By Sarah-Kingdom Evans
...So a slightly controversial yet timely topic, especially given the Costa Rica result = England has officially finished last in group D. (Please note that I am Welsh, and given that we failed to qualify I am totally independent!)
The disappointing results from Brazil lead me to question if a more collaborative effort between Wales, Ireland, and Scotland, along with the English squad could have resulted in a stronger side? If we had been Team GB, would the results have been better, would the resource pool have been richer and could the random Scottish Guy have cheered for GB instead of Uruguay?
What are the advantages of collaboration? The fact that we are potentially stronger in a larger group is a consideration, or does that just lead to a diluted support for the team or process?
The selection stage may have enabled Team GB to select Bale from Wales... But then who else...? Northern Ireland are currently ranked 70th and are not equipped with a headline maker (apologies my Celtic cousins) however Scotland are 27th (Costa Rica are 28th so league tables are not always a good indication). Yet England remains the strongest talent pool. Does that leave the English fans feeling that they are carrying the rest of the supporters and their ambitions? Is the rest of GB simply jumping on the bandwagon?
If we transfer this to our procurement world, does collaboration give us a strong force to enable better results and leverage? Or does it reduce the effectiveness of the strongest member compared to standing alone? Let me have your thoughts (cc Roy Hodgson, or maybe Harry Redknapp, depending on when you read this...)
...So a slightly controversial yet timely topic, especially given the Costa Rica result = England has officially finished last in group D. (Please note that I am Welsh, and given that we failed to qualify I am totally independent!)
The disappointing results from Brazil lead me to question if a more collaborative effort between Wales, Ireland, and Scotland, along with the English squad could have resulted in a stronger side? If we had been Team GB, would the results have been better, would the resource pool have been richer and could the random Scottish Guy have cheered for GB instead of Uruguay?
What are the advantages of collaboration? The fact that we are potentially stronger in a larger group is a consideration, or does that just lead to a diluted support for the team or process?
The selection stage may have enabled Team GB to select Bale from Wales... But then who else...? Northern Ireland are currently ranked 70th and are not equipped with a headline maker (apologies my Celtic cousins) however Scotland are 27th (Costa Rica are 28th so league tables are not always a good indication). Yet England remains the strongest talent pool. Does that leave the English fans feeling that they are carrying the rest of the supporters and their ambitions? Is the rest of GB simply jumping on the bandwagon?
If we transfer this to our procurement world, does collaboration give us a strong force to enable better results and leverage? Or does it reduce the effectiveness of the strongest member compared to standing alone? Let me have your thoughts (cc Roy Hodgson, or maybe Harry Redknapp, depending on when you read this...)
No comments:
Post a Comment