Is That All There Is? part 2

if you aren't involved in a specifiers' group, don't wait for Institute to tell you what to do - call another specifier!

part 1

part 2

Specifications were the focus of CSI when it was formed fifty years ago, and they remain the most important part of CSI activities today. As noted in a previous column, most CSI activities are related to specifications. But, as was also noted, CSI is no longer an organization of only specifiers, nor has it been for many years.

Efforts to expand CSI's influence have generated a flurry of protest. If the result of the new initiatives is reduction of the significance of construction documents there is cause for alarm. On the other hand, if the result is the inclusion of more people and organizations that deal with specifications, we should welcome the expansion of CSI's influence. We should also recognize that expansion offers an opportunity for our standards to be accepted and used by more of the construction industry. We like to think that CSI is the dominant organization in construction, but a tremendous amount of construction work does not comply with either the Manual of Practice or MasterFormat. And a lot of that work is in building construction - supposedly our turf.

unfair criticism?

Some of the happenings at Institute level are certainly subject to criticism, if for no other reason than poor communication. Others seem to be attacked simply because they represent change. A common protest is "If it ain't broke don't fix it!" but the people who complain frequently weaken their case when they say "I've done it this way for X years, and I'm not going to change!" The standards these people claim to love were undoubtedly subject to the same criticism when they were introduced - but without change there would be no MasterFormat or Manual of Practice! I oppose change for the sake of change - but I also understand that no change at all means there will be no progress.

Some have complained that Institute officers and staff are not doing enough to help with chapter and member activities - a task for which they are ill-equipped. Or that Institute has not made it convenient for specifiers to exchange ideas. But what is to prevent specifiers across the country from talking to each other and working together? Is Institute our nanny? Must we wait for direction from the home office?

Some of the grumblers give themselves away, complaining that nothing is being done - but they are too busy to get something started. The Institute web site has discussion forums - late on the scene, but there nevertheless. Institute offers a variety of education programs, including the Audio Exchange series. How often do members take advantage of these opportunities?

Many chapters have specifiers' breakfasts or roundtable meetings - all set up without help from above. Such meetings used to be limited by travel time, but today we can have virtual meetings wherever there are telephones. And most chapters have technical topics for their meetings, again without assistance.

Nothing prevents discussion of specification issues - if you aren't involved in a specifiers' group, don't wait for Institute to tell you what to do - call another specifier and talk! Similarly, there is nothing to prevent chapters from having technical activities. If your chapter doesn't have meetings with technical content - organize one! If you don't have classes on specification writing - start one!

Quitcherbitchin', get off your duff, and make it happen! You don't need permission!

Material from CSI Chapter newsletters used with permission.