Society Board Vacancy

[Jay]

Just for the avoidance of doubt, all Well Society Board members were aware of my own personal feelings on the managerial situation ahead of the club Board meeting on Monday evening.

 

As were most folk on social media and at the 30th I was at in Kilmarnock on Saturday night come to think of it...

[Busta Nut]

And I asked if in this particular instance, were all 7 consulted in advance of the club announcement. I'd be unhappy if I was a board member and a press release was issued citing my endorsement if I hadn't been consulted regardless of my view.

 

 

Just to clarify anaw, I wasn't meaning you when I suggested folk who gave a fiver a month think they should run the club.

 

I just mean from comments on social media etc.

[Jay]

Just a wee heads up - the questions I was asked on here and elsewhere (Twitter etc), I fired together and sent around the Board for answers. Includes G&F's questions about how the consulting over McGhee worked too.

 

http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2017/03/09/recently-asked-questions/

[Andy_P]

Just a wee heads up - the questions I was asked on here and elsewhere (Twitter etc), I fired together and sent around the Board for answers. Includes G&F's questions about how the consulting over McGhee worked too.

 

http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2017/03/09/recently-asked-questions/

The answers themselves notwithstanding it's a big step forward to have questions answered in such a fashion and it is to your credit that this has been achieved so soon after your election.

 

Over time you may expect a dip in the number of questions asked but I do hope on behalf of the WS your seeking out questions from interested parties, members or otherwise, will continue on a monthly or bi-monthly basis.

 

As an aside welcome though occasional interjections from WS officials on Steelmen Online in the past were I'm pleased the responses were put out officially on the WS site. For me that provides a touch more credence than a personal view on a forum.

 

Well played all concerned.

[joewarkfanclub]

Cheers Jay. Answers many of the questions raised. Although not sure it totally clears up some of our concerns. Still, any improvement in communication is a huge step forward....

[Lobey_Dosser]

Yeah, certainly a step in the right direction.

[Kmcalpin]

Thanks for raising my question Jay. Good to get some feedback.

[Goggles & Flippers]

Just a wee heads up - the questions I was asked on here and elsewhere (Twitter etc), I fired together and sent around the Board for answers. Includes G&F's questions about how the consulting over McGhee worked too.

 

http://www.thewellsociety.co.uk/2017/03/09/recently-asked-questions/

 

Thanks Jay,

 

Much appreciated. I think I can speak for most standard members when I say answers to questions such as these should be made available in advance of a new member approaching with a list and a cattle prod. That for me is the essence of a society over a commercial board or a single majority shareholder.

 

2nd with respect to the announcement on McGhee it appears that (and maybe I'm inferring) that it was adhoc conversations made here and there rather than a gathering all elected and co-opted members at the same time. Fair enough of that is the case, but not really a place where undecided's can listen to a pro or against argument before making, reinforcing or changing their vote.

 

Finally the one vote in 5 years. I'm sorry but not happy with that bullshit answer. I would agree if I had seen a demonstration of an "efficient" or a "functional and swift decision-making process." however we have not. How can you when it's essentially a volunteer group meeting once a month.

 

I don't equate the renaming of Fir Park to the significant (almost wholehearted) changes to the governance, constitution, structure and model of the WS, an entity that presides over £750,000 of funds raised by the support. I also don't agree that the elected board will represent the groundswell of the full adult membership (1,600 odd) as conveyed in the answer if for example they are all 60+ year old men with season tickets in the POD. They would tend to prioritise issues affecting their peer group. Glad to say there is more of a mix now with Jay, female representation, from multiple stands, etc.

 

The is one simple way to get consensus for major decisions going forward that is truly representative. Do a membership online poll, that sweeps up the majority and someone spends a couple of days making phone calls to those who don't use or are interested in the internet. One WS board member sits on the fence and impartially lists all the pro's and con's, one makes a case for and another against the motion (unless a majority in favour) and that's what the membership use to help sway their vote.

 

No agendas, full transparency, fair and the WS have a mandate.

[weeyin]

If it ever gets to the stage where we have an online poll to sack/keep a manager, I am leaving the Society. That is no way to run a club.

 

We need people on the Board who can address these issues, not mob rule.

 

Of course there should be consultation on some issues, but we need to be careful we don't turn it into The X-Factor.

[Goggles & Flippers]

I concur, hence why I never mentioned manager in the list of major WS decisions.

 

The hiring/firing manager is reserved primarily with the main club board and not the WS. McMahon, Flow, Feely, Leanne and Dickie. with oversight from the what is essentially the WS board plus others.

 

I also agree that a weekly poll is a nonsense, but 1 in 5 years is at the far end of the spectrum when we've had so many changes.

[ropy]

I think the loans should be attempted to be repaid. The money can be recycled at another point when needed. Otherwise there is no great incentive to run the club within its means.

[Andy_P]

Personally I think to an extent with the past loans what's done is done. I'm comfortable in the knowledge that the finance at the time dug the club out of a couple of fairly decent sized holes.

 

That in part along with the emergence of Les and the various schemes there, allied to the hoped for increased revenues that are in the pipeline means I hope that loans will require to be a thing of the past.

[joewarkfanclub]

Personally I think to an extent with the past loans what's done is done. I'm comfortable in the knowledge that the finance at the time dug the club out of a couple of fairly decent sized holes.

 

That in part along with the emergence of Les and the various schemes there, allied to the hoped for increased revenues that are in the pipeline means I hope that loans will require to be a thing of the past.

I agree with some of that Andy. However, if we are running the Society now as a pledge scheme with people making monthly contributions then I think its essential the club and Society are 100% transparent with members as to whats happening with our money. Im happy to contribute as long as the club is being run prudently and we are living within our means. However, Im not throwing money into a bottomless pit for the board or our manager to piss against the wall. Our signing policy over the last 2 years has been shambolic. There needs to be some accountability on the part of the club to encourage fans that their money is being used wisely.

[superward]

When was the last time we loaned the club cash? I've kinda lost track. But I didn't think it was for a while.

[Jay]

Thanks for the feedback on the answers folks, lots of interesting points. Although I put forward the questions and made sure they were answered, I am certainly not 100% satisfied with the actual answers themselves either.

 

Few good points above that I agree with and I'll be wanting to discuss those further going forward. In particular, I do think there has to be more scope for balloting members - even if it is just in an advisory poll rather than a binding ballot - and I concur 100% with G&F about the lack of elections to the board. I reckon I was probably voted on because I'm a vocal critical of the Society and folk wanted me to take those criticisms into the board room, and that's exactly what I'm doing - but if I changed my mind after the election and decided "I'm actually quite content just stoating up to the board room every month without actually rocking the boat, screw the folk that voted for me", I could end up remaining on the board for 5 or 6 years anyway without any issue. More accountability has to be introduced in some way (happy to take suggestions on that by the way).

 

I also agree that the situation around the loaning of money to the club raises a few issues. I agree with Andy P that writing off the loans from the past is something that can be accepted as perhaps part of the teething process and early stages of fan-ownership, but I'll be looking for clarification moving forward as we can't be in a situation where, as joewarkfanclub says, fans are putting cash into a "block hole", where it's blown by the club on whatever it likes without any need to pay it back or, at the very least, without widespread understanding that that's the plan moving forward, so members are least know that's what their money is for.

[fizoxy]

Has there been any talk of finding ways to entice fans in other countries to join, maybe in the form of a campaign specifically targeting them? pulling on the heartstrings with some nostalgia or stuff like "you're not here but you can help", or "you don't have to watch this, but we do, so give us money".

 

Is this an effort that could be an opportunity for an exile member to have something to do?

 

I don't know the size of our international fan base, but if there are two of us in memphis then there must be loads in cities and countries that are nice.

[weeyin]

They made a big deal of overseas fans joining in the early days of the Society, but we haven't exactly been top priority.

 

It took years before we even had a mechanism to contribute financially and we can't actively participate in any Society meetings.

[Jay]

Has there been any talk of finding ways to entice fans in other countries to join, maybe in the form of a campaign specifically targeting them? pulling on the heartstrings with some nostalgia or stuff like "you're not here but you can help", or "you don't have to watch this, but we do, so give us money".

 

Is this an effort that could be an opportunity for an exile member to have something to do?

 

I don't know the size of our international fan base, but if there are two of us in memphis then there must be loads in cities and countries that are nice.

 

A proper campaign targeting overseas members is definitely something worth considering. The distinct lack of any proper fundraising or recruitment campaigns has been telling. It seems the Society has viewed itself as a campaign, rather than realising that you get more success from properly ran campaigns which boast a certain theme, target, and/or time frame. The Double You Money offer is a great example of a fundraising campaign which has been pretty much handed to the Society on a plate, and it's no surprise that so many people have already increased their pledges as a result. I'll definitely be looking at how we can orchestrate other campaigns going forward, and the idea of targeting exiles is certainly a good one. However, I also believe that if we can get the Society to a point where members view it as transparent, engaging, and worthwhile, then that's something that will positively impact all members, no matter where they reside.

 

They made a big deal of overseas fans joining in the early days of the Society, but we haven't exactly been top priority.

 

It took years before we even had a mechanism to contribute financially and we can't actively participate in any Society meetings.

 

All Society members, whether they live in Lanarkshire or not, can submit questions for discussion at every Society meeting. There has also been the recent introduction of allowing members to submit agenda items for discussion. Both of these factors have not been publicised enough, however, with brief mentions at the bottom of e-mails being about as good as it's gotten. We're going to be looking at properly advertising the fact that members can essentially dictate a proportion of the discussions at Board meetings moving forward. It's not something that'll interest everyone but, again, it's about small steps in the right direction.

[weeyin]

Unfortunately, submitting questions remotely isn't really helpful as often they are misinterpreted or the answer isn't clear. And without the ability to follow up with a clarification or expansion (from the questioner or the responder), then you often don't really get a satisfactory answer.

 

So, for example, when somebody asked about how the Society funded the club, the response discussed loans that weren't expect to be repaid. While that goes some way to answering the question, it immediately opens up a number of other questions such as:

 

How is reflected on the clubs books as far as income?

When we budget to break even, does the budget include the income from non-repayable loans?

If we are lending the club money every year with no intention of asking for it back, does that mean we have to be paying money into the Society every year to keep the club afloat?

etc.

 

All of this could easily be raised and discussed in person, but impossible if all you get is a question asked on your behalf with no follow-up.

[Del_Superwell]

The just of it from what i gather the club is solely due to be funded off any income which comes into the club ie through transfers, sponsorships etc but also they do get some loans to help plug any shortfalls from the Well Society, i'm not sure tho whether that loan gets repaid back to the Society.

[weeyin]

The just of it from what i gather the club is solely due to be funded off any income which comes into the club ie through transfers, sponsorships etc but also they do get some loans to help plug any shortfalls from the Well Society, i'm not sure tho whether that loan gets repaid back to the Society.

 

The official answer was that the Society is not expecting to be repaid.

 

That was just an example, though, of the kind of question that can be submitted and asked, but doesn't lend itself well to submission if there isn't a follow-up available.

[Jay]

Unfortunately, submitting questions remotely isn't really helpful as often they are misinterpreted or the answer isn't clear. And without the ability to follow up with a clarification or expansion (from the questioner or the responder), then you often don't really get a satisfactory answer.

 

So, for example, when somebody asked about how the Society funded the club, the response discussed loans that weren't expect to be repaid. While that goes some way to answering the question, it immediately opens up a number of other questions such as:

 

How is reflected on the clubs books as far as income?

When we budget to break even, does the budget include the income from non-repayable loans?

If we are lending the club money every year with no intention of asking for it back, does that mean we have to be paying money into the Society every year to keep the club afloat?

etc.

 

All of this could easily be raised and discussed in person, but impossible if all you get is a question asked on your behalf with no follow-up.

 

Completely understand that mate. We're also working on bringing social media Q&As and the like into play, so that folk don't need to be present at an actual event at Fir Park in order to quiz the board. Again, it's something that might have its flaws, but it's about trying to find solutions to the many problems the Society has, and at the same time improving communications ASAP, even if just a little at first. With that in mind, I'd be more than happy to take any suggestions you have to the rest of the Board.

[weeyin]

Every suggestion I have had has been turned down on the basis that the meeting room doesn't have good enough internet or phone connectivity. That may well be true, in which case options are limited. If we do have some kind of phone or internet available then we might be in business.

 

There are quite a few internet options available like Slack, Google Hangouts, Skype etc. that are free (or cheap) that allow long distance users the ability to participate. Even audio only would be a step forward. Would probably require investing a decent mic or two for the speakers, but that would definitely help. There are limits on the numbers of people that can join in the free versions of these apps, but with time differences etc. I suspect we won't get too many people calling in for any given meeting.

 

For something more professional, there are many conference call services available that let people dial in - usually a free number - and participate directly. I expect they would be pricier (unless any telecoms sponsors could assist) so I can understand why that may not be an ideal solution.

 

Using Periscope for the last couple of meetings was a big step forward - even though we couldn't actively participate, it made a big difference to be able to watch the proceedings. Even if there was a moderator who could monitor a live skype chat room where we could post questions while watching the Periscope stream, that might be a way forward.

[Jay]

Every suggestion I have had has been turned down on the basis that the meeting room doesn't have good enough internet or phone connectivity. That may well be true, in which case options are limited. If we do have some kind of phone or internet available then we might be in business.

 

There are quite a few internet options available like Slack, Google Hangouts, Skype etc. that are free (or cheap) that allow long distance users the ability to participate. Even audio only would be a step forward. Would probably require investing a decent mic or two for the speakers, but that would definitely help. There are limits on the numbers of people that can join in the free versions of these apps, but with time differences etc. I suspect we won't get too many people calling in for any given meeting.

 

For something more professional, there are many conference call services available that let people dial in - usually a free number - and participate directly. I expect they would be pricier (unless any telecoms sponsors could assist) so I can understand why that may not be an ideal solution.

 

Using Periscope for the last couple of meetings was a big step forward - even though we couldn't actively participate, it made a big difference to be able to watch the proceedings. Even if there was a moderator who could monitor a live skype chat room where we could post questions while watching the Periscope stream, that might be a way forward.

 

Fair enough mate, admittedly I'd picked you up wrong thinking you met Society Board meetings rather than Q&As! I'm not clued up on the technology that's been used for previous Q&As, or what's been tried out, but it's certainly something I'm happy to raise when plans are being put together for the next one. I don't see any reason why, at the very minimal, there can't be a chat platform for folk to participate.

[weeyin]

Cheers Jay. I meant Board Meetings too - that example was just something that sprang to mind that was fresh in my memory.

 

A chat platform might be the best option for members in a different timezone as we can keep up with it while we're at work!