What is the purpose of CLSA

[CBarrett]

We're still stuck in union vs non union programs discussion. I call it flogging because a variety of these arguments has existed most of my career.

Over the years I ended up graduating from or finishing from two non-accredited programs, was offered a scholarship for a third one (Pomona was still unaccredited at the time), and was recommended about 15 years into my career that 'if I want to get more proper field experience (by the faction which strongly believed that being a union party chief was the only way one can gain qualifying year of field experience) to take a step back, sign up as an apprentice A with tbe union and 'pay my dues' (not the monetary ones).

But but, two degrees and 15 years of experience at the time... not good enough.

If we want better quality of people on surveying, we need to set our sights much higher than this perpetual battle.

My family is full of doctors, lawyers, engineers etc... I picked surveying, ad an homage to my beloved grandfather who was a head of cadastre in my old country. When he heard that, his first reaction was to shake his head and say, what did you do that for? Many times I think he was right. However, what I weas getting at is that it is easier to convince a doctor or a lawyer that you are good enough or smart enough to be a part of the profession or have the right qualification, then it is with surveying.

This perpetual union vs. non union and field vs. office internal battle has created a number of unintended consequences, which are causing a failure to attract new talent into the profession.

Would I reccomend this field to someone who is smart and polished enough to have other prospects? The answer is NO. Especially not to another female like myself.
These are the people dave wants to attract.. but when they are in front of us, most crusty ole surveyors (which we are becoming too) fail to recognize right in front of them.

Sure, as I said there will always be lowest common denominator that needs policing. I am very glad tat someone is addressing this.

But beware, if you legislate or create rules to force large number of lowest common denominators to work extra to get licensed, the result will be a lot of resentful lowest common denominators, but now with licenses and voting rights and possible grudges. While that may be a way to get more licensees in a short run, I fail to see how this will attract higher quality of people into the industry.
You just get more knuckleheads invested into status management, because they were made to do extra work. Peple who are not interest or have time and energy to invest into growth will stop right after they do what they have to.

If you want to raise professionalism, you have to make room and fertile ground for people who are actually interested and able to invest into it. We lack direction on how to accomplish that.

For example, if surveying didnt miss out on a number of emerging technologies, we would be too busy to worry about union vs. non union.

I remember clearly the lack of big picture thinking I encountered in the early GIS days, by industry leaders. Very patronizing "We cant invest into these fly by night things" Limited outlook traditional gatekeepers. Today, some of the people who knew me back then have approached and said, omg, would we're so far head of tbe times.

This is what you will get from smarter people. Forward thinking ideas. The industry is not ready for this.

[mpallamary]

Well said.

I have been in the profession more than 50 years and the battle remains the same. I keep screaming in the wind and am mostly met with resistance and anger; anger from those who are afraid of change. They are the ones who feel a need to protect their fragile little domain, one made of tissue and ignorance. When you try to make a change, they try to change you out of fear. If they cannot change you, they attack you.

[CBarrett]

As I continued learning about things, I started gleaning some insight in this phenomenon. See, many of us surveyors get very decent technical education. Our understanding of human nature, psychology, people management, leadership, emotional intelligence, social interactions, business and financial matters remains at high school level at best. Much lower in many cases. There is more to a respected leading level professional than technical prowess culminating in minimum requirements to get licensed, then serving on the local CLSA board then state organization, going down the same beaten path.
Believe it or not, I tend to be a traditionalist, but not to the exclusion of all other ideas.
I call myself a traditionalist because I evaluate and ponder and try to approach new ideas methodically, rather than getting carried away in the excitement. I try to take more calculated risks, where your losses are limited. After all, that is what you learn if you read about management. Take risks, but of the kind where you are still able to recover and adjust course. Live with the change, don't get so stuck in one thing that you fear it. anyhow, I am doing a 3 second cross section of things that benefit us, which are outside of the technical realm. The list of topics is sizeable and I would have to sit down do some research and thinking to organize them.

The point that I an trying to get tom, is that I am seldom able to have a conversation about these kinds of topics with another surveyor, even those in many leadership positions. The depth doesn't seem to be there (or maybe they just don't want to talk to ME about those things in particular - but that is not the impression I get.) Usually, I just lose people.

I think the climate we haven our industry is the result, most likely unintended consequence of high emphasis on technical knowledge, that everything else becomes distant second or nonexistent. I can't fault only surveying for this. Technical fields are full of people with lopsided skills in this direction. It is the result of previous generations style of management and teaching. Also frankly, much has been discovered in sociology and psychology and by extension in business and management and professionalism in last 30 to 50 years. We need to make an effort to catch up.

We have some notion that the definition of a professional from 50-70 years ago which are memorialized in a number of fantastic books is no longer sufficient.

[CBarrett]

Here is a short article about status management. Once you are aware of it you will traces of it in many places.
https://m.subbu.org/status-management-d632e3c73d12

here is a lot more about this and few other concepts in the book about emotional intelligence:
https://www.amazon.com/Emotional-Intell ... -More-Than

[David Kendall]

The best surveying training model is the school of hard knocks. Nothing but years of good, hard, day in, day out experience is going to provide for an individual dynamic enough to do this job effectively.

Education alone won't do it. The problem solving ability can't be learned in Land Surveying school. The few educational opportunities we offer are mostly training instrument operators. Button pushers coming out of technical programs which are run on a shoestring are not capable of a professional endeavor without additional experience. The licensing boards have known this for many years. Mentoring is mandatory.

A good surveyor can write a complete sentence with good handwriting and few words, (maybe even form a coherent report or legal argument) is a capable researcher, can interpret the significance of a chain of title, has the wherewithal to market a project and compose a contract, delegate the project duties and draft a presentable document for filing. It takes a mix of documentarian, forester, astronomer, pilot, hammer and shovel operator, mathematician, truck driver, computer whiz, radioman, chainsaw mechanic, historian and a little bit of blarney and technical awareness to pull it off. And some luck.

Mentoring is a great way to learn these things, if you have good mentors.... Poor or narrow-minded mentoring is leading many of our brethren down a path of righteous ignorance. This is what they were taught so this is what they do and that's the end of the conversation. A good surveyor can change and adapt with the times, and get unstuck from their own philosophical dogma when necessary.

How are we going to teach these things? It is apparently an uncommon skillset for younger generations. Twenty years ago there were plenty of guys willing to swing a hammer and machete at low wage for for ten years or more to learn these things. Today we all want a living wage the day we get our online two-year associates degree in the mail. Paying dues is not attractive.

And I personally don't have much respect for the Caltrans model. From what I've seen their training program produces form-filling button pushers and glorified tripod setter-uppers in the field and pigeonholed cubicle-campers in the office. Most of the good party chiefs were already licensed when they interviewed for the job. They can produce licensees on paper but are the people who work there honestly performing the profession of land surveying that I describe above? Are guys who never use a stamp or set a tag really practicing surveyors? I don’t have any better ideas….

None of my surveyor mentors retired. They keep working into their 80s because they love it. It's much more than a paycheck or a nine to five, it is a way of life.

The union is actively discouraging people from gaining licensure. They lose their best members if they train too well. That program is self serving. The union surveyor is not a factor in our conversation.

The mark of a true professional is a sense of integrity, justice and selflessness that transcends the title. I suspect by your line of questioning, Mrs Barrett, that you hold these characteristics. We could use a few more of you on the roles. As you know, it is a complex commodity. The sense of community which you project is one of the components missing from our agenda.

I went to college for too long, did fieldwork for too long, and probably job-hopped more than I should have. Now all of a sudden I find that I can complete a survey project, damn near whatever you bring me. If I can't then I know someone who can because I have a solid community network.

How do we teach this? Who do we take the time to try to teach it to? Essentially I believe it is a marketing problem and a training problem. Maybe we require an additional qualification for the privilege of being able to train others. Weed out the bad apples so they don't contaminate half of the barrel. We need to protect our profession like the precious gem that it is.

Police ourselves. Set each other straight as a professional courtesy. Give back more than you get. Stop cutting corners just because you know you can get away with it.

I believe I am preaching to the choir here so going to cut it off now. This is a great conversation and I appreciate you all for participating!

[TTaylor]

: What is the purpose of CLSA
So, I have offered a list of ideas on what CLSA could work on to improve the profession.

The discussion has veered towards union v non- union, mentoring v education, and technical v management.

My personal opion is that there are many paths that could lead to being a professional all equally valid.

IMO, the key aspects of being a professional lie in a pers8n's character, ethics, and dedication to the profession.

While working for a big organization I learned that the skill set to be a good technical professional is completely different than those for rmanaging people.

So, I advocated for diffent career tracts for the two with both getting equal pay.

Again how someone aquires the necessary knowledge and skills is of no consequence to me. How they handle themselves professionally and ethically is.

[mpallamary]

Yes, my friend. You are 100 percent correct!

[mpallamary]

This is an important conversation. It is one of the areas of biggest concern to Curt Brown.

[mpallamary]

And more.

[CBarrett]

Yes, I agree with the idea of different career tracks with equal pay. That topic needs to be elaborated on extensively.
Right now we have a hodgepodge of things. Aside from pay issues, what bothers me immensely is the technology tracks that we are giving away. "SPMPLS" elaborated a bit on this earlier in this thread.

Mike, I love the articles you are posting.

I had a discussion about this question about a week ago, in a group of some 20,000 surveyors across the world (on Facebook) - it brought in some interesting responses:

"You see 2665' and 2665.0' and 2665.00' along a section line, on three different recorded maps.
Are these numbers identical? Discuss ...... "

I know it is an old one... I was interested in checking the room temperature with respect to education levels.

[CBarrett]

And more.

Mike, would you allow me to share this pdf in my Facebook group of surveyors, or even better Would you be so kind to do it?
It's not exactly "my" group, it is a large group of surveyors (about 20,000), mostly field guys from across the world, but mostly American, and I was recently added as a moderator. Among other things I am pushing for in this group is to elevate it's professional image. Especially since it is visible to the public. I am also stirring the pot with starting to push more ideas for mentor mentee relationships.

It's going to be a long process. At least, for the moment there is a bit of somewhat attentive audience over there.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1418725288418358

[CBarrett]

To continue the discussion...

I am looking at the NSPS strategic plan (this is what cones after a business plan to outline tactics which should result in progress) to put it simply. I have not read all of it yet, (I have an actual project I need to work on too.)
It would be nice to discuss some of these and how they may be borrowed, applied and modified to work on the state CLSA and possibly on chapter based CLSA levels.
I know when we look across the state, there is a variety of chapter interests, and one size may not fit all, in goals or implementation.

https://www.nsps.us.com/page/StrategicPlan

[mpallamary]

Please feel free to use what you like.

[Anthony Maffia]

..
What about a REAL conference where all of these topics are discussed?

I think you'd get about five people to show up.

I'd pay for the conference just for this discussion. CLSA can't lobby for legislation worth a d*mn. Unions can, CELSOC/ACEC California can, contractors can, and we're always worse for it.

[CBarrett]

..
What about a REAL conference where all of these topics are discussed?

I think you'd get about five people to show up.

I'd pay for the conference just for this discussion. CLSA can't lobby for legislation worth a d*mn. Unions can, CELSOC/ACEC California can, contractors can, and we're always worse for it.

Follow the Money

[CBarrett]

I was just noticing CLSA's strategic plan. Strategic plan is supposed to outline specific actions which are meant to be taken beyond goals and objectives and strategies. Down to specific tactics (actions) which can be taken to accomplish the objectives.
Ours stops short of defining tactics. This prevents most membership from understanding where and how they can contribute. Often larger single objectives are fulfilled by large number of small actions that can be taken by many.
It doesnt say anywhere whether our strategic plan is a work in progress. Or how to contribute to it's further development. To those with even just basic exposure to business management and planning (i.e. surveyors without an MBA, or MBA in progress) it just looks unfinished.

If you want better membership involvement and enthusiasm, it needs to broken down to specifics where members can get involved and assist. Considering that large percentage of surveyors don't have any business training, tactics need to be understandable and tangible at this level.

I would prefer to see more enthusiastic membership, rather than that which is intimidated, ordered and policed into compliance. After not being very actively involved during the recession and couple of years prior to it, I see a marked loss of inspired leading.