The opposite of love
No one ever expects a high voter turnout during a primary election. But I was surprised to learn that less than 25 percent of registered voters typically participate. Yesterday’s primary in Michigan was no different, with an average 18 percent voter turnout in the Southeast region where I live.
I can think of dozens of reasons why this number is so low. We’re all busy, and it can be a hassle to drive to the right precinct and cast a ballot. Maybe we don’t think our one, small voice is going to have any impact. Maybe we’re content to ride the wave of public sentiment and let others make the decisions. Or maybe we just don’t know or care enough about the issues and people on the ballot. Whatever the reason, decisions are made and the democratic process marches on—perhaps not quite as true as it should be, but the choice was ours, nonetheless.
The same is true in other various committees and associations in which we have a chance to play a part. So often, it’s just easier to let someone else take care of it. We might wonder why things don’t get done a certain way, or why specific services aren’t available, and we might even complain that our needs aren’t being met. But how often do we step up to the plate? Whether it’s sharing an opinion, voting or taking on an active ongoing role, when was the last time we participated?
I had to appreciate the video released by GITA yesterday. In it, Executive Director Bob Samborski makes a plea for feedback that will help the organization shape its future direction to ensure that it remains relevant. “The opposite of love is not hate—it’s indifference,” Samborski says. “We can’t afford for you to be indifferent right now.”
The situation sounds familiar. GITA is not the only association facing challenges.
Where do you see a need? What will you do about it?
I can think of dozens of reasons why this number is so low. We’re all busy, and it can be a hassle to drive to the right precinct and cast a ballot. Maybe we don’t think our one, small voice is going to have any impact. Maybe we’re content to ride the wave of public sentiment and let others make the decisions. Or maybe we just don’t know or care enough about the issues and people on the ballot. Whatever the reason, decisions are made and the democratic process marches on—perhaps not quite as true as it should be, but the choice was ours, nonetheless.
The same is true in other various committees and associations in which we have a chance to play a part. So often, it’s just easier to let someone else take care of it. We might wonder why things don’t get done a certain way, or why specific services aren’t available, and we might even complain that our needs aren’t being met. But how often do we step up to the plate? Whether it’s sharing an opinion, voting or taking on an active ongoing role, when was the last time we participated?
I had to appreciate the video released by GITA yesterday. In it, Executive Director Bob Samborski makes a plea for feedback that will help the organization shape its future direction to ensure that it remains relevant. “The opposite of love is not hate—it’s indifference,” Samborski says. “We can’t afford for you to be indifferent right now.”
The situation sounds familiar. GITA is not the only association facing challenges.
Where do you see a need? What will you do about it?
Comments
Date Posted: Sep 4, 2010 at 6:13 AM
Members of most associations have lost sight of what an association actually is -- a group of individuals associating together to do collectively those things that are more expensive, more difficult or even impossible to do individually.
The emphasis here is on the "individuals doing" -- with or without paid help. In other words, the members are doing something with the association staff's help, not the association doing something for the members.
If that basic premise was adopted by the members of an association, then the relevance would be quickly identified.
The emphasis here is on the "individuals doing" -- with or without paid help. In other words, the members are doing something with the association staff's help, not the association doing something for the members.
If that basic premise was adopted by the members of an association, then the relevance would be quickly identified.
Date Posted: Aug 7, 2010 at 1:43 AM
Kristi I didn't see any problem with your post (yes I appreciate I'm not directly challenged here) but I take the view in life that if something presses my button then I look at me first and see why. (I actually value my wife for that as she is a good 'button presser')
I agree with Deral's comment though. We ALL have unique attributes and if we can appreciate that then suveyors are valued for the contribution they make to society, engineers for there's, GIS professionals for there's etc.
Problems surface when someone starts to be a 'proffesional' out of their area of expertise.
I have seen that first hand and seen the indignant responses from a real professional in that field.
As my surveying career has progressed (expect we all do as age creeps on) I realise how much knowledge I acquire in other fields and yet never claim to be expert.
But that knowledge has enabled me to better help those in other fields to fine tune their requirements for my services limiting their damage to their hip pockets and giving them or their clients a far better outcome.
'in the end the winner will be the public' I think that is the ultimate goal and the prize all in one.
I agree with Deral's comment though. We ALL have unique attributes and if we can appreciate that then suveyors are valued for the contribution they make to society, engineers for there's, GIS professionals for there's etc.
Problems surface when someone starts to be a 'proffesional' out of their area of expertise.
I have seen that first hand and seen the indignant responses from a real professional in that field.
As my surveying career has progressed (expect we all do as age creeps on) I realise how much knowledge I acquire in other fields and yet never claim to be expert.
But that knowledge has enabled me to better help those in other fields to fine tune their requirements for my services limiting their damage to their hip pockets and giving them or their clients a far better outcome.
'in the end the winner will be the public' I think that is the ultimate goal and the prize all in one.
Date Posted: Aug 6, 2010 at 4:18 PM
No problem Kristi. If not for the boldly issued challenge, I probably wouldn't have participated. That seemed to be your goal and I'd say you were successful. I appreciate POB, this venue for discussion, and your hard work very much. So, there's no apology required.
Traditionally, I've viewed (and continue to view) POB magazine as a great source and wealth of knowledge. The contributing authors (AND EDITING) has always been top notch, fulfilling, and it comes at a GREAT price too! The last reason there gives me little cause to complain, but I guess I would have liked to have seen a little more faithful representation of the geomatics professional, instead of GITA. But I do understand how the world works.
But maybe it could have sounded a little bit like this:
Big industry lobbyist - Bob Samborski, of GITA issued a plea in a video for feedback to help his organization remain relevant. Samborski's apologetic tone bares a somewhat striking resemblance to the recent tone of ACSM after a marketing research company identified the key challenges related to their "service provider" relationship to member organizations. Whorton Marketing and Research recommended that ACSM form one single "industry wide" mothership organization to eliminate competition.
Recent actions (or inactions) by ACSM may have been instrumental in the decision to request the NSPS (ACSM's largest member organization) board of directors to initiate the process of separating from the ACSM umbrella. According to a letter by Mr. Wayne Harrison, NSPS President, the board of governors voted 35 to 5 in favor of separation, at the Phoenix meeting.
Mr. Samborski's pleadings may leave much to be pondered. If the NSPS leaves as planned, what is to become of future relations with GITA? With many of GITA'S local chapters in "reorganization", and the recently announced departures of Board of Directors President Cindi Salas, and Treasurer Vince Rosales, what will become of GITA? Will Geomatics Professional's ever find representation?
Traditionally, I've viewed (and continue to view) POB magazine as a great source and wealth of knowledge. The contributing authors (AND EDITING) has always been top notch, fulfilling, and it comes at a GREAT price too! The last reason there gives me little cause to complain, but I guess I would have liked to have seen a little more faithful representation of the geomatics professional, instead of GITA. But I do understand how the world works.
But maybe it could have sounded a little bit like this:
Big industry lobbyist - Bob Samborski, of GITA issued a plea in a video for feedback to help his organization remain relevant. Samborski's apologetic tone bares a somewhat striking resemblance to the recent tone of ACSM after a marketing research company identified the key challenges related to their "service provider" relationship to member organizations. Whorton Marketing and Research recommended that ACSM form one single "industry wide" mothership organization to eliminate competition.
Recent actions (or inactions) by ACSM may have been instrumental in the decision to request the NSPS (ACSM's largest member organization) board of directors to initiate the process of separating from the ACSM umbrella. According to a letter by Mr. Wayne Harrison, NSPS President, the board of governors voted 35 to 5 in favor of separation, at the Phoenix meeting.
Mr. Samborski's pleadings may leave much to be pondered. If the NSPS leaves as planned, what is to become of future relations with GITA? With many of GITA'S local chapters in "reorganization", and the recently announced departures of Board of Directors President Cindi Salas, and Treasurer Vince Rosales, what will become of GITA? Will Geomatics Professional's ever find representation?
