AUSTRALIAN Wool Innovation must be unified, writes BRIAN CLANCY
It's make-or-break time for the crisis-riddled Australian Wool Innovation.
- READ MORE
- AWI under siege
This time an impatient, angry and divided wool-grower electorate won't tolerate another report, another board or - more importantly - another "organisational" restructure.
Despite what AWI chairman Wal Merriman will tell us and despite what many AWI sympathisers want to think and don't want to hear, AWI has big problems.
It has just lost its chief executive Brenda McGahan, who was hailed as the industry saviour in marketing.
It has two other major executive vacancies - manager of research and manager of marketing. In the current crisis, finding the right and willing candidates will be very difficult.
AWI also has a bitterly divided board or as Ms McGahan described it "a very full-on board".
Discipline regarding board directors speaking against board policy is non-existent.
Several directors appear to have conflicts of interest.
Several directors have opted to become involved in AWI's day-to-day operations.
Why does AWI send three directors to talk to its potential global "partners"?
Was this not a task for staff?
It is no surprise this creates staff dissatisfaction, hence the resignations and high staff turnover.
Because of the boardroom crisis, many of AWI's marketing projects this year have been stalled, delayed or still await approval.
Wool is no stranger to crises.
Ten years ago the flock and wool clip were nearly twice what they are today.
Prime lambs were returning good money or 300c/kg-plus but still short of today's peaks.
Today that balance has shifted dramatically.
Wool producers now talk of wool either as a part of the sheep income equation or as a by-product.
Despite this shift, the national farm-gate returns from wool are still well in front of prime lamb.
Wool-grower tolerance to any troubled levy-funded organisation is growing very thin. There will be no new organisation for wool research and marketing.
If growers want to see AWI survive they must demand board-room discipline. It is no longer sufficient for AWI chairman Wal Merriman to say he won't be "gagging" any director.
Diversity of opinion is essential, but that diversity must be kept within the board room.
Those directors who won't agree to boardroom solidarity must resign.
Last year, AWI invested more than $800,000 in WoolPoll to canvass the opinions of its shareholder levy-payers about the next triennium of marketing strategies and levy rate.
For directors to disregard the direction or opinion of its shareholders is a total dereliction of their duties.
- Brian Clancy is The Weekly Times wool writer.
