The answer is (and isn’t) on the clipboard

When my son was in second grade I had the opportunity to coach his soccer team. We were playing a team that was much better than us, but we were only down 2-1. ¶ As I was standing there, clipboard in hand containing all of the team’s stats, the wife of my assistant coach walked straight past me to her husband and lectured him on how badly the team was playing and as coach, he should do something about it. Once finished she turned and began stomping back to where the other parents were standing. ¶ As she walked past me I looked down sheepishly at my clipboard. I still remember her growling, “Karl, the answer isn’t on that clipboard.”

Metrics are a set of measurements that quantify results. There are performance metrics, project metrics and business metrics, to name a few. To organize our data, sophisticated tools (KPIs, Scorecards, Gantt charts, etc.) exist.

On the opposite end, and much cruder in comparison, my clipboard was a source of quantifiable information that I could use to make soccer decisions. Goals, assists, blocks, saves, minutes played — metrics were what I used on the soccer sideline back then, and they have grown in use to dominate much of the decision-making we do today.

Social media companies gather vast amounts of data from users that is quantified in such a manner that advertisers can target the desired category or group of individuals. At universities, we use metrics extensively to determine if faculty or programs pay for themselves. Superintendents use metrics all the time to balance budgets, determine what duties cost and calculate the time required to complete them.

But where metrics are underutilized is in the hiring of crew members. Often times the hiring process is haphazard, consisting of running an advertisement in the local newspaper, contacting university turf programs, posting on the Internet or calling friends.

Do you know how effective each recruiting tool you use is? Metrics like: number of hires; time to fill a position; offer to acceptance ratios; background (college/non-college); longevity; provide valuable information. As the cost of attracting and retaining good people increases, hiring metrics provide return on investment information and in some cases lead to some surprising conclusions.

Take, for example, financial companies that targeted their hiring practices to the top MBAs from elite business schools. They found those hires tended to leave the company quickly, resulting in considerable turnover costs. These companies have since targeted graduates at the next (lower) level of business schools, which happens to produce qualified students who tend to stay longer.

Although I believe golf courses could become more efficient by incorporating hiring and retention metrics, I also realize that metrics alone do not give all the answers. They can’t measure the personal attributes of loyalty, dedication, trust and creativity that must be valued in successful hires — just like my soccer clipboard couldn’t measure hustle. Those attributes are often found and measured through continual personal interaction and observation.

Another example: I was a kid walking down a street with a friend in Champaign, Ill. We passed a house with a rock band practicing in the garage. As we stopped and listened I said to my friend, “Why don’t those guys go out and get real jobs?” (Yes, even as a child I was extremely practical, and metrics-based.)

Metrics alone supported my comment that these guys were wasting their time, given data based on the success of garage bands. But, much like my clipboard, the answer isn’t always in those metrics.

The band? It was REO Speedwagon.

Image: freedigitalphotos.net / pandpstock001