well, they (the chapters) showed them (national). Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face!
Sounds to me like CSI as a workable, grassroots organization, has died and gone centralized.
Not what I joined and worked so hard for.
How does membership benefit from this? Whose benefit is this for?
Does CSI mean anything at this point?
They are quick to dissolve, but what if you WANT to start a chapter? (in an area where it was dissolved/)
A few years after I retired I let all my various memberships lapse. It seems to me that many professional organizations use the model of paying for the national membership which includes the local chapter. This was the case with AIA and the local chapter, BSA. I don’t know enough to weigh in on the affiliation agreement’s particular terms. Maybe, though, the change in structure would work fine, even though common practices - especially around meals - may have to change. Seems extreme to disband without the effort of trying to make it work.
In light of new information, let me clarify my previous post. I learned recently the two chapters, Idaho and Capital (Oregon), in the Northwest Region had been struggling before the home chapter/affiliation agreement. So the recent national organizational changes may or may not have contributed to their demise.
I think that cleaning house by forcing the affiliation agreement when they did – during and on the tail of the pandemic – really helped push chapters into becoming defunct. There were two years of chapters, who were probably already struggling prior to the pandemic, trying to pivot towards… something. And then the national absolutely, positively, HAD to have the affiliation agreements signed by what really was an arbitrarily set date.
A MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better rollout of the plan could have been put into place. It was a difficult two years. Instead of reaching out PERSONALLY, chapter leaders email boxes were littered with even more emails. National should have worked more closely with Regions to find a way to handhold local chapters in the transition better.
I think it the process was handled very poorly.
Loretta, that makes a lot of sense to me. In fact, it seems to me that CSI could have helped local chapters with tools and ideas to survive those couple of years. That could have taken a lot of forms, including facilitating joint online activities between multiple chapters.
I believe issue this began with an ANSI certification requirement that national’s board had decided to pursue.
It required a laundry list of good business practices required for chapters of the national organization.
Personally, I think the communication on this was not good and some chapter leaders may have done an “Emily Latilla” impersonation without being corrected.
The Maine Chapter leadership actually dissolved its corporation and disbanded.
I can only hope that a better dialogue can occur.
Oh… and please send your questions to the Board Chair, Cam Featherstonhaugh, he answered mine pretty well.
At the National Conference I spoke with a few disgruntled members. Most actually thought the affliation agreement was okay idea or at least they did not totally disagree with it. Their main issue was how the agreement was thrust upon them as a “Sign the paper or we will kill your chapter!” extortion tactic.
They told me how CSI talks that it is a membership-oriented association that exists to serve its members yet walks as a top-down oligarchy that ignores the desires of the membership. Kind of a “You don’t know what is best for you. We know what is best for you.” approach.
David Axt: What you heard PLUS doing this during/on the heels of the pandemic. Bad timing, but they should’ve learned to roll a little better with the punches.
My Chapter’s Board vote to approve and sign the Chapter Affliation Agreement. We figured that if we wanted to play ball we would have to abide by their rules.
When I first read over the Chapter Agreement I thought it was nothing more than a francise agreement. That is to say, “Independently owned and operated” but with corporation oversight.
The second thing I though of was the Boy Scouts of America and how a few bad scout leaders are causing the whole organization into bankruptcy and lawsuits.
I figured with this was a reason for the urgency to have chapters on board with this agreement. It would protect Institute from chapters’ or chapter members’ malfeasance.
Ive seen a lot of postings, emails, discussions etc about the changing CSI and how this isnt the CSI I joined years ago. So, first off, this is my opinion on the topic. YMMV
I agree with the comments about the methodology and timing on these changes. I think it put an undue burden on exhausted volunteers. I also realize there were some valid reasons for requiring the Affiliate Agreements and the restructuring is an attempt to streamline the organization and better serve members.
That said, I really dont understand the grumblings that, CSI has changed or CSI no longer cares about the members. Of course CSI has changed! Doesnt everything change? In the 25 years that I have been a CSI member, our world has changed dramatically (I was so bummed when my corner Blockbuster closed!) and so has the construction industry. The way we create construction documents, the ways we communicate, methods of construction everything has changed!
As I was thinking about all this, I had the epiphany that not only have I changed (both personally and professionally), but my reasons for being a CSI member have changed dramatically. When I joined CSI 25 years ago, I was a graduate student, just learning about architecture and specifications. As a student just starting my career, I needed CSI for the education and to meet mentors. I would attend the National Convention and couldnt believe I got two free drink tickets and food at the welcome reception (Best. Day. Ever!) When I started my own firm, I NEEDED CSI to develop relationships with product representatives. I believed the CCS credential would give me credibility. The mentors I met through CSI provided professional support.
Fast forward to today and I no longer NEED CSI in the same way. Today, I have one foot in retirement and so CSI provides a venue for me to now give back to the industry. I enjoy nurturing friendships of over 20+ years at Chapter Meetings, Region Conferences and National Conferences (I thought the conference in Denver was fantastic). I am now the mentor and I can give of my time and knowledge to improve the industry. In other words, I no longer ask what CSI can do for me, but rather, what can I do for CSI? If I have changed, and my relationship with CSI has changed, why would I think the organization wouldnt have changed as well? Is change a bad thing? I propose its worse not to change.
As far as I can tell, there isnt anything in the Affiliate Agreements that prevents chapters and regions from holding the types of events the component believes is best for its members. I question the statement that CSI is no longer able to operate at a Grassroots level. I can still organize Region conferences that offer educational and networking opportunities that our Region enjoys with autonomy, if I maintain the brand standards (this is just plain common sense with any brand). The Agreement ensures that the chapters/regions are all operating as legitimate entities. In our litigious society, this is smart business practice. I dont think anyone benefited from the components that refused to sign the agreement. Seems like a short sighted and cutting of your nose to spite your face. Our region wants to remain a part of CSI so we can continue our mission to educate the construction industry, which, in turn, benefits all of us!
Do I love everything about the changes? Of course not. But, Im choosing to roll with them and focus on the things I can control and can contribute.
I don’t have a problem with the affiliation agreement, and the fact that chapters are forced to sign it.
My problem was with the implementation of it. I think it was done very poorly.
Most people who volunteer at the chapter level of CSI have very busy lives – they have work and family obligations, and, understandably, those take priority over CSI. While we may all be adults, this process that meant sign or be cast into oblivion should have involved more “handholding.” Instead, it was “sign or die.” And if you missed the deadline, the plug was pulled. (And they were not exactly quick to put it back once you did sign.)
We all get a million emails. Reaching out to chapters solely via email for something that has serious ramifications was poor planning and abysmal execution. Top that off with the pandemic, which severely exacerbated national’s poor planning and execution. National should have reached out to regions on how to reach out to chapters on the process. By phone, in person, but not only by email. Which is what we got.
Ive seen a lot of postings, emails, discussions etc about the changing CSI and how this isnt the CSI I joined years ago. So, first off, this is my opinion on the topic. YMMV
I agree with the comments about the methodology and timing on these changes. I think it put an undue burden on exhausted volunteers. I also realize there were some valid reasons for requiring the Affiliate Agreements and the restructuring is an attempt to streamline the organization and better serve members.
That said, I really dont understand the grumblings that, CSI has changed or CSI no longer cares about the members. Of course CSI has changed! Doesnt everything change? In the 25 years that I have been a CSI member, our world has changed dramatically (I was so bummed when my corner Blockbuster closed!) and so has the construction industry. The way we create construction documents, the ways we communicate, methods of construction everything has changed!
As I was thinking about all this, I had the epiphany that not only have I changed (both personally and professionally), but my reasons for being a CSI member have changed dramatically. When I joined CSI 25 years ago, I was a graduate student, just learning about architecture and specifications. As a student just starting my career, I needed CSI for the education and to meet mentors. I would attend the National Convention and couldnt believe I got two free drink tickets and food at the welcome reception (Best. Day. Ever!) When I started my own firm, I NEEDED CSI to develop relationships with product representatives. I believed the CCS credential would give me credibility. The mentors I met through CSI provided professional support.
Fast forward to today and I no longer NEED CSI in the same way. Today, I have one foot in retirement and so CSI provides a venue for me to now give back to the industry. I enjoy nurturing friendships of over 20+ years at Chapter Meetings, Region Conferences and National Conferences (I thought the conference in Denver was fantastic). I am now the mentor and I can give of my time and knowledge to improve the industry. In other words, I no longer ask what CSI can do for me, but rather, what can I do for CSI? If I have changed, and my relationship with CSI has changed, why would I think the organization wouldnt have changed as well? Is change a bad thing? I propose its worse not to change.
As far as I can tell, there isnt anything in the Affiliate Agreements that prevents chapters and regions from holding the types of events the component believes is best for its members. I question the statement that CSI is no longer able to operate at a Grassroots level. I can still organize Region conferences that offer educational and networking opportunities that our Region enjoys with autonomy, if I maintain the brand standards (this is just plain common sense with any brand). The Agreement ensures that the chapters/regions are all operating as legitimate entities. In our litigious society, this is smart business practice. I dont think anyone benefited from the components that refused to sign the agreement. Seems like a short sighted and cutting of your nose to spite your face. Our region wants to remain a part of CSI so we can continue our mission to educate the construction industry, which, in turn, benefits all of us!
Do I love everything about the changes? Of course not. But, Im choosing to roll with them and focus on the things I can control and can contribute.
Instead of posting your concerns, disagreements, and questions here, post them on CSI’s forum page or write to Cam. Contact a board member. Post where you can get answers.
There has been months and months of questions, discussions, grumblings, threats to “leave CSI” etc etc. At some point, everyone needs to decide if they want to accept the changes and focus their energy on moving forward. Too many valuable volunteer hours have already been spent on this issue!
Agreed, Robin.