LD on the Board?

[Nailrod]

Any certainty on whether the new Chief Executive will be a member of the Board that will be "identifying" the "Change Agenda" which Rod will be "facilitating"?

Or in the absence of any reference to the matter in the announcement on the official site, should I just assume that the answer is no?

Never mind. I'm sure she'll keep them all in their place. :confused: :rolleyes:

[Iain G]

Any certainty on whether the new Chief Executive will be a member of the Board that will be "identifying" the "Change Agenda" which Rod will be "facilitating"?

Or in the absence of any reference to the matter in the announcement on the official site, should I just assume that the answer is no?

Never mind. I'm sure she'll keep them all in their place. :confused: :rolleyes:

Are you going to give her a chance to do her job or have you dismissed her as a puppet already? :confused:

[Nailrod]

Are you going to give her a chance to do her job or have you dismissed her as a puppet already? :confused:I realise I'm wasting my time, but here goes anyway.

There is a significant difference between 'being a puppet' and 'having limited influence over high-level strategy and major change initiatives'. In my work, I am not a puppet. I am nobody's puppet. But as I am not a member of the Board in the company I work for, my influence over high-level strategy and major change initiatives is substantially curtailed. I am sure that you are not a puppet in your work. But I very much doubt that you are a member of the Board, with influence over high-level strategy and major change initiatives. Otherwise you wouldn't need me to spell out in words of one syllable what are the implications of not being a member of the Board.

When LD's appointment was announced, I assumed without question that she would join the Board. I was pretty taken aback when Caversham Green suggested that she might not be joining the Board. The Board is crying out for fresh thinking, new ideas, and a broom to sweep clean. If LD is not considered to be Board-level material, then it is as clear a sign as anybody should need, unless they're terminally stupid, of what the limitations on her role will be.

I still hope that I will be proved wrong, and that an announcement will be made. It wouldn't even be that difficult to find out. All that's required is for some journalist, or some other person with a grain of initiative and who has the opportunity, to ask her directly, or to ask Rod directly: "Will you/she be joining the Board?"

[Iain G]

I realise I'm wasting my time, but here goes anyway.

In my work, I am not a puppet. I am nobody's puppet. But as I am not a member of the Board in the company I work for, my influence over high-level strategy and major change initiatives is substantially limited. There is a significant difference between 'being a puppet' and 'having limited influence over high-level strategy and major change initiatives'. I am sure that you are not a puppet in your work. But I very much doubt that you are a member of the Board, with influence over high-level strategy and major change initiatives. Otherwise you wouldn't need me to spell out in words of one syllable what are the implications of not being a member of the Board.

When LD's appointment was announced, I assumed without question that she would join the Board. The Board is crying out for fresh thinking, new ideas, and a broom to sweep clean. If LD is not considered to be Board-level material, then it is as clear as sign as you could be given, unless you're terminally stupid, of what the limitations on her role will be.

I still hope that I will be proved wrong, and that an announcement will be made. It wouldn't even be that difficult to find out. All that's required is for some journalist, or some other person with a grain of initiative and who has the opportunity, to ask her directly, or to ask Rod directly: "Will you/she be joining the Board?"

I think you are getting far too hung up on this board membership issue. For her to do the role she has been brought in to do, which is to successfully run the club on a day to day basis and all that it entails, doesn't depend on her being elected to the board or not to enable her to succeed in that operational position.

If they haven't said so far she is joining the board then it would be pretty safe to assume she isn't.

[Nailrod]

I think you are getting far too hung up on this board membership issue. For her to do the role she has been brought in to do, which is to successfully run the club on a day to day basis and all that it entails, doesn't depend on her being elected to the board or not to enable her to succeed in that operational position.

If they haven't said so far she is joining the board then it would be pretty safe to assume she isn't.Well it's pretty fundamental to the question of how much influence she will wield at the club moving forward, so I think I'll just stay hung up on it for the time being.

[Iain G]

Well it's pretty fundamental to the question of how much influence she will wield at the club moving forward, so I think I'll just stay hung up on it for the time being.

Fair enough! She has been brought into the club in an operational and not executive capacity though.

[flash]

Any certainty on whether the new Chief Executive will be a member of the Board that will be "identifying" the "Change Agenda" which Rod will be "facilitating"?

Or in the absence of any reference to the matter in the announcement on the official site, should I just assume that the answer is no?

Never mind. I'm sure she'll keep them all in their place. :confused: :rolleyes:

I think you should assume the most negative outcome possible. if nothing else it will keep up your 100% record.

[Nailrod]

I think you should assume the most negative outcome possible. if nothing else it will keep up your 100% record.

:yawn:

:ostrich:

[Caversham Green]

I realise I'm wasting my time, but here goes anyway.

There is a significant difference between 'being a puppet' and 'having limited influence over high-level strategy and major change initiatives'. In my work, I am not a puppet. I am nobody's puppet. But as I am not a member of the Board in the company I work for, my influence over high-level strategy and major change initiatives is substantially curtailed. I am sure that you are not a puppet in your work. But I very much doubt that you are a member of the Board, with influence over high-level strategy and major change initiatives. Otherwise you wouldn't need me to spell out in words of one syllable what are the implications of not being a member of the Board.

When LD's appointment was announced, I assumed without question that she would join the Board. I was pretty taken aback when Caversham Green suggested that she might not be joining the Board. The Board is crying out for fresh thinking, new ideas, and a broom to sweep clean. If LD is not considered to be Board-level material, then it is as clear a sign as anybody should need, unless they're terminally stupid, of what the limitations on her role will be.

I still hope that I will be proved wrong, and that an announcement will be made. It wouldn't even be that difficult to find out. All that's required is for some journalist, or some other person with a grain of initiative and who has the opportunity, to ask her directly, or to ask Rod directly: "Will you/she be joining the Board?"

Not guilty on that one. I've always thought, and still do, that she will be on the board. Having looked at Cos Hos this morning, I see her removal from the Motherwell board was only recorded yesterday despite her clearly having left about a week ago or more. I suspect the forms have already been filed and will appear in the next few days.

[Nailrod]

Not guilty on that one. I've always thought, and still do, that she will be on the board. Having looked at Cos Hos this morning, I see her removal from the Motherwell board was only recorded yesterday despite her clearly having left about a week ago or more. I suspect the forms have already been filed and will appear in the next few days.Sorry I thought it was CWG who thought she would be on the Board and you who thought she might not be. It was actually the other way round.

FWIW Scott Lindsay was on the Board while he was Chief Executive. Maybe if I keep harping on about it, somebody will think "Hmm... maybe she better be on the Board."

[Bunter]

Fair enough! She has been brought into the club in an operational and not executive capacity though.
Why is she Chief EXECUTIVE Officer then?
Not being smart, a genuine question.

[flash]

:yawn:

:ostrich:

No head in the sand here. Just the ability to see both sides in a situation.

[Beefster]

FWIW Scott Lindsay was on the Board while he was Chief Executive. Maybe if I keep harping on about it, somebody will think "Hmm... maybe she better be on the Board."

Aye, when Dempster is inevitably appointed to the Board, it'll be because you asked the question a couple of times on Hibs.net. It definitely won't be because that was always the plan.

[Keith_M]

Has anyone mentioned the word 'Conduit' yet?

[Nailrod]

Aye, when Dempster is inevitably appointed to the Board, it'll be because you asked the question a couple of times on Hibs.net. It definitely won't be because that was always the plan.Yep.

That, and relegation. All part of The Great Plan. Coming to you courtesy of The Great Planner.

[Nailrod]

No head in the sand here. Just the ability to see both sides in a situation.Sorry mate. You had me fooled with this high-value add contribution to the discussion:
I think you should assume the most negative outcome possible. if nothing else it will keep up your 100% record.

[Iain G]

Why is she Chief EXECUTIVE Officer then?
Not being smart, a genuine question.

Hmm, what's in a job title :wink::greengrin:

[Speedway]

Leann has been blocked from taking her seat on the board until she has complied with the basic articles of association which require her to grow a tashe first like the rest have had to.

[CropleyWasGod]

Has anyone mentioned the word 'Conduit' yet?

Only in its anagram form. Relates to Petrie/Butcher/Dempster/the trams/fellow posters/anyone else.... delete where applicable.

I do, ****.

[Peevemor]

Leann has been blocked from taking her seat on the board until she has complied with the basic articles of association which require her to grow a tashe first like the rest have had to.


I heard she was told to shave her moustache as it was putting the rest to shame. :agree:

[Speedway]

I heard she was told to shave her bush as it was putting the rest to shame. :agree:

Steady on.

[Peevemor]

That was Amanda Jones.

:greengrin

[Speedway]

:greengrin

:wink: