Role Models?

[Kyle Harris]

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.  

Mark,

Do you feel that the name of any potential consulting architects may have something to do with that?

I'd imagine if a local club brings in a Fazio or Rees, that other clubs may attach more legitimacy to the project and attempt to "mimick" the work done without paying out the nose for the consultancy.

Have you seen any examples in your own work?

How's Bucknell coming along? That course fascinates me, was a nice little day trip from PSU.

My advocacy for transperancy in maintenance operations may boil down to the survival of the game. I think that the golf industry must do a better job in policing, controlling, and minimizing the impact golf maintenance has on the environment and the first step in this process is to get memberships to begin to understand that impact.

[Mark_Fine]

Kyle,
I’m sure having an architect like those you mentioned adds legitimacy in the minds of some clubs.  It definitely garners attention and interest and some mimicking as you call it.  However, whether having an architect like that is the right call for the club is another question.  That depends on the club and what they want done.  There is a big difference between working on a new course vs. an existing one, especially one with a long history.

As to whether I have seen any examples in my own work; I don’t know that I have in that regard.  Clearly if one club nearby is doing work, others nearby pay attention and it often leads to an elevated interest or nudge to do something themselves.  I don't necessarily know if they try to do things on the cheap and save the consultancy expense but I'm sure it happens.  Most recognize the value in the long run of getting some help/advice.

Bucknell is coming along fine.  Pending funding approval which should happen soon, we expect to start some of the work this fall.  The bulk of the project is tied to a large university capital fund raising campaign.  Hopefully it will be successful and the full project will kick off soon thereafter.  It is a very exciting project.  

I like your advocacy for transparency in maintenance operations.  Like anything there are pros and cons but I see mostly positives.  

[JESII]

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.

Mark,

Does Tiger have a responsibility to his fellow tour professionals? Does Hewlett Packard have a responsibility to IBM? These are more appropriate questions within the context of your premise through this thread.

Asking whether Tiger has a responsibility to the game of golf is a wholly different question. In that light I would answer, no, Pine Valley or Merion do not owe Lehigh anything. However, and you likely know better than I, either of those clubs would probably be happy to help in any way they could from a maintenance perspective.

[Mark_Fine]

Jim,
Good points but as you know there are always exceptions.  Didn't Mercedes Benz develop anti-lock brakes and provide the technology at no cost to other car companies because they believed it was best for their industry?  

Sometimes good things happen when someone steps up and does something that no one else would expect and it can lead to great possibilities.    

[wsmorrison]

Mercedes Benz did not invent anti-lock brakes.  Bosch's electronic anti-lock brakes were the 4-wheel ones put into mass production and used by MB.  I doubt MB gave away Bosch's technology.  Mr. Bosch would not have liked that.

[JESII]

Mark,

Regardless of who gave whom what, I am sure it has happened. Does that make it an obligation? Your premise starting this thread was that golf clubs should practice altruism...any examples of clubs that will not, or do not, do this? Let's try to keep the discussion out of the admissions committee office and on the golf course, after all that is the point right?

I would bet Matt Shaeffer, Rick Christian, Scott Anderson or any of the other superintendents in this area would be happy to provide insight to their practice if approached properly. If you have found the opposite, my suggestion would be to first check out the approach because acting like these guys owe something to the other clubs in their area doesn't seem like the wisest tact.

[TEPaul]

Mark:

I see you shifting this over-all question. Are you sure you want to do that? On that other thread this entire subject started out as a question of whether some famous club (what you call a "role model" or "alpha dog") has a responsibility to cut costs in maintenance because some of these maintenance budgets are sending the wrong message to other clubs that can't afford them but try to do the same things anyway.

This is the precise subject and issue I think the clubs that are imitating role model or alpha dog clubs need to accept responsibility for themselves a bit more and a bit better. This is the area I don't see why those role model clubs need to feel some responsibility to others to not do some of the things they want to pay for and do.

[Mark_Fine]

Wayne,
I could be wrong but I'm pretty confident that the technology was never patented and was free to use by other automobile companies.  Regardless there was some sharing involved.  

If that is not a good example, maybe this one is.  My former company helped perfect an important chemical for use in the electronics industry.  It became widely used and relied upon.  During production of the chemical (which was now being produced by numerous other companies) we determined that it could explode under the right conditions.  We developed a way to prevent this from happening and shared the technology with our competitors because we believed it was best for the industry as a whole.  Generous - maybe.  The right thing to do - definitely.  


Jim,
All those guys are great and would probably do what ever they could to help other clubs.  They set a good example that all clubs should follow (and many do).  

Maybe there is no good answer here (nor was I expecting one) and maybe there are few ways that clubs can or should be altruistic.  But if nothing else with this thread, we seem to have established a consensus (among most) that clubs indeed can be role models, they do set precedents by their actions, and their actions can help direct and influence change (outside their own property lines).  Whether they should worry about any of this or what they should or should not do about it, is another matter.

Tom,
I just saw you post.  I hear your opinion and that's fine.  That's in part what we were all discussing.  

[Mark_Fine]

I was just thinking and I don't have time right now to lead it but would a good thread be:

What clubs have proved to be great role models?  Maybe the words need to change but you get my drift.    

[JESII]

Mark,

Two questions about your former company as referrenced in that post above:

-If the chemical was perfected, why did it explode?
-Considering that it did explode, and your company profited from its development, doesn't it seem reasonable to conclude that they "shared the technology with our competitors" as a way to manage potential legal risk?

Listen, I believe companies can and do act altruistically, but the more bad examples you bring up, the more doubtful I am...

Jim,
All those guys are great and would probably do what ever they could to help other clubs.  They set a good example that all clubs should follow (and many do).  

Maybe there is no good answer here (nor was I expecting one) and maybe there are few ways that clubs can or should be altruistic.  But if nothing else with this thread, we seem to have established a consensus (among most) that clubs indeed can be role models, they do set precedents by their actions, and their actions can help direct and influence change (outside their own property lines).  Whether they should worry about any of this or what they should or should not do about it, is another matter.

Is this all you have to say on the matter? Seems like a waste of time to start a thread for the sole purpose of seeking support for your belief that clubs can influence each other because a couple of guys told you on another thread that they didn't think the Alpha club is responsible for the 'copycat' clubs bad decisions.

[Mark_Fine]

Jim,
The chemical is Trimethylindium.  We do not own the patent on the chemical.  What we perfected was developing the purity necessary to help make that cell phone you are carrying work a little better    Others tried to follow us as the demand for the chemical increased.  As such, the production for it had to be scaled.  We were a leader and at the time the largest supplier.  We learned during the scaling process that during a critical sublimation process, if the temperature was allowed to reach a certain level, the chemical could explode.  We held a management meeting and we decided it would be best to share this finding with our competition rather then let them learn the hard way which could lead to serious injury.  You can think what you want about why we made our decision to share our findings.  At the end of the day there are things more important than just making a profit.  
 

[JESII]

Mark,

My three dot (...) ending to a sentence is in place of an emoticon. It's my personal tribute to Dan Kelly. He'll understand, you don't need to. You need to read the words I wrote and try to get a hold of yourself. Whether your company was managing risk or being altruistic is meaningless, I do not doubt that altruism ocurs, just don't try to imply it is or should be a rule. What bothers me is you trying to start a new thread that highlights clubs that have "proved to be good role models". As if you have supported your original premise that they are obligated to do so.

When I suggested to you that the superintendents from Merion, Pine Valley and Huntingdon Valley will, and do, offer advice and information to their counterparts at other clubs you blew it off with the implication that there are clubs and superintendents that do not...

Jim,
All those guys are great and would probably do what ever they could to help other clubs.  They set a good example that all clubs should follow (and many do).  

Mark, these are the "ALPHA DOGS" you speak of. Sure, within the Philadelphia area there are others and if someone is not interested in altruism that is their right.

My original feelings about this still hold. Those values you speak of in role models, like your chemical company, determine ones longetivity in that position. If these clubs completely disregard the rest of the golf community their lofty status will be short lived and you will no longer have to worry about a role model not holding up their obligation to society. Forcing, or attempting to coerce, a club to perform certain outside functions and uphold resposibilities seems like an approach that would likely encounter great resistance. Good Luck.

[Mark_Fine]

Jim,
I don't think a thread on Golf Club Altas is going to coerce anyone into doing something (nor is it trying) that they don't want to do.  We were just having a civil discussion.  Is that a problem?  If you don't agree and/or don't like the topic, there are plenty others here to choose from.  The other thread I started is very different from this one (at least I think it is).  If you want to read into it further, that is up to you.  But there has been good discussion on this thread and I've gotten enough positive IMs/emails on this topic that made the time spent worthwhile.  

Not everyone likes to post for the whole world to see.  As you know some of the best discussions from threads on GCA end up offline.  

[JESII]

I've gotten enough positive IMs/emails on this topic that made the time spent worthwhile.  

Not everyone likes to post for the whole world to see.  As you know some of the best discussions from threads on GCA end up offline.  

I don't really know that Mark. I find it curious that everyone supporting your stance on this would prefer to keep their opinion private. I also find it interesting that you ask me to find another thread to participate on if I cannot/do not agree with you. Why is that?

[Mark_Fine]

Jim,
I wasn't asking you to not contribute.  You are the one who mentioned about me starting the other thread and all I was implying was if you didn't like it, don't waste your time with it.  We might have worn this topic out anyway.  

Regarding IM's, etc. - just look at some of the other threads.  They get so adversarial and confrontational that some just don't like to jump in.  I'm the same on many of them.  It is not worth the time or aggravation.  Those Merion threads are a perfect example.  Sometimes it is better to start a thread and once you generate some interest, take it off line.  I find many of those discussions can be more productive.  By the way, that does not mean we all agree on everything.  We don't.  It just stays a little more civil  

[JESII]

Mark,

From my seat, it looks like this topic is just getting its legs. In other words I think we are just starting to figure out exactly where the other people are coming from. If you're ready to call it quits, fine, and that will likely end the conversation but I think it could continue pretty well.

[Mark_Fine]

Jim,
If we can keep it going great.  The other thread seems to be generating some interest.  It nothing else, maybe it will give some clubs/people recognition that they deserve.  And who knows, maybe it will help someone or some club out in a very positive way.  

[TEPaul]

“Tom/Wayne,
Don't develop a complex because I don't think anyone is selecting out Merion.  I'm sure not.  I know Matt Shaffer very well.  He was a big contributor to and supporter of our bunkers book.  I will give Matt the courtesy of not speaking for him in a public forum, but I will say he would be very much in favor of keeping mantainence costs to a minimum.

But where I will disagree with you is that other courses do try to emulate these top clubs (or the top clubs in their respective areas).  Whether you want to admit it or not, they are leading by example and do influence what other clubs do.  The old saying, "Keeping up with the Jones" is very much a part for the setting of golf course maintenance budgets.

One more important point to add - though it varies from club to club, if the "ideal maintenance meld" (as some like to call it) is very expense to achieve, then maybe they should either not be pushing for it, or change their paradigm of what is ideal.  Aren't some of the courses we talk about that approach this ideal, costly to maintain.  I wish I could post some numbers but I will refrain.  Thoughts anyone?”



Mark:

This is where your questions about the responsibility of “role model” courses started and in my opinion this is a very important area to discuss. You seemed to imply that the “role model” clubs have some responsibility to reduce their high annual maintenance budgets to help set an example for clubs that can’t afford those budgets. Is this not what you implied?

I think we are talking about the same problem here but we may have different solutions to the problem.  Those differing solutions should be discussed on here not avoided by starting other threads on what other responsibilities of “role model” or ‘alpha dog” clubs are.

[JESII]

Tom,

Would it be Michael Jordan's fault if I attempted a 360* dunk and fell on my ass? After all, he was my role model as a teenager and he never made me aware that because I was 5'9" and as white as can be I might not be able to pull it off...

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
Would it be Michael Jordan's fault if I attempted a 360* dunk and fell on my ass? After all, he was my role model as a teenager and he never made me aware that because I was 5'9" and as white as can be I might not be able to pull it off..."

According to Mark it most certainly would be Jordan's responsibility and fault that you couldn't dunk and you fell on your ass trying to emulate him. Frankly, the fact that he shirked that responsiblity or at least didn't admit it shows he's a total failure as a "Role Model" and as an "Alpha Dog". He has probably failed all American kids as a role model for ever dunking in the first place. You have no responsibility whatsoever for falling on your own ass trying to imitate him.

Here's some trivia for you;

Who was it that got Jordan interested in golf?

[John Foley]

Come on Tommy, you can do better than that.

DL III

[Mark_Fine]

Tom/Jim,
Maybe baseball and the use of steriods would be a better example then Jordon and dunking?  Should those high profile players (and baseball in general) feel any responsibily for the example they set particularly to kids who wonder if they also need to use performance enhancing drugs to be successful?  Maybe you don't think so.  I beg to differ.

Is there any analogy here to golf?  Again, some of you don't think so and I happen to feel otherwise.  And remember it is NOT JUST about spending money.  Think of positives instead of negatives.    
Mark

[TEPaul]

Mark:

Well, obviously you're going to continue to avoid discussing the subject of maintenance budgets and "role model" responsibility. I think I've asked enough times, no sense in pursuing it.

See Ya!  

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
Jim brought up the Jordon thing.  I was just responding to it.  

On the other thread on role models there seems to be some good examples.  Maybe you should look at that one.  I think people think this one has tumbled out of control  

Here is one of the posts Paul made that seems to me might address the question you are raising:

"I think the R&A are trying to present the British Open as a role model for clubs.  They really have let the courses burn out in recent years and they have published articles on returning to less manicured, cheaper maintenance."

Paul can chime in but the hope is that these clubs will continue with this practice and other clubs will follow their lead.  They will spend less money on maintenance (even though they could afford to spend more it if they wanted to) because it sets a good example for the game of golf.  

Happy now