Back to the basics

In the early days of CSI there was plenty to do. Construction documents in that time were inconsistent in almost every way, even from a single office, as there were no standards for writing specifications or organizing construction information. I am awestruck at the audacity and vision of that original group, who recognized and analyzed the needs of the construction industry, stated the solution, and then adopted the following ambitious goals for the new organization:

• Better specification writing
• Simpler specifications
• Standardization of specifications for public works
• Standardization of building codes
• Greater efficiency and cost effectiveness throughout the industry

What they wanted to do had obvious value. The fledgling organization had something to offer, and began to attract new members across the country. Chapters were popping up all over, and membership grew at an amazing rate. Much of the work done on CSI's standards was initiated by individual chapters, and members of many chapters wrote monographs and other documents that discussed a variety of construction products, and ways to improve the practice of writing specifications. During the next few decades, CSI successfully established standards that are used to this day - the Manual of Practice (now the PRM), MasterFormat, SectionFormat, and PageFormat.

Part of the reason for growth through the '90s was the absence of good source material. The lack of useful documents provided fertile ground for authors, and the adrenaline that is often found in young, rapidly growing organizations made active participation in CSI beyond the chapter level exciting, useful, and satisfying.

Design professionals wanted to learn how to specify so they could do their jobs better. Manufacturers wanted to offer information to design professionals in a format they could more easily use. And in the late '60s, a quiet revolution began: CSI began work on COMSPEC, which led to SPECTEXT, and AIA began development of MASTERSPEC. These products made it possible for anyone to at least start with a document that closely complied with CSI's standards.

As manufacturers' documents improved, and as more design firms chose to use commercial master guide specifications, the demand for member involvement in technical documents decreased. Prior to that time, technical dissertations had great value, but as information became readily available the need for personal evaluation and comment essentially vanished.

CSI chapters continued to work on SpecGUIDEs, documents intended to help specifiers understand more about construction products. These guides, which enjoy a mythical stature, were of little value, but were widely regarded as a good way for chapters to continue working on technical documents. For a variety of good reasons, the plug was pulled, and the SpecGUIDE program was terminated in 1997.

In the years immediately following the demise of SpecGUIDEs, chapters across the country looked to Institute for something "technical" to do. Given the origin of early CSI documents - individual or small group effort - it was evident that a vast chasm had developed between chapter and Institute technical activities. With reasonably good literature available from manufacturers, and the apparent elimination of the need to learn how to write specifications, it seemed there was nothing left for individuals or chapters to do.

In the last ten years, the Institute Technical Committee made a number of attempts at revitalizing technical activity. Many suggestions were made, but there was no response, and eventually the cry for something to do faded away.

Today, many chapters have technical committee chairs, but no committees, and others have given up all pretense. With a few notable exceptions, those chapter technical committees that still exist have been relatively inactive.

The question, then, is this: Is there anything "technical" that members, chapters, or regions can do? The answer: Yes!

Most of our members have probably had occasion to use or at least look at two web-based knowledge resources, Wikipedia and Wiktionary. Wikis are collaborative websites that can be edited by anyone. At first that sounds a bit scary, but the websites are not complete anarchy. Contributors' statements may be challenged by anyone, and the process leads to consensus on any given subject.

During the past year or so, several members have considered establishing a wiki as a forum for CSI, where ideas and information could be posted, discussed, and developed. Fortunately, at the same time, Institute staff was actually working on making CSIWiki a reality, and in February of this year it went live.

Before announcing its existence, staff populated it with a collection of existing (old) documents, including monographs and SpecGUIDEs. The bad news is that most of these documents need to be updated, verified, and reorganized to make them more useful. The good news is that most of these documents need to be updated, verified, and reorganized. Even better, not all subjects are covered.

As noted, the wiki provides a collaborative environment, where anyone can add or change information. Contributors are asked to provide references to allow others to verify information, and each page has a related discussion area where behind-the-scenes debates can take place.

CSIWiki is a potential goldmine of opportunity for all members. Industry and design professionals alike can contribute technical information and add comments from their experience. There is an almost infinite amount of work to be done, as new products and processes are introduced and old ones are changed. CSIWiki can become the one place to go for definitive information about the construction industry - but it won't happen without your help. We don't have the staff to take on such a monumental task, but more important, you are the ones with the knowledge that is needed to make it a success.

In this time of declining membership, this is the first and only activity that is available to all members. Common complaints from members who don't attend chapter functions are lack of time or money, inconvenient meeting locations, and inability of committees to get things done. None of those objections apply to this project. You can work on it from home, from your office, or anywhere you have Internet access. You can do it in the morning, at lunch, on the bus, or anywhere. You don't even need to be online to write your contributions.

But, even though it can be an individual effort, contributions also can be made by groups. Groups can be made up of members of a single chapter, but a virtual group can have members from anywhere. No matter what your specialty is, you can hook up with a peer in the next house or in a different country.

In the good old days, chapter and region technical committees were busy putting their collective wisdom in print in an effort to help the entire industry. The electronic equivalent is now available. Let's get back to the good old days, and work together toward our original goals of better construction documents.

Sheldon Wolfe, RA, FCSI, CCS, CCCA
Institute Director, North Central Region, CSI