DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Savviioor** · 09-01-2012, 05:42 AM

It will be interesting to see how the management-speak spin will turn this into a great triumph. The CEO has told anyone who will listen for four years that he is in charge. So he has decided to go now that he has achieved what he set out to do. We must assume he set out to create the current atmosphere of animosity and mistrust amongst the fencing community. Those that know about sport, e.g. foreign fencing delegations, cannot understand how we could consider let alone actually appoint someone who knows nothing about the sport as performance manager. As has been previously said those responsible should go. It cannot have been just the CEO who made the appointment.

I think BF will find this difficult. At a guess they will start by trying to get a hold of a bit of moral high ground by praising the great efforts of the athletes, about which nobody could disagree. Then they will point to medal zones for foil teams. Then they'll go on to waffle about preparing for Rio. End up with early days on a structured development programme, Rome not built in a day, good indicators for the success of driving step change through strategic leverage of internal human assets and capabilities in full harness with the tactical deployment of knowledge capital.

Probably say it was a success, but if there is a valid criticism, it reflects on the need to grow talent nationally. Perhaps also, and not unrelated to that, we shall see a "someone else's problem" field brought into place. Oh, and no doubt valuable lessons will have been learned, results will have informed future deliberations and we will be going forward.

There isn't an emoticon for extreme scorn, is there?

09-01-2012, 05:42 AM	#29
Savviioor Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 609 Senior Member	It will be interesting to see how the management-speak spin will turn this into a great triumph. The CEO has told anyone who will listen for four years that he is in charge. So he has decided to go now that he has achieved what he set out to do. We must assume he set out to create the current atmosphere of animosity and mistrust amongst the fencing community. Those that know about sport, e.g. foreign fencing delegations, cannot understand how we could consider let alone actually appoint someone who knows nothing about the sport as performance manager. As has been previously said those responsible should go. It cannot have been just the CEO who made the appointment. I think BF will find this difficult. At a guess they will start by trying to get a hold of a bit of moral high ground by praising the great efforts of the athletes, about which nobody could disagree. Then they will point to medal zones for foil teams. Then they'll go on to waffle about preparing for Rio. End up with early days on a structured development programme, Rome not built in a day, good indicators for the success of driving step change through strategic leverage of internal human assets and capabilities in full harness with the tactical deployment of knowledge capital. Probably say it was a success, but if there is a valid criticism, it reflects on the need to grow talent nationally. Perhaps also, and not unrelated to that, we shall see a "someone else's problem" field brought into place. Oh, and no doubt valuable lessons will have been learned, results will have informed future deliberations and we will be going forward. There isn't an emoticon for extreme scorn, is there?
	Quote