The biggest mistake a green committee member makes is ...

[cary lichtenstein]

Biggest mistake a greens committee member can make is arguing with the greens chairman.

2nd biggest mistake is aguing with him a second time.

It doesn't matter if you are correct, or even if your motives are 100% pure

[ForkaB]

Ahhh…Rich,what’s arachnose???
[/quote

Don, it's a condition which is VERY hard to diagnose, as it does not exist!

I fully agree with your point regarding "mutual respect" and I apologise if anything I said implied any disrespect of greenkeepers or committee members.  Both have very difficult jobs that often get too little respect as it is.  I was just trying to make an observation that agronomic matters may SEEM more simple to committee members than some of the matters they have to manage at work.  Most members have a lawn at home and not a server farm.  That's all.

[Gerry B]

My home course in Toronto is always in top condition day in and day out - have hosted many members from the top clubs in the US and abroad and always receive high praise on the superb condition of the entire course.

We don't have a greens committee  - our course superintendant is given a free reign and a healthy budget to run the show! - I guess the old proverb that the inmates should not run the asylum holds true in this case.

[Brad Klein]

It's easy to dump on green committees. Most of the time they deserve it, and I've written my share of the criticism. But one thing that's overlooked for the most part here - though Bill McBride, above, comes close to it - is that a green committee/green chairman must be an advocate for the superintendent, not only in terms of salary and overall budget but also in the form of capital improvement and management practices - equipment, timing of aerification and topdressing, tree management, that new irrigation system, and all of those other invasive practices that produce certain turf conditions, such as "firm and fast."

So yes, the green committee must work closely behind the scenes to establish what the club wants and to communicate this to the superintendent, but also to communicate back to the club what the superintendent needs for the best interests of the golf course - which, if the green committee is really doing its job, is more importrant than what any golfer(s) want. That means communication, golfer education and club politics. That's the green committee's real job, not micro-managing agronomy or the depth and color of buinker sand.

The real benefit that a green committee provides is as the advocate of a maintenance schedule that doesn't succumb to the golf calandar (i.e. "we need to aerify the first week of September, but it interferes with our Challenge Cup, so let's put it off three weeks").

[mike_malone]

 My experience as a green cmte. person is 1)Speaking from one's own experience and 2)micromanaging. My biggest frustration is that the majority does NO research or learning but still thinks their opinion is worth hearing.

    I agree that the ideal cmte. should aid back and forth communication between the super and the members.

   Informed green cmte. members can be valuable  because they may know the playability of the course better than the super or an outside expert.Interactions that bring out this knowledge are good.

[Jim_Coleman]

   The biggest problem a green committee can have is the member who thinks he knows more than everybody else because he is informed, and anyone who disagrees with him has no basis for his opinion.  Whether a tree belongs or not, whether the fairways should be cut close or not, whether the greens are too slow or not, whether a bunker should be moved or not, are all legitiamate questions with legitimate, varying points of view.  But when one member insists that he KNOWS (not believes) what is right, you have a problem.

[mike_malone]

 Mr.Coleman,
    I agree with you.If you had such a member you would have a problem.

[Dan Herrmann]

    I agree that the ideal cmte. should aid back and forth communication between the super and the members.

 

Mayday - couldn't agree more.  I can't tell you how many times I've played with members not on the cmte who had a gripe about this or that, and were totally satisfied after I explained what was in the works which I leaned, of course, from our Super.

It's all in the communication - prevents frustration and increases harmony.  

[Joel_Stewart]

  The biggest problem a green committee can have is the member who thinks he knows more than everybody else because he is informed, and anyone who disagrees with him has no basis for his opinion.  

Maybe this is me?  I started this post because of our last green committee meeting and the utter stupidity of 2 members who do no research and vote on their whims.

As for Brads discussion regarding the chairman, the chairman really controls what topics come to the green committee meetings and when to vote.  Aside from that, they can't control the vote especially when you have committee people like the ones discussed above.

[Dan Herrmann]

Joel,
One of the suprisingly cool things about being in a non-equity club...  We're the 'customers' and can advise, but the questions are ultimately decided by the professionals.

Kind of keeps us from hurting ourselves  

[W.H. Cosgrove]

We have been reviewing the condition of my home course for most of this year.

After developing a set of maintenance standards about five years ago, we were constrained by a budget system controlled by a Food and & Beverage manager.  Nice guy but very interested in protecting his own turf, which of course had nothing to do with grass.  The manager has moved on to a much better job and as a result we have fighting to reassert the power of the committee that is charged with managing the primary asset of the club.  

What does that mean to me as committee chair?  1) Obtaining a budget of adequate size to meet or exceed the standards.  2) If the budget isn't big enough, identifying and communicating where the membership can expect areas that do not meet the standards and educating them that perfect costs money.  3) Identifying areas where play is hindered by architectural additions.  We don't need an architect to remove a tree that has been allowed to impinge on the ladies tee to the point of rendering it unplayable.  and finally 4) If we manage to survive the first steps, identify and hire an architect to prepare a long range plan that prevents me from screwing up my own golf course.  

The biggest mistake a committee can make: Failing, while doing all of the above, to protect the superintendent from well meaning members bent on making unfulfillable demands?

[Mike_Young]

The biggest mistakes I see made by green comm members are:
1.  not realizing that the position of comm. member is one of service and stewardship and not superiority
2.  FEAR of implemetation that would create issues for them in the future once they are off of comm.
3.  A CYA type of mentality that is backed by consultants that create overkill in their solutions which are backed not by results but by prominence of other clubs where they have worked.  An example:  $100,000 chemical mixing area for a maintnenace building or a $55000 paint booth .  All in the name and fear of the EPA.  Comm members stating "they could shut us down"  and falling for it.   Same goes for USGA green section reports  "tell me what you need written"  These things cost clubs untold millions each year
4.  Thinking that handicap equates to architectural and agronomic intellect

[Jason Mandel]

Before or club was re-done by Bobby Weed, we were overgrown with trees, I mean we were really choked with them in a lot of places.  The funny thing is, however is that we are located on a former dairy farm!  I had always heard rumors of how the course became such a forrest, normally thet rumors dealt with one of the greens committee chairman getting a good deal on trees and planting them everywhere.

Last week, I was lucky enough to get a chance to speak to one of the members who was basically a founding member, or at least a member when we broke ground on our current location.  I really wished I had picked his brain more, but I did ask him about the tree issue.  Right away, he told me the members name and exactly what he had did.  Even with all the work done to our course and the 1,000 or so trees removed, I still see about another 100 or so "christmas style" trees that I would like to see removed.  

[Nick Pozaric]

All I can say is that I am so glad that the course where I work has no green committee or club president or any other committees or officers

[tlavin]

The biggest mistake a greens committee member can make is acting like he knows what the heck he's talking about.  The function of a greens committee is to communicate the members' satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the condition and setup of the golf course.  Greens committee members may have more knowledge about these matters than the rest of the membership, but having some familiarity with the language of agronomy and the terminology or principles of golf course architecture does not translate to a real knowledge of either.  

A greens committee member would best spend his time by attempting to gain knowledge so that his overall experience of being a member of a club is enhanced.  If you're going to spend hours walking the grounds you might as well have a passing familiarity with the work that is required to keep the premises in a playable condition.

Greens committee members are also valuable because they can defend the superintendant in their liaison role.  All too often, uninformed but voluble members tend to hold sway over important personnel decisions at private clubs and an influential greens committee can artfully press the mute button to halt harmful dialogue.

Having said all that, there is no doubt that a good greens committee can help the club spot and remove an ineffective grounds superintendant.  But they can only do that if they enlist the assistance of other experts in the field.  Hire independent experts, have them review the work of your questionable superintendant and then you can make a judgment.