Silence is a decision

Welcome to The Fixer, a weekly newsletter from The WayFinders Group. We’re organisational repair specialists who repair damage, rebuild trust, and restore performance. On Fridays, we examine unfolding corporate crises — breakdowns that reveal what happens when damage goes unrepaired.

Author

Leah Brown FRSA
February 13, 2026

In partnership with

Friday’s fiasco: when the boss becomes the crisis

This week, Sir Jim Ratcliffe - who moved to Monaco to avoid £4bn in UK tax - went on  Sky News  to complain that immigrants are 'costing too much money' and have 'colonised' the UK. He owns 27.7% of Manchester United and runs a petrochemical empire worth billions.

source: theguardian.com

The Prime Minister called Ratcliffe’s comments "offensive and wrong." Manchester's mayor, Andy Burnham, said they were "against everything for which Manchester has traditionally stood." Then Ratcliffe issued a twenty word apology:  "I am sorry that my choice of language has offended some people in the UK and Europe and caused concern". The way this was undermined by a restatement of his earlier sentiments has been explored at length in national press ever since.

Manchester United issued their own statement hours later without naming Ratcliffe but making clear they "remain deeply committed to equality, diversity and inclusion." The club celebrates Manchester as "a city that anyone can call home" whilst their co-owner complains it's been colonised. The Football Association is investigating whether Ratcliffe’s comments brought the game into disrepute.

What is Manchester United facing now?

This isn't a reputational problem the club can spin away. United's squad has players from more than a dozen countries who came here as immigrants or whose parents did. Hundreds of people from global majority backgrounds keep the club running daily. The club's own website celebrates Manchester as "a city famed for its embrace of immigrants." The Premier League calls itself "a league of nations on the pitch." 

Fan groups called Ratcliffe "a total embarrassment" and "out of touch." The Muslim Supporters' Club said his views risk "legitimising prejudice and deepening division." The Manchester United Supporters Trust said: "comments from the club's senior leadership should make inclusion easier, not harder." Burnham called Ratcliffe's comments "inaccurate, insulting, inflammatory" which calls into jeopardy the permissions United needs for the Old Trafford redevelopment project.

What would we advise Manchester United?

You can't fix Ratcliffe. But you can stop his damage destroying the club.

Acknowledgement: Your co-owner said immigrants have colonised the UK. Your squad has players from more than a dozen countries. Your staff are global. Acknowledge who has been hurt by this saga.

Apology: You didn't make the comments. But you created the situation where people have to work under someone who made them. Players training under a co-owner who thinks immigrants colonised their country. Staff wondering if they're safe. Supporters questioning whether your values mean anything. That's on you. Apologise for putting people in this position.

Accountability: Ratcliffe controls football operations. He makes decisions about players' careers. Can someone who holds those views make fair decisions about immigrant players? Answer structurally. What oversight exists? What happens if he does this again? What are the consequences? Right now the message is clear: co-owners are untouchable. Your values statement says otherwise. Fix the gap.

Amends: Your diversity commitments existed before Ratcliffe; they'll exist after. Say that explicitly. Build oversight into football decisions affecting the communities he denigrated. Create routes for people to raise concerns without career consequences. Put transparency around how decisions get made. Deal with Ratcliffe behind closed doors.

Right now, Manchester United's most talented players are quietly having conversations with their agents. Their partners are reconsidering collaboration. Their supporters are questioning whether the club's values mean anything. Every week without repair makes those conversations harder to reverse.

Know someone dealing with something like this?
Forward this newsletter to someone who needs to read it.

For chairs, CEOs and senior partners

If you're reading this thinking "we've got a version of this" - a senior figure whose public statements clash with organisational values, a leader whose conduct is creating internal tension, or someone powerful whose behaviour you're not sure how to address - you're not alone.

We've worked with family offices, public sector leaders, portfolio companies, NHS trusts, union leadership teams, charity trustees, and law firm partnerships on exactly this problem - usually called in months after the public crisis ends, when leaders realise the internal damage is still blocking decisions and driving exits.

Most leaders who contact us aren't dealing with a public scandal. They're at the point where something feels harder to name: a relationship that's changed, a conversation you keep not having, a decision about accountability that's taking longer than it should.

If you’re dealing with senior leadership whose conduct is damaging trust, the longer you wait, the more people leave and the harder the repair becomes. Reply to this email so we can help you work out what's actually broken and whether it's still repairable.

Better prompts. Better AI output.

AI gets smarter when your input is complete. Wispr Flow helps you think out loud and capture full context by voice, then turns that speech into a clean, structured prompt you can paste into ChatGPT, Claude, or any assistant. No more chopping up thoughts into typed paragraphs. Preserve constraints, examples, edge cases, and tone by speaking them once. The result is faster iteration, more precise outputs, and less time re-prompting. Try Wispr Flow for AI or see a 30-second demo.

For chief HR / people officers

If you're reading about Manchester United and thinking about your own senior leader whose conduct is undermining what you've been asked to build, you're probably also thinking about the conversation where someone told you to "manage" it.

You can't manage a governance problem with HR interventions. When someone senior enough creates the damage, your DEI strategy, your speak-up culture, your talent retention programmes don't fix it. They just become evidence of the gap between what the organisation says and what it tolerates.

We work with CHROs / CPOs who've been handed accountability for repair work that requires board-level decisions they don't control. Usually by the time they contact us, they've already tried the HR solutions. The talent is leaving anyway. The legal risk is building. And the senior leader is still untouchable.

If that's where you are, reply to this email to schedule a conversation about what's actually broken and what repair requires when the person causing the damage has power HR can't challenge.

Found this useful? Forward it to someone who should read it.