News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Ryan Coles

  • Karma: +0/-0
Shelf Life of HGK/Supt
« on: August 10, 2014, 07:58:10 AM »
The head greenkeeper of Hoylake said in an interview, that a greenkeeper can become too set in his ways to the detriment of a course, progressing. He moved down from Carnoustie, i believe. Similarly, the appreciation for the great job he does can be taken for granted over time. He advocated moving around, however prestigious the current role was

Is this a fair comment?

Are there examples of greenkeenkeepers who make significant strides in year 5 onwards?

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Shelf Life of HGK/Supt
« Reply #1 on: August 10, 2014, 08:01:30 AM »
Ryan, not sure its universal or right, but I have heard other supers say similar things, that its time to move on after about 5 years.  That was said in the height of the golf boom.  The supers I talk to now acknowledge that they are more likely to hang on to what they have in this market, which might even limit upward mobility of younger people in the biz.
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Ken Moum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Shelf Life of HGK/Supt
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2014, 08:37:07 AM »
I think it goes both ways.  When I worked at GCSAA I talked some of the members about it because I often heard from some of them and a lot of staff that supers were all likely to get fired and/or move on.

But that didn't square with the many superintendents I knew of who stayed in one place for 20-30 years, including places like Pine Valley.

On of the job jumpers finally made me understand the difference.  I could tell from the words he used that he wanted to say the stayers lacked ambition, but wasn't going to be on record saying that.

He had pursued and held a number of "high-end" positions in the years I knew him, and he'd been fired from some of them.  What I realized is that there are a percentage of supers who want to work in places where the expectations are through the roof. The like the prestige of those places, and they like the compensation. And they're willing to pack up and move every few years whether it's to a better job or due to being let go.

One of the upwardly mobile types once said, "There are two kinds of superintendents, those who have killed the grass, and those who will kill the grass."  I spent a weekend with him once, and it happened that earlier in the week he'd been out of town leaving one of his assistants in charge, and a fungal outbreak had almost wiped out several greens while he was gone.

The level of stress he and others like him are under is more than I would EVER be willing to take, regardless of the prestige and salary. Places like that can have maintenance budgets upwards of $2 million.

The other side includes people I have known for years and while they may lack the "ambition" of the first fellow I mentioned, they are all as dedicated to producing the best golf course they can on the budget they have.  But because of the budget, and the kinds of places they live and work, the stress is a little lower, and they aren't constantly expecting to move.

Personally, I see benefits to both kinds of supers.  The movers have seen it all and nothing is likely to faze them.  And because of the resources available where they've worked, they probably know where and how to get the latest technology and equipment.

The stayers, OTOH, usually know everything there is to know about their golf course. They know exactly which greens need to be babied and how.  And they often have been asked to do more with less so much that some of them seem to be able to anything with nothing. I know of a couple whose whole budget is less than half the superintendent's salary at the high end.

One of those guys, at a course where I was a member, once said, "I've got 18 senior citizens out there, and they each need a different kind of treatment to survive."

Of course there are LOTS of supers in between those extremes.

One thing I do know, I've been playing golf for 50 years, and I know a lot of supers.  Every one of them cared deeply about their golf course.

K
Over time, the guy in the ideal position derives an advantage, and delivering him further  advantage is not worth making the rest of the players suffer at the expense of fun, variety, and ultimately cost -- Jeff Warne, 12-08-2010

Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Shelf Life of HGK/Supt
« Reply #3 on: August 10, 2014, 11:03:42 AM »
Ryan,

I think that as long as both the club and the HGK share the same vision for the facility and this is ever evolving than the chances of the situation going stale are small. The problem comes when either the club and HGK do not agree on the way forward or one of the two parties do not want change.

Jon

Don Mahaffey

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Shelf Life of HGK/Supt
« Reply #4 on: August 10, 2014, 12:34:40 PM »
It's not just Supt, this is the way of the world in many different professions. I used to think Supts had one of the most stressful jobs and put up with more judging of their work from ignorant bosses, then I moved to TX and learned what high school football coaches go through. In my day they were educators first, today they better win all the time and be a great politician or they are out after 3-5 years. .

In today's Supt world of hyper management and everybody thinking managing a golf course is more science project then process management, you'd better be seen working hard and using hard to understand words constantly or you will get let go for the next flavor of the month. Calm, well-planned, no drama management is not in favor today.

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Shelf Life of HGK/Supt
« Reply #5 on: August 10, 2014, 12:51:35 PM »
It's not just Supt, this is the way of the world in many different professions. I used to think Supts had one of the most stressful jobs and put up with more judging of their work from ignorant bosses, then I moved to TX and learned what high school football coaches go through. In my day they were educators first, today they better win all the time and be a great politician or they are out after 3-5 years. .


Friday Night Lights is still my favorite TV show ever!

Ken Moum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Shelf Life of HGK/Supt
« Reply #6 on: August 10, 2014, 01:03:00 PM »
Calm, well-planned, no drama management is not in favor today.

No BS.

Everyone seems to think that crisis management is normal.

K
Over time, the guy in the ideal position derives an advantage, and delivering him further  advantage is not worth making the rest of the players suffer at the expense of fun, variety, and ultimately cost -- Jeff Warne, 12-08-2010

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +3/-1
Re: Shelf Life of HGK/Supt
« Reply #7 on: August 10, 2014, 05:03:29 PM »
Calm, well-planned, no drama management is not in favor today.

No BS.

Everyone seems to think that crisis management is normal.

K

Many people are encouraged to manage crises because they are seen as being more valuable for doing so.  They think if they make the job look easy, their bosses will assume it's easy ... and sometimes that is true.

Turf schools were teaching their graduates to always look to be upwardly mobile as the surest way to increase their pay over time [and make room for more turf school graduates].  Now that the growth of the golf business is threatened, there are probably more guys who are willing to settle down.

For my part, I've tried to help clients find superintendents who wanted to stay for the long haul.  The shuffling of superintendents may be good for superintendents' pay, but it is NOT good for a golf course to have a revolving door of managers with different agronomic programs.  It is a pleasure to go back to places like Stonewall and Pacific Dunes and Ballyneal and be dealing with the same guys who helped build those courses 10+ years ago ... and the courses are certainly better for it.

Steve Okula

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Shelf Life of HGK/Supt
« Reply #8 on: August 10, 2014, 05:10:34 PM »
The head greenkeeper of Hoylake said in an interview, that a greenkeeper can become too set in his ways to the detriment of a course, progressing. He moved down from Carnoustie, i believe. Similarly, the appreciation for the great job he does can be taken for granted over time. He advocated moving around, however prestigious the current role was

Is this a fair comment?

Are there examples of greenkeenkeepers who make significant strides in year 5 onwards?

No, it's not a fair comment. There are many greenkeepers serving long tenures who come to know their course intimately and learn how to dial it in regardless of variables, because they've seen them all,  so that conditions are consistently optimal.

And to move for the sake of moving "no matter how prestigious the current role" simply does not make sense. By this reasoning, the superintendent of say, Augusta National would simply resign for no other reason than he set himself an arbitrary shelf-life.
The small wheel turns by the fire and rod,
the big wheel turns by the grace of God.