Weimaraners

2011

Ryanstock

Weimaraners

TOP

Straight Talk 2

The second of three of the ‘Straight talk’s’ are about the Kennel Club

and if you miss any then please go to the Library where you can catch up.

The Kennel Club are desperately trying to be ‘Corporate’ in the way they present their business to the outside world. What they fail to see is that the only people they need to satisfy are their own members, they have no shareholders but they do have a series of captive revenue streams. They take registration fees for puppies and transfer of dogs, they take registration and maintenance fees from clubs with whom they affiliate and they take a commission from shows for dogs entered. They have a successful sales and marketing enterprise and additional sponsorship arrangements due to their unique position of being the largest organisation servicing the needs of dogs, all in all it might appear they have everything under control. The trouble is that in the real corporate world where shareholders must be satisfied there is a very focussed approach to all the elements of the business concerned, nothing is left to chance and it is the ‘core’ business that receives the main focus. The city shows great displeasure if the core business is failing. Budgets that take two months to prepare and are agreed with the city are rewritten if the figures do not meet expectation part way though any quarter, the golden rule is do not go to the city with a profits warning, rather go with a new plan that speaks of restructuring the business to make it more streamlined and cost effective or proposals for acquisitions to make great savings from the ‘critical mass’ of this enlarged company.

I decided to attend one of the Kennel Club’s ‘Question Time’ nights and the team arrived to present their ‘mission statement’ to the audience. Sadly on this occasion the laptop would not recognise the projector and no one knew how to configure the laptop. the team were already flustered as they tried to present what they, the Kennel Club were doing and how good they were at doing it. Preset questions were being received and answered but when a few people , myself included asked questions that they were not aware of, then the mood changed as the members of the top table looked at each other in an attempt to seek inspiration which did not arrive. They were desperate to get back ‘On Message’ as we say in the business world, so they asked questioners to refer to Kennel Club personal afterwards and these questions would be answered in due course. That was about four years ago and despite me raising it at a Kennel Club stand at a show and receiving the same reassurances I am not holding my breath for the answer to my question.

I have worked in several plc ‘s, being a director in that environment gives you an insight into all the skills needed to survive within that environment. We would never give a presentation without many rehearsals, a plan ‘B’ in case of malfunction and a dedicated nominee to deal with the unexpected questioners. In the closed environment of the Kennel Club it seems that there is a degree of naivety, that was clearly visible in that now infamous programme, when the TV cameras were switched on and the would be TV stars turned into court jesters before our very eyes. Dog shows are a part of the core business and the breed standards are part of that process, so why is it that the shows are carried out in isolation. Shows take place most weekends and even after several years the KC do not know if a breed is improving or failing. How can the Kennel Club complain about health issues occurring in certain breeds when they have no coordinated approach to bring these two elements together. Championship judges should be filling out a standard form which should contain their impression of the breed they judge after each appointment. This would be forwarded to the KC online and some bright graduate would input the information into the PC and at the end of the year filter the comments to reveal the concerns of judges, sending these to the judges subcommittee, who in turn would notify next years judges and breed clubs of these concerns in an attempt to identify early, exaggerations or shortcomings. This should provide an opportunity to arrest any adverse changes and try to reverse any detrimental features or characteristics within the earliest time frame.

Then there are breed clubs which are a significant revenue stream and one that could be used to greater effect, more of that next week. In order to utilise their potential first you have to control them and as I know only too well that is not always the case. I have been attending AGM’s for all my time in the breed nearly 39 years. For most of that time there has been little contact between myself and the KC and that is because breed clubs followed a time written format of adhering to rules , regulations and following the correct procedures. There have been a few times in the last 10 years when I have sought clarification on various points and these clarifications have been advised to the appropriate club at an AGM and subsequently recorded as part of the minutes. It is fair to say that not all our breed clubs operate in the same way and when one deviates from the practices laid down in their rules and regulations then members do have recourse to try and correct that situation at an AGM. On such occasions things can get quite heated, as the hard core of members who turn up year in year out feel very strongly about the running of their club. At the same time committee members do not always realise they have transgressed, in those situations it is usually soon resolved. Where one party takes exception to the comments made by the other party then acrimony is usually the end result. Breed club disputes should never be taken personally, it is never about the people but always about the problem. Situations have arisen in recent years that have not always been corrected or formally resolved and in those circumstances the Kennel Club should be the arbiter. So what happens in a legitimate dispute where the minutes do not contain any of the clarifications received from the Kennel Club and which were read out at the previous AGM, the Kennel Club are quite clear about this and as they say “The Kennel Club cannot involve itself directly in the content of the minutes of a registered society AGM or SGM”. Nothing to do with them, they are only the regulatory body. The minutes could be changed at the next AGM and people could wait another year to see if they have been correctly included this time. But what about getting them corrected ? Will the same people be present at this next AGM ? Here is what the Kennel Club say “It is commonly accepted that the approval of the minutes is by those present at the subsequent meeting even though some members may not have been present at the meeting in question”. So when the chair for the meeting asks ‘Can I ask that these minutes be accepted as a true record’, everyone present can say YES, even though they were not there last year. What planet are the KC on ? Finally do they investigate claims made by members relating to procedural matters, rules and regulations not being adhered to, not likely, they quote common law “Even the courts adopt a stance and will accept general concepts of reasonableness and common sense rather than the sometime strict interpretation and rigid application” In order for the courts to adopt this stance there will have been a full investigation and charges brought to get to that point, but not for the Kennel Club.

So we have a body that is involved in dogs that wishes to present a corporate image, to be taken seriously by DEFRA, the RSPCA and the Veterinary Colleges. It can make money from it’s captive revenue streams but it cannot manage a successful and professional presentation and fails to communicate with questioners. When questioned on a television programme senior executives are left floundering. It does not coordinate it’s business to prevent deterioration and quality issues within it’s main product, The Dog and the Breed Standards. It then neglects to manage or regulate it’s Breed Clubs and can only issue comedy statements to argue it’s case.

Whilst the presentation skills may have improved with four years to practice since I witnessed their performance it does show that as a ‘Company’ they have serious problems within their organisation. This private members club with less than 2000 full members is still stuck in it’s own ‘time warp’, with aspirations that exceed it’s capability. I think a little competition would sharpen their attention to detail.

If the Kennel Club are serious about their business they might wish to take steps to engage a Communications Director, a Media Guru ( I know Max Clifford has been suggested in the dog press) and some competent Business Executives who can fully integrate their systems and coordinate all areas of their would be empire !

Next week our final part looks into some of the crazy schemes that have been handed down by the Kennel Club.