The Triad of Human Development

 Human behavior is a fascinating and complex blend of emotion, wonder, curiosity, and awe. I have spent much of my adult life reading, studying, and working at the intersection of leadership, behavior, and science. In recent decades, modern neuroscience has opened doors into a deeper understanding of how the human mind actually functions under pressure, uncertainty, and change.

What I have come to believe is that at the top of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs—Self-Actualization—is not a destination, but an integration. Specifically, it is the integration of self-awareness, mindfulness, and intentionality. Self-Actualization, in this sense, is not something we arrive at once, but something we practice continuously. It is the result of what I call The Triad of Human Development.

When leaders integrate the Triad in a mature and honest way, they become a version of themselves that not only moves toward their own potential, but actively develops and encourages the potential of those around them.

Early in my career, a supervisor once told me that I was “too emotional.” That comment stayed with me for years and resurfaced later when a club president said, “Erwin, you could have 99 people tell you how great the course was, and if one person made the slightest comment that could be interpreted as negative, it would ruin your whole day.” I understood that immediately. What I did not understand at the time was that I didn’t have a character flaw—I simply didn’t understand my internal wiring, or how my own brain could work against the best version of myself.

Eventually, I came to understand that humans operate through a relatively small set of foundational capacities. When those capacities are underdeveloped or poorly understood, unconscious patterns take over. These foundations exist beneath roles, titles, and expertise. They do not disappear with experience. Instead, they quietly determine whether those roles elevate us, stagnate us, or slowly disintegrate our effectiveness.

Those foundational capacities are self-awareness, mindfulness, and intentionality.

The Triad functions as an integrated system. Practicing mindfulness alone, without self-awareness, fails to account for misinterpretation, bias, and deeply conditioned subconscious responses. In isolation, mindfulness can even reinforce victimhood or reactive postures. Likewise, intentionality on its own—without the grounding of the other two—can quickly devolve into command-and-control behavior.

When the three capacities are integrated and allowed to flow together, they create individuals and teams that operate from a framework of psychological safety. That safety encourages collaboration, connection, and curiosity—the conditions necessary to solve complex problems without unnecessary noise, defensiveness, or ego.

This framework is not self-help. It is not abstract theory, and it is not a system of control. It is also not a replacement for technical skill or continuing education. Instead, it acts as an amplifier of skill, helping keep the executive functioning regions of the brain more accessible. This area—the prefrontal cortex (PFC)—is where our best problem-solving, perspective-taking, and forward-looking thinking occurs.

Humans evolved with a powerful pattern-seeking and threat-scanning brain. This trait has kept us alive in a dangerous world. It is not a flaw—it is efficiency. But in a modern environment saturated with noise, speed, and ambiguity, this same mechanism can work against us if we are unaware of how it operates beneath the surface.

At the core of every stimulus, interaction, and experience, the nervous system asks a primary question: Am I safe? This question is answered before conscious thought ever engages. The system is always running, always scanning.

Self-awareness allows us to distinguish real threat from perceived threat. Mindfulness provides real-time presence to the physiological effects of activation—within ourselves and in others. Intentionality is the moment we choose how to move forward, keeping the prefrontal cortex accessible so that our actions reflect our values rather than our reflexes.

This triad belongs to all of us. Regardless of position, title, or industry, we all arrive with the same underlying wiring and biochemical processes. These systems can either be harnessed intentionally or left to run us unconsciously.

Self-awareness is not a momentary state. It is preparatory work conducted outside moments of activation. It does not eliminate activation; it makes activation intelligible. Mindfulness is not calmness, control, or suppression. It is presence—clarity within activation, not the absence of it. Intentionality is negotiation in action. It is the point at which agency is exercised, choosing engagement over imposition or submission.

Many people—and even some textbooks—confuse self-awareness with mindfulness. Others assume that simply “knowing” themselves is sufficient. In reality, the mechanisms that shape perception and reaction operate subconsciously in the background. These patterns are old, established as the brain developed, and they require honest effort to uncover. This work is often uncomfortable. Yet if we are to perform to our potential under the pressure of stress and distraction, we must understand the wiring beneath our emotions. That is where this framework begins.

Intentionally,

Turf 

The Triad of Human Development is a foundational framework within the McKone Human Development™ body of work, developed by Erwin McKone.

Transforming Organizational Culture: The Power of "Rants and Raves"

The Challenge of Culture Change

In 2013, I stepped into the role of Chief Operating Officer (COO) at Briar Ridge Country Club—excited, thrilled, and admittedly a bit apprehensive. I was tasked with the formidable challenge of transforming an organization's culture, a mission that demanded both strategic vision and tactical finesse.

Many organizations talk about growth mindset and empowerment, but implementing meaningful cultural change requires more than buzzwords. It demands practical systems that align with your ultimate goals while addressing immediate concerns. At Briar Ridge, we needed to navigate this delicate balance.

The Birth of "Rants and Raves"

One of our guiding principles, borrowed from successful mentors, was to "make haste slowly." This meant steering the organizational ship with deliberate, measured movements rather than abrupt course corrections that might disorient our team.

To maintain this balance, we needed real-time feedback about what was working and what wasn't. Member surveys provided valuable periodic insights, but we required something more immediate. This necessity gave birth to our "Rants and Raves" (R&R) program.

Implementation: Simple Yet Effective

The R&R system was elegantly straightforward. We placed QR codes throughout the club—on table tents, in newsletters, locker rooms, golf carts, and pool bulletin boards. These codes directed members and guests to a simple form where they could share:

• Raves: Recognizing exceptional experiences or acts of kindness from staff
• Rants: Identifying areas where we failed to meet expectations

Upon submission, the system automatically generated an email summary to me, the appropriate department head, and the relevant committee chairperson.

Confronting Fears

I'll admit—as a new COO, the prospect of creating an open channel for complaints was daunting. It seemed like inviting criticism that might undermine my leadership before it had truly begun. But I recognized that genuine change required understanding our members' needs, so I pushed forward despite these concerns.

The Unexpected Benefits

The R&R program quickly demonstrated value beyond our initial expectations:

Containing Criticism

Perhaps most significantly, the "Rants" feature helped contain public criticism. At private clubs, negative "water cooler" talk can spread like poison. People naturally gravitate toward shared complaints, creating a snowball effect where isolated incidents become perceived patterns. By providing a direct channel for concerns, we prevented many issues from becoming topics of broader conversation.

Building Trust

By openly acknowledging our shortcomings and addressing them promptly, we fostered an environment of trust and respect with our membership. They recognized our commitment to improvement rather than defensiveness.

Recognizing Excellence

The "Raves" component allowed us to identify patterns of exceptional service and celebrate those responsible. This recognition proved remarkably powerful—far more motivating than management praise alone. When members took a moment to acknowledge staff efforts, it created a standard for excellence that others aspired to match.

Elevating Service Culture

The possibility of receiving a "Rave" became a powerful incentive across all departments. Staff members became more attentive and service-oriented, knowing their efforts might be specifically recognized. This created positive competition to deliver outstanding experiences.

The Lasting Impact

In just over two years, the R&R program contributed significantly to our cultural transformation. It provided concrete examples of both service gaps and excellence, giving us clear direction for training and recognition. Most importantly, it created a feedback loop that allowed continual refinement of our service standards.

Today, Briar Ridge continues to benefit from the pathways to success we established during that transformation period. The R&R program—initially launched with some trepidation—remains one of the achievements I'm most proud of from my tenure as COO.

For any organization undertaking cultural change, finding simple yet effective ways to gather real-time feedback is essential. By addressing concerns directly and celebrating successes publicly, you can accelerate positive transformation while building trust with both customers and staff.

See you on the tee-

Turf

Old Tom Morris’ Hierarchy of Needs Of Northern Golf Courses: A proposed categorizing of golf course classifications.

 In my lifetime of being on golf courses; working since fifteen years of age and playing golf even longer,  I have spent much time observing a fascinating industry.  In my travels, I see individuals who excel at building a culture, solving difficult problems, and navigating the good and bad of human nature.  I also see a bit of anxiety and depression.  You might think that the golf course superintendent is a carefree and happy-go-lucky life, but the reality is that often times the superintendent works without a working definition of what it is that they can actually produce.  The possible reasons and rationale for the failure to define the quality, appearance, and future of a golf course is too complex for the scope of this post, however it is responsible for much unnecessary anguish.  I believe we can do better to provide the characteristics of golf courses that give them true meaning instead of nebulous concepts like "we want to take it to the next level."  Comments like the former are rarely ever backed up with any concrete examples of what that even means.  So let's take a dive in.....

What I have observed is that the superintendents who lack a clearly defined, realistic golf course that considers the resources allocated, are the ones who suffer the most.  Interestingly enough, our brain reacts to ambiguity with anxiety.  Establishing an agreed upon definition for a golf course, setting realistic expectations, and establishing maintenance standards based upon resources allocated can reduce the anxiety and frustration for golfers and managers alike.  With this in mind, I set out to try and make some sense regarding the classification of different golf courses.  Below is an introduction to many hours of observing, questioning, listening, and thoroughly enjoying the golf business and my attempt to classify golf courses, reduce ambiguity, and create a happy working environment where employees are not chasing unicorns. 

Tier I Plant Protectant Applications

Many years ago my good friend Brian Baker shared with me an idea of a hierarchy of plant protectant applications as a facility progressed from low maintenance budgets to high budgets as seen in the blue pyramid above.  This tiered system made a ton of sense to me and since I spend a lot of time behind the wheel, I get what we call "mower thoughts" in this industry.  Mower thoughts are the ideas that pop in your head while doing the mundane practice of mowing large areas of turf, or in this case windshield time.  These thoughts churned inside my head for many years and eventually led me to develop a series of diagrams with the different plant protectant applications necessary at each tier of golf course.

Tier V Plant Protectant Applications

I was pretty proud of my visual aids, they added clarity to the differences between courses of differing calibers, but I felt something was missing.  Plant protectant applications alone cannot produce a quality Turfgrass surface.  I maintain that the plant protectant hierarchy works in conjunction with cultural and operational practices.  For instance, if resources are limited, the biggest priority for establishing quality turf would be to have sharp mowers.  Cutting the grass cleanly saves a lot of problems, like a ton of them.  Well..........think about it, if you could chose the knife you had to cut yourself with, would you chose a sharp smooth one or a jagged dull one?  Think death by Zero or a chopping up by Freddy Kruger.  The best plant protectant program that is applied to poorly cut and shredded turf produces a sub optimal surface.  (Sidenote: quality of cut inspections happen at the individual plant level and requires prism, macroscope, close up photography, and other such means.)  

Considering the importance of well maintained cutting units led me down the path of organic matter.  Well, this led to more "mower thoughts," expanded into a series of diagrams like the one below, then another pyramid, and then more diagrams.  I have created more of these diagrams which include other defining inputs like labor tasks necessary and equipment needed.  For now, let's discuss organic matter.

Organic matter is what I consider to be the greatest contributor to the quality of the playing surface.  Controlling the accumulation of organic matter and the intensity in which it is managed determines to a large extent, the quality of the playing surfaces on a golf course.  

Tier I Cultural Practice Focus

Organic matter is the organic component of the soil and can be subdivided into the living and nonliving fractions.  Organic matter and microorganism population contribute greatly to Turfgrass growth and development even though they constitute small fractions of the overall soil complex (Beard 1973).

Golf courses vary greatly in their conditioning of playing surfaces.  Factors such as abiotic site specific issues, infrastructure, budgets, equipment, water management, and grass and soil types, contribute greatly to these variations.  However, in my opinion, the greatest influence in playing surface conditioning, dollar per dollar, is organic matter management.  

Organic matter percentages in playing surfaces are directly responsible for the quality.  That statement is so important that it bears repeating.  The undoubtably, unarguable fact is this “Golf Course Playing Surface Quality is 90% Organic Matter Management.”  Water infiltration, firmness, quality of cut, plant protectant efficacy, surface trueness, and green speed are all negatively affected by an increase in organic matter in greens of as little as <1%.  (1% increase in organic matter can result in up to 25,000 gallons of water retention per acre. Source: Kansas State Extension Agronomy e-Updates, Number 357, July 6, 2012)

Classification of golf courses pyramid

The theory of Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs applies to golf in the sense that before an expectation for the quality of tees, fairways, or any other surface is to be concerned, the putting greens’ needs are to be satisfied.  Quality putting surfaces demand proper cultural and plant protectant programs, cutting units that are sharp and well adjusted, uniform irrigation, and abiotic stresses addressed.  Facilities that commit the folly of ignoring the accumulation of organic matter in greens will endure poor playing surface conditions that will require remediation efforts in the future to correct the situation.  

The common recommendation for golf greens is 3-4% in the top 1 inch of the greens, a threshold which has been established from multiple studies (O’Brien and Hartwiger, 2003).  Organic matter management is complex and each site will have strategies and percentages that result in the best putting surface for each individual site.  Achieving great playing surfaces for the game of golf, begins at the putting greens and expands outwards to the other playing surfaces typically in the order of tees, fairways, green surrounds, primary rough, bunker surrounds, tee surrounds, secondary roughs, practice areas, and so on.  

Championship Golf Conditioning

Golf course greens can only do three things in regard to organic matter; accumulate, maintain, or dilute.  The greater the intensity of organic matter removal via cultural practices, the more disruption the players will encounter.  A cultural program that maintains organic matter at a given percent is less labor intensive and less disruptive than any organic matter removal program.  Preventing organic matter accumulation while maintaining the recuperative capacity for traffic and pitch marks is where a golf course superintendent's management philosophies regarding fertility and irrigation can play a major role of differences in conditioning.  Organic matter management that is delayed is organic matter accumulation multiplied.  

Plant protectant efficacy is greatest on surfaces with proper organic matter percentages.  Once organic matter is controlled properly, a solid plant protectant program can provide optimum conditions.  To be of maximum value the plant protectant program mirrors the intensity that each playing surface demands.  It may appear obvious that the most intensely managed surfaces will require higher inputs than turfgrass that is maintained at the basic level.  The diagrams in their entirety, which are not included in this post, attempt to address the agronomic differences between golf courses of different management intensities.  

As mentioned prior, I have begun to expand these pyramids and diagrams with additional specifics regarding golf course management such as equipment needed and tasks required, demonstrating the differences in inputs that are required to manage a golf course to the differing intensities.  This tiered pyramid idea hopefully provokes conversations that help to define a property and give clear vision to persons responsible for carrying out the processes of caring for a golf course.  Understanding where your course lands in the realm of organic matter management, plant protectant applications, labor tasks funded, and equipment provided, can deliver an understanding of proper golfer expectations.  Alleviating expectations of the golfer hopefully leads him or her to an "openness to experience," or what I would describe as the ultimate goal of golf and play.  

Establishing realistic aesthetic and playability expectations for a facility that are based upon the resources provided is only fair to the individuals managing and maintaining a golf facility, as well as the player.  

Employees deserve a fair and thoughtful job description that provides a framework for evaluating job performance.  The happiest and healthiest employees are the ones that have been given clear and realistic expectations and in the case of a golf course superintendent can be successful providing an appropriate golf experience.  If you would like to discuss how you can use these diagrams to determine the current classification of your course, develop a vision, create maintenance standards, or provide feedback about what is missing or incorrect, please feel free to contact me.

Have a great day, solve collective problems, make deep connections, and spread love,

Turf.

O’Brien, Patrick, and Chris Hartwiger. “Aeration and Topdressing for the 21st Century” USGA Green Section Record, vol 41, no. 2, Mar./Apr. 2003, pp. 1-7 

Beard, James B. 1973 "Turfgrass: Soil and Culture" Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 1973, pp 329