Mcmahon Group Response Paper

McMahon Group examined six focus groups at the country club comprised of 43 members (69%), 12 employees (19%), and 7 non-members (11%). The under 46 age group members and non-members preferred full service over a golf only format. Furthermore, the focus groups revealed members felt the current level of service was not on par as expected from a private country club. Staff members expressed frustration with service limitations due to the board’s restrictions to maintain profitability. The membership study explored means to attract younger, family oriented members. The study entailed mail surveys to 1,650 members and spouses with a response rate of 57% and 48%, respectively. McMahon Group compared the 886 usable returns to survey responses of 80 other country clubs. According to Cooper and Schindler (2014), sampling is examination of attributes of a collection and is considered quality if the attributes accurately represent the population depicted. Furthermore, the authors state a sample must consider the target population, parameters of interest, sampling frame (list of elements), sampling method (probability or nonprobability), and necessary sample size (pp. 344-348). Apparently, McMahon Group’s sampling method was probability sampling as the population was members and spouses only. Although the results are representative of the population (sign of a quality sample), the object of the study is to determine how to attract a different population (a group other than what already exists). McMahon Group’s study would be more informative had a secondary study utilized nonprobability sampling. For instance, the younger age group (under 46 years old) indicated an interest in swimming and spa facilities. This information (acquired in the primary study) warrants further exploration; this sub-group of members qualifies to partake in judgment sampling or quota sampling. Identifying a target population with expressed interests in the most popular aspect noted to attract members can provide guidance how to grow membership. Subr, Nowrouzezahrai, Jarosz, Kautz, and Mitchell (2014) recognized enhanced results when sampling methods were combined. What, if any, problems did you find with the questionnaire as a whole? Consider structure, directions, question order, question phrasing, appropriateness of response strategy chosen, etc. The questionnaire is comprehensive as it addresses demographic information, interests, available amenities, and future possibilities. …show more content…
Generally, the format is simple and easy to follow; the directions are clear and concise; the question order is logical; the phrasing is clear and understandable. The response strategy is appropriate to elicit participation; it eliminates the spirit of reluctance to answer, as evoked by open ended questions some participants experience due to the lack of knowing what or how to answer. For the majority of the questions, the participant is merely required to select the most appropriate response.
Contrarily, the questionnaire’s design hinders thorough participation. Primarily, it is very long and detailed; this inhibits the possibility or participant interest to complete the survey. The question matrix becomes cumbersome; some of the questions, specifically the one pertaining to nonmember golf play (question 21), require superfluous assessment and evaluation of circumstances and consequences of change. This particular question requires too much thought and evaluation to warrant participation in this portion of the questionnaire. Another flaw of the survey is the instructions; they seem to be contradictory in nature and confusing: “complete this” yet “leave blank” and “do not feel qualified” promotes doubt and ambiguity. The instructions also demand the participant