Recently in Specifying Practice Group Category

The July 1st CSI Specifying Practice Group meeting focused on how to collect project data required to write specifications. Group members Louis Medcalf, FCSI, CCS of Gresham, Smith & Partners and Patricia Gallup, RA, CSI, CCS of PSA-Dewberry, and group leader David Stutzman all shared examples of tools they have used and discussed the benefits of each. The sample documents will be available for download at the CSI blog. Here is a summary.

Louis Medcalf showed a table of Project Decisions by Phase. The table includes a column for pre-design, and each design phase for a construction project. Most interesting is the row in the table titled "Design Purpose." Each of the table entries relates directly to the phase purpose. And a goal is stated for some table entries at various design phases. Imagine the cost management goal for DD phase is to have sufficient information to establish a GMP. The corresponding construction information goal is to complete all product decisions affecting cost.

Noble goals, indeed! And consistent with the AIA Owner-Architect Agreement documents. Medcalf noted the table is used to help manage projects and the information that is created and documented at each phase. Stutzman interjected that recently it seemed that CD phase definition has changed. Instead of Construction Documents, it seems to be Continue Designing. Medcalf indicated delayed design decisions can be costly especially when significant design revisions are required as projects near completion.

Stutzman demonstrated a project table of contents in Microsoft Excel format that Conspectus creates when proposals are issued and then refines as projects progress through design. The table of contents includes a description of what is believed to be included in each spec section. Additional information, such as that found in basis of design documents, is included in separate columns as it become available. The file is distributed to the architects with notes about what data they must furnish. The architects use a separate column to respond to comments and questions and to add product selection data. The contents is a master document that uses Excel's auto filter function to quickly "edit" the file to show only the subject that are appropriate, without deleting any information.

Patricia Gallup showed a checklist in Microsoft Excel format that she uses with PSA-Dewberry's project architects. She explained the form is 21 pages long, and there are many selections to be made to complete the form. She has used the form successfully as a starting point to begin drafting the specifications. However, Patricia did report there is some reluctance to completing the form. Patricia is considering revising the form so it can be completed more efficiently as an electronic document.

Stutzman demonstrated a second checklist using Microsoft Word. The checklist was created for a client that builds a single building type at many locations. The file is actually a form using checkboxes, fill-in-the-blanks and drop-down menus added to the file using the Forms toolbar. The owner required the project architects to complete the checklist electronically. Having the owner make the demand of the architects ensured the form was completed for every project. Once completed, a macro is used to compare the form to the default status. Changes the architects make are displayed as red text to ensure the changes are easily found. This allows the client's standard specifications to be edited quickly to mach the checklist.

There seems to be no single answer to the question of how to collect project data or what tools to use. There are multiple approaches and various degrees of success. The right approach seems to depend on project circumstances, the people involved, and how much influence the specifier can exert.

Join your colleagues in discussing current issues by joining the Specifying Practice Group. The group meets the first Thursday of each month from 3:00 - 4:00 PM eastern time. The group meeting topics are for everyone who must read or write construction specifications.

What do you use to describe your design projects? Will owners, lenders, estimators and others understand the design intent? Traditional methods rely on design narratives and outline specs to supplement drawings. Each design team develops their own method for presenting the written information. As a result, sharing the information among various teams and building a library of design descriptions for use with future work is difficult.

Louis Medcalf, FCSI, CCS and Chair of the CSI PPDFormat Task Team explained to the CSI Specifying Practice Group how Preliminary Project Descriptions (PPD) can simplify collecting and sharing information for the benefit of current and future project teams.

The CSI Specifying Practice Group meets the first Thursday each month. Everyone that reads or writes specifications is welcome to join the group and share ideas.

PPDs are not widely known nor widely used even though the concept first appeared in the CSI Manual of Practice in 1989. CSI created the PPD Task Team in 2009 to write a new publication to describe how to prepare PPDs. As a result, PPDFormat was published in May 2010 and is available from CSI. Now the industry has a guideline to help structure PPDs and the information they contain.

The PPD structure provides a systematic checklist to help ensure all the appropriate subjects are discussed. The checklist is UniFormat, the construction classification system for building systems and assemblies. UniFormat was designed for cost estimating. So, PPDs are coordinated with published cost estimating systems, allowing parallel presentation of design data and cost data.

The PPD structure allows each system and assembly to be discussed by description, function, and component. This structure enables analysis and effective comparison of various building systems used to perform the same function. Multiple solutions may be presented as potential design options without the need to show each system graphically. This approach allows options to be analyzed for aesthetics, life-cycle costs, durability, and other factors without investing significant time to document each option.

Documenting all information in a building model is not practical. PPDs provide the opportunity to describe what is required for each assembly that is represented by a model object without inserting the data into the model. Model the major building elements and rely on PPDs to describe the secondary and accessory components that complete the major assembly.

PPDs are useful at every project design phase. They can serve as the Schematic Design project report, the Design Development outline spec, and the Construction Documents quality control tool. They can record the decisions, the rationale, and the design at each step during the process. PPDs are a valuable resource throughout all stages of the design process.

Read the meeting notes and view the PowerPoint presentation slides at the CSI Blog.

Who is involved? What roles do they play? What contributions do they make? And when do each contribute? The CSI Specifying Practice Group explored these and other questions about the specifying process at the April 1, 2010 meeting.

 

If you have an opinion, join the group. Everyone that reads or writes specs is welcome and it is FREE. Participation, controversy, and disagreement are encouraged so we can learn from one another. The group meets for one hour the first Thursday of every month.

 

The perception is that architects and engineers make the product selections. Is the perception reality? Perhaps. But there are thousands of choices to make, and many factors influencing those choices. Architects tend to focus on products affecting the visual and spatial experience of the project. Mundane and commodity products receive scarce attention, if any. So, who makes those decisions?

 

Explore the meeting discussion presentation. Add your own opinions by leaving a comment at the end of this posting.

Owners may have significant influence on product selections and what is ultimately specified. Because of other facilities and maintenance experiences, owners tend to have strong opinions, especially about products that have not performed well. Poor performance and failures tend to generate design standards that must be met for future construction projects.

 

Specifiers, whether independent or in-house, exert a great deal of influence on product specifications. Specifiers usually keep the corporate memory of what works and what does not. The specifications reflect the memory and the designers' selections. The mundane products, ignored by the designers, are relegated to the specifier.

 

Contractors and subcontractors buy the products. Forcing builders to buy outside their normal supply chain will exert pressure on the designers to review substitution requests. And when builders can show owners significant first cost savings, those pressures mount.

 

Manufacturers, Distributors, and Product Representatives can play a significant role in influencing product specifications for construction project. This group works with the designers during the early stages of the project showing potential product applications and offering advice on product selections. The same group also influences the builders' product selection process during bidding and construction, especially when delivery times become critical.

 

So there are many players with changing roles depending on where the project is in the design and construction process.

 

Read additional notes about the meeting and listen to the meeting recording at the CSI Blog.

CSI's specifying practice group discussed the concept of outline specs and came to the conclusion that traditional outline specs will be replaced. Most of the group members admitted they seldom produced or used outline specs. When they do write outline specs, most are not using traditional methods. Surprisingly, the overwhelming majority favored replacing outline specs with preliminary project descriptions. So what do you think? Leave a comment by signing in at the end of this posting.

 

So what do you think? Leave a comment by signing in at the end of this posting. Then join the group to receive notices of future meetings. It is FREE and it is not just for specifiers! Visit the CSI blog for more information on this and previous practice group discussions.

 

Here is the presentation that prompted the discussion. The rationale for the poll results follows. Scroll through the presentation using the arrow button below.

 

 

It is often difficult to produce outline specifications that are consistent. All design team members do not use outlines based on the same system and engineers prefer to use narratives rather than outlines to describe the building systems. Tom Gilmore of Torti Gallas and Partners, Inc. in Denver, CO, has solved this problem by creating a single spreadsheet with all the standard text for all disciplines. Each paragraph is a separate row. The text is selected for the particular project by using Excel's Auto Filter function and then the text is modified as needed.

 

Beware that your design contract may require outline specs as a Design Development deliverable. AIA B101 - Owner Architect Agreement §3.3.1 explicitly requires outline specs as one of the phase services. B101 does not define what constitutes an outline spec. So there may be some latitude for architects within the bounds of accepted practice.

 

The group explored several examples of outline specs. CSI's Project Resource Manual provides guidance on the format for producing the outlines and shows an example illustrating some of the concepts. Masterspec and SPECTEXT, two of the commercial spec systems available do not follow the same format of the PRM example. This has caused confusion about what form an outline spec should take.

 

Steve Lawrey of Vitetta in Philadelphia, PA reported that outline specs are normally throw-away documents. After they are produced, they are little used and the content must be recreated when the construction specifications are written. Creating information once and sharing the result should be the goal rather than duplicating efforts.

 

Two alternatives to traditional outline specifications were discussed: Multi-Purposed Specifications and Preliminary Project Descriptions (PPD). Multi-purposed specifications rely on using a single document to produce outline specifications and construction specifications. For outlines, most of the document text is hidden, showing only text that is relevant to the current design stage. As more information is developed, more of the specification text is revealed, until the final construction spec is issued.

 

Preliminary project descriptions offer an entirely different approach. Using UniFormat, the project description is arranged by system and assembly instead of the MasterFormat divisions and sections used for construction specifications. PPDs offer flexibility to describe multiple options for the same assembly and the ability to document the reason for selecting one of the options as the design solution. PPDs can be used throughout the entire design process to capture the result of the process. Then they can be used as a quality control checklist against the resulting construction documents.

 

The consensus was clear. The group favored PPDs as the preferred method to document projects during the early design stages. Clifford Marvin of KPB Architects in Anchorage, AK, a member of CSI's PPD Task Team pointed out that a PPD Guideline is in progress and wholeheartedly recommended PPDs in place of outline specs. Download the draft guideline from the CSI website.

Today CSI's Specifying Practice Group discussed "What Can You Expect of a Specifier?" As an independent specifier, I presented the specifier's point of view and then opened the meeting for other opinions. The group was not bashful, thankfully, otherwise, the meeting would have been only half the planned time. The interaction during the practice group discussions is enlightening. Learning what others think and the questions raised reminds me of a typical CSI chapter meeting, except the electronic media allows much greater and broader participation.

 

Here is the synopsis. Yes, specifiers write project manuals, perform technical research and advise on product selections. But there is more. Specifiers keep the technical corporate memory, comment on drawing details, coordinate drawings and specifications, and advise designers of dangers in owner front end documents, among other things. The group added their own thoughts about the specifier's role:

 

•           Read the designer's mind

•           Comment candidly on the drawings and specs

•           Interject reality into the design process

•           Offer ideas for project approaches

 

And my personal favorite: "Educate the design team." Everything we do as architects, engineers, builders, suppliers, owners and others involved in construction must attempt to educate the team in the process. Otherwise we will be compelled to reinvent what has already been shown to work or repeat what has already been shown to fail. Neither condition benefits the industry, nor the individual.

 

For the official notes of the meeting, visit the CSI Blog at http://blog.csinet.org.

 

Mark your calendar for the first Thursday of each month. Join the Discussion. This Group is not just for specifiers. Anyone with an interest is welcome to attend and participate. Register as part of the group at http://bit.ly/8ZdfJK. Once registered, you will receive notices of future meetings.

 

Here is the presentation that highlights the discussion and records the group's own ideas about the specifier's role. Scroll through using the arrow button below and share your comments here.

 

Today I had the honor of hosting the first meeting for CSI's Specifying Practice Group. Nearly 200 people have joined the group and over 70 participated in the first meeting. CSI staff commented that this is an excellent turnout. If you missed it, you may still join the group by registering at http://bit.ly/8ZdfJK. Once registered you will receive notices of future meetings.

 

The topic, MasterFormat™ 2004, drew the crowd because the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) announced that, effective January 1, 2010, the 1995 edition of the industry standard format would no longer be supported. By removing all support, CSI is encouraging the industry-wide adoption of the current standard - already celebrating its fifth birthday, so it is hardly new anymore.

 

CSI's MasterFormat Maintenance Task Team will be publishing the first of the future annual updates in February 2010. The update will include new section numbers and titles requested by users to ensure the document remains current with industry trends and general usage. Any interested party can submit requests for revisions or additions to MasterFormat by visiting http://masterformat.com.

 

The discussion during the group meeting was delightful. We heard success stories and difficulties with unyielding bureaucratic government agencies. Groups and individuals turned MasterFormat 2004 into an educational opportunity to improve relations with their consultants, clients, and other industry associations. We learned how one government agency Port of Portland lead the way in adopting and implementing MasterFormat 2004.

 

For notes of the first meeting, visit the CSI Blog at http://blog.csinet.org.

 

The first meeting is history, my butterflies are gone, my recalcitrant mouse will be replaced. So, mark your calendar, for the first Thursday of each month. Join the Discussion. I invite everyone to attend. This is not just for specifiers.

 

Here is the presentation that helped spur the discussion. Scroll through using the arrow button below and share your comments here.

 

CSI's Specifying Practice Group will hold its inaugural meeting January 7, 2010 at 3:00 PM eastern time. To attend the meetings, just join the group. The group is intended for those that read and write specifications and everyone affected by specifications. The range of topics will include:

 

• How technology influences content, production, and delivery
• Disasters and responses to practical experience
• Tools, techniques, and tips worth sharing
• Just what drives product selection, exactly
• Exponential marketplace advancements
• Learning to forget what no longer applies

 

While thinking about specific topics to bring to the group I shared some ideas with CSI staff. To be sure the ideas were on target with the goals of the group. The two ideas were of immediate interest: MasterFormat™ 2004 and the impact it has made; and a Photo Log to learn from built examples of the good, the bad, and the ugly. I intended the Photo Log to involve contribution by group member, so it is not really appropriate for the inaugural meeting. Initially we will explore MasterFormat's impact.

 

Here are some of the other ideas that may appear in the months ahead. I would like to know what your thoughts about these may be and what other topics you would like to suggest.

 

Outline Specs - Useful or Not: How are outline specs developed and used and are there alternatives?

 

Managing Design and Spec Data: What data are needed and how is the information best collected and communicated?

 

Implementing SectionFormat™ 2008: What is the impact and must it be universal?

Seismic Requirements - Beyond the Building Frame: What does the code affect besides the building frame?

 

Out with the Old; In with the New: What standard, code, product, or method has changed significantly?

 

How to get Spec'd - A Peek Behind the Architect's Curtain: What mysterious methods are used to specify products?

 

It May be Green, But is It Durable: How do you balance the choices?

What Can You Expect of a Specifier: Is it more than a technical spec or project manual?

 

And the Goal Is...Satisfy the Owner: What does it take for repeat business for the entire team?

 

Where are the Manufacturers: What happens after visiting the website, filling out the form and leaving a message?

 

That is a year's worth of topics, all subject to change, pending your opinions. So let me know what you think.

 

I hope to meet you on-line to share our thoughts and experiences and learn from each other to better the industry. If you haven't already, just join the group, and then, join the meeting.