Kent McMillan, post: 417898, member: 3 wrote: As a general rule, engineering firms have a surveying department to either (a) support land development projects that they provide engineering services on or (b) to perform engineering surveying in support of engineering projects. It's a kick-the-project-out-the-door orientation that is only marginally focused on actual land surveying as defined in Texas and then only when necessary.
The large engineering firms tend to be sausage factories with many hands running the grinder, all set in motion by engineering staff, if under the nominal direction of some registered surveyor whose work mostly requires him or her to hold down a desk and telephone. I suspect that the young surveyors who graduate from that work environment tend to accept that model or style of practice as a given and to perpetuate it in their own offices.
Good insight. Most surveyors I know will counter that they would love to be a one-man boundary shop, but they don't want to "starve to death". Kent, do you think that's a valid fear or a self-fulfilling prophecy?
FrozenNorth, post: 417899, member: 10219 wrote: Good insight. Most surveyors I know will counter that they would love to be a one-man boundary shop, but they don't want to "starve to death". Kent, do you think that's a valid fear or a self-fulfilling prophecy?
I'm currently in transition from Engineering firm employee to 1 man survey shop, so I will get to see first hand how long it takes me to starve or not.
Sent from my XT1031 using Tapatalk
Kent McMillan, post: 417898, member: 3 wrote: As a general rule, engineering firms have a surveying department to either (a) support land development projects that they provide engineering services on or (b) to perform engineering surveying in support of engineering projects. It's a kick-the-project-out-the-door orientation that is only marginally focused on actual land surveying as defined in Texas and then only when necessary.
The large engineering firms tend to be sausage factories with many hands running the grinder, all set in motion by engineering staff, if under the nominal direction of some registered surveyor whose work mostly requires him or her to hold down a desk and telephone. I suspect that the young surveyors who graduate from that work environment tend to accept that model or style of practice as a given and to perpetuate it in their own offices.
Oh Kent, our years have jaded us.
I don't disagree with your spin. I was one of many surveyors that were spawned in the years when engineering firms were the cradle of our industry. There really existed a time around here that a "surveying only" firm was thought of like unicorns. And even as bored as I get in the thirty or so seconds that I can actually tolerate a conversation about surveying with a civil engineer, I'm going to fall short of calling them "sausage factories".
I can remember quite a few engineering projects upon which the surveying depended on me as an employee of a civil firm. But the budgeted time did not allow the proper research and investigative energy required to properly put the boundary limits together. We either just guessed or (more often) just put dotted lines on paper and labeled them "property line +/-". The engineers liked that I think.
And that was probably the wind in the sails of the surveying profession as it tacked away from the currents of engineering; we could enjoy the specificity required to really "survey" property properly.
The way I see it is they have their job and we have ours. I like to think they are just as worried about errors and litigation as we are. And the details we as surveyors attend to can surely fly over the heads of design personnel that are only focused on a submittal deadline to meet a pay schedule. I think the separation of the two professions has been good for both. And there are multi-disciplined firms that function fairly well nowadays. When Mark Mayer was down here in Norman, OK he worked for a firm that has done an excellent job in keeping both disciplines honed. I can only believe where ever he landed back in the PNW has a solid member of the team.
It's personally a good thing for me that I don't work with civil engineers anymore. Their fancy carpets don't get soiled with my muddy boots and I don't have to listen to their "superman surveyor" stories from the summer or two they spent in the field. 😉
FrozenNorth, post: 417899, member: 10219 wrote: Good insight. Most surveyors I know will counter that they would love to be a one-man boundary shop, but they don't want to "starve to death". Kent, do you think that's a valid fear or a self-fulfilling prophecy?
It's definitely a self-fulfilling prophesy, I think. That's not to say that a land surveyor can expect to have clients beating a path to his or her door without offering something more than just the typical commodities in which the market trafficks.
paden cash, post: 417902, member: 20 wrote: There really existed a time around here that a "surveying only" firm was thought of like unicorns. And even as bored as I get in the thirty or so seconds that I can actually tolerate a conversation about surveying with a civil engineer, I'm going to fall short of calling them "sausage factories".
I'm not going to overlook the fact that once upon a time some of the most capable land surveyors in Texas were trained as civil engineers. That was part of the standard civil engineering curriculum for at least the first half of the 20th century. In Texas, there were an astonishing number of quite good surveyors in practice in the late 19th century whose experience included railroad surveying, which I'd class as a hybrid of land and engineering surveying.
Kent McMillan, post: 417765, member: 3 wrote: A large part of the problem in Texas is the direct result of land surveyors having made their services a commodity to be purchased by "consumers" at the lowest possible price for delivery at the earliest possible date - that and working as employees of engineering organizations.
If you consider marketing practices, you'll find firm names that have no connection with actual practitioners and that with a minor change would work as the names of oil change shops and carpet cleaners. Jiffy Stake, Super Pro Surveying, and Universal Associates, if not presently in use, almost certainly will be.
I don't think it's the public who require education about what surveyors do. It's obvious: surveyors market themselves in the same way that oil change shops do and hide out behind some corporate-sounding image as if they were a franchisee of some fast food chain.
This is the most accurate explanation for the decline of the Surveyors status I have heard in a long time.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
WA-ID Surveyor, post: 417777, member: 6294 wrote: Stop providing 'bids' would be a good start. That just makes us sound like we're trying to be the cheapest and we want you to hire us because we are cheap. Know what you are worth and price accordingly.
The subject of bidding vs QBS is a hot item in Utah these days. The Engineers which dominate our common board want to make it a violation to give out a number (bid) on a project. They are considering limiting it to $50,000 and larger. They have a bill going through the legislature that will allow them to make this rule.
OK, I can see this for projects that require QBS like many state funded projects. BUT the rule they want to make would punish the engineer or surveyor that responded to a bid request. I've have had state agencies that probably should use QBS inquire and want bids. So if I answered and gave out a number I could have my license taken while the agency that asked for bids when they should have used QBS would not be disciplined. For me this is just taking it to far.
There was a discussion at the UCLS conference this year. It was pointed out that if an old lady calls for a lot survey you shouldn't be at risk of losing your license if you give her a number. Ok, a QBS procedure for a simple lot survey would cost more than the survey. Don't know how this is going to sort out.
Interesting, I ended up a a table where one of Utah's largest contractors lead estimator was sitting. They do 800 million dollars a year in construction projects. He made a comment that the most variable proposals they get for their projects is for the surveying. He said the average spread was 800% in the numbers they receive. He mentioned one particular project where the low ÛÏbidÛ was $43,000 and the high ÛÏbidÛ was $800,000. I think the conclusion was that there are surveyors that just don't have clue about what they are ÛÏbiddingÛ on and others that don't want the work but if they can retire on it they will give an off the cuff number.
I hate bidding or even the word bid. But for small practitioners many projects you get calls on, if you deal with shoppers at all and even serious clients, many times it comes down to the lowest number, that's all they care about. I give out a couple of numbers this week, they never called me back. So I must not have been the low number.
My county's government bids everything related to surveying. They always take the low number even when they know they will get crappy work. The state law says they ÛÏmayÛ use QBS if they want. They don't! I suppose on the upside if the new law and rule goes through these guys that respond to the county's bid requests could lose there licenses.
As unsolicited advice, I'd say that what a land surveyor should expect to find most in demand is something that ten other surveyors couldn't do equally well. There are some aspects of land surveying practice that aren't portable or universal. One such significant element is the deeper history specific to a locality. I would expect that a surveyor who acquires specialist knowledge of both the land titles and the work of earlier surveyors in some area has the makings of a very good niche.
Among the elements of a QBS document is local knowledge. In the overall weighting, it can be appropriate to skew it toward the high side under specific, stated, criteria.
Kent McMillan, post: 417916, member: 3 wrote: As unsolicited advice, I'd say that what a land surveyor should expect to find most in demand is something that ten other surveyors couldn't do equally well. There are some aspects of land surveying practice that aren't portable or universal. One such significant element is the deeper history specific to a locality. I would expect that a surveyor who acquires specialist knowledge of both the land titles and the work of earlier surveyors in some area has the makings of a very good niche.
I agree. Things like that come only with experience. However most surveyors I know don't make a point to "stick around" just to acquire specialist knowledge in an area. It's something that takes time and perseverance. Stick around the same county for 20 years, don't drink and drive, don't get divorced too many times and (last but not least) pay attention and some of that specialist knowledge will eventually find its way under your hat.
There are nooks and crannies of the surveying profession that are yet undeveloped I'm sure. A few good surveyors will find them and enjoy a prosperous career if they've developed the skills and experience required to actually perform at a professional level that is in demand. But until then, like you've pointed out, practice, practice, practice.
paden cash, post: 417921, member: 20 wrote: I agree. Things like that come only with experience. However most surveyors I know don't make a point to "stick around" just to acquire specialist knowledge in an area. It's something that takes time and perseverance. Stick around the same county for 20 years, don't drink and drive, don't get divorced too many times and (last but not least) pay attention and some of that specialist knowledge will eventually find its way under your hat.
There are nooks and crannies of the surveying profession that are yet undeveloped I'm sure. A few good surveyors will find them and enjoy a prosperous career if they've developed the skills and experience required to actually perform at a professional level that is in demand. But until then, like you've pointed out, practice, practice, practice.
In my opinion, the smartest thing a land surveyor can do is to identify a few geographical areas that are both interesting and where land is in transition to some more intensive use and focus on working in those specific areas. That way, he or she can develop the sort of background knowledge that is required, but efficiently. That is, the accumulation of data in a limited area is much easier than trying to just do it hit and miss across the map.
As an Aussie Registered Land Surveyor (whatever that means to the general public) I do feel respected by those I come in contact with.
Maybe its age and a fair sprinkling of white hairs!
Here in Tasmania I grew up in a road building authority that was engineering run. Engineers were at the top of the tree and we were an organisation within the main department.
There was always a valid perception we were the lesser of the bunch. (engineer versus surveyor) Pay packet reflected such.
Not much has changed in my view in relation between engineers and surveyors and pay packet,generally.
However amongst professionals I deal with there's definitely a respect between lawyers, solicitors, engineers and architects.
We know our role and rest secure in that knowledge.
The public I generally deal with have a respect that I feel is sincere.
Others have said similar here, but for me it's something we gain by our demeanor, service and willingness to see "it" through.
There's lean times when I've seen some firms undercutting to get jobs. I've been told such and such said they'd beat any price. To me that is degrading the professional status of any organisation, but it's okay for me to say that as I only have myself to answer to.
Overall I do feel the respect and can't honestly say I've encountered derision for the profession or personally towards a particular surveyor.
This is Tasmania, population <500000, and we're known to be an odd breed so may explain something?
Kent McMillan, post: 417924, member: 3 wrote: In my opinion, the smartest thing a land surveyor can do is to identify a few geographical areas that are both interesting and where land is in transition to some more intensive use and focus on working in those specific areas. That way, he or she can develop the sort of background knowledge that is required, but efficiently. That is, the accumulation of data in a limited area is much easier than trying to just do it hit and miss across the map.
Once upon a time in the nether regions of Oklahoma surveyors were very territorial about others "poaching in their woods". If they weren't the current County Surveyor, they were probably at odds with the current office holder. Corner and survey records were treasured and literally handed down father to son as stock in trade. If one had to work in "someone else's" area it was a good idea to visit them and hecepakwv ekkuce (smoke peace pipe). Or take them a cooler of filleted bass or a bottle of No.7...whatever was appropriate.
After 1978 and we were required to file corner records and the office of County Surveyor was abolished. While this 'cleaned up' the practice of referencing corners and keeping the info from others; it dealt a blow to the bond a surveyor had within the area he practiced and knew so very much about. A lot of those records have been lost to the ages.
A good thing? Probably not. But it's history now.
paden cash, post: 417931, member: 20 wrote: Once upon a time in the nether regions of Oklahoma surveyors were very territorial about others "poaching in their woods". If they weren't the current County Surveyor, they were probably at odds with the current office holder. Corner and survey records were treasured and literally handed down father to son as stock in trade. If one had to work in "someone else's" area it was a good idea to visit them and hecepakwv ekkuce (smoke peace pipe). Or take them a cooler of filleted bass or a bottle of No.7...whatever was appropriate..
I'd think that there are still plenty of private records up there above the Red River that require some diplomacy and guile to access.
You guys kill me with your belly aching about proposals versus bids.
You act like the public and your potential customers are supposed to just have an unlimited budget. It's our job to educate them why we might be the best option. It's our job to let them know what will be required to make their project as successful as possible.
You didnt build your house without getting it priced out, would be foolish not to, otherwise you may not be able to pay for it.
So watch out being on your high horse and try to focus on putting out excellent products with great customer service and you'll be respected.
I work for the largest All Risk Fire Department in the US in terms of geographical area (FDNY has the most personnel).
The fire fighters have this figured out. Focus on your mission, talk about the fire service to the public, training, more training, and see that people are paid adequately so that you can attract and keep good people.
Sitting around stewing about what people think of you is counterproductive.
I think the public perception of professionals in general has declined in the past 30 years. Doctors used to be Gods and ruled their domain, the hospital, now it's run by technicians, case managers, and businessmen.
Lugeyser, post: 417935, member: 1249 wrote: You guys kill me with your belly aching about proposals versus bids.
You act like the public and your potential customers are supposed to just have an unlimited budget. It's our job to educate them why we might be the best option. It's our job to let them know what will be required to make their project as successful as possible.
You didnt build your house without getting it priced out, would be foolish not to, otherwise you may not be able to pay for it.
So watch out being on your high horse and try to focus on putting out excellent products with great customer service and you'll be respected.
There is a significant difference between the private land owner looking to have their property surveyed and a local municipality looking to widen a road right of way. Comparing house building to professional land surveying is just wrong. One is a trade the other is a profession....and we continue to wonder why.
James Fleming, post: 417769, member: 136 wrote: ÛÏYou know yourself what you are worth in your own eyes; and at what price you will sell yourself. For men sell themselves at various prices. This is why, when Florus was deliberating whether he should appear at Nero's shows, taking part in the performance himself, Agrippinus replied, 'Appear by all means.' And when Florus inquired, 'But why do not you appear?' he answered, 'Because I do not even consider the question.' For the man who has once stooped to consider such questions, and to reckon up the value of external things, is not far from forgetting what manner of man he is.Û
-Epictetus
LOVE THIS!!!!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just to ask what percentage of your guys clients actually want to get a survey vs a means to an ends to accomplish something else??
Dave Karoly, post: 417942, member: 94 wrote: Sitting around stewing about what people think of you is counterproductive.
Since I'm on a roll with the stoic quotes recently 😉
"Waste no more time arguing about what a good man should be. Be one."
-Marcus Aurelius