Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 06:06:49


Post by: lordbrooks


Here is my letter to GW. If you agree with me, send a message to Recruitment@gwplc.com and tell them to give me an interview!

Brooks Call

To the staff of Games Workshop:
The business of tabletop gaming is evolving at an incredible rate. Interest in the tactile, immersive experience of physical games played with friends in person is increasing as though to rebuke the rise in the electronic, impersonal experiences that were expected to supplant them. For many, the analog experience is superior to the digital. Games Workshop is one of the most respected names, and the most storied, in the history of ultra-specialized gaming experiences that are meant to be mastered to truly enjoy them – a master of the analog in the looming digital age.
I was introduced to the 40K universe in the best possible way – by a dedicated brand ambassador who is also a customer. The passion that collecting and modeling figures in the Citadel range had imparted in him was infectious. Over the course of a few months spent assembling, modeling, learning and playing in the Necromunda universe, the next step was clear. He generated six new customers – Dark Angel, Necron Overlord, Blood Angel, Hive Mind, Farseer, and myself, a warmaster of the Damned Legions; this initial interest has spread to pull at least twenty people back, or further into their investment in the game. This human interaction and brand sharing I see as the traditional cornerstone of Games Workshop sales growth. However, this highly effective operation is ultimately limiting – it requires established social connections and physical outlets to flourish. It was a completely analog experience, accomplished in real space and time.
We are moving towards a time when the creators are becoming as popular as their products. Fans demand an ongoing engagement with the creative process, expressed through an open communication by the creators. Games Workshop from the outside is a nearly closed system. There is little direct engagement with fans. The most ardent of your fans typically view the company as an ivory tower. While the culture of a tight group of artists creating and shaping the universes of Warhammer Fantasy and Warhammer 40K is a noble one, it no longer fits with the desires of your audience. Games Workshop must move to directly engage with established customers, and reach out to engage potential customers.
More nimble competitors are emerging to take market share. Games Workshop is and will for the foreseeable future remain the biggest player in tabletop wargaming. The quality of models, publications and accessories produced remains at the highest tiers in the industry. However, competitors are beating Games Workshop with customer engagement in almost every way. Emerging companies communicate directly with fans while designing factions, rules and even worlds before production even begins, providing experiences that directly reflect customer desires. Established competitors provide a constant stream of errata and updates that balance and enhance the game digitally – that is, immediately. While no competitor can offer the brick-and-mortar experience of the Games Workshop stores, this experience is produced for them at no cost and in direct conflict with Games Workshop in the vital cornerstones of gaming communities – Independent Game Stores.
With the cessation of tournament support and the resultant slowdown of IGS involvement, the analog spread of Games Workshop has been deeply slowed. The free, excited, effective brand ambassadors like the one who pulled me in are disappearing, heading of to different sci-fantasy worlds, selling their armies. Every customer lost is two customers lost if they sell their models, a new or established player side-stepping the webstore, IGS display rack or Games Workshop location and making a year's worth of purchases in the secondary economy. Keeping customers happy keeps them customers.
I propose a new direction for Games Workshop – one that focuses on customer engagement to champion the analog experience while using the tools of digital networking to enhance customers brand experience. Look at any of the popular Games Workshop dedicated websites, blogs or YouTube channels and you will see dedicated individuals who deeply desire a connection to the company and the future of the hobby. These are your best salesmen. They're all working for free. Actually, they're paying you. If we can empower the incredible passion that the rich universes that Games Workshop has grown over the decades has inspired within these individuals, they will in turn make more brand ambassadors, growing the universe of Games Workshop fans.
I am highly interested in overseeing the transformation of Games Workshop into a customer centric business that inspires individuals to become deeply invested within the company, emotionally and financially. This must come with some loss of control over the intellectual property and the set-in-paper mentality that currently dominates. Just as hobbyists “kit-bash” or combine multiple model sets in ways unforeseen by the designers, so too must the rules, universe and future of the universes be fluid and affected by the community.
I want to see your designers Instagramming pictures of their work-in-progress models, your writers tweeting story teasers. Then I want to see them responding to the fans. I want to see the narratives move forward, affected by the results of tournaments that see exponential growth year-to-year. The essential uniqueness that has been created within the Games Workshop universes need to be showcased in ancillary products such as electronic games. Warhammer Fantasy and Warhammer 40K both have incredible ideas and strange races that break the mold of generic fantasy and science fiction – these are the game changers that will bring new customers into the full spectrum of the Games Workshop product line. Bold moves into higher-quality licensed products such as animation or film can utilize these differences to excite complacent audiences.
I don't have the traditional resume of a CEO. I have a Bachelor's Degree in Teaching the Language Arts and an undeclared minor in Business Administration. However, many of the most successful companies in the tech sector have had success with CEOs that were highly passionate about the product and invested in it's production. I play in tournaments and have fully modeled and painted over 5000 points of Chaos. I actively sell the Games Workshop experience to everyone I meet who might have the slightest interest. I want the hobby to flourish, and for this to happen, Games Workshop must add a engaged digital presence that leverages the most important business resource available: the players and hobbyists.

Thank you for your consideration,

Brooks Call


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 06:16:16


Post by: wuestenfux


Great. Somebody of "us" taking over GW would be awesome.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 06:30:03


Post by: Sir Arun


Did you just dare insult our beloved Leader Tom Kirby?


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 06:58:53


Post by: Harriticus


Lol, this is bound to have success.

They're going to appoint another crony like Kirby who hates tabletop gamers.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 11:45:55


Post by: Furyou Miko


Oo how can you state you have an undeclared minor? Isn't that declaring it?


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 12:35:55


Post by: Chute82


Pack your bags your moving to England..


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 12:40:30


Post by: Sigvatr


>> Keeping customers happy keeps them customers.
>> Wants customers to be happy

Denied.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 12:47:19


Post by: Ratius


Pretty dam well written tbh. I was expecting a troll-like application
Kudos.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 12:48:34


Post by: Blacksails


I approve of this application.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 12:56:08


Post by: 13045273


This, my friend, has undeniably earned my full support.

Games Workshop need, need, a change in direction to be a more engaging and community-enhancing company. You, or someone like you, an actual passionate fan and hobbyist yourself, would be perfectly suited to lead this change.

Very well said, sir


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ratius wrote:
Pretty dam well written tbh. I was expecting a troll-like application
Kudos.


Same here

But I'm glad I read it


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 13:12:46


Post by: Vector Strike


If you get it... I'm avaliable for Marketing or Game Design Departments

ps: business managers, unite!


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 13:19:53


Post by: MWHistorian


You got my vote. That was pretty dang good and I fully endorse it.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 13:23:16


Post by: agnosto


 Harriticus wrote:
Lol, this is bound to have success.

They're going to appoint another crony like Kirby who hates tabletop gamers.


Let me look into my crystal ball....

.....I foresee that Merritt will be appointed CEO as he did such a smash-up job under oath in the Chapterhouse lawsuit.....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 agnosto wrote:
 Harriticus wrote:
Lol, this is bound to have success.

They're going to appoint another crony like Kirby who hates tabletop gamers.


Let me look into my crystal ball....

.....I foresee that Merritt will be appointed CEO as he did such a smash-up job under oath in the Chapterhouse lawsuit.....




OP. When writing formal communication, it's always a good idea to spell out any acronyms that you use in your document [i.e. Independent Game Stores (IGS)]


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 14:15:38


Post by: rookshunter


*This is all IMO, obviously, and it may not seem coherent as I just typed what I was thinking. Please forgive if it seems rambling.*

Not to cast aspersions, but I give this a 10% chance of working. Which, if you think about it, is actually really high.

The problem for anyone applying for the CEO position is, w/o understanding the company or its perceived needs, you don't have a chance. There is need for a plan, the right background, and business savvy for any candidate.

At this point, no one has really understood the company, even employees don't fully know what is going on. The best analysis of the situation I've read, so far, was the excellent series, "the future of games day and games workshop" (or similar). Even then, that was a fairly biased series, but it came very close to analyzing one of the root problems of GW today, and that would be the shareholders.
The reason this company hires CEOs is to make them money, not to cater to the fanbase or customers. They've proven over the last decade (or two?) that as long as the profits are rolling in, the fans can take a hike. This is proven in pretty much every decision made by the company, from closing their facebook pages, removing comments on official youtube videos, to the CEO saying they don't do customer surveys on their fiscal reports, you get the idea. Anyone with a business background should be able to see that if they aren't blinded by fanboyism.

Typical shareholders are investors first and, most often, don't give a rotten goose egg about the business they are investing in, they just want to see it thrive (A.K.A., make them money). Notice the big issue with Kirby wasn't that he didn't care about customers, or was messing with fluff or cannon, it was that he was losing the company money (I point to the 2014 semi-annual and annual reports for evidence of this). And while it was not Kirby's direct fault of this, he's gonna take the fall whether you think he should or not. The dude that was CEO before him for 5 years, who's name escapes me atm, he saw five years of growth in the company, and so (to shareholders) he was ok. However, the growth he provided was the same as lots of the swindler CEOs in the US over the last 20 years.
Go into a failing or stagnant company with a promise of big bonuses if they can turn it around, then they cut costs by removing expenses (almost always key assets like equipment, personnel, etc.) and force whatever assets that remain to work 2-3x harder to maintain productivity levels. Most often there was no growth of the company or its customer base, it was a reduction in expense, two completely different things. Then, when the appearance of a rebound surfaces and all is in the black (which will only last a few months as it is not sustainable) the CEO has run off with their bonuses, never looking back. Quite often the company then folds in on itself and gets sold off in or near bankruptcy to some schmuck who doesn't know any better and now has a struggling company with tired employees. The new owner then goes to look for a new CEO who can turn the company around if he promises them big bonuses.... The US mattress industry is a perfect example of this, with one company going through 5 renditions of this before regulators stepped in. To me, it appears GW is already heading in that direction, but with a much healthier bankroll. The concept remains the same, however. Honestly, I know the analogy doesn't fit quite right, and I wonder, it almost seems like that kind of CEO is doing his thing, but using a fairly healthy company instead of one that is on the verge or in bankruptcy. If that's the case, its even more a travesty.


In GW's case, the trimming of fat was from the marketing side, which is a big expense, but critical for the miniatures industry. I think most all of us have been wondering how a one man GW shop will maintain sales when all that person does IS sales. The short answer is that they won't. I'm pretty sure the other employees weren't just sitting on their hands at work, they were helping customers, esp. new customers by parting them with their money in exchange for toy soldiers. Well guess what? at new strip mall locations, instead of premium locations, a lot of the people that frequent those locations won't be willing to drop $200-$400 to start a new hobby, especially when there isn't a dedicated sales guy there to treat you like you are the most important person in the world, show you the hobby, or take the next 1/2 hr. to show you how easy it is to play. One man shops don't have that kind of time when there is more than one customer.

Brooks has demonstrated a solid grasp on one of the parts the new GW CEO needs, which is a plan to reconnect to the customer. Even with one man shops, if GW can reach new and existing customers through Internet media, there can be a rebound. There still needs thought on new customers, which will become a painful issue for them. Also, an analysis of what percentage of current and past profits came from new customers would be helpful, so the CEO can analyze how much they really need them. I'm guessing a lot.

As for the other parts, I really like this application, but it most likely won't fly as there is no business background (no one even remotely like GW's board gives a $300 Million company to a teacher). As evidence, look at all the decisions made by GW for as far back as you can remember. The ones I've researched have been pretty much profit oriented. A 180 degree turn back towards customers at this point won't be possible without exactly showing how the profit margins will go up and it will make them more money than what's been done so far.

A good business minded CEO will be able to show them why growth has tanked (lack of marketing and outreach) why this is bad (reduction in potential profits. Remember, they're still profitable, just not as much), and why this needs to change to prevent the collapse of GW (remember the last statement where Kirby said for GW to survive[i] they need to yadda yadda. He wasn't kidding). Ideally, a new CEO would be able to redirect the shareholders from short term gains into a long term perspective.

Passion is awesome, and Brooks would make a fine CEO, but it takes more than passion to lead a company. Profit-centric companies can seem cold and aloof to their customers, but in a consumer driven niche market, GW can't afford to be this way (as demonstrated by 42% drop in profits in only 6 months). Brooks will have to take them by the horns and steer them towards the road of expanding the customer base, growing the company, and sanity at the helm, a compromise of increased profits and increased customer satisfaction.

The years of the rabbid "gotta have it" fan are quickly coming to an end for GW, they have to be smarter than they have been and reach out to the customers. BUT, the CEO has to cater to the shareholders too, if he wants to be there long enough to make a difference we'd all like to see.

I hope my wall of text has been taken as a positive, constructive criticism as it was meant. I'd love to see one of us (like Brooks) take the helm, but there are more factors than customer outreach that need to be considered to survive in that job.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 14:33:26


Post by: Andilus Greatsword


I was wondering how long it would take this thread to get a serious "what are the chances of this working" response. Pretty insightful though.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 14:33:33


Post by: Brother SRM


I was surprised to see this wasn't just a jokey troll post, but an honest and well-written application. I have a gut feeling that whoever does end up getting that job will just be some old English businessman and not a young, passionate warham, but I can only hope they get applications like this one that they might consider.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 15:27:28


Post by: Loborocket


Not the I don't applaud the effort, but this has 0% chance (someone else above gave it a 10% chance) of working. Pretty sure it will not even change the way GW currently does business. It is easy to find faults when looking on from the outside and make proclamations abut how to fix this or that, but it is rarely if ever that easy. Running a multinational, publicly traded corporation is FAR more complex than it appears from the customer point of view. I can tell you from experience.

I currently work at a large software company, I used to be a user of this software and had (and have) plenty of ideas about how it could be better, how we can engage customers and get feedback, etc...but now that I work here I understand it is not as simple as writing a memo, waving a hand and saying make it so, there are so many moving parts, obstacles to overcome, outside forces to consider, etc...It makes change difficult. As a publicly traded company, communication about future plans with customers becomes even more tricky, what you share with the public and customers has ramifications on the way revenue is recognized by the company and that has effects on the stock price, so it is not as simple as "having a twitter feed showing what artists are working on." Sharing that kind of information can limit the ability of the company to recognize revenue. This happen with the products i work on all the time. Our customers want to know what software features are being worked on, but we simply can't tell them without an NDA until the feature is only a couple of weeks away from release. It might be something we have been working on for 2 years the entire time they were asking about it, but we just can't say it is in development.

The other thing to consider is as customers we tend to be very focused on the "now" what can you do for me now, I want this "item x" now. Good companies need to think both about the "now" and the 5 years from now. They need to try and anticipate the market and act now so they will be positioned correctly in the future. Sometimes the customers focus on the now blinds them to the possibilities of what could be. the story that is thrown around all the time is if Henry Ford asked transportation customers what they wanted they would have responded "A faster horse, a better whip" instead he had vision to see the days of the horse and buggy were already gone and he needed to produce "the car."

I don't honestly have enough history with GW as a company to know for sure if what they are doing is right or wrong. Could they do more to engage the customer, probably so. Will they change in the future, if they want to remain relevant I think they will need to (I see some evidence of that in the past year or so.)

I just think there is WAAAYYYY more for GW to consider than we as customers have any idea about so it is very difficult to sit and say I would do this or that to make changes and make things better. As a customer, I simply do not have enough information to say one way or another. The ony thing I can do is vote with dollars. if I like the product, I buy, if I don't, I spend elsewhere.



I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 15:44:36


Post by: MWHistorian


I think acknowledging that the internet and social media exists would be a basic step forward.
Communicating with the customers would be a step in the right direction as well.

How those actually get put into place, that's the details that need professionals, but the above two are basics that every company should be doing.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 15:51:16


Post by: agnosto


Loborocket wrote:
Not the I don't applaud the effort, but this has 0% chance (someone else above gave it a 10% chance) of working. Pretty sure it will not even change the way GW currently does business. It is easy to find faults when looking on from the outside and make proclamations abut how to fix this or that, but it is rarely if ever that easy. Running a multinational, publicly traded corporation is FAR more complex than it appears from the customer point of view. I can tell you from experience.

I currently work at a large software company, I used to be a user of this software and had (and have) plenty of ideas about how it could be better, how we can engage customers and get feedback, etc...but now that I work here I understand it is not as simple as writing a memo, waving a hand and saying make it so, there are so many moving parts, obstacles to overcome, outside forces to consider, etc...It makes change difficult. As a publicly traded company, communication about future plans with customers becomes even more tricky, what you share with the public and customers has ramifications on the way revenue is recognized by the company and that has effects on the stock price, so it is not as simple as "having a twitter feed showing what artists are working on." Sharing that kind of information can limit the ability of the company to recognize revenue. This happen with the products i work on all the time. Our customers want to know what software features are being worked on, but we simply can't tell them without an NDA until the feature is only a couple of weeks away from release. It might be something we have been working on for 2 years the entire time they were asking about it, but we just can't say it is in development.

Spoiler:
The other thing to consider is as customers we tend to be very focused on the "now" what can you do for me now, I want this "item x" now. Good companies need to think both about the "now" and the 5 years from now. They need to try and anticipate the market and act now so they will be positioned correctly in the future. Sometimes the customers focus on the now blinds them to the possibilities of what could be. the story that is thrown around all the time is if Henry Ford asked transportation customers what they wanted they would have responded "A faster horse, a better whip" instead he had vision to see the days of the horse and buggy were already gone and he needed to produce "the car."

I don't honestly have enough history with GW as a company to know for sure if what they are doing is right or wrong. Could they do more to engage the customer, probably so. Will they change in the future, if they want to remain relevant I think they will need to (I see some evidence of that in the past year or so.)

I just think there is WAAAYYYY more for GW to consider than we as customers have any idea about so it is very difficult to sit and say I would do this or that to make changes and make things better. As a customer, I simply do not have enough information to say one way or another. The ony thing I can do is vote with dollars. if I like the product, I buy, if I don't, I spend elsewhere.




This. Systemic change takes time and often causes the opposite of your intentions, at least initially. In Education we call this the "implementation dip" whereby leadership implements a new program or reform and the changeover causes ripples throughout the organization which have unforeseen negative consequences; it usually works out as long as there is fidelity of implementation but the short and middle term can be rough. Companies like GW don't like change, change is hard and has the chance of reducing profits which may cause shareholder backlash.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 16:45:24


Post by: Loborocket


I am not even talking about systemic change. I am talking about something as simple as sharing plans for development with customers as was suggested in the OP. Something like that is difficult. Say GW says they will be doing a Blood Angels and Necron codex in the next quarter. Now some un-foreseen circumstance prevent them from delivering on that announcement. As a company they are now un-able to recognize any revenue for the WHOLE COMPANY until those cod exes are divered. This is because of SEC regulations. Someone may have purchased stock based on that announcement so they must deliver to recognize revenue. So this kind of rule makes it difficult to be transparent about these kind of things.

Just think about how Apple does this kind of thing, they never release details about a product until they are sure they have product to deliver. You might hear rumors etc, but those do not come from Apple in any "official" way. Same thing for GW. So even if they became more customer focused, woe people get what they are looking for? Probay not.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 17:08:11


Post by: talljosh85


Well written, here's to hoping you get a call


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 17:11:57


Post by: Davor


talljosh85 wrote:
Well written, here's to hoping you get a call


How can you say that is well written? It's poorly written. All I see is WALL OF TEXT. I didn't even try to read it. If the person doesn't even know what a paragraph and spacing is, is not a good sign.

Visually it's not well written, contextual maybe it is, but will anyone at GW or Warhammer try and read that?


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 17:57:17


Post by: AlexiLux


Davor wrote:
talljosh85 wrote:
Well written, here's to hoping you get a call


How can you say that is well written? It's poorly written. All I see is WALL OF TEXT. I didn't even try to read it. If the person doesn't even know what a paragraph and spacing is, is not a good sign.

Visually it's not well written, contextual maybe it is, but will anyone at GW or Warhammer try and read that?


A wall of text and good writing dont have to be mutualy exclusive, and even if nothing changes, i applaud the effort.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 18:10:47


Post by: Noirsable


Nicely written, Brooks. Hopefully others will follow this well written example and take up the opportunity to apply themselves. At the very least, if GW has a flood of great applicants, then the next CEO will be a great one.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 18:22:35


Post by: Saldiven


Davor wrote:
talljosh85 wrote:
Well written, here's to hoping you get a call


How can you say that is well written? It's poorly written. All I see is WALL OF TEXT. I didn't even try to read it. If the person doesn't even know what a paragraph and spacing is, is not a good sign.

Visually it's not well written, contextual maybe it is, but will anyone at GW or Warhammer try and read that?


Formatting and writing quality have very little to do with one another. Secondly, this was, I assume, sent in letter form to GW as requested on their hiring page. I would assume that this is a cut-and-paste from the original word processing program, and formatting was a casualty of the switch to the forum's system.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/10 22:51:26


Post by: Pacific


 lordbrooks wrote:


To the staff of Games Workshop:
The business of tabletop gaming is evolving at an incredible rate. Interest in the tactile, immersive experience of physical games played with friends in person is increasing as though to rebuke the rise in the electronic, impersonal experiences that were expected to supplant them. For many, the analog experience is superior to the digital. Games Workshop is one of the most respected names......


Right there, with the bit I have highlighted/underlined, they would have stopped reading.

Nicely written, but I honestly believe a single line application of "CRUSH THOSE WHO WOULD STEAL OUR IP, FLEECE THE SHEEP, PRAISE LORD KIRBY" would stand a greater chance of being selected


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/11 14:10:49


Post by: Chaos Legionnaire


Nice letter.

I sincerely hope that you get the job. I strongly believe that GW should implement, or, in some cases, return to implementing your ideas.

Having said that, don't quit your day job just yet.

Perhaps, in any event your letter will secure the offer of another position of influence at GW.

Time will tell......

Keep us informed.

Good luck.





I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/11 15:37:57


Post by: Davor


Saldiven wrote:
Davor wrote:
talljosh85 wrote:
Well written, here's to hoping you get a call


How can you say that is well written? It's poorly written. All I see is WALL OF TEXT. I didn't even try to read it. If the person doesn't even know what a paragraph and spacing is, is not a good sign.

Visually it's not well written, contextual maybe it is, but will anyone at GW or Warhammer try and read that?


Formatting and writing quality have very little to do with one another. Secondly, this was, I assume, sent in letter form to GW as requested on their hiring page. I would assume that this is a cut-and-paste from the original word processing program, and formatting was a casualty of the switch to the forum's system.


Thank you, that would explain it.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/11 18:19:50


Post by: prplehippo


I wish you luck, lordbrooks.

You couldn't possibly do any worse than what has come before.

P.S. If you do get the job, I know a couple excellent sculptors who would like to work for GW and are willing to relocate!



I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/11 18:22:03


Post by: Hollismason


It is actually well written. I am thinking of writing one myself.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/11 18:26:34


Post by: talljosh85


You failed to read and said that being a wall of text, it must therefore be poorly written? A wall of text is called a paragraph. If the formatting after being copied and pasted into an internet forum is going to stop you from reading, I'd call you lazy.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/11 23:08:19


Post by: LumenPraebeo


You did submit this along with a resume in front of it, with a list of extensive experience heading an enterprise, right? Or at least extensive study and training working with someone who did? I'm afraid even then, a letter just doesn't cut it. You need to make phone calls, and lots of them.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/12 01:28:06


Post by: weeble1000


 LumenPraebeo wrote:
You did submit this along with a resume in front of it, with a list of extensive experience heading an enterprise, right? Or at least extensive study and training working with someone who did? I'm afraid even then, a letter just doesn't cut it. You need to make phone calls, and lots of them.


It was, of course, GW's humorously ridiculous job posting specifically requesting only a letter, and Kirby's statements in the financial report describing hiring board members without looking at resumes that prompted the OP to send this letter in the first place.

Just saying...


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/12 02:01:05


Post by: Sean_OBrien


weeble1000 wrote:
 LumenPraebeo wrote:
You did submit this along with a resume in front of it, with a list of extensive experience heading an enterprise, right? Or at least extensive study and training working with someone who did? I'm afraid even then, a letter just doesn't cut it. You need to make phone calls, and lots of them.


It was, of course, GW's humorously ridiculous job posting specifically requesting only a letter, and Kirby's statements in the financial report describing hiring board members without looking at resumes that prompted the OP to send this letter in the first place.

Just saying...


To quote the KirbMeister...

Let me dilate about this letter. Last year I wrote here about our recruitment process, and shortly afterwards we recruited a new nonexecutive
director (NXD) using the method described. We got a great (not good, great) new board member. She is still surprised that I did
not read her CV (exasperated would be a more accurate word) but there was no need. Her letter told us what kind of person she was:
sincere, open-minded, a learner, excited at the opportunity. The interview told us she had all the qualities needed. It mattered not one jot
what her CV said. Appointing NXDs because of their careers rather than who they are is at the heart of the rot in the corporate world.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/12 02:17:12


Post by: prplehippo


So basically if you aren't a very good writer and don't catch the attention of whatever HR monkey happens to read it you won't get the job regardless of how much experience you have or how good you are at doing it.

That worries me (as an HR manager myself).


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/12 14:53:55


Post by: Davor


talljosh85 wrote:
You failed to read and said that being a wall of text, it must therefore be poorly written? A wall of text is called a paragraph. If the formatting after being copied and pasted into an internet forum is going to stop you from reading, I'd call you lazy.


Or it's just hard to read and I don't want my headache any worse and will read later?

Also if you can't take the time to format it properly in any format, I guess he will fit just in with GW, copy/paste and don't do any checking afterwards.

Uh, that is why it was done. To show he is just like GW, lazy copy/pasting and can lead the company now. LOL


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/12 15:42:42


Post by: StormKing


I hate to be the guy who says it but you aren't getting the job or an interview lol

Not trying to hate or anything like that, I mean if you wanted to apply then its good you did. I just feel that when you apply for a job (any job) let's say you are applying for a history professor at a university or something. You don't say "I have been reading history books since I was a kid I'd be great at the job, I also have a college diploma in health education but I would still be good for the job"

Please don't take it the wrong way or anything I am saying this as nice as my Canadian roots can lol
They are looking for a company CEO not a hobbyist.

Just my opinion tho (I'm certainly not going to apply lol)


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/12 15:48:18


Post by: Platuan4th


 chiefbigredman wrote:
I hate to be the guy who says it but you aren't getting the job or an interview lol

Not trying to hate or anything like that, I mean if you wanted to apply then its good you did. I just feel that when you apply for a job (any job) let's say you are applying for a history professor at a university or something. You don't say "I have been reading history books since I was a kid I'd be great at the job, I also have a college diploma in health education but I would still be good for the job"

Please don't take it the wrong way or anything I am saying this as nice as my Canadian roots can lol
They are looking for a company CEO not a hobbyist.

Just my opinion tho (I'm certainly not going to apply lol)


Context, Context, Context.

Kirby himself in the last financial report stated that they don't hire based on experience and CVs, they hire based on attitude and then outright stated that said philosophy continues to the highest level and that they will be looking for someone with the right attitude for the new CEO. So showing that you're passionate about the company more than just about business is important to what they're looking for.

They may be looking for a CEO, but they're not necessarily looking for a CEO, if you get my drift.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/12 16:01:48


Post by: Howard A Treesong


They probably already have someone in mind for the job. The truth is probably that if you were called for interview it would just be to go through the motions and for comparative purposes, you wouldn't really be in with a shot.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/12 16:07:15


Post by: angelofvengeance


Best of luck to you. Be the change!


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/12 16:09:01


Post by: weeble1000


 Howard A Treesong wrote:
They probably already have someone in mind for the job. The truth is probably that if you were called for interview it would just be to go through the motions and for comparative purposes, you wouldn't really be in with a shot.


Uhhhh...I don't think the OP actually ever thought that he would get an interview, much less the job. That's, like, not what the letter is about...

It seems strange that people aren't really getting this.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/12 16:13:42


Post by: Rayvon


Nice one !!

I am quite amused by the smart arse comments that totally miss the point as well.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/12 16:59:10


Post by: Mr. Burning


i can see it now.

OP sitting in front of Kirby, High backed chair topped by the hunched figure of Merritt repeatedly squaking 'TRADEMARK!'

Staff cower and moan in their cubicle prison cells. The planner for Forgeworlds releases to 2020 covered by the words SPACE MARINES - written in blood.

Kirby is ignoring the OP's presence, being on the phone to one of his many operatives.
'You tell those Polack thieves that i'll finish what Hitler and Stalin started! I have enough on my plate! My new CEO has arrived for orientation'.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/13 11:47:14


Post by: Barfolomew


Anyone who wants CEO needs to a send a letter that looks like this:

As CEO, I will focus on sales margin and paying the stock dividend above all else. GW has such a wealth of IP, which I will staunchly defend, and is so unparalleled in miniature quality that the customers will follow the business's lead. Emphasizing the exclusivity of GWs premium product is the path best followed.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/13 12:10:51


Post by: Mr. Burning


Barfolomew wrote:
Anyone who wants CEO needs to a send a letter that looks like this:

As CEO, I will focus on sales margin and paying the stock dividend above all else. GW has such a wealth of IP, which I will staunchly defend, and is so unparalleled in miniature quality that the customers will follow the business's lead. Emphasizing the exclusivity of GWs premium product is the path best followed.


Mike drop!

Should you send that the Dakka presence at interview will increase by +1.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/13 17:19:44


Post by: prplehippo


Barfolomew wrote:
Anyone who wants CEO needs to a send a letter that looks like this:

As CEO, I will focus on sales margin and paying the stock dividend above all else. GW has such a wealth of IP, which I will staunchly defend, and is so unparalleled in miniature quality that the customers will follow the business's lead. Emphasizing the exclusivity of GWs premium product is the path best followed.


Isn't that just what the last guy did?

I find it hard to believe that the board at GW isn't looking for someone to just "tow the company line" again and tell them what they want to hear.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/13 18:08:57


Post by: Phobos


These threads are fun in the same way as "what I would do if I won the lottery" fantasies are, but that is all they are.

If anyone here even slightly thinks this is any more than a fantasy, I have a bridge in New York City to sell you.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/13 19:33:43


Post by: Xca|iber


 prplehippo wrote:
Barfolomew wrote:
Anyone who wants CEO needs to a send a letter that looks like this:

As CEO, I will focus on sales margin and paying the stock dividend above all else. GW has such a wealth of IP, which I will staunchly defend, and is so unparalleled in miniature quality that the customers will follow the business's lead. Emphasizing the exclusivity of GWs premium product is the path best followed.


Isn't that just what the last guy did?

I find it hard to believe that the board at GW isn't looking for someone to just "tow the company line" again and tell them what they want to hear.




I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/13 23:21:52


Post by: lordbrooks


Thanks for the replies gents! Just a rare opportunity to send the ol' boys some feedback that might actually get read. Kind of like when dad wrote angry letters to Ford when his truck broke down. GW's like a pretty girl with a terrible personality, and I just don't get it. Positive discussion in our community makes it more likely that we'll be taken seriously, appreciate seeing some humanity here in the forums.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/14 15:50:46


Post by: Occhiolini


Lets all just get 3-D printers and make our own models.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/14 15:59:52


Post by: gorgon


 Howard A Treesong wrote:
They probably already have someone in mind for the job. The truth is probably that if you were called for interview it would just be to go through the motions and for comparative purposes, you wouldn't really be in with a shot.


Obviously, or else they wouldn't be having that designated interview day. If they were conducting a genuine search, they'd have to work around executives' busy schedules, and would want to spend at least a 24-hour period with each candidate.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/14 18:28:50


Post by: rigeld2


Loborocket wrote:
I am not even talking about systemic change. I am talking about something as simple as sharing plans for development with customers as was suggested in the OP. Something like that is difficult. Say GW says they will be doing a Blood Angels and Necron codex in the next quarter. Now some un-foreseen circumstance prevent them from delivering on that announcement. As a company they are now un-able to recognize any revenue for the WHOLE COMPANY until those cod exes are divered. This is because of SEC regulations. Someone may have purchased stock based on that announcement so they must deliver to recognize revenue. So this kind of rule makes it difficult to be transparent about these kind of things.

Just think about how Apple does this kind of thing, they never release details about a product until they are sure they have product to deliver. You might hear rumors etc, but those do not come from Apple in any "official" way. Same thing for GW. So even if they became more customer focused, woe people get what they are looking for? Probay not.

There are ways to announce what the next release will be and contain without setting a date. It happens in lots of places.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/15 01:40:15


Post by: Fishboy


I almost put in for this and I do believe there was a request for resume as we'll. I have a strong business background but don't wish to move to England to work. I also would have difficulty getting to Nottingham on the 7th. If they use the same recruitment method for a US business manager then I might throw my hat in the ring. At some point they need to reinvest in their customer base if they want long term growth and stability. The board and investors will have to make a decision if they want short term double digit growth and a shrinking customer base or a growing customer base that has a lower ROI short term but larger ROI long term.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/15 02:53:59


Post by: Loborocket


rigeld2 wrote:
Loborocket wrote:
I am not even talking about systemic change. I am talking about something as simple as sharing plans for development with customers as was suggested in the OP. Something like that is difficult. Say GW says they will be doing a Blood Angels and Necron codex in the next quarter. Now some un-foreseen circumstance prevent them from delivering on that announcement. As a company they are now un-able to recognize any revenue for the WHOLE COMPANY until those cod exes are divered. This is because of SEC regulations. Someone may have purchased stock based on that announcement so they must deliver to recognize revenue. So this kind of rule makes it difficult to be transparent about these kind of things.

Just think about how Apple does this kind of thing, they never release details about a product until they are sure they have product to deliver. You might hear rumors etc, but those do not come from Apple in any "official" way. Same thing for GW. So even if they became more customer focused, woe people get what they are looking for? Probay not.

There are ways to announce what the next release will be and contain without setting a date. It happens in lots of places.


It is not about setting a date it is about announcing specific plans for features/product. If the information is too specific these rules around revenue recognition kick in because someone may have bought stock on those specific plans. At least that is how it works for the company I work for. We hear these kind of complaints about being secretive and stuff from our customers all the time but can't really do anything about it.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/15 04:35:36


Post by: rigeld2


Loborocket wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
Loborocket wrote:
I am not even talking about systemic change. I am talking about something as simple as sharing plans for development with customers as was suggested in the OP. Something like that is difficult. Say GW says they will be doing a Blood Angels and Necron codex in the next quarter. Now some un-foreseen circumstance prevent them from delivering on that announcement. As a company they are now un-able to recognize any revenue for the WHOLE COMPANY until those cod exes are divered. This is because of SEC regulations. Someone may have purchased stock based on that announcement so they must deliver to recognize revenue. So this kind of rule makes it difficult to be transparent about these kind of things.

Just think about how Apple does this kind of thing, they never release details about a product until they are sure they have product to deliver. You might hear rumors etc, but those do not come from Apple in any "official" way. Same thing for GW. So even if they became more customer focused, woe people get what they are looking for? Probay not.

There are ways to announce what the next release will be and contain without setting a date. It happens in lots of places.


It is not about setting a date it is about announcing specific plans for features/product. If the information is too specific these rules around revenue recognition kick in because someone may have bought stock on those specific plans. At least that is how it works for the company I work for. We hear these kind of complaints about being secretive and stuff from our customers all the time but can't really do anything about it.

At least in the software world you can be pretty specific with Beta as long as you also say that there's no guarantees it'll make it to GA.
And with the proper wording, GW could as well.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/15 09:54:14


Post by: Loborocket


Yes we can run beta programs with customers under NDA and GW could probably figure out a way to do this. I was trying to point out it is simple to say GW "needs to be open to their customers" on a stupid internet discussion board. It is a totally different thing to ACTUALLY make that happen and I might not totally be in GWs control because of these kinds of legal hurdles.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/15 12:34:46


Post by: rigeld2


Loborocket wrote:
Yes we can run beta programs with customers under NDA and GW could probably figure out a way to do this. I was trying to point out it is simple to say GW "needs to be open to their customers" on a stupid internet discussion board. It is a totally different thing to ACTUALLY make that happen and I might not totally be in GWs control because of these kinds of legal hurdles.

Just FYI, you don't always need NDAs either. I know for a fact we do Open Betas, for example. Part of that might be because we deal with Open Source software, but still.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/15 13:03:14


Post by: master of ordinance


Sorry mate but I also applied. Best of luck though


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/15 13:09:16


Post by: Loborocket


rigeld2 wrote:
Loborocket wrote:
Yes we can run beta programs with customers under NDA and GW could probably figure out a way to do this. I was trying to point out it is simple to say GW "needs to be open to their customers" on a stupid internet discussion board. It is a totally different thing to ACTUALLY make that happen and I might not totally be in GWs control because of these kinds of legal hurdles.

Just FYI, you don't always need NDAs either. I know for a fact we do Open Betas, for example. Part of that might be because we deal with Open Source software, but still.


I understand the concept of open betas and technology previews, etc... we have those kinds of situation too, but there is a complex legal landscape surrounding all of this.

To bring this back to the topic at hand, how to "fix" a company, a software platform, whatever, to someone on the outside APPEARS simple but in reality is very complex. Seeing "how the sausage is made" so to speak might change your ideas about what needs fixing and how it can be fixed. Threads like this are fairly pointless in the simple fact that most of us as consumers and players of the game we know next to NOTHING about running a multi-national company that produces games. Just because someone uses my company's software does not mean they know anythign about the development process or what is "simple" to code. Thre are just so many things we do not know about the business.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/15 13:13:37


Post by: Azreal13


Agreed, one could apply the "nobody can really understand a relationship unless they're in it" maxim to a business, or at least a business sector that one doesn't have first hand experience of.

Equally though, there are certain universal truths one can apply to a consumer business, regardless of market sector, structure or anything else. Additionally, one can infer from how GW are going about recruiting their new CEO that they don't feel you need to know anything about their business to run it either, just the right "attitude."


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/15 15:33:27


Post by: jonolikespie


Loborocket wrote:
Yes we can run beta programs with customers under NDA and GW could probably figure out a way to do this. I was trying to point out it is simple to say GW "needs to be open to their customers" on a stupid internet discussion board. It is a totally different thing to ACTUALLY make that happen and I might not totally be in GWs control because of these kinds of legal hurdles.

They used to be much more open, so what changed?
As far as I am aware it is simply a shift in mentality at GWHQ that not telling people about X release 2 weeks from now means your customers will buy Y in one ween, then X as well.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/15 15:39:18


Post by: Wayniac


 jonolikespie wrote:
Loborocket wrote:
Yes we can run beta programs with customers under NDA and GW could probably figure out a way to do this. I was trying to point out it is simple to say GW "needs to be open to their customers" on a stupid internet discussion board. It is a totally different thing to ACTUALLY make that happen and I might not totally be in GWs control because of these kinds of legal hurdles.

They used to be much more open, so what changed?
As far as I am aware it is simply a shift in mentality at GWHQ that not telling people about X release 2 weeks from now means your customers will buy Y in one ween, then X as well.


I think it's just starting to believe the lies that people buy figures because they're cool and not based on the game. So they think announcing a weekly "Look at X cool thing!" will get people saying "oooh pretty MUST HAVE NAO" and then the same thing the next week.

When in reality people only buy Citadel miniatures because of the game.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/20 17:06:01


Post by: rookshunter


WayneTheGame wrote:
 jonolikespie wrote:
Loborocket wrote:
Yes we can run beta programs with customers under NDA and GW could probably figure out a way to do this. I was trying to point out it is simple to say GW "needs to be open to their customers" on a stupid internet discussion board. It is a totally different thing to ACTUALLY make that happen and I might not totally be in GWs control because of these kinds of legal hurdles.

They used to be much more open, so what changed?
As far as I am aware it is simply a shift in mentality at GWHQ that not telling people about X release 2 weeks from now means your customers will buy Y in one ween, then X as well.


I think it's just starting to believe the lies that people buy figures because they're cool and not based on the game. So they think announcing a weekly "Look at X cool thing!" will get people saying "oooh pretty MUST HAVE NAO" and then the same thing the next week.

When in reality people only buy Citadel miniatures because of the game.


Unfortunately you cannot be 100% certain of that, so your statement is totally wrong. Always avoiding absolutes in a statement is the only way to post. I would know, I'm always right.

(had to get 5 in).


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/20 17:23:25


Post by: Da krimson barun


WayneTheGame wrote:
 jonolikespie wrote:
Loborocket wrote:
Yes we can run beta programs with customers under NDA and GW could probably figure out a way to do this. I was trying to point out it is simple to say GW "needs to be open to their customers" on a stupid internet discussion board. It is a totally different thing to ACTUALLY make that happen and I might not totally be in GWs control because of these kinds of legal hurdles.

They used to be much more open, so what changed?
As far as I am aware it is simply a shift in mentality at GWHQ that not telling people about X release 2 weeks from now means your customers will buy Y in one ween, then X as well.


I think it's just starting to believe the lies that people buy figures because they're cool and not based on the game. So they think announcing a weekly "Look at X cool thing!" will get people saying "oooh pretty MUST HAVE NAO" and then the same thing the next week.

When in reality people only buy Citadel miniatures because of the game.
I only buy the game because of the miniatures.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/21 08:37:16


Post by: PhantomViper


 Da krimson barun wrote:
I only buy the game because of the miniatures.


So you only have one model of each? You only have one squad of each?



I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/21 14:18:50


Post by: Rayvon


Quite a few people definitely do buy lots of miniatures for the models alone and do not play the games, I know many people that have collected GW since the 80s and never play at all.
Maybe its different in other parts of the world.

Now I am not stupid enough to think that my friends are a good cross section of the public, but to say it does not happen is a fallacy for sure.

Plenty of people see the models in the window and wander in to buy them regardless of the game system.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/21 17:20:40


Post by: Saldiven


 Rayvon wrote:
Plenty of people see the models in the window and wander in to buy them regardless of the game system.


That may be the situation in UK and parts of Europe, but definitely not the situation in the USA, especially since GW abandoned shopping malls years ago. Their current locations, by and large, are not areas where any significant degree of foot traffic passes by. In the USA, if you don't already know about GW, there is only an infinitesimally small chance that you'll stumble across one of their locations and decide to walk in.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/21 17:23:57


Post by: MWHistorian


Saldiven wrote:
 Rayvon wrote:
Plenty of people see the models in the window and wander in to buy them regardless of the game system.


That may be the situation in UK and parts of Europe, but definitely not the situation in the USA, especially since GW abandoned shopping malls years ago. Their current locations, by and large, are not areas where any significant degree of foot traffic passes by. In the USA, if you don't already know about GW, there is only an infinitesimally small chance that you'll stumble across one of their locations and decide to walk in.

That's very true. I remember long ago when I used to rate malls by the quality of their gaming store. Now I have to research them on line to find them.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/21 23:10:59


Post by: We


You make no mention of your leadership skills, any business experience you may have or any work accomplishments you have made. Why are you qualified to run the company?

I wouldn't hire you to be one of my tech leads much less as a CEO.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/21 23:15:05


Post by: rigeld2


We wrote:
You make no mention of your leadership skills, any business experience you may have or any work accomplishments you have made. Why are you qualified to run the company?

I wouldn't hire you to be one of my tech leads much less as a CEO.

GW proudly hires based off of attitude rather than skills.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 13:30:51


Post by: We


rigeld2 wrote:
We wrote:
You make no mention of your leadership skills, any business experience you may have or any work accomplishments you have made. Why are you qualified to run the company?

I wouldn't hire you to be one of my tech leads much less as a CEO.

GW proudly hires based off of attitude rather than skills.


They want you to have the right attitude but you also have to have the skills. Just saying you love GW is not going to get your foot in the door for store manager much less CEO. Of course writing a letter saying how everything they are currently doing is messed up doesn't show the attitude or skills.

I wouldn't hire someone with a cover letter like that to flip burgers.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 13:32:51


Post by: MWHistorian


We wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
We wrote:
You make no mention of your leadership skills, any business experience you may have or any work accomplishments you have made. Why are you qualified to run the company?

I wouldn't hire you to be one of my tech leads much less as a CEO.

GW proudly hires based off of attitude rather than skills.


They want you to have the right attitude but you also have to have the skills. Just saying you love GW is not going to get your foot in the door for store manager much less CEO. Of course writing a letter saying how everything they are currently doing is messed up doesn't show the attitude or skills.

I wouldn't hire someone with a cover letter like that to flip burgers.

I think you're missing the entire point of why he sent the letter.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 13:41:52


Post by: rigeld2


We wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
We wrote:
You make no mention of your leadership skills, any business experience you may have or any work accomplishments you have made. Why are you qualified to run the company?

I wouldn't hire you to be one of my tech leads much less as a CEO.

GW proudly hires based off of attitude rather than skills.


They want you to have the right attitude but you also have to have the skills.

Based on the statements of the current CEO, that's simply not true.

"We believe that attitudes are more important than skills; for many roles we will happily help you learn the skills you need if you bring a great attitude to your work. - See more at: http://careers.games-workshop.com/games-workshops-internal-culture-fit/#sthash.Sfffc6BE.dpuf"


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 15:17:01


Post by: Loborocket


rigeld2 wrote:
Based on the statements of the current CEO, that's simply not true.

"We believe that attitudes are more important than skills; for many roles we will happily help you learn the skills you need if you bring a great attitude to your work. - See more at: http://careers.games-workshop.com/games-workshops-internal-culture-fit/#sthash.Sfffc6BE.dpuf"


Boy you guys can really parse out a statement.

Do you really think a company is going to hire based on attitude alone? Of course someone has to have the right attitude but you also need some skills. That statement is simply corporate speak for the fact they have internal training programs and such. All kinds of places make statements like this. It does not mean you can show up with a good attitude and no skills and expect to get a job. For Pete's sake!

It is like having a RAW/RAI debate. Use your head just a little bit.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 15:28:58


Post by: Wayniac


Loborocket wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
Based on the statements of the current CEO, that's simply not true.

"We believe that attitudes are more important than skills; for many roles we will happily help you learn the skills you need if you bring a great attitude to your work. - See more at: http://careers.games-workshop.com/games-workshops-internal-culture-fit/#sthash.Sfffc6BE.dpuf"


Boy you guys can really parse out a statement.

Do you really think a company is going to hire based on attitude alone? Of course someone has to have the right attitude but you also need some skills. That statement is simply corporate speak for the fact they have internal training programs and such. All kinds of places make statements like this. It does not mean you can show up with a good attitude and no skills and expect to get a job. For Pete's sake!

It is like having a RAW/RAI debate. Use your head just a little bit.


I believe Kirby stated they hired someone to the board of directors without looking at her credentials/resume/CV so unless he was lying, it might be true.

Besides which, the point of the OP is I'm pretty sure mostly satire and they don't really expect to be called in.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 15:29:51


Post by: rigeld2


Loborocket wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
Based on the statements of the current CEO, that's simply not true.

"We believe that attitudes are more important than skills; for many roles we will happily help you learn the skills you need if you bring a great attitude to your work. - See more at: http://careers.games-workshop.com/games-workshops-internal-culture-fit/#sthash.Sfffc6BE.dpuf"


Boy you guys can really parse out a statement.

Do you really think a company is going to hire based on attitude alone? Of course someone has to have the right attitude but you also need some skills. That statement is simply corporate speak for the fact they have internal training programs and such. All kinds of places make statements like this. It does not mean you can show up with a good attitude and no skills and expect to get a job. For Pete's sake!

It is like having a RAW/RAI debate. Use your head just a little bit.

From Kirby:
. We got a great (not good, great) new board member. She is still surprised that I did not read her CV (exasperated would be a more accurate word) but there was no need. Her letter told us what kind of person she was: sincere, open - minded, a learner, excited at the opportunity.

If they don't read a CV for a NXD, are you really sure they care about skills?


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 16:22:10


Post by: Loborocket


rigeld2 wrote:
Loborocket wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
Based on the statements of the current CEO, that's simply not true.

"We believe that attitudes are more important than skills; for many roles we will happily help you learn the skills you need if you bring a great attitude to your work. - See more at: http://careers.games-workshop.com/games-workshops-internal-culture-fit/#sthash.Sfffc6BE.dpuf"


Boy you guys can really parse out a statement.

Do you really think a company is going to hire based on attitude alone? Of course someone has to have the right attitude but you also need some skills. That statement is simply corporate speak for the fact they have internal training programs and such. All kinds of places make statements like this. It does not mean you can show up with a good attitude and no skills and expect to get a job. For Pete's sake!

It is like having a RAW/RAI debate. Use your head just a little bit.

From Kirby:
. We got a great (not good, great) new board member. She is still surprised that I did not read her CV (exasperated would be a more accurate word) but there was no need. Her letter told us what kind of person she was: sincere, open - minded, a learner, excited at the opportunity.

If they don't read a CV for a NXD, are you really sure they care about skills?


Well if you believe that at face value then either the folks doing the hiring at GW are really dumb, or you are way more gullible than I would have originally thought.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 16:23:18


Post by: weeble1000


There really isn't anything to parse about what Tom Kirby has said. You can happily speculate about whether it is bullgack, but the man seems to have gone out of his way to stress that the company hires based on attitude rather than skills/experience.

Part of the satire about this whole thing is that, yes, as some of the posters in this thread have mentioned, hiring a CEO on the basis of an interview letter is crazy town.

So either A) Tom Kirby is a fething moron taking a dump on his fiduciary duty, or B) he makes ridiculous statements to the company's shareholders and is a fething moron for taking a dump on his fiduciary duty.

Either way...it aint great.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 16:27:59


Post by: MWHistorian


weeble1000 wrote:
There really isn't anything to parse about what Tom Kirby has said. You can happily speculate about whether it is bullgack, but the man seems to have gone out of his way to stress that the company hires based on attitude rather than skills/experience.

Part of the satire about this whole thing is that, yes, as some of the posters in this thread have mentioned, hiring a CEO on the basis of an interview letter is crazy town.

So either A) Tom Kirby is a fething moron taking a dump on his fiduciary duty, or B) he makes ridiculous statements to the company's shareholders and is a fething moron for taking a dump on his fiduciary duty.

Either way...it aint great.

Bingo!
Either way, something's rotten in the state of GW.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 16:54:26


Post by: Wayniac


Loborocket wrote:
Well if you believe that at face value then either the folks doing the hiring at GW are really dumb, or you are way more gullible than I would have originally thought.


If the CEO/Chairman of the Board openly stated it, why wouldn't you believe it?


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 17:04:27


Post by: PhantomViper


WayneTheGame wrote:
Loborocket wrote:
Well if you believe that at face value then either the folks doing the hiring at GW are really dumb, or you are way more gullible than I would have originally thought.


If the CEO/Chairman of the Board openly stated it, why wouldn't you believe it?


Because he is obviously lying! He is lying because of... reasons...


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 17:04:34


Post by: ChazSexington


Lobrocket speaks the truth.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 17:12:33


Post by: Wayniac


 ChazSexington wrote:
Lobrocket speaks the truth.


So Tom Kirby is a liar then. This is the same stupid argument in one of the previous threads where it was basically said not to take what Kirby says at face value, except that then he'd be lying to shareholders which I'm pretty sure would be illegal at worst or unethical at best.

So no, he doesn't speak the truth, he speaks what he thinks is the truth without citing anything to corroborate it, while there is evidence to the contrary.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 17:36:34


Post by: Loborocket


WayneTheGame wrote:
If the CEO/Chairman of the Board openly stated it, why wouldn't you believe it?


Because experience and common sense tells me this is not the complete truth. I understand the spirit of the statement, but I refuse to believe skills and experience of a candidate are not even considered when making a hire. It simply can't be the case.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 17:40:19


Post by: MWHistorian


Loborocket wrote:
WayneTheGame wrote:
If the CEO/Chairman of the Board openly stated it, why wouldn't you believe it?


Because experience and common sense tells me this is not the complete truth. I understand the spirit of the statement, but I refuse to believe skills and experience of a candidate are not even considered when making a hire. It simply can't be the case.

After seeing how GW is run, I can believe it.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 17:40:54


Post by: Wayniac


Loborocket wrote:
WayneTheGame wrote:
If the CEO/Chairman of the Board openly stated it, why wouldn't you believe it?


Because experience and common sense tells me this is not the complete truth. I understand the spirit of the statement, but I refuse to believe skills and experience of a candidate are not even considered when making a hire. It simply can't be the case.


For virtually any other company I'd agree with you. But remember this is a company that proudly claims they do no market research, doesn't ask the market what it wants and thinks that the internet is some kind of fad filled with scary people and trolls and hence virtually ignores social media in its entirety.

Doing something like that would be right up their alley.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 18:04:55


Post by: Loborocket


WayneTheGame wrote:
For virtually any other company I'd agree with you. But remember this is a company that proudly claims they do no market research, doesn't ask the market what it wants and thinks that the internet is some kind of fad filled with scary people and trolls and hence virtually ignores social media in its entirety.

Doing something like that would be right up their alley.


I will go back to what I posted a few posts up; Either GW is really dumb when it comes to hiring, or the people who believe they hire based on attitude alone are really gullible. You can decide for yourself which school of thought you fall into.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 18:20:05


Post by: MWHistorian


Loborocket wrote:
WayneTheGame wrote:
For virtually any other company I'd agree with you. But remember this is a company that proudly claims they do no market research, doesn't ask the market what it wants and thinks that the internet is some kind of fad filled with scary people and trolls and hence virtually ignores social media in its entirety.

Doing something like that would be right up their alley.


I will go back to what I posted a few posts up; Either GW is really dumb when it comes to hiring, or the people who believe they hire based on attitude alone are really gullible. You can decide for yourself which school of thought you fall into.

I don't think that's the issue. I don't know if we believe it or not. That's irrelevant. The fact that that's how they say they do it is what we're making fun of.
(I may be speaking for myself though.)
I think this is satire, like an Onion article. The real joke's on GW.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 18:31:34


Post by: rigeld2


Loborocket wrote:
Well if you believe that at face value then either the folks doing the hiring at GW are really dumb, or you are way more gullible than I would have originally thought.

It seems like the former surprises you and you don't believe it.
It shouldn't - they (proudly) don't do market research, say things like
We know of what we speak. One day 3-D printers will be affordable (agreed), they are now, they will be able to produce fantastic detail (the affordable ones won't) and they will do it faster than one miniature per day (no, they won't, look it up).

They won't produce fantastic detail faster than one miniature per day? Um...

There's other things that show his delusions and how they steer the company, but the "attitude over skill" isn't one I'm surprised about. Multiple times he compares himself to Steve Jobs and GW to Apple. That surprises me more than hiring for attitude.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 19:05:43


Post by: Wayniac


rigeld2 wrote:
There's other things that show his delusions and how they steer the company, but the "attitude over skill" isn't one I'm surprised about. Multiple times he compares himself to Steve Jobs and GW to Apple. That surprises me more than hiring for attitude.


The irony is that GW is more like Microsoft, and virtually nothing like Apple.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 19:06:50


Post by: Loborocket


rigeld2 wrote:
Loborocket wrote:
Well if you believe that at face value then either the folks doing the hiring at GW are really dumb, or you are way more gullible than I would have originally thought.

It seems like the former surprises you and you don't believe it.
It shouldn't - they (proudly) don't do market research, say things like
We know of what we speak. One day 3-D printers will be affordable (agreed), they are now, they will be able to produce fantastic detail (the affordable ones won't) and they will do it faster than one miniature per day (no, they won't, look it up).

They won't produce fantastic detail faster than one miniature per day? Um...

There's other things that show his delusions and how they steer the company, but the "attitude over skill" isn't one I'm surprised about. Multiple times he compares himself to Steve Jobs and GW to Apple. That surprises me more than hiring for attitude.


I think that is the fundamental difference between our opinions. I don't see GW as a company as a bunch of knuckle dragging mouth breathers. I think there are plenty of people who do see them that way.

I don't think you become the leader in your market sector by being dumb about how you do things. I do know often times when you reach the top there are a bunch of people (including customers) who look to condemn every move you make as dumb and characterize everyone in the company as an imbecile. This usually goes hand in hand with accusing the company in question about being in it for nothing but money and out to screw customers over.

I am not ready to do do that to GW. I think they make a decent product I am willing to spend my money on. It is not perfect by any means, but I am happy with my decision to play the game and collect the models.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 19:45:38


Post by: Wayniac


I've seen many companies that were run like idiots but got lucky in a particular niche and used that to catapult to success. GW is probably one of those. Most everything they say and do indicates not only being oblivious to modern things (such as social media and something beyond retail shops) but boundless arrogance as well.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 19:56:22


Post by: rigeld2


Loborocket wrote:
I think that is the fundamental difference between our opinions. I don't see GW as a company as a bunch of knuckle dragging mouth breathers. I think there are plenty of people who do see them that way.

Probably the people who take the time to look up what Tom Kirby says all the time.
Handwaving social media away? Bad decision. Even allowing the Spots issue to happen? Bad decision. How the Spots issue was handled? Poorly.

I don't think you become the leader in your market sector by being dumb about how you do things. I do know often times when you reach the top there are a bunch of people (including customers) who look to condemn every move you make as dumb and characterize everyone in the company as an imbecile. This usually goes hand in hand with accusing the company in question about being in it for nothing but money and out to screw customers over.

Normally it's the vocal minority who "bash" a leader. It's not a minority anymore.
And it's not hard to become the market leader in a niche marker.

I am not ready to do do that to GW. I think they make a decent product I am willing to spend my money on. It is not perfect by any means, but I am happy with my decision to play the game and collect the models.

You do understand it's possible to criticize a company's leadership and still enjoy the product, right?


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/22 21:40:32


Post by: jonolikespie


The GW who became the market leaders and the GW of today are alike in name only.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 03:11:28


Post by: frozenwastes


Also, the GW of the early 90s that grew into an international company did so off the back of trade partners and distributors and demographics. The children of the baby boomers were growing up and GW was at the right place at the right time, with the right trade partners.

Then the LOTR thing happened. GW raked in the cash off a license. As LOTR faded, the problems with their core games became more and more prominent and the last 10 years has basically been GW pissing away their own market dominance.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 12:41:26


Post by: Loborocket


 frozenwastes wrote:
Also, the GW of the early 90s that grew into an international company did so off the back of trade partners and distributors and demographics. The children of the baby boomers were growing up and GW was at the right place at the right time, with the right trade partners.

Then the LOTR thing happened. GW raked in the cash off a license. As LOTR faded, the problems with their core games became more and more prominent and the last 10 years has basically been GW pissing away their own market dominance.


I don't know anything about their trade partners, distributors, or demographics, so I can't speak to that at all. (I doubt many people could without intimate inside knowledge of the company, but that is a whole different topic.) What I will say from my own experience and observations, game companies in general probably suffered over the last 10 years (pretty much every sector suffered 2008 til about a year and a half ago.) I think this trend is reversing itself and tabletop gaming is seeing a resurgence. I think the market is looking to have a different gaming experience than the virtual and computer games of the early 2000's.

I my view GW is now retooling their company to make it easier for them to sell direct to their customers (cutting some cost along the way). They are also making the game be more approachable in general. There is a shift to be able to buy the models you like and play them (unbound) there is a move to make the game flow on the table better rather than just a dice fest (Maelstrom missions). A push to get everyone playing on the same footing (release of all major codexes over the past year or so). Some of these moves will alienate some of their existing customer base simply because as humans we are resistant to change, but I think these changes are an attempt to open the game to new customers who in the past may have been intimidated by having to buy a specific army (that may or may not work), or by a game that felt "old". Now those new customers can perhaps come to the game easier. So actually i think GW is pretty good at what they are doing.

In many cases companies need to do this kind of thing. They are always looking for growth, ways to find NEW customers. Sometimes the things done to find new customers and sources of revenue come at the expense of some of the existing base of customers but it needs to happen to make the company grow. From my perspective the changes GW has made over the last year or so go towards this end.

So while many people don't like GW and don't think they know what they are doing, I am in the opposite camp and think they know EXACTLY what they are doing. And of course opinions are like a-holes, everyone has one!


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 14:34:16


Post by: weeble1000


Lob,

It is kind of hard to say that GW knows exactly what they are doing when the company experiences a 50% drop in profits while the industry at large experiences double digit growth.

The TTG industry has been growing for years now at what appears to be a really fast rate. And all the while this growth has been going on, GW's profits and unit sales have been in decline.

With a 50% drop in profitability, mightn't GW want to concentrate on re-engaging with its extant customer base, rather than trying to engage with prospective customers?

It is kind of hard to say that GW knows exactly what it is doing when every year the CEO's statements directly contradict his statements of the previous year. Seriously, check it out. If you read Kirby's statements, each one directly contradicts the previous year's statements. This year, of course, the most glaring contradiction was Kirby's complete 180 on litigation.

GW is so far behind the curve in terms of table top wargaming that it is laughable. Just look at that WHFB app the company just released. Look at the company's game design. Look at the company's stance on social media.

GW is in crisis mode. The company is flopping around like a fish out of water, hoping that the sheer power of its directionless flailing will land it back in the water. The executive staff is doubling down on some of the company's worst decisions because that's all they know how to do.

The 'changes' being implemented are, in my personal estimation, A) not at all innovative, B) completely ignorant of where the market is headed, and C) too little too late.

If GW's profits tanked because the company aggressively reinvested in developing a hot new, trim, skirmish-style wargame with progressive rules and a spanking new product line I would be singing a different tune. If GW was using the power of its market presence to bleed out competitors with aggressively competitive pricing, I would be singing a different tune. If instead of retracting into progressively narrower product lines, GW was expanding into a more diverse portfolio of products aimed at different subsegments of the market, I would be singing a different tune.

GW is doubling down on 40K, retracting WHFB into obsolescence, and tossing everything else it can overboard in order to keep the ship afloat for a little while longer.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 14:46:29


Post by: frozenwastes


Loborocket wrote:

I don't know anything about their trade partners, distributors, or demographics, so I can't speak to that at all. (I doubt many people could without intimate inside knowledge of the company, but that is a whole different topic.)


You can look around your own country. You can get old white dwarfs and look at their independent trade partners and where they are. You can look at out GW used to sell through normal distribution channels until the late 90s. You can look at their partnership with Milton Bradly during the early to mid-90s.

What I will say from my own experience and observations, game companies in general probably suffered over the last 10 years (pretty much every sector suffered 2008 til about a year and a half ago.)


2008 was the beginning of a gaming explosion. 2009 saw the release of Warmachine MK2 and the arrival of many companies that are still doing great today. It was also the beginning of Infinity breaking out in a big way. Historicals also started getting more and more traction in those years. I think many people theorize that in bad economic times hobbies tend to do better rather than worse. If you go look at old Hasbro investor relations documents you'll also find it was a great time for Magic: The Gathering as well.

I think this trend is reversing itself and tabletop gaming is seeing a resurgence.


I don't think it's a resurgence, I think it's going parabolic after already growing for the last five or so years.

I my view GW is now retooling their company to make it easier for them to sell direct to their customers (cutting some cost along the way).


I agree this is smart, but they simply can't cover the world with their GW stores. So much of it has to be direct only. And GW has shown themselves to be unable to embrace the internet except as far as they can control it.

They are also making the game be more approachable in general.


Rulebook/starter + codex + demo sized legal army = enormous cost. I think GW has realized that people don't stick around for more than a couple years so they try to front load the cost onto new customers to get them to pay as much as possible before they quit.

In many cases companies need to do this kind of thing. They are always looking for growth, ways to find NEW customers. Sometimes the things done to find new customers and sources of revenue come at the expense of some of the existing base of customers but it needs to happen to make the company grow. From my perspective the changes GW has made over the last year or so go towards this end.


The interesting part will be whether or not they can recruit new customers fast enough. The problem is that GW relies largely on word of mouth advertising and if they just shed old customers as part of some plan to get new ones then they've either just reduced their word of mouth advertising base, or worse than that, pissed people off enough that they're actively opposing GW's acquisition of new customers. If they meet a new person who's interested in miniature gaming, they'll be actively steered away from GW by the very people GW abandoned in favour of new customers. I know I've done it. Not out of some malice, but because it's a good thing to do to warn people away from a bad situation. I know locally, Flames of War, Infinity, Warmachine, Dystopian Wars and Bolt Action are all thriving because the word of mouth recruiting going on locally is no longer GW focused.



I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 14:57:05


Post by: Wayniac


 frozenwastes wrote:
Rulebook/starter + codex + demo sized legal army = enormous cost. I think GW has realized that people don't stick around for more than a couple years so they try to front load the cost onto new customers to get them to pay as much as possible before they quit.


Didn't they actually state something to this effect somewhere? Something about people not staying for very long? It would explain the "churn and burn" type of strategy perfectly.

Also, Loborocket, keep in mind that tabletop gaming as a whole is GROWING. It's only GW that's declining.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 15:01:48


Post by: Aldonis


I am wondering if LordBrooks has been invited for an interview or not?


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 15:02:33


Post by: Wayniac


 Aldonis wrote:
I am wondering if LordBrooks has been invited for an interview or not?


I think all of us doubt it, but what did he have to lose?


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 17:15:07


Post by: frozenwastes


One thing I do want to say about GW's future is that it is certainly possible that they can engineer a controlled decline to some portion of their current revenue and then stabilize there.

They just paid another dividend and they do have the cash for it, but the ratio of their dividend to their earnings is a bit troubling. It's also money that isn't going into actually growing the business, product development, etc.,.

In the last annual report Kirby described GW as a cash machine. I think from here on out it'll be operated that way. Until it breaks. They'll keep protecting their margins with a combination of rising prices and cutting costs and pay out an overly high ratio of any earnings in dividends.

To those who say that there's no more room for cost cuts, I'd like to point out that there are still many, many more stores to shift into the single employee model. Since this shift is accompanied by a decrease in revenue due to the lower open hours (and sometimes a move to a lower traffic cheaper rent location) we'll see costs and revenue drop together, but margins will be okay.

I don't believe any CEO candidate that even talks about deviating from that plan will be demonstrating the "attitude" GW is looking for.

The problem with their current plan is that it is completely and totally vulnerable to a revenue shock. If GW turns out to be wrong about their customers and they turn out to not be chumps who will just buy whatever GW sells, then the social nature of the hobby will drastically harm GW's customer base.

If the network effect continues to play it's part and playing GW's games become less and less common as people leave, then GW could experience a rapid decline in their revenue at a rate even greater than the last year. GW seems to believe that the game play is totally unimportant and that their real customers are the ones who buy things with just the idea of playing games with it, even without actually playing. That the miniatures really are "small jewel like objects of magic and wonder" and the peasants will keep buying regardless of game play experience deterioration (either in quantity of opponents as other people leave or in terms of actual game play experience becoming worse).

The problem is that GW is taking a huge risk on a coin flip. Either they're right and the customers will be good little walking wallets and buy what they're told, or they're wrong and customers actually want good game play and good value and the network effect will cause a massive acceleration in their declining revenue.

The problem is that they likely won't accept any CEO candidate who wants to change course in any way. There's really no reason why you can't approach the situation as if either could be true and be insured against all negative eventualities by offering a product that has every part of it made to the highest quality as possible. I have a theory though that GW isn't interested in anyone who talks about actually playing the games or actually using social media. And certainly no one who points out that injection moulded plastic gives the greatest economic advantage when you increase the volume rather than the price. They have also moved away from leveraging their own customer base in terms of promotion teams and volunteers.

I think the OP did the best possible thing. He used the opportunity to get a letter read by the people looking for the new CEO.




I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 17:26:12


Post by: Azreal13


What's slightly concerning, frozenwastes, is I believe I can reduce all of that well reasoned and thought through to, in essence, two words. Well one, really.

Kirby.



I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 17:49:33


Post by: frozenwastes


Anyone who actually wants to get this job should talk about how they looked into GW's history and Kirby's heroic management buyout and how Kirby has become the most successful individual in the industry and that the opportunity to learn from the chairman would be the most valuable part of becoming GW's new CEO.



An indirect comparison between Kirby and Steve Jobs wouldn't be amiss either. Perhaps say something like how Steve Jobs essentially created the personal audio device industry and lead the integration of media devices into phones, Kirby essentially created the industry of collecting Citadel Miniatures. It would be an honour to work with someone who did for fantasy collectibles what Jobs did for personal electronics




I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 19:05:07


Post by: Baragash


I hear a second hand rumour that it is a toss up between two internal candidates.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 19:12:16


Post by: Azreal13


 Baragash wrote:
I hear a second hand rumour that it is a toss up between two internal candidates.




What?!!! You mean the eventual replacement was essentially already ear marked and that advertising the position was essentially just paying lip service to employment regs?

Colour me surprised.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 19:26:11


Post by: Wayniac


 Azreal13 wrote:
 Baragash wrote:
I hear a second hand rumour that it is a toss up between two internal candidates.




What?!!! You mean the eventual replacement was essentially already ear marked and that advertising the position was essentially just paying lip service to employment regs?

Colour me surprised.


Shocker! Still we can hope they turn the ship around, it's just doubtful because of Imperial Indoctrination.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 20:40:39


Post by: weeble1000


WayneTheGame wrote:
 Azreal13 wrote:
 Baragash wrote:
I hear a second hand rumour that it is a toss up between two internal candidates.




What?!!! You mean the eventual replacement was essentially already ear marked and that advertising the position was essentially just paying lip service to employment regs?

Colour me surprised.


Shocker! Still we can hope they turn the ship around, it's just doubtful because of Imperial Indoctrination.


I'll LOL my -ehem- butt off if it is Alan. Roy. Merrett.

M-E-double R-E-double T

This is great news!



I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 21:36:27


Post by: Wayniac


Was that a Jeff Jarrett reference?

That's J-E-Double F J-A-Double R-E-Double T, it's Double J, Jeff Jarrett.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/23 21:55:33


Post by: weeble1000


WayneTheGame wrote:
Was that a Jeff Jarrett reference?

That's J-E-Double F J-A-Double R-E-Double T, it's Double J, Jeff Jarrett.


It is a reference to the way Alan Merrett verbally spells his name. Maybe Merrett likes Jeff Jarrett.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/24 08:43:15


Post by: PhantomViper


 Azreal13 wrote:
advertising the position was essentially just paying lip service to employment regs?


You guys have regulations on how private companies are supposed to hire people?!


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/24 08:53:10


Post by: Baragash


PhantomViper wrote:
 Azreal13 wrote:
advertising the position was essentially just paying lip service to employment regs?


You guys have regulations on how private companies are supposed to hire people?!


There is no legal requirement to advertise internally or externally but not advertising a role can leave a company open to a discrimination lawsuit. If a company interviews a broad range of candidates that includes those with protected status then it's much easier to say "here's the CVs, here's our set of standard questions all the candidates had to answer as a benchmark, the process was fair and transparent and we picked the best candidate".


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/24 17:55:51


Post by: frozenwastes


The other problems you can avoid are internal ones. Like people feeling they were passed over for a promotion unfairly because they weren't even given the opportunity to apply for it.

It's also not just about avoid lawsuits. You can actually find the best candidate when you have a larger pool of candidates.


I applied for the CEO position... @ 2014/10/24 19:04:05


Post by: Azreal13


Yeah, it's one of those things like having the same person as CEO and Chairman, not illegal, but not really best practice and possibly detrimental to the company as a whole.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Emphasis on the mental.