What Is GIS: A Profession, Niche, or Tool?
GITA White Paper - Prepared June 2005
What is GIS? Is it a profession unto itself? Is it simply a niche technology inside the broader discipline of information technology (IT)? Or is it a tool that cuts across numerous professional and technological boundaries?
This debate raged over a period of weeks on GITA’s GEOXchange list server, where members routinely exchange information and discuss topics relevant to the geospatial industry. Thisparticular thread touched off such a firestorm that the association developed a panel discussion on the topic at GITA’s Annual Conference in Denver in March 2005.
Vince Rosales, vice president of Idea Integration in Denver, moderated the panel of four industry representatives who spoke before a packed meeting room. Rosales alternated between comments from the panel and the audience. While no definitive answer to the debate was reached—as was the case on GEOXchange—it became clear that this discussion was far more than an exercise in extemporaneous speaking. The geospatial industry is passionate about this topic as both a matter of professional pride and a concern over where the industry is heading.
Specifically, many involved in the debate see an accurate definition of GIS as critically important to the future because it relates directly to the issue of professional certification and licensing, which has been causing equally stirring discussion within the industry in recent years.
The Great Debate
If a conclusion has to be drawn from the discussions at Annual Conference 28 and on GEOXchange, it is that there is no consensus regarding the basic question. Rosales summed it up as follows: “The argument over whether GIS is a profession, niche or tool will continue because it is all of those things … it simply depends on your perspective.”
He noted that strong arguments were made for each of the positions, and interestingly, most participants in the discussion argued from two or more perspectives. Few felt GIS could be pigeonholed into a single definition. Two of the most prevalent comments, for example, were that GIS could easily be considered a profession or tool depending on the context.
Since there are individuals who are trained and employed specifically in the capacity of performing GIS work, it must be considered a profession. Likewise, how can GIS not be considered a tool in some circumstances when there are geologists, urban planners, and environmental scientists—with no particular training in GIS—using geospatial functionality in the course of their daily work?
One GITA member summarized this point succinctly on GEOXchange: “GIS software is, in and of itself, a tool. The ability to utilize, extend and improve the software, as well as the ability to infuse the system with intelligence, to guide decision-making processes, for a variety of disciplines, is the central task of the GIS professional.”
Speaking at the panel discussion, Peter Batty, CTO of Ten Sails, Greenwood Village, Colo., cautioned against trying to define a GIS professional because the technology is so diverse. In order to get anything remotely meaningful, a number of different specific roles and skill sets need to be defined. The alternative is ending up with a definition that is too broad to be useful, which is what has happened with existing certification programs, he said.
Ian Fitzgerald, GIS coordinator at Truckee-Donner PUD in Truckee, Calif., and a panelist at the discussion, took the debate a step further by clarifying precisely what a GIS professional is: “A GIS professional is a person who maintains the geospatial data and the interface through which the data is converted to information. The professional, therefore, must have a cartographic background, understand database administration, and be an application developer. Someone who uses GIS is not necessarily a GIS professional.”
Glenn Letham, co-founder and managing editor of GISuser.com, based in Frederick, Md., said he could agree with these positions, but that he ultimately came down in the ‘GIS is a tool’ camp: “I feel that it is best described as a tool. GIS, geospatial technologies, and related disciplines are now commonly found as the driving force or backbone of many applications and Web services. GIS has evolved as a tool used and/or required by a variety of users and is now an indispensable component of any information technology professional’s toolbox.”
Many preferred to avoid the terms profession and tool and settled on calling GIS a discipline. One GEOXchange member wrote: “GIS is an ever-expansive far-reaching discipline. There is a difference between GIS software and GIS. In most cases when people refer to a GIS, they are referring to an integration of a variety of software from a variety of disciplines. [GIS] has an academic, intellectual, and theoretical background based on geographical theory and computer science. GIS is a dynamic system of relationships between a vast array of disciplines.”
Another voiced a comment with a theme that ran through many discussion threads: “Indeed, the products are tools, however, GIS is no less a discipline than surveying, computer science (IT), accounting, engineering or marketing. It is a bit different, however, as GIS is a blend of many existing disciplines, including math, history, engineering, geometry and computer science … it will quickly develop as a discipline, much like computer science did in the 1970s and 1980s.”
While the majority of discussion participants fell into the “profession” or “tool” categories, a few vocal members voiced opinions that GIS is merely a niche within IT. The arguments varied, but most cultivated the theme that IT is really the enterprise-wide technology enveloping GIS applications and data. As politely as possible, the pro-IT debaters seemed to make the point that GIS couldn’t survive without IT to prop it up:
“GIS projects are most successful when the existing IT establishment is involved, interested, and consulted on all the usual general issues. Going it alone always brings failure and relegation of GIS to the ghetto of ‘solutions in search of a problem,’” wrote a member of the GEOXchange forum.
Another stated, “After 25 years, it is time to realize that the problem is not that the IT profession needs to understand the real power of GIS. Rather, the geospatial community needs to understand that there are strategic information technology issues that dwarf the relevance of GIS, even in what we think of as intrinsically spatial industries such as local government and utilities.”
Many see the niche argument as pertaining to where GIS technology currently resides in terms of its evolution. Letham noted that some users are further along this evolutionary path than others, which may account for the level of disagreement on the topic, but he saw value in this position as well:
“GIS has matured tremendously over the past five years with new uses and new data resources coming to light almost daily. I can understand how many look at GIS as a profession as well as a software tool; however, to realize and experience GIS to its full potential, [GIS] must be managed and nurtured as an integrated part of a corporate information system. To do so effectively, a coordinated effort must exist and it must be managed effectively within the overall IT plan,” he said.
Letham added that getting a consensus on the position that GIS holds in IT will be as challenging as agreeing on what the acronym “GIS” stand for.
Addressing Certification
During the GEOXchange discussion, Fitzgerald stated, “Going around and stating that my discipline is better than yours serves no purpose in attainment of the final goal.” Fitzgerald echoed the sentiment of many discussion participants who felt this debate served a higher purpose—drafting a blueprint to guide the future development of GIS. Panelists and audience members at GITA’s Annual Conference repeatedly linked the debate to the subject of professional certification, for which some expressed approval and others did not.
Among those in favor of GIS certification was at least one individual who said he had received his certificate, and pointed out that certification had served its purpose by helping him land a job. But others, such as panelist Perry Harts, information services manager for the City of Frisco, Texas, felt that certification in its current form performs a disservice to the industry, perhaps relegating it to a niche, because it doesn’t go far enough toward mandating educational standards:
“GIS is a profession requiring a broad education and experience. This is in contrast to a vocation or niche requiring specific task training for a small set of skills. The education and training of GIS professionals should focus on future needs,” Harts said. “Since GIS is constantly changing, it requires professional skills and training. GIS students should be prepared with problem-solving and analytical skills that will enable them to exploit the next generations of technology.’
Although no general agreement was reached regarding the value of professional certification and licensing, panelists and audience members shared the belief that some mechanism needs to be enacted by the GIS industry to ensure that people who work in the geospatial disciplines have received broad education and training, can perform a variety of skills, and are competent at what they do.
Conclusion: Competency is the Key
GITA is committed to encouraging the “what is GIS?” debate to continue the healthy discourse that will assist in shaping the geospatial industry and its component parts well into the future. The association believes this discussion must be moved forward as it pertains to certification and licensing. Regardless of the terminology—certification or licensing—used to label someone as qualified to practice in a geospatial discipline, GITA supports and actively promotes the notion that this industry must come together to make certain that competent, well-trained people enter the geospatial workforce now and in the future. GITA also strongly supports any efforts that can be made at the academic level to ensure that recent graduates with GIS degrees are prepared to make an immediate and positive impact to the benefit of their new employers as soon as they leave school. After all, competency is the ultimate workforce attribute.
