Ikon founder: I don’t want to talk about why we sacked Johns
Ikon’s new chairman Simon White has refused to discuss the departure of former national CEO Dan Johns and rejected speculation about the media agency’s practices involving online trading.
AdNews had suggested that the departure of national CEO Dan Johns and other senior staff such as Ellie Rogers and Leonie Kerley may have followed their pushing for greater transparency.
“(The allegations) are not true. We are absolutely transparent,” White – who co-founded the agency more than a decade ago before selling to STW – told Mumbrella.
“Ikon is transparent, our ultimate objective is to get the best possible cost per conversion for any sales for our clients. We are paid on performance to deliver clients results. It’s irrelevant.
The old ‘I’ll show you this hand whilst I hope you’re not looking at the other’ trick… this type of thing just isn’t doing anyone from STW / Ikon any favours. Esp when Ikon’s Chairman is so evasive and he’s banging on about transparency.
I just feel for the clients.
What seems deplorable is that great management was pushed out by STW and they were lining up the replacement all the while.
“We are totally transparent, but we are not going to tell you what happened”…
So Ikon is absolutely transparent but won’t talk about why Dan left. In addition Dan is a great person and Simon is happy to help him in the future.
In summary Ikon is transparent; just not transparent enough to actually be transparent nor to outline why Dan is great but not great enough to still be working at Ikon.
“We needed to have a new direction in this company that focuses back on more on the what we do for a living which is how we sell our clients products,”
Like talking in riddles? Crystal clear.
Very evasive. Heres a company that has won major awards, has performed profitably for its shareholders for years, and three of its talented senior executives get walked (two of them after 8 or more years of service) without an explaination to them or the remaining staff ? Everyone including the current staff are still in the dark. Smoke screens and Mirrors from STW it seems. Perception is reality.
” “We needed to have a new direction in this company that focuses more on what we do for a living which is how we sell our clients’ products,” said White.
When asked to clarify what this meant, White said that he had to go, and ended the interview.”
I’d say he’s pretty clearly clarified what he meant – get back to servicing the clients to the highest possible level first, and the culture will follow. Perhaps the previous team lost sight of the goal (client excellence) when they became overly concerned with the peripheral dream (staff happiness).
A trifle harsh peut-etre, Marteau?
What’s Simon being evasive about?
Surely it isn’t ethical to discuss in public the reasons why a senior executive leaves a company, unless it is a publicly owned company of course.
Perhaps the journalist could clarify if the headline is just that, or an actual quote from Simon? If it is indeed the latter, then perhaps therein lies another story.
As for the final comment, many people bring interviews to a close because they have other commitments – an interview with Adnews, AFR or The Australian perhaps? Why is the reporting of that relevant to this story, unless the journalist is trying to imply something that maybe isn’t there…..?
Justin, are you related perchance?
Were the clients really unhappy ? perhaps change the words “client excellence” to “STW profitability”. Its one thing to change the CEO – another to clean out senior execs. Why would you get rid of a talented Digital Director in this way ?
@ Unf, yeah right.
@ A harsh trifle…. Ummmm, so you think they shouldn’t have to come clean unless they are a public company . . . they ARE a public company.
@Secret Squirrel STW Communications Group is indeed a publicly listed company, but IKON isn’t’. As respected as Dan and the other executives that have left are, their departure and the reasons for their departure would not have a material impact on the holding company share price.
obviously they can’t discuss the departure for legal reasons …
And for all those baying for transparency … pause to consider … when was the last time any business discussed the reasons any senior member of staff departed (unless it was just to go to another role)
(Edited by Mumbrella for legal reasons)
Ikon has always been the best place in the industry to work, and their salaries have always been way out of line with all other agencies. You don’t need to be a genius to work out that there were some less than transparent business practices going on. Would be good for them to come clean…
@A harsh trifle So you think when one of the best performing agencies in STW has its management punted, it isn’t material? Surely an outcome will be lost clients, and as a shareholder I want to know what is going on.
@ Secret Squirrel Of course, a potential outcome of the events of recent weeks may be lost clients. Equally a potential outcome under new management may be growth in new clients, increased revenue, improved margins, and share price performance. If past performance is any indicator then James Greet’s record is something to be optimistic about for all IKON / STW stakeholders.
Besides, I’m sure that as an STW shareholder, there are appropriate avenues for asking pertinent questions of STW management as to the reasons for senior executive departures . I’m just not convinced that this forum is one of them.
@ Secret Squirrel A cursory glance at the STW Group daily share price over the past 6 months would suggest that your investment has been a very good one (depending of course on when you became a shareholder), even allowing for the blip over the past two weeks, which I’ll admit may well have been a direct (material result) of the recent shenanigans at IKON. I’d suggest, however, that the bounce back in share price since Monday’s announcement of James’s appointment may support my previous assertion that the business will be in good hands moving forwards.