PASB Election - candidate Jon B

JonB · **Posted:** Mon Jul 30, 2012 8:32 am

I've got a number of meetings lined up with interesting people over the next few weeks (one of which as I've mentioned on ATD is the current Chief Exec of the Institute of Leadership & Management(ILM)) - I'll slip Argyle into every conversation to see if they can give any wise counsel on our development & report back!

JonB · **Posted:** Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:52 pm

Firstly, I must say that I do get some of the angst, irritation & opposition to the Supporter's Board.

I too, have felt disappointed at the inability - to date - to muster any enduring enthusiasm in the development & implementation of the concept. I think that this has been for a number of reasons, but I suspect that one of the biggest factors in this has been the perceived 'on the hoof' approach to the PASB.

The publication of a relatively detailed 'project' timetable would I suspect, be helpful in the delivery of the Board.

The biggest concern that I have however, is what the Board will actually 'do'.

Prof Wheeler has led us to a position whereby the PASB will decide it's role & remit once formed. Although in many ways this is a good thing, it could have course also be problematic.

As I see it, there are two high-level functions that the PASB could fulfil.

The first of these is to act as a voice of the fans, to comment with at least some consensus of the club's proposals & to 'lobby' on issues that it's members think are of relevance & importance.

The second option is to act in a more 'supervisory' capacity. To scrutinise, guide, challenge & publicly report on a semi-formal basis.

The 'Fan's voice' function could have course work well, but the overlap with the Fan's Trust is obvious & I am fearful that if this is the function adopted, the Trust's future would be made more vulnerable - indeed it already seems to be struggling with its own 'peace-time' momentum (although Saturday's agm could be a milestone moment).

The supervisory role seems to be the one initially envisaged by JB ( the other) & makes more sense to me.

Yes, it is 'at the whim' of the owner (as many point out), but so too is the Trust. If the club disengaged from the Trust, it (like the PASB) would either whither or stand on its on two feet. I suspect the former, mind.

I would like the PASB to effectively take on a formal role within the corporate governance structure of the club; of the company.

This works successfully in many areas of life & work - examples of which are school governors & non-executive chairs / directors of companies & organisations.

Although not directly involved in the day to day running of the bodies they oversee, these 'governors' or non-exec boards can require reports, accounts & performance figures on a regular basis & take action (on an escalating continuum) as agreed.

As I've previously mentioned, I'm currently working at the national level within my profession and report directly to such a Chairman - a brilliant man. In addition to his day job, he has previously ran the international news org, Reuters & is also a national trustee of St John Ambulance. His counsel & guidance is genuinely 'money can't buy' .

I have had meetings with a number of other people & am due to meet with a few more, including the current Chief Exec of the Institute for Leadership & Management (ILM).

To date, their words & advice has been quite inspirational & they have helped me markedly in thinking through exactly what role a Supporter's group could have in the corporate governance of something like a football club.

In particular, areas such as being formally enabled to require reports & how an escalating approach to corporate supervision may work, are now much clearer to me.

This is the approach that I am standing as a candidate on.

Additionally, I would like individual members of the PASB to hold portfolios, such as finance, staff management, etc. this would enable a 'round peg' approach & enhance the ability to scrutinise with rigour. I also believe that PASB members should be subject to performance management.

As it stands, due quite possibly to the need to reach out to lots of people in order that votes are secured, the PASB seems to be drifting towards the Fan's Trust model, rather than the corporate governance one that I prefer.

I would genuinely appreciate thoughts & feedback on what I've written.

Cheers,

Jon

JonB · **Posted:** Sat Aug 18, 2012 8:50 am

Just a couple of things to add:

At the last couple of PASB set-up meetings I spoke up against a members-only selection approach. I think Sparksy was also of this opinion, but can't really remember. My feeling at the time was that it was Prof Wheeler's desire.

Indeed, I have been fundamentally against people being selected via election from the start. My fear was that as elections are popularity contents, it would (as ever) drive at least some people to simply say & do things that sound & look good, rather than have any depth & potentially be good.

I think we should have been innovative here - an interview board made up of one nominee from the Trust, Pasoti & ATD perhaps? There'd be no truck taken with superficial soundbites then, I'd wager!

Following on from my suggestion that PASB members are subject themselves to scrutiny via performance management, on reflection this could be extended to a binding Code of Conduct (honesty & transparency could feature?).

If we had thought this through at the start of the process, maybe it should have applied to candidates as something of a gateway to application.

David_Fisher · **Posted:** Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:36 am

I think Prof W was in favour of as wide an "electorate" as possible.

It was the consensus of the meeting I went to that it would be difficult logistically to include POTDs in the first election but once the PASB is up & running they can consider a more inclusive method for future elections.

JonB · **Posted:** Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:55 am

Thanks David,

I've read through my notes from the meeting & on the quick notes that I posted immediately afterwards & it's fair to say that I switched off from the somewhat circular nature of the discussion.

I did not that I suggested 'one vote, one ticket' at a home game - if the Prof was in favour of the widest possible access, I fear that we've ended up designing a camel....

My perception was that the members-only approach was the Prof's preferred option though.

Thanks for the reply though - I think it's reiterated the need for a set of agreed minutes or notes from meetings such as these.

The Doctor · **Joined:** Mon Sep 15, 2003 11:17 am

JonB wrote:

I think we should have been innovative here - an interview board made up of one nominee from the Trust, Pasoti & ATD perhaps? There'd be no truck taken with superficial soundbites then, I'd wager!

Now that's an interesting idea.

JonB · **Posted:** Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:15 pm

I've just posted some bits & bobs about me (as a candidate) on the 'Postal papers' thread that perhaps should have gone there - to avoid double posting please check the aforementioned thread below for an update!

Thanks.

JonB · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:55 am

A quick thank you to everyone's kind words & comments following my successful application to sit on the inaugural Plymouth Argyle Supporters Board.

Congratulations too, for the other successful candidates & commiserations to those not; particularly disappointing I'm sure given the bumpy ride we've experience to date.

Semaphore05 · **Posted:** Sun Oct 21, 2012 4:28 pm

Hi Jon,

Sadly I was one who was not voted on - no matter - good luck to the PASB and hope all goes well for the future.

Just a little disappointed that all candidates were not informed of the results before it was announced publically - I think every candidate is 'on-line' so a quick email would, I feel been a bit more appropriate and more business-like.

Once again good luck to the PASB!!

Alan Barry
Green+ Member
AFT Member No. 622

pilgrim_pete · **Joined:** Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:54 pm

I believe they were informed S05.

OxfordGreen · **Joined:** Tue Jul 19, 2011 8:21 pm **Location:** Oxford

pilgrim_pete wrote:

I believe they were informed S05.

No they weren't read the post above yours again.

JonB · **Posted:** Mon Oct 22, 2012 7:31 pm

Semaphore05 wrote:

Hi Jon,

Sadly I was one who was not voted on - no matter - good luck to the PASB and hope all goes well for the future.

Just a little disappointed that all candidates were not informed of the results before it was announced publically - I think every candidate is 'on-line' so a quick email would, I feel been a bit more appropriate and more business-like.

Once again good luck to the PASB!!

Alan Barry
Green+ Member
AFT Member No. 622

Alan,

I am genuinely sorry that you were unsuccessful - from our Internet discussions I think you'd have been a really useful 'colleague' to work with.

And I too am disappointed that we weren't given a heads-up beforehand - it wasn't just you!

Warm regards,

Jon

pilgrim_pete · **Joined:** Sat Mar 07, 2009 11:54 pm

Apologies OG, I was mis informed.

JonB · **Posted:** Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:53 am

Hi all,

I hope it doesn't come over as too pretentious, but I've set up a new personal email account for contact regarding Supporter's Board purposes, pending any future, more corporate communication routes.

It's JonB.PASB@gmail.com .

The only other thing I'd mention is that currently, I'm usually accessing my IT via the mobile network, so it can be a touch unreliable.

Cheers.

PASB Election - candidate Jon B

Who is online