News Off-field discussion - AGM discussion - General Governance, board etc.

[derp de derp]

Listening to Andy Gowers speak on the Hawk talk podcast was inspiring and I feel he would have been a great appointment to the board alongside Ian Silk.

Shearer and Holdstock’s recent media performances have both left a bitter taste in my mouth. Shearer does some great work but I wish he hadn’t commented on the footy department and Holdstock whilst she makes many valid points comes across as wanting to throw too many elbows when we are all looking for a stable platform to launch from.

Whoever is unsuccessful I hope they still find a way to contribute and don’t begrudge the club.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Maybloom madness]

I believe that state government funding that is essentially withheld from clubs and associations who don't meet the 40% quota. I am not sure that the figure would be $15M - I believe that's a figure that is being withheld from Collingwood on the same issue - I could be wrong though.



Personally I think someone who has been involved with law and governance for as long as she has would not be out of place on our board. That said, I would agree that the commercial acumen of Richmond's directors are a class above and they are all incredibly credentialed individuals. My overall point is that I believe there would be similarly incredibly well credentialed Hawthorn women in the corporate sector who we should be encouraging to run for vacant board positions in future. My argument isn't that Holdstock should be on the board - I openly admitted having not voted for her, I was just defending the points she was making as I felt they were valid.



Don't disagree with any of that - and I don't think anyone asked her to step aside because she is a woman, it was purely a financial thing and that H4C and HFC had obviously made a compromise on Shearer and Silk and Holdstock didn't agree to that. I am not suggesting being a woman is why she was asked to stand aside and if that's an assertion made by Holdstock I would disagree with that element of her statement.



Just because you are a litigator doesn't mean you don't have practical governance experience. Holdstock has experience in governance and risk management - areas of importance to a board in any capacity. She's also a board member of Financial Counselling Victoria - so it's not as if she doesn't have experience at board level.

 

[Maybloom madness]

Don't we already have that in spades? Don't forget we have Nick Holland

Nick Holland

Age

49

Ht

195cm

Wt

102kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

13.8

4star

K

9.2

4star

HB

4.6

3star

M

6.8

5star

T

1.0

3star

G

1.3

5star

No current season stats available

D

11.0

3star

K

7.8

3star

HB

3.2

3star

M

4.8

5star

T

0.6

3star

G

0.4

3star

who is Company Secretary and responsible for governance.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Don't we already have that in spades? Don't forget we have Nick Holland who is Company Secretary and responsible for governance.

Well it's the present board that was being boasted about how great its governance was when declaring our coaching succession plan would 100% work, so...

 

[Hawker55]

Amazing how just a couple of weeks after being challenged Jeff has buried the hatchet with Don Scott who will now accept Legend status

 

[Easy Slips Catch]

Amazing how just a couple of weeks after being challenged Jeff has buried the hatchet with Don Scott who will now accept Legend status

How could you possibly come to that conclusion?

 

[play2win]

Just because you are a litigator doesn't mean you don't have practical governance experience. Holdstock has experience in governance and risk management - areas of importance to a board in any capacity. She's also a board member of Financial Counselling Victoria - so it's not as if she doesn't have experience at board level.

I would consider experience in governance and risk management a mandatory requirement for any or all board members, hardly something that should distinguish yourself to command a board position. It is real life experience in running successful businesses or organisations, marketing etc. that should elevate any potential candidate for consideration. Just my 2c

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Listening to Andy Gowers speak on the Hawk talk podcast was inspiring and I feel he would have been a great appointment to the board alongside Ian Silk.

Shearer and Holdstock’s recent media performances have both left a bitter taste in my mouth. Shearer does some great work but I wish he hadn’t commented on the footy department and Holdstock whilst she makes many valid points comes across as wanting to throw too many elbows when we are all looking for a stable platform to launch from.

Whoever is unsuccessful I hope they still find a way to contribute and don’t begrudge the club.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would assume that if/once Silk joins the board this year, Gowers will follow in 2022.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Because she is a QUALIFIED woman and at present we have a lack of QUALIFIED women in board positions and it is to the financial detriment of the club.

Qualified or not, when someone is using their gender as the platform for election, ad appears to be the case at least (we are only getting a snippet), it makes you question whether they are right for the job.
Gender, race, etc, should not be a factor in any election

 

[flinchfree]

Qualified or not, when someone is using their gender as the platform for election, ad appears to be the case at least (we are only getting a snippet), it makes you question whether they are right for the job.
Gender, race, etc, should not be a factor in any election

Just how are young racially diverse women ever going to get a place at the table when old white men replace eachother with like minded old white men, regardless of qualifications?
Your argument is the same as was made against affirmative action for women in the late 70's through 80's/90's, without which women:
a) Would never have been considered for senior positions
b) Encouraged to apply for said positions
c) Could envisage the possibilities that should be equal for all, and thus follow educational opportunities in business, science and math that lead to credentials that cannot be dismissed in the hiring process.
d) See women achieve their potential, and in fact offer a point of difference purely because some perspective IS shaped by your gender. That different perspective allows companies and people in governance to see the full array of options to delivering results, sometimes in ways that are not initially intuitive.

I think when a historically skewed and compromised system favors one section of society and seeks to maintain that system by encouraging inertia, citing lack of qualifications of their challengers, I would argue you never know what you don't know if you surround yourself by only same same.
Personally, I'd love to see a young Sudanese Mom of 3 who works as a bus driver elected to the board.
Or other non traditional board executive.
I think the perspective of 'ordinary' working folk who can speak to the challenges of being a supporter with limited funds, lack of voice in the community, and who would bring ideas of what would encourage and excite the youth who can't be part of traditional footy routes of development would be an exciting addition to the Hawthorn Club.

Not everyone has to be an accountant you know.

 

[Yardie]

This whole thread appears to have been started to attack Jennifer under the guise of "general board discussion".

 

[flinchfree]

This whole thread appears to have been started to attack Jennifer under the guise of "general board discussion".

Agree. Don't understand it.

 

[Hawkk]

Just how are young racially diverse women ever going to get a place at the table when old white men replace eachother with like minded old white men, regardless of qualifications?
Your argument is the same as was made against affirmative action for women in the late 70's through 80's/90's, without which women:
a) Would never have been considered for senior positions
b) Encouraged to apply for said positions
c) Could envisage the possibilities that should be equal for all, and thus follow educational opportunities in business, science and math that lead to credentials that cannot be dismissed in the hiring process.
d) See women achieve their potential, and in fact offer a point of difference purely because some perspective IS shaped by your gender. That different perspective allows companies and people in governance to see the full array of options to delivering results, sometimes in ways that are not initially intuitive.

I think when a historically skewed and compromised system favors one section of society and seeks to maintain that system by encouraging inertia, citing lack of qualifications of their challengers, I would argue you never know what you don't know if you surround yourself by only same same.
Personally, I'd love to see a young Sudanese Mom of 3 who works as a bus driver elected to the board.
Or other non traditional board executive.
I think the perspective of 'ordinary' working folk who can speak to the challenges of being a supporter with limited funds, lack of voice in the community, and who would bring ideas of what would encourage and excite the youth who can't be part of traditional footy routes of development would be an exciting addition to the Hawthorn Club.

Not everyone has to be an accountant you know.

That’s candy but what actual board credentials is she actually bringing to the board

I absolutely support greater gender balance but amongst the 80,000 rank and file surely we can come up with a better candidate than a local litigator with some grassroots NFB board experience

It’s not like we are a Footscray or North Melbourne this is the Hawthorn Football Club

 

[Yardie]

That’s candy but what actual board credentials is she actually bringing to the board

I absolutely support greater gender balance but amongst the 80,000 rank and file surely we can come up with a better candidate than a local litigator with some grassroots NFB board experience

It’s not like we are a Footscray or North Melbourne this is the Hawthorn Football Club

Jeff wanted to put Simon Taylor on the Board. What was his Board credentials?

 

[Hawkk]

Jeff wanted to put Simon Taylor on the Board. What was his Board credentials?

Absolutely, the quality of applicants (Ian Silk notwithstanding) leaves a lot to be desired

 

[Baz_hawk]

Qualified or not, when someone is using their gender as the platform for election, ad appears to be the case at least (we are only getting a snippet), it makes you question whether they are right for the job.
Gender, race, etc, should not be a factor in any election

Have a read: https://www.footyalmanac.com.au/alm...-on-the-future-of-the-hawthorn-football-club/

I don't really see her running a gender driven campaign at all, she has a lot of great ideas and seems to be looking at ways to really expand upon the family club tag line we project. Some of her ideas were quite good and I voted for her as she seems to be keen to walk into the role and push to make the club better.

 

[jiphoc]

Jeff wanted to put Simon Taylor on the Board. What was his Board credentials?

Director at one of the big 4 Accountancy firms by memory (i forget which and too lazy to Google).

I would have thought plenty of Partner level candidates with more experience would be not hard to find should Hawks go looking, so unusual choice for me. Having said that even if he is chosen he would be more then qualified, just a question of if someone else is more qualified.

Smells of a "bring back one of the boys" to get a bit of support from the Hawthorn faithful.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Director at one of the big 4 Accountancy firms by memory (i forget which and too lazy to Google).

I would have thought plenty of Partner level candidates with more experience would be not hard to find should Hawks go looking, so unusual choice for me. Having said that even if he is chosen he would be more then qualified, just a question of if someone else is more qualified.

Smells of a "bring back one of the boys" to get a bit of support from the Hawthorn faithful.

Director is just a title for upper management at Big 4 firms - it doesn’t mean he’s on the board of directors. It’s still not to be sneezed at - but having worked with a bunch of similarly titled folk at Deloittes who I wouldn’t trust to organise a drinks session, it’s not a title I would be immediately impressed by. That said - Taylor’s CV was pretty damn good and I think he’ll make a good board candidate in the future.

 

[Pessimistic]

There was the time the Melbourne fc recorded a huge loss with a

pwc partner as president

 

[Yardie]

There was the time the Melbourne fc recorded a huge loss with a

pwc partner as president

And our last president was a KPMG partner.....

 

[Yardie]

Director at one of the big 4 Accountancy firms by memory (i forget which and too lazy to Google).

I would have thought plenty of Partner level candidates with more experience would be not hard to find should Hawks go looking, so unusual choice for me. Having said that even if he is chosen he would be more then qualified, just a question of if someone else is more qualified.

Smells of a "bring back one of the boys" to get a bit of support from the Hawthorn faithful.

The real question is when Simon was put up there was no questioning of the decision, but as soon as Jennifer goes up their is all this questioning.

 

[Hawkk]

The real question is when Simon was put up there was no questioning of the decision, but as soon as Jennifer goes up their is all this questioning.

There was a hell of a lot of questioning in the Kennett thread

 

[Yardie]

There was a hell of a lot of questioning in the Kennett thread

I did a quick search and I think the questioning may have been just you and me

 

[Ned Ryerson]

The real question is when Simon was put up there was no questioning of the decision, but as soon as Jennifer goes up their is all this questioning.

In fairness didn't H4C stem, in part, from Jeff trying to just handpick board members once again with his announcement of Taylor?

 

[jiphoc]

Director is just a title for upper management at Big 4 firms - it doesn’t mean he’s on the board of directors. It’s still not to be sneezed at - but having worked with a bunch of similarly titled folk at Deloittes who I wouldn’t trust to organise a drinks session, it’s not a title I would be immediately impressed by. That said - Taylor’s CV was pretty damn good and I think he’ll make a good board candidate in the future.

Very aware of the hierarchical structure (particularly Deloitte ironically enough). Agree with your statement about it being nothing to be impressed by. Thus my comment about better candidates being potentiality available if Hawks just looked a bit more.