• ****Join the YF Fantasy EFL League: HERE. ****

Is OUSP Fit For Purpose?

Is OUSP Fit For Purpose

  • Yes

  • No

  • Unsure/Undecided


Results are only viewable after voting.
Right but pretty sure they’ll have seen this 😂and could have just responded ??

This is the time these groups are actually critical and make or break their reputations . Just seems so much is wrong at the club and we are getting very few answers and very little activity to challenge that . Maybe it’s just perception but that’s about managing the message? 😳 (by both club and supporters groups)

And I’m not suggesting for one moment that being a supporters group representative is either easy or rewarding hence why I’d never go near the role. But if you do…
I get why they don't respond to @Essexyellows because he'll s**t all over any number they give him, but at the same time, you can't just ignore what seems to be a fair question
 
I get why they don't respond to @Essexyellows because he'll s**t all over any number they give him, but at the same time, you can't just ignore what seems to be a fair question
Only 20% of respondents to this poll think they’re fit for purpose (from a total number equivalent to stevensges away support)

I’d be responding with “here are our great numbers” or “here are our numbers. We are new and recognize we need more and here is the strategy to how we will remediate that” .
 
Have to say despite essexyellow coming across as mental and talking to himself, the seeming unwillingness of ousp to communicate on here is not a good look regards transparency and the perception some may already have of their role

They purport to be representative of us but don`t want to communicate with us if the question is seen as "tricky".

"Us" being their mailing list that they then post on here try and expand its engagement....... but will selective "easy"answer questions on here, despite being logged on nearly every day in one guise or another.

PS: I`m tenacious not mental. ;)
 
They purport to be representative of us but don`t want to communicate with us if the question is seen as "tricky".

"Us" being their mailing list that they then post on here try and expand its engagement....... but will selective "easy"answer questions on here, despite being logged on nearly every day in one guise or another.

PS: I`m tenacious not mental. ;)
Have you sent the email?
 
Its a weird time.

I've spoken before about my doubts around OUSP. They're pretty much the same as @Essexyellows but a bit more tempered (not sure our exec team is capable of devising a sophisticated 'divide and conquer' strategy even if they wanted to tbh). But the truth is that the club could *very* easily have formed a group with this 'supporter experience' remit in collaboration with OxVox and with Oxvox at the heart of things. They chose not to. No ill will at all towards OUSP volunteers and lots of appreciation for what you have done within the parameters of the role. In some ways the comms from OUSP have been a little more challenging to the club than OxVox messages recently. But...

Reason for this message is to stress the importance of retaining our focus as fans on engaging via OxVox wherever possible and not getting too distracted by OUSP. OxVox are in an unusual and tough position here I think. They're representing a fanbase that's pretty happy with the playing side and very appreciative of the investment by our owners. For most of our history and for most supporter trusts around the country those are the things that matter and where most of the conflict lies. Here it's not about those areas on the whole, for many of us its about the competence, values and behaviours of employed executives making poor decisions, failing to communicate and incrementally poisoning the culture of the club. My take on recent events is that OxVox have trodden deliberately softly having spoken with the chairman, been given some assurances and then used *very* measured language in public comms. This stuff involves commercial confidences, employment matters relating to individuals and the like so I'm hoping the OxVox strategy here is to be cautious but resolute if things don't improve soon. In the meantime any oxygen spent on getting cross with OUSP feels like a distraction.
 
Its a weird time.

I've spoken before about my doubts around OUSP. They're pretty much the same as @Essexyellows but a bit more tempered (not sure our exec team is capable of devising a sophisticated 'divide and conquer' strategy even if they wanted to tbh). But the truth is that the club could *very* easily have formed a group with this 'supporter experience' remit in collaboration with OxVox and with Oxvox at the heart of things. They chose not to. No ill will at all towards OUSP volunteers and lots of appreciation for what you have done within the parameters of the role. In some ways the comms from OUSP have been a little more challenging to the club than OxVox messages recently. But...

Reason for this message is to stress the importance of retaining our focus as fans on engaging via OxVox wherever possible and not getting too distracted by OUSP. OxVox are in an unusual and tough position here I think. They're representing a fanbase that's pretty happy with the playing side and very appreciative of the investment by our owners. For most of our history and for most supporter trusts around the country those are the things that matter and where most of the conflict lies. Here it's not about those areas on the whole, for many of us its about the competence, values and behaviours of employed executives making poor decisions, failing to communicate and incrementally poisoning the culture of the club. My take on recent events is that OxVox have trodden deliberately softly having spoken with the chairman, been given some assurances and then used *very* measured language in public comms. This stuff involves commercial confidences, employment matters relating to individuals and the like so I'm hoping the OxVox strategy here is to be cautious but resolute if things don't improve soon. In the meantime any oxygen spent on getting cross with OUSP feels like a distraction.
good post ^^

lack of communication (yet again) from the club, regarding important to supporters, issues such as closing ST renewals early, a new website launch and similar , never mins the possible transfer embargo/ fine/ unpaid loan fees- AND still not an official peep out of them either. Its simply not good enough

The Fans Forum *( long awaited) last season saw a short lived improvement in communication from the club, yet as soon as the euphoria following Wembley and promotion has faded the club are back to serving up the mushroom treatment to the fanbase.

*Wasnt there a promise of another FF with the Playing side of the club supposed to have happened by now?
 
From t`other thread..................

"Thank you for your email. We are happy to provide the information you requested as follows:

Current addresses 210
Open Rate 69%
Click through rate 14%

As you know, we make our newsletters and minutes publicly available and provide links to them through various social media channels, not only through Mailchimp. Since Mailchimp changed its free package we have not been actively promoting signing up for our mailing list as we will reach their address capacity. We are currently looking into alternative services that will better meet our needs."


IMHO the Club are using their own construct to gently undermine/sideline OxVox.

I know the response will be "someone from OxVox is there" but that isn`t the point, fact of the matter is the club construct has the easier/possibly preferential access to spoon feed the positive news.

Both organisations struggle to attract volunteers so have the lot under one umbrella so we (the supporters) have a single, united voice on the things that matter to us.
 
Do OUSP representatives have an opinion on whether the club is undermining oxvox with their presence ?
 
Do OUSP representatives have an opinion on whether the club is undermining oxvox with their presence ?

I've replied to this before, but it is my opinion that we enhance the work of OxVox rather than undermine it (but accept that others have a different view).

The reason I say this is we work together on a number of issues and this gives two voices at the same table during discussions with the club, but also when working with councils and other agencies in relation to the stadium. We are also able to spend more time on the day to day issues for fan engagement etc leaving OxVox to focus on the wider club governance.

And finally, nothing is done in secret. OxVox representatives attend meetings between OUSP and the club, and are copied into minutes from meetings and wider discussions. We also worked together on the recent fans forum, and are planning for another one in the coming months.

I respect the view that we could be two parts of the same team, or OxVox could cover more of the fan engagement work. But to my knowledge, OxVox have not asked for that, and it would take away the value in both groups being represented at things like the council hearings into the stadium.
 
I've replied to this before, but it is my opinion that we enhance the work of OxVox rather than undermine it (but accept that others have a different view).

The reason I say this is we work together on a number of issues and this gives two voices at the same table during discussions with the club, but also when working with councils and other agencies in relation to the stadium. We are also able to spend more time on the day to day issues for fan engagement etc leaving OxVox to focus on the wider club governance.

And finally, nothing is done in secret. OxVox representatives attend meetings between OUSP and the club, and are copied into minutes from meetings and wider discussions. We also worked together on the recent fans forum, and are planning for another one in the coming months.

I respect the view that we could be two parts of the same team, or OxVox could cover more of the fan engagement work. But to my knowledge, OxVox have not asked for that, and it would take away the value in both groups being represented at things like the council hearings into the stadium.
You might not be able to answer this but do OUSP or OxVox have the number of fans groups at other clubs across the 92? Do most clubs have just 1 or do clubs tend to have multiple groups to cover different areas?
 
I've replied to this before, but it is my opinion that we enhance the work of OxVox rather than undermine it (but accept that others have a different view).

The reason I say this is we work together on a number of issues and this gives two voices at the same table during discussions with the club, but also when working with councils and other agencies in relation to the stadium. We are also able to spend more time on the day to day issues for fan engagement etc leaving OxVox to focus on the wider club governance.

And finally, nothing is done in secret. OxVox representatives attend meetings between OUSP and the club, and are copied into minutes from meetings and wider discussions. We also worked together on the recent fans forum, and are planning for another one in the coming months.

I respect the view that we could be two parts of the same team, or OxVox could cover more of the fan engagement work. But to my knowledge, OxVox have not asked for that, and it would take away the value in both groups being represented at things like the council hearings into the stadium.
Question for you, if all OUSP members voted to disband OUSP, would it cease to exist, or is the clubs permission/agreement required for that to happen?
 
You might not be able to answer this but do OUSP or OxVox have the number of fans groups at other clubs across the 92? Do most clubs have just 1 or do clubs tend to have multiple groups to cover different areas?


This is a little of associated groups for each club. You will see that most clubs have several fan groups, and often even more that may not be formally affiliated with the FSA.
 
I've replied to this before, but it is my opinion that we enhance the work of OxVox rather than undermine it (but accept that others have a different view).

The reason I say this is we work together on a number of issues and this gives two voices at the same table during discussions with the club, but also when working with councils and other agencies in relation to the stadium. We are also able to spend more time on the day to day issues for fan engagement etc leaving OxVox to focus on the wider club governance.

And finally, nothing is done in secret. OxVox representatives attend meetings between OUSP and the club, and are copied into minutes from meetings and wider discussions. We also worked together on the recent fans forum, and are planning for another one in the coming months.

I respect the view that we could be two parts of the same team, or OxVox could cover more of the fan engagement work. But to my knowledge, OxVox have not asked for that, and it would take away the value in both groups being represented at things like the council hearings into the stadium.
Thanks for a transparent and quick response. Helpful.
 
Question for you, if all OUSP members voted to disband OUSP, would it cease to exist, or is the clubs permission/agreement required for that to happen?

OUSP represents all supporters regardless of memberships so I'm not sure the circumstances where this would happen.
 
OUSP represents all supporters regardless of memberships so I'm not sure the circumstances where this would happen.
If OUSP decided to upsticks and fall under the OxVox umbrella... simple really

So could you all vote to disband the group?
 
Thanks for a transparent and quick response. Helpful.
And I'm not trying to convince anyone. I've always said that there will be those who oppose OUSP in any form, and I respect their views. However, I know that there are many more that we/I have assisted in one way or another, that aren't on the forum or socials, and don't share their stories.
 
If OUSP decided to upsticks and fall under the OxVox umbrella... simple really

So could you all vote to disband the group?
OUSP are voluntary positions, and if individuals chose to leave that would be entirely up to them.

However, and I've answered this same question from you before, I enjoy the work that we do on the Panel and feel that collectively, and individually, make a positive difference to those who need it. So I won't be looking to disband any time soon.
 
Back
Top Bottom