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

When did anyone criticise LT?

Let alone everyone?

I don't remember that at all.

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"

all relevant ones in...yes... Its only relevant to the players and coaches

Agree.

WYL, you've got your head in the clouds again.

This has nothing to do with anyone beyond the footy dept.

When did anyone criticise LT?

Let alone everyone?

I don't remember that at all.

there was quite a lot of it back awhile now...maybe a couple of years now

and also on demonology too

i may be mixing the two a little too

i guess my point is that it is interesting how on a forum opinion can switch a lot depending on circumstances

no biggy here

i notice ralphius has since added a cautionary opinion (which made a lot of sense to me)

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

When did anyone criticise LT?

Let alone everyone?

I don't remember that at all.

Aaahhhh, I did. Well, sort of.

When I wanted to expunge the LG after 2011, I supported the removal of LT as they were 'finding leaders' that weren't really leaders (Green, Rivers, Moloney, Davey, et al).

I always maintained, though, that they are not to blame for anything - their methods can only reveal what is already there. If there is nothing there, you may aswell save your money - which was my point before.

Now, however, I believe that they can make some hay with Jones, Clark, Dawes, Trengove, Grimes, Garland, Frawley, and Cross.

Leading teams really is a case of buy in or get out - clubs who are really going hard with this will not care if you are the most talented player on the list if you don't buy in, they'll trade you.

see collingwood

Fair enough.

I definitely agreed with the LG being stood down, but I'm not sure that was necessarily a LT directive.

Surely they'd have different systems and processes for different circumstances, i.e. playing groups at different stages of overall development.

Besides, the makeup of the playing list is not the domain of LT, rather the list managers.

I agree we can build something much better with what we now have.

Thank christ for that.

there was quite a lot of it back awhile now...maybe a couple of years now

and also on demonology too

i may be mixing the two a little too

i guess my point is that it is interesting how on a forum opinion can switch a lot depending on circumstances

no biggy here

i notice ralphius has since added a cautionary opinion (which made a lot of sense to me)

That's the case with just about every topic on this forum!

I think without being informed as you would be on the inner sanctum, we as supporters try to understand and rationalise every decision.

With all the changing strategies, processes and structures at MFC over the last 7 years with all the regime changes, we are a case-study in this phenomena.

We truly are fickle.

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 ...

Try: " Personality and Leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review". Judge, T.A. Et al,. (2002) Journal of applied psychology (87,4,pp 765-780) for starters. Even skewed meta-analysis shows limited support (and highly inconsistent ) for personality as leader theory. There are many others. Each personality type has low correlation. To leadership performance.

Leadership is one of those motherhood statements we want people to have. The problem is in its definition, developing the skills, and then the implementation. Unfortunately there are too many people teaching leadership poorly and leaving people scarred by the experience.

I do a lot of work in the field, and when you boil it down leadership CAN be taught. Some people have more baseline skills and preferences which are interpreted as leadership 'talent', and there are others that start a long way back. Leadership will not be found in a Donald Trump (insert celebrity boss name of your choice) autobiography, where the wannabes hang out...

The other part of this is Charisma- take a look at leadership exchange theory. Also look at group/ team psychology, in particular social identity theory and salience of prototypical members. Those kiddies in the playground demonstrate it all perfectly. The most 'attractive' to the group may not be the best leader....

The other part of this is Charisma- take a look at leadership exchange theory. Also look at group/ team psychology, in particular social identity theory and salience of prototypical members. Those kiddies in the playground demonstrate it all perfectly. The most 'attractive' to the group may not be the best leader....

Are we defining the beast leader as the person who makes people follow them the most or the person who makes the best decisions for the group?

Are we defining the beast leader as the person who makes people follow them the most or the person who makes the best decisions for the group?

And there is the point. Until leadership is defined, it remains an elusive motherhood statement. Are we talking about good leadership or effective?

The interesting question for me will be how the Dees define what leadership means to them. The one they follow the easiest or the one who helps the group achieve their super ordinate goal? Will say a lot about their potential for success.

I really hope the boys vote Chip into the LG. If not he has another reason to want to leave, that his team mates don't rate him.

When did anyone criticise LT?

Let alone everyone?

I don't remember that at all.

Barry Hall in his interview with Mike Sheahan on Open Mike talked about Leading Teams. He said you have forums where everyone in the team gets up and has the opportunity to criticise whoever they like. He said even a lot of the junior players were getting up and criticising senior players and sometimes just for the sake of it. Some of the comments weren't justified or appropriate and caused problems in the group. Read into that what you like, given some of Hall's behaviour but it gives you some idea of what some of the processes can be and some negative feedback of the process.

LT is just like any psychological conditioning program

It can be beneficial or quite the opposite

it depends heavily on the individual qualities of the people running it

if roosy can get the right people to sell it and run it, it could be helpful

lets all hope that is the case because it sure isn't a given

Barry Hall in his interview with Mike Sheahan on Open Mike talked about Leading Teams. He said you have forums where everyone in the team gets up and has the opportunity to criticise whoever they like. He said even a lot of the junior players were getting up and criticising senior players and sometimes just for the sake of it. Some of the comments weren't justified or appropriate and caused problems in the group. Read into that what you like, given some of Hall's behaviour but it gives you some idea of what some of the processes can be and some negative feedback of the process.

But the leading teams guy is the moderator. You can't just openly get up and take pot shots without being asked to justify them. The LT moderator would expand on themes and ask if the rest of the group felt the same way as the person leveling the criticism. In our case, if it wasn't justified or was over the top it was brought back into line by the group. So after a few sessions we became measured and thoughtful in our criticisms. We got good results.

Have a look at a playground …. 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.

On the basis of what I've experienced with mine, would agree with the first part (natural leaders), but not the second (personality). My son grew up with the same band from kindergarten through to high school, and the leader for the whole time was a little kid that you'd hardly even notice, at least on first meeting. He was the quietest and tended to always be in the background - but he was also the quickest at sizing up a situation and working out what was what, and especially, the best at making things happen. He also knew how to stay out of the quarrels.

I know nothing specifically of LT, though I get the gist. Certainly, with so many new faces around the group, would have thought it had considerable benefits in fast-tracking and driving the kind of culture we need to be putting in place.

Agree.

WYL, you've got your head in the clouds again.

This has nothing to do with anyone beyond the footy dept.

Depends how successful you wish to be.

Depends how successful you wish to be.

No it doesnt. Do you honestly expect Jackson , De Crespigny, Bartlett etc to be part of this..

does the front desk receptionist need to be there, what about Burgo ??

really get real. This is about, and ONLY about the Players and their immediate coaches.

thats it !!

No it doesnt. Do you honestly expect Jackson , De Crespigny, Bartlett etc to be part of this..

does the front desk receptionist need to be there, what about Burgo ??

really get real. This is about, and ONLY about the Players and their immediate coaches.

thats it !!

i am not saying the football list and admin are all in the same room no.

But each department should go through the same LT Program.

PJ & Roos were bought in to restructure the entire club.

The admin are just as important as the the players. That is my point.

Barry Hall in his interview with Mike Sheahan on Open Mike talked about Leading Teams. He said you have forums where everyone in the team gets up and has the opportunity to criticise whoever they like. He said even a lot of the junior players were getting up and criticising senior players and sometimes just for the sake of it. Some of the comments weren't justified or appropriate and caused problems in the group. Read into that what you like, given some of Hall's behaviour but it gives you some idea of what some of the processes can be and some negative feedback of the process.

I recently attended a dinner party where there was a mature gent talking footy when he heard I followed MFC he stated he would love to help Roosey and the club. I asked how and it turns out he has done a lot of "on field leadership" analysis in the coaching box with the likes of Paul Roos at the Swans and Rodney Eade at the Dogs. I assumed he was from Leading Teams but he was quick to say no way. He was quite scathing of LT and their demands that players sit out in front of the group and cop a blast. For what gain he asked, he would rather confront a player with some game day video where he did not take the game on etc and talk about the lost opportunity.

He was about game day analysis of player leadership on the field. He was frustrated by Rocket who would not allow any negative feedback to his senior players even when they had obviously gone missing in action. Interesting dinner it was. He thought MfC had talent and Roos was a good start but LT was not his first remedy.

Personally Im not a great advocate of LT.. But if PR and such have had success than Boorah !!

its whatever the players buy into.....whatever

its about results !!!

I assumed he was from Leading Teams but he was quick to say no way. He was quite scathing of LT and their demands that players sit out in front of the group and cop a blast.

Obviously not from leading teams and by this comment has not been exposed to the process nor does he understand how the process works. (cop a blast - seriously !)

Edit - just so you are aware - Good leaders are able to deliver honest criticism without it being perceived as "giving a blast". Before any of the group critiquing takes place - LT takes you through how to criticize without getting too personal, insulting or invasive. This works for some but not all. The moderator from LT then coaches as you are giving criticism and keeps comments within bounds so it is not a "sh*t canning" exercise. It is done respectfully so it does not demoralise. The idea of sitting in front of the group and copping a blast is fantasy.

Depends how successful you wish to be.

Sorry WYL, but once again, imo... You. Don't. Know. What. You. Are. Talking. About.

I recently attended a dinner party where there was a mature gent talking footy when he heard I followed MFC he stated he would love to help Roosey and the club. I asked how and it turns out he has done a lot of "on field leadership" analysis in the coaching box with the likes of Paul Roos at the Swans and Rodney Eade at the Dogs. I assumed he was from Leading Teams but he was quick to say no way. He was quite scathing of LT and their demands that players sit out in front of the group and cop a blast. For what gain he asked, he would rather confront a player with some game day video where he did not take the game on etc and talk about the lost opportunity.

He was about game day analysis of player leadership on the field. He was frustrated by Rocket who would not allow any negative feedback to his senior players even when they had obviously gone missing in action. Interesting dinner it was. He thought MfC had talent and Roos was a good start but LT was not his first remedy.

Your dinner part acquiantance's technique may work well for decision-making on-field, but what about forming good habits off-field, or at training, or building solid characters in general?

My impression of Roos philosophy is that it is a holistic one, and that limiting it to reviews of game tape would not be ideal.

In fact, it sounds like his area of expertise would have been post-match game tape analysis and constructive feedback, as opposed to leadership and culture.