SCIP, CSI and Construct Show

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Colin Gilboy Senior Member Username: colin Post Number: 454 Registered: 09-2005 Posted on Friday, November 30, 2018 - 02:50 pm:    Annette Wren's Western Output discusses the Construct Show (Informa) and SCIP for the year. Key quote: "In October, at the Construct trade show, Informa notified SCIP that they are no longer welcome at Construct." http://www.4specs.com/articles/scip-csi-constructshow.pdf Colin Gilboy Publisher, 4specs.com 435.654.5775 - Utah James Sandoz, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: jsandoz Post Number: 248 Registered: 06-2005 Posted on Monday, December 03, 2018 - 09:10 am:    I have one thing to say: Proverbs 16:18. Richard Gonser AIA CSI CCCA SCIP Senior Member Username: rich_gonser Post Number: 150 Registered: 11-2008 Posted on Monday, December 03, 2018 - 11:54 am:    Matthew 10:14 Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 439 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 11:24 am:    Amen Dewayne Dean Senior Member Username: ddean Post Number: 178 Registered: 02-2016 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 11:58 am:    Matthew 23:27 J. Peter Jordan Senior Member Username: jpjordan Post Number: 1066 Registered: 05-2004 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 12:06 pm:    There is no discussion of SCIP or SCIP members being "thrown out" of CSI. There is no discussion (as far as I know) of SCIP members being barred from participation in CONSTRUCT. As I understand the situation, INFORMA does not want to compete with SCIP for manufacturers' attention so they are attempting to make it difficult for SCIP to have a meeting at the same time as CONSTRUCT (or just before or just after CONSTRUCT). It is also my understanding that CONSTRUCT will not offer a free exhibit booth to SCIP. I believe these decisions are being made by INFORMA with very little meaningful input from CSI. You may want to make your views known to the people at CSI (elected board members as well as staff). Although I do not think it will do much good, you may also wish to make your views known to INFORMA. Oh, and my feedback to INFORMA may be found in Ps. 50:9a (RSV). J. Peter Jordan, FCSI, AIA, CCS, LEED AP, SCIP Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 440 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 12:14 pm:    Dewayne. Good point. If we start our own convention someday, we'll make sure not to kick our core group of people out of it. Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 441 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 12:20 pm:    Peter: LOL re. 50:9a! My opinion, which I will express to CSI, is that if we are a group founded by spec writers and with specifications in the name, we should require Informa to not use the CSI name or logo on anything, since they have no connection with CSI anymore. And we should begin plans to hold the CSI National Convention as in times past. Although, since they even talked about taking specifications out of the name, I do not have very high hopes for this organization anymore. Have we lost our heart? If so, what even keeps it going? Melissa J Aguiar Advanced Member Username: melissajaguiar Post Number: 5 Registered: 09-2015 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 12:27 pm:    Mark 9:23 Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 442 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 12:38 pm:    9:24b Melissa J Aguiar Senior Member Username: melissajaguiar Post Number: 6 Registered: 09-2015 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 12:42 pm:    We can continue to quote scriptures, but I know we all saw this coming years ago. What happens to your members once you start allowing pieces of your identity to be sold slowly piece-by-piece? You lose control. Then, when the organization talks about changing the very title of the organization? You lose your organization's identity. So, seasons passed. Those who remember either got lost in the recession, retired, or they passed away. Time has changed a lot of things. They say that the organization must change to stay relevant to the needs of the industry. A lot of people worked a lifetime in/for the name of CSI. There are those of us who did go through some tough times, and fought our way back to this industry because of the love they have for our people. I have not lost hope yet that the wolf that swallowed us up years ago might still listen, but we slowly allowed the wolf to bite at us a little at a time until we have prove our brand worth and relevancy to such industry. That is just my two cents. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 443 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 12:44 pm:    Psalm 133:1 Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS 1-818-219-4937 www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 443 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 12:47 pm:    I like your spirit, Melissa! If all things are possible, what would happen if we band together various Specifier Share Group type events and info sharing, as a unified group that is truly about specifications? http://discus.4specs.com/discus/messages/2195/1199.html?1093015550 Don Harris CSI, CCS, CCCA, AIA Senior Member Username: don_harris Post Number: 314 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 12:54 pm:    A little Old Testament Exodus 13:14 Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 444 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 01:02 pm:    If we were bitten and swallowed up, what is left but to become digested food, assimilated into the wolf? And if so, why would the wolf listen? How about Jonah, chapter 2? Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 445 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 01:12 pm:    I do understand the current bite is simply not being allowed to co-locate, and they are not saying we cannot attend. I do not think anyone misunderstands that. But we could list many other bites as well, some recent. If we did form a national share group group, or grow SCIP to something that they fear more than is already evidenced that they do, then it is not far-fetched that they would try to disallow us using MasterFormat as I mentioned in another thread (or pay a hefty fee). Some people have already gotten flack like that, as Colin can attest. However, it was developed by volunteers a long time ago. We do need to dwell together in unity somehow. How do we do this? David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 277 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 02:32 pm:    The underlying organizational identity crisis described in these posts bears an uncanny resemblance to what I have seen in some other not-for-profit groups in the same time period (2008-2018). The organization in question is a little too big to serve its members the way it used to (an unrealistic expectation anyway), yet it is not quite big enough in membership at the current dues level to feed the demands of its overhead. (Dues and exam fees are too cheap). Increasing dues substantially and migrating to a cheaper office location (Prime waterfront office space in Old Town Alexandria - really????) to lower overhead appear to be immediately necessary to solve the money/service-to-members problems. This would initially cause more members to leave, but it would attract different ones who are willing to invest in a healthier organization. Each situation is different, and I realize I am over-simplifying here, but the current state of things is clearly not sustainable. Many good organizations fail by growing too much, which seems counter-intuitive. It is certainly not what organizations want to hear and it is not what consultants want to tell them. Hence, we do things like re-brand, re-write the mission statement, change the logo - all kinds of expensive yet superficial maneuvers that don't address the real problem. Unfortunately, examples of this exist all over the place. SCIP is a great model for a right-sized not-for-profit organization whose work is performed by volunteers. It has no paid staff that I know of, no real estate to maintain, and it is small enough to serve its members very well. I'm not sure, but this is probably what CSI was more like in the 1950s and early 1960s. SCIP and CSI have mutually-compatible aims. CSI has incredible intellectual property that we all benefit from whether or not we are members. SCIP is the cream of the profession and has a very altruistic image. All of the ingredients of great success are there - if only big attitude could be successfully eliminated. Melissa J Aguiar Senior Member Username: melissajaguiar Post Number: 7 Registered: 09-2015 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 02:37 pm:    Well said, sir. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI ,SCIP Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1742 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 03:02 pm:    I don't understand Informa's logic of killing the offspring to protect the family. I estimate about 98% of the people attending the SCIP meeting this year also attended CONSTRUCT. I also estimate about 95% of the exhibitors also exhibited at CONSTRUCT. So explain to me how SCIP is a "threat" to CONSTRUCT? They are quibbling over a measly 5%? I can understand Informa being upset if a majority of exhibitors only participated in the SCIP event and did not participate at CONSTRUCT....but that did not happen. What about all the attendees and exhibitors that showed up because they can go to two separate events back to back? That is a big reason why I, and probably many others, attended both events this year. If Informa locks SCIP out of nearby hotels and forces SCIP to have a separate meeting elsewhere, this will cause many people to have to choose between the two events. This will not increase attendance to CONSTRUCT and will most likely decrease attendance. The law of unintended consequences strikes again! David G. Axt, CCS, CSI, SCIP Specifications Consultant Axt Consulting LLC David Stutzman Senior Member Username: david_stutzman Post Number: 85 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 03:07 pm:    David, you are mistaken about the SCIP sponsor participating in CONSTRUCT. Less than 40% of SCIP sponsors had a booth at CONSTRUCT. So yes SCIP is a threat because manufacturers are recognizing the place to find the most valuable contacts. Margaret G. Chewning FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: presbspec Post Number: 313 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 03:12 pm:    It's interesting that you state that CSI has grown too big to serve the members. When I joined CSI in the early 80's it was larger by at least half if not more at that time and served (from my perspective as a newbie) the members well, even tho' it was (and still is) the best kept secret in the industry. Perhaps that is the problem, we have never had a lobbying arm such as the AIA; and there is no corporate or governmental reinforcement to "encourage" eligible members to join to use the benefits of CSI. Just a thought. David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 278 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 04:25 pm:    I appreciate Margaret Chewning's observation. The complaint I hear most is that CSI does not serve its members the way it used to serve them, which is an unrealistic expectation anyway because times and people have changed. It is not CSI's fault that times have changed and people's priorities and efforts have changed. It may be more relevant to say that the members don't serve the organization the way they used to, and so there is more burden on staff who cannot possible make up for the shift. It is like complaining about the government not doing enough. Well, really the people are the government. It seems to come back to size. People like chapter events and even region events, probably because they aren't very "political" and a little bit of effort is appreciated. The bigger an organization gets, the more rules need to be applied in order to function, and people change in the way they perceive their own efforts and those of others. The same dynamics will occur if SCIP continues to grow too much beyond its optimum size, which it seems to have already achieved. It would lose its personal touch and become more organization-like. Robert E. Woodburn, CSI, CCS, SCIP Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 197 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Tuesday, December 04, 2018 - 04:51 pm:    Having ignored this thread until now, I never would have expected to see so many biblical quotations in a 4specs forum (8, in 21 posts). Last month I attended the SBL-AAR Annual Meetings, the largest gathering of religious scholars in the world (typically around 10,000 attendees), always held the Friday thru Tuesday before Thanksgiving. In addition to the two largest organizations in the field -- the Society of Biblical Literature (mostly Christians and Jews) and the American Academy of Religion (including scholars of all religions), many other medium-sized - and dozens of smaller - related organizations meet together in one big convention, along with what I believe is the largest trade show of religious publishers and related exhibitors in the world. I believe SBL and AAR once tried splitting into separate events, then soon realized it made much more sense (and attracted more exhibitors) to bring everyone together. As far as I know, both SBL and AAR have rather small professional staffs (presumably focused on their publishing endeavors) but they organize the events themselves, using a lot of volunteers. Members of virtually every organization of religious scholars attend, and except for a very few committee meetings and closed or invitation-only sessions (for some, an invitation may be requested), anyone can attend any session for their single registration fee. Other than one archaeological organization which I think meets just before, and with a separate fee (like SCIP), the presentations, business meetings and other sessions sponsored by SBL, AAR and non-SBL/AAR organizations are all listed in a single program book, an 8.5" x 11" catalog at least half an inch thick, listing hundreds of sessions. It is in the interest of academics - even those of quite disparate religious backgrounds - to combine their meetings to attract maximum support from exhibitors - it gives exhibitors the largest possible audience, so they get the best bang for their buck and don't have to choose where to allocate their money and personnel. The interests of an organization like Informa PCL are probably best served by maximizing the number of conventions they organize, and the proliferation of trade show opportunities for vendors. Maybe they even delude themselves that they could organize a separate event for SCIP. Ideally, something similar to the cooperation described above could be possible if CSI, AIA, and the organizations of interior designers, engineers and other related professionals could give up their insularity for the common good, pool their resources, and take back and share control of the event. I'd like to conclude with a biblical passage, but I couldn't find the verse about hell freezing over... Ron Beard CCS Senior Member Username: rm_beard_ccs Post Number: 451 Registered: 10-2002 Posted on Wednesday, December 05, 2018 - 02:41 am:    “...the members don't serve the organization the way they used to...” Reflecting back on David Wyatt’s comment reminds me of one of the reasons that SCIP was formed; that CSI was drifting away from their founding roots of serving the needs of specifiers. Further, there was a resentment (most strongly by members of the DC Metro and Baltimore CSI chapters) for CSI selling the results of the thousands and thousands of volunteer hours writing the old green spec sections with little or no recognition to those members/chapters. The feelings of many back in the day was betrayal. Sure we all supported CSI and wanted CSI to thrive but the Institute displayed their desire to build their own bureaucracy on the backs of the members. "Fast is good, but accurate is better." .............Wyatt Earp David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 279 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Wednesday, December 05, 2018 - 08:50 am:    A sharp memory can be almost as crippling to an organization as a poor memory. At my age, I realize that resentment, revenge, grudges, and a longing for the way things used to be are feelings as harmful to those who harbor them as they are harmful to those to whom they are directed. In the instance Ron Beard cites, the people who made those lamentable decisions may be long gone now or at least not part of the current decision-making process at CSI headquarters. CSI and SCIP are two powerful organizations that could have a symbiotic relationship if people could forget about things that cannot be changed. Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 448 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Wednesday, December 05, 2018 - 12:19 pm:    This is spurred by 2 very recent incidents, and many others that do not go back as far as Ron's general observation of why SCIP was founded. David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 280 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Wednesday, December 05, 2018 - 12:53 pm:    Chris Grimm, thanks for the post. I'm so glad I'm out of that loop. I'm happy just reading and writing from project to project. Ron Beard Senior Member Username: rm_beard_ccs Post Number: 452 Registered: 10-2002 Posted on Wednesday, December 05, 2018 - 04:35 pm:    Of all the present-day professions, I cannot think of any that faces more changes, updates, innovations then construction specifiers, except perhaps the electronics industry. To survive within the specifiers industry one has to move forward every day but we still need to remember what used to be. With my ‘sharp’ memory, I can still remember writing specifications for asbestos, which was still good back than. It is interesting that over time watching how materials/systems progress they generally leave a trace/path of improvements or changes. Same thing with organizations. Many SCIP members will be faced with choosing between attending a SCIP convention and attending a CSI (Construct) convention. It will be interesting to me to see what the Institute will do as they face the reality of a major split within the specifications industry. "Fast is good, but accurate is better." .............Wyatt Earp David G. Axt, CCS, CSI ,SCIP Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1743 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Thursday, December 06, 2018 - 01:06 pm:    Okay so I ran the numbers. (I probably should have done that first before I went shooting my mouth off. Hey if I liked math I would have become an engineer!) I checked the exhibitor list of both events and here is what I came up with. The SCIP Annual Meeting 2018 had a total of 50 exhibitors with only 26 exhibitors who also exhibited at CONSTRUCT 2018. That means that only 52 percent exhibited at both shows or more importantly 48 percent (24) did not exhibit at CONSTRUCT 2018. Now I see why Informa considers SCIP a threat. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI, SCIP Specifications Consultant Axt Consulting LLC Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIP, LEED AP BD+C Senior Member Username: chris_grimm_ccs_scip Post Number: 450 Registered: 02-2014 Posted on Thursday, December 06, 2018 - 01:14 pm:    I seem to recall SCIP having only a couple sponsors even just a few years ago and those had table tops, not exhibitors per se. What changed here?! Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 1440 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, December 06, 2018 - 03:08 pm:    Years ago, when CSI was running the show, they also had a prohibition against SCIP meeting at the convention. The SCIP meeting was always at some non-convention related hotel with a meeting room. It seemed like a silly prohibition at the time because the convention had 1100 booths, took three days, and SCIP was a one-day meeting. Informa will not be running the show that much longer, and once that contract has run its course, it doesn't really matter what they think. Steve Gantner, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: sgantner Post Number: 64 Registered: 08-2007 Posted on Friday, December 07, 2018 - 09:55 am:    Anne, do you (or anyone for that matter) know how much longer Informa has the show? I attended the leaders meeting in Long Beach and I didn't write that date down, but I recall a date that is more that 15 years into the future that Informa owns the show. Mark did state that CSI is trying to get out of the contract. Earlier in this post, Chris mentioned that CSI should not allow use of Institute logo's. It seems as though that is already beginning, in a way. There was no logo on any of the material at Construct this year that would indicate CSI was involved in any way. In fact the promotional "block" that was given out for next year didn't even mention CSI. I initially signed up for CSI for many different reasons and will support it as long as I can. You can't beat the knowledge and camaraderie of our members. Last year I signed up for SCIP for the first time and was excited to be able to attend the meeting this year as it was co-located with Construct. I was impressed with much of what SCIP is able to do, it reminded me of the first CSI National Convention I attended. A lot of focus on members! Both Specifiers and Product Representatives. I certainly hope that 2019 will see SCIP and Construct near each other in Washington as I would like to attend both. If I must choose where to spend my money to travel to a convention....as long as Informa has it, I'm leaning toward SCIP. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 445 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Friday, December 07, 2018 - 02:20 pm:    To Steve Gantner's point, the issue is not how long Informa owns the show, but for how many years CSI is prohibited from affiliating with a different show. Informa is a huge global beast, see informa.com. Construct is a tiny show by their standards: compare AIA, World of Concrete, Greenbuild. See www.informaexhibitions.com/en/about-us/ourevents.html. I suspect that they would sell the show for any half decent offer. IDEA: SCIP could be a cosponsor of the event. Heck, maybe even an a full sponsor on the level of CSI. There are several associations that cosponsor already, such as the Firestop Contractors International Association. Instead of fighting, collaborate. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS 1-818-219-4937 www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru Ron Beard Senior Member Username: rm_beard_ccs Post Number: 457 Registered: 10-2002 Posted on Sunday, April 07, 2019 - 05:36 pm:    Now that the 2019 Construct is being actively promoted, hopefully we will hear very soon about SCIP’s plans. Is anyone from SCIP in a position to comment? What were the results of their surveys? "Fast is good, but accurate is better." .............Wyatt Earp Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 630 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Tuesday, August 06, 2019 - 04:47 pm:    Some info now on scip.com. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 1459 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Friday, August 23, 2019 - 02:59 pm:    It appears that no one remembers that SCIP was typically barred from the CSI hotel and did not have a booth at the CSI Show; the collaboration of the two organizations is actually relatively recent. CSI as an organization always saw SCIP as a threat. Frankly, with SCIP organizing a product show, I can understand that -- it used to just be the meeting. SCIP might do better being under the aegis of the AIA, where the specialty wouldn't pull away the core membership.