Headhunting vs. Interview

[Redjacket 756]

Should we headhunt or should we interview for a new coach?

I found this article on AFL.com.au where Lethal suggests that the interview process is an "imperfect" way to choose a coach and that going down the headhunting route would be a better option for the MFC.

Edited June 18, 2013 by Demonland

[The Chazz 4,077]

Headhunt. We want the best that there is.

To interview would generally imply that they have to apply. We don't want to sit back and wait to see who comes to us, we go out there and get them.

Same tactic needs to be used during trade week.

[MadAsHell 4,217]

I've voted head hunt, but I really think we should do both.

I'd of thought they should head hunt Roos, Williams, Eade, Craig, Ratten & Ayres in the sense that they should invite them in for a chat (not a powerpoint presentation) to discuss the possability of the job. What each party is looking for, etc, etc

However they should also advertise the position and have a formal interview with any potential rookie coaches to make sure we cover all areas and are thorough. This is an extremely important appointment and we should under no circumstances limit ourselves to a certain type of appointment.

[The Chazz 4,077]

I've voted head hunt, but I really think we should do both.

I'd of thought they should head hunt Roos, Williams, Eade, Craig, Ratten & Ayres in the sense that they should invite them in for a chat (not a powerpoint presentation) to discuss the possability of the job. What each party is looking for, etc, etc

However they should also advertise the position and have a formal interview with any potential rookie coaches to make sure we cover all areas and are thorough. This is an extremely important appointment and we should under no circumstances limit ourselves to a certain type of appointment.

You advertise when/if the coach you want don't want us.

There are clear standouts that you would then work out the order of preference. You work down that shallow list (I think it only has 5 names on it), and if you don't have your coach by then, then you advertise.

[dpositive 1,819]

You got it TD

Interviewing is in fact a necessary part of headhunting

FGS you need both parties to sit down and discuss needs and capacities.

the employer needs to scour the field by advertising (opening up for application) just in case someone hasnt heard about the position being available to them and those interested candidates can be supplemented by approaches to any alternatives who may believe they are uninterested for any of a variety of reasons.

Frankness and honesty in the approach will require thoroughness in checking all information gleaned from the interview process.

It does require a fairly explicit and honest appraisal of exactly what you want before you can get it.

PJ appears to understand the processes (although Was he responsible for M knights at essendon???)

[ThreeOneSix 954]

All the experienced coaches feel that they shouldn't have to apply for this job - which is more than fair enough as well.
So, perhaps we should head hunt - instead of opening this job up for an interview.

If we like a coach, go have a chat to him, Rocket, Roos and Williams appear to all be open to a chat.

The thing is, a chat is off the record - whereas an application is on the record and applicants feel that it can affect their chances of future jobs if they are knocked back.

[The Chazz 4,077]

You got it TD

Interviewing is in fact a necessary part of headhunting

FGS you need both parties to sit down and discuss needs and capacities.

the employer needs to scour the field by advertising (opening up for application) just in case someone hasnt heard about the position being available to them and those interested candidates can be supplemented by approaches to any alternatives who may believe they are uninterested for any of a variety of reasons.

Frankness and honesty in the approach will require thoroughness in checking all information gleaned from the interview process.

It does require a fairly explicit and honest appraisal of exactly what you want before you can get it.

PJ appears to understand the processes (although Was he responsible for M knights at essendon???)

If there is a potential saviour coach out there that hasn't heard we are crap and that we are now looking for a new coach, I don't think they need to apply, dpositve.

Do you think Carlton "advertised" after Ratten got the arse? They knew the bloke they wanted, they got him.

Of course there is going to be a conversation (probably a numebr), but a true "job interview" is not what I would call it.

[MadAsHell 4,217]

The only problem with just focussing on headhunting is we coud leave things to late.

Of the 6 names I've mentioned, 3 we can obviously speak to straight away: Roos, Craig & Ayres.

Roos is obviously top of the list but what happens if he declines? The club would obviously also want to speak to Williams, Eade, Ratten who all could go deep into September? And even then what happens if they to aren't interested after the discussion?

We've then missed out on time where we could have formally interviewed a Allan Richardson, Shane Woewodin, Rohan Welsh etc.

Should always cover your bases.

[Tony Tea 2,814]

We need a committee (chaired by Garry Lyon) to decide whether we headhunt or interview.

[rjay 25,306]

The only problem with just focussing on headhunting is we coud leave things to late.

Of the 6 names I've mentioned, 3 we can obviously speak to straight away: Roos, Craig & Ayres.

Roos is obviously top of the list but what happens if he declines? The club would obviously also want to speak to Williams, Eade, Ratten who all could go deep into September? And even then what happens if they to aren't interested after the discussion?

We've then missed out on time where we could have formally interviewed a Allan Richardson, Shane Woewodin, Rohan Welsh etc.

Should always cover your bases.

We will headhunt, as I've said before there will be no bs committee on this one and don't worry about Williams and Eade they will be approached and I believe at least one of them has already been sounded out. We will have a coach locked away before the end of the season, it will only be the announcement that will be delayed.

[Grapeviney 9,909]

We need a committee (chaired by Garry Lyon) to decide whether we headhunt or interview.

Was astonished to hear Garry's suggestion that Gerard Healy should be part of the panel deciding the next coach.

What are his credentials, other than being a prominent media figure?

[jackaub 1,402]

G Lyon should just concentrate on his media career

His recent past re the MFC is embarrassing

Even Caro made him feel uncomfortable and his body language was very very poor

[PJ_12345 1,098]

Was astonished to hear Garry's suggestion that Gerard Healy should be part of the panel deciding the next coach.

What are his credentials, other than being a prominent media figure?

Also wants him to be president too

[Toad33 57]

I have voted Head Hunt because I think that any of the former AFL coaches discussed already will be better and produce more than what we have had in our last two. We don't need another 'up-and-comer' with 'potential' we need a battle/media hardened experienced coach who has a track record of taking poor teams and improving them and their culture by getting the best out of them not someone who wants to throw out what we have and start again....again.

I would NOT like to see the club 'advertise' for a new coach but boldly tell the football world what we need (and let's face it the football world already knows).

It will essential there be an interview process of course but WE should be approaching the coaches WE think are capable and NOT waiting for them to show some interest and coming to us.

I would NOT rule out contacting current senior AFL coaches mid season either or at least mentioning their names in the media to show we will not leave any stone unturned to get the right person.

[Barney Rubble 1,576]

I'd of thought

Could we get this correct. It's giving me the irits. I would have

woulda, coulda, shoulda. Could of, should of, would of, don't exist in anyone's vocab.

Edited June 19, 2013 by Chippy

[[email protected] 101]

I'd of thought

Could we get this correct. It's giving me the irits. I would have

woulda, coulda, shoulda. Could of, should of, would of, don't exist in anyone's vocab.

Obviously do exist in many vocabularies on DL.. otherwise it wouldn't give you the irits... .. If DL posters were banned for their misuse of the English language , we would not have much to read on the DL site... Just saying...

[Tony Tea 2,814]

I'd of thought

Could we get this correct. It's giving me the irits. I would have

woulda, coulda, shoulda. Could of, should of, would of, don't exist in anyone's vocab.

Irrits.

[dpositive 1,819]

If there is a potential saviour coach out there that hasn't heard we are crap and that we are now looking for a new coach, I don't think they need to apply, dpositve.

Do you think Carlton "advertised" after Ratten got the arse? They knew the bloke they wanted, they got him.

Of course there is going to be a conversation (probably a numebr), but a true "job interview" is not what I would call it.

Yeah I agree that potentials would know we are looking but also should understand that they can approach us not just sit waiting for a headhunter to find them.

A "True job interview" also goes beyond one presentation when it is a critical appointment. I would suggest given the toxic nature referred to there could even be some engagement with stakeholders rather than a pure appointment and sale.

I was once advised by a mentor that no one likes surprises and this critical issue should be treated accordingly

[Jack7 528]

Our next coach will be either Roos,Choco or Eade so interview in that order.

Clarkson would be my choice but the Dees won't be where the Hawks are today in 5 years so why would he.

[dpositive 1,819]

Toad 33 has nailed it also probably expressed it better than me

Part of the transparency and engagement needed

[The Chazz 4,077]

Our next coach will be either Roos,Choco or Eade so interview in that order.

Clarkson would be my choice but the Dees won't be where the Hawks are today in 5 years so why would he.

In 5 years there is no certainty that the Hawks won't be where we are now (ok, perhaps not that low but you get my drift). Players like Hodge, Mitchell, Sewell, Lewis, they aint getting any younger, so it will rely on their kids stepping up. Could happen, might not too.

[McQueen 17,867]

Peter Jackson knows what the club needs and therefore the new coach will be head-hunted. Nothing more certain.

[Bonkers 994]

The only problem with just focussing on headhunting is we coud leave things to late.

Of the 6 names I've mentioned, 3 we can obviously speak to straight away: Roos, Craig & Ayres.

Roos is obviously top of the list but what happens if he declines? The club would obviously also want to speak to Williams, Eade, Ratten who all could go deep into September? And even then what happens if they to aren't interested after the discussion?

We've then missed out on time where we could have formally interviewed a Allan Richardson, Shane Woewodin, Rohan Welsh etc.

Should always cover your bases.

Candidates should be spoken to regardless of whether they are contracted or not. If the club identify a coach they want & they are contracted its simple, talk to them in secret discussions & tap them up for the job. It happens in the EPL regularly, no party will ever admit it. It is now a well known fact that Man Utd tapped Ferguson & met him secretly in hotel rooms & relatives homes etc before he became manager. The same would apply for many transfers. Even Ross Lyon was tapped by Freo & they got their man.

If the club identifies Eade as their man then do what it takes & disregard anything that Eddie says. Which is what the club should have done with Malthouse before all this Shite happened with Neeld.

[deanox 10,045]

The question isn't interview or head hunt, it's application or head hunt. All parties will be interviewed long and hard and the position discussed in detail. We will head hunt the people we think are worth talking to, but will we accept applications from other candidates not on our short list?

[rjay 25,306]

The question isn't interview or head hunt, it's application or head hunt. All parties will be interviewed long and hard and the position discussed in detail. We will head hunt the people we think are worth talking to, but will we accept applications from other candidates not on our short list?

I don't think we will. Whether it is good process or not but I also don't think any one else will apply.