SPECKS?

In architecture, engineering, and construction, “spec” is a slangy, informal word that is completely understandable in spoken language, but sometimes muddles meaning when used in business writing.

In a construction project context such as a meeting or a phone call, it’s easily understood when you say “I’ll spec a coiling steel door”, or “Include an allowance for face brick in the spec”.

In the first case, it’s clear that spec means specify.  In the second case, it’s clear that spec means specifications.

But things get clumsy when you try to use “spec”, and variations of it, in writing.

When you write “specs” in a sentence,  the reader may have to pause to figure out whether the intended meaning is “specifies” or the plural of “specifications”.

And it gets even odder with the use of past tense. Instead of saying “specified” writers will sometimes resort to “specd”, “spec’d”, “speced”, or funniest of all “specked.”  In each case, the reader has to pause to figure out what the writer means.

Do yourself and your readers a favor: In written communication, use the full words “specify” and “specifications.”

PHOTOGRAPHS OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION ARE ESSENTIAL WHEN DESIGNING AND SPECIFYING RENOVATION PROJECTS

Studying photographs of what’s existing helps me as a spec writer to be a proactive member of the design team, especially if the directive from the owner is to “match existing”.

Many owners of existing buildings do not have drawings or specifications for their buildings. Even if  drawings or specs of the existing construction do exist, undocumented changes may have been made during the construction process.  Many more changes may have taken place over the years as owners added, deleted or modified systems, and performed routine maintenance and replacement of building components.

That’s why it’s important to take plenty of photographs when surveying an existing building for a renovation or addition project.  You’ll want to provide a wealth of information to the design team - especially the spec writer -  so the construction documents can be done correctly, and within available fee dollars.

Many projects these days are designed and specified on a compressed time schedule. This often means that specification production must be produced simultaneously with drawing production.  When writing specs, I don’t have the luxury of waiting until all the details are drawn and the door schedule and room finish schedule are completed before starting the specs.

I have to start specs while drawings are in progress.  I have to wing it, sometimes using a healthy dash of clairvoyance.   A thorough photographic survey can help me do my job better.

Here are just a few examples of how information gleaned from photos helped me to get the specs right on recent projects.  Photos:

• Helped establish the profile of existing metal industrial siding.
• Showed that a pair of doors to a conference room swung out of the room, rather than in - as depicted in original drawings (hardware implications).
• Showed that floor finish was terrazzo, and without a flash cove base.
• Showed that existing CMU was laid in stack bond rather than in running bond.
• Showed that door hardware finish was satin chrome or stainless steel on exterior doors, and satin bronze on interior wood doors.
• Showed that painted piping in a mechanical room was color coded, not painted the color of the room’s walls.
• Showed that an overhead door was a coiling door rather than a sectional door as depicted in original drawings.
• Showed that an automatic door operator was pneumatic, showed the manufacturer's name and model number, and showed that the actuating device was a pull cord.
• Showed what was painted, and what was not painted, in an industrial space.

Some advice for maximizing the usefulness of photographic surveys to the project design team:

• Take only digital photos, and file them with other project reference information on your server.
• Take multiple, overlapping, photos of each exterior elevation, and from multiple vantage points. Taking another shot from a few feet to the right for example, may reveal a louver, a downspout, a sign, or something else, which was hidden by a tree in the previous view.
• When photographing existing roofs, document more than just the areas that look to be problems. Take several overall views.  Then take closeup photographs of every different parapet and edge condition, and every object penetrating the roof.
• Take multiple, overlapping photos in each room.  
• Don’t just look straight ahead.  Look up to photograph the ceilings and soffits.  Look down to photograph flooring and bases.
• If your camera’s flash is too wimpy to illuminate a big or dark space, use a tripod or monopod to steady the camera so the auto settings don’t cause long shutter openings resulting in blurred, useless, images.
• When photographing interior spaces, indicate the location of the photo.  Sometimes it’s obvious where the image was taken. Sometimes it’s not. If you don’t rename each photo, try preceding the photos in a room with a photo of the floor plan of that room.
• When taking closeup shots, put an object into the view to establish scale.  Include a pen, a scale, a dollar bill, a quarter, or even your own hand.

Take lots of photos, because that’s much less costly than returning to the site for another field visit.  Your project design team, including your spec writer, will appreciate it

SPEC PROCESS

Preparing class materials for my spring 2012 semester portion of “Codes, Contracts, and Specifications” this weekend, I found myself comparing the old CSI Project Resource Manual to the new Project Delivery Practice Guide.  


In the Project Resource Manual, the product selection process, and by implication the spec writing process, is portrayed in a very neat, orderly, structured, idealized, one-step-follows-the-next, flow-chart-y way.


It would be nice, but a little boring, if the process actually unfolded this way much of the time for me.


Instead, construction document production is usually on such a tight schedule that drawings and specs have to proceed simultaneously, so the spec writing process is anything but a straight line affair. 


In order to edit even some of the simpler spec sections, it’s often necessary to look multiple times at constantly evolving in-progress drawings on the server, ask various members of the project design team lots of detailed questions, wait for answers, and draw inferences when drawings aren’t explicit or when product or design decisions don’t seem to be imminent.  Often it's necessary to go back and delete or add sections when the design takes an unforeseen direction. 


If anything, the trajectory of the process I’ve become accustomed to is less like a flow chart and more like the way a restless canine explores his territory.  


Like my Sheltie, Ollie, in the snow in my back yard this morning.

WHY NOT BE A SPEC WRITER?

Young architects and engineers:  Are you wondering how you can carve out a satisfying career niche in the AE business?


Are you looking for something unusual that increases the likelihood that your services will be in demand in this turbulent economy?


Why not consider becoming a spec writer? Spec writing is a niche job that very few architects and engineers seem to want to do even occasionally, let alone full time. Why?  Beats me.  I think I’ve got the best, most interesting job in the office.
I’m not suggesting you become your father’s spec writer. Not the irascible old guy with all the red pencils and the six-inch scale in his shirt pocket who talks to himself. 

I suggest that you aspire to something more along the lines of a knowledge manager, as the concept is explained by Robert S. Weygant in his new book BIM Content Development - Standards, Strategies, and Best Practices. A couple of passages from Mr. Weygant’s book, which I recommend highly (emphasis in italics is by me):

“Knowledge management is the supply, maintenance and delivery of graphical and topical information related to a project. With the advent of building information modeling (BIM), there has been a considerable increase in the amount of information and collaboration during the design of the project. Because so much information is being passed between so many different parties, a single responsible party or team should be assigned to manage this information to ensure consistency between the plans, specifications, model, and other supporting documents.”


“As construction documents are created and the project manual is assembled, the knowledge manager can organize information based on its specification section and export the information from the model for use by the specifier. In many cases, the specifier is the individual who makes decisions regarding the performance attributes of certain components. Cases such as this lead me to believe that a seasoned specifier may be the most appropriate individual to take on the role of knowledge management. A seasoned specifier is not an individual who simply understands how to edit a form document, but one who understands the differences between products based on their performance values, when to use certain components, and the appropriate methods for documenting them.”

Why spec writing is already interesting and will get even better:

• Spec writing is entertaining. As a full-time spec writer, I get to work on many of the projects in our office. The pace of the work and constant deadlines pretty much preclude boredom, and the wide range of project types and sizes in our office mean I have to be constantly researching and learning.
• The job is way more than just editing master specs. Spec writers help to express the owner’s business objectives in the bidding and construction process.  Owner’s complicated business needs and objectives mean lots of custom writing of bidding requirements, bid forms, and General Requirements.  
• Ditto for projects using Integrated Project Delivery (IPD).
• BIM/spec linkage will require parts of spec production  to switch from  word processing to a relational database approach - another opportunity to add to your specifier’s skill set.

How to get started in spec writing/knowledge management:

• Commit to being a lifelong learner; stay informed and relevant because change is constant and inevitable.
• Find a mentor, or maybe a few mentors.  Find someone who knows construction detailing. Find someone who knows the bidding process.  Find someone who knows a lot about construction contract administration.  Listen.  Learn.  Repeat.
• Hook up with a CSI Chapter somewhere.  Listen, learn, volunteer.  You’ll learn a lot about the business and will meet people that will eagerly help you.
• Take the CSI Construction Documents Technologist (CDT) certification exam as soon as you can.  Professional credentials really matter in this business, not to mention the fact that you’ll learn a lot in the process of studying for the exam.  After you pass the CDT, take the Certified Construction Specifier (CCS) and/or Certified Construction Contract Administrator (CCCA) exams.
• Read everything you can find about BIM-linked specs, because that’s the future of the profession.
• Tune in to CSI’s free BIM Practice Group, and Specifying Practice Group, monthly webinars, and every other BIM/spec forum you can find.
• Set up Google Alerts and RSS feeds for BIM and specs to ensure a steady flow of up-to-date information.
• Find and follow every BIM and spec-related Twitter account. Watch the dialog for a while and then join in.
• Become the BIM go-to person in your firm.
• Read Robert S. Weygant’s book BIM Content Development - Standards, Strategies, and Best Practices.
• Read Randy Deutsch’s new book BIM and Integrated Design - Strategies for Architectural Practice.  I’m reading it now.
• Jump on the first opportunity you see to work with BIM-linked specs.  Few others will want to follow, and you’ll soon become the go-to person.
• And if you get lucky, you’ll probably be rewarded with a spec writer/knowledge manager role. 
• Put it all together and you'll be a very sought-after professional.

EYEWASH? BOILERPLATE?

I don’t think I’m especially thin-skinned about my work as a spec writer.

Point out something you want changed in one of my specs and I’ll probably change it, after making sure it’s an informed decision. After all, spec writing is a collaborative profession, integral to the production of contract documents, and I like being part of a smoothly functioning, respectful, team.

Point out an error in one of my specs and I’ll thank you for telling me. Then I’ll promptly make the correction.

Ditto for alerting me to a contradiction between one of my specs and the accompanying drawings. It’s common for production of drawings and specs to proceed simultaneously, and for differences in nomenclature between drawings and specs to be discovered during onboard and final reviews of the construction documents. So I expect to constantly make adjustments to specs in progress.

But I am very thin-skinned about a couple of words and the attitudes they reveal. The two words are “eyewash” and “boilerplate.”  

Eyewash, definition from The Random House Dictionary of the English Language:  “...nonsense, bunk.”.

Boilerplate, from Wikipedia:  “...those parts of a contract that are considered ‘standard language’.”  Even though many provisions in the contract conditions and in the specs may be standard, that doesn’t mean they’re not meant to be part of the contract’s requirements.

A speaker using either of these words seems to me to regard the specs as inapplicable, or only partially applicable, to his role in the current project, and by using them may be signalling his intention to follow the specs selectively, as he chooses.

These words also convey the speaker’s disdain for the size and complexity of the specs.  As I said in my blog post Why is the Project Manual So Big, “...the minute that any of the actors in a construction project need support for a position they’re taking, where do they look?  The spec. If the spec has information that settles the issue, everything’s fine. But if the answer can’t be found in the spec, the spec writer puts on his or her thinking cap and wordsmiths something to make the documents better on the next project.  That’s why the spec book is so big.  We spec writers get a lot of feedback.  And we’re driven by the need to strive for a loophole-proof set of construction documents. The inevitable result of such feedback is more words and more pages in the Project Manual.”

Remember those hilarious Pink Panther movies, in which the antics and incompetence of Parisian police Inspector Jacques Clousseau elicited facial tics, and worse, in Clousseau’s boss, Chief Inspector Charles Dreyfus? Here’s a YouTube collection of scenes of the great actor Herbert Lom playing Inspector Dreyfus.

Calling specs “eyewash” or “boilerplate” will have a similar effect on me, and I suspect, other spec writers.

You wouldn’t want to be responsible for that, would you?

CONVERGENCE

At CONSTRUCT 2011, CSI’s Joy Davis opined that social media are converging. That’s not all the convergence that’s going on.

Convergence of TV and Internet:  Google TV and Apple TV will soon turn TV and the Internet into one experience.

●      Old way with separate media, and separate apparatus.

●      Future, with access to both TV and Internet through TV sets. Apple and Google have both been working on this for years now, and it’s just a matter of time until one or both of them finds the right way to make it a hit with consumers.

Convergence of Spec Writing, Word Processing, and File Management:   This has already happened.  These tasks used to be performed by separate people. Now spec writers need all three abilities in their skill set.

●      Old way, with spec writers doing the editorial work via hard copy markups, secretaries doing keyboarding and managing files.

●      Current way, with spec writers responsible not only for editorial and technical content of specs, but also for  word processing production and file management. For me, file management has been particularly challenging, what with multiple reviews, multiple bid packages, addenda, and issued-for-construction sets.  In addition, most of us now are responsible for turning spec word processing documents into bookmarked combined PDFs for distribution on CDs and/or the Internet.

●      Future:  See below.

Convergence of Specs and Drawings:  Specs and drawings will eventually converge into the BIM model.  Since I haven’t yet had a chance to work on BIM-linked specs, I don’t have a clear picture of what’s possible or practical.  I’ve got a lot to learn about here.

●      Old way: Separate people produced drawings and specs, using separate production tools and separate production tracks. Users (builders, and then owners) have to refer to sets of drawings and volumes of project manuals to learn about the buildings they build and own.

●      Present and near term future: Software interoperability used mainly (I think.  Please correct me if I’m wrong) as a coordination aid in producing specs and drawings.  Linking software (at least BSD’s Linkman-e) isn’t part of the deliverable construction documents.  It doesn’t appear that there’s an industry consensus yet about how much specification data really belongs in the model. 

●      Future:  Hard to say exactly how it will work out, but as a minimum, graphic files and data files will be linked for ease of use by builders in building, and later to aid owners in managing the buildings.

And if that’s not enough convergence for you, check out futurist Ray Kurzweil’s fascinating website Accelerating Intelligence and his book The Singularity is Near, in which he posits (I think) the eventual merging of humans and machines.

Hang on. Everybody in the AEC business is in for a wild ride the next few years.  We will NOT be bored!

FROM PUNCH CARDS TO BIM, ALMOST

Recently I’ve tuned in to several of CSI’s excellent BIM Practice Group webinars.  Last Friday’s session, which featured two experts from Autodesk explaining their Autodesk Seek product/service, got me to thinking about how much construction document production has changed during my time as a spec writer. And about how much more it’s destined to change in the next few years.

Contrast BIM’s intriguing interoperability with the way specs were prepared at the time of my first job as a spec writer.

Bill Lohmann, one of the finest people I’ve ever known, gave me the opportunity to work as a spec writer in his department at C. F. Murphy Associates in Chicago in early 1973. 

All the major AE firms had begun using some sort of word processing by then, and the routine at CFMA was a multi-step process consisting of the following:

• Spec writers marked up hard copy of firm master specs.  There were three of us at the time, Bill Lohmann, Paul Tiffin, and yours truly.
• Word processing was performed by three secretaries using key punch machines.
• After they punched the cards, two secretaries proofread the cards, out loud.
• They then took them to the firm’s mainframe computer on another floor in the building.  Hours or days later, the draft printouts were ready.  Since the spec drafts were printed on continuous form paper, they had to go through a burster, a loud machine that pulled apart continuous form paper at the perforations into 8-1/2 by 11 pages.
• The burster was prone to jams which tore or wrinkled the paper, prompting consternation, muttered expletives, and usually reprinting.
• Secretaries proofed the hard copy against the punch cards before it was released to the spec writers.

Seems almost comically redundant to our 2011 sensibilities, right?  It was more or less state-of-the-art at the time, though.

I haven’t yet had an opportunity to use any of the BIM-enabled specification systems, but I can’t wait to get started.  BIM’s potential for better, faster construction document production seems fabulous to me. I don’t have a clue about the details of construction document workflow in a BIM-enabled spec system, but I’m trying to absorb as much about BIM-specs as I can until I get a chance to work with it. 

Some in the specorati have expressed concern that linking BIM and specs will make spec writers obsolete, primarily because some of the specification system marketing claims will probably leave naïve AE executives with that impression.  I don’t think spec writers will disappear any time soon, though, and here’s why:

• Most architects using BIM will still need assistance with specification/product matters.  I know some extremely able and productive architects, but it’s too much to expect that they can deal with what’s already on their overflowing plates, and be responsible for all of the embedded spec choices in the model.
• Architects are fascinating, creative, resourceful problem solvers, but most of them are much less comfortable with words, writing, than they are with graphic means of expression, drawing.  This often manifests itself in their avoidance of reading text, seemingly on the ground that if something is typed neatly, it must be correct. Somebody has to be responsible for the fine print in the model and how it meshes with specs, and I think spec writers will claim a considerable share of that work.

In ten years (or maybe sooner) when BIM-enabled specs have become commonplace, my MS Word spec processing routine will probably look as primitive to us as the punch card system of the 1970s looks now.

SCARLETT O’HARA, MY WRITING COACH

“I can't think about that right now. If I do, I'll go crazy. I'll think about that tomorrow.”  - Scarlett O’Hara, the indomitable but flawed heroine of “Gone With the Wind”, Margaret Mitchell’s 1936 historical novel of the old South.

Writers’ block does not just afflict creative writers.  It hits technical writers like yours truly, too.

When I get (spec) writers block, it’s not that I can’t write, really.  I don’t do much real writing anyway.  I mostly edit, and tweak, and modify language from master specs, and attempt to coordinate with project drawings.  No, my writers’ block takes the form of difficulty in getting an angle, of figuring out the overall strategy of the documents. 

CSI’s platitudes about making specs “clear, complete, concise and correct” are only indirect guidance when I’m trying to produce construction specifications for unusual projects (of which we seem to have quite a few). The specs may have to accompany drawings that are still in progress, making final terminology coordination difficult.  It may be tough to get the client’s attention, even though that’s vital to understanding his or her objectives.  There may be little or no documentation of project decisions and other needed data.  Key AE decision makers may be unavailable or have extremely limited time to give me the lowdown on the project.  All the while, project deadlines loom.

The biggest challenge is always to make the documents change-order proof and loophole proof, and that’s where the strategy, the angle, the AE business creativity if you will, comes in.

As a spec writer, I have come to take Scarlett O’Hara’s coping strategy - I'll think about that tomorrow - as my guide.   Whenever I’m stumped by a spec writing project, I put the project out of my mind, go home, and get a good nights’ sleep.  For years I thought I was just procrastinating, but now I realize I was on to something.

The next morning, usually when I’m tying my shoes of all things, an answer often comes to me.  I may think of someone from whom I can get good advice.  I may realize the current project is analogous to another from the past.  I may think of some way to coordinate better with the project architect even though he’s still detailing the project.  I may figure out a way to set aside other projects for a while so I can concentrate better on the current one.  The answer can take many forms.

Thanks for the advice, Scarlett.

NO, NO, NO!

On TV recently, I saw a short video clip of the late Senator Ted Stevens’ famous “NO” speech  It reminded me that sometimes architects have to say no to contractors. 

I know this is going to sound as though I’m biased against contractors, but I’m really not.  I cheerfully acknowledge that 99 and 44/100 percent of the time, construction contractors do the right thing.  Sometimes even when it’s not what I specify.

Still, sometimes we just have to say no.

So, taking my cue from another famous naysayer, Amy Winehouse, I have composed this little ditty. 

Sing to the tune of Amy Winehouse’s great rendition of “Rehab” (Subtitled “They wanted me to go to rehab, but I said no, no, no”).  See one of many versions of this song here.

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

Yes the spec is right and when I fight you’ll know, know, know

I ain’t got the time and the Owner thinks I’m fine

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

            I’d rather be at work on the next job

            I ain’t got any fee left

            I have to listen to you bidders sob

            That my spec ain’t deft

            Don’t you bury me in RFI’s

            Just trying to get a rise

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

Yes the spec is right and when I fight you’ll know, know, know

I ain’t got the time and the Owner thinks I’m fine

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

            How many more substitutions

            Are you gonna ask for?

            I specified eleven paints

And you want me to approve one more?

           

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

Yes the spec is right and when I fight you’ll know, know, know

I ain’t got the time and the Owner thinks I’m fine

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

            You’re billing 70 percent of the drywall

            But the studs aren’t even up.

            You forget some waivers of lien

            Still you want us to pay up

            It’s not just the money

            Retainage ain’t funny

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

Yes the spec is right and when I fight you’ll know, know, know

I ain’t got the time and the Owner thinks I’m fine

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

           

            The specs and drawings ain’t contradictory

Or full of conditions unforeseen

            Documents are complimentary

            Better than they’ve ever been

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’

Yes the spec is right and when I fight you’ll know, know, know

I ain’t got the time and the Owner thinks I’m fine

You tried to make me say OK, but I said ‘no, no, no’