top of page
Search

Results – Supporter Director Survey 

Thank you to everyone who completed our survey about the supporter director role on the Club board. We have summarised the responses we received below.  


Using your feedback, we have amended the draft agreement. All the changes are marked so that you can see clearly what changes have been made. To summarise the changes: 

  1. Changed re-election to every 2 years. 

  2. Added an expectation of regular communication by the supporter director, such as using fan media channels. 

  3. Explicitly specified that the supporter director must not abuse the position for their personal benefit. 

  4. Specified that the supporter director must not bring OASF or the Club into disrepute, including via their use of social media. 

  5. Added that OASF will publicise a statement of suitability for candidates before any member vote, including any potential conflicts of interest. 

  6. Added a commitment from OASF and the Club to protect the supporter director’s welfare and reiterate their role as fan representative and not the sole decision-maker. 

  7. Reduced financial information updates to every 6 months and added deadlines to align this with regular board-to-board meetings.  

  8. Added an expectation of fan forums with at least two club board members every March and September. 

  9. Added a requirement that the Club do not hire the supporter director during their time on the board or within 2 years. 



Our next step will be to share this draft agreement with the Club board via Darren Royle for their review. We will provide an update on their response in due course. 


Who completed the survey? 

140 Latics fans completed the survey. 59% of them were OASF members. Most of the non-members who responded had never been an OASF member before. 

 


Agreement drafting 

As well as asking a couple of yes/no questions, the survey had a few open questions so that respondents could give us specific feedback on the proposal and the draft agreement. We’ve summarised the responses we received and broken them down by category. 


Most comments were expressing support for the concept of having a supporter director and of the draft agreement itself, with many remarking that the proposal is a reasonable expectation of the Club. 


Fan engagement 

Many respondents said that having a fan on the Club board would be good for the Club as well as fans. Respondents felt that it was important that the Club listens to fans’ views and has them at its heart when making decisions. 


Some respondents suggested that the Club should go beyond just accepting a supporter director and also commit to more regular public fan engagement, like through fan forums. They noted that regular and public fan engagement like this would reduce the pressure on the supporter director. 


Role and responsibilities of supporter director 

Several respondents were keen that the draft agreement clarified the supporter director’s purpose. Most of these respondents said the supporter director needs to listen to and act on behalf of OASF members and supporters, not raise their own profile. And that the supporter director represents fans for the betterment of the Club. 


Some respondents also said the supporter director should add value for the Club, not just represent fans.  


Supporter Director relationship with fans 

There were also several comments about the importance of the supporter director’s relationship with the fanbase as a whole. Many responses recognised that the confidentiality requirements of the role would likely bring them into conflict with supporters and that unpopular decisions, like price rises, may still occur even with someone on the board. 


Other respondents said that the supporter director should regularly communicate directly with OASF members and the fanbase, that they should be open to and be able to respond to questions to help build trust. A couple of respondents suggested that this communication should be via the Boundary Park Alert System podcast. 


Relationship with the Club 

Some respondents commented on the potential impact on OASF’s relationship with the Club. One respondent was concerned that taking up the role would damage our relationship with the Club. Another suggested that OASF should leave the role vacant, instead try to improve our board’s relationship with the Club board. A fan also said that the supporter director should focus on supporting the Club board and avoid antagonising them; that they should provide a positive fan input, not a negative one. 


On the other hand, a different respondent criticised the current Club board, saying they were out of touch with normal fans and a fan being on the board could be part of fixing that. 


Selection process 

Our proposal is that the supporter director would be an OASF board member. The supporter director would be proposed by the OASF board and then OASF members would get to vote (‘Yes’ or ‘No’) whether they go onto the Club board. 


Most (82%) respondents agreed that OASF members should vote to approve whether someone gets put on the Club board. 



We also had several comments on this selection process. The most common comment was that the selection process should be as transparent as possible and that OASF should ensure members and the wider fanbase are well-informed about the candidate’s suitability. Some fans said that information should include potential conflicts of interest and relationships with anyone at the Club now or in the relevant past. 


Other individuals suggested alternative selection methods, including: 

  • The Club should be involved in deciding who the OASF board puts forward for election to their board. 

  • The vote should be open to all fans, not just OASF members. 

  • There shouldn’t be an election; OASF should pick the best person for the job. 


Recalling the supporter director 

Some respondents also commented on our proposal that OASF members should be able to recall the supporter director if a majority of them vote to do so. All respondents who commented on that part of the proposal were in support; being able to recall the supporter director was seen as very important. 


Re-election and scrutiny 

Our proposal also stated that, after 3 years of being on the Club board, the supporter director has to be re-elected by OASF members. Most (93%) respondents agreed that the supporter director should have to be reapproved every three years. 



There were several comments on the re-election process: 

  • One respondent proposed that the re-election process should allow for feedback from fans on the supporter director’s performance, even if they get re-elected. 

  • Some respondents commented that re-election should be more often than 3 years. One suggested that every 2 years would be more appropriate. 

  • Another fan said that there should be no re-election. Once an individual has served 3 years, they should have to step down from the Club board and a new person elected. 


Suitability of candidates 

Most of the comments we received related to the suitability of prospective supporter directors. By far the most common response was that the candidate should have the best interests of supporters at heart, not their own interests. This was closely followed by suggestions that the person should be knowledgeable and experienced, ideally with experience sitting on a company board. Other qualities fans suggested a suitable supporter director should have include: 

  • Being able to rise above being a normal fan and avoid getting drawn into arguments on social media. 

  • Having a cool head. 

  • Not a yes man. 

  • Needs to be very committed. 

  • A minimum number of years as an OASF member. 

  • A minimum number of years as an OASF board member. 

  • Not being an OASF board member or an OASF member at all. 


There was a consistent theme that the person should meet high standards before being proposed by the OASF board for the membership to vote on. 


A few other respondents commented on the difficulty of the role, that it will be a thankless task and hard to fill. Some other fans said it was important to protect the supporter director’s welfare, given the challenges of the role. In particular, that OASF, the Club and the wider fanbase should protect the supporter director from undue personal criticism, emphasising that they are the fan representative and not a decision-maker on the Club board. 


Conflicts of interest 

A common theme throughout comments on the suitability of prospective supporter directors was needing to mitigate the risk of conflicts of interest developing. This was seen by these respondents as a main failure of previous attempts at having a fan representative on the Club board. Most of these respondents said that a strict process needed to be in place. A couple proposed a modification to the draft agreement: That the supporter director can’t be hired by the Club or appointed to its board after vacating the supporter director role or during it for a number of years. 


Information-sharing 

Some respondents provided specific comments on the information-sharing elements of the draft agreement. Some specifically asked that we set out a clearer process for how and when information is shared. This would include more specifics on what is considered confidential information. One person suggested a mediation or oversight arrangement would need to be in place in case there are disagreements over information-sharing. 


One respondent said that our current expectation of receiving quarterly financial updates could be too onerous and that every six months may be more reasonable. Another fan said that the draft agreement would be too restrictive for the Club to sign up to, and specifically that all financial information should stay within the Club. 


Some respondents were sceptical that a supporter director on the board would deliver additional information for OASF or the wider fanbase. One said that a better relationship between the OASF and Club boards would deliver the same information. Another commented that, while it was good to have someone privy to meetings, they were concerned no extra information would be shared beyond what is currently. One fan said putting someone on the Club board would be a waste of time, saying they would be forced to sign a non-disclosure agreement. 


General comments on OASF 

Some respondents also used this survey to make comments on OASF more generally, including: 

  • OASF should share more information with all supporters. 

  • OASF needs to get more members. 

  • Appointing someone to the Club board will make them rejoin OASF. 

  • OASF membership should be included in season ticket purchases. 

711 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Комментарии

Оценка: 0 из 5 звезд.
Еще нет оценок

Добавить рейтинг
bottom of page