CAD standards team ?

[Anonymous]

My company is trying going to start an earnest effort to re-evaluate some
(all) of our CAD standards. The principals have suggested that I put
together a team of employees that will all give input, produce a manual, and
institute new standards.

While I am in favor of gathering information from multiple users (all
specializing in different disciplines) I know that a "team approach" to
standards and their eventual implementation and management will be a
nightmare.

Any thoughts on different approaches that I might suggest?

Thanks

[Anonymous]

There will be some topics that will be the same for all disciplines,
and having the other disciplines represented will enable you to
coordinate the implimentation of standards for those topics.
There will also be topics that are specific to a particular
discipline. Standardizing those topics within a discipline will
ensure consistency and predictability in the way your drawings are
created.

The trick to getting the *team* approach to work is to get everyone to
agree on what should be overall standard and what should be discipline
specific.

[Anonymous]

We have a cad team very similar to what you are suggesting. We meet weekly for
approximately 1 hour (we are currently re-writing our cad standards to "comply" with the
ncs). The main thing that I can tell you is to go in with an idea or path that you want
to get to by the end of the meeting.
Let's say your talking about layers. Your choices are basically create your own standard,
use AIA, or use ISO. Assuming that you're the cad manager (administrator, lead operator
... whatever, it doesn't matter, if you're putting together the committee you're
essentially "in charge" of the committee) have a good idea of what you want to do before
you go in there. If you've decided to use the AIA standards have plenty of backup as to
why it is the best choice.
Caution: This does not mean don't be open minded. Listen to others. There are many
times that they will have much better ideas than you had independently.
Be sure that you go in with a definite direction. Don't just go in and say "What should
we decide to do today?" You'll never get anywhere.

hth

jason martin
frankfurt-short-bruza
"Timothy Rider" wrote in message
news:9760FEC8C5921C9498CEB0E8A026F6BA@in.WebX.SaUCah8kaAW...
> My company is trying going to start an earnest effort to re-evaluate some
> (all) of our CAD standards. The principals have suggested that I put
> together a team of employees that will all give input, produce a manual, and
> institute new standards.
>
> While I am in favor of gathering information from multiple users (all
> specializing in different disciplines) I know that a "team approach" to
> standards and their eventual implementation and management will be a
> nightmare.
>
> Any thoughts on different approaches that I might suggest?
>
> Thanks
>

[Anonymous]

Lists, man, lots of lists.

list 1 - the team:
Since it sounds like you get to hand pick your "team", try to pick the most
level headed ones. Not the most talented, fastest, smartest, nor
complacent. By choosing level-headedness, you will likely find a variety of
skill levels being represented. This is good because the manual has to be
understood by everybody. Make sure they know this may be the only chance
they have to have some say in what goes on.

list 2 - existing standards
What is really good about the existing standards? What is bad? Make this
list yourself and use it as a springboard for discussion. Pick the items
you would like to address. The "team" will add to this as discussions
unfold.

list 3 - new standards
What will the modifications to existing standards be drawin from? the
National CAD Standard would be a good place to start. Whatever you choose,
be familiar with it going in.

Ok, so you have a team and a list outlining current pros and cons and a
third proposing where changes should come from. Time to have a meeting
aka - the nightmare begins). Start with broad stroke issues from list 2,
what's good, what's bad. Realize that this can easily turn into a gripe
session - which isn't so bad at this time because you will get a feel for
the team you have chosen, it gives them a chance to let some things air out
and it adds to your discussion topic list.

Prepare an agenda for each meeting. As the leader, it is up to you to adhere
as closely to the list as you can. Even when the early meetings stray into
non-productive discussions, the agenda gives you something to thump on to
get everyone back on track.

Take notes (aka - more lists). Off topic items brought up throughout the
meeting will soon have a topic as your standards become more detailed. This
also helps keep everyone accountable.

Report the results from each meeting to the team. As decisions are made,
report the results to the whole office. Try to make everyone feel involved,
even though they really aren't.

Remember, this is not a democracy, it is a dictatorship. Be a benevolent
dictator.

When putting together your agenda, try to spot what items will be met with
resistance. Prepare for them. If the first couple of meetings turned into
gripe sessions then you will have an idea of the individuals involved and
thier discussion styles. Try not to let them put you on your heels. You
get to pick the discussion topics, do it with care.

Oh, one more thing, it will be a nightmare. Satisfying in the end, but
still a nightmare.

BTW, i am currently in the same boat.
good luck
chris

"Timothy Rider" wrote in message
news:9760FEC8C5921C9498CEB0E8A026F6BA@in.WebX.SaUCah8kaAW...
> My company is trying going to start an earnest effort to re-evaluate some
> (all) of our CAD standards. > Any thoughts on different approaches that I
might suggest?
>
> Thanks
>

[Anonymous]

chris brooks wrote:
>

>
> Remember, this is not a democracy, it is a dictatorship. Be a benevolent
> dictator.
>

Chris is right about this. You will need first and formost to decide
who is really the dictator. If you do not currently really have any
true authority this will be a long road indeed. It seems like I am
always saying this but here it goes - I know from experience...

We had an all out war because we went in naively thinking we could work
as a democracy. Nope, did not work for us anyway. I found that there
are very strong feelings out there and someone needs to step up to the
plate and make a ruling.

I would suggest also that this person think more long term. Consider
the future of CADD and where it is headed. Also consider the companies
desires. For the most part the big cheifs do not get into the details
of cadd standards but they do in fact own the place so they should have
an input. I would suggest as we did, to have a representitive member of
the owners sit in on the meetings or at least receive updates. There
are some things to consider that the cadd users will likely not consider
such as general filing procedures, archiving, file structure, legal
issues as well as the general look and feel of the completed documents.
You will find that everyone has an adgenda and it will be your job to
determine when all votes have been counted and enough is enough. You
are in fact the supreme court in this case. Sorry I could not resist.

Evan Larson
GLT Architects
elarson@gltarchitects.com
www.gltarchitects.com

[Anonymous]

Tim,
Good luck!

I have been working on updating and changing our current CAD Standards for the
past 3 years. My team was first comprised of myself the "CAD Manager" and
another person, the "Network Administrator." This went on for about a year, and
I accomplished a lot. All hell broke loose, and I had to establish a new team
for the new standards.

The second team was comprised of myself, a lead architect (Project Manager), two
Job Captains, two CAD Drafters, and the "Network Administrator." (I put it in
quotes because he doesn't administor anything besides havoc.)

We sat around and created a list of what current standards didn't work, what did
work, what needed improvement, etc. We then sent around a memo asking the staff
what concerns they had about the current standards and what changes they would
like to see. This worked very well, we established a Table of Contents, a job
task list, and got to work. This went on for about a year, and I accomplished a
lot. All hell broke loose, and I had to establish a new team for the new
standards.

The third team was comprised of members of the second team, the Project Manager,
used to oversee all of us pee-ons, and two of my CAD Drafters. The CAD Drafters
I selected had the MOST knowledge of CAD, drafting, the standards, basically
everything. This new team finished the new standards, we upgraded to ADT2 and
Acad2000. We wrote massive amounts of code, and accomplished everything we had
to. We also did this without ever going back and addressing the staff again.

I just recently upgraded our entire staff, and we are implementing the new
standards as we start a new project. So far, besides answering a butt-load of
questions, the staff is completely satisfied, optimistic, ecstatic that old crap
has been fixed, etc.
Basically what I am saying to you is to only choose your most knowledgable staff
for your team, and keep it limited to a few people. Input from staff is
acceptable, but the decision making should be left to only those few that know
what they are truly doing.

Any other questions about changing standards, let me know, post a message!

Justin Tucker

Timothy Rider wrote:

> My company is trying going to start an earnest effort to re-evaluate some
> (all) of our CAD standards. The principals have suggested that I put
> together a team of employees that will all give input, produce a manual, and
> institute new standards.
>
> While I am in favor of gathering information from multiple users (all
> specializing in different disciplines) I know that a "team approach" to
> standards and their eventual implementation and management will be a
> nightmare.
>
> Any thoughts on different approaches that I might suggest?
>
> Thanks

[Anonymous]

Seems to be two divergent opinions going.....included the level headed and
not necessarily the most talented, and only include the most knowledgeable.
Maybe the most knowledgeable won't be the most talented, and maybe you can
exclude hot-heads period.

One thing I can tell you and you should have learned by now from what you
wrote as your experience history, is that CAD Standards are a living
organism and subject to frequent changes. The areas I noticed the most
changes going on almost daily is the addition of new layer names and new
blocks or the revision of old blocks. Of course, one good thing about the
standard is that the new blocks are done in conformance with the standards.
And new layer names likewise.

But if you find that there is some part of the new standard that is
receiving a lot of complaint...do not wait for the next year or new version
of AutoCAD before changing it. Fix it and make a change to the standards.
I think this will help the standards get used without threats of violence,
and also will help attitudes when they see that the complaints if accurate,
will get listened to on a timely basis. Beside that, if part of the
standard does not work very well, you will find people will circumvent the
standard when they can get away with it.

Just my opinion...only mild experience of two years of cad standards
management behind it.

Jack Talsky

"Timothy Rider" wrote in message
news:9760FEC8C5921C9498CEB0E8A026F6BA@in.WebX.SaUCah8kaAW...
> My company is trying going to start an earnest effort to re-evaluate some
> (all) of our CAD standards. The principals have suggested that I put
> together a team of employees that will all give input, produce a manual,
and
> institute new standards.
>
> While I am in favor of gathering information from multiple users (all
> specializing in different disciplines) I know that a "team approach" to
> standards and their eventual implementation and management will be a
> nightmare.
>
> Any thoughts on different approaches that I might suggest?
>
> Thanks
>

[Anonymous]

Thanks to everyone that has put ideas up here for me to absorb.

Our team is assembled and we meet this week. Wish me luck.

I'm looking forward to the process and I'm sure I'll put up more questions
as we go.

This is a great group!!!!

"Jack Talsky" wrote in message
news:0351E29467AE267D5F63CAD188231E32@in.WebX.SaUCah8kaAW...
> Seems to be two divergent opinions going.....included the level headed and
> not necessarily the most talented, and only include the most
knowledgeable.
> Maybe the most knowledgeable won't be the most talented, and maybe you can
> exclude hot-heads period.
>
> One thing I can tell you and you should have learned by now from what you
> wrote as your experience history, is that CAD Standards are a living
> organism and subject to frequent changes. The areas I noticed the most
> changes going on almost daily is the addition of new layer names and new
> blocks or the revision of old blocks. Of course, one good thing about the
> standard is that the new blocks are done in conformance with the
standards.
> And new layer names likewise.
>
> But if you find that there is some part of the new standard that is
> receiving a lot of complaint...do not wait for the next year or new
version
> of AutoCAD before changing it. Fix it and make a change to the standards.
> I think this will help the standards get used without threats of violence,
> and also will help attitudes when they see that the complaints if
accurate,
> will get listened to on a timely basis. Beside that, if part of the
> standard does not work very well, you will find people will circumvent the
> standard when they can get away with it.
>
> Just my opinion...only mild experience of two years of cad standards
> management behind it.
>
> Jack Talsky
>
> "Timothy Rider" wrote in message
> news:9760FEC8C5921C9498CEB0E8A026F6BA@in.WebX.SaUCah8kaAW...
> > My company is trying going to start an earnest effort to re-evaluate
some
> > (all) of our CAD standards. The principals have suggested that I put
> > together a team of employees that will all give input, produce a manual,
> and
> > institute new standards.
> >
> > While I am in favor of gathering information from multiple users (all
> > specializing in different disciplines) I know that a "team approach" to
> > standards and their eventual implementation and management will be a
> > nightmare.
> >
> > Any thoughts on different approaches that I might suggest?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>