(Advancing the game) Golf's n-f-p format

There are more than 40,000 not-for-profit associations throughout America, which includes almost every meaningful golf organization – national and regional. The problem is that golf’s n-f-p associations perform inconsistently in today’s economically tight, more challenging golf world because the traditional n-f-p format – with its historic inefficiencies and lack of accountability and commitments to excellence – unwittingly ties the hands of our nation’s golf associations.

Whenever there’s a lack of a commitment to excellence, three situations customarily result: mediocrity becomes an acceptable operating norm; new program development slows; and timely performance becomes a lost art. Examples of these shortcomings follow.

1. Fiscal profile. Without a profit motive, annual expenses are allowed to approach but not exceed revenues. Some might think this is an example of sound management. Not really, because n-f-p associations avoid the issue by generating new dues revenues instead of managing expenses better.

2. Staff profile. Because labor costs are the biggest expense for any sizable business, inefficient labor management practices within an n-f-p can get out of hand and result in an oversized staff.

An example of accelerated staff growth is when the GCSAA staff totaled 19 in 1982 doing about 70 percent of the work load (manually without computer/Internet support) of the current staff, outside consultants advised that staff size could be expected to approach 40 through the 1990s. However, by the early 1990s, GCSAA staff size already had grown to more than 100 and is about 120 people presently. This pattern prevails throughout many n-f-p associations. (Estimated current association profiles: GCSAA: 21,000 members with 120 staff, PGA: 27,000 members with 150 staff, CMAA: 6,500 members with 37 staff.)

The more important observation is that n-f-p staffs generally become the power base within their associations. The reason for this is primarily because boards of directors are transient by definition, and association staffs are essentially permanent in nature. This isn’t meant to be critical of staff motives because there’s no other way for associations to go when boards persistently turn over and many presidents serve one-year ceremonial terms. The problem that arises, however, is that association staffs develop their own agendas naturally, which can and do differ from “what serves the membership best” agendas. A bureaucratic culture results with staff self-interests often driving association policy.

So should staff leaders be held accountable for not disassembling current overriding n-f-p staff cultures? No more than we blamed Colin Powell when he assumed the leadership of the bureaucratic driven State Department and left four years later with the same staff bureaucracy in tact – electing not to battle with career staff to effect change. There are better ways.

3. Key issue profile. Amid otherwise noteworthy programming, the following are examples of where lax association thinking is proving to be inherently costly:
• Within the GCSAA, when a change stifling mandatory two-thirds vote of annual meeting attending members is required to amend the bylaws – a situation that seriously impedes the GCSAA’s ability to modernize and assume a leadership role throughout a changing golf industry;
• Within the PGA, when the lack of emphasis put on quality teaching results in as many players leaving the game as join each year – a situation that seriously undermines current player development programming, which similarly fails to focus on the priority need to foster a new generation of more and better qualified golf instructors; and
• Within CMAA, when the ill-defined title of general manager is so easily applied and so widely misused throughout golf – a situation that erodes respect for CMAA and the club management profession.

4. Missing programs. There’s no need to separate the three golf associations when noting the lack of key program development because they each have the same common failings. First, the career planning needs of their separate memberships aren’t being addressed, which positions each association member and family at a serious disadvantage when migrating through career and life’s challenges. And second, each association has done little to educate employers (i.e., green, golf and house committees) to the nature of each profession’s job culture and mission statement, which continues to minimize job security, leave compensation money on the table, and slow professional growth and recognition.

Recommendations
With all of these unaddressed inherent problems, we’re blessed that some n-f-p associations fair better than others. For example, the U.S. Golf Association is a membership of clubs/courses and not professional people. It is free to bring the proven expertise of private sector business people to its board. Consequently, the USGA is a fiscally sound, highly accountable organization that commits to the pursuit of excellence and is respected for this. Accordingly, I recommend that the GCSAA (with the PGA and CMAA to similarly follow suit) consider the following:

1.) Borrowing from the USGA model, expand the GCSAA board of directors from nine to 11 to include five private sector voting members to generally address the following discipline areas: finance, education, association management, program development and communications/promotion. Officerships would remain the sole province of GCSAA members.

In addition to the obvious advantage of bringing needed expertise to the board to assertively address the collective program shortcomings mentioned above, this board reconfiguration also would reposition the power base within the association to where it belongs, i.e., at board level. I believe the GCSAA staff would welcome this change because of the program and people growth that would follow.

2.) To dislodge static staff culture, require key department heads to commit to obtaining certified association executive status and to research/publish relative to the profession as the academic community demands of its professorial community. This would enhance staff qualifications and create upward mobility whereby staff members would graduate to more responsible GCSAA or industry jobs after serving the association well.

3.) Relocate the GCSAA headquarters because it’s very difficult to ensure consistent high level of constructive staff turnover in Lawrence, Kan.

Every business organization must adjust to changing times, and so must golf’s n-f-p associations. Their horizons will be unlimited in service to their members and the game of golf once they acknowledge the need to bring private-sector expertise on board and to mobilize staff flow. GCN

Jim McLoughlin is the founder of TMG Golf (www.TMGgolfcounsel.com), a golf course development and consulting firm, and is a former executive director of the GCSAA. He can be reached at golfguide@adelphia.net or 760-804-7339.