CMI logo chosen.

[Michael R. Boyett]

I feel so "untouchable"

[pdacey]

Is this worksheet part of the requirement? If it is, that's pretty unsettling. More than half of that list is BS and has nothing to do with being a "Master Inspector".

http://certifiedhomeinspections.info/

[Nick Gromicko]

No. These are the requirements http://www.nachi.org/cmirequirements.htm

[Richard L. Bennett]

Things are still a little hard to understand -- ie what is the school requirement??

Nick -- This whole program is good but at this time it needs some help

What are some of your "gray areas"???

Put it out on the BB and lets see what some of the public "membership" thoughts are

rlb

[nbhi]

Does this new CMI labeling mean that someone like myself, new to the business, will be look at as not being qualified? This reminds me of that other organization, ACHI. Hmmmm

[jmichalski]

Gary,

Yes. It is a marketing tool that can (and will) be used by those who hold it to cast doubt on the credentials of those who do not.

There is no other purpose to it.

There will now be 2 classes of NACHI members (3 if you count that you are not a "full member" until you do 100 inspections) We are all equal...but some are more equal than others!!

[Joseph Burkeson, CMI]

Originally Posted by jmichalski

Gary,

Yes. It is a marketing tool that can (and will) be used by those who hold it to cast doubt on the credentials of those who do not.

There is no other purpose to it.

There will now be 2 classes of NACHI members (3 if you count that you are not a "full member" until you do 100 inspections) We are all equal...but some are more equal than others!!

It was not so long ago that those who struggled to apply themselves, sacrificed to become educated, allowed themselves to be tested by their peers and succeeded were rewarded for their efforts and became entitled to the nomenclature reserved for "masters". Others in training were designated apprentices or journeymen and their was no shame in those titles.

Today everyone believes a silly little logo or patch will make you equal to those who have truly journeyed, the thing is saying it will not make it so and remember your customer is no fool.

[jkormos]

Joe, I couldn't agree with you more it is and always will be that.. the haves and the have not’s, a label is a label it is a separation as well as a segregation

Joe

Originally Posted by jmichalski

Joe F.,

It isn't the internal mechanisms that worry me with creating a"class" system of inspectors. The external appearance is precisely what concerns me.

I have no idea if or when I will qualify for this 'designition' (the details I last saw indicated 1000 inspections).

But I do know this:it is of absolutely no use to me if I can't market it. And what is the most effective way to market it? "Make sure your inspector is a Certified MASTER Inspector - not some clueless rookie with a flashlight. Let the experience and wisdom of a MASTER Inspector protect YOUR investment."

Makes anyone without the CMI tag look like a rookie. It can't help but be devisive and polarizing - that's what labels do. They divide us into haves and have-nots, naughty and nice, CMI and not good enough.

I know mine is the minority opinion on this, but if this is to have any teeth or merit at all it will be relatively hard to attain, meaning that there will be some haves and many have-nots.

And I, for one, would not blame those who attain this label from using it as a marketing tool to totally bludgeon those that don't.

Separation is a form of segregation, I guess this will be determined as to what path NACHI wants to go down, do we want to be unique or are we modeling after other organizations. I suppose the masses will drive this discussion.

Joe

[jmichalski]

Joe B.
It was very long ago by current standards.

Marketing and the media by which we market has grown exponentially. Words rapidly change or lose their meaning in the context of the online culture and society of instant gratification. "Candidate" "Apprentice" and "Jourenyman" all have negative connotations. They all mean "unqualified" or "the B team".

No one in their right mind would want to open a business advertising that. There is no shame in those titles, but there is also no benefit - in fact, they are a detriment.

No one is saying the rookies know as much as the vets (although some do).

What is being protested is that many rookies could have spent the money anywhere. They came to NACHI because it is inclusive and their is an openness and equality of members here that I have not felt in the other organizations - even at casual moments.

They came here becasue they are not stigmatized or branded. We (the more experienced) benefit by having a broad and diverse membership (and a deep pool of dues to drive the machinery). WE benefit and learn from each other - ALL the members, not just those who have "truly journeyed".

Class, status and membership levels (and dues and fees, and forced apprenticeships) are why the old-heads love those other orgs. It is because they revere the old way of doing things (which you also seem to revere) and perpetuate the old heiarchy. I am sure that they are appalled (as many old-timers are) that newbies can so quickly get up to speed and succeed.

This is professional jealousy, IMO. If the old heads were so sure that age, wisdom and experience were truly what drove business, they would sleep peacefully and not worry their grey heads about young upstarts. They see others ascending the ladder more rapidly and with greater ease (thanks to technology, better education and tools, and NACHI) and they dislike it.

I don't need a CPI or any other designation to prove my worth. I seek education to improve myself when I can. I obtain new credentials when I think they make me a better inspector. I also don't begrudge those who do not.

I worry about making myself a success, not about others making themselves successful.

NACHI is for everyone and our greatest asset is not following in the footsteps of the other orgs, but blazing our own trail. I know you seem concerned that soem think NACHI is a "laughing stock". So be it. Let them laugh while we succeed. But let's not cave to be like them. They are anachronisms.

Make way for the new industry....led by people like us, together, without need for classes.

Now if only we could get a plan on paper to ensure that progress is constant and structured.....

[Nick Gromicko]

We don't publicly disparage our working members and never have. In fact, we don't even permit most of our staff access to that information, let alone the public.

That other diploma mill association (evil empire) has a disparaging term for members with little experience: Candidate. Or as I like to call them Come only with Cash Candidates.

Disgusting.

The National Association of REALTORs does the same as NACHI. The day you get your real estate license and join NAR.... you are a REALTOR. You have no duty to disclose to your first client your lack of experience.

REALTORs have all sorts of professional designations: ABR, GRI, Multi-Million Dollar Club, etc. CMI is no different.

If it means CMIs can raise their prices... I cheer them on. More room for the rest of us to raise our prices.

Our veteran inspectors don't whine about NACHI treating newbies with respect... newbies shouldn't whine about our vets earning (yes I said EARNING) a professional designation.

CMI is like flipping a coin where heads you win, tails you don't lose... It helps some members and hurts none.

[jmichalski]

That just doesn't make sense from a marketing perspective, Nick.

Ask this:
How can I use my CMI designation to improve my business?

The logical answer:
By differentiating myself from those who do not have it, making their services seem less qualified.

The extent to which this method is successful for CMI's is the exact entent to which they are successful in making non-CMI inspectors appear to be clueless or unqualified.

Ergo, the most effective strategy does, inherently, hurt newbies. It cannot help but create a tiered class, and it will be used agressively as a marketing weapon against non-CMI's

Therefore: It helps some, it hurts some.

[jmichalski]

Rookie Realtors are told not to expect to make any money their first year.

This is because the more senior Realtors have these designations and who, in their right mind, when selling a home would list with the first guy that answers the phone and has no intials, when compared to the "Million Dollar Club" "Platinum Circle" Realtor?

Can newbie inspectors come in expecting not to make money their first year, now? Is that the direction we really want to head in?

When you talked before about capping membership, I didn't think it would be in this way....

[Nick Gromicko]

Veterans aren't taking any work away from anyone. They are already busy doing 600-700 inspections a year. 3 letters aren't going to change their established markets. 3 letters won't make them work harder, but might permit them to charge more.

You know maybe if our vets who are already working full schedules charged more they might just find it unnecessary to accept as many jobs.

[Nick Gromicko]

By the way, when I got my ABR as a REALTOR I had represented about 500 buyers at that point. ABR only required me to have represented 5. In other words I had 100 times the experience required to get my ABR. A one-day course and a short quiz and I had my ABR designation.

[jmichalski]

first, if 3 letters don't matter, then why do it?

For the money they can charge? If they have that much work then they can already increase fees, take a hit in the number of inspections while still increasing the overall profit margin.

No CMI is needed for that. And the math works without the CMI.

The real problem is that the only stat I have seen says that the industry average for a veteran inspector is 230 inspections a year (ASHI survey). I would be thrilled to stand corrected.

Is there any single inspector firm perfroming 600-700 inspections annually (or 50-60 per month)?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Nick, you don't need to use hyperpole to make a point, but you do have to bring a quantifiable fact to the argument. What is your source for single-inspector firms and the 600-700 per year?

Also, if it "might" permit them to charge more when they are already doing 2-3 per day EVERY day of the week, I think they are either charging what the market will bear to keep them as busy as they need o be , or very bad business people who will not take advantage of the CMI designation.

Either way, it will polarize and divide membership along class lines for no good reason.