Listening

[Ted Sturges]

The genesis for this thread is based on the comments from Mike Young on Bogey's thread on the "gilded age" of golf architecture.  I think Mike Y. makes some great points.  His point that too many US clubs have Green Chairmen who are not well informed (often followed by another less informed Green Chair) is well taken.  His point about listening to the architect and learning from them versus wanting the architect to listen to them is also a great point.


So...how have the clubs who have enjoyed successful renovation projects (Oakmont, Maidstone, Shoreacres etc) built the necessary consensus within the club to "listen" to the architect hired to help them?  In my eyes, every golf club has people who know a good bit about golf, and people who think they do.  Often times, the people who think they know (and sadly don't know what they don't know) are very influential at their clubs.  How have the Oakmonts of the world overcome them?  What guidance would this panel offer a club considering (and in need of) a thoughtful restoration to properly "lead" their clubs, build consensus for what needs to be accomplished, and overcome the vocal but uninformed portions of the membership.  In other words, how do you convince the majority of your club's members to "listen" to the expert architect who has been retained?


TS

[JESII]

in my opinion, it's for architects to only take resto/reno jobs in which they have a clearly mutually applicable goals and expectations...


Member owned, committee run clubs are always going to have a multitude of opinions when something as extensive as this is happening. Trying to set the table up front is the only chance.

[Tim Martin]

in my opinion, it's for architects to only take resto/reno jobs in which they have a clearly mutually applicable goals and expectations...


Member owned, committee run clubs are always going to have a multitude of opinions when something as extensive as this is happening. Trying to set the table up front is the only chance.

+1

[John Kavanaugh]

Sorry, wrong thread.

[Tom_Doak]

in my opinion, it's for architects to only take resto/reno jobs in which they have a clearly mutually applicable goals and expectations...


Member owned, committee run clubs are always going to have a multitude of opinions when something as extensive as this is happening. Trying to set the table up front is the only chance.

+1000


Part of my reputation for being “difficult” stems from passing on a lot of jobs because there was no alignment. 


That applies equally to consulting and to new jobs.  You’ve got to have clients who trust you to do what you do.  Mr Dye taught me that at age 20 and I was clear about it the day I started on my own.  It’s harder for long term consulting work because committees change, and inevitably there is someone who wants to zag where you zig, even at storied clubs that are well run.  (Somebody at Oakmont planted all those trees.)


P.S.  The only clients who thought I was difficult are dead now. 

[Mike_Young]

Ted,
I also agree with Jim's take on things.  His comments were aimed at the architect's view.  But you also ask how can a club keep such from happening.  I know of one club who hired a guy because he was willing to work with them on changes they wanted implemented.  Make sure you cut a guy who says that....