Are We Generalists or Specialists? by Dr. Keith Swift.

Originally Posted By: gromicko
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

Originally Posted By: gbeaumont
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

Hi to all,

A very interesting article by Keith, and one which I whole heartedly agree with, we have long considered ourselves to be generalists, but the problem with this belief is that our clients and their agents believe that they are paying for specialists.

That is what causes us many problems , no matter what we put in our contracts in most states a Judge & Jury can decide what passes a test of reasonableness (Keith do you remember Lord Justice Denning?) Increasingly it seems that the legal system sees us as being specialists, with a considerable duty of care owed (rightfully IMHO) to our clients.

So what is the answer? I belief that as an industry we should fight to raise standards, and ensure that our members are well trained and well versed in our profession, that the roles and responsibilities are fully understood, and that we all strive to continually increase our knowledge and qualifications (IRC certifications for example).

If we are going to be held to be specialists then we need the training and testing that supports the premise.

There is an upside to this, as professional specialists we can charge much more than our average $ per hour, and be perceived as being worth the several Hundred $ per hour that professional engineers and the like earn.

Just my opinion, as Russel says' your mileage may vary ![icon_wink.gif](upload://ssT9V5t45yjlgXqiFRXL04eXtqw.gif)



Originally Posted By: kswift
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.

You’re absolutely right. One day, maybe NACHI’s voice will be strong enough to demand change. Until then, we’ll remain the victims of blue collar terrorists. Sit in on my avopiding litigation seminar in February if you can; perhaps we’ll get get a lively question-and-answer going. Till then, stay happy and healthy.

Originally Posted By: jburkeson
This post was automatically imported from our archived forum.


Tough road indeed, the perception, gene pool and most unfortunately the pay will very likely stay static as long as the bar to entry remains low.

It is almost comical when you view the vast distance that separates the entry requirements from the bankroll, skills, education and experience needed to be successful in this profession. Is it any wonder why so many fail, imagine how those failures hamper our profession from rising to the top; today you can open any phone book in any city and find many home inspection companies with disconnected phones.

No doubt raising the bar is the answer, but it is very hard to put ethics into a system from the inside, the major changes to our profession will come down through government regulation kicking & screaming as it has with all other professions. It won't take but a few major consumer complaints and lawsuits before places like New Jersey realize that lowering the bar was not in the best interest of the public.

As for me, regardless of what our illustrious licensing committee has to say, I will continue to fight the good fight against the ever so popular proletariat movement within our profession.

Joseph Burkeson, RPI (Hooperette)

?Anyone who has proclaimed violence his method inexorably must choose lying as his principle.?
~ Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn