Appraisers are opining values, based upon arguments from the discipline of Economics. Economic theory is based partly (a large part) on the behavioral sciences, partly on Mathematics, Probability Theory, (Statistics).
I just can't wait until we live in a country where Economists have standards of practices with numbered lines and legislation incorporating them as if handed down from above, carved on stone tablets.
We have an example here of socialization of a profession in need of evolutionary thinking. The evolvement, I would rather see in a slightly more open system. There would be a better chance for the best practices and ideas to get to the top, in my opinion.
Right now, we are guaranteed group think. Maybe a bit of gorilla marketing from the inside by like minded people will make up for the relative lack of growth opportunities, typical of a closed system. That is why I share my thoughts. I know they are no where near exclusively my own. But, since I no longer appraise, I am free to present a position seeking a better operational paradigm for the valuation profession, in the long run.
The structure of the status quo severely hobbles progress, IMO. But I am glad there are volunteers willing to try and make the most of it. I tip my hat to the instructors, seasoned and newly minted.
You're concerned about group think, which is a legitimate concern. However, USPAP doesn't really get into the science (if one chooses to call it that) of appraising. It doesn't tell appraisers they have to use the URAR or how to complete a Sales Comparison Analysis or Discounted Cash Flow.
What USPAP does do is require appraisers to be honest, ethical and competent, and to provide appraisal services in a manner that is meaningful to their intended users and not misleading. Yeah, the very fact that they are standards of practice does reflect enough group think to form a group, but as far as inhibiting the progress or the flexibility of our profession I can't see any element that does that.
We do have some elements of the Ethics Rule that will slow some appraisers down in terms of conducting the business of appraising. For instance, the role of the appraiser conflicts with actions that amount to client advocacy, so we prohibit them. Because client advocacy generally involves lying to the other intended users of those appraisals the appraisal business interests that suffer cannot be considered legitimate.
There are a few hard points in USPAP which can be argued do not necessarily contribute to the appraisal process or the reporting of that appraisal. We are required to report 3-year sales histories; we are required to maintain our workfiles for 5 years. However, virtually every other hard point is oriented to what an appraiser would normally do in an assignment if they were doing what they said they were doing. We need to know what the intended use is, we need to know who the intended users are and what they require, we need to identify a meaningful scope of work within the context of the intended use; etc. If we didn't routinely do all those things we probably wouldn't be able to routinely meet the "meaningful and not misleading" tests of our "Constitution".
It's true that the failure of other competing valuation providers to adhere to USPAP does result in dilution of our market share. When an RE broker doesn't know enough about the appraisal process to understand that HBU analysis is a necessary component of developing an opinion of market value then that deficiency does translate into a diminished trust in their BPO (appraisal). Most of the time WYSIWYG with these properties, but when they do run into HBU issues they don't know enough to recognize those problems let alone deal with them. When they don't research a 3-year sales history they increase the risk of missing something about that property that might be meaningful to their intended users.
I'd assert that the very thing that separates the professional appraiser from the hack (regardless of licensure status) is their recognition of the importance of the public trust to the longevity and economic viability of the appraisal profession; and consequently, their recognition the relevance of each of the requirements in USPAP as they pertain to the public trust. Simply put, it pays for us to have and adhere to some form of appraisal standards because it's the only thing that distinguishes our valuations from the valuations of every other player in these transactions. We don't sell our valuations; we sell our assertions of ethics and competency that contribute to the credibility of our valuations.
If it were not for our profession's adoption of some form of uniform standards, regardless of their source of origin or promulgation, we would have already been overrun by the barbarian hordes of AVMs and realtor chicks.