CAD Standards

[BCrouse]

I believe you should be able to simply open the page and read it. ( www.blaugi.com )
I've yet to try it here (but if the link works) all you should need is an RSS reader.....

Thank you very much Bmyers.

[Mike.Perry]

I tried to subscribe to the BLAUGI and I cannot. Do you know I can subscribe to it?

Hi

Use the "Subscribe to this blog's feed" link to subscribe to the sites RSS feeds (refer to attached screen capture).

Note - Your e-mail client or web browser requires RSS functionality for this web technology to work OR use a standalone News Aggregator.

Have a good one, Mike

[sschwartz85916]

One area I think we tend to clump together is Standards. What I mean by that is that we tend to put "drawing standards", "Quality standards" and "CAD standards" together too often and in many ways they are different.

Drawing standards = The look of the final product when it goes out the door. Does the product look like something yourself and the firm would produce?

Quality Standards = Is all the information correct? Can something be built/constructed well from these documents? (This includes accuracy.)

CAD Standards = The method by which the drawings are produced. Will this cost us extra money/grief/man hours if not done correctly?

I believe "Quality Standards" are #1 and should always come first.

Drawing Standards is #2 as it's a direct reflection on your company and the image it projects to the public. High quality drawings often bring back more business (since accuracy of Quality Standards is expected).

CAD Standards is #3 as it's an internal function... but it still can be very important when it comes to extra money/grief/man hours. BUT it's the least likely of the three to come back and effect you and it's the only one you can handle internally. Quality and Drawing Standards effect clients (or management, production, etc) in the outside world and can directly effect the revenue stream coming into your organization. No matter how good your marketing department is, if your product is bad.. then its bad. Word will get out and effect your bottom line. But internal CAD standards can be enforced on a "company" level and proven with production benefits. If the bottom line looks bad because of this then you can make internal changes to ease the problem. On the other hand, almost nothing makes a client happy that's been burned by a bad product.

That's why we should focus on the original question which was "CAD Standards" which is really much different from the question of accuracy. You can be accurate without following CAD Standards (but not following CAD standards could effect accuracy down the line and force further revisions... and cost.. then again, it might not depending on the product and which CAD Standards are broken).

I am copying this exceptional description and printing it... Very well put!

[TerribleTim]

I am copying this exceptional description and printing it... Very well put!

Yea, that was one of the best bits I've read in a long time.

[RICHARD_JONES]

How do you stop people from questioning the CAD standards that the Company has set for everyone to follow?

Questioning the standards I don't mind. Completely ignoring them, that’s a completely different story! Unfortunately I’ve come across that situation all too often.

[burchd]

This is a great thread.... thankyou... wonderfull input..

I would like to add 1 additional comment.

Standards in all cases, must be rules. Much of the process of our work, is based on these rules. It is important for standards to have defined methods and processes of being upgraded and changed and then implimented into the process.

Making an arbetrary change to an office standards, no matter how awsome it is, is bound to have downstream concequences.

Too often these changes come in the form of new staff ,who have not been properly oriented in the standards, make arbetrary changes to them midway through projects. Maybe, this helps that user finish something on time, but more often than not, it creates a nightmare for the 'next guy' who works on this 'tweeked' project.

Good or bad, cultures form in offices around processes. Changes to these must be properly considered or and methods to review and revise standards must be in place and inforced.

'A Standard' is not 'An Option'.

Having defined processes also helps avoid the political issues which sometimes crop up in theses sorts of discussions. Being sensitive to culture, and letting people have their voice in the right setting, goes along way to equalizing those feelings, in my opinion.

[Opie]

'A Standard' is not 'An Option'.

A standard is an option when it becomes a barrier to finished a project on time and within budget. Of course, if that happens too often, the standard should be reviewed and possibly modified.

[Brian Myers]

Thanks for the nice comments about my posting, it's been 2 years and a job ago since I typed that... but I still believe it.

I feel CAD managers sometimes take things a bit too personally. As a CAD manager its your job to quantify how not following these rules effects the bottom line and communicate this to upper management for them to take the appropriate action. It's not your job to ENFORCE these standards, it's your job to communicate these standards and quantify their effects. It shouldn't be your job to FIX these issues (at least if you are being used correctly) as it isn't your job to do the job of others... but it is your job to quantify how someone elses errors are likely effecting the bottom line and the work of others. Remember.. you are MANAGEMENT and management reviews the deliverable and the process by which it is created, they ideally don't DO the work of others. You are not managing drawings or likely employees... you are actually managing the effects of this process by which these deliverables are produced and quantifying how the process that created each deliverable (following standards or not) effected the bottom line. You supply the tools (hardware, software, and process) and communicate to your employees what they SHOULD do... it's up to them to do their jobs. Once you given them the tools you can evaluate how well they are using them to the benefit of the company and suggest when changes need to be made either in company process or employee process while QUANTIFYING why these changes need to be made. Let upper management decide based on your findings what the best thing to do with this information will be.... so don't take it personally...provide them with the rope to drag the company toward record profits or hang themselves... it's just your job to give them a rope and quantify how they've been using the rope.

[Comach]

Thanks for the nice comments about my posting, it's been 2 years and a job ago since I typed that... but I still believe it.

I feel CAD managers sometimes take things a bit too personally. As a CAD manager its your job to quantify how not following these rules effects the bottom line and communicate this to upper management for them to take the appropriate action. It's not your job to ENFORCE these standards, it's your job to communicate these standards and quantify their effects.

I don't agree, it is the Cad managers job to ensure that the drawings are in compliance with the CAD standards. After all it is probably the Cad Manager who developed the standards in the first place and subsequently approved by management. Why do you think they were created? If no one follows the cad standards and end up doing their own thing then the bottom line will suffer. No point in trying to sort the problem after the event.

You are not managing drawings or likely employees... .

Managing drawings is an integral part of being a cad manager.

[Brian Myers]

I don't agree, it is the Cad managers job to ensure that the drawings are in compliance with the CAD standards. After all it is probably the Cad Manager who developed the standards in the first place and subsequently approved by management. Why do you think they were created? If no one follows the cad standards and end up doing their own thing then the bottom line will suffer. No point in trying to sort the problem after the event.

Managing drawings is an integral part of being a cad manager.

It partially depends on your company organization. One of the top complaints most CAD managers have is that they don't have the authority to really enforce standards regulations when problems are repeatedly committed by certain employees. This leads to the question... WHY have they not been giving the authority to do it? In some cases, it's a matter of difficulty quantifying the bottom line to those that do have that Authority.
In other cases employee rentention and company culture are often an issue... mostly because these problems are being worked out within the company without a major percieved impact on the bottom line.

I do agree the CAD manager has a duty to make sure that standards are being followed, but I don't believe in most organizations they have been given the authority to enforce them. (Virtually every office I enter says they have CAD standards in place but how closely they are followed usually leads to smiles, nudges, and joking...).

To answer the question you asked "Why do you think they were created?" well I didn't say they shouldn't be followed, the rules are in place for various reasons, ultimately leading to production and bottom-line benefits. But what I am questioning is a practice I've seen in many companies of fixing items that don't require being fixed. An example: a new employee puts the majority of the text on the same layer when they should have been split between a handful of different layers. These CAD files are to stay inside the company and don't need to meet outside standards. If the CAD manager or the employee goes back in to change the layering of all those text entities when in reality this text being on the same layer likely will have zero effect on the bottom line ... well this bothers me. This is a point where a subtle reminder (or a quantification of the effects of this action) is enough.

In the end I'm not questioning CAD managements authority over the standards and the tools... but I do question if they understand the best way to package their worth. A CAD manager does need to manage files that are "going out the door". But I stand by the fact it shouldn't be their job to actually do the work, they simply should be the ones to report back that the work hasn't been done correctly. I don't believe its the CAD managers job (in most cases) to "manage" drawings... it's their job to track that employees are being productive and doing their jobs correctly in terms of the technology, and reporting/quantifying/and communicating when they see issues in production and the drawings that effect the deliverable or the bottom line and communicating this appropriately.

Now in some companies the CAD manager WILL BE the person that has the authority to state "You WILL do X-Y-Z"... and this is fine. The only issue I have with this is when/if it leads to "benevolent dictatorship" of CAD management being "the rules" and not part of the "team". I've seen this setup lead to many inner-office clashes (designers vs CAD management) and many long-term CAD managers that get stuck in their ways and don't evolve. CAD management I believe should be more about relationships, quantifying value, providing the appropriate tools, and checking the deliverable. You are part of the team that ensures a good product and that jobs are done efficiently. Managing drawings is just a function of the bigger picture of CAD management (that your team is productive and meeting its goals)... or at least I feel that it should be if done effectively.