Like it or not our game is becoming increasingly 'corporatized', by which I mean funding and media placement of the club and the competition at large.
A club seeks to make itself 'attractive' to corporate interests in many ways we know. Success is of course a prime consideration, the more corporate 'support', the more likely a club is to be successful so they are interlinked pretty closely.
Collingwood are fortunate in respect of being a long term successful organization, seldom out of the finals and thereby guaranteeing maximum exposure for our corporate partners. From our point of view we should be a prime candidate for any corporate entity seeking to gain exposure in prime time.
Now looking from the corporate point of view they seek not only a successful organization to support but also one that reflects their own ethos and values.
Most of us would understand that corporates value stability and predictability of performance so how does this reflect on a team or competition which doesn't display these values?
We don't need to look too far into the past to see that they will quickly get off a shaky or ugly (imagewise) club or competition. The smart club / competition seeks to maximize their corporate desirability which means being all those things that corporates respect within their own sphere.
So incidents such as Dids/Beamsy/Heater/Swan are NOT a good look for a corporate sponsor. Hence the iron hand we have witnessed this season.
I Believe the club is tired of micro managing some players and putting out the media fires and want to get the organization settled and accountable - upward and downward.
Whether its right or wrong a corporate club is more likely to be desirable to corporate funding and therefore the corporate player is a growing fact of life.
A club seeks to make itself 'attractive' to corporate interests in many ways we know. Success is of course a prime consideration, the more corporate 'support', the more likely a club is to be successful so they are interlinked pretty closely.
Collingwood are fortunate in respect of being a long term successful organization, seldom out of the finals and thereby guaranteeing maximum exposure for our corporate partners. From our point of view we should be a prime candidate for any corporate entity seeking to gain exposure in prime time.
Now looking from the corporate point of view they seek not only a successful organization to support but also one that reflects their own ethos and values.
Most of us would understand that corporates value stability and predictability of performance so how does this reflect on a team or competition which doesn't display these values?
We don't need to look too far into the past to see that they will quickly get off a shaky or ugly (imagewise) club or competition. The smart club / competition seeks to maximize their corporate desirability which means being all those things that corporates respect within their own sphere.
So incidents such as Dids/Beamsy/Heater/Swan are NOT a good look for a corporate sponsor. Hence the iron hand we have witnessed this season.
I Believe the club is tired of micro managing some players and putting out the media fires and want to get the organization settled and accountable - upward and downward.
Whether its right or wrong a corporate club is more likely to be desirable to corporate funding and therefore the corporate player is a growing fact of life.
