Topic: Which is worse?

[craigr]

Just for curiosity's sake...

BTW, I was given the task of creating standards for our company that has had no standards from the get-go. It was very difficult to get everyone to agree on the standards.

It remains difficult to get others to follow them, 5 years later.

'I don't have time to learn / follow them'

craigr

[M-dub]

Gotsta have standards!

[Matt__W]

I was going to choose "sliding down a pole covered with razor blades into a pool of rubbing alcohol" but I see that wasn't an option - so I chose "Company Without Standards".  At least with the other option you have a bit of a starting point - it's better than nothing.

[TimSpangler]

I was going to choose "sliding down a pole covered with razor blades into a pool of rubbing alcohol" but I see that wasn't an option - so I chose "Company Without Standards".  At least with the other option you have a bit of a starting point - it's better than nothing.

Thats what i was going to say.......

Ditto, at least there is something.

[James Cannon]

Without.

I'd rather have standards, even if I have to adapt.  

[JohnK]

Both!

No standards: People cant decide upon one.
Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

[jonesy]

Even when theres standards in place, some people like to think the standard dont apply to them  

[craigr]

Even when theres standards in place, some people like to think the standard dont apply to them  

EXACTLY!!

That's what happens here.

Sometimes I feel like a  and they are just trying to 'get away with it'.

MUCH time wasted.

craigr

[M-dub]

I voted wrong... I voted for which was better.

Changed my vote.

[Matt__W]

Even when theres standards in place, some people like to think the standard dont apply to them  

EXACTLY!!

That's what happens here.

Sometimes I feel like a  and they are just trying to 'get away with it'.

MUCH time wasted.

craigr

Ahhh... stop being such a big    

[KewlToyZ]

Standards by writing some automation into processes are the best.
Accomplishing multiple tasks with a single click removing the tedious and mundane from their job is usually the most successful way to get them adopted.
Once they learn the commands, improving/re-writing the routines is a transparent way of continuing to improve upon them. When they run into trouble with a project because they didnt follow standards, they can find it on the list of reasons they went over budget.

Creativity is a great thing but not when it becomes inconsistency in a production environment.
Sure it gets done, but without the standards, there is no way to optimize or improve productivity.
Not to mention production absolutely has to have some sense of predictability in their work flow.

[Krushert]

Standards by writing some automation into processes are the best.
Accomplishing multiple tasks with a single click removing the tedious and mundane from their job is usually the most successful way to get them adopted.
Once they learn the commands, improving/re-writing the routines is a transparent way of continuing to improve upon them. When they run into trouble with a project because they didnt follow standards, they can find it on the list of reasons they went over budget.

Creativity is a great thing but not when it becomes inconsistency in a production environment.
Sure it gets done, but without the standards, there is no way to optimize or improve productivity.
Not to mention production absolutely has to have some sense of predictability in their work flow.

Whoa that some pretty profound stuff. 

[KewlToyZ]

LOL! I try. My biggest concern with Standards currently is our workflow and productivity.
Keeping the company lean by creating these standards.
When I say lean, I mean less time on training more time on the production.
Of course it will always result in up front time investment with regard to the project setup.

As the complexity of these projects increase exponentially I am faced with the crossroads of BIM transition for the company and its standards. Currently we are pretty much open source Autolisp customizations.
I lobbied for the company to make a transition to the aec content specific methods, but ultimately everyone has stuck with the the open source standards and Vanilla use of AutoCAD MEP.
I spent quite a bit of time setting up the drawing template for MEP to have it collect dust without any verification from the users.
Once again, every few months someone comes by and asks about Revit to work with our clients.
As always, I am interested, but we spent $800-$1000 for 6 candidates to take the courses.
Not once have they used the application since. Changing the workflow as dramatically as it would be has made the grass seem not so green. Sooner or later we are going to have to force our own hands with this though.
Of course no one wants to because the profit margin for the project and the unknown's scare every one off.
The same for the aec BIM content of the Autodesk verticals.

So I am still trying to find the path to subtly push the herd into using a BIM approach.
It is already becoming fairly difficult to manage with the open source Autolisp routines.
Moving toward the Proprietary content of MEP still looks like my best bet.
Making the time and introducing them to it is still daunting.

[Bakerman]

Our company has standards and even has an accompanying manual. I think everyone follows it pretty well......at least the ones in the main office. I'm in a construction field office and sometimes "I get in a hurry". 

[CADaver]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

[M-dub]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

Well, one reason could be that they're really poor standards.  Just because "It's always been done like that" doesn't make it right.

[JohnK]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

Change is unavoidable. For example, the Army no longer caries muskets and rides horseback. New technologies, advancing deadlines, etc all urge change.

[JohnK]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

Well, one reason could be that they're really poor standards.  Just because "It's always been done like that" doesn't make it right.

A little of the first but more of the latter.

You know change is necessary but the psychology behind it can be a monster!

[MickD]

Consistency is key, without standards you can't possibly have consistency unless all staff have been working together for 20 years or more and know how the office ticks.

To enforce standards the team leader should be reviewing all drawings leaving the office checking against the standard and the checker should be held accountable for not making sure they are implemented properly.

The Boss wants the standards, the team leader must listen to the boss and checkers must listen to the team leader/s. If drafty's don't tag the line they should be asked to leave, end of story.
If you don't have the standards in black and white though you have no leg to stand on.

[JohnK]

I wouldn't go that harsh of a route, but i mostly agree.

I was being sarcastic in my initial post;  i tend to lean more towards the "CAD Manual" then the "CAD Standards" feel in my books. There is no way i can account for 100% of the situations so i leave something up to the designer/engineer.

Consistency is the key. I agree wholeheartedly.

[Dinosaur]

just to be obtuse I chose the shop with different standards ...

I actually have always worked in very small shops where there were no established standards.  Being the senior person most of the time, the defacto standard became "do it like Steve does" ... worked for me.  It really did not matter that much in the long run as it often turned out with the whole office just pounding out the design intent using whatever technique necessary to get the prints out the door before 3:00.  More often than not those, far higher than I on the food chain were involved and used their prestige to actively ignore ANY conventions even those much easier than their preferred methods.  I consoled myself with the knowledge that even as they were fouling my pristine sets, at least I didn't have to do the work they picked up and with any luck, any further work would be done by them while I was busy designing new projects.

[CADaver]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

Well, one reason could be that they're really poor standards.  Just because "It's always been done like that" doesn't make it right.

So you're assuming that if they have standards they are poor, or just inferior to yours?

[CADaver]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

Change is unavoidable. For example, the Army no longer caries muskets and rides horseback. New technologies, advancing deadlines, etc all urge change.

So you assume that existing standards are equivalent to ball and musket and must be changed?  hmmm... standard doesn't seem very "standard".

[CADaver]

Consistency is the key. I agree wholeheartedly.

and yet you assume that existing standard require change?

[M-dub]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

Well, one reason could be that they're really poor standards.  Just because "It's always been done like that" doesn't make it right.

So you're assuming that if they have standards they are poor, or just inferior to yours?

I have my own words in my mouth.  I don't need yours stuffed in there with them.

They key word in my hypothetical post was "Could".

[SDETERS]

When all of you talk about standards what type of standards are you talking about?  Drawing Standards? Industry standards?  Or what how to sit at your desk standard?

We always Continuous improve our Standards.  Part of our way of doing things.  If we have a better idea or have a better way of doing things quicker easier and for the better there is always room for continuous improvement.  We need to cut waste from everything we do!!!

I agree standards are needed.  But they need to be continuously improved with the new technologies that come out in new software releases year after year after year.

Anybody still using the same standard that they had when Autocad 12 was popular?  No more no less?  I guess no.  Some of the base standards are there but I guarantee with the evolution of software there needs to be evolution or continuous improvement of standards.

[M-dub]

I totally agree.

[JohnK]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

Change is unavoidable. For example, the Army no longer caries muskets and rides horseback. New technologies, advancing deadlines, etc all urge change.

So you assume that existing standards are equivalent to ball and musket and must be changed?  hmmm... standard doesn't seem very "standard".

Would you prefer Pen's and Silk then?

You adamant in arguing this aren't you? People need to conform to the industry drafting standards (Leader heads: 1/8" Text: 3/32" etc.) Those standards are in effect and adhered to, the way to go about the minutia of a project are always changing. For example pipe labels inline may not be as effective with the adoption of "smart pipes" --or whatever the newest selling point Autodesk wishes to inherent-- which automatically place the labels above. So a change in the policies is necessary to save extra effort, project budget if the new "smart pipe" is deemed effective.

This is why i said i tend to lean more toward a CAD Manual then a CAD Standards book because the Standards are already in place (Leaders, text, dimensions, etc).

[James Cannon]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

Change is unavoidable. For example, the Army no longer caries muskets and rides horseback. New technologies, advancing deadlines, etc all urge change.

So you assume that existing standards are equivalent to ball and musket and must be changed?  hmmm... standard doesn't seem very "standard".

[voiceover author=Steve Irwin]
Here we see the voracious swamp troll stalking it's prey, slavering at the mouth at the sight of delicious meals to be had.  These creatures feed not on flesh or marrow or vegetation as most do, but consume the very interest and enjoyment that any discussions may yield.  The interesting thing to note is these creatures are still considered scavengers, though they must hunt for their feasts.

We see this swamp troll stalking an otherwise benign and ontopic thread first by trying to separate some members from the herd.  They use distraction and bait to attempt separation at which point the troll will jump and sink in it's teeth, slaying any ability for the thread to continue in it's natural ways.  This leaves the herd confused, and will then wander off, original topic left either dead or unaddressed.

Let's watch what happens as this troll tries for a meal!
[/voiceover]

[Krushert]

Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone, and another one gone
Another one bites the dust
Hey, I'm gonna get you too
Another one bites the dust

[KewlToyZ]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

They will always have to evolve to keep up with an exponential growth in data complexity and design intelligence.
Of course I use that term loosely with most architects 

[KewlToyZ]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

Change is unavoidable. For example, the Army no longer caries muskets and rides horseback. New technologies, advancing deadlines, etc all urge change.

So you assume that existing standards are equivalent to ball and musket and must be changed?  hmmm... standard doesn't seem very "standard".

[voiceover author=Steve Irwin]
Here we see the voracious swamp troll stalking it's prey, slavering at the mouth at the sight of delicious meals to be had.  These creatures feed not on flesh or marrow or vegetation as most do, but consume the very interest and enjoyment that any discussions may yield.  The interesting thing to note is these creatures are still considered scavengers, though they must hunt for their feasts.

We see this swamp troll stalking an otherwise benign and ontopic thread first by trying to separate some members from the herd.  They use distraction and bait to attempt separation at which point the troll will jump and sink in it's teeth, slaying any ability for the thread to continue in it's natural ways.  This leaves the herd confused, and will then wander off, original topic left either dead or unaddressed.

Let's watch what happens as this troll tries for a meal!
[/voiceover]

"Crikey look at the fangs on that one!"

[craigr]

When all of you talk about standards what type of standards are you talking about?  Drawing Standards? Industry standards?  Or what how to sit at your desk standard?

We always Continuous improve our Standards.  Part of our way of doing things.  If we have a better idea or have a better way of doing things quicker easier and for the better there is always room for continuous improvement.  We need to cut waste from everything we do!!!

I agree standards are needed.  But they need to be continuously improved with the new technologies that come out in new software releases year after year after year.

Anybody still using the same standard that they had when Autocad 12 was popular?  No more no less?  I guess no.  Some of the base standards are there but I guarantee with the evolution of software there needs to be evolution or continuous improvement of standards.

VERY well Put!!

SOME of our standards change as our products change, but the basics don't, ie - snap is always set at .05, wire are trimmed at intersections, we always have our TitleBlock in PSpace, our Main layer is layer '0', etc...

When everyone sticks to standards, it helps with making some macros work, because I know what I have to work with in our dwgs. For us, macros save us a huge amount of time.

craigr

[MP]

[voiceover author=Steve Irwin]
Here we see the voracious swamp troll stalking it's prey, slavering at the mouth at the sight of delicious meals to be had.  These creatures feed not on flesh or marrow or vegetation as most do, but consume the very interest and enjoyment that any discussions may yield.  The interesting thing to note is these creatures are still considered scavengers, though they must hunt for their feasts.

We see this swamp troll stalking an otherwise benign and ontopic thread first by trying to separate some members from the herd.  They use distraction and bait to attempt separation at which point the troll will jump and sink in it's teeth, slaying any ability for the thread to continue in it's natural ways.  This leaves the herd confused, and will then wander off, original topic left either dead or unaddressed.

Let's watch what happens as this troll tries for a meal!
[/voiceover]

[TimSpangler]

[voiceover author=Steve Irwin]
Here we see the voracious swamp troll stalking it's prey, slavering at the mouth at the sight of delicious meals to be had.  These creatures feed not on flesh or marrow or vegetation as most do, but consume the very interest and enjoyment that any discussions may yield.  The interesting thing to note is these creatures are still considered scavengers, though they must hunt for their feasts.

We see this swamp troll stalking an otherwise benign and ontopic thread first by trying to separate some members from the herd.  They use distraction and bait to attempt separation at which point the troll will jump and sink in it's teeth, slaying any ability for the thread to continue in it's natural ways.  This leaves the herd confused, and will then wander off, original topic left either dead or unaddressed.

Let's watch what happens as this troll tries for a meal!
[/voiceover]

[Larry the Cable Guy]

I don't care who you are, that's funny right there..... 

[/Larry the Cable Guy]

[Matt__W]

[voiceover author=Steve Irwin]
Here we see the voracious swamp troll stalking it's prey, slavering at the mouth at the sight of delicious meals to be had.  These creatures feed not on flesh or marrow or vegetation as most do, but consume the very interest and enjoyment that any discussions may yield.  The interesting thing to note is these creatures are still considered scavengers, though they must hunt for their feasts.

We see this swamp troll stalking an otherwise benign and ontopic thread first by trying to separate some members from the herd.  They use distraction and bait to attempt separation at which point the troll will jump and sink in it's teeth, slaying any ability for the thread to continue in it's natural ways.  This leaves the herd confused, and will then wander off, original topic left either dead or unaddressed.

Let's watch what happens as this troll tries for a meal!
[/voiceover]

 

[CADaver]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

Well, one reason could be that they're really poor standards.  Just because "It's always been done like that" doesn't make it right.

So you're assuming that if they have standards they are poor, or just inferior to yours?

I have my own words in my mouth.  I don't need yours stuffed in there with them.

They key word in my hypothetical post was "Could".

Those were your words.  You assumed that existing standards needed to change, when pressed for a reason for that requirement you offered one reason.  I'm still wondering why you assumed the existing standards require change.

[CADaver]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

Change is unavoidable. For example, the Army no longer caries muskets and rides horseback. New technologies, advancing deadlines, etc all urge change.

So you assume that existing standards are equivalent to ball and musket and must be changed?  hmmm... standard doesn't seem very "standard".

Would you prefer Pen's and Silk then?

You adamant in arguing this aren't you?

I'm not arguing anything at all.  I'm attempting to discover why you originally assumed existing company standards need to be changed.  They may indeed need change, or they may not.  I've worked several places with standards (manual, whatever) in place, some needed change some did not, and I've worked at places with no stanrds at all.  If you wish to employ standards it is considerably easier to do for places that have standards in place (already employed).

[CADaver]

and will then wander off, original topic left either dead or unaddressed.

Gee funny... and added "what" to the topic?

[CADaver]

Existing standards: People dont/wont change.

If they have standards why do they need to change?

They will always have to evolve to keep up with an exponential growth in data complexity and design intelligence.
Of course I use that term loosely with most architects 

And why would that not be part of the existing company standards?  (See thread topic)

[CADaver]

When all of you talk about standards what type of standards are you talking about?  Drawing Standards? Industry standards?  Or what how to sit at your desk standard?

We always Continuous improve our Standards.  Part of our way of doing things.  If we have a better idea or have a better way of doing things quicker easier and for the better there is always room for continuous improvement.  We need to cut waste from everything we do!!!

I agree standards are needed.  But they need to be continuously improved with the new technologies that come out in new software releases year after year after year.

Anybody still using the same standard that they had when Autocad 12 was popular?  No more no less?  I guess no.  Some of the base standards are there but I guarantee with the evolution of software there needs to be evolution or continuous improvement of standards.

VERY well Put!!

SOME of our standards change as our products change, but the basics don't, ie - snap is always set at .05, wire are trimmed at intersections, we always have our TitleBlock in PSpace, our Main layer is layer '0', etc...

When everyone sticks to standards, it helps with making some macros work, because I know what I have to work with in our dwgs. For us, macros save us a huge amount of time.

craigr

Great discussion on why standards need to keep up with technology, which has nothing at all to do with the thread topic.

In light of the thread topic, which is preferred a company with or without standards?

[CADaver]

Now that's funny.