The error that could define F1 2017

Other than another U-turn on regulations by the FIA and the Formula 1 Strategy Group, the biggest thing that happened around the German Grand Prix was the departure of Ferrari technical director James Allison.

Everyone in F1 passes on their sympathies to James, who lost his wife just after this year's Australian Grand Prix. He has three children back in England and has been totally honest with himself that they take priority over Ferrari in Italy.

But I don't think it will be too long before we see him snapped up by an English team, which would give him the opportunity to work in the domain he has dedicated his life to - provided, of course, that's something he wants to happen.

One big question is why Ferrari couldn't at least come up with a proposition that would allow him to continue with the team, at least in the short term, while accommodating any personal requirements.

Following the departure of Allison it has promoted from within, after all, so with a bit of lateral thinking I'm sure there was a way to make this work. James would then not be involved with a competitor and could still contribute his considerable skills, even if not on the same basis.

This is a very difficult time for Ferrari to be making such a major change. It is already trailing Mercedes and increasingly also Red Bull in the current pecking order, and needs to understand and recover that gap while also preparing for the 2017 rules.

This season was supposed to be a closely-matched Mercedes vs Ferrari head to head. That hasn't happened, and making the wrong moves now could mean it will be some time before it does. Ferrari in flux has big implications for the shape of F1 next year.

Allison's exit raises big questions about how Ferrari operates. I've heard rumours that Ferrari chairman Sergio Marchionne wasn't a fan because James was clever enough not to be bullied by him into unrealistic situations and was happy to voice his opinion.

After all, why would someone with little or no experience of F1 want to listen to someone like James, with 25 years of experience and a reputation as one of the best technical minds in the paddock?

So, in a nutshell, there we have what has been wrong with Ferrari since the days of Michael Schumacher, Jean Todt and Ross Brawn came to an end.

Jean was extremely good at keeping Luca di Montezemolo, then in charge of Ferrari, from interfering in the technical side of the F1 team. That allowed Ross to run the technical and engineering elements and get on with the important job.

Along with the services of Schumacher, who was Ferrari's undisputed number one driver, that allowed the team to get the results.

The big question to answer when asking what happens when you part company with your technical director is exactly what does the role involve and what is the gap that now needs filling?

That has become a bit cloudy over the past decade, what with the introduction of titles like chief technical officer and chief engineering officer! But when the technical director role works well, it's the same as it has always been: someone with a good gut understanding of what makes a racing car both fast and confidence-inspiring for the driver.

They don't necessarily have to be the best personnel manager there is, or the most organised. You can find people with these qualities from any part of the engineering industry, and it is their job to put together the personnel, procedures, working practices, design communication and create the motivation required for a large group of people to be a successful and cohesive operation.

The technical director has to have a vision and the ability to see the whole jigsaw of how an F1 car fits together to get the best out of all areas and then extract the performance each and every race weekend.

That doesn't come from a spreadsheet. Yes, there is room for engineering proven concepts, but that balanced with the good gut feel for the car concept still plays a big part in how a technical director focuses a team's development direction.

And when it comes to realising the potential of that, stability is everything. It can take years to evolve that stability but Ferrari just keeps making changes before anything has time to pan out.

Looking at Ferrari's performance over the past few years, since the new 1.6-litre turbocharged V6 hybrid power units were introduced in 2014, the numbers say it all.

Taking its fastest lap of the weekend against the fastest overall as a percentage (that gives each circuit equal weighting in a way that using time gaps wouldn't), averaged out over the season, we get the following figures:

2014: +1.276%
2015: +0.703%
2016: +1.198% (after 12 races)

During this season, the best performance was in Canada, where Ferrari was +0.244%, whereas the worst was in Austria, +2.914%. So there's a big spread in circuits that, in reality, are not actually that different in car set-up. Both require high top speeds, good traction and stable braking.

This year has been one of crisis for Ferrari, with the added pressure of the pre-season talk about fighting for the world championship. But when you consider what has happened to Allison personally, it's no surprise the season has somewhat fallen apart given circumstances were against him, particularly in a team that operates like Ferrari does.

For the new man, Mattia Binotto, there is a mountain to climb. And on the way, he will have to deal with politics that he will never have contemplated existed before.

There will be big decisions too. Does he continue to work with the building blocks James has put in place, or does he flex his muscles and kick things off in a different direction? Or will he just be an interim technical director until they find someone else?

Binotto is clearly very accomplished at what he does. He has been at Ferrari since 1995, when he joined as a test-engine engineer, rising to become chief operating officer of the power unit side in 2013. So he's very much an engine man.

With major changes coming for 2017, that will affect the overall aerodynamic concept of the car more than anything has done since 2009. Someone with an aero background leading the design direction will be vitally important.

But it's too late for that now because anyone of the relevant standing in F1 will be under contract. Even if Ferrari did manage to convince somebody to agree to put their head on the Maranello chopping block and go to a team that appears from the outside to be in disarray, they will be put on gardening leave by their current employer for a minimum of six months. Their arrival at Ferrari will be far too late to influence the 2017 car at all, or perhaps even the '18 one.

As for those working in the Ferrari design team, they will spend a reasonable amount of time looking over their shoulders.

This sort of sudden change always creates a period of uncertainty, which will no doubt impact short-term developments.

They will be as confused as the outside world is. Is the new technical director there for the long term, or is there someone else waiting in the wings who will change things again?

This can all have a real impact on the way the team works, and results on track.

I'm afraid to say that until Ferrari puts greater emphasis on stability and gives 100% long-term backing to those it has entrusted to achieve success, it will continue to be the team we see today. Up and down like a yo-yo is a simple way to explain it.

Harvey Postlethwaite, who was Ferrari's technical director on a couple of occasions, once gave me some very wise advice.

He told me that if I ever go to work for Ferrari, I should take the business card I would be given on the first day and write how much the team was paying me on the back of it and put it in the desk drawer.

When it all becomes too much, open the drawer, look at the back of the card, put it away again and just get on with it...