Process for head green keeper search?

[Ian Mackenzie]

A friend of mine here in Chicago belongs to a club that is now embarking on a search for a new head green keeper/superintendent.
He has asked me for some input hence I am posting here for your feedback.


Some background:


1. Golden era course with solid GCA pedigree
2. Upscale private country club with golf course as top priority, but also has tennis, pool, etc.
3. Looking at doing some significant restoration work in the coming 3-5 years.
4. The goal, I believe, is to find a TOP quality consummate professional with management, budget, agronomy and turf skills

How would you go about doing a search?


A. Engage a national search firm?
B. Tap into the local and national networks to source an "off-market" guy?
C. Formulate a search committee to create transparency and accountability?


Also, what essential, initial qualifying questions would you ask potential candidates?
Would appreciate all comments from those who have relevant experience here.


Thanks,
Ian

[Howard Riefs]

Ian -


Some prior threads that may be helpful:


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,62359


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,61495.0.html


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,57606.0.html

[PCCraig]

Ian,


I would probably just go "B."


I don't think most club members would even know where to begin when it comes to what it would take to hire a good superintendant.


If it were me, I would try to call around to some of the more successful clubs/Superintendants and put out feelers. That way you can try to get in touch with some really solid first assistants.


Look at a place like Shoreacres, they hired someone who was a "younger" guy with great work experience (Merion) and that's turned out pretty well for them.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Ian -


Some prior threads that may be helpful:


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,62359


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,61495.0.html


http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,57606.0.html

Thanks, Howard!

[SL_Solow]

Let's talk

[Tom Bacsanyi]

One of the candidates should be the lead assistant of the outgoing superintendent unless the outgoing was let go for poor conditions or concerns with the workplace culture and such.

Other candidates should be the lead assistants of other local/regional clubs, preferably those locally/regionally that are more prestigious.  This is the usual order of things.

Other candidates should be head superintendents of less prestigious clubs looking for a pay bump. A super moving laterally between two clubs of similar quality is rare, as an offer from another club is just leverage for a pay bump from the current club.

I personally would look for guys at less prestigious clubs that provide great conditions with small budgets.  They have head man experience and can get the most bang for the buck.  Or guys that have worked at multiple high-end courses as an intern/assistant and worked their way up into being the lead assistant of an experienced superintendent.  They are familiar with the processes of a high end facility such as the one in question and will be eager to make the jump to being the lead dog.

A friend of mine here in Chicago belongs to a club that is now embarking on a search for a new head green keeper/superintendent.
He has asked me for some input hence I am posting here for your feedback.


Some background:


1. Golden era course with solid GCA pedigree
2. Upscale private country club with golf course as top priority, but also has tennis, pool, etc.
3. Looking at doing some significant restoration work in the coming 3-5 years.
4. The goal, I believe, is to find a TOP quality consummate professional with management, budget, agronomy and turf skills

How would you go about doing a search?


A. Engage a national search firm?
B. Tap into the local and national networks to source an "off-market" guy?
C. Formulate a search committee to create transparency and accountability?


Also, what essential, initial qualifying questions would you ask potential candidates?
Would appreciate all comments from those who have relevant experience here.


Thanks,
Ian

[BCowan]

I personally would look for guys at less prestigious clubs that provide great conditions with a small budgets.  They have head man experience and can get the most bang for the buck.  Or guys that have worked at multiple high-end courses as an intern/assistant and worked their way up into being the lead assistant of an experienced superintendent.  They are familiar with the processes of a high end facility such as the one in question and will be eager to make the jump to being the lead dog.

+1

[Mike_Young]

I would ask several fertilizer salesmen, equipment salesmen and irrigation salesmen.  There will be a few common names between them.  Then go talk to those guys. 

[Matt MacIver]

If you live in a difficult climate to grow grass (is Chicago?) it's preferable to recruit locally since they have experience with weather, grass strains, water needs, etc.

[John Kavanaugh]

I'd like to see a course go old school and not replace the superintendent. Let the head pro oversee all operations of the course. He can tell people when and where to mow or jump on a tractor himself. Sure you have a maintenance foreman but nothing so fancy as a titled department head. It's where we are going so why not get there first.

[corey miller]

The club has a course that is one of many "priorities", is architecturally significant, and is about to undergo some sort of restoration/renovation/transformation which will cost multiples of what you actually pay your Superintendent not to mention the actual savings you might be able to incur were they to hire someone with that sort of experience.

Lot's of mention about growing grass and being a good guy but what of their knowledge of classic architecture? What would be their vision for the future work?  Would they be strong enough and knowledgeable enough to work with a typical country club membership? 

Assuming the club has a clue architecturally I would take the person around the course and get their view on what work should be done.  Heck, 90% of a restoration could be done in house by a thoughtful person in that it is usually mowing lines, trees, green widening. 

   

[Brad Treadwell]

Ian -

I was part of the search committee at our club 3 years ago when we were looking for a new Super.  I started by reaching out to all the good local Super's to see if a) they'd be interesting in talking to us and b) if they had anyone they'd recommend we should talk to.  In most cases the good ones were happy and tied down as expected but we got a good list of candidates, some of which were first assistants, some were former firsts that had gone to public facilities for their first head jobs, etc.  Most were also local, which I think is a good thing if you want someone looking for a long term gig.  In the end, our selection was obvious and unanimous and our guy has been doing a phenomenal job over the last three years. 

This doesn't answer your question re GCA but that is something that could be discussed in an interview process.  In our case they guy had played golf for a long time, was a good player, and appreciated good golf.  In the end the restoration work will be done with a GCA and Contractor....the Super needs to be a very active part of that team, but as long as he is humble and willing to learn, I'm not sure how important GCA knowledge is out of the gate.  It would certainly be a bonus but I'd be more concerned about his other qualifications, especially communication and dealing with members...when you start talking about change (and whacking trees) that becomes very important. 

+1 also to talking to the local reps that sell products to the Superintendents....they know who knows their stuff and possibly as importantly who don't.  For instance we learned from one after the fact that our old Super hadn't purchased any PGR's for at least 10 years. 

Good luck!

Brad

[Mark Chaplin]

JK you couldn't be more wrong, the business is changing to more professionally trained and qualified course managers. Might as well get rid of the head pro and get the course manager to give lessons as he's seen thousands of golf swings over the years.

[Andrew Buck]

Ian,

I reached out with some thoughts, but I'd also mention you may want to reach out to some local architects that have done a fair amount of restoration work in Chicago to see if they have any suggestions from past work.

[corey miller]

I strongly disagree with the notion that a country club about to embark on a restoration (which is clearly the preferred buzzword now though most work is far from being a restoration) should hire a guy the will be quiet and willing to learn.  Do you really want a guy that has taken no interest in architecture over the course of his career?

Yes, your view might work if the club has contracted with Tom Doak or any of the guys that frequent this site but is he really supposed to listen and learn from Rees Jones? Very few clubs have people that have a clue about architecture you might as well hire someone who has an interest and may exert some superintendent capital in either "maintaining" the architecture or in "fixing" the architecture. 

Do you really want a guy who will "do whatever you want" in a club of 300 amateur architects with nary a clue other than what the "like"?  That might be fine for a typical club but isn't this one with some pedigree? 

A typical committee might tell the Super that a line of trees or insane rough may be needed to "penalize" misfired shots.  Should the answer be "yes"..."no, do you the firm green being angled is "penalty" enough" or "we can ask the architect" which in the end might be preferred (assuming you don't have Rees) but eventually they will tire of all the questions because you probably have not enacted all the changes they suggested in the first pass. 

Bottom line....it is easier for a Super  politically within a club to spread and propagate architectural misinformation than it is to try to educate.  Great clubs need the latter.   

[John Kavanaugh]

Mark,


I'm a member of a course that just did exactly what I mentioned and it is going fantastically. The course has gone full circle from when I was a child when the pro and his family ran all aspects of the operation. As profits near zero you are going to see many more pro/super/manager combos.


I'll never understand why we let smart people develop smarter grasses that need the smartest people to grow them.

[Andrew Buck]

Mark,


I'm a member of a course that just did exactly what I mentioned and it is going fantastically. The course has gone full circle from when I was a child when the pro and his family ran all aspects of the operation. As profits near zero you are going to see many more pro/super/manager combos.


I'll never understand why we let smart people develop smarter grasses that need the smartest people to grow them.

Golf Course maintenance is very important.  A solid business leader who can teach and encourage members/players and facilitate social interaction is also very important.

Lucky are the golf courses that have individuals that can understand and do both (even if one isn't their primary concern).  It's certainly a model that worked long ago at large clubs, and works today at some smaller clubs based on expectations.  That said, would you truly prefer that all the clubs you belong to go that route, and let the chips fall where they may?   

[Justin VanLanduit]

I'd like to see a course go old school and not replace the superintendent. Let the head pro oversee all operations of the course. He can tell people when and where to mow or jump on a tractor himself. Sure you have a maintenance foreman but nothing so fancy as a titled department head. It's where we are going so why not get there first.

U get this idea from MySpace?

[John Kavanaugh]

Andrew,


I wouldn't change a thing at any of the clubs where I am a member. I can not recall a time in my life where I was surrounded by such a long list of consummate and dedicated professionals that make it a joy to visit my clubs day in and day out.

[BCowan]

I'll never understand why we let smart people develop smarter grasses that need the smartest people to grow them.

Simply top 10 for the year!! 

[Andrew Buck]

I know this question will derail this thread, but speaking of smarter grasses I have to ask about the ultradwarf bermuda.

Having grown up on northern courses with bent grass, I certainly think it's as good of a playing surface as exists for greens, but it's certainly on edge every summer, with the potential to go sideways given a stretch of the wrong weather.  After being introduced to ultradwarf bermuda varieties the last couple years in Pinehurst, and watching the golf at Sedgefield this week, that surface almost appears "idiot proof" (at least in the summer).  It almost feels like you're walking on a firm artificial turf, and you can achieve firm conditions without discoloration (which I like) and what appears to be little stress.

Are those surfaces much harder to maintain than they appear, or are they really a miracle product for those with the right climate?

[Mike_Trenham]

I strongly disagree with the notion that a country club about to embark on a restoration (which is clearly the preferred buzzword now though most work is far from being a restoration) should hire a guy the will be quiet and willing to learn.  Do you really want a guy that has taken no interest in architecture over the course of his career?

Yes, your view might work if the club has contracted with Tom Doak or any of the guys that frequent this site but is he really supposed to listen and learn from Rees Jones? Very few clubs have people that have a clue about architecture you might as well hire someone who has an interest and may exert some superintendent capital in either "maintaining" the architecture or in "fixing" the architecture. 

Do you really want a guy who will "do whatever you want" in a club of 300 amateur architects with nary a clue other than what the "like"?  That might be fine for a typical club but isn't this one with some pedigree? 

A typical committee might tell the Super that a line of trees or insane rough may be needed to "penalize" misfired shots.  Should the answer be "yes"..."no, do you the firm green being angled is "penalty" enough" or "we can ask the architect" which in the end might be preferred (assuming you don't have Rees) but eventually they will tire of all the questions because you probably have not enacted all the changes they suggested in the first pass. 

Bottom line....it is easier for a Super  politically within a club to spread and propagate architectural misinformation than it is to try to educate.  Great clubs need the latter.

Really the club is going to hire the wrong golf course architect and you expect the superintendent to block and tackle for them?  That is the job of the club's leaders.  I was on a restoration committee and we did the blocking and tackling between the architect and our staff and our members.


For me it is more about getting a the most talented person who has experience at a similar facility with a similar budget.  In the end conditions are driven mostly by talent, budget and weather.  The superintendent can't be good at everything so balancing those weaknesses with the right staff hires is critical.


I too agree with JK that most clubs have too many managers and either the payroll is too high or the compensation of the individuals is too low for everyone to succeed.

[corey miller]

I am not quite sure I understand what blocking and tackling is or what it means but I to was involved in a renovation (can we drop this restoration crap? ten years after coming into vogue it now is just a marketing line that means nothing) also  and would offer that the the Super is a vital member of the team. 

Ian's friends club (which seems to be of exceptional heritage) is about to embark on major work with a undetermined architect.  At a minimum, the new Super will be part of this team.

How did the club "evolve" where it was determined that work needed to be done?  Was that a result of some committee or the Super or a combination of both?  It seems it would not be the worst thing in the world to have a super who knows more about what the architect is trying to accomplish (sell) than those on the committee.  how involved does your house committee with the chefs recipes? 

 

[Brad Treadwell]

How many Superintendents truly have a good understanding of GCA?  Some have a ton but I'd argue the majority don't....and that's no fault of theirs....they spend years studying / honing the agronomic side and last I checked, they don't teach much GCA in turf school. 

I completely agree that you can't have 300 members making the decisions but if the club is doing It the right way, they will select a capable architect with a proven track record working on courses of this era.  As long as the super has an appreciation for golf and GCA, I'd rather have a guy that can grow grass.  In the end it's up to the club and its leadership to sell the vision....not the super....just not fair to that individual and puts a bullseye on them. 

[Ian Mackenzie]

I am not quite sure I understand what blocking and tackling is or what it means but I to was involved in a renovation (can we drop this restoration crap? ten years after coming into vogue it now is just a marketing line that means nothing) also  and would offer that the the Super is a vital member of the team. 

Ian's friends club (which seems to be of exceptional heritage) is about to embark on major work with a undetermined architect.  At a minimum, the new Super will be part of this team.

How did the club "evolve" where it was determined that work needed to be done?  Was that a result of some committee or the Super or a combination of both?  It seems it would not be the worst thing in the world to have a super who knows more about what the architect is trying to accomplish (sell) than those on the committee.  how involved does your house committee with the chefs recipes?

Thanks, Corey.
It's a very long story, but this club has retained one of the best GCA's in the business today. Once the club gets out of its own way and gets a commensurate super, it will be a beautiful thing to watch.


I appreciate all the input and PMs.