| Author |
Message |
Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: lazarcitec
Post Number: 949
Registered: 05-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 07, 2012 - 11:05 am: |    |
So one of my existing architect clients has asked us to share our process of preparing specifications so that they in turn can mesh their process of design and documentation with it to develop a means of avoiding specwriting problems...what this really means is their PM's don't have time to read the specifications, so how about coming up with a magic bullet to solve all our problems. I've tried to tell them one doesn't exist, that I don't have a crystal ball, that every specwriter has an internal process of developing specifications that is based on their experience base and time spent reviewing and coordinating the drawings -- they don't believe me, they think I need to explore what is being done by other firms, so anybody have any magic bullets they wish to share. |
Liz O'Sullivan
Senior Member
Username: liz_osullivan
Post Number: 92
Registered: 10-2011
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 07, 2012 - 11:21 am: | |
Jerome, I write notes to the architect in my progress sets, and if it's acceptable, in the DD set, when we have one. I put them right in the section text, in bold, highlighted text.
Some of these notes are questions, such as "Are we using epoxy paint in the restrooms? That's what I have specified at this time." Some are comments, things like "Note this submittal turn-around time" or "I specified this type of masonry veneer anchor because of the rigid insulation in the cavity" or "The owner's technical specifications indicated that we are to use certain manufacturers who have all gone out of business, so I specified these instead. It would be good to verify with the owner that these are ok."
When they don't read the spec, I call their attention specifically to the highlighted areas, which they are pleased to find out are really easy to find in a PDF. Then they usually answer my questions, and, just as important, read my comments, which helps both of us to develop coordinated documents.
I think that communication is the magic bullet. I try to tell my clients what I'm thinking, where I'm coming from. It's not a perfect system. But it's as good as it can be without cloning myself to sit in my clients' offices, or mind-melding with my clients. |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 368
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 07, 2012 - 11:46 am: | |
Other than just making stuff up as I go, I use two methods to communicate.
First, I try to get the design team to compile product data and decisions into folders that I set up using MF Divisions. I then take that information and re-compile them into Section headings including Section number and title so they can find their own information. Some designers are receptive to this, some aren't.
For the second group, I send emails with bullet points raising questions or notifying them that I just wrote something in the spec that will impact their design. They usually respond when I include the word URGENT in the subject line (most are sensitive to paper trails and liability). As to responses, most of the time half my questions in any one email will get answered if noted as URGENT. Obviously they can't all be URGENT. When I can, I usually re-compile the unanswered questions into follow-up emails. When those go unanswered, I resort to the URGENT subject line and start the process over again.
I'm not sure why many designers can't answer an entire email, though I do understand that making, and rethinking, decisions requires time. Design can be tricky and people need time to focus on the decisions they are making and the cascade effect it has on other decisions. Then they need to take time to communicate those decisions. I try to stay friendly but still try to let team members know that I don't know when they make decisions or what those decisions are. Very often design teams communicate internally but forget to tell the Specifier.
Liz, you seem to have found a way to get responses from your design teams.
At my last firm I was very pleasantly surprised to see that just about every team I worked with had either a PA or a team member who actually read the specs and provided me with excellent comments and questions. It's the only place where I experienced that. |
Nathan Woods, CSI, CCCA, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: nwoods
Post Number: 493
Registered: 08-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 07, 2012 - 10:01 pm: | |
One Spec writer that I enjoy working with sends me several lists for me to deal with.
List 1: All references to Mockups and Samples wherever occurs in the spec. I can then respond by section in the email whether we need them, exclude them, properly define them, etc...
List 2: All references to "As Selected by Architect" for finishes, model type, etc..
List 3: Specialty language items, or litigation prone sections, such as plastering and trims....
It takes me about 2 hours to respond to each list, and suddenly over the course of the week, I have reviewed and edited a significant portion of the spec that really requires my full attention, without having had to actually sit down and read 2,000 pages of material. I find it very helpful and expedient. |
Robin E. Snyder
Senior Member
Username: robin
Post Number: 440
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 07, 2012 - 10:28 pm: | |
I follow a siilar approach to Liz. I include notes in the spec itself, with highlighting and boxes. |
Mark Gilligan SE,
Senior Member
Username: mark_gilligan
Post Number: 522
Registered: 10-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, November 08, 2012 - 04:01 am: | |
There is no magic bullet but the architects are right that there will be fewer problems when everybody is working towards an integrated process that is continually improved upon. The first step is for both parties to define the process that they follow. This has to be an ongoing process where both parties continue to refine and improve the process.
If you do not have a formal process that you have written down the chances are that you are probably dealing with many issues in an ad hoc manner.
And while we talk about a process the process assumes a shared understanding regarding contents of the master specifications, the contents of typical details, and how information is presented in the construction documents. The necessary coordination between the specifications and the drawings will occur over time.
This is harder if not impossible to do unless both parties regularly work together. For the architect this means that if they have an outside specification writer they need to work with the same one all the time. For the specification writer this creates problems if he works with multiple architects who follow inconsistent processes. |
Scott Mize
Senior Member
Username: scott_mize_ccs_csi
Post Number: 61
Registered: 02-2009
| | Posted on Thursday, November 08, 2012 - 11:09 am: | |
Ken, I learned the hard way that most people don't "scroll down" in an email message. They see the message, they read as far as the first question, they don't read the rest of the email, they respond to the first question.
I never found a satisfactory solution except to keep my emails VERY short - i.e., fit into the default-size message window, limit them to no more than about three questions per email and, as you said, add URGENT to the subject line and start over again ;-)
On rare occasion, when some one was truly unresponsive, I'd mention they were holding up the specifications and copy their boss :-) My definition of "working and playing well with others" does not include "taking a bullet for a lazy (or simply overwhelmed) PM".
Since a lot of the personality types who rise in the corporate hierarchy do so by learning how to blame others for their mistakes/omissions and the specifier is often a low-status member of the project team, I became a ninja at defense ;-) |
Scott Mize
Senior Member
Username: scott_mize_ccs_csi
Post Number: 62
Registered: 02-2009
| | Posted on Thursday, November 08, 2012 - 11:23 am: | |
Jerome,
This is what worked for me: I would ask the PM to copy me on all correspondence on a job. A lot of it was of no use, but as long as I kept up, it wasn't too burdensome. Things like meeting minutes are a gold mine of decisions that even a conscientious PM might forget to mention.
I'd also offer the PM the choice of redlining a set of master specifications or sitting with me for an "interview". PMs who "didn't have time" to meet with me suddenly found time when I put about 600-800 pages of master specifications on their desk to be reviewed.
I also had the PMs redline a draft table of contents after the interview. A four or six page document is a lot less intimidating than a whole specification.
I *would* make the consultants (civil, landscape, fire protection, MEP, etc.) redline a full set of their specifications. It was the only way I found to force them to actually pay attention to the written part of their contracturally-required deliverables. Also, the only way to get a consistent format (margins, fonts, headers, footers, correct project name and location, etc.) was to force them to use my documents. (I went so far as to convince our contract guy to change the wording of the firm's standard contract to include this, so I could hold their feet to the fire.)
I also developed a set of checklists covering most major/common design decisions that served as "ticklers" for both my PM "interview" and my own process. Anything that surprised us or caused an unexpected problem was added to the checklists.
Finally, I'd do a comprehensive review of the drawings once they really started to come together. (A lot of firms use percentage milestones; I would usually review what my former employers called "a 90% set", which was really the final progress set before the drawings went to QC/QA.)
I hope some of this is helpful, and good luck! |
J. Peter Jordan
Senior Member
Username: jpjordan
Post Number: 520
Registered: 05-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, November 08, 2012 - 11:31 am: | |
Every project is different; every Owner is different; and every Architect is different (even in the same office, there are sometimes differences from team to team). You can't approach a church the same way you do a strip shopping center or an urban high-rise corporate HQ facility. One mistake I have seen in my career is architects trying to force every project into the same process.
Even at the specification level, the way issues are identified; the way information is generated; the way that information is communicated; it varies. As an independent specifier, I have to approach a new client (the Architect) with some degree of care until I get used to their expectations, process, and manner of communication.
Unfortunately, the specifier can't realistically dictate design process to the Architect (believe me, I sometimes want to). Inconsistent nomenclature (and sometimes erroneous nomenclature) means the specifier has to be ready to question anything. This can be especially difficult when code requirements change.
There is no silver bullet for dealing will all the variable. Checklists and procedures help, but sometimes good, ol' fashion nagging works best.
For Architects who don't believe the specifier needs drawings and they should not have to review the specs (and then get upset because the specs don't match their design intent), I say, "Let Darwin rule." They deserve to get sued and be put out of business. Their true level of responsibility should be asking "Do you want fries with that?" |
John Regener, AIA, CCS, CCCA, CSI, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: john_regener
Post Number: 594
Registered: 04-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, November 08, 2012 - 02:09 pm: | |
By far, the A Number One issue in my opinion is ignorance ... er, I mean, lack of knowledge. That is, lack of knowledge of the fundamentals of construction contract documents and construction technology. And it isn't the young and inexperienced whose ignorance is most irritating. It's project managers and principals who are the most shocking. I just lost 40 percent of my fee on a project that was incompetently designed and managed. That was the first time in 14 years of independent practice that I've been screwed on fee. (The project owner sued the architect and the architect lost.)
If there is a "silver bullet", I think it is CDT. When design professionals and building product representatives have a sufficient knowledge of the materials covered in the CDT program, there's a context in which to address so many of the matters that need to be addressed on a project. And it is beneficial for team members to understand the "Division 00" stuff and the owner-architect agreement too.
Without knowledge of the fundamentals, checklists, procedures and problem resolution are superficial and frustratingly insufficient, in my experience.
I was surprised at this year's SCIP meeting in Phoenix that, when the group was asked, "How many of you have taught CDT classes," 80-90 percent of those present raised their hands. |
Margaret G. Chewning FCSI CCS
Senior Member
Username: presbspec
Post Number: 223
Registered: 01-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 08, 2012 - 03:36 pm: | |
Why would that be a surprise to you John? It's in our best interest as independent specifiers to have knowledgeable PM's working with us. Half the time when working with a client I have the professor's hat on, not the specifier's. |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 369
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, November 08, 2012 - 03:44 pm: | |
John, I was often perplexed by the fact that the CDT classes I taught through CSI Chapters were mostly attended by Contractors and subs, rarely by architects or engineers.
The 'Construction Specifications' classes I used to teach at a local community college outside Baltimore was almost entirely attended by people who worked for GCs and subs. Occasionally there were students who were just entering the field of Construction Management or related fields. It was a required class for the curricula.
One large firm I worked at years ago embraced the idea of holding in-house CDT training for anyone who wanted to take it. At first it was popular and the curriculum expanded to include CCS and CCCA classes for those who wanted to pursue those certifications as well. After a few years, fewer people came to classes unless they were actively 'encouraged' by those who ran their offices. The classes were terminated about 6 years ago; to my knowledge no one at that firm is encouraged to pursue the knowledge any longer.
Another large firm I worked at more recently accepted the fact that in-house training made sense but limited attendence to a handful of people from various offices each year. While LEED registration was mandatory, approvals to sit for CDT were doled out sparingly. The first year it was offered, in-house instructors were expected to somehow create a curriculum from scratch on their own time. After that, the firm piggy-backed onto another firm's classes. Those who were permitted to attend did very well on their CDT exams, learned a lot, and sang praises to the program. I don't know if it's still being offered. |
Dave Metzger
Senior Member
Username: davemetzger
Post Number: 447
Registered: 07-2001
| | Posted on Friday, November 09, 2012 - 09:30 am: | |
Clear and open communication is the silver bullet--but the process of how that is done will vary with the firm and the individuals involved, and, as Peter noted, the project.
My process has been like Liz's. After I have sent drafts to the PM (or PA, as applicable to the project) and they have had time to review them, I schedule a meeting to go over the tagged questions/comments in the drafts, page by page.
These meetings are not a suggestion or a request from me; they are an obligation of mine and of our clients if they do business with us. The meetings can be intense, I've had 2-3 consecutive days of 8+ hours each day. But they are a great way of making sure we understand each other, and of increasing drawing/specification coordination. And yes, we build the cost of these meetings into our fee.
Maybe we have been fortunate in our clients, but in 22 years of specification consulting I have had just one client who said "you mean you want me to read the specification?". We did not do work for that client again. |
David Stutzman
Senior Member
Username: david_stutzman
Post Number: 79
Registered: 07-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, November 10, 2012 - 09:37 am: | |
I too use a process similar to Liz. I find it interesting that most architects refuse to publish draft specifications as a DD phase deliverable with our questions in them. The attitude seems to be that the questions are an admission that not all decisions are made and that somehow reflects badly on the architect.
We never outright delete the questions until they are answered or until we must give up asking. They serve as our reminder of the open issues that still must be resolved to make the spec "right" instead of "not wrong" - big difference.
I like to think of the questions as the best coordination tool we have for the entire design and construction team. Yet that perception is not mutual among the team members. |
Robert W. Johnson
Senior Member
Username: robert_w_johnson
Post Number: 223
Registered: 03-2009
| | Posted on Saturday, November 10, 2012 - 11:23 am: | |
Another technique that I use is to (yellow) highlight areas of question in the draft specifications. |
Chris Grimm, CSI, CCS, SCIPa, LEED AP BD+C, MAI, RLA
Senior Member
Username: tsugaguy
Post Number: 273
Registered: 06-2005
| | Posted on Friday, December 07, 2012 - 08:49 am: | |
#1 Foremost is effective communication.
#2 Project Notes and design team markups mainly in e-SPECS Desktop.
#3 Using the recommended document formats (SD: PPD, DD: outline, then CD: full specs) goes a long way toward not being faced with a ton of questions in a full spec at the end of a project.
#4 Frequent review meetings with the design team. Include broader team for key topics – cross-discipline, Owner, CM or GC if on board, CA.
#5 Work with the PA to set deadlines for consultant items and other items to be received, and ask the PA to communicate these. Mark them on your calendar and make sure you get what is needed on time and that it is right.
#6 Newforma action items as an automatic nagger - use sparingly. |
Colin Gilboy
Senior Member
Username: colin
Post Number: 331
Registered: 09-2005
| | Posted on Friday, December 07, 2012 - 08:55 am: | |
I was not familiar with the term Newforma and thought this link would be useful to others:
http://www.newforma.com/
Colin Gilboy
Publisher, 4specs.com
435.654.5775 - Utah
800.369.8008 |
|
4specs.com Home Page