9th January 2007, 02:43 PM
Posted by Unit of 1:
I would only call something a specification if it is written by one organisation to tell another what to do or how to do it. For instance, a consultant might write a spec on behalf of his client, agree it with the curator, and then invite a number of different contractors to tender for the work on the basis of that spec. Obviously, the spec could not identify the contractor under those circumstances, because they would not yet have been appointed.
Why is that sinister? It is standard practice in much of British archaeology and throughout the construction industry.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Quote:quote:Most specs I have ever seen normally say somebody who will be doing the work. Seems a bit sinister. Donât they mention specialists and resources. I prepare my specs with my name on iI think there may be some confusion about terminology here. If you write a document describing what you are going to do yourself, I would call that a 'project design', or possibly a 'written scheme of investigation'.
I would only call something a specification if it is written by one organisation to tell another what to do or how to do it. For instance, a consultant might write a spec on behalf of his client, agree it with the curator, and then invite a number of different contractors to tender for the work on the basis of that spec. Obviously, the spec could not identify the contractor under those circumstances, because they would not yet have been appointed.
Why is that sinister? It is standard practice in much of British archaeology and throughout the construction industry.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished