Well said! But if you are pushing to keep your market share (to which you alluded) or trying to prove to others how much you know (especially if they can’t use the software YOU can use) this is not a good description.

With few exceptions, I find the discussions in our field to be based on very narrow concerns and narrow visions of what professional education means. A genuine interest in geography, the humanistic discipline that is, not just the techno-gadgets of today, would be a great start, but that isn’t all that common. Without a broader view, people are either fighting over money or over status, and the result is a new form of snobbism, nerd snobbery. Not a pretty picture.

The discussion of user interfaces on James Fee’s blog (how I found this blog) is illuminating. Maps are, after all, produced to communicate to others. Would we tolerate this prose:

“Rotate the handle in a counter-cyclic manner to the degree that it ceases movement without minimal energy applied…”

When we mean this:

“Turn it counter-clockwise to open it?”

No, but many seem to think the equivalent in web-mapping is okay.

For example, a GISP certificate tells me something about what you’ve achieved in the past, but nothing about your approach to your work. You could get your GISP tomorrow and spend the rest of your working life drinking beer and photocopying your backside all day – are you still a GIS “professional” then? Certification programs/titles should focus on describing what you can do e.g. call it “GIS Practitioner” with “Advanced/Expert” grades for the real experts.

As for “professional”, if your customers/bosses think you work in a “professional” manner, then maybe you’ve earned the description, but let others be the judge of that. I’ve worked 20 years in IT, but I wouldn’t go around shouting about my own “professionalism” – I just try to do my job in a professional manner, and let my work speak for itself. Some of the most experienced guys I’ve worked with did not seem particularly “professional” to me, while I’ve worked with guys not long out of college who were far more “professional” in their approach to work.

As for which software you use, only a software manufacturer on the slide would think that was the way to measure “professionalism”!

OK, rant over.

Agree there is far more to being a professional than operating software, and it is not a binary decision. I think certifications and education degrees are good things because they are generally unbiased third parties. My bit of a rant is about the software providers trying to define “professional” as being the users of their software. I think it creates artificial divisions in the industry. In this case GeoWeb being amateurs and GIS users being professionals. Just seems to be counter productive in my opinion. Appreciate the comment and feedback.

best,
sean

There are obviously amateurs and pros in many fields (writing and sports both spring to mind) and I guess that there’s the same blurring of boundaries – and pros getting snobbish – in all of them.