Footscray football clubs core values and purpose

[lachy]

This topic has been mentioned with some information covered in the the thread 'Patience is required like it or not'

With the dramatic changes in the club overnight I thought it appropriate for its own thread, given that David Smorgon and Peter Gordon had to front the AFL to ensure we were viable and had a viable future and there was no animosity still towards Peter Gordon.

Our position in the club is still precarious despite the years a fantastic hard work by David Smorgon and those who assisted him over the years. The 1000 odd page trading and drafting thread becomes a mute point if the club no longer exists.

Posters know my position on the name change, and unlike many on the same side of the argument mine is not an emotional one but a strong beleif that it was and still is a disastrous business decision as it changed the core ideologies of the club.

In the thread noted in this post myself and other posters tried to articulate the WHY of our club, which in essence is its core ideology and purpose. I am not sure how to link those threads so apologies for having to swithch threads to read the information.

Whether it is Peter Gordon or anyone else as president the first thing they must do to have a visioned strong future is articulate our core ideology and live by it. A leader ensures the core ideolgies are there many a generation after they are not.

Understand it never changes but ensure we also have a robust vision for our future that is both strong and flexible to allow opur club to grow no matter the obsticles put before us.

A shortened version of an article co authored by Jim Collins published in the Harvard busienss review is below. the full version is linked in the thread mentioned above:
A core ideology has two parts:
1. Core values are the handful of guiding
principles by which a company navigates.
They require no external justification. Instead of changing its
core values, a great company will change its
markets—seek out different customers—in
order to remain true to its core values.
2. Core purpose is an organization’s most
fundamental reason for being.
It should not
be confused with the company’s current
product lines or customer segments. Rather, it
reflects people’s idealistic motivations for
doing the company’s work.

An envisioned future, the second component
of an effective vision, has two elements:
1. Big, Hairy, Audacious Goals (BHAGs) are
ambitious plans that rev up the entire organization.
They typically require 10 to 30 years’
work to complete.
2. Vivid descriptions paint a picture of what
it will be like to achieve the BHAGs.
They
make the goals vibrant, engaging—and tangible.
Don’t confuse your company’s core ideology
with its envisioned future—in particular, don’t
confuse a BHAG with a core purpose. A BHAG
is a clearly articulated goal that is reachable
within 10 to 30 years. But your core purpose
can never be completed.

 

[Interloper]

Putting this here to keep the Footscray vs Western Bulldogs name change out of the Smorgon resigns thread. At 3:45 in the "Smorgon hands over..." video Gordon says that he supports the name change (from Footscray to Western Bulldogs) but that the change has to work harder for us. It sounds like he won't be championing any move to revert to Footscray as the name of our team in the AFL competition. The VFL team would be a more likely outcome.
Nothing was specifically said about this but it seems to me that one of the principal complaints surrounding the name change initially was that the members were effectively disenfranchised with no opportunity to vote on the issue. This is understandably a sticking point with many. I wonder if this might finally be addressed in some way and the club can move forward.

 

[dogsbody]

...Gordon says that he supports the name change (from Footscray to Western Bulldogs) but that the change has to work harder for us. It sounds like he won't be championing any move to revert to Footscray as the name of our team in the AFL competition. ....

Gordon isn't going to adopt a position beyond steady as she goes until he's installed and will then allow some time before he tries to put his mark on the organisation. But even if he did come out and announce his intention to ressurect the name, it won't be just him, it'll be a board decision, with a bit of luck, after consultation with the members. Frankly, although I support reversion strongly and it's the black mark against Smorgon, I'd be worried if it was an issue this early, let Gordon and the Board concentrate on running at a profit, reducing the debt and onfield success for the time being.

 

[Butane]

Not to belittle Lachy's will thought out essay on core values but I can't sit through another Footscray Vs Western thread.

This is how I feel.

 

[lachy]

Not to belittle Lachy's will thought out essay on core values but I can't sit through another Footscray Vs Western thread.

This is how I feel.

Butane,

like the video, one thing though the thread isn't meant to be just a Footscray v WB thread.

The name change itself tried to change the core of what this club stands for, what it is about and how it is seen by the community in general. Any successful business distinguishes its core from its vision, we didn't and it is why the name change will always be devicisive unless those who beleive in the club can be shown that the name is NOT part of the Core value or core purpose of the club.

It doesn't matter who the leadership are, leaders attract people who beleive in what they beleive in. This is fact not fiction, and a sporting club magnifies this. It is not just a region based decision we will grow our club by attracting people who share our core values and core purpose this has been proven in business time after time and in another thread I have provided links and can provide many more if people don't beleive this to be true.

We changed our name and expected a result, but never looked at the reason WHY people give their heart and soul to the club. it really was primary school plastic marketing. Comments made in this thread above are true. Whether its Peter Gordon or someone else, the name MUST be addressed properly, determine if it is part of our core, and if so change it back and never change it again, if not then is it a valid visionary change.

As for the 15 years since the change, I wonder if anyone knows the apple story and Steve Jobbs.

Steve Jobbs was a co-founder of apple and grew it into a successful business. Now Steve was not the friendliest person to deal with so the board of apple in their infinant wisdom using standard business management and marketing theories sacked him.

What happend over the next 15 years was the company lost its WHY or core purpose and values as the marketing people got hold of the company. With the business close to foing under they begged Steve Jobbs to come back.

He did, changes were made that brought he business back to its WHY or core and all decisions made from then on did not move one bit from the core of what apple was about, yet it became a leader in visionary equipment. Incidently none of its products are technically the best but they reflect the core values and pupose of the business.

Apple recently became the largest business in the world.

 

[yebiga]

This is a more important issue than many are comfortable to acknowledge. The change of President, who by reports in the Hun today is full of many ideas, is a timely opportunity to re-examine the clubs vision, image and future direction.

There is no doubt that D.Smorgon has been a professional and steady hand at the helm. He has guided the club thru 5 preliminary finals and grown our membership base. But in the end, we are still a struggling club, with a $10M debt, reliant on AFL hand-outs, a comparatively low membership and a team again in rebuild mode.

As pointed out, the name change made some 15 years ago was designed to rebrand the club in a new positive light, rid itself of any stigma attached to the Footscray area, and broaden the appeal throughout the western suburbs of melbourne. There was no consultation with the membership and supporters on this change; no submissions were asked for or any discussions entertained. Not involving the membership in such a fundamental change was a lost opportunity to engage the base and obtain buy in, loyalty and support.

I am not quite sure why so many dismiss this without giving it fair consideration, as if it were a matter of no consequence, tiresome, petty...

Other areas of concern are: poorly negotiated terms with Ethihad, limited corporate sponsorship, membership base not expancing at sufficient rate compared to other clubs i.e. Hawthorn, lack of a vision to excite the membership and expand its base.

These concerns are not new, rather they have become entrenched.

Unless the club can address these concerns in a meaningful way prior to the next TV rights contract, there could be some serious and uncomfortable old demons to face: relocation or merger. At the minute, these are more likely than not.

Averting this destiny does not necessarily entail a name change, but it does require envigorating the base, supporters, sponsors. It requires a financial robustness and an exciting vision. This is more than just winning a premiership. Hawthorn after being the most successful premiership club in the modern ear held a meeting which could have easily ended in a merger with Melb FC.

So this thread is a timely piece.

 

[lachy]

Yebiga you are spot on with your post.

I understand how some posters see the big footy forum.

As I have noted in other threads, this forum provides an amazing opportunity to raise issues, provide solutions and generally discuss the club we all love. And more importantly we know people inside the club read it.

This issue is bigger than the Footscray v WB debate, as with all you mentioned in your thread as well as other posters noted in other threads, Interloper as an example, no one at a leadership level at our club articulates our core values or core purpose and unless these are fully lived by unchanged, any growth or vision will at best be average or more likely fail. You sum up well why the name change will never work, people were never engaged in the change so the decision makers at the time had no idea whther the name itself formed part of the non changeable core vaues and purpose of the club.

Our coach does seem to have tapped into our core, more so than allot of those who have been involved in the club for a long time. I am not sure if this is a good thing, that outsiders get it more than peolple inside the club or not, but it is interesting none the less.

The more supporters who demand vision whilst respecting and never changing our core the more chance of success we have, as our leaders will either GET IT or we will not exist.

Peter Gordon's speach alluded to him getting it, and his history tends to suggest he does. Lets hope with a progressive board, a more conciliatory AFL, he and other leaders at the club can address the issues you raised.

The only way they will do this is articulate and live by WHY the club exists, its core purpose and Values, this will attract those who also beleive in those cores to the club, and allow growth through identifying opportunities in all parts of society that resonate with what the club is about.

 

[caesar86]

I believe that the ill-conceived “Western Bulldogs” moniker introduced in 1997 must be replaced by our traditional name Footscray.

The well-documented reason for such a change in 1997 was based on the logic that the “Western” branding would allow the club to increase membership and corporate sponsorship levels in the Western suburbs of Melbourne. However, what the club failed to grasp was that Footscray has always been known as the team of the West.

Later I will analyse whether this ambition of increased membership sales were actually achieved after 15 years under the new banner. But to begin with, I would like to make parallels with other clubs both in the AFL and NRL and what is required to be a sporting powerhouse in Australia.

The mid-nineties saw a noticeable shift in football club marketing as weaker clubs struggled with the implications of a shift to a fully professional football league. Extra strain was placed on these clubs to remain profitable against the backdrop of rising costs. The pervasive marketing school of thought of the day was to change the name of clubs to geographically broaden their supporter bases. In the AFL, Footscray became the “Western Bulldogs” and North Melbourne became simply the “Kangaroos”.

This phenomenon was not just confined to the AFL with a number of weaker NRL clubs doing likewise. For instance, the Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs became known initially as the “Sydney Bulldogs” in 1995 before dropping the Sydney branding altogether and became the “Bulldogs”. The Eastern Suburbs Roosters changed to the Sydney City Roosters and then the Sydney Roosters. The Balmain Tigers changed to the Sydney Tigers for a couple of years before reverting back to Balmain until they merged with Western Suburbs to form the Wests Tigers. And finally, the Cronulla-Sutherlands Sharks became the geographically indistinct “Sharks”. All of these changes were made in the mid-nineties, the same time proud Footscray became the Western Bulldogs.

It is important to note, however, that in the intervening years, every single one of these clubs (including North Melbourne) bar the Western Bulldogs and Sydney Roosters have reverted back to their traditional club names. Why? The reason is simple. The people who implemented those changes did not understand the reason why supporters part with their hard earned money for memberships and merchandise. It has nothing to do with glitzy marketing campaigns. It is fundamentally buying into the identity of the club and the history that goes with it. Supporters of the above mentioned clubs felt that part of their club was now “missing” when the tradition and identity of their proud clubs was removed.

I now turn my attention to this misguided marketing ideology that is behind the re-branding of Footscray. Successful clubs are those that have a large supporter base to financially draw upon with increased membership and merchandise sales. Thus, in turn, corporate partners have a preference to sponsor these clubs due to the additional exposure that they provide their brand and also being associated with a “winning culture”.

It is beyond dispute that the clubs with the most members are the ones who have had the most on-field success, consistently over a long period of time. If you analyse the records of all the big Melbourne clubs such as Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond, Essendon and Hawthorn, what they all have in common multiple premierships at regular intervals. People want to support clubs that win and win regularly.

Successful clubs (with the most members) are not the ones with the most geographically inclusive names. The Melbourne Demons are a perfect example. According to the marketing philosophy of the Western Bulldogs re-branding, Melbourne should have the most supporters as their brand encompasses the whole of Melbourne. Instead, they have one of the lowest supporter bases along with the Western Bulldogs. Why? Clearly, it is because they have consistently under-performed on the field since their glory days over six decades ago.

This is the reason why the Western Bulldogs have one of the lowest membership bases of the Melbourne clubs NOT the fact that they were once called Footscray. Their lack of success is highlighted by the fact that the club has only won one premiership in 1954 and a losing grand final in 1961 since they were admitted into the big league. The club shares this familiar theme with the other Melbourne clubs with the lowest supporter bases such as North Melbourne, Melbourne and St Kilda—a lack of on-field success.

Additionally, if the Western Bulldogs re-branding philosophy was so successful, why haven’t other clubs followed in their footsteps? Why hasn’t Essendon become the Northern Bombers; Hawthorn the Eastern Hawks and St Kilda the Southern Saints? This has not and will not occur as these clubs rightly recognise that their existing brands of over a hundred years tradition is their most powerful selling point. It is the very reason why long-standing AFL clubs (unlike many NRL clubs) do not change their traditional jersey every second year for the sake of increase merchandise revenue. They understand that their history is what binds the club together and makes them who they are.

This brings me to the membership levels of the Bulldogs since they became the “Western Bulldogs”. People often point to old Footscray who were always struggling to keep their head above a sea of red ink, and compare them to the club’s current relative secure financial position. They then conclude that this improvement is due to the Western Bulldogs name change. However, on closer inspection, it is clear that this is instead due to both the prudent financial management of the club and increased financial support by the AFL since Fitzroy was forced to merge with the Brisbane Bears. Supporters of the Western Bulldogs brand point to the increase in membership numbers since 1996, however, what they fail to mention is that AFL club membership has increased substantially across all clubs with administrations becoming aware of the correlation between increased membership and revenue. The following excerpt is from Mr Anthony Costa’s article titled, “Branding: Why AFL’s Bulldogs should reclaims their Footscray name after 15 years”:

To their credit the Bulldogs have grown significantly since their rebranding. From 1997 to 2012 the club’s membership has increased 49.83%. Yet total AFL club memberships have grown similarly over this period – up 45.96% (44.27% if you exclude the two recent expansion teams).

If the Western strategy is really working, if it has won over the fastest growth region in the whole country, then shouldn’t the Bulldogs be bounding further ahead of their rivals?

As of 2010, 16.7% of the Victoria’s total population lived in Melbourne’s West. If the Bulldogs’ brand strategy is right then even in a bad year they should dwarf “land locked” North Melbourne. Why then do they currently have 11.38% fewer members than the Kangaroos?

These figures clearly debunk the myth that the change of name to the Western Bulldogs has been successful in widening the club’s supporter base. The powers to be who instituted this change wanted to steer clear from the “so-called” Footscray stigma of a team based in a gritty, working class suburb. This logic does not make sense as Collingwood has clearly become the number one club in Australia based on their much heralded working class roots. This working class identity of the Footscray name only reinforces and compliments the club’s mascot, the Bulldog. Bulldogs are renowned for their grit and determination which is exactly in the spirit of club legends Charlie Sutton and Ted Whitten.

I applaud the club in reverting back to the traditional Footscray jumper of the 1954 premiership side. However, I believe that it is time to honour those past sons of the ‘Scray and once again be known to the AFL community as the Footscray Bulldogs.

 

[lachy]

caesar86 great post.

Again it bewilders me how opposition supporters get it, and in our case a coach who worked at 3 opposition clubs seems to get it, yet so many of our own supporters and particularly decision makers don't.

 

[VitalDread]

 

[Interloper]

That's all very well Vital Dread but do the things being discussed here interest you (I'm sensing not) or anyone of your generation do you think?

 

[SonOfScray]

caesar86 Quality post.

I don't want to get into the debate of the name here (well I do, but no one wants it to go there so I won't ) but I do want to acknowledge that the values and narrative are really important and need to take centre stage again.

The club has really pushed the 'community' aspect really well since the mid 90's with varying degrees of success. I think our branding around community engagement has been better than the actual push into the 'Western' market. I'm talking about things like Bulldog's Backyard, SpiritWest, VU partnerships, etc etc. Credit where it is due.

When you watch 'Year of the Dogs' there is an interesting discussion about our image and how to make us sexy. We've been pretty good on that front, on field most people would acknowledge we've been an entertaining Club. I do think we may have thrown the baby out with the bathwater on a Club level though.

Some of the defining features of our Club, that combative nature, cede nullis, wog squad type stuff the fans really respond to and creates a universality of experience that has been eroded. I hope PG and expect can address this.

 

[Interloper]

So where are we going with this? Are we colonising the greater west for the AFL? In essence, our Mission, should we choose to accept it, is to sell AFL (the game) to new settlers, undecideds and people who identify with Greater Western Melbourne (it can be reasonably assumed that residents of Greater Western Melbourne with pre-existing allegiances will be difficult to budge). Other sports or allegiances to other sports seem the primary obstacle/common enemy (perhaps apathy) and this would fit with AFL’s goal of dominating the Australian sporting landscape (acknowledging that such domination is a powerful negotiating tool with regard to television rights and that this is essential to maintaining the competition as we know it and potentially improving it). We are to do the AFL’s bidding in this region (Greater Western Melbourne) in return for life giving sustenance (equalisation handouts) in the short term, and, if we do the job well enough, increased and sustainable membership will be the pay off and thus a sustainable existence which will diminish or eliminate our financial dependence on the AFL. Helping the AFL to grow the pie generally could also have beneficial commercial outcomes for us. The relationship between ourselves and the AFL is being presented as symbiotic which it essentially is in the contexts of the game itself and a commercially driven western crusade. We are crusading for survival in the first instance, sustainability and prosperity thereafter, while the AFL wants market penetration and domination.
The commercial aspects of this are not difficult to understand and there is no doubt that our financial position requires urgent attention in the short term and sustainable revenue streams in the longer term. A commercial imperative no doubt. I also see some reason for confidence that other aspects of the club’s being will also be addressed with similar perspicacity. The opportunity exists.

 

[dogsbody]

I don't know who you are, ceasar86, but for a 5th post, not a bad effort (that's old working class western suburbs understatment for "brilliant"). I dips me lid.

Perennial underdogs ultimately succeed when they stick fat, stay tough and take pride. Collingwood, take a bow.

 

[Igloo]

I don't know who you are, ceasar86, but for a 5th post, not a bad effort (that's old working class western suburbs understatment for "brilliant"). I dips me lid.

Perennial underdogs ultimately succeed when they stick fat, stay tough and take pride. Collingwood, take a bow.

At the time of the post, it was his 1st

 

[VitalDread]

That's all very well Vital Dread but do the things being discussed here interest you (I'm sensing not) or anyone of your generation do you think?

my view on the naming of bulldogs and the overall cost is that it should be kept to western bulldogs
since i feel more of a connection to bulldogs instead of footscray since i live in the eastern suburns and i always call wb- bulldogs
8km on my phone os simple answer

 

[SonOfScray]

my view on the naming of bulldogs and the overall cost is that it should be kept to western bulldogs
since i feel more of a connection to bulldogs instead of footscray since i live in the eastern suburns and i always call wb- bulldogs
8km on my phone os simple answer

Don't take this as me picking on you specifically mate, because this idea that the two are separate comes up a bit. I don't get it. How can you have more of a connection with Footscray than the Bulldogs, or vice vera? It is the same Club. Is it the case that you see them as different entities, one whose values and identity more closely aligns with your own?

That view would be an interesting one in the context of this discussion.

 

[Interloper]

my view on the naming of bulldogs and the overall cost is that it should be kept to western bulldogs
since i feel more of a connection to bulldogs instead of footscray since i live in the eastern suburns and i always call wb- bulldogs
8km on my phone os simple answer

Thanks for your input

 

[dogsbody]

At the time of the post, it was his 1st

his next was why Sydney should wear the old South Melbourne Jjumper in Melbourne. The lad's a visionary.

 

[VitalDread]

Don't take this as me picking on you specifically mate, because this idea that the two are separate comes up a bit. I don't get it. How can you have more of a connection with Footscray than the Bulldogs, or vice vera? It is the same Club. Is it the case that you see them as different entities, one whose values and identity more closely aligns with your own?

That view would be an interesting one in the context of this discussion.

don't care if you were just targetting me lol
it's becaise i cannot say " remember when footscary played against bears"
it's the same club same legends, same players but it's bulldogs to me and thats the only name i have lived with
i'm only 20 years old and bulldogs is only name i grew up with until i was old enough to know footscary was renamed to bulldogs when i was a more mature footy fan

 

[SonOfScray]

don't care if you were just targetting me lol
it's becaise i cannot say " remember when footscary played against bears"
it's the same club same legends, same players but it's bulldogs to me and thats the only name i have lived with
i'm only 20 years old and bulldogs is only name i grew up with until i was old enough to know footscary was renamed to bulldogs when i was a more mature footy fan

Ta. Only added the bit at the start in case you were one of these flogs that gets terribly upset when someone offers an opinion that doesn't align with their staunch belief in the Western branding and its infallible outcomes. But you're obviously not so, fair play.

I'm 27. I think there is something interesting happening between the time we've become really acutely aware of what the Club is and represents for us. With respect to what lachy is discussing, I think a really explicit and well developed set of values would reduce the gap between our experiences. In recent years I think we've not put forward a strong message about what we stand for and why that is the case.

 

[Interloper]

don't care if you were just targetting me lol
it's becaise i cannot say " remember when footscary played against bears"
it's the same club same legends, same players but it's bulldogs to me and thats the only name i have lived with
i'm only 20 years old and bulldogs is only name i grew up with until i was old enough to know footscary was renamed to bulldogs when i was a more mature footy fan

You're perspective is as valid as anyone's in the context of this discussion. There are probably many supporters in your age group with a similar perspective and it would be part of the consideration in any deliberations the club may have had on it's name. Most likely those deliberations have already happened and a name change is unlikely.

 

[SonOfScray]

The disparity between a member's understanding of the Club and what they are buying into as a member for fans pre 97 and post seems to be fairly high in that scenario, Interloper. That would be a weakness in my view. The Club really would be more appealing if it leant itself to a thoroughly universal experience for those who identify as one of us. What are your thoughts?

 

[VitalDread]

You're perspective is as valid as anyone's in the context of this discussion. There are probably many supporters in your age group with a similar perspective and it would be part of the consideration in any deliberations the club may have had on it's name. Most likely those deliberations have already happened and a name change is unlikely.

naming the vfl side footscary will be a good start since young supporters will ask why is it named that and could lead to people looking up bulldogs history more

 

[Eastdog]

I too live in the Eastern Suburbs like Vital Dread and since I've supported them its always been the Bulldogs for me. If we went back to the Footscray name I wouldn't mind that either because its still the same club the Bulldogs back to its a original name. It would be interesting to see supporters numbers of afl clubs in areas around Melbourne.