Hi all, just wanted to get peoples opinions on something Ive been thinking about today whilst reading some comments people have about the selection process for our new coach. The most popular view seems to be that we need to go through a very thorough selection process. This will probably involve setting up a coaching election commitee, identifying desirable traits in a coach, matching them against the candidates etc.
Firstly let me say that I think thats probably the way to go to, but I do have some concerns. I work at a large insurance company, and its fair to say that all decisions are made through a very similar process. I realise football clubs are now large businesses but I must say I get a little worried when all this talk to 'going through the process' comes up. Getting the right coach is vital for us, all would agree. I must say however, that from personal experience (and Im sure many would also share my view) I would say that just because you go through a long process to make a decision, does not mean the decision you make wil be the right one. In fact I would go further and say that in most cases what ends up happening is that people in charge get swept up in going through the process, making sure all the boxes are ticked etc and the decision made in the end in not necessarily the right one, but the one which seems most obvious or acceptable.
I think it is also fair to say that people in charge are paid to have a clue, know the business, and be able to make the right decisions for the business. When there is a tough decision to be made, their responsibility is to make the decision they believe is best for the club, even if it is not a popular one. At the end of the day they will be judged on the outcome, and thats fair enough. This begs the question, are the people in charge at RFC (you would say March and Cameron) strong enough and knowledgeable enough to make this decision, or do we need to bring in outside parties to help us go through the process? The likely outcome probably will be that the chosen commitee will give their recommendation with RFC having the final say...
BTW Im just thinking out loud
Firstly let me say that I think thats probably the way to go to, but I do have some concerns. I work at a large insurance company, and its fair to say that all decisions are made through a very similar process. I realise football clubs are now large businesses but I must say I get a little worried when all this talk to 'going through the process' comes up. Getting the right coach is vital for us, all would agree. I must say however, that from personal experience (and Im sure many would also share my view) I would say that just because you go through a long process to make a decision, does not mean the decision you make wil be the right one. In fact I would go further and say that in most cases what ends up happening is that people in charge get swept up in going through the process, making sure all the boxes are ticked etc and the decision made in the end in not necessarily the right one, but the one which seems most obvious or acceptable.
I think it is also fair to say that people in charge are paid to have a clue, know the business, and be able to make the right decisions for the business. When there is a tough decision to be made, their responsibility is to make the decision they believe is best for the club, even if it is not a popular one. At the end of the day they will be judged on the outcome, and thats fair enough. This begs the question, are the people in charge at RFC (you would say March and Cameron) strong enough and knowledgeable enough to make this decision, or do we need to bring in outside parties to help us go through the process? The likely outcome probably will be that the chosen commitee will give their recommendation with RFC having the final say...
BTW Im just thinking out loud
