Day 2
It's been two days and I have a lot of thoughts about how this new organization operates. I can't tell if it's because I think that they're doing things wrong or if it's just because it's different than what I'm used to. In my previous role I had some ability to effect changes in the way the group operated and it often made things run better, but here I'm the outsider and there's a voice in my head saying that I should hold back my suggestions until I'm more settled into the workflow that these people have developed over 20 years of working together. That is a long time obviously, but it hasn't been just them that whole time, they've had several other members of the team over the years, including someone who left just in the last few weeks. Each of them left their own impact and impression on the function of the office, some of which have been manifested in lines of the office manual which specifically requests us to not "yawn loudly" (wonder who caused the need for THAT). I'm sure that I'll leave my impact too, but at the moment I'm just trying to get my feet under me.
The guy who just left was the firm leader in Revit, the drafting software that the industry is moving towards, and now that he's gone there's a hole in that area of expertise. Filling a vacuum in the knowledge and practice of Revit is a specialty that I've made the focus of my career for the last 10 years, so I feel like I'm in a good place. The downside is that the remaining staff don't use Revit much at all; they're talented architects and designers who know what they're doing, but just haven't had much time with the tool. So this means that I don't have someone to guide me in learning what the firms standards and best practices are; I'm just picking through files in an attempt to forensically reconstruct office standards. Their models are good, in some ways better than what I'm used to, but it's not like you can show work in a Revit model. There's good organization, I think the naming convention could be more clear, but what's there makes sense. I realized tonight that their lineweights (the thickness of lines on a drawing) are really good and the drawings are super crisp and clear. But then I see something like them having three different fonts on a titleblock and I wonder if that's purposeful or not. I wouldn't do it that way, but is this a standard that they've been developing for 30 years? Is that even a conversation worth having? Am I getting wrapped up in minutiae?
But I do have to codify some things and these guidelines need to work all members of the team. But then I think that I'm going to be pretty much be the only working in Revit in the near term, so how important is it that what I come up with works for them? As much as I like to go my own way, I know the answer is that, deep down it is important that what I come up with works for other people. I've always held that ease of use is one of the prime directives of a good Revit manager, so now my task is to understand 30 years of standards and practice and condense it into some practical guidelines and templates. All while also running projects and producing drawings. Should be fun, but to be honest, it's easier than the last time I did since I didn't also have to train an office of 30+ people and troubleshoot IT problems at the same time!
The guy who just left was the firm leader in Revit, the drafting software that the industry is moving towards, and now that he's gone there's a hole in that area of expertise. Filling a vacuum in the knowledge and practice of Revit is a specialty that I've made the focus of my career for the last 10 years, so I feel like I'm in a good place. The downside is that the remaining staff don't use Revit much at all; they're talented architects and designers who know what they're doing, but just haven't had much time with the tool. So this means that I don't have someone to guide me in learning what the firms standards and best practices are; I'm just picking through files in an attempt to forensically reconstruct office standards. Their models are good, in some ways better than what I'm used to, but it's not like you can show work in a Revit model. There's good organization, I think the naming convention could be more clear, but what's there makes sense. I realized tonight that their lineweights (the thickness of lines on a drawing) are really good and the drawings are super crisp and clear. But then I see something like them having three different fonts on a titleblock and I wonder if that's purposeful or not. I wouldn't do it that way, but is this a standard that they've been developing for 30 years? Is that even a conversation worth having? Am I getting wrapped up in minutiae?
But I do have to codify some things and these guidelines need to work all members of the team. But then I think that I'm going to be pretty much be the only working in Revit in the near term, so how important is it that what I come up with works for them? As much as I like to go my own way, I know the answer is that, deep down it is important that what I come up with works for other people. I've always held that ease of use is one of the prime directives of a good Revit manager, so now my task is to understand 30 years of standards and practice and condense it into some practical guidelines and templates. All while also running projects and producing drawings. Should be fun, but to be honest, it's easier than the last time I did since I didn't also have to train an office of 30+ people and troubleshoot IT problems at the same time!
👍🏼❤️
ReplyDeleteI also think there is a way to speak up when you are new so that you don’t come across as a jerk. I think they respect another opinion from a fresh set of eyes. I know that I would appreciate someone who spoke up. My 2 cents.
DeleteI think there's a bit of an unspoken timeframe before you point out how wrong they're doing things....but I don't know exactly when that is....lol.. 6 months?
ReplyDelete