| Author |
Message |
Anonymous
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 09:00 am: |    |
The firm I am working for is considering the use of a specification writing service. The company providing the services is located in another state. Thier service is no different than a consultant who provides service locally. It seems obvious that using a consulting service is nto a bad thing and other than the obvious - what are the pitfalls of not having in house specification writing sevices? |
David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI
Senior Member
Username: david_axt
Post Number: 193
Registered: 03-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 11:32 am: | |
I can tell you from being a consultant and working in an office that getting complete and correct information in a timely manner is always a problem. Make sure that you keep your consultant in the loop.
Working in an office is a little easier because I can walk over and look at drawings or speak with project architects. Still I find myself left out of the loop of a lot of information and decision making. |
Marc C Chavez
Senior Member
Username: mchavez
Post Number: 17
Registered: 07-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 11:52 am: | |
David is right on the money. I am currently working in-house but was a consultant for 4 years. One of my greatest concerns as a consultant was NOT getting information from my clients. Hopefully your prospective consultant is a member of CSI and SCIP. If you’re not familiar with SCIP (Specification Consultants in Independent Practice) you should be. They are a great bunch of really with-it spec writers. http://www.scip.com |
David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI
Senior Member
Username: david_axt
Post Number: 194
Registered: 03-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 01:23 pm: | |
Another problem is scope creep. You initially agree on writting a 100 section project manual that turns out to become a 250 section project manual with multiple reviews and submittals. I could never make any money at it......so I had go out to get a real job. ;-)
I hope this helps even though I am answering the other side of the question, that is being a consultant instead of hiring a consultant.
|
William C. Pegues, FCSI, CCS
Senior Member
Username: wpegues
Post Number: 240
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 01:55 pm: | |
Anon,
I can't speak highly enough of those writers in independent practice.
On the other hand, an office with a vision for itself should consder an in-house writer. The benefits are far more than just writing specs, and go way beyond 'just being there' to get unprovided information.
At the bottom of the rung, they are there through the entire process. You can get their opinions on materials and systems early in design for complex problems - or they can see something atypical coming on a project and get the necessary information well ahead of time. Better, they can alert the design team to what is really needed, not what they think they need to investigate.
Next is that they are there to tell you what is where in the manual - when you need to know. You are not left leafing through a project manual that you probably did not have time to pay attention to when it was being explained what was where and why. Many times I get to say, 'oh, here is what you are looking for' when the project architecct thinks a change is needed.
Next step up is that they are there to the end. Specifications can change like drawings change - this is often a supplementary servce for outside consultants. Internally, they are there when you need them and can suggest alternatives.
And that's just the project related basicis. Any good specifications writer knows much more than just writing. If they are any good at all, they are materials and systems experts. And a firm with any view for the future takes full advantage of that. Not only that, but doing materials research is what keeps the writer from going entirely batty -grin!
And how many does it take? I am only one in an office of about 100 people in DC and an office of about 20 in Dallas, TX. There have been times when we have been extremely busy, but we have never blown a deadline. And even with just me, that leaves plenty of time to update the master and keep up with industry changes because there is always down time from projects.
And the other really major benefit is consistent quality assurance with the documents tailored to the practice of the firm. No one has to remember that for some things there are manufacturer's you don't use or specifically want to use - its there, written in advance. The same with other particular requirements from construction to liability issues.
Sometimes, especially if the group is local, a firm can opt to have an ongoing relationship with a consultant who creates a special master for their practice and does the work. You don't get the benefits of the internal writer, but you do get more consistent quality control.
I could say more about input to special programs that having an internal writer will greatly benefit. But for right now, I am running out of time today.
William |
Dave Metzger
Senior Member
Username: davemetzger
Post Number: 62
Registered: 07-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 02:23 pm: | |
The following is an article that Barbara Heller and I wrote for the Washington AIA newsletter several years ago.
* * *
Why should an architect hire a consultant, and what should they expect from their consultant as opposed to an in-house employee? Typical reasons to hire a consultant might include the following: you don't want to keep a salaried specialist on the staff because workload fluctuations may not support one; the consultant has specialized experience that will contribute to the project; you don't have the time or inclination to produce work that a consultant can do more efficiently.
Consultants in every discipline have been hired for each of the above reasons, and probably others in addition. As architects who are specification consultants to architects, our relationships with our clients differ from the typical architect/consultant relationships. While specifications are only a part of the design process (and, as measured by fee, a much smaller part than the engineering disciplines), they deal with the whole gamut of issues encountered during design, from the most global contractual matters to the tiniest technical details.
Because we've had the same type of education and training as our clients, we commonly develop a synergistic relationship with them. We are fortunate to have written specifications for many very creative architects. As a result we not only have experience with a wider range of project types than if we worked for a single firm, but we have learned from the varied approaches that different architects take in designing a project. This benefits not only ourselves but our clients, as we are able to use the experience gained on one project to contribute to the success of others.
One difference in working as a consultant rather than doing the work in-house is that the consultant must be pro-active. As an employee, one is working with a project manager and other team members whom one may see every day. In contrast, a consultant works independently in their own office, and is in effect his or her own project manager. The consultant should be expected to take the initiative in requesting information and in advising the client on choices, decisions, and options within the consultant's area of responsibility.
Also, because consultants are hired for their specialized expertise, they should be expected to act as a candid sounding board for their client's ideas and to be forthright about disagreeing with their client when the situation warrants--in a tactful and discreet way, of course. A consultant's value shouldn't be measured only by the specific product they produce, but by the questions they ask as a result of viewing a project from their own perspective.
What is it like to be an independent consultant? One has to be able to work by oneself, and to complete projects and meet deadlines without supervision. It may not be an easy transition to move from a studio space in an architect's office, surrounded by many other people, to a single room with perhaps one or two others, in a garret with bare floorboards and the wind whistling through newspaper-stuffed cracks in the unpainted plaster walls, trying to type with shivering fingers wrapped in threadbare gloves. It's a tough job but someone has to do it. |
Richard Hird (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 08:56 pm: | |
Economies:
If you have around 100 folks in your firm William is right. If you have only 10, a specifier costs 10 times more than he does in a large office. If he only does specs, that is expensive. If you do only a couple of project types, he probably can keep up the specs and contribute in other ways. If you are small firm with lots of project types, you need every bit of "technolgy transfer" you can get and David is right.
Quality:
William is right about consistancy tailored to your firm, but that is not necessarily quality. I have been consistantly wrong on few things over the years. In a large firm no believes you are wrong and you have to get burned to find that out. Now my clients inform me before we go out the door that "that is not how they do it".
Quality is not how you get it, but who you get it from. If you can get someone inhouse that is good, and you can afford him, grab him. Otherwise remember that outside consultants that are not good have a tendency to disappear. |
Phil Kabza
Senior Member
Username: phil_kabza
Post Number: 30
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 09:41 pm: | |
I think the final question is: Is how you produce the documents by which your buildings are built integral with how you practice architecture? If you can do this utilizing mail order specs or drafters in Bombay, all the better. But if you have a different vision of what constitutes the practice of architecture, then that is what you should pursue. We tell the industry that the documents are complimentary. Read Article 1 of the AIA A201. We should practice architecture as if we believe this to be so. Whether that means hiring a superior consultant, or a superior staff person to work in house, is a matter of business judgement. If it means farming out the work to the cheapest alternative, then the resultant architecture should be consistent with the business judgement. |
|
4specs.com Home Page