
Richmond
Praise the Lord!! Finally Richmond! Very Impressed with the brains trust of the club due to this appointment. Coming from a Carlton family, it was a worry that we potentially had been heading down their path, continuing our mental weakness and not standing up on the big stage, when it matters the most. Finals is what counts, and with his experience at Geelong this can only be good for now and beyond.
 
Perhaps your right @TheChimp in some areas but I wouldn't think a team that goes 9 in a row gets into finals(No other team in history has done that) from 3-10 is mentally weak. I get your point though (I think) that they need to take the next step in finals....
I agree with you in part. To win nine in a row was outstanding. All supporters knew that the team had the ability, but to put it in actions is something else.
If you look a little closer to the teams played I believe that their was one game were the pressure was on. Adelaide in Adelaide is a win for the ages. Yes, Richmond did beat PA,WCE away and SS away. All those teams were out of form or major players missing. The first couple of games had no pressure, as no one expected them to get anywhere.
The players themselves admitted that they dropped the standards required to compete. Now the test comes. They know they can play, what the standards required to be a finalist , so now is the time to deliver.
As commented before, the WB made a real hash of their program. Honest feedback is important, as long as the final out come is positive and all players feel they can work as a team. The WB had real division amongst the group, something that Richmond coaches and players need to be aware of and drive a positive culture.
 

tunksy

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 6, 2011
10,145
17,254
AFL Club
Richmond
As I said before, do you seriously believe a guy who was key in setting up the principles of leading teams will stray from the philosophies that greatly?
seems you got smashed with similar replies to mine haha.

i have hope we dont implode like the doggies. i feel as though our culture has improved immensely and the fact cotch isn't being mean enough will lead to good things not worse things. constructive criticism is the key and needs to be remembered by all here. blokes just need to be prepared to take it on the chin and go ok i need to such and such to get better, not sook and whinge.
 

theflea

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 16, 2010
24,386
27,878
victoria
AFL Club
Richmond
It's impossible to not train to the same idea, but it's using the program outline and the program materials that would cause an ip conflict. As long as you name it something else, and use independent mats, you could effectively be the same.

I don't know, but let me ask you this. The leading teams people are passionate and obsessed about the program and its perceived success. You really think one of the key people behind that is abandoning that when he works solo? His business card may change, but you can't change what a person believes.
That's fair, as I would expect leadership per se can be pretty generic, but the programs might not be the same or at least presented differently. It also may be dependant on what the client parameters are. I get that you don't like the confrontational aspect of LT's but unless we see it we don't know its exactly the same. I would expect he has modified it somewhat but as you say maybe it still has aspects of the previous programs. I still maintain we need it, as we need to harden up a little.
 

theflea

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 16, 2010
24,386
27,878
victoria
AFL Club
Richmond
You would hope so, but the RTO field is very much focused on getting the next program signed up, once your inquiries stop you are forgotten quite quickly.

the worst LT story I heard was at a school. The instructor came in (not one of the major ones), stirred up a lot of s**t among the staff, and then left. No follow up, no post reviews, and left a Lord of the Flies environment behind him.

The great thing with LT is the success stories of the Cats and co, esp in this town that is what sells their program. Just look at this board, whenever its raised people always say "yeah, but look at Geelong"
It sounds as if the program wasn't contextualised to the organisation at hand, or it was the wrong program to start with, particularly any non accredited training package.
 
That's fair, as I would expect leadership per se can be pretty generic, but the programs might not be the same or at least presented differently. It also may be dependant on what the client parameters are. I get that you don't like the confrontational aspect of LT's but unless we see it we don't know its exactly the same. I would expect he has modified it somewhat but as you say maybe it still has aspects of the previous programs. I still maintain we need it, as we need to harden up a little.

I have no issue with the confrontational aspect of the program. My massive issue with it is that they do not audit the organization initially, customize based upon what that audit reveals, and then do proper follow up and maintenance.

they have a cookie cutter approach, and no follow up because it doesnt generate revenue.

this means the program is awesome IF your organization culture is suited to its applications
 

theflea

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 16, 2010
24,386
27,878
victoria
AFL Club
Richmond
speaking to a few people on this, the feedback Ive been given is its a very powerful tool, but its success depends upon the existing organizational culture. At the dogs, the cliques and club divisions meant the tools were used to intimidate and consolidate power. A good example would be the group criticism sessions. At Geelong, these were constructive with assessments bringing out negatives, but always bringing it back to a positive (the best example being GAJ). At the Doggies, it was more like a star chamber, with people subjected to a bag out session. The Aka sessions were classics of this. Yes Aka had issues, and these needed to be raised. The notion however of young players telling Aka what behaviour was needed to "become a premiership player" was laughable.
The point on the management structure is a good one, but it is in every work place for any training program. I just talked to a mate who runs he owns consultancy on education and leadership who did a session at a leading school for the teachers, and the program was really well received. But the principle didn't follow up the program, with procedures to continue to implement the learning that was given, so the all the staff just gave it away. Very poor leadership by the school executive.
 
Back