Independence isn’t the Opposite of Collaboration

A reflective look at independence, collaboration, and accountability in residential surveying.

The situation

I’ve seen a couple of recent commentary pieces discussing collaboration and independence in surveying. They come at the issue from different angles, but they share a common assumption.

They frame the problem as cultural or emotional — about attitudes, openness, or reluctance to work together — when in reality it’s structural and regulatory.

That distinction matters more than it might first appear.

Surveyors aren’t navigating a question of preference. They’re operating inside a framework where independence is not optional, and responsibility is personal.

Takeaway one: Independence isn’t a mindset — it’s a requirement

Surveyors are required to give an independent professional opinion. That obligation is ethical, regulatory, and legal.

Independence means forming your own judgement, standing behind your conclusions, and taking responsibility for the advice you give.

It doesn’t mean working alone for the sake of it.
And it doesn’t mean rejecting collaboration.

But it does mean that responsibility never becomes shared simply because a conversation has taken place. The liability remains individual. The opinion remains yours.

That reality shapes behaviour far more than culture ever could.

Takeaway two: Collaboration is being discussed as an ideal, not a practice

Both articles I’ve seen treat collaboration as a moral or cultural choice — something the profession either embraces or resists.

That’s the blind spot.

In a regulated profession, collaboration isn’t just about willingness. It’s about how support is designed in a way that respects professional risk.

What often goes unexplored is:

• How collaboration works inside regulation
• How peer discussion differs from decision-making
• Why surveyors are cautious in public or semi-public spaces

Without that context, collaboration gets promoted as an ideal, rather than examined as a practice that has to function within real constraints.

Takeaway three: Support, mentoring, and collaboration aren’t the same thing

Another quiet confusion sits underneath these debates: collaboration is often treated as interchangeable with support or mentoring.

They’re not the same.

• Support helps someone think
• Mentoring helps someone develop
• Collaboration involves shared working, which immediately raises questions about responsibility

Surveyors are rarely confused about the value of support. Most actively seek it.

What they are careful about is where support might be mistaken for shared responsibility — by others, or retrospectively.

What surveyors are actually weighing up

What gets described as resistance usually sounds more like this internally:

• If I help here, am I exposing myself to liability?
• If I ask for help, am I diluting my professional standing or independence?
• Will collaboration make me look weak — or worse, careless?

These aren’t emotional hang-ups.
They’re rational questions in a profession where accountability is personal and consequences matter.

That’s why well-intentioned calls for “more openness” can sometimes feel slightly off — even when the underlying sentiment is sound.

The irony

The most open, honest conversations about practice already tend to happen in:

• well-moderated peer spaces
• communities that understand boundaries
• environments where “this is not advice” is understood, not mocked

That’s where surveyors ask the questions they wouldn’t ask publicly.
That’s where nuance survives.
That’s where learning happens without pretending liability has disappeared.

Which is exactly why how collaboration happens matters far more than how loudly it’s promoted.

Where this leaves us

Surveyors don’t fear collaboration. They fear confused accountability.

The real risk appears when discussion turns into delegation, opinions are crowdsourced rather than formed, or responsibility is blurred in the name of openness.

Where surveyors have the most appropriate support, they tend to have the most confidence — and often the most sustainable success.

That doesn’t happen by accident.

Whether you’re a practice owner or not, support tends to work best when it is intentional: chosen carefully, structured thoughtfully, and aligned with how responsibility actually works in practice.

Independence isn’t the opposite of collaboration.
Isolation is.

And confusing the two does far more harm than good.

Until next time,
Marion

If you found this useful, you’re welcome to share it with others who may benefit.

Surveying, Actually articles are shared by email when new posts are published. You can subscribe to Surveying, Actually here.