News Club creates new position - "Head of Leadership and Culture". Who will fill it?

[Big Gazoongas]

Look, if you're not willing to actually discuss any of the contradictions I point out, then piss off.

The echo chamber of people in here who repeat their biases back to each other constantly is pathetic.

It doesn't matter what actually occurs, people here have a view that comes from being a mile away from knowing what has actually occurred.

Should Chapman have resigned? Yes, following the Tippett scandal, for a lack of rigor around his governance. Is he a horrendous person and a liar? No, he's much more likely someone who tried his best to do what he thought was right for the club, and supported the staff that worked for him. He raised a lot of money for us - but he should have fallen on his sword if he wanted a truly decent culture.

There is nothing to discuss with you. There is always an excuse from you. There is always some angle that the club is right. There is always some bulls**t statement from you giving the club the benefit of the doubt.....and for all your defending here you are again stating that Chapman should have resigned.

When it comes to analising and forming an opinion on what you read, hear, see and what eventually plays out you are so far removed from any logic its not funny.
For someone that acts so smart you are horrendously out of touch.

 

[Mego Red]

Well written and I agree. Perhaps another fault was a poor internal review system that actually rubber stamped poor performance. Chapman and the board have something to be accountable for there.
One thing I can not get my head around at the time of the Tippet saga is why we buckled so quickly and self punished ourselves when in fact we never broke the cap limit. Clubs like Essendon and Collingwood would have fought hammer and nail for a better result. That was Chapmans fault.

I agree.

The closest I ever came to cancelling my membership was when the club didn't fight the Tippett accusations. I thought it was cowardly, and other clubs would have fought it, even if they were more in the wrong than we were.

I was more upset that they didn't push back to the AFL than I was with their complete incompetence at the negotiations.

 

[Elite Crow]

I agree.

The closest I ever came to cancelling my membership was when the club didn't fight the Tippett accusations. I thought it was cowardly, and other clubs would have fought it, even if they were more in the wrong than we were.

I was more upset that they didn't push back to the AFL than I was with their complete incompetence at the negotiations.

They did that because they weren’t prepared to hold Trigg accountable because he was one of the boys, that attitude has continued on with Burton and why we find ourselves in the s**t we are.

Thats why defending Chapman because of his “good” intentions is crap, their intentions are to back the boys club in despite the consequences for the teams performance.

 

[MRB37]

Advertiser saying Michael Klinger could be in line for the role if he doesn't take up a spot on the national selectors team in the cricket.

 

[Mego Red]

They did that because they weren’t prepared to hold Trigg accountable because he was one of the boys, that attitude has continued on with Burton and why we find ourselves in the s**t we are.

Thats why defending Chapman because of his “good” intentions is crap, their intentions are to back the boys club in despite the consequences for the teams performance.

Click read for this one.

If I'm honest, I agree with you.

I think Chapman's key failing is backing people in when they actually need intervention.

You often see that on boards. They back the executive in because they are a bit too close to them as friends.

I don't see that as a character flaw and it's probably helped him as much as hindered along the journey - but we needed a firmer hand following Tippett. We needed decisive action.

Assuming we know what was actually said - there is a case you can make that Trigg's exit was made very easy to guarantee everything remained confidential.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

Click read for this one.

If I'm honest, I agree with you.

I think Chapman's key failing is backing people in when they actually need intervention.

You often see that on boards. They back the executive in because they are a bit too close to them as friends.

I don't see that as a character flaw and it's probably helped him as much as hindered along the journey - but we needed a firmer hand following Tippett. We needed decisive action.

Assuming we know what was actually said - there is a case you can make that Trigg's exit was made very easy to guarantee everything remained confidential.

Hooorray.
Agree with all you've said except the reference to a character flaw. Its a massive character flaw and one of the key reason why we find ourselves in the position and why he needs to go.

For old Chappy its about trying to right the ship so he can come out smelling roses. Problem is he is the key contributor to this mess.

 

[Mego Red]

Hooorray.
Agree with all you've said except the reference to a character flaw. Its a massive character flaw and one of the key reason why we find ourselves in the position and why he needs to go.

For old Chappy its about trying to right the ship so he can come out smelling roses. Problem is he is the key contributor to this mess.

As a board member, being able to build a close and trusting relationship with his executive staff has no doubt historically helped him get the best performance and results from them. That's Chairman 101 stuff, and most of the time that the right leader to be.

But sometimes you have to be bad cop. You still have a clear governance role.

I think he's made some incorrect decisions. But I don't think he is a flawed person. That's what shits me off, when people claim that. Being wrong and being bad aren't the same thing.

 

[flashcrow]

Head of Leadership and Culture

 

[DJ75]

As a board member, being able to build a close and trusting relationship with his executive staff has no doubt historically helped him get the best performance and results from them. That's Chairman 101 stuff, and most of the time that the right leader to be.

But sometimes you have to be bad cop. You still have a clear governance role.

I think he's made some incorrect decisions. But I don't think he is a flawed person. That's what shits me off, when people claim that. Being wrong and being bad aren't the same thing.

So which do you choose, incompetence or wilful neglect? It's one or the other.

 

[knobby]

Head of Leadership and Culture
View attachment 777579

I've heard this too

 

[1970crow]

Advertiser saying Michael Klinger could be in line for the role if he doesn't take up a spot on the national selectors team in the cricket.

National Cricket selector must be one hell of an overpaid gig.