Role Models?

[Doug Braunsdorf]

I think Kyle's watching too many K-Fed and Eminem videos down in Florida.  

Come home, Kyle, we miss you

[Mike_Young]

It doesn't sound like Eagle Scout talk if you ask me  

How many Eagle scouts on this board?

[wsmorrison]

Me, I got to Star rank but really only liked going camping.  I stopped doing the requirements to move on.  

Badges?  I don't need no stinkin' badges!

[TEPaul]

I might be the only young American who couldn't get into the Boy Scouts or the Eagle Scouts or that kind of stuff back then.

My Dad took me to some of those things but I proposed that it should be War Exercises with real darts and tracer bullets and shit and not all that Goodie-Two-Shoes crap those organizations were into. The Den Brother or whoever it was asked me if I was recommending war GAMES, and I said Hell No Brother, I'm recommending real war here.

He just told my Dad to get me the hell outta there and never let me come back. They were all a bunch of pussies with their little neckerchiefs and shit! Those organizations were totally unrealistic back then, in my opinion. Back in those days there were all kinds of Communists and Ex-Nazis floating around and you just had to be prepared to gouge their eyes out at a moment's notice.

[Mark_Fine]

Tommy,
As you say, that is part of my point; the restoration movement has been lead by example.  Call those clubs who were leading role models, leaders, precedent setters, …, they set an example and it influenced others to do the same.

And yes each club should have its own identity.  But often they look to other clubs as Tom Doak said, the “Alpha dogs” to help them shape it.  No one here said that this is right or wrong.  It is just a fact of life.  

Scott,
Looking over your shoulder is a good analogy.  As I said above and you said as well, many clubs need help shaping their identity and they look to the leaders to see what they are doing.  Human nature.  

Guy,
Thanks for the comments.  I was hoping this thread would get people thinking.  Your point about your club being “constantly reviewed by our peers and methodologies are copied” is once again what I am getting at.

Tom Doak,
Your statement below is pretty clear:

“The general role of top golf clubs being looked to as models for others in the area is certainly true, architecturally as well as for maintenance trends.“

Maybe the next question to ask is, "Do (or should) the top clubs care?"

Chris,
Excellent statement:

"I am not saying that leaders in industry are responsible for other's mistakes that they may make in trying to emulate their heroes, but the leaders should not be so callous as to think that their actions either go unnoticed or are without consequence.”

Jim said something similar:

“Seems to me that leading clubs need to realize the effect they have on other clubs.”

Tom Paul,

You said:

“I'm certainly not saying that some clubs aren't role models---some definitely are.  What I'm saying is clubs that emulate those role-model clubs and make mistakes in doing so have only themselves to blame.”

Yes clubs need to be held accountable for their own decisions.  But as I and many others here have tried to explain, the “Alpha dogs” actions do have a big influence on how those decisions by others are shaped.  Their actions set examples and precedents and many try to follow.  

Mike,
You stated:

“guys that would be solid business people look at their golf course in an entirely different light.”

I think you are correct about this.   My approach to clubs is very business like.  Right or wrong, maybe this method will help change some of this as I have a different background than most people in this field.   I see golf clubs/courses as essentially a type of business entity that needs to be understood and managed properly just like any other.  Judging by the number that are closing and/or struggling, maybe “they should look at their golf course in an entirely different light.”  I sure don’t have all the answers, but I do have a certain perspective.  

If the tread doesn't get derailed, maybe it will continue to invoke some good discussion.

Mark

[TEPaul]

"But as I and many others here have tried to explain, the “Alpha dogs” actions do have a big influence on how those decisions by others are shaped.  Their actions set examples and precedents and many try to follow."

Mark:

I don't think you need to explain anything like that to anyone on here.

The point is if anything is to be done about it postively trying to convince those clubs you call role models to spend less and not do some of the thngs they want to do is just not how to correct the problem of other clubs emulating them.

The place to go to correct the problem is the clubs that are emulating those role models. I think you realize that as well as anyone on here, you're just not willing to admit it for some reason.  

[ChasLawler]

Yes clubs need to be held accountable for their own decisions.  But as I and many others here have tried to explain, the “Alpha dogs” actions do have a big influence on how those decisions by others are shaped.  Their actions set examples and precedents and many try to follow.  

Mark,
What specifically would you suggest the "Alpha Dogs" do to be more responsible?

[JESII]

Yes clubs need to be held accountable for their own decisions.  But as I and many others here have tried to explain, the “Alpha dogs” actions do have a big influence on how those decisions by others are shaped.  Their actions set examples and precedents and many try to follow.  

Mark,
What specifically would you suggest the "Alpha Dogs" do to be more responsible?

That question sort of cuts to the heart of it, doesn't it? tom Paul has a post about 17 or 18 in the CBM thread that touches on his feelings about this issue, but it seems pretty far fetched today.

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
We did need to clarify that because at first it appeared that some totally disagreed that clubs could be role models, etc. (would you like me to highlight some earilier quotes)  

Cabell,
You ask a good question.  Maybe before trying to suggest an answer we address the next question which is much more subjective:  

"Do (or should) the top clubs care that they are being viewed as examples, role models, precedent setters,... ?"  And this question might be followed by, if they do care, how should that impact what they do?  Remember, top clubs do many positive things so please don't just focus on the negative.  This is not just about spending money.  It could be the opposite.  

I think one of the best "postive" examples of "Do what I say and don't do what I do", was a video put out by the USGA on the U.S. Open set-up for Pinehurst #2.  It would be worth showing to many clubs so they understand what it takes to get a course in that kind of playing condition.  This goes back once again to education.  Cabell, maybe this is part of the answer to your question.  

I will stress again though (and I realize some will disagree) that when a top club takes an action, they should be at least cognizant of the impact it might have on other clubs.  In this regard, I think Chris stated it best:

""I am not saying that leaders in industry are responsible for other's mistakes that they may make in trying to emulate their heroes, but the leaders should not be so callous as to think that their actions either go unnoticed or are without consequence.”


 

[TEPaul]

Mark:

I don't think we should go back and ask a bunch of hypothetical questions first and try to answer them before getting to the question above.

You started this thread and obviously you must know what you mean by it so why don't you just answer the question above from Cabell Ackerly?

"Mark,
What specifically would you suggest the "Alpha Dogs" do to be more responsible?"

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
You are reading into things too much.  This is a discussion group and the thead was meant to discuss what I thought might be an interesting topic.  

Maybe it would be best for Cabell to start a new thread as I do think he has a good question.  

By the way, I did give one example of the USGA and their set up for the U.S. Opens.  This could be an example of an "Alpha Dog".  In this case, the USGA felt it was important to explain what it takes to prepare for this event and that maybe you shouldn't try to do this at home    To me this at least showed that they realized and cared that they might be setting a (very expensive and unrealistic) precedent that others were trying to follow.  Do you agree?

[TEPaul]

"By the way, I did give one example of the USGA and their set up for the U.S. Opens.  This could be an example of an "Alpha Dog"."

Mark:

The USGA is not a top-flight golf club, far from it in fact.

So that's not much of an appropriate example or answer to Cabell Ackerly's question which is a pretty fundamental question on this thread's subject that you started. But if you don't want to answer it so be it.    

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
You are correct the USGA is not, but they do set up golf courses and golf courses try to emulate those set ups so I thought it might be an example.  

Cabell's question needs answers and I will give it more thought.  Do you have an answer or suggestion?  Could one answer be more communication about what they do and don't do at turf conferences, in articles, at seminars,...?  

[JESII]

Mark,

Of the clubs you deal with, do any of the non-"Alpha Dogs" actively seek out communication, information or advice from the "Alpha Dogs"? If so, what is the response? If not, why not?

[Mark_Fine]

Jim,
Many do seek advice/information and many ask “what is so and so doing” and “why don’t we do what so and so is doing”.  This covers the whole gamit whether it be taking down trees or planting them, expanding greens or leveling greens, adding or removing bunkers, type of sand, widening or narrowing fairways, upgrading irrigation systems, doing master plans,...and so on.  You can see how if a club doesn’t get good (or should I say appropriate) advice, they can end up down the wrong path.  

Club to club networking is very prevalent.  But if you think about it, this popular business strategy of “best practices and/or scouting out the competition” is very common in any type of business.  I’ve used it often in my past and present business endeavors.  Better to learn from what others have already done and apply the best of it to your own business.  The key is to figure out what the best is and what is right for you.  

On the positive side, I saw this networking and sharing/comparing practices strategy in action up and down the East coast two years ago as Superintendents scrambled to learn all they could from their peers as to how best to tackle the various diseases, etc. that were threatening their golf courses.  Ask any superinendent how important these relationships were/are and they will tell you.  As you know, this networking and comparing of practices at club to club happens all the time.  Clubs are competing for golfers/members just like businesses are competing for customers.   In reality they are not much different (again part of my initial post).  

[JESII]

Mark,

You first paragraph in that post seems to be implying that these (for lack of a better term right now) copycat clubs are asking you for the information and advice about what the Alpha clubs are doing. That's not my question. The rest of your post touches on my point and should shed light on my opinion of this idea of yours. If the 'copycat' clubs are actually contacting the Alpha clubs at the superintendent and maybe green chairman level they should be fully aware of the benefits, consequences and challenges of anything they do to follow suit.

At that level there is no "competition" for members. They empathize with each other and do what they can to help out. If a superintendent and green committee in the Philadelphia area decide they want to pursue the really intense firm and fast maintenance preparation HVCC strives for, it would be a bloody mistake for them not to contact Scott Anderson and pick his brain a bit. When they do not do that and they get in trouble with weather or something, who's to blame? Is it HVCC?

Do you think it's just a coincidence that former GE executives get hired into top positions in all industries? A company like Hewlett Packard did not set out to be a "Role Model", they set out to run their business as well as they possibly could. In hindsight they did it very well and Mr. Hewlett was afforded the opportunity to reflect upon that with pride. I think a fair comparison in terms of golf would be Bob Ford and his 'family tree' among the club pro ranks.

[Mark_Fine]

Jim,
Good points and I appreciate you taking the time to contribute.  As you know, information comes to clubs in all different ways.  The super to super network is just one of them.  Egos between clubs plays a big role as well - "why is their club in better shape then our club?"  You must have heard that before.  

I will say though that there is camaraderie but there is also competition at all levels between clubs.  Similar clubs fight for similar members/golfers.  I trust you get involved in different club meetings; haven't you ever seen a club try to justify what they are doing or spending by suggesting so and so is doing the same?  

Regarding Hewlett Packard; here is what is/was at the heart of their core values since the inception of the company:

i) Technical contribution to fields in which we participate ("We exist as a corporation to make a contribution")
ii) Respect and opportunity for HP people, including the opportunity to share in the success of the enterprise
iii) Contribution and responsibility to the communities in which we operate
iv) Affordable quality for HP customers
v) Profit and growth as a means to make all of the other values and objectives possible

I'm not sure anyone sets out to be a "role model".  But many end up there and one of my points was that there is responsibility that goes with it.  Do you disagree?  

[Garland Bayley]

...
I think Hewitt's remarks were remarkably short-sighted as well. If his model and ideals where so revolutionary, Carly Fiorna wouldn't have run the company into the ground. It's the person that makes the difference, not the model.

Kyle,

Stick to golf.

Whatever, Carly did, she didn't run the company into the ground. If she did, it would not have been possible for HP to recently pass IBM as the big "blue" of technology. (Both companies use blue logos.)

What Bill Hewlett was talking about was the treatment of employees and a culture that valued the employee for their knowledge and ability. That culture has spread through the high tech industry, and Mr. Hewlett has a right to be proud.

Perhaps you prefer the Andrew Carnegie model of "corporate culture"?
 

[TEPaul]

"Cabell's question needs answers and I will give it more thought.  Do you have an answer or suggestion?  Could one answer be more communication about what they do and don't do at turf conferences, in articles, at seminars,...?"

Mark:

As you know I don't really think it is the responsibility of these "role model" clubs or clubs you're now calling "Alpha Dogs". You're the one who is suggesting they have some responsibility. Cabell is asking you to give us some examples of what that responsibility would be exactly.

Do I have any suggestions?

Yes, and I've put them on this thread a number of times. I think clubs that are thinking of emulating "role model" or "Alpha Dog" clubs like Merion should try to talk to a guy like Matt Shaeffer.

And I think Matt has shown responsibility in speaking to people who seek him out for this purpose.

Matt does speak at conferences and such about this stuff. Did you not go to the one last winter at Dupont put on by the USGA? There were probably about 300 people there---superintendents, golf chairmen etc .

Matt's talk was really good, probably the best of the day by far.  

[Kyle Harris]

...
I think Hewitt's remarks were remarkably short-sighted as well. If his model and ideals where so revolutionary, Carly Fiorna wouldn't have run the company into the ground. It's the person that makes the difference, not the model.

Kyle,

Stick to golf.

Whatever, Carly did, she didn't run the company into the ground. If she did, it would not have been possible for HP to recently pass IBM as the big "blue" of technology. (Both companies use blue logos.)

What Bill Hewlett was talking about was the treatment of employees and a culture that valued the employee for their knowledge and ability. That culture has spread through the high tech industry, and Mr. Hewlett has a right to be proud.

Perhaps you prefer the Andrew Carnegie model of "corporate culture"?
 

Garland,

My father worked for Digital Equipment/Compaq/HP for 20 years. I am familiar with HP's culture.

[JESII]

I'm not sure anyone sets out to be a "role model".  But many end up there and one of my points was that there is responsibility that goes with it.  Do you disagree?  

I think I might. I think you become a "role model" because of the result of certain practices, and the succesful implementation of those practices...some examples are listed in your post above about HP...if it's your opinion that the people or entities that work and earn their way to this higher echelon and find themselves being admired owe anyone anything I would probably disagree.

[Garland Bayley]

...
I think Hewitt's remarks were remarkably short-sighted as well. If his model and ideals where so revolutionary, Carly Fiorna wouldn't have run the company into the ground. It's the person that makes the difference, not the model.

Kyle,

Stick to golf.

Whatever, Carly did, she didn't run the company into the ground. If she did, it would not have been possible for HP to recently pass IBM as the big "blue" of technology. (Both companies use blue logos.)

What Bill Hewlett was talking about was the treatment of employees and a culture that valued the employee for their knowledge and ability. That culture has spread through the high tech industry, and Mr. Hewlett has a right to be proud.

Perhaps you prefer the Andrew Carnegie model of "corporate culture"?
 

Garland,

My father worked for Digital Equipment/Compaq/HP for 20 years. I am familiar with HP's culture.

I think the model has made a difference. How about your dad?

[Kyle Harris]

...
I think Hewitt's remarks were remarkably short-sighted as well. If his model and ideals where so revolutionary, Carly Fiorna wouldn't have run the company into the ground. It's the person that makes the difference, not the model.

Kyle,

Stick to golf.

Whatever, Carly did, she didn't run the company into the ground. If she did, it would not have been possible for HP to recently pass IBM as the big "blue" of technology. (Both companies use blue logos.)

What Bill Hewlett was talking about was the treatment of employees and a culture that valued the employee for their knowledge and ability. That culture has spread through the high tech industry, and Mr. Hewlett has a right to be proud.

Perhaps you prefer the Andrew Carnegie model of "corporate culture"?
 

Garland,

My father worked for Digital Equipment/Compaq/HP for 20 years. I am familiar with HP's culture.

I think the model has made a difference. How about your dad?

His income has made quite a difference in my family's life.

[Kyle Harris]

I've been thinking on this thread for some time now. I fear we may be blending the normative argument as to should a club consider its impact on other clubs based on its decision making as opposed to the objective argument of a club sharing and providing information as to the motivation, process and implementation of their projects.

I am a strong advocate for an increase in transperency for all golf course operations (mainly concerning maintenance and arhictecture practices) as a way to increase general knowledge of "fringe" maintenance practices and to promote a better understanding of the environmental impacts that a golf course has. No matter the privacy of the golf course, a golf course impacts the environment surrounding it and for that purpose, the club must consider the impact.

However, when it comes to the specific "golf" impact of a decision, and the idea that a decision made by my club may impact a decision made by a completely independent club elsewhere, I cannot agree that the first club should consider any impact in the area.

In our area, when Lookaway Golf Club opened in May 1999, the presence of fescue rough on the course lead other public courses to suddenly maintain such roughs on their own. The impact was huge, especially on the first hole of our venerable local muni, Warminster's Five Ponds, where players looking for lost balls after the first tee shot in full view of the starter, and the next three groups waiting on the tee became a common and frustrating sight.

Did the golf course management decide to remove the fescue, despite the blindingly obvious? No.

Is Lookaway responsible for this decision? No.

The problem wasn't one of Lookaway setting a poor example, but of Five Ponds following an example that wasn't set for its particular venue. This poor decision making is not the responsibility of the club first implementing, but instead the club following.

[Mark_Fine]

Jim,
It is a tough question and the answer surely varies from "role model to role model".  Does a Tiger Woods owe golf anything?  I'm not sure his position on this, but he does give back.  Couldn't the same question be asked of a noted golf club?  

If you are a club for example that is blessed with a great design by a Ross or a  ___, does the club owe anything or have any inherent responsibility (even to those outside its membership)?  Ask the same question of a company that has a high stature in a local community?  Does it have any responsibility to the community as well as its employees?  

I have asked questions like these numerous times to different people at various clubs and got a mix of answers.  Probably the most common answer (at a high profile club) is that many feel an obligation to protect and preserve their club to the best of their ability not only for themselves but for future generations to enjoy.  Maybe next time I will ask the question if they feel any obligation to those not associated with their club.  I will try that in the coming weeks and report back.

Kyle,
Your statement is a good one that you are a:

"strong advocate for an increase in transperency for all golf course operations (mainly concerning maintenance and arhictecture practices) as a way to increase general knowledge of "fringe" maintenance practices and to promote a better understanding of the environmental impacts that a golf course has."

Maybe this is part of the answer to the question that Cabell raised.  

I agree with you about Lookaway in that is was not their fault that other clubs followed.  But clubs do follow other clubs, especially the top clubs, as the perception is that they know what they are doing.  Tree work is one good example.