Expectations management is something that all too many geoprofessionals have not yet mastered. They need to. According to Expectations Management – the newest addition to the Geoprofessional Business Association’s (GBA’s) series of GBA Best Practices monographs – “All too many geoprofessionals manage expectations poorly….The problem occurs when a client representative asks how much a service will cost and/or by when it will be completed. Possibly because they fear a forthright response may cause a client representative to find an alternative provider, all too many geoprofessional project managers respond to such queries by citing a range. They’ll say ‘$12,000 to $15,000’ knowing that the client representative hears ‘$12,000,’ when – in fact – the $15,000 figure is far more likely, and – even then – only if everything works out well. And the same applies to ‘12 to 15 weeks.’ In other words, in order to secure an engagement, some project managers get into the unfortunate habit of setting expectations they are not likely to meet; i.e., they overpromise and then underdeliver.”

So, how should a geoprofessional project manager proceed? According to the new GBA Best Practices, experienced geoprofessional project managers “know about how long it will take to perform a given service, having performed it dozens – if not hundreds – of times before. They’re also aware of the other projects they’re working on and how much time will have to pass before they can start on the new one. In other words, they’re in a position to quote realistic budget and schedule ranges. In many cases, however, those ranges do not consider the unexpected, like an illness or accident that suddenly slows things down. As such, a truly realistic range that accounts for the potential for the unexpected…geoprofessionals the ability to delight, or at least satisfy, client representatives. If client representatives decide to rely on a different geoprofessional because they regard a realistic fee range as too high or a realistic delivery-date range as too long, so be it: The firm that commits to realistic ranges would likely get another chance to prove its mettle at some future time, especially so if the ranges cited by the alternative provider prove to be aspirational.” As the new publication also points out, “How much better it would be to let a client representative know that a commission will cost as much as $20,000 to fulfill, and/or that it will take as many as 20 weeks…and then deliver in 18 weeks and/or for $18,000.”

GBA Best Practices monographs are available only to GBA members, without charge. Members can order Expectations Management from the GBA website.

Established in 1969, the Geoprofessional Business Association is widely regarded as geoprofessionals’ best source of comprehensive business guidance. GBA serves geotechnical engineers, environmental professionals, civil engineers engaged in a variety of specialties, and construction-materials engineering and testing professionals, among other geoprofessionals. GBA is well known for its innovation; it was the force behind the limitation of liability contract provision, alternative dispute resolution, and organizational peer review, among other concepts it developed to help its member firms thrive by confronting risk and optimizing performance.

All GBA Member Firms’ technical activities are under the full-time control of an individual who is legally and/or ethically bound to hold paramount public health, safety, and welfare. GBA’s associate membership comprises geoprofessional constructors; geoprofessional educators; geoprofessionals employed by government agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and industry; and attorneys and other consultants to GBA Member Firms.

Obtain more information about GBA at its website (www.geoprofessional.org) or by contacting the organization at info@geoprofessional.org or 301/565-2733.

“Safety Is Priority One” – That’s the key message of a new employee-pocket safety card developed by the Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) Safety Committee for use by its member firms. “Firms can print it ‘as-is,’ or they can easily customize it, to add their own logos or special messages,” said Safety Committee Chair Randy A. Knott, P.E.

The front of the card poses a series of brief instructions and questions employees should address before moving forward with a task; e.g., “Identify what could go wrong.” and “Do you have written procedures to follow to ensure safe performance?” In large bold letters the card advises, “IF YOU DON’T KNOW IF IT’S SAFE, DO NOT PROCEED.”

The card’s reverse asks, “Which of these six hazard categories apply?” The six categories are contact, exposure, fall, caught/crushed, ergonomics, and energy source, with each being subcategorized; e.g., for “energy source,” electricity, pressure, compression/tension, or rotating equipment.

GBA members can print the card in its GBA PDF format, using the GBA logo. The card also the card in a Microsoft Word format and an InDesign format. The Word format makes logo substitution easy. The InDesign version provides a higher-quality result, but special software is needed to use it.

According to Mr. Knott, “For a firm to achieve safety, it must make safety awareness part of its culture. It cannot treat safety as some kind of program that people can turn on or off at will. A pocket safety card of itself can do little. However, when it is regarded as part and parcel of an organization’s culture, it can provide specific guidance and a reminder of all other aspects of an organization’s safety-mindedness.”

The new GBA employee-pocket safety card is available only to GBA members, without charge. Members can order it from the GBA website.

Established in 1969, the Geoprofessional Business Association is widely regarded as geoprofessionals’ best source of comprehensive business guidance. Geoprofessionals include geotechnical engineers, environmental professionals, many civil engineers, and construction-materials engineering and testing professionals, among others. GBA is well known for creating innovative programs, services, and materials to help its member firms thrive by confronting risk and optimizing performance.

All GBA Member Firms’ technical activities are under the full-time control of an individual who is legally and/or ethically bound to hold paramount public health, safety, and welfare. GBA’s associate membership comprises geoprofessional constructors; geoprofessional educators; geoprofessionals employed by government agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and industry; and attorneys and other consultants to GBA Member Firms.

Obtain more information about GBA at its website (www.geoprofessional.org) or by contacting the organization at info@geoprofessional.org or 301-565-2733.

Laura R. Reinbold, P.E. ( President-Elect )

Laura R. Reinbold, P.E. (Terracon) is the new president-elect of the Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA), succeeding Joel G. Carson, who resigned the position after being chosen to serve as GBA’s executive director. Charles L. “Charlie” Head, P.E., P.G. (Sanborn, Head & Associates, Inc.) has been named GBA’s new secretary/treasurer, filling the position Ms. Reinbold vacated.

Ms. Reinbold is a director of client development for Terracon, a consulting-engineering firm providing environmental, facilities, geotechnical, and materials services from 150 offices nationwide. Located in Nashville, TN, Ms. Reinbold has been in the engineering profession for more than 30 years. She chaired GBA’s Education Committee before being elected to the group’s board of directors, and continues to serve on committees of the American Council of Engineering Companies, the Urban Land Institute, and the Nashville Chamber of Commerce. In 2013, Governor Bill Haslam appointed Ms. Reinbold to the Tennessee Architects and Engineering Licensing Board. She holds a Bachelor of Engineering degree from Vanderbilt University.

Charles L. Head, P.E., P.G. ( Secretary/Treasurer )

Mr. Head is CEO of Sanborn, Head & Associates, Inc., a multidisciplinary, New Hampshire-based firm serving industry, development, solid-waste, and energy clients nationally and internationally. Licensed as both a professional engineer and a professional geologist, Mr. Head has 30 years of practice experience. He has been active in GBA for more than a decade, chairing its Emerging Issues and Trends Committee before joining the GBA board last year. Mr. Head holds Bachelor of Science degrees in geology (from St. Lawrence University) and civil engineering (from the University of New Hampshire) and a Master of Science degree in civil engineering (from Colorado State University)

Conceived in 1968, and formally established in 1969, the Geoprofessional Business Association is widely regarded as geoprofessionals’ most-relied-on source of comprehensive business guidance. GBA serves geotechnical engineers, environmental professionals, civil engineers engaged in a variety of specialties, and construction-materials engineering and testing practitioners, among other geoprofessionals. GBA is well known for creating innovative programs, services, and materials to help its member firms thrive by confronting risk and optimizing performance.

All GBA Member Firms’ technical activities are under the full-time control of an individual who is legally and/or ethically bound to hold paramount public health, safety, and welfare. GBA’s associate membership comprises geoprofessional constructors; geoprofessional educators; geoprofessionals employed by government agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and industry; and attorneys and other consultants to GBA Member Firms.

Obtain more information about GBA at its website (www.geoprofessional.org) or by contacting the organization at info@geoprofessional.org or 301-565-2733.

“Can’t You Come up with a Cheaper Alternative?” is the candidly descriptive title of a new publication developed by the Geotechnical Business Council of the Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA).

In his introduction to the new guide, Geotechnical Business Council Chair Richard D. “Rick” Heckel, P.E., D.GE (Ardent Geotechnical Consultants) points out that geotechnical engineers are more likely to hear “Can’t you come up with a cheaper alternative?” than other members of the design team. He also states, “‘Can’t you come up with a cheaper alternative?’ is not an unreasonable question….Nonetheless, in an effort to accommodate client representatives’ preferences, [geotechnical engineers of record or] GERs will all too often acquiesce to changes (often suggested by other project participants) that create new and sometimes-severe risks. Later, after those risks materialize into full-fledged problems, GERs get blamed and ultimately have to deal with professional-negligence, breach-of-contract, and similar claims, commonly because they failed to issue a written warning about the new risks pursuing the alternative would entail.”

The booklet’s six chapters provide guidance geotechnical engineers can apply to help deal with the risks responses to “Can’t you come up with a cheaper alternative?” can create. Chapter titles are:

•  “Using a Group-By-Group Approach, Educate Client Representatives, Prospective-Client Representatives, and   Those Who Influence Them”;
•  “Educate Clients and Their Intermediaries on a Case-by-Case Basis”;
•  “Develop a Contract Provision”;
• “Do What Professionals Are Supposed To Do”;
• “Recommend Value Engineering”; and “Be Prepared.”

Authored by John Philip Bachner, the guide points out that, “with few exceptions, GERs have already considered the ‘cheaper alternatives,’ and have rejected them, because the risk they entail makes it extremely difficult to achieve risk/reward balance [for the client].” As Bachner also notes, “More construction problems arise from subsurface issues than any other source.” In the chapter titled “Do What Professionals Are Supposed To Do,” Bachner writes, “If the client insists on applying an alternative that would create unacceptable risks…the GER would be forced to object in writing and, possibly, withdraw from the project. True: Doing ‘the professional thing’ might cause you to lose a client, but – were the risk to materialize – you’d probably lose the client and a lot of money ‘to boot,’ not to mention the two or three years (or more) of frustration and aggravation you’d experience.”

“Can’t You Come up with a Cheaper Alternative?” is available at $175 per copy; members receive it free, as part of their membership. Order it from the GBA website.

Established in 1969, the Geoprofessional Business Association is widely regarded as geoprofessionals’ best source of comprehensive business guidance. GBA serves geotechnical engineers, environmental professionals, civil engineers engaged in a variety of specialties, and construction-materials engineering and testing professionals, among other geoprofessionals. GBA is well known for creating innovative programs, services, and materials to help its member firms thrive by confronting risk and optimizing performance.

All GBA Member Firms’ technical activities are under the full-time control of an individual who is legally and/or ethically bound to hold paramount public health, safety, and welfare. GBA’s associate membership comprises geoprofessional constructors; geoprofessional educators; geoprofessionals employed by government agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and industry; and attorneys and other consultants to GBA Member Firms.

Obtain more information about GBA at its website (www.geoprofessional.org) or by contacting the organization at info@geoprofessional.org or 301-565-2733.

Safety has become a top priority for many design and environmental firms, and not just because they are concerned for the welfare of their employees. As explained in Safety and Your Geoprofessional Practice, the most recent entry in the Geoprofessional Business Association’s (GBA’s) series of GBA Best Practices monographs, “For many major clients, safety performance is a key criterion when it comes to the procurement of professional services, directly or by subcontract. They are committed to avoiding on their property work-related injuries or illnesses caused by any outside entity that fails to follow established safety regulations or best industry practices.” Many of these major clients “use comprehensive prequalification questionnaires that inquire about a firm’s safety program and request electronic copies of documents that support the answers,” the new publication explains.

The new monograph provides important information essential to the development of an effective safety program. Part of this information focuses on the direct and indirect costs of an inadequate safety program, ranging from higher insurance premiums and legal exposures to lost business and lower productivity. Also covered: Some of the key safety metrics being used, known by acronyms such as EMR, TRIR, DART, LCWR, and IPMMD; benchmarks firms can use as targeted objectives; and an array of techniques for developing a “robust, proactive safety program that seeks to eliminate hazards and prevent injuries.”

According to the GBA Safety Committee, which is responsible for the new GBA Best Practices monograph, “The effectiveness of any safety program is tied directly to the demonstrated commitment of top management. For that reason, the CEOs of safety-conscious firms demonstrate their commitment to safety by making it part of their organization’s pre-employment screening, including motor-vehicle reports (MVRs). Also recommended: A drug- and alcohol-testing program that includes pre-hire/post-offer, random, and post-accident testing.”

GBA Best Practices monographs are available only to GBA members, without charge. Members can order Safety and Your Geoprofessional Practice from the GBA website.

Established in 1969, the Geoprofessional Business Association is widely regarded as geoprofessionals’ best source of comprehensive business guidance. GBA serves geotechnical engineers, environmental professionals, civil engineers engaged in a variety of specialties, and construction-materials engineering and testing professionals, among other geoprofessionals. GBA is well known for creating innovative programs, services, and materials to help its member firms thrive by confronting risk and optimizing performance.

All GBA Member Firms’ technical activities are under the full-time control of an individual who is legally and/or ethically bound to hold paramount public health, safety, and welfare. GBA’s associate membership comprises geoprofessional constructors; geoprofessional educators; geoprofessionals employed by government agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and industry; and attorneys and other consultants to GBA Member Firms.

Obtain more information about GBA at its website (www.geoprofessional.org) or by contacting the organization at info@geoprofessional.org or 301-565-2733.

Joel G. Carson has been selected to serve as executive director of the Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA), succeeding John P. Bachner. Bachner’s firm – Bachner Communications, Inc. – has managed GBA since May 1973; Bachner has served as GBA’s chief of staff during that span. GBA will become a fully self-managed entity in November 2015. Carson will be tasked with assembling the new management team that he will lead to achieve GBA’s long-term strategic vision.

According to GBA President Gordon M. Matheson, Ph.D., P.E., P.G., D.GE (Schnabel Engineering), “The GBA Board of Directors conducted an extensive search to find the right individual. Joel has the executive leadership capability we need, a deep understanding of management, and an intimate knowledge of GBA and the people who comprise it.”

Mr. Carson began his career in 1988 after majoring in civil engineering at the University of Utah. In 1993, he joined the staff of Kleinfelder, a multi discipline technical-services firm that today employs some 2,000 staff members worldwide.

Carson quickly initiated a 20-year focus on environmental engineering, hydro logical and hydro geological site characterization, and remediation. At the same time, he began a steady progression through the firm’s management hierarchy, now retiring there as manager of the commercial segment of its private-sector market, responsible for the segment’s strategic leadership and marketing direction.

Conceived in 1968, and formally established in 1969, the Geoprofessional Business Association is widely regarded as geoprofessionals’ best source of comprehensive business guidance. GBA serves geotechnical engineers, environmental professionals, civil engineers engaged in a variety of specialties, and construction-materials engineering and testing practitioners, among other geoprofessionals. GBA is well known for creating innovative programs, services, and materials to help its member firms thrive by confronting risk and optimizing performance.

All GBA Member Firms’ technical activities are under the full-time control of an individual who is legally and/or ethically bound to hold paramount public health, safety, and welfare. GBA’s associate membership comprises geoprofessional constructors; geoprofessional educators; geoprofessionals employed by government agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and industry; and attorneys and other consultants to GBA Member Firms.

Obtain more information about GBA at its website (www.geoprofessional.org) or by contacting the organization at info@geoprofessional.org or 301-565-2733.

According to GBA President Gordon M. Matheson, Ph.D., P.E., P.G. (Schnabel Engineering, Inc.),
“For many years efforts to collect a bill have been a principal trigger to negligence claims. For that reason, GBA has counseled consistently that it is better to write off a fee than it is to contest it with an unscrupulous client. A key preventive, discussed in the guide, is performing a thorough background check before accepting a new client, to help ensure the organization involved pays on time and doesn’t resort to a claim as a discount mechanism. It’s also why design and environmental professionals’ contracts should include a dispute-resolution mechanism that makes litigation a last resort or not an alternative at all.”

The author of the guide is John Philip Bachner, an independent consultant and long-time editor of GBA’s newsletter, NewsLog, an every-other-week publication that’s available free of charge. For many years, Bachner penned a NewsLog column titled “Getting Paid.” Content of the new guide is based on those columns, with updates through April 2015.

Just a few of the new guide’s chapter titles include:

• Rely on Effective Billing and Payment Language in Your Contract,
• Consider Carrots and Sticks,
• Be Mindful of the Client’s Payment Language,
• Obtain a “Creditworthiness Guarantee,”
• Use Lump-Sum Pricing More,
• Post Bills to a Client-Accessible Extranet,
• Use a Well-Designed Invoice,
• Restrict Use of Deliverables,
• Obtain Cash on Delivery, and
• Require Collectors to Abide by the Ten Commandments of Effective Collectors.

Getting Paid is available to nonmembers at $125 per copy; members receive it as part of their membership. Order it from the GBA website.

Established in 1969, the Geoprofessional Business Association is widely regarded as geoprofessionals’ best source of practice business guidance. GBA serves geotechnical engineers, environmental professionals, civil engineers in a variety of specialties, construction-materials engineering and testing professionals, and other geoprofessionals by giving them effective tools to help them achieve business success by confronting risk and optimizing performance. GBA creates those tools by promoting an environment of trust where members share their collective talent, energy, expertise, and experience to help one another succeed as firms and individuals.

All GBA Member Firms’ technical activities are under the full-time control of an individual who is legally and/or ethically bound to hold paramount public health, safety, and welfare. GBA’s associate membership comprises geoprofessional constructors; geoprofessional educators; geoprofessionals employed by government agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and industry; and attorneys and other consultants to GBA Member Firms.

Obtain more information about GBA at its website (www.geoprofessional.org) or by contacting the organization at info@geoprofessional.org or 301-565-2733.

Many geoprofessional reports include recommendations whose efficacy is dependent upon findings in the field. If the subsurface conditions observed during excavation are the same as those inferred to exist based on the results of sampling and testing, and the geoprofessional’s knowledge, experience, and judgment, then – and only then – the recommendations can be “green lighted”; i.e., they become final and can be applied.

If observed conditions differ from inferred conditions, however, the recommendations must be modified before they can become final and used. This important information – that the recommendations included in a final report are not final recommendations – is covered in GBA’s unique series of “Important Information” report- and proposal-insert sheets; e.g., “Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your report. Those recommendations are not final….”

But how should you label these recommendations in your report? Should you simply write RECOMMENDATIONS and rely on the “Important Information” insert sheet? No! Because a user may assume the recommendations are “good to go” as written and, as a professional, you are obligated to warn users they are not. PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS is also incorrect, it seems because the recommendations are not preliminary. Dr. English suggests that you consider using CONFIRMATION-DEPENDENT RECOMMENDATIONS, to make clear exactly what the recommendations are; i.e., recommendations that can be applied only when conditions inferred to exist are confirmed to exist.

You may also want to consider using a lead-in paragraph such as the sample below:

CONFIRMATION-DEPENDENT RECOMMENDATIONS :
We have developed the following recommendations under the tenuous assumption that the sampling and testing we performed on a relatively tiny portion of the site accurately portrays conditions that are otherwise concealed by earth, rock, water, and time. RESPONSIBLE GEOPROFESSIONALS CANNOT FINALIZE SUCH RECOMMENDATIONS UNTIL THEY CONFIRM THAT THE CONDITIONS THEY INFERRED TO EXIST ACTUALLY DO EXIST, a process they perform in the field, through observation of excavation. We are responsible geoprofessionals. Accordingly, if we do not observe excavation to see what actually exists, we cannot accept responsibility for these recommendations, given that – if we observe conditions we did not expect to see – we would modify the recommendations.

If another party performs field observation and confirms they are what we expected, that other party must take full responsibility for the recommendations. Please note, however, that another party would lack our project-specific knowledge and resources. DO NOT RELY ON THESE RECOMMENDATIONS UNLESS A QUALIFIED GEOPROFESSIONAL OBSERVES ACTUAL CONDITIONS AND TAKES APPROPRIATE FOLLOW-UP ACTION.

Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) is the new name of the organization formerly known as ASFE/The Geoprofessional Business Association. According to GBA President Steven D. Thorne, P.E., D.GE (Terracon),

“The time had come. Continually fewer of our most active members knew what GBA originally stood for or how we’ve evolved over the years. Geoprofessional Business Association identifies who we are today.”

ASFE was an acronym for Associated Soil and Foundation Engineers, the name the organization began with in 1969. Several years later it changed its name to Association of Soil and Foundation Engineers and, a few years after that, it dispensed with the name entirely.

“GBA Member Firms were the first to become active in the environmental-remediation field,”  Mr. Thorne said, “and those members of staff who focused on the environment, rather than soil and foundation engineering, felt like second-class citizens. That’s when we changed our name to ASFE – adopting the acronym as our name in full – and added a tag line explaining who we were; for example, ‘The Association of Professional Firms Practicing in the Geosciences.’ Taking that approach, we were able to recognize our geotechnical heritage while also explaining what we had evolved into. But answering the question ‘What’s ASFE stand for?’ was becoming a steadily more cumbersome process.”

Mr. Thorne noted that the geoprofessions, as defined in Wikipedia, consist principally of geotechnical engineering; geology and engineering geology; geological engineering geophysics; environmental science and environmental engineering; and construction-materials engineering and testing. He said,

“GBA is the source of programs, services, and materials geoprofessionals apply every day to help themselves and their clients confront risk and optimize performance.”

He added that, to the best of his knowledge, GBA is unique in that it provides all its materials – more than 700 items – to member-firm personnel free of charge.

Now that GBA has renamed itself, subsequent steps include establishing a new logo, securing a new website address and creating an entirely new Internet presence, and revising graphics on its 700 case histories, best-practices monographs, manuals and guides, model documents, and so on. “It’s a daunting task,” Mr. Thorne observed, “but we’ve already made some excellent progress.”

All GBA Member Firms’ technical activities are under the full-time control of an individual who is legally and/or ethically bound to hold paramount public health, safety, and welfare. GBA’s associate membership comprises geoprofessional constructors; geoprofessional educators; geoprofessionals employed by government agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and industry; and attorneys and other consultants to GBA Member Firms.

Obtain more information about GBA at its website (www.geoprofessional.org) or by contacting the organization at info@geoprofessional.org or 301-565-2733.

Forty-two organizations now endorse Recommended Practices for Design Professionals Engaged as Experts in the Resolution of Construction Industry Disputes, an annotated list of 13 “shoulds and should-nots” originally developed by the Interprofessional Council on Environmental Design (ICED).

The Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) recognized the need for the document and spearheaded its development through ICED, an “umbrella organization” also including, among others:

• the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE),
• National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE),
• American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC),
• and The American Institute of Architects (AIA),

all of which are endorsers. GBA accepted responsibility for the document’s publication and management, as well as gathering additional endorsers. The 37 additional endorsers comprise a “who’s-who” of construction-industry organizations.

According to GBA President Steven D. Thorne, P.E., D.GE (Terracon), Recommended Practices for Design Professionals Engaged as Experts in the Resolution of Construction Industry Disputes is believed to have received more construction-industry-organization endorsements than any similar document or position statement ever developed. Created in 1988, “Recommended Practices…” has been used extensively – and very successfully – in legal proceedings, especially in matters involving the standard of care.

According to GBA Executive Vice President John P. Bachner,

“To find a design professional negligent, a trier of fact – a judge or a jury – has to believe that the design professional failed to uphold the standard of care. But first the trier of fact has to decide what the standard of care actually was at the time of the incident in question. As it so happens, the standard of care is a moving target. It’s what’s commonly done by peer professionals operating in a given area at a given time. Practices evolve, however. What is common today may have been unheard of just five years ago.”

Bachner explained that courts almost always require an expert witness to explain the standard of care in terms the trier of fact – usually a jury – can readily understand. He went on to say,

“All too often, however, experts testify about the standard of care based on what they would have done or what a book says to do, and either or both of these measures may be seriously out of sync with reality. Forty-two prestigious organizations concur unanimously that experts need to conduct research to know what the standard of care was at the time it allegedly was violated. Experts who are cross-examined need to be able to explain how they reached their opinion about the standard of care.”

Some of the other issues addressed in the document include conflicts of interest, expert qualifications, research methods and integrity, illustrative devices, and confidentiality.

Because the document has been used extensively to impeach the testimony of “hired-gun experts,” GBA advises that leaders of “every engineering, environmental, and architectural firm in the nation should be familiar with ‘Recommended Practices.’ Their lawyers and insurance agents need to be aware of it, too.”

Recommended Practices for Design Professionals Engaged as Experts in the Resolution of Construction Industry Disputes is available at GBA’s website (www.geoprofessional.org) or by contacting GBA staff at info@geoprofessional.org or 301-565-2733.

Established in 1969, GBA “helps its members – geoprofessional firms – and their clients confront risk and optimize performance.” Geoprofessional firms provide geotechnical, geologic, environmental, construction-materials engineering and testing, and related professional services.

All GBA Member Firms’ technical activities are under the full-time control of an individual who is legally and/or ethically bound to hold paramount public health, safety, and welfare. GBA’s associate membership comprises geoprofessional constructors; geoprofessional educators; geoprofessionals employed by government agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and industry; and attorneys and other consultants to GBA Member Firms.

Obtain more information about GBA at its website (www.geoprofessional.org) or by contacting the organization at info@geoprofessional.org or 301-565-2733.

Geoprofessionals write more than just about any other professionals, are constantly under the gun to produce now, and are personally liable for every word they write in their professional capacities. And because the best legal evidence always is what’s in writing, wise geoprofessionals want to be certain that what they say is unambiguous, so it is not subject to interpretation and so limits the ability of others to claim,

“What the geoprofessional wrote was ambiguous, making the geoprofessional liable for the consequences because professionals are supposed to write clearly.”

Words to the wise:

Unless you are trying to be ambiguous, always select words that have the fewest alternative meanings. Therefore, when you want to discuss causality, use “because,” because “since” has a meaning with respect to time, and because “as” – popular usage notwithstanding – does not mean “because.” Likewise, when you’re talking in terms of quantity, use “more than” instead of “over,” because “over” has more meanings than “more than.”

Engage in such exercises not only to help reduce ambiguity, but also to remind yourself that, by choosing words effectively, you perform more professionally. The career you protect will be your own.

“You, too, can have the vocabulary of a Harvard English major.” You’ve probably seen that advertisement in airline magazines, suggesting that you, too, can develop knowledge of words that other people don’t know, making them feel stupid and, thus, elevating your own self-image.

As it so happens, Dr. English is a Harvard English major, and the only others he knows who use words most people don’t understand are just plain rude. After all, why say “eleemosynary” when “charitable” will do just as well? Why say “have a predilection for” when all it means is “like”?

What about you? How secure or insecure are you about your language skills? The more you opt for the simple alternative, the more secure you are.

It’s pretty common for people to mishear a word or phrase and then go on to use it improperly, and it’s also pretty common for those who recognize the corruption to say nothing about it, so as not to offend the user.

Just a few you may be familiar with:

An early adapter : would be someone among the first to modify something for a new purpose. What’s almost always meant is early adopter; someone who is among the first to start using something new, like an iPhone.

Take a different tact : makes no sense. What’s meant is take a different tack, which refers to the course taken by a boat; generally a zigzag course when heading into the wind.

Unchartered waters : could mean water that charter boats aren’t seen in an area. The correct expression – uncharted waters – refers to new areas that have not yet been mapped (a map being a chart). The phrase is also used metaphorically to indicate a new situation for a person.

Throws of passion : could refer to what Stephen Strasburg hurls for the Washington Nationals, but when pitching woo is the topic, it’s throes of passion.

All and all is used by people who are trying to express “In summary” but don’t realize that all in all is the phrase that does it.

Butt-naked : is used (incorrectly) because the correct phrase – buck-naked – doesn’t seem to make sense. (“Buck” was a term used sarcastically to refer to African-American slaves and American Indians, who, at the time the word was applied, were imagined as savages in the woods.)

Remember the old days when you had to submit a paper that contained at least 1,500 words, so you did everything you possibly could to add words when your count came up short? All the words you added were worthless, of course, except to the extent that they got you to where you had to be numbers wise. And that’s when you decided that a technical career was the career for you, only to learn (too late now!) that geoprofessionals probably write more than almost all other professionals. The good news: You graduated. The bad news: You’re still likely to be using worthless words that sap energy from your writing, tarnish your image as a professional, or, worse, create a significant liability exposure.

All: This is one of the most dangerous words of all. It means “no exceptions whatsoever, no matter how tiny.” Still, so many people use it all the time. For a technical professional, it’s not just a bad habit, it’s outright dangerous. Bottom line: Get into the habit of not using it at all. (Removing “of all” at the end of the first sentence of this paragraph and “at all” from the end of the fifth have no impact on meaning; they simply reduce the word count, making the writing less off-putting, and lower the risk. In the third sentence, removing “all the time” does the same thing the other two deletions would do, and more: It eliminates an outright lie created by use of a colloquialism. “All the time,” colloquially, means “frequently,” not continuously, ceaselessly, endlessly, and so on. But professionals are supposed to be able to express their thoughts clearly and reliably. What to do? Just delete “all the time.” It results in fewer words and enhanced accuracy. (Use other colloquialisms cautiously, too: Replace “for a duration of 48 hours” with “for 48 hours“; use “100 yards” instead of “a distance of 100 yards“; try “now” as a substitute for “at this point in time.”)

Currently: Replacing a suspected-worthless word with its opposite is an easy way to tell if the word is really worthless (with “really” as just used being itself worthless (and “itself” as just used also being worthless)). As examples, even though they’re spoken far more often than they’re written, “Our lines are currently busy.” or “I’m currently away from my desk.” Given that “Our lines were really busy yesterday.” or “I’m going to be away from my desk sometime next week.” make no sense, “currently” should be eliminated.

(Note that the tense of the verb – the present in both examples – itself conveys “currently.”)

Apply the same test to “past experience,” “different examples,” “existing debt,” “successfully delivered,” “intended objectives,” “diametrically opposed,” “disorganized mess,” “received correspondence,” “end result,” and the “personally” of “Personally, I believe that….”

Subjective modifiers – like “hot” – are worse than worthless, because what the writer conceives as hot is most likely not what a reader – let alone all readers – regard as hot; e.g., the temperature hit 80F and the writer wrote, “It’s a hot day today.” The reader, from Tucson, Arizona, reads “hot day” and imagines it to be 110F wherever the writer was at the time of writing. “Very” – as in “very hot” doesn’t help, given that “very” is worthless, as is the “particularly” of “particularly hot.” “Several” falls into that category: Just how many are several? Even worse, and responsible for at least one claim we know of, “a number of.”

Some modifiers are worthless when they are used to add something to an absolute word; e.g., the “more” of “more perfect,””more ideal,” or “more unique.” “Perfect” and “ideal” are the top rungs of the ladder. If someone considers something “more perfect” or “more ideal,” whatever it is that the something is being compared to is less than perfect or ideal. (That’s why “fullest” is illogical and, as such, worthless.) “Unique” means one of a kind. Because something cannot be “more one of a kind” than something else, “more unusual” or “odder” – among other words and phrases – can be used to convey the intent.

You don’t need to use “as follows” to introduce a list; readers can see a list follows the colon you should use. Likewise, “Finally“is often unnecessary when writing the last paragraph, because readers can see it’s the last paragraph. (When finishing an oral address, people can assume that “finally” happened when you’re done talking.)

“You, too, can have the vocabulary of a Harvard English major.” You’ve probably seen that advertisement in airline magazines, suggesting that you, too, can develop knowledge of words that other people don’t know, making them feel stupid and, thus, elevating your own self-image.

As it so happens, Dr. English is a Harvard English major, and the only others I know who use words others don’t understand are totally rude. I mean, really, why say “eleemosynary” when “charitable” will do just as well? Why say “have a predilection for” when all it means is “like”? And, at a lower level, why say “utilize” when all it means is “use”?

What about you? How secure or insecure are you about your language skills? The more you opt for the simple alternative, the more secure you are.