Selecting products for specification 2

[SlipMatWax]

When using suppliers to assist with writing specs, is the reputation, experience of the supplier more important than the actual product?

 

[CajunCenturion]

Depends on what you're writing the specs for.

If the supplier may also be a bidder, then objectivity is an issue. Not just the objectivity of the supplier, but yours as well. This leads directly into reputation as you can become known as a company which writes specs that only one supplier can meet.

I personally am not a fan of suppliers being involved at all in the development of specs. I want the specs to be what is best for the project, not what is best for a supplier.

 

[rdstone]

I'm with Cajun. If I design something, I want to create the specifications.
If you are an ISO9000 or other certified company there are documentations that you create to depict the the specifications. ie... (Functional Specification Documentation)-- These are released with the ECN package and are then classified as a controled document.
I do not want a supplier telling me what "I" have to do... I stipulate to them what is needed, and they supply it. If they can't--- there are other suppliers that can. Now granted there are times we as engineers have to do some investigating on our own to make sure we didn't design something that "CAN'T" be manufactured. --- This doesn't happen very often.
Also to complete the answer to your question -- The product to me is the most important aspect. It reflects my work and my capabilities, therefore I want the best possible. I really don't care if the company that is making it for us is just now getting into the business of manufacturing this part or has 100 yrs experience. As long as the part meets all of the criteria reflected on the print/prints, ie (Quality, Lead Times, Capacity etc...) -- Thats for purchasing to hash out.

 

[IFRs]

If the product is a bolt, I agree with the above answers. If the product is an engineered structure with materail, fabrication and installation interactions, I think the vendors can and should help develop the specifications. In this case, the reputation and experience of the vendor is crucial. You still have to make sure you write the specs and the specs are yours to avoid non-competitive issues, patent issues, cronyism, etc.

 

[SlipMatWax]

I am independently contracted by a supplier of HVAC products to get their products specified by the local engineering community. I am contracted to provide full selection services to local Engineering companies, upon demand, for air handling related products and equipment (15800). The selections I make are based on the requirements of the Consultants design and the product offerings I am representing.

Servicing the Consultants this way has rewarded my client with a large spec base, but without following up our spec service with an aggressive post-tender review of competitors’ submissions on all lost jobs, the work done will go for zero. This is where the lines get blurred

 

[buzzp]

For specialized equipment yes it is important. Even if you don't use their spec. Get them to write one and you can modify it to allow other vendors equipment based on whats important to your situation.

But having been a spec writer myself, I can say it is always written by the vendor to be as tight as possible with the products they have available so as not to include competitors products.

The big dogs do this on a regular basis. And believe it or not they also give kick backs to the spec writer based on products ordered under this spec. Granted sometimes this is not known so no kick backs can not be paid. But I do know it happens, first hand, with one multi-billion dollar company that we would all know by name.

 

[RDK]

Buzzp

Are you telling us that you know of illegal activity that you have not reported to the proper legal authorities?

Are you telling us that you are aware of unethical professional activities that you have not reported to the proper licensing authorities?

If the answer is yes, then you too are guilty of the illegal and unethical behaviour and could be taken to task for your failure to report this activity.




Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[buzzp]

Ahh Rick, I knew you could not resist the chance to attack me since I have proven you wrong so many times. But in any case, I will be delighted to answer your questions (instead of red flagging your post ).

The cases were not reported. One needs to have documented proof of such allegations before putting ones neck on the line. But you would certainly contact this major manufacturer and call them on their unwritten policies wouldn't you?

I wrote specs for products for a company I worked for to be used by a specifying engineer. I did not write specs that a consultant would write for bidders of a particular job/product.

I did not have any physical proof that kick backs were being passed along. Any proof is buried in the mountain of financial statements that accountants/CFO's massage so thoroughly (as can be seen with the many recent corporate scandals).

So no, I did nothing unethical. It was the PE that accepted the kick backs that was unethical. And even more worry-some is the illegal practice that the company was engaged in (paying out kick backs).

 

[SlipMatWax]

I'm talking about getting paid to do a job...assisting consultants with product selections...no kick-backs...just honest value added service

 

[IRstuff]

Seems to me that the answer to your original question depends on the requirements of the customer.

Obviously, there are some customers whose sole criteria is cost, particularly for off-the-shelf or stock hardware.

Others would be more interested in your client's responsiveness and ability to adapt or otherwise modify your client's product to meet specific needs.

Therefore, you need to have both; a better than average value product and the ability to respond to unique needs not met by stock hardware.

TTFN

 

[arunmrao]

In case of defence and other sensitive areas expertise would be limited and the single vendor's recommendations will have to be relied upon.

In general engineering areas, opinion of 2 or more vendors can be taken. But more often the dominant vendor draws up a specification which is very tight thus barring competition. This process also makes the product expensive and adds to dependence of one source. I am sure a bright and experienced sourcing engineer can read the mischief and temper the specification.

 

[JoeTank]

I am a consultant that is extensively involved with inspection and maintenance of pressurized equipment such as pressure vessels, storage tanks and piping system. I think I'm pretty good at it and therefore prefer to write a specification of my own liking. For example, when I specify a material grade for use when repairing the shell of an API oil storage tank, I am absolutely sure it's the right choice. I allow the discussion of alternatives, but I make the the final call in the client's best interest. I can be fairly hardnosed about things in my area of expertise. I guess I've never quite put it this way, but one ends up looking pretty stupid if a product is specified and then the engineer rolls over and allows a substitution when first questioned. You ought to be committed to your choice of product specified and know why you are sure it's the right choice. Avoid at all costs being a spec whimp. There are too many of them now

However, there are a number of items on any given project for which my expertise may not be as extensive. In such cases, I want to hear what the vendors have to say. In particular, I want the to keep me updated on the latest, greatest stuff. Of course the challenge is to not get swept up in their hype.

In the end you have to know at least some of the basics of any critical component and why it is being specified. Ask yourself this question... Why is that particular product specified? If you can't answer that question you are the wrong person to be writting that part of the specification.

Nothing irrates me more that seeing boiler plate specs wherein there are lots of requirements and no one knows why?

Hope this helps.

Steve Braune
Tank Industry Consultants

http://www.tankindustry.com

 

[sc]

I often use a simple statement that allows the tendering companies decide what to use, "or engineer approved equivalent". Often in many industries aparticular type of product becomes known by its inventors company name.

For example in Australia storm water pit lids are often refered to as gatic lids (due to Gatic being the main manufacturer for many years). So the speci will often read "heavy duty gatic lid or approved equivalent". Similarly a precast concrete panel may be specified with "Ramset lifting lugs or engineer approved equivalent".

So the person tendering on the project can use an alternative providing he requests approval prior to submitting the tender and he specifies the change in his tender document.

regards
sc

 

[sc]

Sorry I forgot to mention that this does not, in my view, breach any ethics as no kick backs are involved and the tenderer is given the opportunity to use their prefered products.

regards
sc

 

[SlipMatWax]

Engineers I am familiar with always state "or approved equal". Often Consultants give out "Approved equal" status based on the manufacturers name. It becomes my job to ensure the Consultants specification (which I primarily wrote) is not compromised with lesser quality or lower performing products.

This fortunately is not that difficult so I can push the engineer to reject inferior products...but how far should I push to uphold my spec - I do not want to over do it an put the Consultant in a bad position.

I specify air handling products oriented around specific performance requirements.