[Lou_Duran]

Mike Young,

Are you primarily referring to non-member owned private clubs operated by large management companies?  We have several of those in my neck of the woods, mostly lower second tier clubs, and the owners and management companies don't make any bones about who is running things.  Member committees serve mostly in an advisory capacity, and the owners' needs are satisfied as much as possible by what I see as more of a broad, cookie-cutter property management approach.  In a service business, when the staff complains more about completing paper work than meeting the demands of the top 10 high-maintenance members, you know there's an owner/management/employee problem.  Why anyone would want to get into the golf business today is a mystery to me.

[Dunlop_White]

Hello Mike -- you are so on the money with this it has drawn me out of my shell!!!!

[Anthony Butler]

IMHO many of our private courses have become employee driven in the last 20 years.  The course so often discussed here evolved in a time when golf was a game and not a business.....members dictated more to employees as to what they wanted or expected....in the last few years the employee has become an intimidation for many a club board....and has driven much of the decision making.....most of the time the member cannot and will not argue with the employee....and a corporate culture develops....I think it is getting ready to change....

Mike,

I have to agree with most of the commentary here. You might have a bug up your ass about some particular interaction you've had at your club or somewhere else, but that has never been my experience at any decent private club in Australia or the US. In fact, senior long-term employees of these clubs are very careful to present any policy they are in enforcing or communicating as being the decision of the board, or at least made in consultation with the club president. I have never experienced or heard of any situation where the manager of the club gets involved in membership applications other than executing the decisions of the board. I think you open a very dangerous door when you have people who don't play at the club making decisions on who gets to play on the course. (Beyond the one day corporate and charity days many clubs hold)

The personal style of how people interact with you or communicate decisions made by others will, of course, vary. The only time I have seen it get a little blurry was back when members (generally past or present elected officers) take jobs at the club. My great uncle served as the Captain at NSW Golf Club from 1966-71 then as the Sec/General Manager for 7 years after he retired in the early 70s. That was a fairly common occurrence in Australia and the UK up until the 80s. Sometimes it lead to some high-handed dealings with the members. Or at least the suspiicion of that in my great uncle's case. I can't recall the name, but the guy who was the Secretary Manager at my father's club at the time was a prime example of that. With the advent of professional club managers this has mostly gone away. The guy currently serving as GM at NSWGC, I think, does a phenomenal job at responding to individual member concerns while following the policy laid down by the club's board.

If you've joined a club run by a professional management group or your club has outsourced the management of their club, that's the problem, not the individual behavior of those employees. Ultimately the club employees should answer to the membership not vica-versa

[Mike_Young]

Tim,
I am aware of the cutbacks and how they have affected clubs....I stand by my theory....PGA, CMAA and GCSAA have lost touch with the average club or course their member works for....these times will clean up a lot of the mess....cheers.

Mike,
I think it's the architects who lost touch. Maybe if you guys quit blowing smoke up the backsides of owners so you could charge bigger fees and actually told some of them that they didn't need 8,000 yard courses with all the bells and whistles that have basically done to golf what you are now lamenting we'd all be in a better place.

You ought to quit casting stones on people who actually work for a living.

Jim,
We have plenty of pompous ass architects...most overated job in the golf industry....but we don't have an association to name above so I didn't mention it....I am not casting stones at people who work for a living....I'm just making an observation in private member owned clubs...not owner operated for profit entities or management company clubs..but clubs where the board meets for three hours once a month and the green chair changes every year....
All I am saying is that IMHO the members need to know more of how their club actually operates than being TOLD how it operates...
I have gone to conferences where supts are presenting a class on how to convince your board regarding your budget etc...great...nothing against the supt for that...that's what the schools are teaching....when a young guy interviewing tells an owner that he will only walk mow and can't triplex because "it is his reputation"...come on...that's all association hype and dribble that has been used to "enhance the profession" ....
My father in law was a supt for years at three top FL clubs...he loved being a supt and the goal was to "get it done"....I don't see that much at the type of clubs I describe above.  Look how titles have changed....Director of Golf, director of Agronomy...Certified club Manager...that's all association stuff....and to be a Director of Golf you have to be over the Supt..( I don't know how that got done)
I am not slamming anyone here...I also work for a living....

[Mike_Young]

IMHO many of our private courses have become employee driven in the last 20 years.  The course so often discussed here evolved in a time when golf was a game and not a business.....members dictated more to employees as to what they wanted or expected....in the last few years the employee has become an intimidation for many a club board....and has driven much of the decision making.....most of the time the member cannot and will not argue with the employee....and a corporate culture develops....I think it is getting ready to change....

Mike,

I have to agree with most of the commentary here. You might have a bug up your ass about some particular interaction you've had at your club or somewhere else, but that has never been my experience at any decent private club in Australia or the US. In fact, senior long-term employees of these clubs are very careful to present any policy they are in enforcing or communicating as being the decision of the board, or at least made in consultation with the club president. I have never experienced or heard of any situation where the manager of the club gets involved in membership applications other than executing the decisions of the board. I think you open a very dangerous door when you have people who don't play at the club making decisions on who gets to play on the course. (Beyond the one day corporate and charity days many clubs hold)

The personal style of how people interact with you or communicate decisions made by others will, of course, vary. The only time I have seen it get a little blurry was back when members (generally past or present elected officers) take jobs at the club. My great uncle served as the Captain at NSW Golf Club from 1966-71 then as the Sec/General Manager for 7 years after he retired in the early 70s. That was a fairly common occurrence in Australia and the UK up until the 80s. Sometimes it lead to some high-handed dealings with the members. Or at least the suspiicion of that in my great uncle's case. I can't recall the name, but the guy who was the Secretary Manager at my father's club at the time was a prime example of that. With the advent of professional club managers this has mostly gone away. The guy currently serving as GM at NSWGC, I think, does a phenomenal job at responding to individual member concerns while following the policy laid down by the club's board.

If you've joined a club run by a professional management group or your club has outsourced the management of their club, that's the problem, not the individual behavior of those employees. Ultimately the club employees should answer to the membership not vica-versa

Anthony,
I know nothing of Australian clubs....I am not speaking on management company clubs...speaking only of member owned, non profit country clubs....operated by committee which on average meets once a month and rotates off every three or four years....these clubs have lost control of their clubs....not saying there are bad employees out there....no different than a parent that only spends limited time with their child...that's what these places do with their clubs...
And yes I do have a bug up my ass about this...but it is more to do with the BS that has been sold to clubs via associations...nothing to do with employees...

[Mike_Young]

Mike McGuire,
Thanks for understanding "Wuss-consin".  

The premise here is ridiculous and nothing more than a blame-game, with employees as an easy target. Mike, and others, would have us believe that the members of a club are such a bunch of morons that they can be led around by their noses, and have been for many years, by employees who only have their own welfare at heart. Well guess what, if club presidents or board heads/members are so intimidated by their supers, pros or managers then they as a group should be the target, not the employees.
When it was full speed ahead no clubs cared too much if their restaurant lost some money, after all, they had their own little dining enclave away from the hoi-polloi and that's what the club wanted.  When the swimming pool and tennis courts were put in the costs were absorbed, because the club wanted the amenities. When it was full speed ahead and the club wanted greens that stimped at 12 and lush fairways mowed at 3/8" and were told by the super that it was going to cost XXX$, well, it was full speed ahead because that's what the club wanted.  

At the white elephant clubs, the CCFADs, the story is no different. It wasn't an employee who spent millions on behemoth clubhouses sheltering overblown pro shops, sports bars, locker rooms, dining facilities, etc. It wasn't an employee who decided that there should be official greeters in the parking lot, or cart boys or food carts or ten-acre practice ranges with multple pyramids of PROV1's stacked on the line, and it wasn't an employee that spent the big pile of cash needed to hire the name-brand architect.  

This thread wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for an economy that took a huge downturn, and someone looking to blame someone else.

Am not playing a blame game and am not dissing employees....but while this may not be occurring at your club there are plenty of places where this happens on a daily basis....and it happens for the reason you mention....intimidation and plenty of members are led around by their noses....

In my experience , members being led by their noses is a good thing for the club

Jeff...
As long as you are not leading them to air conditioned greens, 12 ft wide cart paths, a larger dining room and waterslide

[Kris Shreiner]

Many posters on this thread have made some very valid points in assessing where many of these private clubs have gone sideways. There is no question...some of these professional golf associations have become part of the problem. While the intentions are noble, many of them have created unsustainable models of ever-increasing costs and administrative layers that are not necessary...unless thery're trying to justify their position and bloated salary.

I have plenty of respect for the majority of hardworking golf industry professionals and begrudge no one for earning a good living for their efforts. That said, when assistent pros are often working 60 hr+ weeks, making peanuts after spending over a hundred grand plus for the asssociation stipulated PGA credentials through college golf management programs and ass. superintendents are often working even more hours for not much more than peanuts, after often spending even more time and money on required education...something's wrong with this picture.

In these systems of almost indentured servitude, the only person making a decent wage is the guy at the top. Sound familiar?!
It's the corporatization of the game that's helping ruin it. Look at the salaries of these upper level, administrators in the various golf organizations. Many are knocking down a million plus...for what! Where are all the health of the game innovations, ground-breaking initatives and real numbers growth that the games supposed to need...  that we constantly hear about from the pulpits of these entities. Sorry, the results don't match the remuneration scale folks.

While golf has many positives to point to, there is no question a sobering introspection and unvarnished assessment of realistic goals is long overdue and the denial, bunker-mode mentality is still in full flower with many. Quite often, it is more prevalent the higher you go in these organizations, as they're interested in preserving the status quo. The net result of this continued behavior will be a deeper decline before it gets better.

Take care of the golf and everything else takes care of itself, provided you have competent folks in place who love and put the game as a sport first, rather than focusing on the "golf business" and how much money they can extract from it.

Cheers all...Happy New Year!

Kris

[Anthony Butler]

IMHO many of our private courses have become employee driven in the last 20 years.  The course so often discussed here evolved in a time when golf was a game and not a business.....members dictated more to employees as to what they wanted or expected....in the last few years the employee has become an intimidation for many a club board....and has driven much of the decision making.....most of the time the member cannot and will not argue with the employee....and a corporate culture develops....I think it is getting ready to change....

Mike,

I have to agree with most of the commentary here. You might have a bug up your ass about some particular interaction you've had at your club or somewhere else, but that has never been my experience at any decent private club in Australia or the US. In fact, senior long-term employees of these clubs are very careful to present any policy they are in enforcing or communicating as being the decision of the board, or at least made in consultation with the club president. I have never experienced or heard of any situation where the manager of the club gets involved in membership applications other than executing the decisions of the board. I think you open a very dangerous door when you have people who don't play at the club making decisions on who gets to play on the course. (Beyond the one day corporate and charity days many clubs hold)

The personal style of how people interact with you or communicate decisions made by others will, of course, vary. The only time I have seen it get a little blurry was back when members (generally past or present elected officers) take jobs at the club. My great uncle served as the Captain at NSW Golf Club from 1966-71 then as the Sec/General Manager for 7 years after he retired in the early 70s. That was a fairly common occurrence in Australia and the UK up until the 80s. Sometimes it lead to some high-handed dealings with the members. Or at least the suspiicion of that in my great uncle's case. I can't recall the name, but the guy who was the Secretary Manager at my father's club at the time was a prime example of that. With the advent of professional club managers this has mostly gone away. The guy currently serving as GM at NSWGC, I think, does a phenomenal job at responding to individual member concerns while following the policy laid down by the club's board.

If you've joined a club run by a professional management group or your club has outsourced the management of their club, that's the problem, not the individual behavior of those employees. Ultimately the club employees should answer to the membership not vica-versa

Anthony,
I know nothing of Australian clubs....I am not speaking on management company clubs...speaking only of member owned, non profit country clubs....operated by committee which on average meets once a month and rotates off every three or four years....these clubs have lost control of their clubs....not saying there are bad employees out there....no different than a parent that only spends limited time with their child...that's what these places do with their clubs...
And yes I do have a bug up my ass about this...but it is more to do with the BS that has been sold to clubs via associations...nothing to do with employees...

My experience is that the boards of most golf clubs in Australia and the US have more to worry about in the form of fruitcake fellow members than a rogue employee. As mentioned, the only system that works long-term is when the GM answers to the board and the employees answer to the GM. Apart from the superintendent and his staff, golf club employees are in the customer service business. Of course that rationale doesn't work with Comcast and many others.

Any group of members who are passionate about their course and their club would not let things get this out of hand. Probably a good yard stick by which to measure the engagement of the membership at any prospective club... join them at your own risk after that.

[JMEvensky]

Somehow this has turned into a club employee referendum.

My inference from Mike Young's original post was that he believed that a lot of member-owned clubs had,for a variety of reasons,allowed employees to have a greater say in the direction.This has led to a more "corporate" feel.

I didn't read any nefarious motives--just that the members got lazy and didn't get involved enough.A decision-making vacuum got formed and the employees filled it.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jim,
We have plenty of pompous ass architects...most overrated job in the golf industry....but we don't have an association to name above so I didn't mention it. - Mike Young

Did you forget ASGCA? You may not be a member, but as long as you're painting with a wide brush.......

JME,
I don't think anyone is accusing Mike of having nefarious motives, but he is trying to lay the blame for the sorry state of affairs at some clubs, and in the industry as a whole, squarely on the shoulders of employees. Some of Mike's points:  

in the last few years the employee has become an intimidation for many a club board....and has driven much of the decision making.....most of the time the member cannot and will not argue with the employee
I’d like to meet this hypothetical Obi-Wan Kenobi and find out the secret of mind control that magically turn members into zombies.
 
I can name at least 25 in one state.
Obi-Wan must be working his magic on employees in the south, Mike’s locale. I hope he makes a trip north in the near future.  

This why we now have 40,000 dollar pool slides at clubs, three times the mowers needed, over built pro shops and dining rooms that are never used..bunkers with 15 irrigation heads on them....members didn't come up with this stuff....they bought into it.
Ah yes, once again the zombie member is not responsible for the conditions they want at their clubs. It is that damn group of anarchists employees who foisted all the fluff on them.  

the board members want to be sure that when they leave the board they can walk around the club w/o being chastised for decisions so they will often go with whatever the employee tells them so that they can't be blamed.....
This one confuses me. Is the employee using the member or is the member using the employee? I wonder who will be looking for the new place to work if the ‘decision’ made by the employee, in cohoots with the cowardly –lion member, goes wrong?      

Am not playing a blame game and am not dissing employees....but while this may not be occurring at your club there are plenty of places where this happens on a daily basis....and it happens for the reason you mention....intimidation and plenty of members are led around by their noses....
No beating around the bush here, the employees are being accused of using intimidation to subvert the membership. Dastardly business!!    

No one is saying that any of these employees is incompetent....please understand that...in most cases they are more than competent but they know they can manipulate and control the boards.
More employee subversion. Will the bastards never stop!

I wouldn’t have had much opposition if Mike initially said that part of the golf industry is in a sorry state and the blame for that predicament is partly due to the influences that the various acronyms have had on it. He didn’t, he chose to single out club employees as the culprit, and he’s wrong.

Happy New Year

[JMEvensky]

Jim Kennedy,I guess we just read between the lines differently.Sounds like each of us has some personal experience with screw ups from each side of the equation.

The only thing I'm certain of is that there's enough blame to go around.

Happy New Year to you,too.

[Mike_Young]

Jim,
We have plenty of pompous ass architects...most overrated job in the golf industry....but we don't have an association to name above so I didn't mention it. - Mike Young

Did you forget ASGCA? You may not be a member, but as long as you're painting with a wide brush.......
JIM,  ASGCA IS NOT AN ASSOCIATION...IT IS A TRADE GROUP WHO SUBJECTIVERLY CHOOSES MEMBERS...

JME,
I don't think anyone is accusing Mike of having nefarious motives, but he is trying to lay the blame for the sorry state of affairs at some clubs, and in the industry as a whole, squarely on the shoulders of employees. Some of Mike's points:  

in the last few years the employee has become an intimidation for many a club board....and has driven much of the decision making.....most of the time the member cannot and will not argue with the employee
I’d like to meet this hypothetical Obi-Wan Kenobi and find out the secret of mind control that magically turn members into zombies.
GO TO ANY ASSOCIATION CONFERENCE AND YOU WILL MEET THEM
 
I can name at least 25 in one state.
Obi-Wan must be working his magic on employees in the south, Mike’s locale. I hope he makes a trip north in the near future.  
YOU HAVE THEM THERE ALSO

This why we now have 40,000 dollar pool slides at clubs, three times the mowers needed, over built pro shops and dining rooms that are never used..bunkers with 15 irrigation heads on them....members didn't come up with this stuff....they bought into it.
Ah yes, once again the zombie member is not responsible for the conditions they want at their clubs. It is that damn group of anarchists employees who foisted all the fluff on them.  OF COURSE THE BOARD IS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE...

the board members want to be sure that when they leave the board they can walk around the club w/o being chastised for decisions so they will often go with whatever the employee tells them so that they can't be blamed.....
This one confuses me. Is the employee using the member or is the member using the employee? I wonder who will be looking for the new place to work if the ‘decision’ made by the employee, in cohoots with the cowardly –lion member, goes wrong?    
ALL USE EACH OTHER....AND YEP..IT IS USUALLY THE EMPLOYEE THAT GOES... 

Am not playing a blame game and am not dissing employees....but while this may not be occurring at your club there are plenty of places where this happens on a daily basis....and it happens for the reason you mention....intimidation and plenty of members are led around by their noses....
No beating around the bush here, the employees are being accused of using intimidation to subvert the membership. Dastardly business!!  
NOPE...YOU R HEARING IT WRONG....THE EMPLOYEE IS TO BE COMPLEMENTED FOR EXCELLENT SALESMANSHIP JUST LIKE THE ARCHITECT OR BUILDER THAT CONVINCES THE SAME BOARD TO SPEND THREE TIMES WHAT'S NEEDED IN MANY CASES. 

No one is saying that any of these employees is incompetent....please understand that...in most cases they are more than competent but they know they can manipulate and control the boards.
More employee subversion. Will the bastards never stop!
IT WILL NEVER STOP BUT THAT IS THE FAULT OF THE BOARD AGAIN....NOT THE EMPLOYEE

I wouldn’t have had much opposition if Mike initially said that part of the golf industry is in a sorry state and the blame for that predicament is partly due to the influences that the various acronyms have had on it. He didn’t, he chose to single out club employees as the culprit, and he’s wrong.
I NEVER SINGLED OUT EMPLOYEES AS THE CULPRIT....I SINGLE OUT ASSOCIATIONS...
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE AUTO WORKERS BUT WE SEE WHERE THEIR UNIONS GOT US....THE ASSOCIATIONS WILL DO THE SAME TO GOLF IF THEY HAVEN'T ALREADY....
OBVIOUSLY JIM YOUR SET UP IS QUITE DIFFERENT AND THAT'S GREAT....BUT THERE ARE MANY PLACES WHERE IT IS DIFFERENT...
BUT WHEN I SEE A YOUNG SUPT TELL ME HE CAN'T USE A TRIPLEX BECAUSE IT COULD HURT HIS REPUTATION AND THE CLUB NEEDS TO SAVE THE MONEY....WELL THAT IS THE EMPLOYEE...AND YET IT IS NOT HIS FAULT....THE FAULT IS WITH THE BOARD MEMBER THAT COULD NOT ARGUE WITH HIM....HAPPY NEW YEAR....

Happy New Year

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()