Tuesday 7 May 2013

Scottish Golf Survey

The SGU, working in partnership with Scottish Enterprise and Event Scotland, [sic it is all one word!] has commissioned KPMG to conduct an exercise to assess the economic value of golf in Scotland and, importantly, the prospects for the future. We would appreciate your contribution by participating in our survey at the link below, which should take no longer than 2 minutes to complete. Your views are vitally important to the success of this project.
Okay, when you see the email's from these four bodies you think this may be important. It certainly adds gravitas.

You would of course assume that an industry survey sent out to golf businesses across Scotland ahead of a major seminar to discuss golf (10th annual Golf Business Forum in St Andrews from 3 to 5 June 2013) and supported and perhaps even funded by public money would have been proof read?

There is a sense that the survey has lost something, shall we say, in the translation. This is not however the fault of the Hungarian market researcher who has sent it out but you would have thought that maybe someone would have picked it up at one of the three esteemed bodies associated with it!!

Where do you start? the use of the word "loss" instead of reduction? A ranking list where everything can be ranked as 1? The Americanised spelling of Programs? The misspelling of "associations" in a drop down list?

Or as one golf tour operators has said the biggest mistake must be in question four
4. Assuming significant ongoing governmental support for the golf industry, what is the maximum growth you would see achievable on industry level?
As the wag points out, the oxymoronic phrase is pretty clear... "significant ongoing governmental support".

The point of the post? Well as someone who gets lots of spelling wrong but usually without the support of the SGU, Scottish Enterprise and EventScotland it just seemed fair to point out that if inclusion and involvement of the industry is important then respect should be given to the intelligence of the audience being engaged with.

Yes you could argue this whole post is pedantic. The flip side is you could say it is reflective of the collaborative malaise.

Take the survey

No comments: