Managing ambiguity through smarter golf course risk management

Golf course superintendents are not fans of ambiguity. A mostly straight-forward, no-nonsense bunch trained in scientific discipline and tenaciously dedicated to their responsibilities, their job demands certainty.

“Maybe” is not an answer they look upon kindly. Also, “it depends” and “we’ll see.” But those are sometimes the answers they get from their managers, owners, boards, members and customers. The best of them learn to navigate the roiling waters of inexactness to get the answers and information they really need.

Here’s how they do it:

Many of the most agile managers use what is known as “scenario planning” to organize their options and intentions. Scenario planning seeks to answer the questions, “What if?” and “Then what?” Their ability is founded in a five-step process for tackling ambiguity, reducing stress and increasing effectiveness.

1. They describe the problem to be addressed, being as clear in their description as possible.
2. They identify the options realistically available and sort them into three categories: best-case, worst-case and probable-case scenarios.
3. They evaluate the various impacts that could arise within each scenario. These evaluations should include considerations for labor and staffing, financial impacts, environmental responsibilities, supply chain capabilities and impacts on the course’s stakeholders.
4. They determine the most likely outcomes of each scenario and evaluate them against their responsibilities, course objectives and access to resources. Like all of us, they hope for the best and plan for the worst.
5. They establish the indicators and metrics to be monitored in-process and at key points to make sure all pre-planning possibilities have been identified and considered.

 Once clearly defined and described, they evaluate the risk factors that will impact their plan.

• Scale and scope of the undertaking
• Capabilities and skills of staff resources
• Availability of and access to required external resources
• Reliability of third-party assets and suppliers
• Access to necessary capital (with contingencies)
• Weather variability and possible impacts

Dealing with ambiguity extends beyond projects and project-related matters. A superintendent also deals with irregular and inconsistent guidance from throughout the organization. Managing organizational ambiguities requires a mutually agreed upon set of primary goals and objectives … and a lot of communication.

This is where a carefully considered agronomic plan provides the structure that enables and empowers superintendents to do the required work. In this sense, the agronomic plan is the first responder, providing direction and purpose.

Launching into a new calendar year, superintendents should take the following steps to minimize risk and to reduce ambiguity:

1. Complete your annual update of the agronomic plan. Add recently acquired tools, capabilities and expectations to ensure that your plan is consistent with 2026 goals and budgets.
2. Organize your conference and trade show trips to optimize your time. Keeping current on resources, information and best practices reduces risk at your facility.
3. Review your agronomic plan with assistants, supervisors and your crew. They need and want to understand what they are expected to achieve.
4. Conduct your annual equipment review with your mechanics to update your understanding of the useful life of your equipment and other physical assets. This will eliminate or reduce uncertainty up the organization and send a clear message regarding needed capital reserves.
5. Review your 2026-and-beyond capital plan with your general manager and CFO/accounting manager. Successful budgeting needs always require ample up-front discussions with these important gatekeepers.

Dealing with ambiguity is as important as the numerous other details that challenge superintendents on a daily basis. Now is the time to put a plan in place to reduce ambiguity and bring needed clarity to your work.