Is this an indication of more 'hands on' to make sure that investors money is being spent wisely or am I over reading this appointment ?
That is how I read it.
GC is now better placed to ask questions and get answers as well as challenge the SMT ie Methven, Rodwell and Warwick.
IIRC Scott is no longer on the SMT.
It means, IMHO, Charlie isn't marking so much of his own homework
So the board had no chairman before and these successful business men only now see that as needed?
IIRC Rodwell was chairman of Charlton Athletic previously but it's not clear what his position is now.
My reading of it, since I only know what we've all read on the OS, is that the owners now want one of themselves as Chair so they can have better scrutiny of what is going on.
Quite right too … pity it took a while but better late than never
The appointment feels like the majority shareholders trying to get a better handle on what the hell’s going on, rather than just relying on Charlie Methven, who came with Rodwell, Scott and Holden as a package.
Let’s hope we see some changes in the near future, as there has to be some accountability for the club’s regression. The current arrangements are far too cosy.
I suggest it is a matter of closer oversight by and greater clarity of communication with the investors. Whether such clarity will extend to all stakeholders remains to be seen. I am still trying to work out Rodwells’ June appointment of specific oversight of all football affairs.
Overall performance might suggest not everybody is aligned with the same script.
Sorry @Grapevine49, but the rest of your post seems to be missing.
Means the owners dont trust Methven & want someone they can trust to tell them what the hell is going on.
Probably more like there are serious questions being asked as to why our season is over before Christmas and what is going wrong. I would have thought that the moneymen were expecting to be challenging top six. Any fool can see we’re nowhere near that.
Means the owners dont trust Methven & want someone they can trust to tell them what the hell is going on.
Probably more like there are serious questions being asked as to why our season is over before Christmas and what is going wrong. I would have thought that the moneymen were expecting to be challenging top six. Any fool can see we’re nowhere near that.
It may mean nothing but the timing, just over three weeks to the transfer window, might give some clues into how the owners view a mid table position with a squad of 29 players, with Josh Laqeretabua, now bringing that number up. A squad not producing the desired results and not sustainable, whoever owns the club.
Means the owners dont trust Methven & want someone they can trust to tell them what the hell is going on.
Probably more like there are serious questions being asked as to why our season is over before Christmas and what is going wrong. I would have thought that the moneymen were expecting to be challenging top six. Any fool can see we’re nowhere near that.
It may mean nothing but the timing, just over three weeks to the transfer window, might give some clues into how the owners view a mid table position with a squad of 29 players, with Josh Laqeretabua, now bringing that number up. A squad not producing the desired results and not sustainable, whoever owns the club.
They could bring in a dozen of the top PL players and it probably wouldn’t make any difference. It all comes down to the manager making them into a tight-nit team with a clear and effective gameplan. ATM we simply haven’t got that. Chelsea spent a billion pounds and 3 (?) managers and a season or so along its only now coming good with a manager that’s got them where they need to be as a team.
If it means the "proper" businessmen are tightening the reins and wanting a bit more hands on control that probably is a good thing. As ever it's not a question of that we haven't spent enough money, we've just spent it badly (again).
Chances are that nothing is going to change in the immediate future but hopefully it does suggest that the owners (as in the Americans, not the SMT/circus) are not looking at jumping ship just yet.
Worry with Carter is that he might be too cosy with the current SMT and doesn't really put across the severity of any issues. His comments about Sandgaard in particular don't fill me with confidence that he's happy to go against the status quo.
Worry with Carter is that he might too cosy with the current SMT and doesn't really put across the severity of any issues. His comments about Sandgaard in particular don't fill me with confidence that he's happy to go against the status quo.
He now has a responsibility to report back to the real money and presumably it’s expected that things improve, otherwise what’s the point. I doubt GC is willing to sit back look like he’s not effecting positive change when he reports back to the USA. I’m pleased that he’s a supporter and will see things as such.
Worry with Carter is that he might too cosy with the current SMT and doesn't really put across the severity of any issues. His comments about Sandgaard in particular don't fill me with confidence that he's happy to go against the status quo.
He now has a responsibility to report back to the real money and presumably it’s expected that things improve, otherwise what’s the point. I doubt GC is willing to sit back look like he’s not effecting positive change when he reports back to the USA. I’m pleased that he’s a supporter and will see things as such.
Does he not also have a financial stake now? Being hit in his own pocket might very well give him a slightly different focus you'd think.
I found this online (sorry about the embedded links, don't know how to re-format them so please ignore):
What is a non-executive chair?
A non-executive chair, also known as an independent chair, is a board member who oversees the functioning of the board without holding a concurrent management position within the organisation. They are responsible for leading the board and ensuring effective governance practices, while maintaining a clear separation from the day-to-day operations managed by the executive team.
Key responsibilities of a non-executive chair
The non-executive chair has several crucial responsibilities:
Board leadership: The non-executive chair sets the agenda for board meetings, facilitates discussions, and ensures that all directors have the opportunity to contribute effectively.
Governance oversight: They are responsible for maintaining high standards of corporate governance, ensuring compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, and promoting a culture of integrity and transparency.
Strategy and performance: The non-executive chair works closely with the CEO and executive team to develop and implement the organisation's strategic objectives, monitor performance, and hold management accountable for results.
Board composition and succession planning: They play a key role in assessing the skills and expertise required on the board, identifying potential candidates, and ensuring a smooth succession process for board members and the CEO.
Stakeholder engagement: The non-executive chair acts as a bridge between the board and stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, customers, and the wider community, ensuring effective communication and addressing concerns.
Mentor and advisor: They serve as a sounding board for the CEO and provide guidance and support to the executive team, while maintaining the independence necessary for objective decision-making.
By focusing on these areas, the non-executive chair helps to ensure that the board operates effectively and that the organisation is well-positioned for long-term success.
Benefits of having a non-executive chair
The presence of a non-executive chair offers several advantages:
Independence: A non-executive chair brings an objective perspective to the board, free from the potential conflicts of interest that can arise when the chair also holds an executive position.
Checks and balances: The separation of the chair and CEO roles provides a system of checks and balances, ensuring that no single individual has excessive power or influence over the organisation's decision-making processes.
Enhanced governance: Non-executive chairs are typically well-versed in best practices for corporate governance and can help to ensure that the board adheres to these standards.
Diverse perspectives: As an independent member of the board, the non-executive chair can bring fresh insights and challenge established thinking, promoting robust discussions and well-informed decision-making.
Stakeholder confidence: The presence of a non-executive chair can enhance the confidence of stakeholders, who may perceive the board as more independent and objective in its oversight of the organisation.
Organisations that appoint a non-executive chair demonstrate a commitment to good governance and the separation of powers, which can ultimately contribute to improved performance and long-term sustainability.
Challenges and considerations
While the non-executive chair role offers numerous benefits, there are some challenges and considerations to keep in mind:
Time commitment: Non-executive chairs must be able to dedicate sufficient time to their role, attending board meetings, engaging with stakeholders, and staying informed about the organisation's activities.
Industry knowledge: Non-executive chair aught to have a deep understanding of the industry in which the organisation operates, as well as the broader business landscape, to provide effective guidance and oversight.
Relationship with the CEO: The non-executive chair must strike a balance between supporting and challenging the CEO, maintaining a constructive working relationship while also holding them accountable for performance.
Succession planning: Organisations must have robust succession plans in place for the non-executive chair role, ensuring a smooth transition and continuity of leadership.
Remuneration: The compensation structure for non-executive chairs should align with their responsibilities and the time commitment required, while also reflecting market standards and the organisation's performance.
Organisations should carefully consider these factors when appointing a non-executive chair and ensure that the individual selected has the skills, experience, and personal qualities necessary to fulfil the role effectively.
The non-executive chair plays a vital role in providing independent leadership and oversight for an organisation's board of directors. By focusing on governance, strategy, and stakeholder engagement, non-executive chairs help to ensure that the board operates effectively and that the organisation is well-positioned for long-term success. The separation of the chair and CEO roles provides a system of checks and balances, promoting accountability and transparency. By embracing this model of leadership, organisations can strengthen their governance structures and build the resilience necessary to thrive in the face of future challenges.
Still not convinced. The latest announcement says ‘has been appointed as the Non-Executive Chair of the Charlton Athletic board.’
That could read as a co- chair to Rodwell.
Maybe I’m being too cynical
Roswell is on the executive and an employee, so clearly was not a non-executive Chair. GC is not an employee and is not an executive, so I think the words are to clarify that GC is not taking up any role on the executive.
It denotes a change in culture and suggests the shareholders are no longer comfortable relying on what is reported to them, in effect, directly from the executive team.
Means the owners dont trust Methven & want someone they can trust to tell them what the hell is going on.
Probably more like there are serious questions being asked as to why our season is over before Christmas and what is going wrong. I would have thought that the moneymen were expecting to be challenging top six. Any fool can see we’re nowhere near that.
It may mean nothing but the timing, just over three weeks to the transfer window, might give some clues into how the owners view a mid table position with a squad of 29 players, with Josh Laqeretabua, now bringing that number up. A squad not producing the desired results and not sustainable, whoever owns the club.
They could bring in a dozen of the top PL players and it probably wouldn’t make any difference. It all comes down to the manager making them into a tight-nit team with a clear and effective gameplan. ATM we simply haven’t got that. Chelsea spent a billion pounds and 3 (?) managers and a season or so along its only now coming good with a manager that’s got them where they need to be as a team.
I wasn't suggesting that the squad needed adding too letthegoodtimesroll, more that it needs trimming severely to allow some balance, six central midfield players is probably an indicator of that lack of judgment.
Means the owners dont trust Methven & want someone they can trust to tell them what the hell is going on.
Probably more like there are serious questions being asked as to why our season is over before Christmas and what is going wrong. I would have thought that the moneymen were expecting to be challenging top six. Any fool can see we’re nowhere near that.
It may mean nothing but the timing, just over three weeks to the transfer window, might give some clues into how the owners view a mid table position with a squad of 29 players, with Josh Laqeretabua, now bringing that number up. A squad not producing the desired results and not sustainable, whoever owns the club.
They could bring in a dozen of the top PL players and it probably wouldn’t make any difference. It all comes down to the manager making them into a tight-nit team with a clear and effective gameplan. ATM we simply haven’t got that. Chelsea spent a billion pounds and 3 (?) managers and a season or so along its only now coming good with a manager that’s got them where they need to be as a team.
I wasn't suggesting that the squad needed adding too letthegoodtimesroll, more that it needs trimming severely to allow some balance, six central midfield players is probably an indicator of that lack of judgment.
We need an injection of quality players but imo we need somebody with an effective winning gameplan that they can successfully organise the players to adopt even more.
Still not convinced. The latest announcement says ‘has been appointed as the Non-Executive Chair of the Charlton Athletic board.’
That could read as a co- chair to Rodwell.
Maybe I’m being too cynical
Roswell is on the executive and an employee, so clearly was not a non-executive Chair. GC is not an employee and is not an executive, so I think the words are to clarify that GC is not taking up any role on the executive.
It denotes a change in culture and suggests the shareholders are no longer comfortable relying on what is reported to them, in effect, directly from the executive team.
You may well be right. It just didn’t say ‘.. and Rodwell steps down’.
Still not convinced. The latest announcement says ‘has been appointed as the Non-Executive Chair of the Charlton Athletic board.’
That could read as a co- chair to Rodwell.
Maybe I’m being too cynical
Roswell is on the executive and an employee, so clearly was not a non-executive Chair. GC is not an employee and is not an executive, so I think the words are to clarify that GC is not taking up any role on the executive.
It denotes a change in culture and suggests the shareholders are no longer comfortable relying on what is reported to them, in effect, directly from the executive team.
You may well be right. It just didn’t say ‘.. and Rodwell steps down’.
Carter appears to me to be a professional and authentic businessman, as well as a fan. Less of the salesman routine that's served up by M and R. You wonder if his business record and general demeanour has been as much a factor in the investors' choice for the non-exec role, as his emotional connection to the club.
Carter appears to me to be a professional and authentic businessman, as well as a fan. Less of the salesman routine that's served up by M and R. You wonder if his business record and general demeanour has been as much a factor in the investors' choice for the non-exec role, as his emotional connection to the club.
He's also in the country far more often as he seems to come to most games despite living in Canada.
Still not convinced. The latest announcement says ‘has been appointed as the Non-Executive Chair of the Charlton Athletic board.’
That could read as a co- chair to Rodwell.
Maybe I’m being too cynical
Roswell is on the executive and an employee, so clearly was not a non-executive Chair. GC is not an employee and is not an executive, so I think the words are to clarify that GC is not taking up any role on the executive.
It denotes a change in culture and suggests the shareholders are no longer comfortable relying on what is reported to them, in effect, directly from the executive team.
Fancy that. I mean, we all thought Charlie was a straight-up guy, didn’t we?
The signs were there from the start regards Methven Am I right in thinking that neither Oxford or Sunderland never got out of league one during his involvement? Excels in failure.
The signs were there from the start regards Methven Am I right in thinking that neither Oxford or Sunderland never got out of league one during his involvement? Excels in failure.
And trousers hundreds of thousands into the bargain.
The signs were there from the start regards Methven Am I right in thinking that neither Oxford or Sunderland never got out of league one during his involvement? Excels in failure.
And trousers hundreds of thousands into the bargain.
He has hundreds & thousands of trousers ??? Surely not all salmon pink ???
Comments
‘E’s the ‘ead… he’s the head of the computer section
Let’s hope we see some changes in the near future, as there has to be some accountability for the club’s regression. The current arrangements are far too cosy.
Chances are that nothing is going to change in the immediate future but hopefully it does suggest that the owners (as in the Americans, not the SMT/circus) are not looking at jumping ship just yet.
What is a non-executive chair?
A non-executive chair, also known as an independent chair, is a board member who oversees the functioning of the board without holding a concurrent management position within the organisation. They are responsible for leading the board and ensuring effective governance practices, while maintaining a clear separation from the day-to-day operations managed by the executive team.
Key responsibilities of a non-executive chair
The non-executive chair has several crucial responsibilities:
By focusing on these areas, the non-executive chair helps to ensure that the board operates effectively and that the organisation is well-positioned for long-term success.
Benefits of having a non-executive chair
The presence of a non-executive chair offers several advantages:
Organisations that appoint a non-executive chair demonstrate a commitment to good governance and the separation of powers, which can ultimately contribute to improved performance and long-term sustainability.
Challenges and considerations
While the non-executive chair role offers numerous benefits, there are some challenges and considerations to keep in mind:
Time commitment: Non-executive chairs must be able to dedicate sufficient time to their role, attending board meetings, engaging with stakeholders, and staying informed about the organisation's activities.
Industry knowledge: Non-executive chair aught to have a deep understanding of the industry in which the organisation operates, as well as the broader business landscape, to provide effective guidance and oversight.
Relationship with the CEO: The non-executive chair must strike a balance between supporting and challenging the CEO, maintaining a constructive working relationship while also holding them accountable for performance.
Succession planning: Organisations must have robust succession plans in place for the non-executive chair role, ensuring a smooth transition and continuity of leadership.
Remuneration: The compensation structure for non-executive chairs should align with their responsibilities and the time commitment required, while also reflecting market standards and the organisation's performance.
Organisations should carefully consider these factors when appointing a non-executive chair and ensure that the individual selected has the skills, experience, and personal qualities necessary to fulfil the role effectively.
The non-executive chair plays a vital role in providing independent leadership and oversight for an organisation's board of directors. By focusing on governance, strategy, and stakeholder engagement, non-executive chairs help to ensure that the board operates effectively and that the organisation is well-positioned for long-term success. The separation of the chair and CEO roles provides a system of checks and balances, promoting accountability and transparency. By embracing this model of leadership, organisations can strengthen their governance structures and build the resilience necessary to thrive in the face of future challenges.
valleynick66 said:
Roswell is on the executive and an employee, so clearly was not a non-executive Chair. GC is not an employee and is not an executive, so I think the words are to clarify that GC is not taking up any role on the executive.
It denotes a change in culture and suggests the shareholders are no longer comfortable relying on what is reported to them, in effect, directly from the executive team.
You wonder if his business record and general demeanour has been as much a factor in the investors' choice for the non-exec role, as his emotional connection to the club.
Am I right in thinking that neither Oxford or Sunderland never got out of league one during his involvement?
Excels in failure.