Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

[Stevo]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

Timing is indeed bizarre, but, according to that HS article this external ''review'' is being pushed for hard by people of influence surrounding the club.

I would of preferred it the second our off season started but beggers can't be choosers.

Not sure what (if anything) would come of this, if PJ finds that Grant is the problem and recommends to the club to replace him, leaving it a little late aren't we? No change that he can recommend to the football department at this point would really have much of an effect on next season.

You cant really make big changes to the footy department without sacking the coach and even then history say most clubs would normally put in a number of band-aid solutions and address the bigger picture at the end of the season.
Weve implemented a number of changes to the football department and that planning would have started around mid season as contract discussions for some key football people like Smith and Inness wouldn't have been progressing.
After completing the football department restructure the club has moved on to the bigger picture of a club wide review and I doubt we could have started it earlier. Some internal pressures would have been at play that Watson-Wheeler needed to satisfy but the timing appears to be right from my perspective.

[SquirrelGrip]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

You cant really make big changes to the footy department without sacking the coach and even then history say most clubs would normally put in a number of band-aid solutions and address the bigger picture at the end of the season.
Weve implemented a number of changes to the football department and that planning would have started around mid season as contract discussions for some key football people like Smith and Inness wouldn't have been progressing.
After completing the football department restructure the club has moved on to the bigger picture of a club wide review and I doubt we could have started it earlier. Some internal pressures would have been at play that Watson-Wheeler needed to satisfy but the timing appears to be right from my perspective.

Yes the review is broader than just football operations.

With the significance and depth of these changes, combined with the exciting new football facilities arising from the transformational redevelopment of Whitten Oval, we now need to ensure these changes seamlessly translate into the operation of the most effective, integrated and high-performing AFL men’s program possible for our 2024 season.

With that mission in mind, Club CEO Ameet Bains will be undertaking an additional process of reviewing various aspects of the administration, operation and integration of the AFL men’s program, the program’s overarching environment and how the Club best maximises the opportunities of on-field success. This is an important step that will benefit the AFL men’s program, our players and our staff.

KWW mentions "integration" a number of times. I'm not sure I fully understand what this means in a practical sense. What makes the program more "integrated"?

[Sedat]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

?You don?t ask the barber if you need a haircut?

Famous saying. There will be plenty of reccomend changes. You could be perfect and consultants will always advocate for change. It?s their job. They are never going to say you don?t need a haircut.

So the timing is odd. We just appointed a stack of coaches and it?s very late to replace anyone. Also, wouldn?t our plans for the preseason and the season proper already be in the late stages of being finalised?

This review should have been implemented during September.

I'm in the better late than never camp. This external review should have been implemented immediately after the conclusion of our failed 2022 season, but the club insulted its members with a mickey mouse internal review without giving any clarity or information around the findings of this supposed review.

Our 2023 season was a disaster and I'm all for the club doing everything in its power to review all operations to get better and (more importantly) stay better. And some overdue visibility from our president is welcome. It is still the off-season and every day of this review is a new opportunity to bed down best structure/best practices - let's have a good look under the hood to see what is wrong, what is working and what needs to be done to challenge everyone inside the four walls to get better.

[GVGjr]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

I'm in the better late than never camp. This external review should have been implemented immediately after the conclusion of our failed 2022 season, but the club insulted its members with a mickey mouse internal review without giving any clarity or information around the findings of this supposed review.

Our 2023 season was a disaster and I'm all for the club doing everything in its power to review all operations to get better and (more importantly) stay better. And some overdue visibility from our president is welcome. It is still the off-season and every day of this review is a new opportunity to bed down best structure/best practices - let's have a good look under the hood to see what is wrong, what is working and what needs to be done to challenge everyone inside the four walls to get better.

I agree, There is a fine line between being knee-jerk and complacent with your reactions to under-performance and for what it's worth I think we've got the balance and the timing right. We made an error with our assessment of the playing list at the end of both the 2021 and 2022 seasons but we've addressed that now. I'll be in interested spectator on how this review is both conducted and communicated.

[Jeanette54]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

Surely the timing is questionable. One would expect that, with all the decisions already made off-season that this is rather shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. Thus IMHO, the review can only achieve one of two things. It can pat management on the back for the changes already made, or it can threaten to destabilise the structure so recently established.

I am deeply suspicious of the management review process. Years ago, I was part of a group set up to recommend a course of action by a major company. I think we were all pretty happy to be given the responsibility, and the procedure was exhaustive. When the results were given, and proved contrary to managements desires, we were told go away and rework our recommendations so that they confirmed the decision management had already made. (WOFTAM).

Ruthless external reviews however, can be two-edged sword and should be implemented with caution, consideration and restraint.

[azabob]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

I am glad an external review is happening. Better late than never. Interesting it took pressure from the number one ticket holder to do it.

Did he threaten a board spill?

[Topdog]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

Better late than never but any outcomes of this review surely wont be to impact our 2024 season? It all feels a bit to late for 24.

[GVGjr]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

Better late than never but any outcomes of this review surely wont be to impact our 2024 season? It all feels a bit to late for 24.

It's a strategic review and I'd bet that some of the changes will be implemented quickly while others will take a bit longer.

[Bornadog]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

Better late than never but any outcomes of this review surely wont be to impact our 2024 season? It all feels a bit to late for 24.

The season is 4 and half months away

[hujsh]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

Better late than never but any outcomes of this review surely wont be to impact our 2024 season? It all feels a bit to late for 24.

Would have to be more focused on the Grant/Baines side of things you'd think. Wrong guy to sit down and look over Bevo's shoulder.

May as well look at this stuff now to prepare to make any changes needed in 2024/5

[Sedat]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

I agree, There is a fine line between being knee-jerk and complacent with your reactions to under-performance and for what it's worth I think we've got the balance and the timing right. We made an error with our assessment of the playing list at the end of both the 2021 and 2022 seasons but we've addressed that now. I'll be in interested spectator on how this review is both conducted and communicated.

The West Coast game was an utterly shameful performance (Hawthorn the week before was not much better), and I think it tipped the scale over from a disappointing (if unlucky in patches) season to a disaster IMO. I think in the long run that shameful performance was the catalyst for meaningful self-reflection and change, which might not have occurred had we won and snuck into the finals. It was at least 12 months too late, but nonetheless very welcome to see the club being proactive and aggressive this off-season in their quest to get better and stay better as an elite sporting organisation with lofty ambitions.

[The Doctor]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

Message from KWW.


Club CEO Ameet Bains will be undertaking an additional process of reviewing various aspects of the administration, operation and integration of the AFL men?s program, the program?s overarching environment and how the Club best maximises the opportunities of on-field success. This is an important step that will benefit the AFL men?s program, our players and our staff.

To gain additional perspective, the Club has engaged experienced football administrator Peter Jackson to assist with this further process.


At the conclusion of the AFL men?s season, the Club spoke of our ongoing process to identify improvements to the AFL program to underpin our future success. We started a process during the latter stages of the 2023 season and ramped up the day after our season?s conclusion.

I can't help but think the appointment of Jackson at this stage is due to disagreement among key stakeholders about the findings of the initial internal review. KWW says that the internal review started in the later stages of the season and 'ramped up' at the conclusion.

The season concluded two and a half months ago. Ample time to conduct a thorough review. Plenty of time to consider the findings.

Blind Freddie can see there has been a disconnection or two in the club since 2021. If I am right in assuming that I think it would be hard to get people to agree especially if fingers are being pointed. There were strong rumours of a power shift in the footy dept soon after the end of the season.

I therefore conclude that it was felt (probably at board level) that an independent set of eyes on the club was necessary.

This is just speculation on my part but having been in senior management positions over many years and had to wrestle key stakeholders, boards etc in past you can follow a trail of breadcrumbs easily enough.

[Grantysghost]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

I can't help but think the appointment of Jackson at this stage is due to disagreement among key stakeholders about the findings of the initial internal review. KWW says that the internal review started in the later stages of the season and 'ramped up' at the conclusion.

The season concluded two and a half months ago. Ample time to conduct a thorough review. Plenty of time to consider the findings.

Blind Freddie can see there has been a disconnection or two in the club since 2021. If I am right in assuming that I think it would be hard to get people to agree especially if fingers are being pointed. There were strong rumours of a power shift in the footy dept soon after the end of the season.

I therefore conclude that it was felt (probably at board level) that an independent set of eyes on the club was necessary.

This is just speculation on my part but having been in senior management positions over many years and had to wrestle key stakeholders, boards etc in past you can follow a trail of breadcrumbs easily enough.

Do you think there's a point where a faction might feel persecuted and leave?

Bevo can't be feeling super empowered right now. Not sure who would be on that ticket, maybe Darcy and a couple of others.

[Bullies]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

Would have to be more focused on the Grant/Baines side of things you'd think. Wrong guy to sit down and look over Bevo's shoulder.

May as well look at this stuff now to prepare to make any changes needed in 2024/5

Agree. It is overall a review of the clubs operations - what is working and what is not. The changes to the footy department ie: coaches etc have been done and now they can review the Operations and Administration. Something the majority wanted and now we are getting it.

[WBFC4FFC]

Re: Peter Jackson helping Dogs with review

I am glad an external review is happening. Better late than never. Interesting it took pressure from the number one ticket holder to do it.

Did he threaten a board spill?

My understanding of the #1 ticketholder is that he remains a massive fan of Bevo.