Surprised that it hasn't been tried before (or has it?)

Leading Teams brought in to help Melbourne as Paul Roos tries to change culture at club

I'm pretty sure Bailey had Leading Teams at the club, but then Neeld got rid of them when he arrived, in line with Malthouse's philosophies on leadership & leadership consultants.

Come to think of it, I'm not surprised Malthouse had an issue with Leading Teams' theories of "player empowerment" considering the rabble they would have been empowering to make decisions.

Fancy giving Dane Swan, Heath Shaw, Alan Didak, Ben Johnson or Dayne Beams that sort of license!

Harry O is clearly not stable enough to handle it either.

No wonder when Buckley brought LT back into the club it all started falling apart and he's had to go the renovation route with his side.

Yeah, LT reveal what you have, they don't mould leaders.

Might actually work this time with us because we have decent leaders; opposed to what we had circa Bailey (exception Junior).

jay clark again also can't resist the opportunity for a few more sly cracks at us

i also object to his hyperbole of "seven coaches in seven years"

whilst technically true, three were interim existing coaches. But paint it as evil as you can jay

jay clark again also can't resist the opportunity for a few more sly cracks at us

i also object to his hyperbole of "seven coaches in seven years"

whilst technically true, three were interim existing coaches. But paint it as evil as you can jay

He who laughs last laughs best dc

I vaguely recall that it has been used by Dees in the past and obviously from the outside looking in it was not a success or maybe it was how it was implemented?

I vaguely recall that it has been used by Dees in the past and obviously from the outside looking in it was not a success or maybe it was how it was implemented?

I think rpfc has covered it pretty well.

LT is one approach- one that Paul Roos has used before, and obviously likes.

Contrary to popular opinion, leadership is a set of skills. It is not a 'personality' (in fact, the correlation between personality type and leadership is less than 0.2, or put simply less than 10% of leadership is personality.)

Leadership and culture go hand in hand. I am looking for the Dees to demonstrate clear standards as well as skills of leadership in this new era. If LT can help them, then great. Otherwise we will be cellar dwellers again.

The difference to mobs like colon-wood is that even though they may talk the talk, with fig jam running the show, there is only one leader, and the rest is just window dressing.

Let's hope Roos and LT create a list of leaders at MFC.

LT is one approach- one that Paul Roos has used before, and obviously likes.

Contrary to popular opinion, leadership is a set of skills. It is not a 'personality' (in fact, the correlation between personality type and leadership is less than 0.2, or put simply less than 10% of leadership is personality.)

Leadership and culture go hand in hand. I am looking for the Dees to demonstrate clear standards as well as skills of leadership in this new era. If LT can help them, then great. Otherwise we will be cellar dwellers again.

The difference to mobs like colon-wood is that even though they may talk the talk, with fig jam running the show, there is only one leader, and the rest is just window dressing.

Let's hope Roos and LT create a list of leaders at MFC.

like

LT is one approach- one that Paul Roos has used before, and obviously likes.

Contrary to popular opinion, leadership is a set of skills. It is not a 'personality' (in fact, the correlation between personality type and leadership is less than 0.2, or put simply less than 10% of leadership is personality.)

Leadership and culture go hand in hand. I am looking for the Dees to demonstrate clear standards as well as skills of leadership in this new era. If LT can help them, then great. Otherwise we will be cellar dwellers again.

The difference to mobs like colon-wood is that even though they may talk the talk, with fig jam running the show, there is only one leader, and the rest is just window dressing.

Let's hope Roos and LT create a list of leaders at MFC.

The skills can be taught but it doesn't make the person a leader. I still would say leaders have a natural tendency to be leaders and that is not measurable by personality type or taught. Roos is the prime example of a natural leader, having seen him out and about (not just on the ground) with the Fitzroy boys in his playing days it was obvious.

The one positive of being such a rubbish side is that no player should be above some harsh truths which should make the infamous peer review aspects on LT much easier to swallow.

From then on it's a time to empower the lads to believe in themselves and lead. From my view of trainings and comments from Roos I'd be shocked if he doesn't have confidence in at least half a dozen who are already set standards outside of game day. I'm hoping LT is much more an affirmation than another big culture changer. It's time to build things up not strip them down.

Having read Ray Mcleans books and used some of the strategies myself, I can say that it is a fantastic program IMHO. but it is a very long term one - I was shattered when neeld got rid of it. bailey had it for 2 years and it was just starting to pay off.

there will be off days of course but its a great way of getting those home truths out in the open.

for example, everyone knows stuff about other people at their work, what their main problems are, if they are lazy or don't do x, or concentrate too much on y or whatever - but usually this stuff just gets said behind that persons back.

this is a way of telling that person their problems and then saying "we will help you improve"

Having read Ray Mcleans books and used some of the strategies myself, I can say that it is a fantastic program IMHO. but it is a very long term one - I was shattered when neeld got rid of it. bailey had it for 2 years and it was just starting to pay off.

there will be off days of course but its a great way of getting those home truths out in the open.

for example, everyone knows stuff about other people at their work, what their main problems are, if they are lazy or don't do x, or concentrate too much on y or whatever - but usually this stuff just gets said behind that persons back.

this is a way of telling that person their problems and then saying "we will help you improve"

Been through the leading teams process.

Like anything - it requires buy in from all participants and it can be confronting.

The main issue we had at work with this is that the people who were most accepting and really bought into the process were the people who needed it the least. Those who were resistant and "didn't need the leading teams bullsh*t" were the ones who needed it the most.

Been through the leading teams process.

Like anything - it requires buy in from all participants and it can be confronting.

The main issue we had at work with this is that the people who were most accepting and really bought into the process were the people who needed it the least. Those who were resistant and "didn't need the leading teams bullsh*t" were the ones who needed it the most.

Hence the bonding in sorrento this week.

If the LT program everybody in the club needs to be both honest and trusting.

Much of the early program will be very confronting.

I hope the entire club staff are doing it and not just the playing list.

Hence the bonding in sorrento this week.

If the LT program everybody in the club needs to be both honest and trusting.

Much of the early program will be very confronting.

I hope the entire club staff are doing it and not just the playing list.

Not sure about the entire staff but I think you will find that Roos and the assistants and football manager is involved ( or should be)

Hence the bonding in sorrento this week.

If the LT program everybody in the club needs to be both honest and trusting.

Much of the early program will be very confronting.

I hope the entire club staff are doing it and not just the playing list.

why ??

its only about the the actual playing list and their immediate staff

interesting

one minute everyone criticizes LT when we are not using it

next minute everyone is on board because we are going back to LT

LOL

why ??

its only about the the actual playing list and their immediate staff

No. It is about the entire Football club. Everyone plays a part and pulls their weight when required.

Everyone.

No. It is about the entire Football club. Everyone plays a part and pulls their weight when required.

Everyone.

sorry mate thats just ridiculous.

This is about the Footy Team.. not the Footy Club.

The first part of being a great leader is about self awareness. If you don't allow yourself to evaluate your true strengths and weaknesses and 'lead' yourself, how can you lead others? The self awareness bit is often the hardest, and when people assume that they are not the problem or don't need this mambo jumbo BS, then they really will be stuck.

Some will get it more than others, and some more quickly than others. The club has to make culture and leadership a fundamental plank of what they are doing, so even the recalcitrants see that if they want to be in, this is part of the deal.

For me, the trip to Sorrento will not end the process, but will start it. I would be structuring up the days to build inclusion, sort out competence and competition issues and then start driving enhanced self-disclosure. Only then can these programs work to lead to high performance.

sorry mate thats just ridiculous.

This is about the Footy Team.. not the Footy Club.

What is actually ridiculous?

The reason the club hit rock bottom last year is primarily because the football team and the club were not functioning together.

"One in all in"

Did OK for Gary Ablett. Was just a player before the brought in LT. Has done OK since...

LT is one approach- one that Paul Roos has used before, and obviously likes.

Contrary to popular opinion, leadership is a set of skills. It is not a 'personality' (in fact, the correlation between personality type and leadership is less than 0.2, or put simply less than 10% of leadership is personality.)

Leadership and culture go hand in hand. I am looking for the Dees to demonstrate clear standards as well as skills of leadership in this new era. If LT can help them, then great. Otherwise we will be cellar dwellers again.

The difference to mobs like colon-wood is that even though they may talk the talk, with fig jam running the show, there is only one leader, and the rest is just window dressing.

Let's hope Roos and LT create a list of leaders at MFC.

Do you have a source for those numbers? I'd be very interested to see it, because my own experience is the opposite. Have a look at a playground (quickly, before it gets creepy and they call the cops) and you'll see that there are natural leaders in the group who the others flock to automatically. It's all about the personality type. These kids haven't studied a set of "leadership skills" to get themselves into that position, it's simply who they are and generally they don't even think about it. That sort of personality carries through into later life.

On the other end of the spectrum are those who want to be leaders and who read all the right books and do all the training but still just can't do it. They invariably come across as fake, and they do things pretty much according to a mental checklist, often misinterpreting the intent behind the points they are following. How often have you met a professional male who seeks to establish his authority with a "firm, confident handshake" but sadly doesn't understand the term and instead goes for the bonecrusher grip. Does this impress you? Does it make you think of them as authoritative or as a [censored]? This is the classic example of a type A wannabe.

Obviously there are many people who fall between these two extremes. For most people training can provide them with the tools to be an effective leader, if not a great one. Give the same training to one of those natural leaders and you get a charismatic powerhouse who people will follow anywhere. Give it to the [censored] of the second example and you get a creepy person who puts people off and doesn't understand why nobody wants to work under them.

Back to Leading Teams, I have to say that while I don't know all that much about their methods I have heard some bad stories from them along with the good. I'm not personally a huge fan, and this is influenced by my own experience of corporate teambuilding consultants of whom I have been subjected to more than enough to last a lifetime and have invariably found to be overly simplistic, self-serving and narcissistic (and I'm in for yet another one tomorrow. Yay!). Still, given the state that we find ourselves in, I don't see that they can do any more harm than we've already done to ourselves, so bring it on and let's all hope that it works and we see some benefit out of the process.

Do you have a source for those numbers? I'd be very interested to see it, because my own experience is the opposite. Have a look at a playground (quickly, before it gets creepy and they call the cops) and you'll see that there are natural leaders in the group who the others flock to automatically. It's all about the personality type. These kids haven't studied a set of "leadership skills" to get themselves into that position, it's simply who they are and generally they don't even think about it. That sort of personality carries through into later life.

On the other end of the spectrum are those who want to be leaders and who read all the right books and do all the training but still just can't do it. They invariably come across as fake, and they do things pretty much according to a mental checklist, often misinterpreting the intent behind the points they are following. How often have you met a professional male who seeks to establish his authority with a "firm, confident handshake" but sadly doesn't understand the term and instead goes for the bonecrusher grip. Does this impress you? Does it make you think of them as authoritative or as a [censored]? This is the classic example of a type A wannabe.

Obviously there are many people who fall between these two extremes. For most people training can provide them with the tools to be an effective leader, if not a great one. Give the same training to one of those natural leaders and you get a charismatic powerhouse who people will follow anywhere. Give it to the [censored] of the second example and you get a creepy person who puts people off and doesn't understand why nobody wants to work under them.

Back to Leading Teams, I have to say that while I don't know all that much about their methods I have heard some bad stories from them along with the good. I'm not personally a huge fan, and this is influenced by my own experience of corporate teambuilding consultants of whom I have been subjected to more than enough to last a lifetime and have invariably found to be overly simplistic, self-serving and narcissistic (and I'm in for yet another one tomorrow. Yay!). Still, given the state that we find ourselves in, I don't see that they can do any more harm than we've already done to ourselves, so bring it on and let's all hope that it works and we see some benefit out of the process.

Pretty much agree with what you say here 'Ralph'.