A recent post got me to thinking about small survey companies and the progression of technology.
1985 survey office:
1. three man field crew just switching from steel tape to EDM
2. one office puke
3. one LS
4. one secretary
that's five people making anywhere from min wage ($10,000) to maybe $50,000, people learning the trade and advancing. You went home at night (even the LS) and took it easy.
2016 survey office:
1. one LS doing all the field work, drafting, research, secretarial duties etc.
Working 50 - 60 hrs. a week with little free time making $100,000, nobody in the wings being taught. All the money that went to payroll in 1985 is taken up by taxes/new technology/insurance/etc.
So I ask, are we really any better off today? sure we can do a job faster and more accurate than in 1985 but at what cost to us personally and our profession?
Maybe I was naÌøve back then but the world seemed to get along just fine without all the technology.
Respectfully,
Jim Vianna
James Vianna, post: 365958, member: 120 wrote: A recent post got me to thinking about small survey companies and the progression of technology.
1985 survey office:
1. three man field crew just switching from steel tape to EDM
2. one office puke
3. one LS
4. one secretary
that's five people making anywhere from min wage ($10,000) to maybe $50,000, people learning the trade and advancing. You went home at night (even the LS) and took it easy.2016 survey office:
1. one LS doing all the field work, drafting, research, secretarial duties etc.
Working 50 - 60 hrs. a week with little free time making $100,000, nobody in the wings being taught. All the money that went to payroll in 1985 is taken up by taxes/new technology/insurance/etc.So I ask, are we really any better off today? sure we can do a job faster and more accurate than in 1985 but at what cost to us personally and our profession?
Maybe I was naÌøve back then but the world seemed to get along just fine without all the technology.
Respectfully,
Jim Vianna
If GPS all went down tomorrow, I would be happy, but don't take my robot..........
James Vianna, post: 365958, member: 120 wrote: A recent post got me to thinking about small survey companies and the progression of technology.
1985 survey office:
1. three man field crew just switching from steel tape to EDM
2. one office puke
3. one LS
4. one secretary
that's five people making anywhere from min wage ($10,000) to maybe $50,000, people learning the trade and advancing. You went home at night (even the LS) and took it easy.2016 survey office:
1. one LS doing all the field work, drafting, research, secretarial duties etc.
Working 50 - 60 hrs. a week with little free time making $100,000, nobody in the wings being taught. All the money that went to payroll in 1985 is taken up by taxes/new technology/insurance/etc.So I ask, are we really any better off today? sure we can do a job faster and more accurate than in 1985 but at what cost to us personally and our profession?
Maybe I was naÌøve back then but the world seemed to get along just fine without all the technology.
Respectfully,
Jim Vianna
"Working 50 - 60 hrs. a week with little free time ..."
Double your rates! You'll have half the work, the same amount of money and more free time!
This describes me to a tee! (A "T"? A tea? Now I'm confused...)
Jim in AZ, post: 365964, member: 249 wrote: Double your rates! You'll have half the work, the same amount of money and more free time!
Sometimes though it seems like if you raise your rates by $1 per hour, you lose 75% of your work!
We still need some way for green, low-wage employees to be be involved and maybe get their interest stirred to advance up the ladder.
We also need some low end equipment available to help new freelancers get started. Prevent silly requirements from being added into minimum standards and local codes that would require a $250,000 investment to hang out a shingle.
1985 nobody questioned your work
2016 everyone is a critic and there is 10 times more red tape to filter thru
B-)
The small business that I am proudly a part of still resembles the 1985 office to a T. Thanks to a couple of great folks, i.e. the LS I work under and the secretary, I have enjoyed learning the art of surveying in and out from field, office, pricing and then some. One day, if it is in the cards, I would like to be able to run a similar size company. One surveyor doing all of the work from work orders to field to staking to billing to paid may work for some solo business models, but it does nothing for future surveyors. There is the exception to that also in that some solo surveyor and business owners contribute to the profession in a such a way that is beneficial to the future of this wonderful profession. Being able to employ a couple of folks and teach them the ways of the past so that they can take it to the future is the ultimate ideal in my little survey world though.
I have absolutely no desire to be a solo shop. I just don't think it's very appealing.
tried employees. not a good manager. They go outside, do the fun work, go home at 5, have a life and a check (smart people). employee A refused to work with employee B, but would work with employee C. Spend all my time in office on phone, fixing problems, and keeping crew busy and separated, all the money went to employees, i worked double their hours. bought robot, GPS, now I am the one that goes outside every day, and meets every deadline without excuse, surprise or misunderstanding. turn phone off during day. I have 300' of sewerline stakes in the ground in the same amount of time it takes to get the crew set up. all of the people I teach how to survey in the past (losing money) are now my competitors, no more! Just look at the caliber of high school kids being exposed to surveying through Trig-Star, compared to me at that age, and rest assured that the future of our profession is very bright.
Financially, I am better off. I am not having nearly as much fun. Using my time to manage limits my opportunities to survey and visa versa. What I have to do makes more money than what I want to do. I am considering retiring, so I can just survey.
I don't think surveying has changed much at all since 1985, except for the technology. Multi-section boundaries only take 1/4 of the time they use to. Research is armchair and mouse activity now, instead of a day trip to the county seat. "Drafting" doesn't take near as long as use to either.
But are we any better off?
Who knows. The environment has changed, but the work hasn't. Just like 1985, I have employees I can depend on for certain things and some that require micro-managing. The clients can still be a bunch of whiney-babies...except they're all younger than me now.
Money wise, I believe the business is pretty much the same. With a good work ethic and a small investment one can provide themselves with a good and proper living. There are folks, just like 1985, that get big and roll on to their riches in a diamond studded limo...and just like 1985, they never last. Just a flash in the pan.
"are we better off today?"
absolutely not.....in my opinion
Dan Patterson, post: 366045, member: 1179 wrote: "are we better off today?"
absolutely not.....in my opinion
I think that is more about the economics of the situation, and not so much tech or some congenital defect of surveyors. The population bubble of the baby boomers is past. We built vast tracts of suburban homes, then we built vast amounts of golf courses with homes on them, for the upgrade, then we built a bunch of 50+ communities...now we will build some retirement homes.
But, the industry has changed. We will get DOWN to the right number of PLS's some day. (Don't listen to the professional society's wails and moans, their dues will go down, and that always hurts, but it isn't proof of not enough PLS's.)
And, this decline is historic in some sense. There isn't new territory being opened up. Until the BLM sells off all its land, and we open up Ellis Island again, the number of necessary surveyors is on the decline.
I expect a stabilization in about a decade, due to the number of retiring and burning out PLS's. As the mentoring model dies, the university model will grow, it will all work out.
I'm of the humble opinion that this all very subjective as to whether we're better off or not. Everything is and always will be in a state of flux, change being the only constant. How well we adapt to that change and work it to our advantage ultimately determines the outcome of whether we're better off for it or not. For many years I had an I-man, great guy, very easy going but not terribly driven and I warned him that he'd need to up his game or he'd find himself going the way of the VHS and 8-track. His job is now performed by a robot and I had to find someone else who did have the ambition to up his game and could roll with changes and come out on top. This has been going on since the first surveyor stretched a rope and made a pile of stones.
dmyhill, post: 366052, member: 1137 wrote: ...I expect a stabilization in about a decade, due to the number of retiring and burning out PLS's. As the mentoring model dies, the university model will grow, it will all work out.
I hope so. By then all the youngins' I've "learned up" in this business will be the grey headed sages. Hopefully they'll remember at least one two things I've taught them.
On that same note, it might be my imagination but sometimes I sense there is a sentiment that all the grit, piss and vinegar required to be a surveyor is going to leave the profession with what you've called the "university model". My only remark to that is I believe all that "grit, piss and vinegar" is a product of our profession, not necessarily what you need to get into it. Anybody that sticks with the profession for a number of years will grow a good rough hide of experience...I don't care how dumb they've made themselves with schooling. B-)
James Vianna, post: 365958, member: 120 wrote: 2. one office puke
paden cash, post: 366068, member: 20 wrote: I sense there is a sentiment that all the grit, piss and vinegar required to be a surveyor is going to leave the profession with what you've called the "university model".
One of the first party chiefs I worked with in the late 80's thought it was clever to refer to me as 'the college puke" all the time. He may have had a lot of "grit, piss and vinegar" but he wasn't a good judge of character. Sure, I may have used some of them fancy English major words, but I was 6'3" 225 lbs and played league rugby after working a full day in the field. As I told the field coordinator when he asked why I had to hit him the second time: "he was apparently too stupid to stay down." 😀
It just seems like we buy more expensive stuff so we can plow through all the work faster and charge less.....Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me. I would like to go back about 20-30 years and use that technology. (Keep in mind I'm only 33 and didn't start surveying until about 12 years ago)
Dan Patterson, post: 366081, member: 1179 wrote: It just seems like we buy more expensive stuff so we can plow through all the work faster and charge less.....Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me. I would like to go back about 20-30 years and use that technology. (Keep in mind I'm only 33 and didn't start surveying until about 12 years ago)
Ironically, the ability to do something cheaper and easier decreases the value...meaning anyone can do it. So, we need to discover where the value is for each of us. I think that this is part of why some have championed value pricing, not T&M.
This is the same thing the Luddites ran into.
Dan Patterson, post: 366081, member: 1179 wrote: It just seems like we buy more expensive stuff so we can plow through all the work faster and charge less.....Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me. I would like to go back about 20-30 years and use that technology. (Keep in mind I'm only 33 and didn't start surveying until about 12 years ago)
The good old days weren't that good. I'm 38 and have been surveying since I was 12.
I caught the tail end of some chaining jobs, large boundary, oil and gas, et cetera. I love my cell net R10 and my VX. I love my CAD. I don't want to get my leroy set back out.
Also, I go home around 5. If you work all those hours, it's only you doing it to yourself. (The last comment was for everyone else.)
Dan Patterson, post: 366081, member: 1179 wrote: It just seems like we buy more expensive stuff so we can plow through all the work faster and charge less.....Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me. I would like to go back about 20-30 years and use that technology. (Keep in mind I'm only 33 and didn't start surveying until about 12 years ago)
"...so we can plow through all the work faster and charge less."
This is what really bugs me about the complete lack of business sense of the majority of surveyors! You must be operating on the "hourly" model, which with all due respect, is MORONIC. If you charge what your work is worth instead of how much it costs you to do it you'd be much better off. You'll rarely get ahead charging on an hourly basis.
Do you know any physicians or surgeons that charge less now that they have newer and more expensove equipment?
To be successful you have to be a businessman that surveys, not a surveyor in business. Some level of business education should be a mandatory requirement for licensure... far too many of us have no clue!
