Hiring a Construction Super and Beyond

[Norbert P]

I am wondering how often, in recent years, that a new course is built with a

hired superintendent that does not stay much past opening.  Clearly, it is

advantageous to everyone to have the super on board and entirely involved

in all phases of construction and grow-in, and for planning maintenance into

the future.  He will know as much about the course as anyone, but it seems

that many times the original guy is replaced or leaves within the first

couple of years anyway.

I am curious about actual and fairly recent good and bad examples of this

situation.   

[Michael Blake]

My vote for a recent good example is Don Mahaffey.

[Tim Nugent]

Slag,I think it's because there are more than one type of Super in the golf world.  It seems there are several different types of supers out there.  The following is tongue-in-cheek, so take it as that.
1) construction/grow-in.  This guy likes to create and typically hates golfers.  So after the funs done, he may stick around  to polish it up but is soon after is on the prowl for a new gig.
2) the grass grower.  This guy isn't much on projects or construction but likes to "grow and mow".  He will put up with the golfers because they affirm his efforts. You won't find this guy around the office much.
3) the environmentalist.  This guy is stoked to have control of an 180-acre living lab to play with.  Doesn't like construction because it allows an "outsider" to mess with his baby.
4) the Professional.  Sees himself as a manager.  Likes to write reports and go to board meetings.  Active in local and national GCSAA.  Writes articles. Gives speeches.  Likes projects because they are one more thing to manage - but won't want to expose his crew (or himself) to any construction work.  Takes credit if things go well, places blame on "consultants" if things don't.  Splits time between clubhouse and office.  Usually has an assistant (or 2) that should be a super at another course, top notch mechanic, irrigatation tech, spray tech and a long time foreman to run the crew.

Rarely, you get blessed with a multiple personality.  The best example I know of is Marc Davison at Green Bay CC.  He is all the above all rolled into one.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Michael,
Thank you.
I like construction a lot.

I like grow-in even more.
It’s so hectic and demanding that you have to stay focused and on guard all the time if you want it to turn out great. I love the pressure. Luckily I have great in laws and whenever I've done a grow-in I've been able to ship the family off to Northern Michigan where they have a great time...because they know if they were around me they wouldn't get much of my attention during this time.

I also like maintenance, especially preparing for big events. I miss setting up for the member-guest or hosting amateur events. I also enjoy training young people who take an interest in golf course management.

I think there are a lot of guys who would love to be involved from the beginning and then take care of the course for years afterwards. But, construction is fun, and for me, I'd love nothing more than building golf courses for the rest of my career. That has nothing to do with golfers as I enjoy seeing people play my course and interacting with players.  

[Bill_McBride]

I would love to spend some time around a job site where Don Mahaffey, Joe Hancock and Slag Bandoon were playing in the dirt.  I would buy a ticket to see that, and bring several six packs of high quality beer.  For after work.

[Mike_Young]

Slag,I think it's because there are more than one type of Super in the golf world.  It seems there are several different types of supers out there.  The following is tongue-in-cheek, so take it as that.
1) construction/grow-in.  This guy likes to create and typically hates golfers.  So after the funs done, he may stick around  to polish it up but is soon after is on the prowl for a new gig.
2) the grass grower.  This guy isn't much on projects or construction but likes to "grow and mow".  He will put up with the golfers because they affirm his efforts. You won't find this guy around the office much.
3) the environmentalist.  This guy is stoked to have control of an 180-acre living lab to play with.  Doesn't like construction because it allows an "outsider" to mess with his baby.
4) the Professional.  Sees himself as a manager.  Likes to write reports and go to board meetings.  Active in local and national GCSAA.  Writes articles. Gives speeches.  Likes projects because they are one more thing to manage - but won't want to expose his crew (or himself) to any construction work.  Takes credit if things go well, places blame on "consultants" if things don't.  Splits time between clubhouse and office.  Usually has an assistant (or 2) that should be a super at another course, top notch mechanic, irrigatation tech, spray tech and a long time foreman to run the crew.

Rarely, you get blessed with a multiple personality.  The best example I know of is Marc Davison at Green Bay CC.  He is all the above all rolled into one.

Tim,
Excellent breakdown....
Tim has broken it down as well as I have ever seen....the problem I see often is where the # 4 supt " The professional" or possibly #2 or #3 are in place and a renovation takes place...and they have no clue how to grow it in....it is a totally different animal and IMHO that is why so many of the grow-in supts leave...I have seen it take a normal supt almost twice as long to grow-in as a grow-in supt  and it also often cost the supts their jobs when they can't get the renovations back on line or encounter problem....
AND this is not being critical of the regular supt....not all supts get to do a grow-in....

[Jake Straub]

Tim

Bang on man....two small additions, might add a 2a The Programmer.  He has developed a turf program that brings back turf conditions to championship caliber, will spend money like it's going out of style but gets the job done from a playing conditions standpoint.  Also 4a The Puppeteer.  the guy who is smart enough to know how good is staff and how much he has forgotten and will work harder at keeping them around then actually letting them move forward in their career path.

[Troy Alderson]

Hi Slag,

I am not sure the construction superintendent exist in this economy.  During the good time of the 80's and 90's a construction/grow-in superintendent was a specialty position that could be afforded.  These days with the economy, I would say a golf course developer is looking for a superintendent that will do everything and stay on-board for years to come.  The cost is less over the long term then hiring specialty positions.

I like to prefer to myself as all four of Tim's descriptions.  I just have not had the opportunity to show it yet, as I love all aspects of golf course management.  Don is an example of all four superintendents rolled into one and I do not think that type of superintendent is all that rare.  Any superintendent today should be able to handle all four aspect of golf course management as described by Tim.  It comes down to communicating with the developer and/or members that you have the capabilities.

Troy

[Norbert P]

   There are so many fine responses that I don't know where to start except to say thank you for your experienced answers.

 I take it that the onus is on the investors to have the foresight to choose the right candidate for the life of the course. If, say, the construction/grow-in style Super is to be hired, with expectations of his leaving within a year or so, then he had better place heavy emphasis on educating the crew for the maintenance side after his departure.  Amongst other scenerios, I see that the most ideal situation is to hire a Super that will be committed for years to come, but life and circumstances don't always allow for that, thus the question.

  Thanks again, and Billy Mac ! I think I speak for the three amigos when I say that we look forward to sitting down with you for "several six packs of high quality beer". 

  Please don't let this post put a cork in the thread.

[Jake Straub]

Slag I like the post and hopefully this will keep it going in the right direction, let me know if you think so.   In a perfect world scenario wouldn't it be awesome if the GCA hired the super from his/her fold.  Hear me out on this one, would the GCA's rather have someone who has worked their way up through the ranks of their firm and has a good understanding of what the GCA is trying to accomplish left in charge after everyone has left the site?  Let's say, "this super" has worked for the GCA as a PM until grassing then takes over as the super and is contracted with GCA's firm and the club to give at least some agreed upon time frame at that facility.  This would ensure enough time to show a potential young and upcoming super the ropes or develop a sort of "history"  while protecting the integrity of the Architecture for the outside super who would succeed him/her.  It would seem to me to be a insurance policy for both the architect as well as the club.  Let's be honest we can all think of cases where as soon as the course was turned over some of the Architecture started to be lost as more people tried to interpret what the GCA was trying to accomplish in certain areas with their original layout.

what do you think a pipe dream or the future??

[Joe Hancock]

I would love to spend some time around a job site where Don Mahaffey, Joe Hancock and Slag Bandoon were playing in the dirt.  I would buy a ticket to see that, and bring several six packs of high quality beer.  For after work.

I will personally see that you get an invite.

 

[John Gosselin]

Slag,I think it's because there are more than one type of Super in the golf world.  It seems there are several different types of supers out there.  The following is tongue-in-cheek, so take it as that.
1) construction/grow-in.  This guy likes to create and typically hates golfers.  So after the funs done, he may stick around  to polish it up but is soon after is on the prowl for a new gig.
2) the grass grower.  This guy isn't much on projects or construction but likes to "grow and mow".  He will put up with the golfers because they affirm his efforts. You won't find this guy around the office much.
3) the environmentalist.  This guy is stoked to have control of an 180-acre living lab to play with.  Doesn't like construction because it allows an "outsider" to mess with his baby.
4) the Professional.  Sees himself as a manager.  Likes to write reports and go to board meetings.  Active in local and national GCSAA.  Writes articles. Gives speeches.  Likes projects because they are one more thing to manage - but won't want to expose his crew (or himself) to any construction work.  Takes credit if things go well, places blame on "consultants" if things don't.  Splits time between clubhouse and office.  Usually has an assistant (or 2) that should be a super at another course, top notch mechanic, irrigatation tech, spray tech and a long time foreman to run the crew.

Rarely, you get blessed with a multiple personality.  The best example I know of is Marc Davison at Green Bay CC.  He is all the above all rolled into one.

Most supers I know are a combination of all 4. The stereotyping above is about as insulting as it gets.

[Greg Chambers]

Slag,

I was hired in my current position to do the grow-in and then it was understood that I was to move on after it was done.  After the first summer of grow-in, the developers were impressed with how much time I spent on site...they could tell I was completely devoted.  They offered me the position full time and I took it.  I'm glad I did, as grow-ins are few and far between these days.  I have been here for the past nine years now, and I'm sure that the course is better for it, as I know exactly what the GCA wanted the course to be and to play, and I've been able to keep the original design intent intact.

[Mike_Young]

Slag,I think it's because there are more than one type of Super in the golf world.  It seems there are several different types of supers out there.  The following is tongue-in-cheek, so take it as that.
1) construction/grow-in.  This guy likes to create and typically hates golfers.  So after the funs done, he may stick around  to polish it up but is soon after is on the prowl for a new gig.
2) the grass grower.  This guy isn't much on projects or construction but likes to "grow and mow".  He will put up with the golfers because they affirm his efforts. You won't find this guy around the office much.
3) the environmentalist.  This guy is stoked to have control of an 180-acre living lab to play with.  Doesn't like construction because it allows an "outsider" to mess with his baby.
4) the Professional.  Sees himself as a manager.  Likes to write reports and go to board meetings.  Active in local and national GCSAA.  Writes articles. Gives speeches.  Likes projects because they are one more thing to manage - but won't want to expose his crew (or himself) to any construction work.  Takes credit if things go well, places blame on "consultants" if things don't.  Splits time between clubhouse and office.  Usually has an assistant (or 2) that should be a super at another course, top notch mechanic, irrigatation tech, spray tech and a long time foreman to run the crew.

Rarely, you get blessed with a multiple personality.  The best example I know of is Marc Davison at Green Bay CC.  He is all the above all rolled into one.

Most supers I know are a combination of all 4. The stereotyping above is about as insulting as it gets.

John,
I can't speak for Tim but I know that as for myself I would not intend for the above to be insulting.  As I think about it I can see where someone as yourself could take it that way but that would be because you are capable of doing any of it and don't mind getting it done.

Several times I have seen where the acting supt got into a grow-in situation and just could not handle it....not to say he was a bad supt but  the size of things sometimes gets to some guys.  Sometimes it comes at guys so fast during grow-in and things get out of sync...I have seen it take 4 months for a supt to grow-in a set of bentgrass greens that were planted in May.  where a growi-n supt can usually move it along a little faster.  I saw a guy take 8 months to put sand in bunkers because he wished to do it the way he did it normally in a "spoonfed manner"...... so please don't take it as insulting.....  it exist just maybe not for you....

you talk about being insulted...or should I say amused...in a recent golf   Monthly  a prominent archie says  "In a zen like way I am a master of my art, and I want to teach you my art.  And if you enjoy it as I have, then I am blessed."  I hope you don't think all architects think that way about their profession....
Mike

[John Gosselin]

"Takes credit if things go well, places blame on "consultants" if things don't.  Splits time between clubhouse and office." 

Mike, it's very insulting to read what Tim wrote and especially lines like above. How about if superintendents wrote insulting condescending, generalizations about architects? Would you be insulted?
 

[Ian Larson]

I too thought that at first, but then reminded myself that it does really exist in specific situations.

[Mike_Young]

"Takes credit if things go well, places blame on "consultants" if things don't.  Splits time between clubhouse and office."  

Mike, it's very insulting to read what Tim wrote and especially lines like above. How about if superintendents wrote insulting condescending, generalizations about architects? Would you be insulted?
 

John,
After reading what you say above by itself...yes I will agree with you....none of us should generalize any profession....but I have seen such in individual situations....sorry about that...
Mike

[Mark Hissey]

I know I'm prejudiced, but they don't get too much better than Garret Bodington.

[Tim Nugent]

John, I was not attempting to be insulting - but was worried some may not read it as the satire it was intended hence the warning "this is tongue-in-cheek, so take it as that".  Guess you didn't. By the way, over the yrs  I have run into guys that make up these categories.  I also don't see why you think it's so wrong to be one.  All these guys were/are very successful - they fit or conformed to the requirements of the job

I used the groups to illustrate why some supers do grow-ins and why it's not others cup-of-tea.  Doing construction/ grow-in takes someone who can work from dawn to dark, 7 days a week, every week.  It can burn a guy out real fast.  Not everyon is cut out for it.  Like Mike Y stated, some guys are good at it and others arn't.  During the past 20 yrs, I been involved in many grow-ins, sometimes 3-4 a yr.  Hence, I have a pretty good basis from which to generalize.  

Jake S. - when the archie  gets to bring in the super, it's usually a win-win.  The archie will know the capabilites up front and they usually have had some prior experience and didn't kill each other.  If the super takes the job, he knows what the expectations are.  The developer wins because he gets a cohesive team that can work together and not have to deal with competing adgendas.

Mike Y hit it on the head with his observation that a grow-in can overwhelm the inexperienced.  Establishing is different than maintaining.  And usually there are a host of other things that also require attention - the worst of which is hiring and training a crew, having guys no-show or quit.  The turnover of holes starts of slow but quickly accelerates to several a week. The stress level can get pretty high, couple with sleep deprevation  and it's not uncommon for some to say "been there, done that"

[Alan FitzGerald CGCS MG]

One item to keep in mind with a grow-in super vs a 'regular' super doing a renovation or one that is planning on staying around after a grow-in is they have two totally different 'goals' of growing grass that to an outsider may look like inexperience.

I hate to generalize, but a grow-in super that knows he will be moving on, has one goal, grow grass, which means fertilize the crap out of it, generally he's not as worried about about long term maintenance, thatch control, playability etc where as the guy that is going to be sticking around will (or should) be thinking about down the road, a few extra weeks of grow-in would greatly be beneficial in long term playability and maintenance.

[Steve Okula]

 Doing construction/ grow-in takes someone who can work from dawn to dark, 7 days a week, every week.  It can burn a guy out real fast.  Not everyon is cut out for it.  Like Mike Y stated, some guys are good at it and others arn't.  During the past 20 yrs, I been involved in many grow-ins, sometimes 3-4 a yr.  Hence, I have a pretty good basis from which to generalize.  

Whether you're a GCS, GCA, or chief cook and bottle washer; if all you have is your work then you don't have much at all.

It pains me to read comments on this site about supers like, "He lives and breathes it.", as though dedicating every waking moment (and half the sleeping ones, too) to a sward of turf is something heroic, instead of the reality that it is obsessive and unhealthy.

Why can't a super be considered first rate based on the results he produces, and not for sacrificing his health and personal relationships for the benefit of a real estate developer and some golfers?

[Ian Larson]

Because the nature of construction and grow-in is go go go until opening day. The job requires complete commitment and alot of sacrifice. The guys that NEED their every other weekend off and one day during the week they have the weekend on should stay on the established / maintenance side. Those that are willing to commit 24/7 because of an aggressive schedule can handle construction and grow-in. There is alot more than the capability to grow grass involved with it.

[Anthony Gray]

  Damon DiGiorgio was the construction super at Roko KI and stayed on as head super.

  Anthony

[Don_Mahaffey]

I hate to generalize, but a grow-in super that knows he will be moving on, has one goal, grow grass, which means fertilize the crap out of it, generally he's not as worried about about long term maintenance, thatch control, playability etc where as the guy that is going to be sticking around will (or should) be thinking about down the road, a few extra weeks of grow-in would greatly be beneficial in long term playability and maintenance.

You hate to generalize but you just did. Maybe you haven't been through a grow-in in the south during the summer; during thunderstorm season. But I have, three times, and I can tell you it's a lot easier to deal with puffy grass after you’re covered up than spend months chasing a sod cutter and repairing erosion because you didn't want to grow thatchy grass. In reality, all this generalizing is BS. Yeah, maybe some guys just want to cover the course up and move on, but just about everyone who directs a grow in has also been a maintenance super. I believe most of them get it and understand the long term goals. I guarantee you that if you were doing a grow in a thunderstorm prone area, and you've had to deal with serious erosion because you decided to slow it down, you'll be working your tail off to get it covered up ASAP the next time.
IMO, the quicker you get covered up, the quicker you can get about the business of providing a good golfing surface.

[Greg Chambers]

I've got to agree with Don on this one.  I've been a part of four grow-ins now, and in no case did we ever slow down the process for the sake of reducing thatch in the long run.  Get it grown in, start getting it ready to play, then deal with the consequences later.  Isn't that why they come out with newer, better, faster aerification equipment every 2-3 years?

[Tags:]

Tags: