Practice Management Member Conversations

I am a small office (2 architects) and need an inexpensive way to develop a good set of specs for medium size bid projects. Does anyone have a recommendation?

I am a long time (30+ years) specifier and have also been a long time user of MasterSpec.  I'm not as familiar with SpecLink, but I can say that I hear a lot of complaints about it from clients of mine.
 First of all, with your small office, Masterspec provides a site license, not a seat license.  So-- you can get one subscription for your entire office, plus install it on the laptop that you take home.  To rebut a couple of things I've read on this forum:
You can edit Masterspec sections and screen out the unwanted text, rather than just delete it.  This provides some of the same functionality that SpecLink brags about.  In addition, the Masterworks software will give you a full list of all submittals, and run editing checks to make sure you have finished editing the section.  I use the submittals software all the time for my clients -- and it helps me verify what I've specified.

Masterspec has, of course, a terrific resource in its accompanying documents -- each section has a supplementary document that helps with decision making, providing references, and resources for more information.  In addition, its the review process that makes Masterspec so valuable --  the AIA funds 6 committee members who meet quarterly to review all sections coming for renewal -- and those people are carefully selected to represent all regions of the country, plus various practice types.  I sat on the Review committee for 6 years and was able to get a perspective that I couldn't have gotten any other way -- and that multiple perspective is reflected in Masterspec.
It translates seamlessly to Word for additional editing, which I can say from experience that Speclink does not (yes, you convert to an RTF, and then use some macro and then fool around more because the specs dont format properly -- that's a pain).  And to those complaints that Masterspec is ""too long"" or "" too hard"" -- you can get the short form sections.
I have two clients who base their specs on SpecLink and I find those sections to be really lacking in quality
control informaiton, and are rather naive in their content. 

Specification writing is not simply a matter of just picking out the sections from some box on your shelf and putting them in a notebook.  The software will not do the coordination for you, and you have to have some knowledge about the products and systems you are putting in your project.  As for the update issues: many of us deal with that on a regular basis and its just not that hard.  I would beware of any one who claims that specs can be ""automatic"  becasue of their software -- specification writing is an architectural discipline and you do get better at if if you do it more.  However, I think you will find that the Masterspec language has been more thoroughly vetted and has borne up under thousands of projects.
-------------------------------------------
Anne Whitacre
Principal
Whitacre Ink
Seattle WA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 09-09-2010 07:06
From: Jeffrey Horton
Subject: Spec Software

I am a small office (2 architects) and need an inexpensive way to develop a good set of specs for medium size bid projects. Does anyone have a recommendation?

-------------------------------------------
Jeffrey Horton AIA
Vice President
Herron Horton Architects, Inc.
Little Rock AR
-------------------------------------------

We have recently transferred to MasterSpec from a custom master system.  The MS versions of our previous sections are 2-3 times longer.  I understand that MS has to address more conditions, but I think that a great deal of the length is due to needless repetition.  For example, why does the same edit note need to appear over every list of products/manufacturers?  I counted almost 40 times in one section.  A lot of the MS length results from Arcom wanting to be thorough, more to protect Arcom than to communicate effectively.  The impression is that Arcom writers never work under real project conditions.  And for non-specifiers who don't have the benefit of close familiarity with the text, slogging through the text is bewildering; doing it with a deadline imminent is mind-wrecking.  Customizing the text for office masters would be a good solution if Arcom would show where the text has been changed; I am amazed and confounded that they do not provide this service to their subscribers.  Masterworks could be a great tool, but it's not supported adequately.  We have been dealing with a bug that hides section text when the edit notes are displayed for well over a year.  And it could have better features built in, like shortcut keys:  Why should I keep having to transfer from mouse to keyboard?  But Arcom can always claim that Masterworks is free, so deal with it.  I would be willing to pay extra for MasterWorks that had fewer bugs and more features rather than pay for e-Specs, my complaints of which I will not go into. 

So, to summarize MasterSpec:  Great research tool; text is unnecessarily wordy and redundant; sections are too inclusive--should be split into smaller sections for faster editing; Masterworks is flawed and poorly supported.

I expect that this will generate a response from happy MS users, who must be full-time specifiers and have developed work-arounds and familiarity with the technical issues, MS contents ,and the Arcom tools, and so can be very productive.  In our situation, we like to have the project staff edit the specs, and MS makes this unnecessarily difficult and time consuming.

-------------------------------------------
Tony Wolf AIA
SmithGroup
Detroit MI
-------------------------------------------

I am in agreement with Anne's viewpoint on Masterspec. We are also a small firm of two architects and support staff. We recently bought masterspec to 'spec' for two $6M projects and to use on future projects.  I had used masterspec extensively before. The initial pass at editing each new section was tedious- 1 to 6 hours, however, the second project took much less time.   Masterspec gives you the benefit of including 95% to 100% of the information for each section and you have to determine which part to remove or modifiy.  The support information available for each section through Masterspec will help you get to  a finish spec on almost all of the sections. You will have to add some information and add some manufacturers for regional and local products such as paint. They have split up a few sections such as interior and exterior paint and have split up gypsum board assemblies. I choose to use a paint spec that I have kept current over the years which includes 'regional' paints that I have used successfully.  I have heard of speclink and know users but I have not heard of 'rave die hard fans' it is ' I use speclink, like it, BUT....   Masterspec has a spec system for small projects that might be more beneficial to a small practice but you will give up access to some not so common sections.  We choose the full version for detention specs and for items such a terraso floor.  Happy specing!  
-------------------------------------------
Todd McNall AIA
Senior Architect
Design Dynamics, Inc.
Cedar Rapids IA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 09-09-2010 11:39
From: Anne Whitacre
Subject: Spec Software

I am a long time (30+ years) specifier and have also been a long time user of MasterSpec.  I'm not as familiar with SpecLink, but I can say that I hear a lot of complaints about it from clients of mine.
 First of all, with your small office, Masterspec provides a site license, not a seat license.  So-- you can get one subscription for your entire office, plus install it on the laptop that you take home.  To rebut a couple of things I've read on this forum:
You can edit Masterspec sections and screen out the unwanted text, rather than just delete it.  This provides some of the same functionality that SpecLink brags about.  In addition, the Masterworks software will give you a full list of all submittals, and run editing checks to make sure you have finished editing the section.  I use the submittals software all the time for my clients -- and it helps me verify what I've specified.

Masterspec has, of course, a terrific resource in its accompanying documents -- each section has a supplementary document that helps with decision making, providing references, and resources for more information.  In addition, its the review process that makes Masterspec so valuable --  the AIA funds 6 committee members who meet quarterly to review all sections coming for renewal -- and those people are carefully selected to represent all regions of the country, plus various practice types.  I sat on the Review committee for 6 years and was able to get a perspective that I couldn't have gotten any other way -- and that multiple perspective is reflected in Masterspec.
It translates seamlessly to Word for additional editing, which I can say from experience that Speclink does not (yes, you convert to an RTF, and then use some macro and then fool around more because the specs dont format properly -- that's a pain).  And to those complaints that Masterspec is ""too long"" or "" too hard"" -- you can get the short form sections.
I have two clients who base their specs on SpecLink and I find those sections to be really lacking in quality
control informaiton, and are rather naive in their content. 

Specification writing is not simply a matter of just picking out the sections from some box on your shelf and putting them in a notebook.  The software will not do the coordination for you, and you have to have some knowledge about the products and systems you are putting in your project.  As for the update issues: many of us deal with that on a regular basis and its just not that hard.  I would beware of any one who claims that specs can be ""automatic"  becasue of their software -- specification writing is an architectural discipline and you do get better at if if you do it more.  However, I think you will find that the Masterspec language has been more thoroughly vetted and has borne up under thousands of projects.
-------------------------------------------
Anne Whitacre
Principal
Whitacre Ink
Seattle WA
-------------------------------------------

Anne, I respect the amount of research and experience represented by MS.  But I find myself chuckling when I read specs like this:

1. Do not apply paints in snow, rain, fog, or mist; when relative humidity exceeds 85 percent; at temperatures less than 5 deg F (3 deg C) above the dew point; or to damp or wet surfaces.

 

I wonder why sleet, hail, hurricane and other forms of wet weather didn't make the list.  Even if the writer received review committee comments to add "snow, rain, fog or mist," s/he didn't have to include them, did s/he?

 

I have seen older architects add specs and general notes to drawings, and they consist mostly of scar tissue.  S/He got burned once on an issue, so it wasn't going to happen again.  The more unnecessary words used, the less effective the communication.  MS text has the A/E take on much more responsibility than I'm comfortable with.

 

Many times there are provisions that are worded only slightly differently that appear in 2 or all 3 Parts.  I think this redundancy is a result of approaching the SectionFormat too scrupulously.  My mentor used to say that "the headings sucked text," or in other words, just because there's a heading, don't feel compelled to write something.  But I can see where a group of specifiers would include some hair-splitters that insist that the text complies with the letter of SectionFormat, to a fault.  Anyway, the redundancy confuses editors and reduces the effectiveness of the communication, and increases the likelihood of error.

 

I do understand why the edit notes are repeated.  It's an extension of the attitude that provides handholding to the contractor and excess liability to the A/E:  "The contractor might ignore all the instances where he's told to coordinate with other contractors, so we should tell him again here."  On the other hand, however, there are thousands of technical selections that the user has to make, and quite often there is no guidance whatsoever.  Is the architect [who won't read the product selection warning] going to consult the Evaluation for guidance?

 

Actually, I would forgive MS for a lot, and I would simply make office masters, if only Arcom showed what they changed on updates.  I think it's unconscionable for them not to.  Can you tell me why they don't?  When I asked Matt[?] Sutton about this, it was like an entirely new concept, and I know it can't be.

 

Thank you for the explanation.  I know MS is the result of much good effort.  Another review committee member described it once to me.  My comments are not from the point of view of what goes into MS, but from the user of the resulting product.

 

-------------------------------------------
Tony Wolf AIA
SmithGroup
Detroit MI
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 09-10-2010 13:24
From: Todd McNall
Subject: Spec Software


I am in agreement with Anne's viewpoint on Masterspec. We are also a small firm of two architects and support staff. We recently bought masterspec to 'spec' for two $6M projects and to use on future projects.  I had used masterspec extensively before. The initial pass at editing each new section was tedious- 1 to 6 hours, however, the second project took much less time.   Masterspec gives you the benefit of including 95% to 100% of the information for each section and you have to determine which part to remove or modifiy.  The support information available for each section through Masterspec will help you get to  a finish spec on almost all of the sections. You will have to add some information and add some manufacturers for regional and local products such as paint. They have split up a few sections such as interior and exterior paint and have split up gypsum board assemblies. I choose to use a paint spec that I have kept current over the years which includes 'regional' paints that I have used successfully.  I have heard of speclink and know users but I have not heard of 'rave die hard fans' it is ' I use speclink, like it, BUT....   Masterspec has a spec system for small projects that might be more beneficial to a small practice but you will give up access to some not so common sections.  We choose the full version for detention specs and for items such a terraso floor.  Happy specing!  
-------------------------------------------
Todd McNall AIA
Senior Architect
Design Dynamics, Inc.
Cedar Rapids IA
-------------------------------------------