I said it too. It was a Ferguson way.
But that’s not even really the issue. The issue is Ferguson was a egomaniacal autocrat.
That becomes a problem when autocrats leave organiz(s)ations because they have established themselves as the repository of all decisions. Their staff is there to support them, not the organiz(s)ation. Ther staff is not entrusted with leadership abilities nor discretion because that rests with the autocrat.
Autocrats do not care about the shape of the organiz(s)ation when they leave. They don’t care about legacy, because if the organiz(s)ation is successful when they leave, they take credit, and when it isn’t, they take comfort in the fact that it’s because they aren’t a part of it. They can’t lose, legacy-wise.
Ferguson touted “complete control” as a key leadership tenet in his speeches and writings for Harvard Business School in fact.
Forget the football — as an ORGANIZ(S)ATION, United was doomed to fail, and still is — not because of the Glazers, though their leveraged buyout has certainly weakened the pillars financially — but because of Ferguson’s use of the club as a vessel to his own ends without a thought to what it looked like after he left.
Great leaders leave organiz(s)actions in better shape than they found them. Fergusons record as a COACH is unquestioned; as a LEADER he is one of the great shams those who study how businesses operate can point to