What is a Master Builder?

Last month, I said the architect no longer is the Master Builder. Architects still have a valuable place in construction, but that place is much diminished from what it was a hundred and fifty years ago. To appreciate the degree of change, let's look at what things were like many years ago. The following quotation uses the term "master mason", but the meaning is essentially the same as "master builder."

The master mason was in charge. He was architect and builder rolled into one. He often directed a work force numbering into hundreds. But he also worked among his people. He cut stone and installed plumbing. That puzzles us, wed as we are to the notion that academic and manual knowledge don't mix.

John H. Lienhard, Professor Emeritus of Mechanical Engineering and History, University of Houston; my emphasis.

What happened to the Master Builder?

It's time architects accepted reality: They no longer are master builders, and haven't been for a long time. It's nothing to get excited about (well, not too excited), and there is no reason to maintain the fiction that architects are what they were in the good old days. In fact, there is good reason to admit the truth and move on.

Building materials have evolved, fabrication and construction have evolved, and the tools of our profession have evolved, yet we continue to create and use construction documents the same way we have done for nearly two hundred years, simply because that's what we have done for nearly two hundred years. And, even though architects do less now than they did many years ago, we maintain the fiction that architects are master builders.

"Heretic!" "Blasphemer!" "How dare you!" "Vile person!"

3 reasons to not get certified

Aren't you tired of all this talk about certification? No one will tell you, but there are a few good reasons to save your time and skip the exams. Why waste the time and effort on something you probably don't need? If any of these reasons apply to you, sit back and relax - you're in great shape.

Whose responsibility?

Design professionals rely on manufacturers and suppliers for the information necessary to design a project, and to create specifications and details for incorporation of those products. Advertisements, specifications, and performance data distributed by manufacturers are a primary source of information used by design professionals to determine if a product will meet the requirements of a project. This information is supplemented by discussion with the manufacturer's representatives, distributors, suppliers, and installers, but the written documents must be accurate, factual, and reliable illustrations of how products and assemblies should be used.

It is not unreasonable, then, to expect that a product advertised for a particular use is indeed suitable for that use. Consider a company that produces wood doors. The company's literature calls them wood doors, it specifies them by standards used for wood doors, and it shows pictures of them being used as wood doors. An architect should be comfortable choosing this product for use as a wood door; a specifier should be confident that it can be specified as such; and the owner should have no doubt that it is, indeed, a wood door, with all that implies. But I'm not talking about wood doors.

Etched in stone

What is the value of a signature? More to the point, what is the value of a "wet" signature? Although some states have taken steps to modernize the requirements for certification of construction documents and other legal documents, others are mired in practices that haven't made sense for a long time.

Of those states that allow something other than a manual signature to certify documents, some allow only software encryption, while others allow a facsimile of a signature. The result is a mix of methods, requiring design professionals to verify requirements for each state. To make things more interesting, states and local agencies are inconsistent in the way they interpret or use state statutes.

What really makes sense? Is a wet signature necessary? What does it prove?

Let bylaws be bygones

Oh, if only! CSI's members approved amendments to the Institute bylaws twice in the last few years, and each time, those amendments required changes to region and chapter bylaws. Are we done now?

The answer will depend on how we want CSI to change. The Institute board may recommend that the bylaws be amended, as happened in 2006 when the board proposed changes intended to improve our governance process. Members also may propose changes; this year's amendment was the result of member requests to have a single type of full membership.

Let's take a look at bylaws, and see if we can dispel the mystique that surrounds them. I doubt we'll get to the point that you love them, but at least you should be able to say bylaws without a shudder.

A tale of two companies

Smoke and mirrors?

A few months ago, in "Go-to guys", I spoke of the many excellent product representatives I know, and how valuable they are to me in my job as specifier. This past month, I experienced something just a bit different. It wasn't that the product reps weren't helpful, but their corporate structure made it difficult for them to offer the help that specifiers need, which, in turn, makes it difficult for specifiers to properly serve their clients.

It all started with an e-mail from one of our construction administrators, about a substitution request. The subcontractor claimed that a substantial savings would result from using the proposed products, and went on to say that one of the proposed substitute products was, in fact, identical to one that had been specified.

Signature blocks on steroids

The first time I get an e-mail from you I don't mind if you include your full name, title, phone number, cell phone number, and fax number, along with your company name, division, department, main phone number, address, and website, and even a logo or two. In fact, I like to get all that information at one time; it's a great way to complete my contact file for you without having to ask for missing pieces. I don’t need to see a message telling me that I should save paper by not printing the message (does anyone really do that?), but I'll let it go the first time you send me e-mail.

After that, all I need is your name and phone number. Your e-mail address is in the message; if needed, I can use it to bring up your contact file.