Golf Practice Facility at
Lordsburg Institute of
Technology
1
Monday May 1, 2009
Mr. Birdie Maker
Manager, LIT Golf Course
1234 Fairway Lane
Lordsburg, NM
Dear Mr. Maker,
This report summarizes our research project on whether or not Lordsburg Institute of
Technology golf course needs a new or renovated practice facility.
We drew up a survey of twenty-six questions and asked current LIT golfers whether or not they
were satisfied with the current practice facility. We then distributed these surveys to LIT golf
team members, students enrolled in the LIT Professional Golf Management program, and
everyday LIT golfers. We received responses from roughly 125 people. We used Microsoft
Excel to analyze this data.
We discovered that the current practice facility was inadequate for many users. In fact, golfers
would prefer a new practice facility or some major improvement to the current facility.
Thank you.
Best Regards,
Aaron Jean
Derek James
Evan Jules
cc: Pat Gavin, Head Pro
2
Table of Contents
LIT Practice Facility Study
Letter of Transmittal
1
Executive Summary
3
Research Introduction
6
Methodology
7
Results
8
Conclusions
13
Recommendations
14
Appendix A & B
15
3
Executive Summary
Background
The LIT golf course is located on LIT property and is the most heavily used golf course in
Mesilla Valley. LIT has recently built a new clubhouse and practice facility to satisfy the
growing needs of its customer base. The old practice facility had the basic necessities, but was
not large enough to satisfy user demand or recent improvements in golf industry technology; for
example, the driving range was insufficiently long for modern drivers. With this history in mind,
golf course management should be concerned about how the LIT course is perceived and be
ready to make adjustments to increase revenue. The new practice facility is very large and can
satisfy the basic needs of most customers. However, the facility has come under scrutiny recently
because of its overall quality and day-to-day management.
The purpose of this study is to probe customers’ attitudes and perceptions about the LIT practice
facility to determine what, if any, changes should be made. Information from this study could
help LIT golf course managers to assess what features should be improved.
Respondents were asked to participate in a survey comprised of twenty-six questions, from
overall attitude toward the facility to attitude about the practice bunkers. The research objectives
for this study are as follows:






Determine overall opinion about the practice facility.
Determine how much time players typically spend at the LIT practice facility.
Determine which practice facility (the old one or the new one) golfers preferred.
Discover golfers’ assessments of equipment (range balls, ball dispenser, et
cetera) quality.
Identify key improvements to the practice facility that would boost its image and
customers’ satisfaction.
Discover golfers’ assessment of the LIT practice facility versus other practice
facilities.
The research design consisted of exploratory survey research. The sample was comprised of
adult golfers who had used the LIT practice facility, students of PGM program at LIT, and
members of LIT golf team. These respondents were selected via convenience sampling to
expedite the data collection process. The questionnaire was distributed at the LIT golf course, the
PGM office, and at PGM meetings. In total, 125 respondents participated in our survey.
Results
Golfer Behavior
Most respondents (70%) reported using the LIT practice facility for three years or less. This
shows that the LIT golf course has great potential for attracting and retaining new customers. If
these golfers continue to see improvement in the facility that they have recently started to use,
4
then they are more likely to continue their usage and provide the golf course with much-needed
revenue. Most golfers (79%) reported golfing between 8 and 12 years.
Crosstab results show that the more playing experience, the more years spent practicing at the
LIT facility. The golfers who have used the practice facility for seven or more years have the
most playing experience (an average of 11.33 years). The vast majority of these respondents
were men (94.4%). Most respondents were students in LIT’s PGM program (83.2%), which is
why 72.8% were between the ages of 18 and 22.
Practice Facility Impressions and Preference
When respondents provided their opinions of the practice facility as a whole, the majority
(46.4%) said they thought the LIT practice facility was average at best. This was followed by
34.4% who thought the practice facility was fair. What is more surprising is that only 5.6% of
golfers surveyed thought the facility was good and no one thought the facility was excellent.
When asked about their preference between the old practice facility and the new one, the
majority (47.2%) said they liked the old one better. This result shows that LIT golf course
management should address the practice facility if customer retention is important.
5
Introduction to Research Problem and Questions:
Our research question for this project is ‘Does LIT need to improve its current practice facility at
the Lordsburg Institute of Technology University Golf Course?’ To answer this question, we
surveyed PGM (Professional Golf Management) students currently attending LIT. The number
of PGM students at LIT is roughly 190. This group generally believes that the current LIT golf
practice facility needs vast improvements to meet the needs of up-and-coming golf professionals.
Among the PGM and golf team members, we hear various informal complaints about the current
practice range. These complaints range from uneven hitting surfaces to inadequate practice
putting and chipping greens. At many PGM schools, the practice facilities are well maintained
and provide future golf professionals a place to hone their golf skills. For example, at Mesilla
Valley University, the school golf course has a well-maintained driving range with level hitting
surfaces and a large practice putting and chipping green. MVU also has a state-of-the-art ball
dispensing system.
In conducting a survey, we will ascertain what all golfers—but especially PGM students and golf
team members—believe should be improved at the current practice facility. We hypothesize that
all PGM students and golf team members believe that improvements must be made to make
LIT’s golf course an enjoyable place to practice.
Hypotheses:



Customers believe that improvements must be made to the current practice facility
PGM students and golf team members do not consistently practice at LIT’s driving range
because of inadequate conditions.
Customers believe the current practice facility is under staffed and poorly maintained.
Research Objectives:



To determine customers view the current LIT golf practice facility negatively.
To determine the reasons why PGM students and golf team members do not practice at
LIT’s golf course driving range.
To determine what improvements should be made to LIT’s golf practice facility.
Introduction to Research Questions:
Our survey consisted of 21 questions and 5 general information questions. Each question helped
us understand what kind of improvements should be made to the practice facility.
Topic-Specific Questions
Question 1:
Question 2:
Question 3:
Question 4:
Question 5:
How many years have you been using the LIT practice facility?
Indicated the percentage of time you spend in each area during a practice session?
What is the condition of the range balls used at the LIT driving range?
What is the turf condition of the driving range?
Is the ground at the driving range level enough to meet your practice needs?
6
Question 6:
Question 7:
Question 8:
Question 9:
Question 10:
Question 11:
Question 12:
Question 13:
Question 14:
Question 15:
Question 16:
Question 17:
Question 18:
Question 19:
Question 20:
Question 21:
Which driving range do you prefer: Old LIT driving range or new LIT driving
range?
Rate the acceptability of different characteristics of the LIT practice facility.
Rate the acceptability of the chipping area.
Does the chipping area give you the opportunity to improve your short game?
Which chipping area do you prefer: the old one or the new one?
Rate the acceptability of the practice putting green.
Does the putting green give you the opportunity to improve your putting and short
game?
Which putting green do you prefer: the old one or the new one?
Rate the acceptability of the ball dispensing machine at the LIT practice facility.
Indicate the acceptability of the pricing of balls at the driving range.
Overall, which practice facility do you prefer: the old one or the new one?
Do you believe the practice facility is properly staffed?
If you believe that the practice facility is not properly staffed, what additional
staffing should be provided?
Does the LIT practice facility staff adequately assist you with your questions
and/or needs?
What is our overall impression of the LIT practice facility?
Rate the acceptability of additional characteristics of the LIT practice facility.
General Information Questions
Question 1:
Question 2:
Question 3:
Question 4:
Question 5:
What is your gender?
What is your age?
How many years have you played golf?
Are you in the PGM program?
Are you on the LIT golf team?
Some questions on our survey asked which practice facility does the student prefer, the old LIT
practice facility or the new LIT practice facility. These questions were asked to compare the
overall perception of both practice facilities. Because many PGM students have practiced at both
facilities, asking these types of comparison questions will give us a better understanding on what
students liked better. The remaining survey questions deal with problematic issues, such as level
hitting surfaces and staffing.
Methodology
The questionnaire consisted exclusively of closed-ended questions. This type of questionnaire
was designed because it is inexpensive and can collect accurate information quickly with little
burden on respondents. The survey had 20 questions that identified demographics, interests,
opinions toward certain subjects, and overall beliefs about the facility. Although not ideal, the
preferences and attitudes of our convenience sample of respondents should provide valuable
insights about the current practice facility. Although the sample was comprised of current
practice facility users, many respondents were either PGM students or golf team members.
7
The questionnaire was distributed at the PGM office, at PGM meetings, and at the LIT golf
course. We distributed questionnaires at the various locations and waited for respondents to
complete them. The questionnaire required roughly 5 to 7 minutes to complete. Respondents
answered all questions; there was no missing data. Responses were anonymous. Microsoft Excel
was used to analyze the data; in particular, frequency distributions, cross-tabulations, and
descriptive statistics.
Results
Years Using LIT Practice Facility
Frequency: When answering how many years they have used the LIT Practice Facility, 37.6% of
the respondents said that they have used it for “0 to 1” year, 32% answered that they have used
the facility for “2 to 3” years, 20% said “4 to 5” years, 8% said “6 to 7” years, and 2.4% said
“7+” years.
Frequency of Years Using the LIT Practice Facility
% of Respondents
40
30
20
10
Number of Years
0
0 to 1 2 to 3 4 to 5 6 to 7
7+
Number of Years Playing Golf: Crosstab results indicate that the people that have used the LIT
practice facility longer have played golf for more years. Respondents who used the practice
facility for “0 to 1” year have played golf an average of 8.8 years; those who used it for “2 to 3”
years have played golf an average of 9.97 years; those who used it for “4 to 5” years have played
golf an average of 10.68 years; those who used it for “6 to 7” years have played golf an average
of 10.8 years; and those who used it for “7+” years have played golf an average of 11.33 years.
PGM Students: Crosstab results indicate that most PGM students have used the practice facility
for “0 to 1” year. Of PGM students surveyed, 35.5% responded “0 to 1” year, 33.6% responded
“2 to 3” years, 21.1% responded “4 to 5” years, 9.6% responded for “6 to 7” years, and 0%
responded “7+” years.
LIT Golf Teams: Crosstab results indicate that most LIT golf team members have used the
practice facility for “4 to 5” years. Of those surveyed, 38.5% responded “4 to 5” years, 30.8%
responded “0 to 1” year, and 30.8% responded “2 to 3” years.
Old Practice Facility vs. New Practice Facility
Frequency: When answering whether as a whole they liked the old LIT practice facility, the new
LIT practice facility, or neither, 47.2% of respondents said that they liked the old LIT practice
8
facility, 40.8% said that they liked neither the old nor the new practice facility, and 12.0% said
that they liked the new LIT practice facility over the old one.
Preference of Practice Facility
50
40
% of Respondents
30
20
10
0
NEW
OLD
Preference
NEITHER
Number of Years Played Golf: Crosstab results show that respondents who prefer neither of the
two practice facilities have played golf for more years. Of those surveyed, those who said
“neither” to the type of facility have played golf an average of 9.84 years, those who said “old”
have played golf an average of 9.8 years, and those who said “new” have played golf an average
of 9.67 years.
Overall Impression of LIT Practice Facility
Frequency: Regarding their overall impression of the LIT practice facility, 46.4% of respondents
said it was “average,” 34.4% said it was “fair,” and 13.6% said it was “poor.” Only 5.6% of
respondents said it was “good,” and 0% said that it was “excellent.”
Frequency of Impression of LIT Practice Facility
%
of
Respondents
50
40
30
20
10
0
Poor
Fair
Average
Good
Excellent
Age: Of the “19-22” year olds, 41.8% rated the facility “fair” and 36.3% rated the facility
“average.” Of the “23-30” year olds, 71.4% rated the facility as “average” and 14.3% rated the
facility as “fair.” Of the “31-45” year olds, half rated the facility as “average” and half rated the
facility as “poor.”
PGM Students: Crosstab results indicate that most PGM students believe the practice facility is
“average.” Of the PGM students surveyed, 47.2% rated the facility as “average” and 33.3%
9
rated it as “poor.” Of the non-PGM students surveyed, 38.8% rated the facility as “average” and
38.8 % rated the facility as “fair.”
LIT Golf Teams: Crosstab results indicate that most golf team members believe that the practice
facility is “average.” Of the male golf team members, 75% rated the practice facility as
“average.” Of the female golf team members, 60% rated the practice facility as “average.”
LIT Practice Facility Characteristics for Before A Round
Frequency: We asked respondents if certain characteristics of the practice facility are acceptable
for a pre-round warm-up. The characteristics were the putting green, chipping area, bunker, and
the driving range. Of respondents, 76.8% said that the putting green was acceptable, 17.6% said
it was “neutral”, and 5.6% said it was unacceptable. For the chipping area, 52.8% said it was
acceptable, 28.8% said it was “neutral,” and 18.4% said it was unacceptable. For the bunker,
44.0% said it was acceptable, 22.4% said it was “neutral,” and 33.6% said it was unacceptable.
For the driving range, 68.8% said it was acceptable, 17.6 % said it was “neutral,” and 13.6% said
it was unacceptable.
Frequency of Acceptability of Characteristics for Pre-Round Warm-Up
80
70
60
% of Respondents
50
Acceptable
40
Neutral
30
Unacceptable
20
10
0
Putting
Chipping
Bunker
Range
Gender: Crosstab results indicate that males and females find the putting green to be most
acceptable for pre-round warm-up. Of those surveyed, 77.1% of males find the putting green
acceptable, 53.4% find the chipping area acceptable, 43.2% find the bunker acceptable, and
71.1% find the range acceptable. For females, those percentages are 71.4%, 42.9%, 57.1%, and
28.6%, respectively.
LIT Practice Facility Characteristics for Multi-Hour Practice
Frequency: We asked respondents if certain characteristics of the practice facility are acceptable
for a multi-hour practice session. Again, the characteristics were the putting green, chipping
area, bunker, and the driving range. Of respondents, 64.8% said that the putting green was
acceptable, 29.6% said it was “neutral,” and 5.6% said it was unacceptable. For the chipping
area, 65.6% said it was acceptable, 25.6% said it was “neutral,” and 8.8% said it was
unacceptable. For the bunker, 27.2% said it was acceptable, 27.2% said it was “neutral,” and
45.6% said it was unacceptable. For the driving range, 37.6% said it was acceptable, 19.2% said
it was “neutral,” and 43.2% said it was unacceptable.
10
Frequency of Acceptability of Characteristics for Multi-Hour Practice
70
60
% of Respondents
50
40
Acceptable
30
Neutral
20
Unacceptable
10
0
Putting
Chipping
Bunker
Range
Gender: Crosstab results indicate that males find the driving range to be most acceptable for a
multi-hour practice session, and females find the putting green to be most acceptable for a multihour practice session. Of those surveyed, 64.4% of males find the putting green acceptable,
35.6% find the chipping area acceptable, 28.0% find the bunker acceptable, and 66.1% find the
driving range acceptable. For females, the percentages are 71.4%, 57.1%, 14.3%, and 42.9%,
respectively.
LIT Practice Facility Staffing
Frequency: We asked if the LIT practice facility was properly staffed. Of respondents, 64.8%
said it was not properly staffed.
Staffing Positions to Add: We then asked respondents who said “no” to the staffing question to
list what positions they believe need to be added. Of those surveyed, 95.1% said the facility
needs a “range room attendant,” 54.3% said it needs a “ball picker attendant,” 28.4% said it
needs a “teaching professional,” and 3.7% said it needs a “head golf professional.”
Frequency of Different Facility Positions
100
80
% of Respondents
60
40
20
0
RRA
TP
HP
BPA
Age: Crosstab results show that the 22 to 30 year old age range has the highest percentage of
people who believe that the practice facility needs to add a range room attendant and a ball
picker attendant. Of respondents age 19-22 who believe the practice facility staff was
inadequate, 58.2% said it needs a range room attendant and 52.7% said it needs a ball picker
attendant. Of respondents age 23-30, 90.4% said the facility needs a range room attendant and
76.1% said it needs a ball picker attendant.
11
Gender: Crosstab results show that the belief that the practice facility needs a range room
attendant and a ball picker attendant is unrelated to gender.
Demographics
Gender: Of all surveyed, 94.4% were males and 5.6% were females.
Age: Of those surveyed, 72.8% of respondents were in the “19-22” age group, 16.8% were “2330,” 6.4% were “15-18,” 3.2% were “31-45,” and 0.8% were “45+.”
Total Years Playing Golf: When asked how many years they have played golf, 48.8% of
respondents said they played for between “9 and 12” years, 30.4% between “6 and 8,” 12.8%
between “13 and 17,” 5.6% between “3 and 5,” and 2.4% have played golf for “18+” years.
PGM Students: When asked whether they were Professional Golf Management students, 83.2%
of the respondents said ‘yes’.
LIT Golf Teams: When asked whether or not they were on a LIT golf team, 10.4% said ‘yes’.
Of those who said yes, 61.5% said they were on the men’s team and 38.5% said they were on the
women’s team.
Conclusions
Golfer Behavior
Most respondents reported using the LIT practice facility for three years or less, which shows
that the LIT golf course customers often use this practice facility. Improving the current facility
should attract more golfers to it. If these golfers see improvement, then they are more likely to
tell future golfers about the improvement thus provide the LIT golf course with more revenue.
The crosstab results show that the more experienced golfers had spent more years practicing at
the LIT practice facility. Most respondents were male and PGM majors, which explains why the
largest age group was 18-22 year olds.
Practice Facility Impressions and Preference
An intriguing result is that 0% thought the LIT facility was good; most respondents said it was
“average” and the rest were not happy with it at all. These data show that there is definitely a
need for improvement. A surprising finding: almost half of respondents said they liked the old
practice facility.
Staffing
A few staffing changes are suggested. We found that that roughly 60% of respondents thought
that facility was understaffed.
12
Recommendations
Renovating the Practice Facility
The LIT driving range seems unfit to meet the practicing standards of the golfers who are using
it. It has a downward slope to it, so every practice shot hit from the range is off of a downhill lie.
To make it worse, it forces golfers to hit up a hill. A downhill lie to an uphill shot is not the kind
of scenario a golf course should be striving for when designing a driving range. However, this is
what happened and it needs to be changed. We recommend that the driving range be leveled off
so golfers aren’t hitting off an uneven playing surface. Based on this survey, we recommend that
the grounds crew needs to take a serious look at improving its current practice facility. Also, a
larger short game area needs to be developed so golfers can practice hitting pitch shots, much
like what the old practice facility possessed. This was determined by golfers saying they
preferred the old driving range, which had a nice short game area where golfers could hit an
array of short game shots.
Staffing Upgrade
Small improvements, such as adequate staffing, could be the deciding factor in someone’s choice
of whether or not they are going to return to a certain facility. All that the LIT golf course
management should do is hire one person to respond to all customer requests in the range room.
New Equipment
A few equipment upgrades would leave customers more satisfied and reflect upon the golf
course in a positive manner. Providing new, higher quality range balls reflects positively on the
facility. Customers would be more apt to spend their hard earned dollars on high quality balls
instead of old ones that don’t perform well. Finally, a better ball dispensing machine could be
one improvement that would improve customers’ perceptions and satisfaction.
13
Appendix A
Research Proposal
Research Problem:
Does the Lordsburg Institute of Technology golf course need to renovate its practice facility?
Research Questions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
What is your opinion of the current practice facility?
How much time do you spend at the practice facility?
Did you prefer the design of the old practice facility, the new practice facility, or neither?
What improvements need to be made to the current facility?
What is your opinion of the range balls at the practice facility?
How does LIT compare to other practice facilities you have used?
Research Sample
Our respondents will be students in LIT’s PGM program and the men’s and women’s golf teams.
We will also surveys to golfers at the LIT golf course.
14
Appendix B
Questionnaire: LIT Golf Practice Facility
This questionnaire is meant to assess your attitudes toward the LIT golf practice facility.
Please help us by completing this questionnaire. Thank you.
1. How many years have you been using the LIT practice facility? (Circle your answer)
a. 0-1 years
b. 2-3 years
c. 4-5 years
d. 6-7 years
e. 7+ years
2. Indicate the percentage of time you spend in each area during a practice session (dividing 100
units between all the choices):
Putting
Chipping
Bunker play
Full shots (driving range)
Total
______
______
______
______
100__
3. What is the condition of the range balls used at the LIT driving range? (Circle your answer)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
poor
fair
average
good
excellent
4. What is the turf condition of the driving range? (Circle your answer)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
poor
fair
average
good
excellent
5. Is the ground at the driving range is level enough to meet your practice goal needs? (Circle
your answer)
a. Yes
b. No, it is too much sloped to the right
c. No, it is too much sloped to the left
15
6. Which driving range do you prefer? (Circle your answer)
a. The old LIT driving range
b. The new LIT driving range
c. Neither
7. Indicate on a scale of 7 (Acceptable) to 1 (Unacceptable) the acceptability of the following
characteristics of the LIT practice facility. (Circle your answer)
Before a Round
Warm-up on putting green
Warm-up on chipping area
Warm-up in bunker
Warm-up on driving range
Acceptable
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
Unacceptable
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
Multi-hour Practice Session
Practice on putting green
Practice on chipping area
Practice in bunker
Practice on driving range
Acceptable
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
Unacceptable
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
8. On a scale of 1 (bad) to 10 (excellent), what would you rate the chipping area at the LIT
driving range? (Circle one number)
Bad
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 Excellent
9. Does the chipping area give you the opportunity to improve your short game skills? (Circle
your answer)
a. Yes
b. No
10. Which chipping area do you prefer? (Circle your answer)
a. The old LIT chipping area (Chipping green left of the old 18th hole)
b. The new LIT chipping areas (Chipping areas near driving range)
c. Neither
11. On a scale of 1 (bad) to 10 (excellent), what would you rate the putting green at the LIT
driving range? (Circle one number)
Bad
1
2
3
4
5
6
16
7
8
9
10 Excellent
12. Does the putting green at the driving range give you the opportunity to improve your putting
and short game skills? (Circle your answer)
a. Yes
b. No
13. Which putting green would you prefer to do your practicing on? (Circle your answer)
a. The old LIT putting green (Near old clubhouse)
b. The new LIT putting green (Near driving range)
c. Neither
14. On a scale of 1 (bad) to 10 (excellent), what would you rate the ball dispensing machine at
the LIT practice facility? (Circle one number)
Bad
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Excellent
15. Which of the following do believe about the pricing of the balls at the driving range? (Circle
your answer)
a. Too high
b. Just right
c. Too low
16. Overall, which practice facility would you prefer? (Circle your answer)
a. The old LIT practice facility
b. The new LIT practice facility
c. Neither
17. Is the practice facility properly staffed? (Circle your answer)
a. Yes
b. No
(If ‘Yes’, skip to Question #19.)
18. If the practice facility is not properly staffed, what additional staff should be added? (Circle
all that apply)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Range room attendant
Teaching professional
Head professional
Ball picker attendant
Question does not apply to you
17
19. Does the LIT practice facility staff adequately assist you with your questions and/or needs?
(Circle your answer)
a. Yes
b. No
20. What is your overall impression of the LIT practice facility? (Circle your answer)
a. poor
b. fair
c. average
d. good
e. excellent
21. Indicate on a scale of 1 (unimportant) to 6 (important), how important or unimportant the
following characteristics of the LIT practice facility are to you. (Circle one number per
characteristic)
Important
Quality of range balls
6
Quality of turf conditions
6
Well-trained staff
6
Maintenance of overall facility
6
Maintenance of putting green
6
Maintenance of chipping area
6
Putting green quality
6
Chipping green quality
6
Sufficient parking lot for facility
6
Working range ball dispenser
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Unimportant
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
General Information
22. Gender:
Male
Female
(Circle One Answer)
23. What age group are you in?
a. 15-18
b. 19-22
c. 23-30
d. 31-45
e. older than 45
24. How many years have you played golf: ___________
(Fill in blank)
25. Are you in the PGM Program:
(Circle One Answer)
Yes
No
26. Are you on the Lordsburg Institute of Technology University Golf Team:
Men’s
Women’s
None
(Circle One Answer)
18