Which one of these sentences is preferred?
“Install per manufacturer’s instructions”
or
“Install in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions”
or are they the same?
I believe they mean the same thing. The following is directly from my American Heritage dictionary (impertinent definitions deleted):
per (pr) prep. Abbr. p. Usage Problem. According to; by: Changes were made to the manuscript per the author’s instructions.
USAGE NOTE: Per is used in its more general use to mean according to (as in per the terms of the contract), it is best reserved for business and legal communications, unless the writer seeks a tone of jocular formality.
How about simply “Installation: Follow manufacturer’s instructions.”
On a similar note: does anyone perceive a difference between “in accord with” and “in accordance with”? I try to use the shorter version. Of course, “per” is even shorter.
“Per” comes from Latin, and means “through”. And according to a scholar I know, it adds intensity to the meaning of a sentence such as “We do research following Einstein’s ideas”, or more positively “We do research per Einstein’s ideas”. So it can be used in the sense of “as per the terms of the contract”. I have been saying “in accordance with”, but maybe it’s more powerful to say “per”.
I used to use “in accordance with” a lot. Too wordy, but I never liked “per.” I like a “according to.”
I also avoid “per” and other Latin-sounding phrasing. If we have to check the dictionary for a meaning, that should be a clue that the end users of the specifications (superintendent, installing foreman, etc.) might not be familiar with the term.
The shortest word or phrase is not necessarily the most clear or concise. I always try to keep the reader in mind – simple, direct language like “according to” and “comply with” work well.
I’m with Peter on this one.
Direction to the contractor is implied so we get to delete the “The Contractor shall…” from many sentences. Per, or according to or any of the others (I believe) can be eliminated from the document in many locations.
I must admit that “in accordance with” is a common phrase in most of the “commercial” masters, including the ones I use.
I do have several locations where I have simply stated the property, the standard, and the value.
Tear strength: ASTM D 751; 100 lbf min.
Are the rest of the words implied? Is there anything vague about that string of words?
Or as they say in Pig Latin:
ifelay isway oftenway away iocechay etweenbay away ommacay
andway away oloncay
emisay orway ullfay akemay uresay otay eckchay ouryay olonscay
evernay useway igpay atinlay inway ouryay ecificationsspay,
I personally like sliced per in a salad with lettuce, nuts, and a light vinaigrette.
Usage should be reasonably consistent with the rest of the Project Manual.
Depending on the specific project, I may use a more abbreviated form to produce a shorter [smaller] final volume. If one is reasonably consistent in practice, it should be more enforceable if there is ever an issue with the wording.
What if the manufacturer’s instructions allow them to do something that the spec intentionally tells them not to do? I prefer “in accordance with”. Per seems to indicate a more literal interpretation which could result in conflicts, while “in accordance with” means, at least to me, do it in harmony with or in agreement with what they are also telling you to do.
The rule of “the specific controls the general” would apply in making that call should a conflict arise, and I suspect the specification being the more customized form would trump the mfr’s lit. (Except if the specification was technically unsound).
The end result would probably be the same whether you used “per” or something similar.
Meaning: I do think they mean essentially the same thing.
Choice: Neither. I like “Install according to manufacturer’s written instructions,” on the theory that simpler is better but that “per” is jargon. (I guess this means I agree with Jeffrey.)
Caveat: What Chris Grimm points out is true, the manufacturer’s instructions might conflict with mine. For products I’m not familiar with, I make a point of reading the manufacturer’s literature and citing it only if it’s both clear and useful. The advantage of this approach is that I can then say something like “Install according to manufacturer’s written instructions for the Floating Floor method, except provide edge trim as indicated in Drawings.” This way, I can be more specific and point out and resolve any conflict.