If our club is losing so much money then is it wise to invent and have all these positions?

CEO
Chief of staff to the CEO
Sporting director
Head of Football Operations & Club Secretary
Assistant club secretary
Player Liaison Coordinator

We're a third division club with someone employed to liaise with our small squad of players. Presumably it's too hard for the dozen or so first team staff.
Do we need a CEO and a sporting director?
Do we need a sporting director and a head of football operations? It's not like Anne is dealing with football and Mladen is concentrating on our bobsled team is it.
Do we need a club secretary and anassistant club secretary and a chief of staff to the CEO as well?

 

Let's not forget the Chief Car Parking Officer. They do a great job.

 

You jest but why do we actually employ so many car park attendants to stand next to each other? 3 standing at the end of each row of cars is excessive

 

It does seem strange when we are recruiting media staff on minimum wage and letting a long serving commentator go...

 

Reminds me of when I worked in the Jaguar systems department, they'd have a reorganisation to stream-line the operation and always seemed to end up with more middle managers and fewer people actually doing the work.

 

In our one season in the Premier Division the demands on the Club's staff must have been immense by comparison with today and yet effectively we were fronted by John Dennis and Mick Spinks with JD fronting the Board of Directors and Mick heading the admin side. Today's admin team does seem bloated, perhaps that's due to the fact that, unlike John Dennis, the current owners are too remote from Barnsley and therefore the Club.

 

Is Robert Zuk still there? He is/was FD and I thought he'd been given a wider remit of Ops (so effectively a COO). I've not heard anything about him for a while, so I don't know if he was moved on with all these high level executive appointments.

 

It all depends if it improves us as a club financially and on field progress.
I think we've been stuck in another era when it comes down to our commercial operation at driving revenues, I do believe this is too much for a combined role with the football side like we had with Khaled it does need to be separated.
The DOF worries me seriously, he's only had one transfer window and not a good one but i am prepared to cut him some slack, but since his arrival there's been a decline on the on field product especially our woeful home form, all eyes definitely on his January performance

 

He's definitely still there.

 

No

 

In answer to your 3 questions I would say Yes, Yes & don’t know as I don’t know the volume of work involved.

Ultimately whilst every penny counts you have to weigh up value for money v expenditure.
I’d suggest it’s too soon to answer that properly and whilst I’m not convinced all those wages add up to a lot in the grander scheme of things I do say it without knowing their salaries.

 

All those jobs yet to cut costs we get shut of the club's official photographer the matchday commentator and also allow our best media guy in years to leave.

Fanfare for the common man.

 

Depends how you wish to measure it. Whilst we may not have the points on the board, the product as for me been generally a lot more pleasurable to watch than last season. There is still a lot more to do but I think we seem to be heading in the right direction. A coach/ Dof rapport needs developing, it doesnt happen overnight.

 

4 wins in 19 home league games ain't pleasurable for me since a DOF was appointed, hence my concerns over him, all opinions of course but it's generally a poor standard at this level, it's all about steps and priority is results and getting out of this league, if that means bringing in short term cloggers so be it, start to worry about the product thereafter with a bigger budget, nothing more frustrating watching 3rd tier players try to overplay and it breaks down, its about being effective at this level.

 

Very valid point imo!

 

Patrick Cryne ran the club on a shoestring to try and make us sustainable. Don Rowing did a good job of supervising it all. And that’s fine - but the club could never develop or grow off the field with that setup and it was limited.

Slowly, we’re building back to a level where we should be staffing wise and comparable with other clubs around us.

People going about management numbers - but we’re a business turning over several million a year - staff have to be in place to manage it correctly.

We have split the football and business side - pretty much all of our former CEOs said it was too much for one person. As you’d expect, each will have an assistant. Perfectly normal.

If you’ve worked in a similar size business, all of this appears normal.

As for media cuts - yes, probably had to trim back accordingly. But staff still exists. I think Cooper and Tandy do a great job to be fair, and have taken it a different path which is now starting to show. The website is getting better as well now - although I’d suggest most BFC traffic is via social media now, and the website is possibly a secondary element.

 

Well if you preferred last years approach on the pitch to this we will just have to disagree.

 

Depends how much they are being paid and it is a multi million pound business

 

I believe the approach of using social media in this way is wrong. The factual info the club puts out is often shrouded in negative opinions so it is often hard to decipher what is actual fact and what is opinion. The factual tends to lose out to the opinion.
Better to put factual info on the website so that we dont have to weed thro loads of crap to get an understanding of what is goin on. If they want to utilise social media then why not make the website the hub that feeds everything else. By the way I dont think the website is any better yet but it could be.