tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6416426589713285085.post4622380704343314555..comments2024-02-28T02:23:50.477-06:00Comments on Constructive Thoughts: CSI membership - one more timeSheldonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13799057838622646083noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6416426589713285085.post-71704906456834899452010-12-21T22:24:19.515-06:002010-12-21T22:24:19.515-06:00But the decision has not been made yet - only the ...But the decision has not been made yet - only the Task Team and Board have made a decision to put up a proposal for a membership vote to make a decision.<br /><br />What needs to happen now is a good membership wide discussion of the issues related to the proposal before the vote so that the membership is well informed to make a good decision.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13523072166839134261noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6416426589713285085.post-25715748076072483722010-12-21T18:08:43.550-06:002010-12-21T18:08:43.550-06:00You're right, of course, except that the quali...You're right, of course, except that the qualifier makes the question a little easier to ask. With a qualifier, simply members means all members, while without a qualifier, you would have to supply one, e.g., voting members, or full members, or professional members. If you're going to use a qualifier, why not make it part of the name? <br /><br />Taking several things into consideration, the student to emerging professional to professional sequence makes sense. <br /><br />The intent was not to change the subject, but to show that, as stated, at some point you make a decision and move on. Decisions made in choosing a name, in changes to MasterFormat, in the way you choose to follow or not follow standards, are all subject to the same criticism, and all are defended in the same way. <br /><br />I have asked the same questions, and have accepted the same response. You can debate things forever, and never make a decision, or you can evaluate the input, consider options, and make a decision. You can please some of the people...<br /><br />The response to your last question was posted today. I know we're going to disagree on this, too, even though I agree with you that our recent representation of our two largest groups has been good for the Institute. However, I also believe in our recent governance changes, and I am confident the Institute Nominating Committee will do its job and maintain representation of not only our largest member groups, but of as many perspectives as is possible with a Board of eighteen.Sheldonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13799057838622646083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6416426589713285085.post-72730941818585931452010-12-21T16:57:37.201-06:002010-12-21T16:57:37.201-06:00So I you are saying when someone asks how many mem...So I you are saying when someone asks how many members in your chapter they won't have the same question - all members or just professional members? I don't buy that argument.<br /><br />It's a nice transition from "emerging professional." So a tag that I believe was created by a young group of members now determines membership labels for others. Don't buy that one either.<br /><br />Sorry I am not ready to react to the "change the subject tactic." The subject is the change in mmbership classifications.<br /><br />When are you going to discuss the important issue of retention of membership diversity on the Institute Board?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13523072166839134261noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6416426589713285085.post-74822267199692975482010-12-20T12:49:13.983-06:002010-12-20T12:49:13.983-06:00You're right, there is an element of political...You're right, there is an element of political correctness, but we felt some modifier was necessary; without it, how do you answer the question, "How many members are in your chapter?" Response: "Do you mean student members, intermediate members, professional members, industry members, etc., or the sum of all of them?"<br /><br />I don't buy the argument that people will be confused by the use of professional, any more than I bought the argument that members were confused about the difference between professional, industry, and associate. Apparently, I give them more credit than do you or others. <br /><br />Full member and voting member also were discussed, but we settled on professional, as it gives a nice transition from student to emerging professional to professional. What are you when you're done emerging? If, at some point, all distinctions between student, intermediate, and full voting member are removed, that would be a good time to refer simply to members.<br /><br />Methinks you occasionally like to have fun, so I'll ask you a few questions about issues that I'm sure others find confusing.<br /><br />Why "construction" in Construction Specifications Institute? Isn't demolition also included? And is remodeling or refinishing the same as construction? <br /><br />Why "specifications"? That's been going on enough that I need go no further.<br /><br />Why "institute"? Why not organization, or brotherhood?<br /><br />MasterFormat may be the epitome of confusion. Why does it have so cotton-picking many exceptions? What is the difference between resinous, epoxy, liquid-applied, fluid-applied, marble chip, epoxy-resin, and quartz flooring? Why are some finish materials in one division and some in others? I seem to recall a member who was involved in many of these decisions... ;-)<br /><br />Why do MasterFormat numbers have those irritating blank spaces between pairs of digits? Why are the titles so obtuse?<br /><br />Why, on your website and the Institute website, do mailing addresses not comply with post office standards?<br /><br />We could have a lot of fun with this, but in the end, at some point you have to make a decision and move on. We believe the proposal will work.Sheldonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13799057838622646083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6416426589713285085.post-12755991516767078252010-12-20T10:21:10.330-06:002010-12-20T10:21:10.330-06:00With a change to a single CSI membership classific...With a change to a single CSI membership classification, why keep using the term professional?<br /><br />What is the meaning of the word "professional" in the proposed new single CSI member classification?<br /><br />Is it referring to the type of work one does? If that is the meaning, then many people are going to be confused by the label. Per you comment about asking a random group of people what is meant, most people would not include constructors or product representatives in that category. The use of the word will be confusing to many potential and new members.<br /><br />Is it now referring to a characterization about the manner in which one interacts with others in the industry? The member is professional in the way he/she goes about their business and in the way he/she treats others. Why put such a characterization in single member classification label?<br /><br />Is "professionalism" a requirement for membership? If a person has acted unprofessionally in the past, are they restricted from membership? Who determines who is professional and who is not?<br /><br />If we are going to describe CSI members as professional, why do we ignore other postive attributes? Why not make it Professional, Intelligent, and Considerate Members. If we are going to label ourselves with postivie attributes, why restrict it to one?<br /><br />Including the word professional appears to be a hangover from the discussion of some members with a hangup about some members being labeled professional others not - now everyone is labeled as being professional. If we are going to have one membership classification, why aren't we all just members?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13523072166839134261noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6416426589713285085.post-64784549207635059602010-12-12T22:22:42.873-06:002010-12-12T22:22:42.873-06:00Michael, you are correct when you say, "Regar...Michael, you are correct when you say, "Regarding use of the term "professional", we have to consider contractors to be professional as they are also licensed." Similarly, students at vo-tech schools and those in apprentice programs would have the same status, as Emerging Professional members.<br /><br />Bob, I agree that representation of member groups is important, and that will be addressed, though not quite in the way you would prefer. One of the next posts will address this issue.Sheldonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13799057838622646083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6416426589713285085.post-67638971734288239132010-12-12T11:37:44.799-06:002010-12-12T11:37:44.799-06:00Many words have multiple meanings - "professi...Many words have multiple meanings - "professional" is one those. It can refer to a characterization of how you interact with others or the type of work you do. As used for CSI membership classification, it is obviosuly the later meaning. Some industry members take offense to the classification interpreting it to have the former meaning. If this is a problem, why not change the word so the meaning is clear?<br /><br />Yes the organization started out as a group of specifiers who looked upon industry members as second-class citizens to support them. As Sheldon comments, this changed over the years to have both membership classifications have equal rights. It looks like there are a couple of bylaw items that still need to be cleaned up. Why not just clean then up?<br /><br />Sheldon's comments do not comment on an important function of the membership classifications - ensuring that the various elements of the industry have representation on our governing bodies. This is the essence of CSI - representatives of the various elements of the industy are able to to sit down together around the same table and try to come up with solutions to industry-wide issues and problems (something that our congress has lost the ability to accomplish). To do this we have to have make sure that the board will have representation of the various elements of the industry. Membership classification is the current tool used to accomplish this. In my opinion, that is the only reason to keep the membership classifications. I have no problem with doing away with the membership classifications if another tool to accomplish this is created. Keeping this representation should not be allowed to rest on the whim of nominating committees of the future who may or may not understand the importance of keeping a proper representation in light of current issues or personalities. It must be maintained as requirement not to be violated. If the membership classifications are eliminated, what is the now tool to maintain proper representation?<br /><br />PS I have been both professional and industry member during my over 40 years a CSI member. I have not been treated any differently by anyone in CSI based on my membership classification.Bob Johnsonhttp://jandjconsultants.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6416426589713285085.post-26031736258180687662010-11-27T22:02:21.488-06:002010-11-27T22:02:21.488-06:00I agree that it's an emotional decision and I ...I agree that it's an emotional decision and I find myself strongly in favor of CSI changing to a single class of membership. <br /><br />I don't think we really have to worry about CSI being dominated by sales reps, thus driving architects, engineers, and spec writers into the arms of some other organization. (What we really have to focus on is what BIM is going to do to redefine Spec Writer and AE roles and workflows, in my opinion.)<br /><br />Back to the single classification: I've been a CSI member since 1973 and I've seen at least as much "professionalism" from industry members as from professional members. Professionalism in the sense of cheerful volunteer work, genuine concern about making the built environment better, candor, conscientiousness, and product and construction knowledge, that is.Specologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00870574712590092597noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6416426589713285085.post-20535404206768868822010-11-26T13:30:05.427-06:002010-11-26T13:30:05.427-06:00Very thought provoking. I have not seen "Indu...Very thought provoking. I have not seen "Industry Member" as a pejorative, as I believe them to be equally honorable. I can see value in a chapter having both "industry Directors" and "Professional Directors" to make sure a balance is maintained. Afterall, one of the things that distinguishes CSI from other industry associations is that we do welcome all facets of the industry. Will we be happy if ten years from now CSI is dominated by sales reps using the institute primarily as a sales platform? Would that drive designers and specifiers looking for support for their needs into the arms of SCIP or other organizations?<br /><br />On the other hand, the distinction continues to blur, as sales reps, contractors, and manufacturers are increasing asked to be part of the design table, and designers are part of integrated project teams.<br /><br />Regarding use of the term "professional", we have to consider contractors to be professional as they are also licensed.<br /><br />In my business as a marketing consultant to building product manufacturers (www.chusid.com), I continue my membership as a Professional as I am a licensed architect. Yet day by day I am focused on helping my clients sell products.<br /><br />At the end of the day, this is an emotional decision. Does one FEEL comfortable with the traditional way, or FEEL a need for egalitarianism?Michael Chusidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05450387557968843922noreply@blogger.com