Thanks to all who have taken the time to post. I have enjoyed reading your responses and would like to summarize what I have learned to date in my own words:
With regards to Architects preparing their own specifications.
-
There are 2 fundamental and distinct tasks necessary for the preparation of specifications: what Ill grossly simplify into two terms (which we can all argue about later): the content task on one hand and the preparation task on the other.
-
Of the 3 sensory channels used in filtering and communicating information (auditory, kinesthetic and visual) there is a split (either real or perceived) between those with a natural predilection for the visual (graphically-oriented) and those with a natural predilection for the auditory (verbally-oriented).
-
By and large, Architects historically consider themselves visual; the mechanics of preparing written specifications is a primarily auditory (verbal) task and therefor seen as less desirable by a more visually-oriented person.
-
Based on her first-had knowledge of project requirements (regulatory requirements, functional requirements, performance requirements, sustainability requirements, aesthetic requirements, constructability requirements budget requirements, etc.) the Project Architect is in the best position to perform the task of providing content.
-
Based on her training in the forms and formats of specifications, her specialized writing skill and experience (knowledge of manufacturers, code requirements, industry standards, installation requirements, product characteristics, maintenance characteristics and in some cases cost information, etc.) the Specifier is in the best position to perform the task of preparing specs based on content provided.
-
The weakness of the specifier in the role of preparing specifications is that she may not be intimately involved in the decision making process. The weakness of the Architect in the role of preparing specifications is a lack of time and the specialized skill necessary to produce specifications.
-
The role of the specifier is to assist the architect in externalizing and recording the decision-making process through the life of the project; the role of the architect is to assist the specifier by communicating adequate project goals, and by providing adequate information and adequate time for the specifier to ply their trade.
-
My conclusion? As a specifier I shouldn’t be insular or territorial. I cannot afford to be. My proper role is that of coach: persuade the Architects to get off the “design reservation” and engage the full spectrum of the design and documentation process by encouraging them to maximize their involvement in preparing their own specifications. Not all will do so of course, and each will have their own level of ability to participate, but I should help train and mold the skills of those who do show aptitude or interest and in doing so I am participating in perpetuating the knowledge of our craft to the next generation.
With regards to the trends in technology and their effect on how we as specifiers do our job
- The limitation of technology is that is favors the preparation task over the content task. No amount of automation can replace the instantaneous judgment exercised by someone with many years of experience.
2.Understanding this limitation, I believe technology should focus on the following 4 areas:
a. Short-term information transfer Methods for specifiers to share information in a way that architects understand; ways architects can communicate first-hand knowledge of the project in ways specifiers understand.
b. Repetition For architects participating in the process of preparing specifications, automation needs to take place in a way that preserves some level of the repetitive task of doing. Repetition is the key for learning: for example, a specifier sees more projects go across his desk in a year than most architects see in 10 years. This is why the average specifier has an experience separate and unique from the average architect.
c. Edification Lessons learned need to be integrated into the structure of automation so that knowledge can be transferred over time during the routine course of doing business.
d. Long-term information transfer If we as specifiers can utilize those architects who are willing and able to participate in our process, we should then utilize technology to leverage our experience and add value in other areas over the life of the project.
The roles of both the architect and specifier in any office are changing; I for one am excited about the possibilities and engage my work remembering the words of Mark Twain:
Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions, small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you too, can become great.
Thanks again to all for you time.
AW