The Importance of Fixing "Institutional Failure" before New Manager appt.

[buster. 1,114]

2 minutes ago, With Heart and Hand said:

isn't this kind of issue the exact reason we brought in a Director or Football?

Partly wrt the football operation (probably including future managerial appt.).

However I was getting at a strategy that encompassed the club as a whole. For the football operation to be given a chance to be successful, we need the club as a whole to be functioning within 'a plan' that everyone is on the same page, working toward.

[buster. 1,114]

11 minutes ago, JCDBigBear said:

The problem we have rests within the boardroom.  They took a chance on Warburton and after a false dawn in the first half of his first season it became apparent that he wasn't the answer.  He was given time to try to change but that failed.  The board then took a quite unbelievable gamble on a manager not only unknown to the support but barely heard of in any country.   That appointment gave us some disastrous results despite a significant transfer outlay.  Frankly, those responsible for his appointment should have resigned.  They appointed a manager whilst knowing they were looking for a Director of Football, which I found astonishing.    We have a board of directors of questionable worth both financially and of ability.  Stewart Robertson has been underwhelming as MD.  Dave King, John Bennett, Paul Murray, Douglas Park, Graeme Park, James Blair, Alastair Johnston, Andrew Dickson.  What positive influence do all these people bring to Rangers?    The only two I would keep would be Douglas Park and John Bennett.  The rest should be replaced.  We have an AGM due sometime soon although I wonder what the accounts will say whenever they get released.  At this AGM I doubt that any investor will hold the board to account.  The club PR is shocking.  

How does that work wrt the soft loans provided/committments and who would be coming forward to take their place at this moment in time ?

[K.A.I 36,183]

Just now, buster. said:

How does that work wrt the soft loans provided and who would be coming forward to take their place at this moment in time ?

He’s talking ideally - in an ideal world the lot would be gone.

i don’t think they don’t not care for the club or anything, I think they do care but they are so pig headed and useless at the jobs they’ve been tasked with. 

[buster. 1,114]

Just now, K.A.I said:

He’s talking ideally - in an ideal world the lot would be gone.

i don’t think they don’t not care for the club or anything, I think they do care but they are so pig headed and useless at the jobs they’ve been tasked with. 

I think we need some reality.

[K.A.I 36,183]

Just now, buster. said:

I think we need some reality.

We know the realities we are faced with (and it’s not good) 

[buster. 1,114]

6 minutes ago, K.A.I said:

We know the realities we are faced with (and it’s not good) 

Yes, but we don't throw in the towel.

We know where we want to get to,.... it's about realism (finance/circumstances), an appropriate strategy/timescale, communication, leadership, competent middle mgmt., due patience and embarking on a process together.

[Jack The Flipper 5,936]

47 minutes ago, OhW said:

I really hate when people on here bring up their own work experience, as if it proves anything. 

"Well I own a small business, in charge of over 14 employees so....." Nobody gives a fuck.

*Sorry Flip, not really a dig at you. Monday morning anger.

Lol that wasn’t the reason for saying it, if anything it was the opposite mate.

I wasn’t saying look at me I’m great, I was saying I’ve struggled when there would be no need - if a certain thing was in place to help me from the start.

[OhW 4,669]

 

[Falcoholic 1,348]

Are the current board just treading water and hoping that, at some point in the near future, a big money ivestor will come along and buy them all out and once again line their pockets at the expense of the club?

 

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

3 hours ago, buster. said:

Last week Alastair Johnston used the phrase "institutional failure" when looking back over a period of time that included the fall of Mark Warburton and the appointment of Pedro Caixinha.

I think the most important thing regarding the next managerial appointment is that they sort out and rectify whatever issues led to what AJ described as instituional failure. This next appointment shouldn't be rushed into and handled in a simplistic reactionary way that may come from a hunch by X or a friend of Y or simply the opposite of what didn't work before.

Instead of reactionary and at times divided management from the boardroom (moreso post April 2016), the board need to develop a clear medium to long term strategy and stick with it as they approach all the issues and very public fire-fighting that comes with the job.

They need to have the right people in at middle management and it was encouraging to see that the L5 and Traynor would seem to be getting diluted with the club looking for a 'Director of Corporate Communication and Marketing', they seem to recognise that L5 and Traynor aren't working.

Many have called for Stewart Robertson to be replaced and I have to agree. I think that on a number of the higher profile issues he is out of his depth and a new hardnosed and competent CEO, to help implement a fresh medium to long term strategy would be ideal. It might cost a little more but if you get the right man, it'll be money well spent.

Getting back to the managerial appointment.

Only when a fresh medium to long term plan is in place and includes the input from the DoF (if indeed a DoF is required within a new strategy), should we decide on the remit of the next manager......and only when we know that remit should we look to identifty candidates.

Going forward, we need to have everything moving in the same direction or we'll almost certainly keep tripping up.... and going forward we need to manage expectation in relation to finance, timescales and the competitive reality out there.

 

The appointment of the DofF happened after the Pedro appointment - that appointment should take care of many of the institutional failures - DofF is now firmly in the driving seat and should be leading the new manager quest - he should carry the can if that fails ( and plaudits if it succeeds) 

i go back to what I said when Ally/MW/ PC  were appointed - all the new Rangers manager needs to do is win - we don't really care about how the club is run/ corporate governance/ youth policy/ balance sheet/ back room staff/ academy/ style of play - as long as we are winning - we should but these subjects get hardly a mention if we are winning and get trotted out at times like these. 

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

44 minutes ago, Falcoholic said:

Are the current board just treading water and hoping that, at some point in the near future, a big money ivestor will come along and buy them all out and once again line their pockets at the expense of the club?

 

Something along those lines and very much so.

Their exit strategy penned quite some time ago. Just that the wheels have come off the wagon somewhat. Probably underestimated how much it would take, TAP, no new share issue, year on year losses, costly Pedro fiasco. At the minute, our exposure is rather high and no doubt some vulture waiting to swoop.

How much longer they are willing with the misnomer of soft loans is another matter and of course that will be the tipping point.

[roboscot 1,176]

What I take from that article, and it's probably a bit of an outside slant, the CEO is the DOF.  Is there a candidate who has been involved in football at the highest level but also has the business acumen to drive a commercial enterprise with the unrealised earning potential of Rangers?

For now, if King believes that Mark Allen is the right man for the job then he has to also realise that the current CEO is incompetent and need replaced pronto.

[ZZed 4,510]

2 hours ago, K.A.I said:

He’s talking ideally - in an ideal world the lot would be gone.

i don’t think they don’t not care for the club or anything, I think they do care but they are so pig headed and useless at the jobs they’ve been tasked with. 

Bang on.

This is a result of people having enough money to buy their way on to the board really and then making football decisions. But, good business men do not necessarily make good football men and good football men have often proven not to be good at business. We need to have money men focused on making money, corporate strategy and football men focused on the football systems in place to create success. Our DoF should be the one sorting out the football side of it and he if brings in football men such as JG and Sir Walter Smith to assist then good.

[buster. 1,114]

36 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

The appointment of the DofF happened after the Pedro appointment - that appointment should take care of many of the institutional failures - DofF is now firmly in the driving seat and should be leading the new manager quest - he should carry the can if that fails ( and plaudits if it succeeds) 

i go back to what I said when Ally/MW/ PC  were appointed - all the new Rangers manager needs to do is win - we don't really care about how the club is run/ corporate governance/ youth policy/ balance sheet/ back room staff/ academy/ style of play - as long as we are winning - we should but these subjects get hardly a mention if we are winning and get trotted out at times like these. 

IMO what was described as "institutional failure" goes deeper and further back (from what I can see/to about April 2016) and the appointment of a DoF may partly address it.

We don't actually know the precise remit of the DoF and how much influence he will have in the actual decision regards the managerial appointment. I think he may have a lot to do with drawing up any short-list, proposing candidates but that the final decision will be taken by the board and in that case, it may be that if they have their candidate, that he wins the day.

ie. You don't really need a DoF to appoint McInnes but his remit should be about a lot more than managerial appointments and here I think it isn't so much that the DoF has to make the decision but after due consideration/input from all, that the best decision is reached. 

That is only me thinking out loud so don't read anything much into it. 

-------------

As for all they have to do is win and that it doesn't matter what else is going-on. We aren't in a place that that phrase can realistically be applied and very much have to sort out the details so as to have a chance of getting back to a place where it could..........Although, it's actually a very short-termist view that has already drove us to a very dark place.

 

[plymouthranger 3,873]

5 hours ago, buster. said:

Last week Alastair Johnston used the phrase "institutional failure" when looking back over a period of time that included the fall of Mark Warburton and the appointment of Pedro Caixinha.

I think the most important thing regarding the next managerial appointment is that they sort out and rectify whatever issues led to what AJ described as instituional failure. This next appointment shouldn't be rushed into and handled in a simplistic reactionary way that may come from a hunch by X or a friend of Y or simply the opposite of what didn't work before.

Instead of reactionary and at times divided management from the boardroom (moreso post April 2016), the board need to develop a clear medium to long term strategy and stick with it as they approach all the issues and very public fire-fighting that comes with the job.

They need to have the right people in at middle management and it was encouraging to see that the L5 and Traynor would seem to be getting diluted with the club looking for a 'Director of Corporate Communication and Marketing', they seem to recognise that L5 and Traynor aren't working.

Many have called for Stewart Robertson to be replaced and I have to agree. I think that on a number of the higher profile issues he is out of his depth and a new hardnosed and competent CEO, to help implement a fresh medium to long term strategy would be ideal. It might cost a little more but if you get the right man, it'll be money well spent.

Getting back to the managerial appointment.

Only when a fresh medium to long term plan is in place and includes the input from the DoF (if indeed a DoF is required within a new strategy), should we decide on the remit of the next manager......and only when we know that remit should we look to identifty candidates.

Going forward, we need to have everything moving in the same direction or we'll almost certainly keep tripping up.... and going forward we need to manage expectation in relation to finance, timescales and the competitive reality out there.

 

I think we're in an odd situation, where we've not had the best start to the season but we're still only 6 points behind and have an easy run of games coming up. 

 

If we were 12 points behind with no chance of winning the league, I'd let Murty take control until we had resolved the above and found the manager we want. Because we're a good managerial appointment away from challenging for the league, I think we need to be decisive with the manager and then sort out the background. Someone like McInnes, Warnock, McLeish or Wright would come in, and at short notice get us beating the other 10 sides in the league. At the present time, if we can go and beat the others we've got a good chance of sneaking the league. 12 months ago, we weren't going to win the league unless we won every single remaining game. 

[Fred H Crawford 1,182]

6 minutes ago, buster. said:

 

-------------

As for all they have to do is win and that it doesn't matter what else is going-on. We aren't in a place that that phrase can realistically be applied and very much have to sort out the details so as to have a chance of getting back to a place where it could..........Although, it's actually a very short-termist view that has already drove us to a very dark place.

 

Whilst I would agree with you that we need a medium to long term plan in place (and more importantly , the balls to see it through) and have faith in the choice of DOF and his ability to do the job he is tasked with . Do you not think that a winning team on the pitch can buy the Board & coaching staff time to implement changes to the set up that would maximise the chances of stability and the medium to long term goals being met ?

No matter how good our strategic planning is , the longer we struggle to challenge at first team level is going to lead to a drop of in crowds and therefore income , and the louder the clamour will get to ditch long term and concentrate on the here and now .

[buster. 1,114]

20 minutes ago, Fred H Crawford said:

Whilst I would agree with you that we need a medium to long term plan in place (and more importantly , the balls to see it through) and have faith in the choice of DOF and his ability to do the job he is tasked with . Do you not think that a winning team on the pitch can buy the Board & coaching staff time to implement changes to the set up that would maximise the chances of stability and the medium to long term goals being met ?

No matter how good our strategic planning is , the longer we struggle to challenge at first team level is going to lead to a drop of in crowds and therefore income , and the louder the clamour will get to ditch long term and concentrate on the here and now .

Of course a winning team is what would ease pressure and buy time but what say in Year 1, is a 'winning team' ?

- One that consistently puts away the provincial clubs with the odd reverse but can't beat a celtic team who rise to their best level in OF games ? ie. more or less where Aberdeen are today (remember they are only 1 point behind).

---------------

I talked of realistic expectations all things considered........... and looking back, in April 2015 Paul Murray said very similar together with a realistic timescale but MW's first season created an expectatation that partly because of what I saw as the first signs of "institutional failure", ended badly. We veered from what appeared to be the plan, got badly caught out and have since been making reactionary decisions that haven't allowed the club to go forward.

With the AGM coming up, straightforward communication with fans/shareholders is important. A fresh approach has to be bought into at the sametime as coming to terms with the realistic competitive panorama (in the short-term).

# patience&realism

 

[Fred H Crawford 1,182]

5 minutes ago, buster. said:

Of course a winning team is what would ease pressure and buy time but what say in Year 1, is a 'winning team' ?

- One that consistently puts away the provincial clubs with the odd reverse but can't beat a celtic team who rise to their best level in OF games ? ie. more or less where Aberdeen are today (remember they are only 1 point behind).

---------------

I talked of realistic expectations all things considered........... and looking back, in April 2015 Paul Murray said very similar together with a realistic timescale but MW's first season created an expectatation that because of what I saw as the first signs of "institutional failure" ended badly. We veered from what appeared to be the plan, got badly caught out and have since been making reactionary decisions that haven't allowed the club to go forward.

With the AGM coming up, straightforward communication with fans/shareholders is important. A fresh approach has to be bought into at the sametime as coming to terms with the realistic competitive panorama, in the short-term.

# patience&realism

 

The first part of your answer sums up IMO where the Board now find themselves due to previous poor choices . I'm sure a lot of our support who are in favour of Derek McInnes getting the managers job on the basis of being able to secure a 2nd place finish , will be amongst the first to decry the board if we're sitting in a similar position at Christmas next year with some more defeats to the tarriers under DM's watch . Patience has never been a virtue that sits easy with the vast majority of Rangers fans when faced by another lean season (I include myself in that ) 

[McEwan's Lager 30,532]

5 hours ago, Courtyard Bear said:

After 3 and a half years of failure. I would’ve thought the only solution was a change of board members for folk who actually know what the fuck they are doing. 

Does anyone actually know what the plan is??

Is this the same plan that they started 3 1/2 years ago or has that been ripped up and it’s start all over again??

And why is the Bovril still too HOT?? 

The pies are fucking molten and all.

[buster. 1,114]

5 minutes ago, Fred H Crawford said:

The first part of your answer sums up IMO where the Board now find themselves due to previous poor choices . I'm sure a lot of our support who are in favour of Derek McInnes getting the managers job on the basis of being able to secure a 2nd place finish , will be amongst the first to decry the board if we're sitting in a similar position at Christmas next year with some more defeats to the tarriers under DM's watch . Patience has never been a virtue that sits easy with the vast majority of Rangers fans when faced by another lean season (I include myself in that ) 

I'm afraid that given where both teams are right now and that celtic will more often than not raise their game against us (as they did v Aberdeen 0-3 but followed by Killie 1-1) we are going to take more sore ones in the short term. Whilst this is painful, we can't keep sacking managers for it. They need to be allowed to build (but show ongoing improvement).

What has to be considered is that our main rivals are as a club are in the strongest state I have known them to be in during the last 40 odd years. This makes things so much more difficult than the norm and expectation of immediately catching up, not realistic. 

I think it inevitable that we'll lose some ST holders along the way but it's preferable to give ourselves a chance of building a solid platform rather than headlines of optimism but end up bouncing from one mistake to another.

 

[Fred H Crawford 1,182]

1 minute ago, buster. said:

I'm afraid that given where both teams are right now and that celtic will more often than not raise their game against us (as they did v Aberdeen 0-3 but followed by Killie 1-1) we are going to take more sore ones in the short term. Whilst this is painful, we can't keep sacking managers for it. They need to be allowed to build (but show ongoing improvement).

What has to be considered is that our main rivals are as a club are in the strongest state I have known them to be in during the last 40 odd years. This makes things so much more difficult than the norm and expectation of immediately catching up, not realistic. 

I think it inevitable that we'll lose some ST holders along the way but it's preferable to give ourselves a chance of building a solid platform rather than headlines of optimism but end up bouncing from one mistake to another.

 

Sadly I have to agree with you there (FFS 3 posts in a row ) We can only hope that whoever ultimately picks the new boss gets it right and we start to make some inroads towards catching the tarriers . Fuck knows , We as a support deserve to see some light at the end of a very dark tunnel after all the shit we've had to endure .

[kenny6131 148]

If we the fans continue this witch hunt at every game we drop points it just puts untold pressure on anything they are trying to build. Murty can win the next 2 games and it will be all sunshine and rainbows his 1st drop points will be followed by meltdowns on here and in the stands,  how long are we going to continue with this as it then makes the managers job very unappealing to potential suitors. Word will get about that were making the managers position toxic at Ibrox. The next appointment needs our backing no matter what through thick and thin we can't go straight to meltdown mode after 1 bad result.

Also forgot to add about the atmosphere at Ibrox it's fucking shite were so stuck in our moaning and whinging ways the atmosphere is almost non existence 

[TMB 14,167]

8 hours ago, buster. said:

Instead of reactionary and at times divided management from the boardroom (moreso post April 2016), the board need to develop a clear medium to long term strategy and stick with it as they approach all the issues and very public fire-fighting that comes with the job.

What is the medium to long-term strategy?  Any manager that comes in will need to win games or the support will quickly turn against them and they'll be sacked soon after.

The time to change the philosophy and build for the future was when we were in the lower leagues and the pressure was off.  We've well and truly fucked that.  Now we need instant success and the only way to get it is by spending money.

[K.A.I 36,183]

11 minutes ago, kenny6131 said:

If we the fans continue this witch hunt at every game we drop points it just puts untold pressure on anything they are trying to build. Murty can win the next 2 games and it will be all sunshine and rainbows his 1st drop points will be followed by meltdowns on here and in the stands,  how long are we going to continue with this as it then makes the managers job very unappealing to potential suitors. Word will get about that were making the managers position toxic at Ibrox. The next appointment needs our backing no matter what through thick and thin we can't go straight to meltdown mode after 1 bad result.

Also forgot to add about the atmosphere at Ibrox it's fucking shite were so stuck in our moaning and whinging ways the atmosphere is almost non existence 

With Pedro it’s not with hunting every game we drop points like it’s over reactions in isolation - you’ve a short memory actually use what brain cells  you have and remind yourself what his tenure was like 

[Smile 26,610]

7 hours ago, Bobby Hume said:

 

Until we get winners at all levels of the boardroom and coaching team ...... as football is a results driven "business" ..... we will continue to be rudderless and continue to just drift ..... the truth is we have to have a clean out from top to bottom and a winning mindset installed in all areas of our Club.

Easier said than done of course .... as financial investment and a proper scouting system to identify proper talent is so far lacking at the moment .... and in my opinion the main reason for our hot and cold performances over the last few seasons.

This lies at the doorstep of the current board .... their time has run out.

 

We have to clear out the dross from the boardroom and all the Hangers-on institutional failure to me indicates it's from the top down.