Specification Writers

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

Author Message Harry Peck (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Thursday, May 12, 2022 - 07:09 am:    Who will be filling vacant specification writer positions? Our firm has been looking to fill an open position for almost a year. We have not been contacted by any qualified applicants. Lynn Javoroski FCSI CCS LEED® AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 2279 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, May 12, 2022 - 09:29 am:    The company of my last position (before I retired, so this was 10 or so years ago) had been searching for 2 years. I was recruited by a employment agent who happened to be a CSI member. So, this is not completely a new problem. Gail Ann J. Goldstead, AIA, CSI, CCS, CDT, LEED AP, BD+C Senior Member Username: ggoldstead Post Number: 34 Registered: 03-2015 Posted on Thursday, May 12, 2022 - 09:36 am:    I believe companies need to post internal Specifier Job Descriptions and start training from within. The most likely initial place to scout will be experienced technical Project Architects with CCA experience. The carrot: Advertise a significant pay raise for successful recruits. CSI can do its part to ramp up Specifier mentoring and training as well. Gail Goldstead Greta Eckhardt (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Thursday, May 12, 2022 - 09:52 am:    This is a good question, which I sincerely hope the architectural profession will grapple with. I think the problem is that Architects don't recognize (and celebrate!) the fact that specifications and other technical aspects of architecture are just as integral to the design process as the visual aspects. I have had the honor of working as a specifier at some of the very best architectural firms in the Boston area and even so I have seen the emphasis within firms move toward visualization and innovative aesthetics while inhouse technical expertise has been supported less and less. Over the years, I talked to younger architects who appeared to have potential as specifiers, but they always said they did not want their work to be limited in this way. I sensed that they did not think specifying would be as "cool" as drawing and discussing how a building would be massed, what the facade would look like, etc. Fortunately, there are excellent building enclosure consulting companies and specifications consultants who can be engaged to fill in these gaps. However I think something is lost when dealing with the technical aspects of a project is just seen as something someone else will do. Edward R Heinen CSI CDT CCS LEED-AP Advanced Member Username: edwardheinen Post Number: 5 Registered: 04-2022 Posted on Thursday, May 12, 2022 - 11:30 am:    I think it would help if some of the unfortunate mindset issues related to specifying were addressed; and I do see an opportunity to educate and influence the profession in this regard. A few systemic bad ideas I know of: The role of specifier is supposed to be a single individual working in the background in support of everyone else in the firm, if the firm has enough work to justify such a position. To me this reinforces the notion of specifier as a siloed, pigeon-hole position with no opportunity for advancement – hardly appealing to prospective new generations of professionals. I recall countless apologies from team members for forgetting to include the specifier – from project communications to celebratory lunches. The idea that specifications are only to be “backup to the design” and not part of design. This idea stems from the shift in the 70’s and 80’s from technical-driven design (e.g. the Sears/Willis Tower design based on a pack of cigarettes; Robert Moses’ mega-tech urban project in NYC), toward post-modern design ideals for cultural purposes in which “design” comes first and technical follows. That’s what a master’s degree can do for ya. I prefer to identify specifying firmly as part of design, rather than mere technical backup. In my educational presentations, I examine the AIA contract structure (complementarity) and cite the CSI Project Delivery Practice Guide, in which design is both aesthetic and technical, that the two are inseparable, and technical design consumes substantially more time. The idea that specifying is supposed to be easy, and/or will become easier once you purchase and download new software. I think all of that is experimental and might work for stock, commodity-driven projects. However, the built environment is increasingly complex given the increasing demand for performance, access, equity, quality of life, etc. thereby demanding increasingly customized solutions from the talents of dedicated specifiers. Having attempted to provide in-house training as a professional service, I can attest that one system limit of a successful training effort is the firm’s executive-most leadership, which may not participate in the training, and may not understand nor appreciate the material. That can undermine the trainees’ development of capability and application of new learning. Speaking of new software – the idea that specifiers will become either 1) keepers of the “I” in BIM, or 2) BIM will replace the specifier since the BIM “design” will simply output the specs and back up the design. I also heard we would all have flying cars by the year 2000. My understanding from BIM experts is that for the most part the inputs of BIM content are not happening in the design phase. Here I’m thinking open-sourcing and knowledge-sharing is key vs competition. Dan Helphrey Senior Member Username: dbhelphrey Post Number: 97 Registered: 12-2018 Posted on Thursday, May 12, 2022 - 04:24 pm:    Too bad classical economics hasn't found a way for employers to attract and retain people with necessary specialized skills...oh, wait... Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 1475 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Monday, May 16, 2022 - 03:18 pm:    As a "pigeon-holed spec writer" my entire career, I feel quite strongly that it stay that way. Here is my take on this: 1) spec writers look at the project holistically and not specifically for "that client" and that project. 2) spec writers have contacts in the industry that are over and above the typical project architect's contacts. I regularly get in touch with the corporate technical directors of firms, not just the local product rep. Everyone on this discussion group has done the same thing. 3) I see product development over multiple projects and multiple locations. In my position with large firms, I've been the only person who has seen product difficulties on one project in Seattle, one project in Los Angeles, and one project in the DC office. No one else in the firm had that overall viewpoint. On a more local level, I'm aware of the differences in application of a product between our northern California office and the performance we get out of the LA office. Again, no one else is seeing this. 4) I see detailing issues on all projects and call them to the attention of our technical principal in three separate offices. We had (recently) 4 different ways of detailing stucco walls -- and now we have only one, corporate-wide method. 5) Because I get the same questions from multiple contractors on multiple projects, I can push back when I think our contractors are being unreasonable. The typical project architect has a different relationship with the contractor than I do. A spec writer is not a "project architect with a different focus." It is a related discipline, but has a different role in the project. I'm training a guy now who was a project architect and his current construction experience is valuable -- but he remarks regularly to me that he has to back up and change his emphasis in order to write specs. I knew that, but hadn't heard it said so explicitly before. And, I consider that my job is to "support the design intent" in the same way that technical drawings support the design intent. There is nothing wrong with being a "back up to the design" because we emphasize different aspects of materials and systems. There is no question that my viewpoint on a product is very different than our design partners -- but we can collaborate to make a better decision. Brian Payne Senior Member Username: brian_payne Post Number: 270 Registered: 01-2014 Posted on Monday, May 16, 2022 - 04:24 pm:    To add one item: I am a spec writer and BIM manager and in my opinion (whether or not you know how to model a building in Revit), every spec writer has a crucial role to play in a firms BIM standards, modeling best practices, and taxonomy. Most firms won't have specs and BIM in the same person, but there should be a strong connection. Spec writers (among others) are definitely the I in BIM. Ruppert Rangel, AIA CDT Senior Member Username: rangel Post Number: 35 Registered: 08-2006 Posted on Monday, May 16, 2022 - 05:49 pm:    Anne, Thank you for your insight. You hit the nail on the head, especially for firms with multiple offices. Phil Babinec Senior Member Username: pbabinec Post Number: 44 Registered: 09-2004 Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2022 - 10:16 am:    I was meeting with our current groups of coops to discuss specifications with them. I asked if any of them had any experience working with specifications. One said, they did and then they tried to block that from their memory! Hopefully the head fake was this was another way to look at products and assemblies. But we DID have a great discussion. I started with having them randomly grab a material sample from the library and talked about that. And I finished with walking them through 4Specs.com as a research tool - they liked this! Dan Helphrey Senior Member Username: dbhelphrey Post Number: 99 Registered: 12-2018 Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2022 - 12:57 pm:    I respectfully disagree with having dedicated spec writers. I do believe that firms should have someone knowledgeable &#119946;&#119951; &#119940;&#119945;&#119938;&#119955;&#119944;&#119942; &#119952;&#119943; their specifications, but that person should be there to support the PAs preparing the specs for their own projects, &#119925;&#119926;&#119931; to prepare project specifications for them. One of the ways I believe our profession has failed is in not expecting or requiring "project architects" to actually be responsible for all of the architecture on their projects. I also don't think the person in charge of a firm's specifications should be so exclusively - a more broadly "technical" person, who also spends time checking drawings and assisting teams with detailing, will, IMNSHO, be a better spec writer than someone exclusively dedicated to specifications. Jeffrey Potter Senior Member Username: jpotter Post Number: 25 Registered: 02-2017 Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2022 - 03:57 pm:    Dan, I tend to agree with you. The industry has failed in grooming and producing future specifiers and it is showing. Project Architects are becoming weaker, only concentrating on the Drawings and not the specifications as well. The industry and more experienced specifiers think specifiers need to have certain experience to be qualified for that role. I don't agree with that. I have a degree in Criminal Justice, with no architectural background, and became a successful specifier leading the specifications department for a large west coast firm (Dan previously worked for and knows well) working on over 300 projects a year with "full control" of the specs. Teams didn't have 'live" editing capability. There are other extremely successful specifiers that don't have an architectural background either. Its time for this industry and specifically specifiers to start grooming young specifiers for either a dedicated role or a support role. We need to look outside the industry, take a different approach, and change the perception of specs. Otherwise in 10 years, the specifier will be on the verge of extinction. Melissa J Aguiar Senior Member Username: melissajaguiar Post Number: 16 Registered: 09-2015 Posted on Friday, May 20, 2022 - 09:05 am:    I understand and can agree to everyone's commentary about specification writers. I have been a processor for architects that take that lead role, and I have been a true construction specification writer that was invited as an equal to the AEC community to provide my technical insights and knowledge on projects. I have appreciated both roles. You learn to adapt, or you die. I was trained by one of the industry's leading specification writers. Every day I learned something from her for 20+ years before her passing. I learned more from her than I did when I worked for an architectural firm. Do I wish that I can teach those coming up in the AEC community what I was taught? I sure do. Is it falling on deaf ears? YES.IT.IS. Eyes glaze over, and then they fall back to their computers because the drawings take more importance than specifications. Too many times I have heard, "NO ONE READS THESE SPECIFICATIONS ANYWAYS!!", or "We can fix them by addendum." This was not something that just happened. Do not misunderstand me. I truly love my career. I find value in this life as a specifier. To see the written language evolve into the built environment is magical to me (in the purest form, minus legal issues) to see. The death of the specifier has been a slow one. I can backtrack it in my lifetime to the beginning of my career. Sitting in conferences watching us slowly slice our wrists giving control others in the industry of our standards. Selling pieces of us off one-by-one to the highest bidder. I do see it being reborn into a computer-aided design with easy clicks for the AEC community to select from within the cloud based computer program (whatever name they give it today). The newly elected "knowledge manager" within said firm will only have to click those boxes in that program, and poof!!! Specifications are born. Those automated words are then tracked through the entire design phase of the project. Done. Easily. Less work. Less money wasted. Surely...less legal issues as well...right??? The role we lived is dying. You must admit it. Where do you pull the fruit from off this dying tree? Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 708 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Friday, May 20, 2022 - 11:55 am:    I have virtual lunch most Fridays with a young architect working for one of our clients who is working on her CCS and interested in the specification world. I love these conversations - which range all over the map and go from the weeds to 15,000 feet. I'm thinking there are no industry solutions, or association solutions, just individual solutions, and I happened to stumble on to one and hope others can look for similar opportunities. She sees career opportunities. We need to help other young practitioners see the same. Phil Kabza FCSI CCS AIA SpecGuy Specifications Consultants www.SpecGuy.com phil@specguy.com John Bunzick Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1874 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, May 20, 2022 - 12:20 pm:    I was fortunate in my career to have positions where I was a full member of the team. I actually started out doing CA, then took on specs, and then only specs. It was great to have that level of respect. Sometimes it felt like too much(!), such as when one of the most senior members of one firm wanted me at weekly team meetings even when specs weren't the issue. But, I was able to jump in with technical and coordination issues. The hours I was allowed on a project were way more than would be justified if I just wrote the specs. For example, I put in over 200 hours on a complicated high school project, but then again, I drove the fenestration selection process and had a significant role in the envelope and roof designs among other things. In the nearly all the firms I worked for, most - if not all - senior architects definitely understood the value of the specifier. Perhaps this was self-selection on my part by not working where I wasn't valued. I'm not sure. I am fortunate to live in Boston which has a very strong market for architecture. I am not an architect by training, and in some cases I think that helped as I was not seen as "competition" by coworkers. Also, they often were glad to have someone around who was willing to actually read and understand a testing protocol or product standard. Though retired now, I believe I was well-compensated for what I did. I hold out hope that the best firms understand the value of a specifier. Maybe what we need is a rebranding: I was "technical manager" in one position. Lynn Javoroski FCSI CCS LEED® AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 2280 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Friday, May 20, 2022 - 03:38 pm:    My undergraduate degree is in Psychology, with a minor in English. After about 8 years, I had an opportunity to take a course at a local "junior" college in Engineering Drawing - and I loved it. The instructor encouraged me to take Architectural Drawing, and that was even better. I realized that I had always had an interest in and aptitude for architecture, but had not pursued it (for various reasons). Circumstances allowed me to obtain my Master of Architecture, and I was happy. I discovered specifications when my boss told me that although I could put some instructions for constructions on the drawings for ADA compliance, he would have to do "Division One" because that was complicated. Gauntlet thrown. Soon afterward, I began learning specification writing and was thrilled that my love for architecture AND the written word could be combined and contribute to better documents. Both drawings (the graphics) and writings (the specifications and associated documents) are equally vital to complete documentation and a successful project. The firms I worked for realized that and specifiers were valued, included on projects and I was grateful for that. Firms that don't recognize the value of well-written specifications along with well-drawn graphics will pay eventually for the errors that will surface, one way or the other, in RFIs, adjustments, or ultimately, poor construction. Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 709 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, May 25, 2022 - 10:43 am:    There's no question that there are many highly qualified specifiers out there who do not have architectural degrees or formal architectural practice training (CAD tech or other). We employed a construction manager who brought a lot to our practice. One of our specifiers has an advanced degree in history. I earned an English degree before moving on to architecture, so I was fated to be a specification writer. At the same time, I'm thinking of a conversation I just had with one of our writers: licensed architect, specifier specialist, 30 years' experience. It took him one minute to answer the question whether we needed to include seismic design requirements in our individual sections. It takes a fair amount of training and backup for a new non-architect specifier to imprint those kinds of questions on the brain. But we all started somewhere. I didn't know what ASTM stood for when I started. Phil Kabza FCSI CCS AIA SpecGuy Specifications Consultants www.SpecGuy.com phil@specguy.com John Bunzick Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1875 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, May 25, 2022 - 12:33 pm:    Phil, that's a good point about specific architectural education and what it can bring to preparation of specs. My experience before working in architecture included being a small commercial contractor. What I took from that - and my CA experience - to spec writing was a very solid sense of what installation requirements were needed, practical and made sense. It also gave me realistic knowledge of what products and procedures contractors actually used in projects and how. That's important to avoid the "ivory tower" effect. Architecture education doesn't do much in that regard. Like film-making, building design really does need to be a collaborative process to get the best result. ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 1466 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Wednesday, May 25, 2022 - 01:12 pm:    I am always happy to see this sort of discussion and suggest that people consider coming to Dallas/Grapevine June 13 and 14 for the SCIP Annual Meeting to discuss these issues in person with our peers. Last year was my first Annual Meeting and I am very encouraged that our profession has hope. Regardless of where people come from in terms of education and training, as long as they understand that they will be learning from day one until their last day and find that prospect exciting we can add another good Specifier to our ranks. Anne, I think you very clearly explained our roles and hope designers see your entry. This entire thread should help them better understand what we are doing. My question is how do we support and encourage someone who is interested? The initial investment in an uninformed person who wants to break into the industry can be substantial. The time it takes to teach them how to start out as a spec coordinator and later to evolve into a Specifier requires patience and endurance for both parties. Not everyone is cut out for either role. I'm suggesting to one person who is currently interested to try to get a job with a vendor or rep organization in order to start getting some understanding of the overall picture. He is a restaurant manager who finds what we do intriguing. I believe this forum truly helps all of us move closer to our goal. I like Gail's thought of training coworkers who show potential and have often tried to encourage that path. I found that introducing CDT training, with or without having people take the exam, is a strong way to introduce designers to specs, especially if you can do it using humor and sharing "war stories". Most people want to learn, not be lectured to, so I apologize for this long entry. Many people I've spoken with don't feel that they have anyone to learn from. I hope we can change that. Loretta Sheridan Senior Member Username: leshrdn Post Number: 24 Registered: 11-2021 Posted on Friday, May 27, 2022 - 12:53 pm:    Phil - Now "ASTM" no longer actually stands for anything; it's just "ASTM International," or (as I think of it), the standards organization formerly known as American Society for Testing and Materials. ;-) Dan Helphrey Senior Member Username: dbhelphrey Post Number: 100 Registered: 12-2018 Posted on Friday, May 27, 2022 - 02:28 pm:    Loretta - that's the very first thing I check any time a client tells me, "we have our own masters." Loretta Sheridan Senior Member Username: leshrdn Post Number: 25 Registered: 11-2021 Posted on Friday, May 27, 2022 - 04:01 pm:    Dan -- I am right now in the midst of just updating the numbering for the client's masters to that newfangled six digit MasterFormat. <sarcasm> I can't wait to actually read what is in them. </sarcasm> Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 710 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Saturday, May 28, 2022 - 11:58 am:    Loretta: In the ASTM analogy I'm referring to back to a time when pin register hand drafting was a radical step forward! Phil Kabza FCSI CCS AIA SpecGuy Specifications Consultants www.SpecGuy.com phil@specguy.com Dan Helphrey Senior Member Username: dbhelphrey Post Number: 102 Registered: 12-2018 Posted on Wednesday, June 01, 2022 - 10:03 pm:    I always HATED pin-register drafting. It was one of those ideas (like CONDOCS and BIM) that must have seemed like a really good idea to some engineers who had no idea how construction documents were actually produced or used. Kirk Wayne Mackey New member Username: kwmackey Post Number: 1 Registered: 12-2021 Posted on Monday, June 13, 2022 - 03:14 pm:    @ Phil Kabza: "I didn't know what ASTM stood for when I started." ASTM used to be an acronym for, 'American Society of Testing and Materials', which is pretty descriptive moniker. It now is not an acronym for anything, but merely a prefix for 'International'. As the world changes, specs need to keep pace. Kirk W. Mackey Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 1477 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2022 - 12:03 pm:    I got placed in a spec consulting firm by an employment agency and after a few months, my boss starting talking about CSI. After he explained what it was, I said "you mean there are more of you and you admit it in public?" Lynn Javoroski FCSI CCS LEED® AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 2284 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, July 14, 2022 - 12:34 pm:    LOL! Yes, and we're all darn proud of it, too! Loretta Sheridan Senior Member Username: leshrdn Post Number: 132 Registered: 11-2021 Posted on Monday, April 01, 2024 - 08:45 am:    Resurrecting this thread seemed the best place to go. Why is it advantageous for an architectural firm to use a dedicated spec writer (whether in house or as an external consultant) as opposed to just having architects working on the project write the specs? I know why I think it is advantageous, but I would love to hear, er, read what you all have to say. Thank you!! Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 789 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Monday, April 01, 2024 - 09:16 am:    A typical staff architect will develop 2, 3, or 4 projects in a year. A dedicated specification writer will work on that many in a couple of weeks. This enables much faster mastery of information within a narrower channel of expertise, which greatly benefits the design process and the final documentation. Given the demands on a project architect across the range of owner, community, and statutory requirements and coordination of an ever-increasing number of project consultants, adding competent specification development seems more and more unreasonable. Phil Kabza FCSI CCS AIA SpecGuy Specifications Consultants www.SpecGuy.com phil@specguy.com ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 1623 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Monday, April 01, 2024 - 09:32 am:    Well I could be snarky and say that it would be great if every project architect would write, or at least read, their project specs since they know best what is in their projects. What a great exercise in learning how to communicate content to others. I know a number of Architects who value Specifiers because they had to write a spec and enforce it in CA. They are some of the best people I have to work with. They populate my product data folders with marked up product data sheets and even save the PDS in the correct Division folders (well, most of the time). Why do Architects use other "consultants" whether in-house or independent? Can't they do their own hardware or theater design or acoustic studies, etc.? Do they even have time to finish design before transitioning to CDs or for that matter to finish fleshing out the project? How many more RFIs do you think projects get when there's a disconnect in communication between Drawings and Specs? Imagine what happens when Architects who do not value specs end up writing their own. BTW, there are a lot of Architects who are not dedicated Specifiers who write darn good specs. They are usually great people to work with. Melissa Finch, CSI, CDT Senior Member Username: melgfinch Post Number: 10 Registered: 02-2024 Posted on Friday, April 19, 2024 - 11:19 am:    I think another way to fix this overall issue is firms need to be willing to give students an opportunity. I'm 31 years old and started writing specs because after I went back to college (technical college) at 25, I ran across a job opening for a Specifications Coordinator position. I barely knew what specs were but I knew I wanted to get my foot in the door in the industry & I had a 4.0 GPA so that firm took a chance on me. I was trained by one of the best & now here I am 5 years later, the sole Specifications Writer for a different firm & loving what I do. There are certainly more people out there like me, that want a solid career and might enjoy it. Firms just have to be willing to look at people with 2 year degrees instead of 4 & willing to take a chance on someone that is smart, with good work ethic. Folks aren't going to school intending to write specs for a living. I originally wanted to be an estimator but I fell in love with my first position in specs. Loretta, in this thread, actually remembers those days I'm sure and she taught me a lot that I know as well. I'm very grateful I was given that chance & I think there are surely others out there like me.