But later in the interview, when discussing Sebonack, Nicklaus says "The decision-making was something we had to agree upon, otherwise the owner, Michael Pascucci, would make the decision. We never wanted the owner to make the decision (says smiling)." So how to reconcile that quote with his earlier one about doing what the owner wants? Perhaps he means that the owner supplies a sort of macro approach to the project, the overarching brief on what is wanted, but the design itself belongs to the architects. That's the way I read it, anyway.
Jack did say that very thing about Mr. Pascucci to me, right in front of Michael, the first time we all got together ... kind of laying down a marker, I think. He and Michael have known each other for a long time and he probably knew how involved Michael would want to be in the project. The whole setup was ripe for triangulation, which is one reason co-designs are so difficult to pull off.
The topic of HOW involved you would like an involved client to be is a sensitive one. You do want to fulfill THEIR mission, but at the same time, they are hiring YOU to design the course and paying to put YOUR name on it.
The person who had the best perspective on this, for me, was Dick Youngscap, who developed Sand Hills [and Firethorn before that]. Dick is an architect himself, by profession, so he was all too familiar with having clients who kept changing their minds in mid-process, and otherwise meddling with the design. At Firethorn, he battled with Mr. Dye a bit, but he kept his input to reminding Pete to stay on budget, because he didn't have the unlimited resources of some of Pete's other clients. At Sand Hills, he certainly had strong opinions, but he did not want to interfere with Bill and Ben on details of the design.
My impression is that Mr. Youngscap believes most clients [including a lot of the ones you read about] get too involved in the process.
For my own part, I like it when the client comes out during construction to see what is going on, and to ask questions about why we are doing certain things. It's much better for him to hear the answer from me, than to get the question from a golfer two years later, and agree with the golfer because he never heard my side of the story. [I made the mistake of not communicating with the client very well at High Pointe, and that's one small reason it's now gone.] However, when a client does get involved, we always hold our breath hoping that they won't start suggesting where to put bunkers or move a green. The golf course is a big puzzle, and it's hard to put a puzzle together when somebody else is changing the shapes of the pieces!