Kurtley Beale

[It is what it is]

Like many professional roles ILTW, it's been implied the role was catered for her somewhat by applying a number of responsibilities of previous roles and areas of her expertise.

Does the fact that nobody else was interviewed show any untoward behaviour or poor management? Not necessarily.

I've been formally offered 4 different jobs since 2010 with international companies. Only 1 of those was actually advertised. The remainder were interviews which came about due to my professional network and filled into a role which they waited until the right person was available for.

OK, but there must have been a JD completed for Patston's role and I'm wondering who wrote that. Otherwise we have a situation where a preferred person has been promoted into an undefined role...never a good move when the new role impacts so many people and causes collateral damage. Wasn't Rob Egerton's role eliminated as a consequence of this new position?

 

[Lorenzo]

Lorenzo. I don't think it's that black and white. As I stated, I see a sense of entitlement culture being an issue. But I'm not educated on the facts. For all we know, Patson could very well be a bumbling idiot and the players views are valid.

But that said, right now all we know is that Patson was successful in her role at QLD and has been nothing less than professionally adequate in her role with the ARU.

I see what you are getting at, but if you want to bone this cartel-of-influence culture, you need to do it swiftly and aggressively.

There shouldn't be a "leadership group". There should be a captain, whose responsibilities relate solely to on-field matters. He shouldn't be the youngest player in the squad. Anything else needs to be dealt with by the adults - the coaching and admin staff.

If we want to turn into a professional outfit we need to do it properly.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I could be wrong but I was under the impression his departure was unrelated and her role began to fill the void.

But again for note, with one of those roles I took I asked for a job description and was never ever given one. This was for a defined position that had a specific pay band, etc.

For my reasons I wanted it to not be pushed into responsibilities outside my role. But as noted was never provided one by an international property and construction company despite requesting it from HR.

 

[mst]

Can we put to rest the idea that the ARU was somehow negligent or not sufficiently diligent by not advertising her role?

Much bigger orgs dealing in much bigger $$$ amounts hire people based on recommendations and without advertising.

....then have an incident similar to what is being alleged, are sued and change their governance and business practises to be, professional and accountable, and conform with required WHS and employment laws to protect and value employees.

Those organisations that can get away with it usually have little to no risks to consider such as a male dominated working environment, no media scrutiny and not a "public product" for entertainment purposes.

Do you think sponsors will be accepting of the lack of risk management and governance? They wont be putting up their $$$ near anything that just done on a recommendation and without risk controls.

 

[Train Without a Station]

You mean sponsors potentially who employ the same recruitment measures mst?

 

[It is what it is]

Both irrelevant. I know many people that have their jobs by the same means as Patston. Job descriptions evolve in many workplace's.

Did any of them write their own JD for the new role?

 

[It is what it is]

Can we put to rest the idea that the ARU was somehow negligent or not sufficiently diligent by not advertising her role?

Much bigger orgs dealing in much bigger $$$ amounts hire people based on recommendations and without advertising.

Who mentioned advertising being an issue here?

 

[Lorenzo]

..then have an incident similar to what is being alleged, are sued and change their governance and business practises to be, professional and accountable, and conform with required WHS and employment laws to protect and value employees.

Those organisations that can get away with it usually have little to no risks to consider such as a male dominated working environment, no media scrutiny and not a "public product" for entertainment purposes.

Do you think sponsors will be accepting of the lack of risk management and governance? They wont be putting up their $$$ near anything that just done on a recommendation and not risk controls.

That is just incorrect. The overwhelming majority of recommendation hires or "i need to bring this guy with me" hires are successful and result in no issues of that nature at all.

It's incredibly common in business. Large law firms take entire practice groups based on the recommendations of one partner. Does the acquiring firm do some DD in relation to the new staff? Sure, but they don't take out an ad in the paper or interview other people - they just take the people that the partner says he/she needs to get things done.

Patston would have been reviewed prior to her hiring. They presumably found that she appeared competent and qualified, but they really took her on because Link wanted her.

 

[Lorenzo]

Who mentioned advertising being an issue here?

You mentioned interviewing. I meant that.

 

[Muglair]

Love your work pfitzy. Wanker has just lot it's sting and meaning.

As far as responsibility for structure and organisation I recall there was a lot of media coverage for McKenzie stepping up to take control of the whole Wallaby structure to ensure that productivity was improved and savings made in support of ARU financial position. My recollection is that he claimed considerable cost savings at the time.

 

[mst]

You mean sponsors potentially who employ the same recruitment measures mst?

Thank you, exactly - an example oh the different business risks that require different management and governance!

If this incident happened at a business who sponsored the Wallabies we may see a small report about it. But with an organisation that is exposed to the public globally 24/7 - 365 you would figure it very unwise to not be considered and measured in your business practises.

The only place for risk in the Wallabies is on the field. Beyond that its playing with fire and its guaranteed to get in to the media.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Not sure how financial efficiency is really relevant.

 

[Train Without a Station]

Mst do you live in the real world? Almost any experienced professional is hired based on their experience and professional references.

In this case they were vouched for by an ARU employee.

 

[Muglair]

I am not sure Burke is such an idiot. Wales France Ireland and England looks a tough four week program to me. Even assuming there will be immediate improvement. Even the opening game against the Barbarians is a two edged sword. An opportunity to get some things right against a thrown together combination but a disaster if there is a poor performance. That team could be quite motivated as well.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I am not sure Burke is such an idiot. Wales France Ireland and England looks a tough four week program to me. Even assuming there will be immediate improvement. Even the opening game against the Barbarians is a two edged sword. An opportunity to get some things right against a thrown together combination but a disaster if there is a poor performance. That team could be quite motivated as well.

Did you even read my comment. Either it's a tough assignment and the 7 game winning streak against 3 of them was an achievement, or if the 7 game winning streak was such a walk in the park (despite no wallaby team managing that in their fixtures for 12 years prior) and it's not that tough a tour.

You can't discredit the quality of the same teams who you wish to talk up.

 

[Lorenzo]

I have not read Burke's article today but generally his written work is awful. He was hardcore pimping for Foley and Beale at 10 and 12 in gold because, yknow, it worked at the tahs. It's like he has never watched test rugby.

 

[Muglair]

Are you really following this thread?

The question was who is responsible for the current structure and job descriptions (whether written or not).

I previously posted that any savings have been massively inefficient if they have contributed to the current management mishaps.

 

[TahDan]

No, the original article (that's been posted earlier in this thread) was removed from all Fairfax news sites the same day it was published.

And I think the "rational observer" you speak of is draped in tin foil.....

The Rand Corporation... reverse vampires..... lizard people... Di Patston's LinkedIn profile...... ISIS....

Things that are irrelevant to this story.

Well now you're just being silly.

The facts that remained in the altered version that remains on the SMH are still odd and I don't know how you don't think it is.

As I've said previously the only possible explanations for it are intentional embellishment or incompetence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Train Without a Station]

But have they contributed to the mishaps? Not sure how Kurtley's texting and mid air argument can be at all attributed to any budget issues?

 

[Quick Hands]

I can't really imagine reasonable person watching sports all their lives (rugby or otherwise) and reaching a conclusion that players are anything but grossly unqualified to offer views or have any influence at all. Go out there and tackle and cross the gain line. Shut the fuck up the rest of the time.

The challenge is a we have a small market from which to draw players.

Do people see American Football teams with these sorts of dramas often? Yes, the Ray Rice incident was grossly mishandled but the idea that a leadership group headed by a 22 year old man could walk into a NFL head coach's office and try to make policy without being told to fuck right off is bloody absurd.

Not quite. As employees the players have the same workplace rights as the rest of us. If someone isn't happy with something going on in the workplace, it's perfectly appropriate for them to raise it with someone senior in the organisation. There's a right way and an wrong way to do this and it's important to accept the determination of the manager/coach and move on with your job.