English speakers have been verbing nouns and nouning verbs since before English was called English. Still, this kind of zero derivation (also known as "conversion") is only quasi-regular, like most other kinds of derivational morphology: it spreads word by word. And new conversions are sometimes surprising, like this one from "Red Sox Act Swiftly, Fire Valentine After One Season", AP 10/4/2012:
“This season was by far the worst we have experienced in over ten years here. Ultimately, we are all collectively responsible for the team’s performance,” Red Sox chairman Tom Werner said. “We are going to be working tirelessly to reconstruct the ballclub for 2013. We’ll be back."
“We thank Bobby for the many contributions he made and for the energy he brought each day. He is a baseball man through and through.” [General manager Ben] Cherington, who replaced Theo Epstein last offseason, will headman the search for a replacement.
The conversion of head from noun to verb ("in many senses having no connection with each other, but formed independently on the n. and its phrases, at various times", as the OED explains) has been established for a while:
a1400 Minor Poems fr. Vernon MS. (1892) liii. 188 Hir herte holliche on him þat þe heuene hedes.
1670 Dryden Tyrannick Love ii. i. 15 They head those holy Factions which they hate.
But "…will headman the search…" is still worth a boggle, especially since "…will head the search…" would have worked. And some versions of the story that originally had "…will headman the search…" now have "…will lead the search…"
The verb lead goes back to "a Common Germanic weak verb (wanting in Gothic)"; and the noun lead (as in "take the lead") was derived from the verb at some point around 1300. But if we go back even further, we're told that those Common German verbs are themselves derived from a noun:
< Old Germanic *laiđjan , < *laiđâ road, journey (see load n., lode n.) [...]
[Tip of the hat to Elliott Pinegar.]