Having read all the comments about not understanding why Adam Pearson came out with his now infamous “Heels dug in” comment I thought I’d chip in with some observations I made first hand, whilst working for him during his first spell in charge of Hull City.

The first thing that struck me as odd was that upon taking over city he didn’t have a six month appraisal period and then get rid of the deadwood as I expected. Instead he kept on almost all of the staff, even those who had no skills or abilities to take the club forward in their respective roles. What became clear after a few weeks was the Adam liked to have close control of almost every aspect of the club, right down to signing off for orders of mouse mats and mugs for the club shop. He therefore kept in place middle management who accepted this over those who wanted a certain level of autonomy to get on and develop themselves in their role. This is why I wasn’t surprised when he took over FC and didn’t replace James Rule, instead giving Tony Sutton a limited number of Rule’s tasks and controlling the rest himself.

Since City I’ve worked for two other “entrepreneurs” and found that (along with AP) they have an unshakeable self-belief, which is cemented by them making some early business decisions that pay off spectacularly. This self-belief is a double edged sword however, as the result of this is that they develop what is known as a high internal “locus of control” (LOC) for positive outcomes, and an external LOC for negative outcomes. An example would be attributing successful outcomes to decisions made by them, with unsuccessful ones being attributed to others. Evidence supporting this theory are the multitude of recent comments blaming the recent performances on everything from the players not performing, to injuries, to Peter Gentle, almost absolving all blame from himself and Lee Radford, whom he appointed.

The worrying thing is that such an unshakeable belief in your own judgement causes the person to constantly ignore the evidence in front of them, believing that it will all come good in the end because they discount any other possible outcome. Such behavior has seen several famous businesses fail due to what Danny Miller coined the “Icarus Paradox” in his book of the same name. If I am correct I fear Hull FC will go the same way.

I think that is something you often see with successful people, especially at the top of a hierarchy when they're no longer obliged to listen to alternative views. Just as unsuccessful people tend to overestimate the role luck has played in their lives, the successful (naturally) tend to downplay it in their personal narrative. And the idea of a superman is more appealing or easier to accept for a lot of other people than the idea that there's a big slice of arbitrary serendipity running through events - it's the same thing that fuels conspiracy theories.
On reading your post, three examples sprang to mind - thatcher and the poll tax, Blair and WMD, and Allam and 'look at my record'. Trust in their own judgement, which they see as having been thoroughly in the past, blinds them to evidence pointing in the other direction.
I don't for one second think Pearson has 'lost it' like that. But looking back at the thread somebody dragged up from 2011, that sort of stuff isn't going to help ground a fella. And really somebody close to him needs to point out the flaws in his 'Gentle's fault' story, as they're obvious even to people who want to think the best of AP.
The other side of the coin, of course, is that with just one more good performance, you'd have won the cup within 2 years of his arrival and I'm sure he'd still be 'the man'. He just needed a bit more luck at a key moment.

Having no interest in the football I don't know all the facts but didn't Pearson have a reputation for sacking managers? If they are managers he employed it sort of blows everything said in the OP out of the water.

hull daily fail picture of radford .... does that sign behind him say doughnut ??

My take on this, having just read Radford's `we must all protect Pearsons investment' garbage. He's a crawler/yes man.

The thing is most clubs can only dream of filling 20,000 seats, we can do it after third from bottom and then languishing at the bottom of the table this term. But that sort of support will not last long if they keep serving up the absolute garbage they did on Thursday.
AP has the opportunity to build an amazing club with an amazing fan base. And to be honest he is making a total balls of it, and once them people walk away it is twice as hard to get them to return.
I feel AP will keep Radford, and we will be bottom four. We should stay in SL, but when his pass sales have dropped beyond recognition and it starts to hit his pocket, then he will realise the magnitude of leaving LR in charge

While I'm not entirely convinced, I think the counterpoint would be that this level of confidence isn't something most people are born with - it develops as people experience success and claim ownership of it, assigning it more and more to their inspiration, intelligence or intuition, and in the most extreme cases, infallibility.

Having also read this boring and cringeworthy piece I couldn't agree more with you.
Blaming yet again the players for all our woes and deflecting the blame and being in total denial about his own ability in order to save his job for me shows the true measure of this man now. I'm not one for personal insults but no wonder the team don't want to play for this guy would you?

He's lost the respect and trust of many a fan and probably the team now with this constant criticism of them in order to save his own skin. How can he not see that he's tearing this club apart from the on field performances to the ever decreasing and thoroughly frustrated fan base the true heart of any club.

He is making this whole situation worse and could save a lot of face and respect what little there is left by just resigning.

We have a squad that I think could perform better and make the 8 with a decent coach at the helm but that's never going to happen with Radfords constant squirming and ear bending of Pearson trying to justify his own position and vindicate his abysmal performance and record.

After a few pages of lavish praise for Pearson on that 2011 thread, there's a debate about whether he is/was doing the right thing in retaining James Rule. There was a sentiment that whatever Pearson decided would be right, and Pearson making the decision would be evidence of that, so no need to worry either way.
A bit extreme, but perhaps so too is the worst-casing we're seeing now. His Club Hull philosophy isn't an inherently a bad one. it's clearly not going well so far, but corners can be turned, and there's still a possibility that holding on a little longer will see the first green shoots push through the manure you're currently enduring. He's not infallible, but that doesn't mean he's definitely wrong. Having come this far, I reckon he'll stick with it for a few more weeks and hope your attacking play clicks. From his pov, that remains, for now, the best option imo.

It depends upon the reason for hiring the said manager in the first place. If Pearson was advised by someone to hire them then it would be easy for him to rationalise that the advice was wrong and get rid of the manager as a result. This is exactly the same situation as paying off all the players hired by McRae and Gentle, they were not his decisions so he bears no responsibility for them.