Advancement for Specifiers?

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

Author Message Steven T. Lawrey, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: lawrey Post Number: 68 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Friday, April 13, 2007 - 01:41 pm:    I have been a full-time in-house specifier for the past eight years (RA with 25 years total experience). Recently, I've wondered if there is anywhere to go from here while maintaining my involvement with specs and Q/A. Other than accruing more experience, how does one gain greater standing or more exposure within a firm? Managing one or more additional specifiers or PAs who prepare specs is the only thing that comes to mind. Has anyone been promoted to associate, vice president, partner or some other corporate role? This question is not intended to be salary related but rather role related. Is the in-house specifier in a deadend position? W. Dean Walker, AIA, CCS, SCIP Intermediate Member Username: wdwalkerspecs Post Number: 4 Registered: 08-2006 Posted on Friday, April 13, 2007 - 01:56 pm:    Depends on the firm and how its leadership percieves the work you do. In one firm I was named Associate a year after arrival and Senior Associate shortly there after. In another - Associate, Sr. Associate and Vice President. All the while I was very active in AIA and CSI and the principals of the firms knew it. For me it was timing. I'm now an independent and love it. Steve Pirozzi, CSI, CDT Intermediate Member Username: spirozzi Post Number: 4 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Friday, April 13, 2007 - 01:57 pm:    Steven, In the most recent issue of BD+C, Walter Marlowe, executive director of CSI responded to the following question: "Are specifiers an endangered species at AEC firms?" WM Response: There's a changing role for the specifier, no doubt about that. The key is the knowledge that they bring to the construction process. With the advent of BIM, the growth of software solutions, and specifications from databases, specifiers need to move more into a role of knowledge manager. They're going to be managing the access to specification information in databases. They're going to be important in assuring the quality of information in a specification. Without that knowledge, a lot of that information from software may not be accurate. Doug Frank FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: doug_frank_ccs Post Number: 182 Registered: 06-2002 Posted on Friday, April 13, 2007 - 01:58 pm:    Dead End Position? Absolutely not! I’m a Senior Vice President at my firm and I know of at least two other dedicated specifiers who are principals at their respective firms. Gaining respect for me came from quality specifications but even more directly from my involvement with CSI. I have always been real active at the Chapter level, and some at Region level as well. The folks here recognized (I did a little campaigning) the value of my CSI-related activities and use the fact that I’m a past Chapter President and past Region Technical Chair among many other positions, and a Fellow in CSI, in our marketing materials. I’ve also made presentations at the CSI Convention, Region Conferences, etc. to further increase my visibility. I’ve gotten my firm involved as corporate sponsors of local CSI events as well in an effort to show them the value of our organization. Managing others within the firm is a very small part of my deal. William C. Pegues, FCSI, CCS Senior Member Username: wpegues Post Number: 658 Registered: 10-2002 Posted on Friday, April 13, 2007 - 02:01 pm:    Yes, there are some who have gained enough respect within their offices to make higher management levels. My office is a partnership. I was made an Associate about 6 years after joinging the firm and have advanced through Senior Associate, Director of Research and Specificaitons and currently an Associate Principal. In addition, I am solely a specifier, I am not a registered architect. William Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wyancey Post Number: 350 Registered: 05-2005 Posted on Friday, April 13, 2007 - 02:23 pm:    Dean, Are you moving up your own corporate ladder but still performing the grunt work? W. Dean Walker, AIA, CCS, SCIP Advanced Member Username: wdwalkerspecs Post Number: 5 Registered: 08-2006 Posted on Friday, April 13, 2007 - 02:32 pm:    Wayne, I do it all: market, write, edit, check, legal, bill, plead for money, and spend. By doing it all I get a break. Having worked in Corporate America for 38 years, its great to turn off the light and go down the hall to bed. Dean Ronald L. Geren, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 442 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Friday, April 13, 2007 - 10:17 pm:    Dean, you get to go to bed!? Boy, I must be doing something wrong... Steven: I had those same thoughts you're having about 2 years ago. In the firm I worked for, people having less or equal experience, and that were either more design savy and/or great "people" persons that work well with clients, were promoted to VP or principal. The firm thought I was indispensable, but I had the same title as an unregistered architecture graduate in the office with 10 year's experience. Solution: Do my own thing and now I can call myself anything I want. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 519 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Saturday, April 14, 2007 - 04:23 pm:    I am a senior associate at my present firm and in my previous firm was supposed to be promoted to principal at the next promotion cycle (whenever that ends up being). I think being in the firm management is ESSENTIAL to being a good specifier -- you're making daily decisions on quality and risk management for the firm, and in many cases, you're the one person who sees every job in the office. In fact, I think if you're not at a senior staff position, you simply can't do your job properly because you have to have the authority of the partnership behind you (and everyone has to know that). I also am not licensed (and I'm not even an architect by training) but I see my job as absolutely critical to the smooth operation of the firm. when the firm is discussing new materials, the people around the table are four partners and me; I'm considered integral to the implementation of new materials and/or processes in the office. (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Saturday, April 14, 2007 - 07:31 pm:    I would like to echo Anne's assessment of the specifier's role 110%. Especially the part about having the support of the principals (and the respect of the PAs and PMs). Something most architects do not realize: they may work on a few projects in any given year, whereas the (in-house) specifier for that firm may work on anywhere from 20 to 30, if not more. This makes for a more concentrated exposure to the technical, and what seems to be an innate ability for most specifiers to retain and manage information truly makes them an invaluable resource to all the staff. In time (maybe even short) the knowledgeable specifier will earn the trust and respect of senior level management - in turn earning promotions and authority. The result has personally paid off: I, too am a senior associate with the company, and there's room to keep growing. David R. Combs, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: davidcombs Post Number: 222 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 08:22 am:    Sorry folks. The above UG post is mine. Richard Howard, AIA CSI CCS LEED-AP Senior Member Username: rick_howard Post Number: 128 Registered: 07-2003 Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 09:08 am:    Specifiers are in tremendous demand. The firm that refuses to acknowledge the importance of that position is going to suffer, especially as the industry transitions to new technologies, like BIM. The better firms will do what it takes to keep key people, and that usually includes delegating more responsibility. Our firm is unusal in not having associates or principals. Instead we have grades that parallel the GS designations of the federal government and people are given titles that reflect their function. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 701 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 09:21 am:    In the firm I work at now (about 150 people), the senior specifier is a principal. I was assured Friday, (during my performance review!) that the firm has no limits on advancement for me as a specifier, despite the fact the the firm's "Criteria for Advancement" include many areas that I do not (and probably would not) get involved in. Responsibilities, beyond specs, that I have taken on include roles in training and professional development, and quality assurance. I was recently appointed to our ISO 9000 Quality Steering Committee. There seems to be plenty of ways to get involved in management and advance. Steven T. Lawrey, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: lawrey Post Number: 69 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 01:55 pm:    Thanks to all who have posted. I see that the in-house specifier is certainly NOT in a dead end position IF the firm indeed values the knowledge and contributions made to its work AND backs the specifier. In addition to preparing project manuals suitable for bidding and construction, I perform quality assurance reviews, code reviews, help identify suitable lunch-and-learns, sit on several committess and am very active in my local CSI chapter. In fact, I've gained local credibility through our certification course and I'm also on the chapter board. For me, the problem is that the firm and some project managers/architects don't truly value the work I do. Recently, one Associate said he doesn't need specs for his projects. Over the past couple of years, I've had discussions about what I bring to the table, but little has changed. Because I'm not an Associate, consultants know they can largely ignore my direction and comments, especially if they require considerable effort. It took 10 years for me to be recognized as the "employee of the month" and that was due to someone who assisted me for a few months. His nomination said, "spec writing is more than pushing a few buttons; it requires considerable knowledge and time". John Bunzick: I seem to remember that you changed firms within the past year or so. Did these issues play a part in your decision to swith firms? Because most of you have administrative responsibilities, I'm curious about what percentage of project manuals each of you prepare and how the remainder are prepared. W. Dean Walker, AIA, CCS, SCIP Senior Member Username: wdwalkerspecs Post Number: 7 Registered: 08-2006 Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 02:00 pm:    Steven, It's time to move on. There are so many firms looking for specifiers. What city do you live in? Go to the AIA website under national listings for one place Dean Walker John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 702 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 03:25 pm:    Short version: My decision to switch firms had more to do with the type of work the firms do than opportunity for advancement. I wanted to be specifying larger, more interesting projects. At my prior employer, I was part of the senior mananagement as well, though it is a much smaller firm. David R. Combs, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: davidcombs Post Number: 223 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 04:24 pm:    Steven, Right now, I'm taking a break from the specs a bit and helping out to provide some CA oversight on a rather difficult high-rise condo project. Under normal circumstances, however, I can figure on doing about 20 - 25 project manuals per year, for projects ranging from as little as 2 or 3 million, to about 110 - 120 million. Healthcare, Higher Ed, Assisted Living mostly. Our overflow is handled by an outside specifications consultant who uses our office masters as a basis, supplemented and modified as necessary. Please let me know if you would consider relocating to Dallas (sunny and low 70s today). At our firm at least, the specifications writer role is considered to be an invaluable technical resource, and one not to be taken lightly. Your expertise would be very much appreciated and valued. david.combs@perkinswill.com if you would like more information. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 521 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 04:54 pm:    Steven: I switched firms 3 months ago and a big part of the switch was the disregard that I saw in my former firm for the position of specifier. I felt I was treated very well and was a firm wide resource, and could set my own schedule, but the firm had as many "sustainability coordinators" as they did specifiers, and treated the sustainability people as bringing more to the table. I had exit interviews with 5 partners, and I think this issue is being looked at seriously now -- because they never thought I would leave. I was able to negotiate a good position in my current firm, but a big part of my negotiations was how the role of the specifier was seen in the office and what role I would play in overall office work. And of course, the opportunity to work on truly world-class design was a big consideration. (I have to remember this as I continue to sneeze from all the pollen in the air here in LA) I don't feel a qualified spec writer should need to "sell" their services in a legitimate firm and if you find yourself having to do that, I agree with Dean that its time to leave. there are tons of positions open for specifiers -- I can think of three in Seattle, and probably a dozen in the LA area, not to mention nearly every other location out there. Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 51 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 05:50 pm:    Anne, Your comments really hit close to home. Our firm just elevated a young person to "Practice Area Director" for Sustainability. There is no equivalent director position for Specifications, and I prepare virtually all of our specifications. Very fortunately, that person passed his oral exam in the same month so that they are now actually a registered Architect. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 522 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 06:08 pm:    I'll reiterate: we (meaning any firm) does not get sued if a building doesn't pass a LEED rating; the rating is determined by a third-party, for profit organization, not a state agency. Every office I know has a "not responsible" clause and does not guarantee a LEED rating. we get sued if the specs are a problem. if firm management doesn't "get" that, then I think there is a problem in the overall emphasis of the firm and its why I left my former employer. (and they are VERY aware of that) I had a lot of conversations about that emphasis before I hired on at my current firm. W. Dean Walker, AIA, CCS, SCIP Senior Member Username: wdwalkerspecs Post Number: 8 Registered: 08-2006 Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 06:10 pm:    Anne, Good point - and very important. I totally agree with you. Anonymous   Posted on Monday, April 16, 2007 - 07:31 pm:    The perception of the specifier as a tech in lieu of a professional in our own right in my own geographical area is what prompted me to go out on my own. The Design firms in my area tend to depend on the project managers to produce the specifications for their projects. I get called in when they realize they have forgotten to do something (like the specs) or think they are all of a sudden too busy to do them. 'Course I use the 2 of 3 rule in establishing the fee in those cases. (pick two of the three: Fast, Cheap, Correct) Some of the bigger firms herebouts have started to realise the value of a dedicated specifier, even if out-sourced, and I have had one or two try to get me to come on board. I'm still not convinced things would change yet. When my spouse retires, I may need to go back to the corporate world. We'll see. Anonymous   Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - 10:50 am:    My last career move was for reasons almost exactly as Anne related. There was a management transition that subordinated the role of the specifier and the emphasis shifted from doing good work to assure repeat business to a strategy of growth to improve the partners investment. I didn't like the disregard for technical expertise and I won't put up with second-class treatment. Ownership has never been a motivator for me. The way it works in many firms reminds me of a pyramid scheme. You have to keep growing the business and adding increasing numbers of associate partners so the senior partners can cash out at retirement. My current firm is traded on the NYSE, so anyone can be an owner. I can't begin to tell you how much nicer it is to be treated with respect and valued for my contribution. It is like being cultivated as a sunflower instead of a mushroom. And if you have been in one place very long, especially if it is a place where you are not fully appreciated, you may be surprised at how your compensation has lagged. Spec writers are really in demand and firms that value them are willing to pay accordingly. John Regener, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: john_regener Post Number: 282 Registered: 04-2002 Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - 11:35 am:    I've heard the laments for many years about specifiers not being appreciated --- and I've lived with the issue as both an in-house and out-sourced construction specifier. There are some firm principles who appreciate construction specifications and those who produce them. They appreciate "team players" who are more than functionaries and who bring more to the project (insight on products, quality assurance in coordination of drawings and specifications and a mentoring attitude toward team members). A key to this is selling the idea that well-prepared specifications (and construction documents in general) have value. As pointed out above, well-prepared specifications reduce problems and that translates into many beneficial things for the firm (less time and expense resolving conflicts and enhanced reputation to clients, construction managers and contractors). So, putting this against what I see is the emphasis in CSI for selling stuff (and I've got something to sell too) rather than promoting quality in construction documentation for the sake of excellence in its own right, the challenge for specifiers is to convince the leadership of CSI that promoting the value of well-prepared construction documents is in the best interest of CSI members --- both professional and industry. Publications such as Masterformat should have a primary purpose to make better documents and have as a side benefit the financial bounty that supports the operation of CSI, rather than the converse. I attend CSI chapter meetings, region conferences and institute conventions not because I enjoy being with old people but because I gain knowledge, build relationships and get positive perspective on who I am and what I do. And it works out in practice. The more professional I am, the more likely I am treated with respect and get paid for what I am worth. Randy Cox Senior Member Username: randy_cox Post Number: 40 Registered: 04-2004 Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - 01:46 pm:    I think that John Regener's comments that "… promoting the value of well-prepared construction documents is in the best interest of CSI members…" is a key assessment. The reason that Leed AP is desirable within most architecture and engineering firms is because it means something to our clients. It helps market our firms. Our clients (even the public agencies) want Leed certification for their own marketing efforts. If those clients realized that having a great specifier would give them a greater bang for their buck, it would mean something to them. If that happened, then the quality of spec writing would mean something positive to the architecture and engineering firms out there. As I write this, I realize that my logical conclusion would be for CSI to shift its attention from recruiting members and selling new products to convincing owners (and their investors) that having a CCS in a key role on their projects will save them time and money. If those decision makers are convinced, then CSI membership and respect for specifiers will follow. Kenneth C. Crocco Senior Member Username: kcrocco Post Number: 94 Registered: 04-2003 Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - 01:52 pm:    I agree John, "well-prepared construction documents". I think that should be the new motto, objective, or slogan. I just want to complete one of your sentences: "A key to this is selling the idea that well-prepared specifications (and construction documents in general) have value". . for the completed project. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 523 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - 03:10 pm:    Randy- the selling of the CCS has been my mission for about 10 years now -- and its the reason I wanted to get on the board. LEED became "important" because the government required it. CCS can be too. (this discussion has occurred on other threads... many times) I think its also critical that the architect enforce the specs -- if they don't enforce the documents, you could just as easily give them blank pages. its very difficult to quantify the savings that well prepared specs brings to the project, because well coordinated specs generally mean well coordinated drawings -- and the opposite is true as well. specs are never just a "stand alone" thing like the LEED costs, and so its hard to sell the value, because its difficult to determine what that value is. however, this is a much longer conversation.... David J. Wyatt Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_csi_ccs_ccca Post Number: 56 Registered: 07-2005 Posted on Tuesday, April 17, 2007 - 03:19 pm:    I have noticed that many architects who have advanced to partnership in their respective firms have much more appreciation for well-prepared specifications than they did during the years preceeding their advancement. Once they become part owners in their firms and their stake in risk management is significantly greater, their awareness of the spec writer's value is raised considerably. Anonymous   Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - 10:05 am:    This has been the most interesting thread since the survey on compensation. I’ve been thinking about this subject for the last few days on my commute to and from my new job. It became apparent to me at my former place of employment that, while my knowledge and abilities were much valued and respected by most of the people I worked with, upper management considered the position of specification writer to be just another form of overhead that they were forced to maintain in order to do business. In fact, when I met with a principal of the firm to let him know that I had another offer, he told me that he considered everyone, including himself, to be “just a commodity.” Life is fickle; any one of us could be gone tomorrow with no warning and the world would not stop rotating on its axis but prolonged dwelling on this cynical attitude can not be healthy. Our careers will each come to an end at some point but it is not deceptive or vain to think that we can make a difference by always striving to do our best and improve. We can and we must think and act this way. If your superiors do not appreciate your effort and talent after they have had sufficient opportunity to observe it, chances are they never will (at least not until it is too late for them and for you). You might as well move on. I agree with David Wyatt. There are those in leadership roles out there who do appreciate the talent and good effort of those they work with no matter the level of experience. When you find such a situation stick with it. The phrase “no matter the level of experience” sprang to mind when I think of all the promising interns I have seen leave firms because their talent or ability was not recognized “in their own backyard.” I also must second Doug Frank’s comments about the benefits of being active in CSI, especially on a chapter level. I believe I owe my last two positions, with their associated increases in compensation and “prestige,” to the relationships I built through my activities in my local CSI chapter. I have not only enhanced my personal knowledge and abilities, I have also tapped into the vast wealth of knowledge held by others and become a member of a very deep think tank (you are swimming in it right now) that has a proven record of examining and resolving unique problems as they present themselves in this industry. In some ways a niche position is a dead end even if the person filling it is well compensated and invited to own a piece of the pie. One can only do so much. On the other hand, life is much larger than a person's job. Involvement in organizations such as CSI is that portal between “your job” and the rest of the world. Life is too short to put up with ingrates (or at least those who are just “out to lunch”). Find a situation that makes you happy then you will reap all the benefits (tangible and otherwise) that you need. William C. Pegues, FCSI, CCS Senior Member Username: wpegues Post Number: 660 Registered: 10-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - 10:16 am:    Very nice summary, anon. One of the telling points is when the employer themselves tells you they consider themselves 'just a commodity'. Says something about the self esteem of the corporate entity itself. That kind of feeling can often be felt out at an interview. Early in one's career, you can work most any place. But you want to know that the place you are going after you reach a certain level has self respect. Sure, we can all be hit by a bus tomorrow, but a firm should have no problem stating that certain bus accidents would be critical to the organization. Apparently, upper management considers themselves no different than toastrs - so how they treat others, and even the body of their own work and the firmst significance in the profession carries that underlying ... 'taint' (for lack of a better word). J. Peter Jordan Senior Member Username: jpjordan Post Number: 230 Registered: 05-2004 Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - 10:20 am:    In my experience most firms generally see the specification writer as an important support role, but not a "mission-critical" line position. Mr. Wyatt's point about the value of good specifications in managing risk is well taken, but I would suggest that this perception is not generally held below the principal level and may not be widely held at the principal level. I would be satisfied if architects would percieve the writing of specifications (and writing them well) as a critical part of their career path to the position of principal. Unfortunately, the recent conversations that I have had with a number of younger architects lead me to believe that their perception is that spec writing only tangentially related to design practice. I am please to hear in several postings in this thread that some specifiers are reaching the top ranks in their firms. I would also suggest that in these roles, they may do less "spec writing" and more management of various issues, usually technical in nature, some of which may not be directly related to the development and production of specifications. I believe that a career spec writer may be uniquely qualified to fill such roles, but it does mean less time for actually writing specifications. I am mindful of a conversation I once had with a retired AF general in which he asked if we really wanted to elect a fighter pilot to be president. The point being that the qualifications that make a good combat fighter pilot may not be what is needed to function well as the commander in chief. After having this conversation, I saw a chart of a career USAF officer. At the beginning of their career, they were assigned more duties directly related to flying. Toward the end of a 20- to 30-year career, their duties were much more related to management. Only those who were able to offer more than good flying skills would advance to the most senior ranks. Those who concentrate very narrowly on spec writing skills may not have other necessary skills to bring to the table when discussing their career. Most specifiers will acquire good legal and research skills as they relate to design and constuction; however, they must also develop good skills in planning and budgeting, leading a team, managing resources (people, budgets, and technology), marketing services, and balancing conflicting expectations. David J. Wyatt Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_csi_ccs_ccca Post Number: 57 Registered: 07-2005 Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - 12:11 pm:    Peter Jordan is right. As important as specification writing is for all of the reasons that have been expressed here, one must have more than exceptional technical ability to become a truly valuable human resource. CSI provides local, regional, and national opportunities for specification writers to develop communication, management, and leadership skills. These skills elevate them from those who simply do their jobs very well to that small group of people who build careers. Business owners want career-builders. Ron Beard CCS Senior Member Username: rm_beard_ccs Post Number: 187 Registered: 10-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - 12:59 pm:    Years ago, there was a survey/study conducted by the Harvard Business Review, IIRC, trying to determine the single most important quality in a top level CEO. The final conclusion was the ability to write superior business letters and communications. Hey, since we're highly skilled written communicators, doesn't that mean we're almost there? As mentioned by David and Peter and others above, we individually need to develop other personal skills to compliment our technical skills. As technicians we are detail oriented, sometimes we have to step back and observe things from an overall viewpoint. People and project management, public speaking (which I detest and am dreadful at), planning, and other personal skills most likely will need to be acquired outside of our spec writers cubicals through professional and non-profit associations, community activities, and (shutter the thought - politics). It also helps to schmooze once in a while. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 525 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - 03:12 pm:    as my former firm is going about finding a replacement for me, what I've been told by them that has come up over and over again -- was my contacts and resources. I think my technical ability is a "given" in the staff position; but the 30 years of meeting people at CSI gave me resources that no one else in the office had. some years ago, the managing partner of my office asked me about the CSI convention. "What technical classes did you go to?" he wanted to know. My response was that I could get the technical information in a lot of places, but what he was paying me for was to sit and have drinks with the "Director of Sales" for some corporation or the specification writer from some firm in another part of the country. As my firm expanded to doing work all over the US, that convention cost was more than paid for because I knew who to call to get the information we needed for our project in Wisconsin, North Carolina, Florida or New York. This isn't just "schmoozing" -- this is aquiring resources in much the same way that you send away for books from ASTM or some other trade organization. the fact that I could ask someone I knew about the hurricane requirements in Miami Beach -- and get a response based on past experience by someone with 30 years experience-- rather than spending 2 days or more looking up the requirements on the web site -- is a skill as valuable as knowing how to edit a spec section. My consistency and insistence on participating in CSI events was always sort of "pooh-poohed" in the early stages of my career, but now after 30 years of doing this its given me irreplaceable skills that are very difficult to duplicate and the firms I work for have recognized that fact -- and paid for it. John Regener, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: john_regener Post Number: 283 Registered: 04-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - 05:19 pm:    There are many paths to the position of Specifications Writer, with people having varying capabilities, experience and expertise. An article in The Construction Specifier many years ago by Tom Heineman, FCSI described the career paths of several specifications writers. My observation is that one can be a competent specifications writer without a degree in architecture or engineering. I've also observed that people without a degree can have the title of specifications writer and merely be a clerical worker who produces specification documents. The difference is willingness and ability to learn and to develop expertise in product evaluation and the principles and practices of construction specifications production. I know at least two specifications writers who have achieved CCS certification and Fellowship in CSI and who do not have architecture or engineering degrees (but who have other degrees). The most qualified specifications writers I know have degrees and licenses in architecture or engineering and they have "come up through the ranks" of architectural and engineering firms, starting as drafters and moving up to job captain, project architect/engineer, project manager and construction contract administrator. After 10-15 years of experience, they now focus their practice on written construction contract documents ("specs"). They are not "overhead" for a firm. They are essential team members. Speaking in generalities is risky and I don't mean to demean anyone. I think the measure of basic competence in specifications writing is the Certified Construction Specifier (CCS) certification through CSI. It is not mandatory for getting a job and project owners don't seem to value having a CCS on the design team (as much as a gaggle of LEEP AP types) and I have very high respect for several spec writer colleagues who are architects and as a matter of choice have not and will not take CCS exam. What I perceive is that specifications writers who develop themselves through education, networking and experience, and who achieve a "professional" status at least in their own minds and in the view of their spec writing peers, are the most valued. I frequently get calls from headhunters and architectural firms looking for spec writers. I tell them, "Good luck. The good ones are busy and in high demand." Anonymous   Posted on Wednesday, April 18, 2007 - 04:13 pm:    This thread is fascinating, particularly as it's been something that's been weighing on my mind for the last few weeks. This after I approached a higher-up about the fact that, having been a full-time specifier here for over two years, I have seen no promotion (and was more or less told that it's impossible for specifiers to be promoted) and then found out that I was one of very few who did not receive a bonus this year. This to me is about far more than money - I've had pay increases in the time here - it's about respect for what I do. The sad part is I too see the "babies", the arch graduates right out of school (oh, who are willing to work 60 hour weeks frequently) promoted to associate, and here I sit. The other thing that really gets me is that by far the majority of the consultants we deal with, whose spec sections I coordinate into the completed Project Manual, as well as these baby architects, seem to think that I'm clerical staff and that what I do is word processing. So, does the lack of promotion mean that the door names have no understanding of what my job is? If that's the case, maybe, even at my age (57 - but don't ask me how much I weigh because that I won't reveal) it may be time to start looking around again. Anonymous   Posted on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 08:36 am:    A lot can be said without words. A national firm with a "good reputation" once wanted to hire me away from a smaller firm with a superlative reputation where I was a core team member and seen as a fundamental participant in all projects. After a rosey interview, an offer of more benefits and a substantially higher salary, I asked to see the whole office. The studios were very showy; clients must have thought they were in a profitable Swiss bank. Then I saw where I'd be working--the space their spec writer for the last 20 years had been assigned in a recent office move. It was on a second floor, but with the only windows facing directly into the side of a bridge beam five feet away. It was dim and sunless, but somewhat better than a utility room (utility rooms generally don't have windows at all). They may still be looking for a spec writer. Richard Howard, AIA CSI CCS LEED-AP Senior Member Username: rick_howard Post Number: 130 Registered: 07-2003 Posted on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 09:02 am:    At least they had a space for the spec writer. The last firm I was with moved from a suburban location to new office space downtown, and with much fanfare unveiled the floor plan showing where everyone would be located in the new office. Can you guess who they had left off the plan? It wasn't any of the interns. John Regener, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: john_regener Post Number: 285 Registered: 04-2002 Posted on Thursday, April 19, 2007 - 12:42 pm:    Regarding the theme of this thread, Advancement for Specifiers, I think the core issue to deal with is the value of well-prepared construction specifications. Since construction specifications are addressed only superficially in the curricula of most colleges and universities (especially the prominent ones) and since construction specifications are also treated as superficial in intern development and professional license programs, is it any surprise that construction specifiers are treated with disrespect? Yes, construction specifiers must take charge of their personal development and make themselves valuable within project teams. That's what each of us can do. But when it comes to the "Big Picture" of product selection (including "green" products) and construction documentation, the significance and value of construction specifiers can be best enhanced, in my opinion, by getting to decision makers through education and public relations (promotion). I'm trying to think how this can be achieved, including identifying who are the decision makers. Perhaps the efforts of CSI in reaching professional societies, such as the booth CSI has at the AIA Convention, should receive more support. Michael Chambers, FAIA did an excellent education program several years ago at the AIA Convention. But these are relatively small voices in a very large and generally disinterested context. Looking at it from the level where each of us specifiers can have influence, perhaps it's a matter of local action using materials developed at a national level. That is, if succinct materials about the value of well-prepared specifications are developed by CSI and made available (FREE!) to CSI chapters and individual members, we specifiers can present the material to professional associations and architectural, engineering and construction firms (including CM firms and institutional facility owners). The materials could even be used within architectural firms by the staff or out-sourced specifications writers to educate those we work with about what it is we actually do and how they interface and participate in the process. Helaine K. (Holly) Robinson CSI CCS CCCA Senior Member Username: hollyrob Post Number: 317 Registered: 07-2003 Posted on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 - 11:38 am:    I don't drink and turn down all of those invitations to go for drinks. Unless there's a darn good resign, I avoid all of the parties. That's not why I go to convention. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 535 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 - 12:40 pm:    the point is not the alcohol. the point is the personal relationships that get formed in a casual setting. Showing up in a classroom will get you continuing education credits, but unless you have a cup of coffee with the lecturer, you can't ask them for help the next time your project needs that point of view. if you have a project in a part of the country that is not where your office is then you need to know who the people are who can provide assistance or help you navigate your way through the project. And of course, you do the same for them. this business is based on personal relationships. its not based simply on finding stuff in books. Helaine K. (Holly) Robinson CSI CCS CCCA Senior Member Username: hollyrob Post Number: 320 Registered: 07-2003 Posted on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 - 12:45 pm:    Anne, I have plenty of those personal relationships and don't HAVE to go out for drinks with strangers to get them. Anonymous   Posted on Friday, April 27, 2007 - 11:13 pm:    Getting back to the original comment, I find the same frustration as Steven. I believe most large, multi-national corporations do not recognize the value of specification writers, or licensed architects for that matter. The number one priority is marketing, and those that win contract proposals win promotions. They use your credentials to win the project, but it is the person doing the marketing that is promoted. I work for a large corporation where all marketing personnel ("salesmen and saleswomen")are Senior Associates and Vice Presidents, while some Architects and Engineers with 25 years of experience have the same title as the Receptionist -- none. In fact, the Receptionist makes less money, but gets more respect. I left this firm four years ago because I was continuously passed over for promotion. I was practically promised the world if I stayed, but I left as a matter of principle. I returned with the assumption that things had changed. Promotions were announced today, and it is the same old BS. (I'll be handing out my resume at the AIA convention next week.) Anonymous' posting on April 18 hits close to home. I was a project architect before I focused on specifications, and I make this known to people I work with. Many times, architects have asked me "Why did you give up architecture?" Huh!?! Thanks Steven for starting this thread and thanks to the responders for giving me hope that out there, somewhere, there is a future. Enough ranting, I have to update my resume.