"Designer Gene" and Technical Proficiency

[Ian Andrew]

In the article she makes the case for the traditional European education of choosing between an academic or vocational path of study at a fairly young age, 14 or 15.

John,

Seems very early to make such an important choice. Not everyone can make an informed choice so early. Some need to fall into their careers, rather than jump towards them. My wife, for example, has testified at the Supreme Court of Canada on Education as an expert on copyright. She never choose her path, she didn't study for it, she slowly became an expert by circumstance and time. Our older son is wired the same, I used to struggle with that, but she was right, he too wandered blindly into an interesting career.

[Sean_A]

In the article she makes the case for the traditional European education of choosing between an academic or vocational path of study at a fairly young age, 14 or 15.  She believes that many of the tradesmen that she has worked with over the years had similar visual learning skills (autistic traits) to her own strengths.  Without elaborating, I agree.

While I'd agree that the system you describe would be better than the one we have (in the US), I feel like it creates a false dichotomy between the trades and academic paths. Does an architect or accountant or a doctor need to read philosophy any more than a machinist, a builder or an engineer? I would like it better if everyone could make that determination a bit more on their own, though with some guidance. (If I hadn't been required to take Phil 101, I likely would have missed out on so much that makes me who I am today, for good or ill)

I like the idea of a divided career path in school where young people notal academically inclined can finish school /internship and have opportunities to earn excellent money at a young age. Currently, we are spending far too much on university courses that could be taught with a more hands on approach. My proviso would be that there are second chances. I seriously dislike the idea of exam results or a decision at a relatively young age determining a life path without opportunities to change one's course in life.

Ciao

[Charlie Goerges]

I've long had the idea that "everyone's a geek about something", maybe I should add to it that everyone's a designer about something. I don't think there is anyone who isn't a designer in some sense of the word. I mentioned my wife has terrible spatial reasoning skills, but she still designs and makes jewelry. She doesn't need to worry a lot about functionality (the design of a necklace or bracelet was worked out long ago) so she can focus on selecting pretty things and laying them out on a pattern. I guess all of this is to say that I don't think there is a designer gene per se (unless everyone has it), though there are aspects of design some might be more suited to than others. And when designing something as large and diverse as a golf course I can totally see Tom Doak's point about collaboration. I would imagine that not everyone on his team needs to understand a topo map as well as he does in order to make an important contribution to the final design.

[Charlie Goerges]

I seriously dislike the idea of exam results or a decision at a relatively young age determining a life path without opportunities to change one's course in life.

Me too! This is why the idea of the separation worries me. Perhaps in most of Europe, it is done right, but I'm certain that in the US the system in either event would keep a tradesperson from ever having the chance to go back and say, minor in philosophy (or learn video production etc). The system now doesn't allow it either, that's why I thought the European system would be better than what we have, but I think it could be improved upon.

[Charlie Goerges]

Seems very early to make such an important choice. Not everyone can make an informed choice so early. Some need to fall into their careers, rather than jump towards them. My wife, for example, has testified at the Supreme Court of Canada on Education as an expert on copyright. She never choose her path, she didn't study for it, she slowly became an expert by circumstance and time. Our older son is wired the same, I used to struggle with that, but she was right, he too wandered blindly into an interesting career.

I agree with you here Ian. If I'm playing devil's advocate, perhaps the "academic" branch essentially equates to the choice for the more wandering-oriented person. I'm not certain that an early binary is the best answer as far as a system is concerned, but I concede it would likely be better than what we have here in the US (I know you're in Canada) because what we have is just chaos.

[Tim Martin]

I’ve a got a nephew that from a young age struggled in school with the regular disciplines and was determined to have some learning disabilities. My brother noticed that he had an inclination toward taking things apart and rebuilding them first with model cars and advancing to small engine repair with GoKarts, mini bikes, motorcycles, lawnmowers and the like. He also demonstrated an entrepreneurial side as he started to buy broken items and rebuild them for sale which he has done well with through high school. Instead of him being dissuaded to pick a more mainstream pursuit my brother embraced his talent and nurtured his passion which has led to the goal of him becoming a big diesel mechanic. As Charlie mentioned “everyone is a geek about something”.

[Charlie Goerges]

I’ve a got a nephew that from a young age struggled in school with the regular disciplines and was determined to have some learning disabilities. My brother noticed that he had an inclination toward taking things apart and rebuilding them first with model cars and advancing to small engine repair with GoKarts, mini bikes, motorcycles, lawnmowers and the like. He also demonstrated an entrepreneurial side as he started to buy broken items and rebuild them for sale which he has done well with through high school. Instead of him being dissuaded to pick a more mainstream pursuit my brother embraced his talent and nurtured his passion which has led to the goal of him becoming a big diesel mechanic. As Charlie mentioned “everyone is a geek about something”.

This example makes a good case for there being a vocational/technical track available to kids. Did your brother and nephew get much help from the educational system in this track or was it all in addition to whatever is the standard in high school?

[Bruce Katona]

So, few questions for those who have opined on the design "gene" and process so far:


1. Are you predominantly left brained or right brained ?  The left side of the brain is the logical - reading/writing/math side. The right side is the visual, creative side.  I'm both, which I discovered in design school.  Spreadsheets, real estate finance and modeling come relatively easily to me as does math calcs done in the head.  I can also draw pretty well, visualize a drawing in 3D and think spatially.  What I did learn was I couldn't do both left and right brained functions simultaneously - it would cause a migraine.   I had to take a break between left & right brained functions to "switch gears"


2. Do you dream? Yes I do - and in color & black & white. Lots of creative folks do.


3.Exterior design (GCA/landscape architecture) is designing a series of spaces, IMHO  - think of each hole as a space, and how one moves thru the subspaces - tee, to landing area, to green, to the next tee - and what one feels and visually perceives. TD, Jeff, Mike, Ally, Ian & the list of other professional contributors can opine on my $0.02, but that's what I see and feel anyway.


4. I'm pretty sure I've said this before but one of the greatest created movement from one space (hole) to the next I ever had the chance to experience was at a course in Naples done by JN.  The amount of time and attention to detail going from green to the next tee was just phenomenal.  OTOH, the experience from 16 to the clubhouse at Kapalua is pretty spectacular,  envisioned by a Higher Power and capitalized upon by a great hole and cart path routing.

[Thomas Dai]

There may well be or not be a 'designer gene' and technical proficiency is important but so is leadership including seeing the bigger picture and picking the right people to be part of the team producing something. Dealing with perspective clients and getting the job in the first place. Then preparing for and 'running the job', dealing with clients, authorities, delegation and supervision both within and outwith the direct team, suppliers, specialists, contractors, good and bad, headaches, stumbling blocks etc all while constantly ensuring that all the numerous bits and pieces fit together to produce the desired outcome in the right timeframe and with the Ł$ financing balancing out appropriately.
Perhaps there's a leadership 'gene' too although not necessarily one always best suited to the designer ('boffin'?) or the most technically proficient individual.
atb

[Kalen Braley]

Thomas,

You hit the nail on the head pretty good with that last post.  A singular "designer gene" seems a bit of misnomer for this conversation given that successful architects really need to have a pretty well rounded toolbox of skills as you pointed out.  Its the combination of all those things that probably contributes most to it being a damn tough job.

Unlike some crazy brilliant geniuses I've ran into in the Tech biz.  They can barely figure out how to get dressed in the morning, and string more than a few words together, but shove them in the corner with a computer and a case of mountain dew and magical things happen.

[Charlie Goerges]

I'm certain that Thomas and Kalen are right about the importance of those myriad other functions in a design business, but some of them are secondary. The designer doesn't need to be good at everything as long as there is someone in their organization that is good at it.


I'm pretty curious about what the various functions in the design team are and what traits people can have to fulfill those functions and still be called a designer. I realize that's sort of general, so maybe concrete or hypothetical examples would be helpful, basically the various perspectives that people can take. My hypothetical is that maybe a history-focused person would call back to courses that use X strategy. A strategy-focused person will wonder about how decision making is affected by the choice, maybe a technically-oriented person would wonder whether a change can be made without disturbing work that's already been done, and so on. Now I realize the individuals will contain all three and many more besides, but the idea is that no individual can probably contain everything.

[Tom_Doak]

Charlie:


The two tasks where I spend most of my time in designing a course are the routing, and the shaping of the greens.  I think those are the two most important pieces of a great course.


I'd say that doing routings is a more left-brained exercise, and shaping greens is more sculpture, presumably a right-brained exercise.  So you're not going to find many people who would be great at both.  Although, one thing I learned from my when I made money taking pictures of golf courses was that I have a really good sense of composition, which I would have thought was right-brain, but maybe not?


During the shaping I'm more of an observer and editor now, probably because I'm more left-brained.  But I firmly believe that part is sculpture, so I don't try to turn it into a left-brain thing by drawing plans and working out the elevations on paper.  I think it's important to get the thing to feel right first, and then massage it so it works right.  When I actually jumped back on the bulldozer in New Zealand last year, the couple of greens I shaped were very different from the rest.

[John Kirk]

In the article she makes the case for the traditional European education of choosing between an academic or vocational path of study at a fairly young age, 14 or 15.

John,

Seems very early to make such an important choice. Not everyone can make an informed choice so early. Some need to fall into their careers, rather than jump towards them. My wife, for example, has testified at the Supreme Court of Canada on Education as an expert on copyright. She never choose her path, she didn't study for it, she slowly became an expert by circumstance and time. Our older son is wired the same, I used to struggle with that, but she was right, he too wandered blindly into an interesting career.

Mostly I was reporting small snippets of the Temple Grandin article.  I added the simple "in general, I agree" without much forethought.  I was thinking mostly about the person that may want to opt out of the standard educational system to begin a specific career in something else.  An early start in a field like welding or plumbing is worth a lot of money.  Maybe only 15-20% of students would opt out early for vocational training, but some people know what they want to do early.  Why waste their time?

I also figured that America needs more craftsmen, and that too many people were opting for the academic education route with a specific goal.  The news articles are varied and suggest that may or may not be the case.  Here's an article in favor of that view:

https://www.opb.org/article/2023/01/05/america-needs-carpenters-and-plumbers-try-telling-that-to-gen-z/


Life is long, and the people who find their way into an occupation they never imagined as a kid don't necessarily have to take the traditional academic path to get there.  It probably helps.  I really enjoyed the early part of my college education, when I took all the general introductory classes about subjects.

I'm definitely a generalist when it comes to knowledge, with a strong emphasis on science and little interest in art and literature.  When I had to specialize, I chose engineering because I could do the math.  I had no idea what I wanted to do, but figured I could get a good paying job.  I only found success as an engineer after I found myself in a job where I could work at a large systems level, analyzing and reporting all the changes to the big communications system.  I was essentially a librarian, organizing and monitoring large amounts of data.  I knew things and could give quick answers to questions.  That's what I do best, analyze and organize data.  I learned that mostly by reading reams of baseball (and other sports) statistics, and train schedules when I was really young.

I also started drawing golf holes when I was 10 or 11, a decade before I ever played the game my Dad and Grandad played.  Golf architecture is a dreamy subject for the science generalist, so rich with different disciplines.  Geology, geography, plant science, math, chemistry and physics are all classes I took as an college student.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I remember after reading this book that was the first time I thought about empathy as an integral components of design. As how can I create emotions in the spaces that I build if I close my heart and mind of to the experience of others 

It helped that at the time I was still in school and watching a bunch of other young designers work. I can tell you to the students that became the best designers in that room were also the kindest to their peers and learned not only from doing their work but by watching the experience of others. As they were open to helping others in that act of kindness they were exposed to other workflows, skill sets and the other hundred intangible things that go into personal design process. I noticed this probably due to my own neural atypicality.

Ben:


Bingo!  Part of the reason I react so much to this idea that some people are just natural designers, and others aren't, is that it I believe that design is a collaborative process.  And for my teammates I don't want a bunch of clones of myself.  I don't need that -- I need others who are looking at the thing from different angles. 


Any one of them could be doing this job and doing it well, although they will probably be better at it if they also have a team, and it includes someone like me.


I have seen other firms in action where everyone thinks like the boss, or worries what the boss will think.  That's just not how great work gets done.


As to your first question, my original choice of minimalism was less about the environment, and more about admiring old courses and wondering why nobody built stuff like that anymore.  That was one of the things Ben Crenshaw and I corresponded about back when I was still in college!  My mantra at High Pointe was "when in doubt, do less".  [It's a particularly good time to remind me of that, so thank you.]


It was only after we started on High Pointe, and my associate Tom Mead recognized the environmental aspect of what we were doing, that I really thought about that part . . . although, I did spend enough time with Walter Woods in St. Andrews to have some of his ethos drilled into me.

TD,


As mentioned by someone else, the term "designer gene" is a bit over the top, and not representative of someone who has the traits of a designer's personality.


Similarly, wanting people of different views and talents on your team for open discussion is always a good idea, and not at all contradictory to the premise that there are different personality strengths, as Mike Young pointed out best with his dog analogy.


Even the title of this thread is a bit misleading.....there are conceptual designers as well as technicians. And among designer types, there are differences in their relative strengths as seeing options to solve certain problems.  And, experience is in there.  As you suggest, the more golf holes you see, the more likely you are to have seen a similar design problem and solution.


Didn't some designer or songwriter define creativity as stealing from the best?

[Tim Martin]

I recall reading that Alfred Tull could create golf holes without consulting a topographical map which was out of the ordinary. Would this be some variation of the “designer gene”?

[Charlie Goerges]

I recall reading that Alfred Tull could create golf holes without consulting a topographical map which was out of the ordinary. Would this be some variation of the “designer gene”?

I think we need some context as to what is meant here. Because designing courses without a topo map is exactly what the real old-timers would have been doing most of the time. I'd bet that most of the pros posting to this thread would have no problem doing the same. Unless it means something else that I'm not quite getting. I'd bet that the topo map is primarily a time-saving device in this type of example.

[Charlie Goerges]

Charlie:


The two tasks where I spend most of my time in designing a course are the routing, and the shaping of the greens.  I think those are the two most important pieces of a great course.


I'd say that doing routings is a more left-brained exercise, and shaping greens is more sculpture, presumably a right-brained exercise.  So you're not going to find many people who would be great at both.  Although, one thing I learned from my when I made money taking pictures of golf courses was that I have a really good sense of composition, which I would have thought was right-brain, but maybe not?


During the shaping I'm more of an observer and editor now, probably because I'm more left-brained.  But I firmly believe that part is sculpture, so I don't try to turn it into a left-brain thing by drawing plans and working out the elevations on paper.  I think it's important to get the thing to feel right first, and then massage it so it works right.  When I actually jumped back on the bulldozer in New Zealand last year, the couple of greens I shaped were very different from the rest.

Thanks for the glimpse behind the scenes. So you're very involved with shaping of the greens, but sometimes you're driving the machine and sometimes you're not? If that's the case, when someone else is driving, how much do you need to talk to them while they're driving?


Edit: not trying to get too specific, but the question goes toward the type of person who would be good on the machine and communicating with the person in charge.

[Tim Martin]

I recall reading that Alfred Tull could create golf holes without consulting a topographical map which was out of the ordinary. Would this be some variation of the “designer gene”?

I think we need some context as to what is meant here. Because designing courses without a topo map is exactly what the real old-timers would have been doing most of the time. I'd bet that most of the pros posting to this thread would have no problem doing the same. Unless it means something else that I'm not quite getting. I'd bet that the topo map is primarily a time-saving device in this type of example.

Charlie-I took it to mean that it was a tool available to him that he didn’t feel he needed although I don’t disagree with your reply.

[Tim Martin]

I’ve a got a nephew that from a young age struggled in school with the regular disciplines and was determined to have some learning disabilities. My brother noticed that he had an inclination toward taking things apart and rebuilding them first with model cars and advancing to small engine repair with GoKarts, mini bikes, motorcycles, lawnmowers and the like. He also demonstrated an entrepreneurial side as he started to buy broken items and rebuild them for sale which he has done well with through high school. Instead of him being dissuaded to pick a more mainstream pursuit my brother embraced his talent and nurtured his passion which has led to the goal of him becoming a big diesel mechanic. As Charlie mentioned “everyone is a geek about something”.

This example makes a good case for there being a vocational/technical track available to kids. Did your brother and nephew get much help from the educational system in this track or was it all in addition to whatever is the standard in high school?

Charlie-In high school he enrolled in a Career Technical Education Program which was certainly an aide in what he now aspires to do.

[Kalen Braley]

I recall reading that Alfred Tull could create golf holes without consulting a topographical map which was out of the ordinary. Would this be some variation of the “designer gene”?

I think we need some context as to what is meant here. Because designing courses without a topo map is exactly what the real old-timers would have been doing most of the time. I'd bet that most of the pros posting to this thread would have no problem doing the same. Unless it means something else that I'm not quite getting. I'd bet that the topo map is primarily a time-saving device in this type of example.

Charlie-I took it to mean that it was a tool available to him that he didn’t feel he needed although I don’t disagree with your reply.

This could have been post WW2 (50s - 70s), as wasn't it common to just put the holes wherever they wanted and moved the dirt to make it work?

[Tim Martin]

I recall reading that Alfred Tull could create golf holes without consulting a topographical map which was out of the ordinary. Would this be some variation of the “designer gene”?

I think we need some context as to what is meant here. Because designing courses without a topo map is exactly what the real old-timers would have been doing most of the time. I'd bet that most of the pros posting to this thread would have no problem doing the same. Unless it means something else that I'm not quite getting. I'd bet that the topo map is primarily a time-saving device in this type of example.

Charlie-I took it to mean that it was a tool available to him that he didn’t feel he needed although I don’t disagree with your reply.

This could have been post WW2 (50s - 70s), as wasn't it common to just put the holes wherever they wanted and moved the dirt to make it work?

Kalen-You could be correct as Tull was alive until the early 1980’s.

[Ian Andrew]

So, few questions for those who have opined on the design "gene" and process so far:
1. Are you predominantly left brained or right brained ?

Bruce,

I'm predominantly right-brained. I have a need to be organized at everything I do in life. It's a blessing and a curse. I have no issue with changing my mind and even completely abandoning a philosophy. If you had read my golf design blog from 2006-2008 that was very obvious. But I like to begin with an initial plan - even if its to be abandoned quickly for something more interesting or through circumstance.

Even when I paint water colors, I organize everything. I like to draw out my shadow patterns, my light source, the direction of fur and hair. My sketches are probably over-organized because I'm thinking through the process as I draw. Once I have the basic colors in place, my shading patterns established and broad concepts are clear, I paint by feel and become far more spontaneous.


The first wash - you need to paint and dry, paint and dry .... the shadow planning is obvious

I move through life this way. I don't "fly by the seat of my pants" unless I'm forced to by circumstance. I can. But I prefer to start with a plan and then throw it away at the appropriate moment.

I expect most don't like this approach, but its the one that works for me.

If curious - the final result is here: https://ianandrewsgolfdesignblog.blogspot.com/2023/01/blog-post.html

[Tom_Doak]

Ian (and Charlie):


I couldn't paint like that for all the money in the world.


That's why I will never believe that designers all come from the same place, or the same brain space.  Most have talents I don't have, and I might have one or two that most others don't have [or that they're not in touch with, anyway].


I do start with an idea . . . anytime I route a hole and set a green site, I've got some sort of plan in mind.  But all that does for me is to guarantee that there is some solution that will work, that I can fall back on if necessary.  And with that in my back pocket, we just go ahead and start building something.  Sometimes I will give the shaper a very thorough explanation of what I was thinking, sometimes very simple [i.e. "make it harder to come in from the right"], and sometimes I'll just let them take the first crack at it without any input, depending on how much I've thought about it myself.  The only times I'm really adamant about an idea is when I think that something is already there and I want to make sure the shapers see it and don't wreck it to do something different.

[Peter Bowman]

There's an amazing amount of things about golf that can be described mathematically.  The flight and rolling characteristics of a ball.  The size, firmness and slope of the ground.  The aerodynamic characteristics of the club.  Golf and most all sports operate in four dimensions, with time being the fourth one.

It probably helps to have a good academic knowledge of physics.  I learned about gravity and momentum and kinetic energy and fluid dynamics in college, things like that.  Most of that is a distant memory, but I could probably relearn the relationships quickly. 


However, I don't think it's as important as personal experience and obsession with the game.  While I do believe some people have greater genetic gifts in terms of learning ability and spatial orientation, a passion for understanding the game must be the greater determinant of inspired design.  Those two qualities may be one and the same.

The sooner a person develops good spatial orientation, the better.  Most of us old jocks develop that spatial orientation by playing sports.  I used Google a couple days ago to find relevant articles.  One study (sorry, I can't find it now) argued that a key tool was teaching how to accomplish geometric proofs.  Geometric proofs require the student to prove a certain physical relationship using standard geometric theorems and hypotheses.  A solution requires several steps of creative thought to accomplish the goal.  Apparently, this is a not a widely used teaching method anymore, and the researchers were concerned that the modern American education system might be overlooking a valuable tool in developing good spatial orientation.

Temple Grandin is quite famous these days.  She's a professor of animal science at Colorado State University, and she is renowned for developing humane physical systems for handling livestock.  Talk about having empathy.  Part of her epiphany in developing her original designs was recognizing the distress of the cattle and the ways they moved together.  Grandin has written an essay in today's New York Times about the importance of visual thinking and the failure of American society to develop this important skill.  It's a lovely article and relevant to this discussion.


https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/09/opinion/temple-grandin-visual-thinking-autism.html


One last thing.  I am finding that one of the few gifts of growing older is a heightened sense of creativity.  I don't know why.  I keep reading and learning as much as I can, and maybe that increased knowledge leads to deeper, more abstract connections between things.  In my case, I also may be influenced by a burning desire to create something after a leisurely period in middle age.  I'm losing both mental and physical prowess, but boy do I have lots of ideas of things to write about.

 

Key phrase in all this is “Burning Desire.” I learned this reading Napoleon Hill 11 years ago

[Bruce Katona]

Ian:  I always wished I could paint pictures - (walls & ceilings (no murals) I have down pat.  I was ok @ water colors and certainly can draw perspectives, which helps with design.


I used to render (color) my designs using pastels & colored chalk, rather than markers or print ink, as the colors are softer and its a very quick application process.


Its also a lot of fun to head on onto construction sites of any kind to see how they're got the site drainage set up and see where someone it looking to attempt to make water run uphill to drain or where there are flat spots for ponding & ice.  Pretty easy to see once you know what to look for.