Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
@powederjunkie
Glad to see someone else to work for the Board and come away with a bad opinion of them.
|
Here's the thing though...I didn't work for the "Board", I worked for the Calgary Stampede. I certainly had interactions with board members, and they would get involved in my business from time to time (although that was a part of their job (each director was assigned to various aspects of the organization). It only meant a little bit of politicking and playing some lip-service, but it didn't have much impact on how I, or anyone on my team made strategic decisions or implemented said strategy (no more than the influence from board members of any other company).
The Stampede has a CEO, CFO, and a few VP's. They signed my paycheque and had the power to send me packing if they were so inclined (FWIW I wasn't fired, so nothing to do with my bitterness). They are NOT members of the "Board". The "Board" is not sitting in a ivory tower coming coming up with the ideas and making the deals. The executive leadership team does all of that, and brings it to the Board for approval, feedback, guidance and direction. Of course the Board has a major say in how things go, and essentially guide the direction of the organization (and decide if the CEO sticks around or not), but it's a few hours a week for most of them (more in June/July of course). Running the top of an organization is lots of work, which is why it's down by the aforementioned CEO, CFO and VPs, who are salaried, and spend ~8 hours on any given day focused on Stampede.
This is hardly any different from any other organization (perhaps Stampede board members seem a bit more prominent, but I think that may have to do with the breadth of backgrounds they come from, including some higher profile folks. An oil company's board is going to be mostly other oil dudes, and maybe some bankers, etc.).
Why aren't people outraged at the Encana Board or Petro Canada Board, etc. for layoffs? "Stampede Board" must just has a nice ring to it.
Lastly, because the Stampede isn't putting a team on the ice, they should have been more willing to give up their revenue stream? Giving it up for nothing would probably have meant the loss of some full time jobs (people like I used to be)...the majority of Flames payroll expense is for P/T, typically second jobs for people; 5-20 hrs/week.