How do you get the "detail" work correct? Private Clubs

[corey miller]

I guess this question is directed at the private club contingent on this site. 

My experience is that the knowledgeable benevolent dictator model works best nonetheless:

Under the typical greens committee structure at most clubs, Who has the primary responsibility of getting the details correct?

Such things as:

1. fairway mowing patterns
2. greensite mowing patterns
3. Green expansions
4. elimination of unnecessary "clutter" on the golf course "bushes" etc.
5. insuring the holes play as designed
6. honoring original architect intent

How do your clubs typically handle the hundreds of "choices" that can be made in mowing different areas on the golf course?

Do you require some sort of "plan" from either the Super or the committee?

[Paul Carey]

The Superintendent and the GM with input from the Green Committee.

[TEPaul]

corey:

At my club, if any of those kinds of things you mentioned comes up and there needs to be consideration of them they go through the Green Committee.

I believe that is basically the modern American model in most cases but I've been told that the older more traditional model that is generally used abroad is the Golf Committee deals with these kinds of things and then directs the Green Committee to carry them out.

Some clubs over here seem to use the latter model such as The Creek Club.

[W.H. Cosgrove]

We have a maintenance standards "publication."  It spells out the basics.  From there we have a superintendent who shows pride in his work despite having a long line of curtailed budgets.

No green committee should be actively involved in day to day operations.  That's how disasters happen.  Let's face it, firing a superintendent for cause is pretty difficult if the green chair is out on the course measuring mowing lines for parallel! 

Superintendents (as any human being) should be given the respect to succeed or fail on their own merits given specific enough goals.   

[Patrick_Mucci]

Corey,

The answer to your question depends upon the "force" behind the directives.

If the directive for conditions/maintainance came from the green committee, then it should be the Green Chairman and the Superintendent, acting in harmony.

If, the directive came from the Board, then the President and the Superintendent acting in harmony.

If the concept came from the Superintendent, then the superintendent with notification to the appropriate parties.

If the concept came from the GM, then the GM and Superintendent with notification to the appropriate parties.

[brad_miller]

In Pat's answer guess which person keeps coming up. The Superintendent. The benefit of a great one can't be lost on the process regardless from where the direction comes.