Our club: the Board, corporate structure and governance

[barry]

There was a discussion on the Age's Realfooty podcast about the corporatisation of clubs. They pointed out that clubs boards are very keen to spruik their huge membership numbers, but loath to let those members have any say in the running of the club or makeup of the board.

They have no say in most cases. 'Membership' is a loose term. More accurate would be "Season ticket holder"

[barry]

The role of the board is basically two things:
1) Set the KPI's they want the company to achieve, and give those to the CEO to achieve (CEO uses the other executives to execute)
2) Provide business advise, and more importantly, contacts in the local and national business community to the CEO and other exec's.

[barry]

Just looking through swans executive site, I cant believe the Wiz is not a life member. Not many did more to cement the swans in sydney than Warwick Capper.

Official AFL Website of the Sydney Swans Football Club

My bad, the wiz is a life member. Order has returned to the galaxy.

[Aprilbr]

The role of the board is basically two things:
1) Set the KPI's they want the company to achieve, and give those to the CEO to achieve (CEO uses the other executives to execute)
2) Provide business advise, and more importantly, contacts in the local and national business community to the CEO and other exec's.

A corporate governance expert would say that the two key functions of a Board are: 1. to set the Strategic Plan for the organisation and 2. to provide oversight of management. It is the role of the CEO to carry out the strategic plan set by the Board. The Board should not be involved in carrying out the day to day operations of the business.

Of course, we have seen this model violated within some Clubs such as Collingwood where Eddie as President seemed to have his finger in every pie and acted like the CEO in addition to being President. This is not seen as best practice. The closest to Eddie's approach in the corporate world was News Corp where for a long period, Rupert Murdoch was both CEO and Chair of the Board. This is no longer the case and generally considered poor corporate governance. Being President/Chair for 20 years is also not seen as ideal! Now back to the football.

[liz]

A corporate governance expert would say that the two key functions of a Board are: 1. to set the Strategic Plan for the organisation and 2. to provide oversight of management. It is the role of the CEO to carry out the strategic plan set by the Board.

That's a far more accurate description of the role of a board.

[barry]

That's a far more accurate description of the role of a board.

They are the same thing. I've simplified it for there folks who aren't familiar with board structure.

Tell me, in either case, what mickey O contributes?

[Aprilbr]

They are the same thing. I've simplified it for there folks who aren't familiar with board structure.

Tell me, in either case, what mickey O contributes?

True, but your definition omitted the critical role of oversight of management. Monitoring kpi's is not the same thing. There is a lot more to oversight than this eg ensuring the organisation does not break any laws or lose its social contract, ensuring that the organisation does not trade while insolvent etc.

In terms of Mickie O, it is important that board composition reflects contemporary Australia rather than consisting of a group of white, middle-aged males. This is especially important for sports given that fans come from a diversity of colours and creeds!

[barry]

In terms of Mickie O, it is important that board composition reflects contemporary Australia rather than consisting of a group of white, middle-aged males. This is especially important for sports given that fans come from a diversity of colours and creeds!

I'm all for diversity, but it has to benefit the swans, and I just dont see a strong correlation between the board roles and responsibility and what Mickey O can contribute. No offense to Mickey O, champion player, champion bloke.

However, it doesnt hurt to have an ex-player on the board, and it doesnt hurt to have an aboriginal perspective on the board as about 11% of players in AFL are indigenous.
But I dont think we need two ex-players on the board. Mickey O case is better if he replaced Leo Barry.

[stevoswan]

I'm all for diversity, but it has to benefit the swans, and I just dont see a strong correlation between the board roles and responsibility and what Mickey O can contribute. No offense to Mickey O, champion player, champion bloke.

However, it doesnt hurt to have an ex-player on the board, and it doesnt hurt to have an aboriginal perspective on the board as about 11% of players in AFL are indigenous.
But I dont think we need two ex-players on the board. Mickey O case is better if he replaced Leo Barry.

Just because they're ex-footballers doesn't mean they can't contribute in a positive manner to our board.....times are changing, not just in cultural and gender diversity at board level but also 'diversity in style of governance' if you'd like to call it that.....I am.....and after all, it is a football club.

It makes sense to have ex-players who have substantial corporate experience at club board level.....with their natural passion for club success and respect of club history, to me it's like an insurance policy against sometimes non-sensical and purely business based board decisions. I will admit, due to lifetime of experiences, I have an ongoing suspicion of purely business driven people....but I do realise not all are evil and self serving.

So don't get me wrong, I have faith in the Swans board, they have done an exemplary job over the years and the occupants of it wouldn't be there without the due diligence of the club to ensure they align with our clubs excellent values and ethos.....but ex-players of this calibre, to me, are a huge and frankly comforting asset regarding our clubs future direction.

If I've ranted a bit....I've had a few scotches tonight.

[Mr Magoo]

Just because they're ex-footballers doesn't mean they can't contribute in a positive manner to our board.....times are changing, not just in cultural and gender diversity at board level but also 'diversity in style of governance' if you'd like to call it that.....I am.....and after all, it is a football club.

It makes sense to have ex-players who have substantial corporate experience at club board level.....with their natural passion for club success and respect of club history, to me it's like an insurance policy against sometimes non-sensical and purely business based board decisions. I will admit, due to lifetime of experiences, I have an ongoing suspicion of purely business driven people....but I do realise not all are evil and self serving.

So don't get me wrong, I have faith in the Swans board, they have done an exemplary job over the years and the occupants of it wouldn't be there without the due diligence of the club to ensure they align with our clubs excellent values and ethos.....but ex-players of this calibre, to me, are a huge and frankly comforting asset regarding our clubs future direction.

If I've ranted a bit....I've had a few scotches tonight.

Im mixed on the whole ex player thing - wholeheartedly agree if they bring other experiences in the real world but definitely not if they just bring their experience from being at the club as a player. Thats the domain of club coaches and development staff and even there I have mixed views over the hiring of people just because they were a player for the club.

[Bangalore Swans]

Im mixed on the whole ex player thing - wholeheartedly agree if they bring other experiences in the real world but definitely not if they just bring their experience from being at the club as a player. Thats the domain of club coaches and development staff and even there I have mixed views over the hiring of people just because they were a player for the club.

If you were looking at the board of a major bank wouldn’t you like at least one board member to have prior banking executive experience?

If you were a shareholder would it be concerning if a major bank board was made up of a couple of ex politicians, some mining executives and some FMCG experience, but no banking experience.

The Swans are in the business of AFL football and I would imagine an ex footballer or coach would ad some relevant experience to the board. I think every former player or former club coach that joins a club board has experience in another field.

Maybe someone like Dennis Pagan would be great for a club board. As well as being a club coach he’s also had sucess in the real estate and horse racing industries. A brilliant transition out of football.

[Mr Magoo]

If you were looking at the board of a major bank wouldn’t you like at least one board member to have prior banking executive experience?

If you were a shareholder would it be concerning if a major bank board was made up of a couple of ex politicians, some mining executives and some FMCG experience, but no banking experience.

The Swans are in the business of AFL football and I would imagine an ex footballer or coach would ad some relevant experience to the board. I think every former player or former club coach that joins a club board has experience in another field.

Maybe someone like Dennis Pagan would be great for a club board. As well as being a club coach he’s also had sucess in the real estate and horse racing industries. A brilliant transition out of football.

I dont think we disagree - if I was a shareholder of a bank I would want more from a board member than the sum of the experience of that board member is they worked in banking. Theres plenty of people that have done that so why choose that person as the board member. Same with the ex player. Theres plenty of ex players so you would want someone who has attributes beyond being a footy player and being a better player doesn't necessarily mean they are a better and more informed advisor.

[i'm-uninformed2]

I'm all for diversity, but it has to benefit the swans, and I just dont see a strong correlation between the board roles and responsibility and what Mickey O can contribute. No offense to Mickey O, champion player, champion bloke.

However, it doesnt hurt to have an ex-player on the board, and it doesnt hurt to have an aboriginal perspective on the board as about 11% of players in AFL are indigenous.
But I dont think we need two ex-players on the board. Mickey O case is better if he replaced Leo Barry.

Mickey O is a bit more than an 'ex-player'.

He's also had extensive coaching and development experience - including his time as a coach of both the Swans Academy and AIS AFL.

He founded the GO Foundation. He also founded and serves as Managing Director of a substantial property, facilities and infrastructure services company.

[mcs]

Mickey O is a bit more than an 'ex-player'.

He's also had extensive coaching and development experience - including his time as a coach of both the Swans Academy and AIS AFL.

He founded the GO Foundation. He also founded and serves as Managing Director of a substantial property, facilities and infrastructure services company.

Yep its somewhat of a disservice to not recognise the significant 'other' experience beyond his direct time that Micky O brings to the tabled. For a footy club board, he has very well rounded experience highly relevant to the board.

Both he and Barry would be strong candidates for the board, even if they didn't play for the footy club.

[bloodspirit]

Well, possibly for the first time under the current constitution there is a contest for an elected board director position: Two candidates contest Board position (sydneyswans.com.au). I'm excited! Personally I would love to see a bit of an outsider, and someone with a connection to the grassroots, involved. The Board could aways appoint Leo as a Director too when the next vacancy arises if he is not elected and they value his contribution.

I encourage anyone who is entitled to review the available information about the candidates and to vote.