Vendors In the Loop

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

Author Message Russell W. Wood, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: woodr5678 Post Number: 128 Registered: 11-2003 Posted on Friday, January 30, 2009 - 01:14 pm:    My employer has asked that we send letters to Vendors notifying them when we add them to our specs and when we remove them from our specs. This not CSI standard prcatice. Can you think of any pros or cons? Anonymous   Posted on Friday, January 30, 2009 - 01:24 pm:    What is your employer's purpose/intent? When you remove, vendors will (likely) immediately call you to find out why, then you have to explain (that is if you know why). Do you (and your employer) really want to expend that type of "non-productive" time? On the "add" side, what do you (and your employer) gain (other than possibly killing a tree and keeping postal service in business)? Doug Frank FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: doug_frank_ccs Post Number: 225 Registered: 06-2002 Posted on Friday, January 30, 2009 - 01:49 pm:    I can think of no good reason for doing this; especially for Vendors (local reps). I agree with "Anon" that you'll spend a lot of time and effort for no benefit. I have, in the past, approached manufacturers at the National level (at CSI Convention) to let them know if I'm displeased with their local rep's performance; but that's a slightly different story. Doug Frank FCSI, CCS, SCIP Affiliate FKP Architects, Inc. Houston, TX Doug Frank FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: doug_frank_ccs Post Number: 226 Registered: 06-2002 Posted on Friday, January 30, 2009 - 01:51 pm:    well, that didn't work quite like I had it planned Doug Frank FCSI, CCS, SCIP Affiliate FKP Architects, Inc. Houston, TX Richard Baxter, AIA, CSI Senior Member Username: rbaxter Post Number: 84 Registered: 12-2004 Posted on Friday, January 30, 2009 - 02:08 pm:    Mr. or Mrs. Anonymous is right. There are few pros to telling vendors that you are excluding them from your spec. It is their job to convince us to include their products, not our job to justify our decisions to them. The only exception might be if you were extremely disappointed with a product that you had previously specified. In that case, it does us all some good for the manufacturer to know that we are not continuing to tolerate their poor product performance. You just might influence them to try harder to improve their product. David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1027 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, January 30, 2009 - 02:27 pm:    Sending letters to vendors sounds like a full time job! I also question the intent of your employer. If a vendor wants to know if he is included in the specs, he can call/visit or better yet...read the project manual at the plan center. Sometimes I delete a vendor for a certain project but ad them back in later. For example I recently remove a manufacturer from the specs when their window profile could not meet the design. I added the manufacturer back in the specs for the next project when there products did meet the design. Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 358 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Sunday, February 01, 2009 - 08:31 am:    I never cease to be amazed by non-specifiers' lack of understanding of what we do. So many people in the industry think that a specifier or a firm has "a spec." You hear someone say "I'm in their spec" or "I'm trying to get into their spec." David has it quite right: we write project specifications that meet project requirements, and we often create master specification libraries that address a practice's array of projects, but that must then be edited to meet a project's requirements. The employer requesting an ongoing letter writing campaign sounds like someone on the outside of the specification world; it will take some introduction and explanation time to bring him/her to understand why this is both inappropriate and impractical. Christopher E. Grimm, CSI, CCS, LEEDŽ-AP, MAI, RLA Senior Member Username: tsugaguy Post Number: 165 Registered: 06-2005 Posted on Monday, February 02, 2009 - 08:17 am:    That would definitely be the case with systems like metal roofing, as well as many many others. With the metal roofing example, wind uplift can vary a lot depending on location, building configuration, and even the surrounding features. Owner's insurance requirements may also affect which systems are eligible. On one project I heard the Architect tell a rep it would literally take an act of Congress to drop the FMG requirement. Other times FMG is a design criteria and used as a reference standard. In other cases, UL is fine, and the negative pressures alone are of primary importance. Others on the forum may have many other methods of specifying roof performance too. Combine all those with the Architect's and Owner's intended aesthetic, and possibly Energy Star or LEED Credit SS 7.2, various substrate possibilities, and it becomes more clear why there is really no standard "spec"! Occassionally I'll get a call from a rep or two asking "Why am I not in your spec" for such and such project. The answer may be this project requires aluminum because it is near the coast, and the Owner wants the increased corrosion resistance and is willing to pay for it. Do you make aluminum? No? Sorry... Other criteria may include trained and certified installers, or only factory-formed products, or both. But on a different project, there could be 90-foot runs and the Owner wishes to have no end laps, and specifically requests roll forming. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1002 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Tuesday, February 03, 2009 - 11:36 am:    Yes, and I love it when the reps ask "Why are we not listed in your spec for XYZ project?" Yet, they haven't actually bothered to read the spec, ... if they did they might understand why they're not in it. Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: rlmat Post Number: 317 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Friday, February 06, 2009 - 04:37 pm:    For the most part - the vendors of products that are in my specifications know they are in there because I have talked to them about their products. I don't bother to tell vendors whether or not they are in my spec - time consuming and I think unnecessary - especially if they have been removed - why have to justify it to them? I like John's respone - they need to read the specs! ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 10 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Monday, February 09, 2009 - 05:25 pm:    Mr. Wood. I fear that your school board has missed their target. Maintaining a list of tested and qualified manufacturers for specific uses, such as Miami/Dade's NOA (http://www.miamidade.gov/buildingcode/pc-search_app.asp),makes sense. It also pays for itself. Maintaining and notifying every vendor who may qualify to sell products to your school district does not. If this extraordinary task is truly something that is considered valuable by your employer, why not include a requirement in Division 01 on your next project and have the GC submit an electronic copy of their vendor list? At least it gives you a starting point. You can then require subsequent Contractors to provide updates.