First Steps

Well right out of the gate, if you want to implement new software and change processes, you'll have some things to nail down and a lot of issues to deal with.

1) Sell the idea of changing software to management
Everybody's boss is different but here are some ideas based on ABS.

• Drafting speed will increase
• Engineering tools available
• Improved accuracy in scheduling
• New level of standardization - layers, styles, dwg management
• Direct interoperability with ADT
• Near automatic background clean up with ADT drawings.

Now I also had to point out some problems

• Long setup process
• Mandatory education for designers and engineers
• Process changes make old-timers upset

Everything you say at this point can and will be hit with an objection. Try to focus on the big picture idea that this change would over all be beneficial even if some of the parts were not adopted and others are optimized. They all go together to make the process and product better.

You may be asked to back up your promises with some sort of fact. Robert Green counts mouse clicks and so do I. Pick the processes that you see the most benefit in using and count the mouse clicks. Weigh that against the old way to quantify the time by clicks, then multiple by the number of users and the average number of times per day they may use the process. Now it's pretty simple math for how many days will it take to make up the cost of the software and initial slowdown on productivity.

Here's an example.

Drawing a single open ended lentgh of 2 line duct with a label in AutoCAD takes a minimum of 10 clicks counting each keyboard entry as a click.The same duct can be done in 5 clicks in ABS. Let's say a click takes 1 second and my average HVAC drafter draws duct about 4 hours a day. If that drafter is making just $10 an hour, I'm saving $20 a day per drafter. Ok, I have 5 mechanical drafters so that's $100 a day. If they work 230 days a year that's a savings of $23,000 on drawing duct faster alone.

There are plenty of assumptions in there and things that may or may not apply to you. The idea is that you stack enough of these processes and time savers together to give your managment confidence that this really is going to make a difference.

That was ABS. Revit was similar but different. Harder to sell with it's shortcomings. See my previous post on the subject.

2) Sell the company on the matter

You may be surprised by the level of fear in some employees. The whole thing once announced can cause quit a bit of conversation at the old water cooler. A company wide meeting to set a common and correct expectation of what is to come, will go a long way to help stiffle rumors before they start working against you and the process of change. Plus, everybody needs information to help them feel confident about major changes to their job.

Next time, I will be talking about where to go from here.

Delivering the Goods in the 21st Century

I am currently studying the options for a MEP firm that has been using AutoCAD for the last 15 years. Their AutoCAD has been highly customized. There are great standards in place and the whole company seems to know what to do to get construction documents out the door. CAD has been clicking along here for some time now, but there is an ever-increasing pressure to be able to deliver something more than the competition. So there’s that question, ABS or Revit? As I have been talking to architects and owners to determine what is best to deliver, I have come to a conclusion, which will probably make me unpopular.

Are you reading Norfolk-Observer?

The clients are asking for everything. They want AutoCAD. They want a Revit Systems. They want Building Systems, and they want them in every version they make.

I have spent the last 15 years trying to raise the level of AutoCAD intelligence in the world to give firms a competitive advantage only to discover that it’s time to raise the bar again. We need confident CAD users who are fluent in 3 CAD languages. That's no small task in front of all of us. Some power users will be willing and excited to learn more, but other folks do not handle change so well. Especially a change that requires them to change the way they think about design.

We have been using AutoCAD to draft. It has always been about the construction documents. Engineers engineer and pass it to a draftsperson to create CDs. There have always been some designers that design and draft, but for me it has always been a mostly polarized process.

When I think about Autodesk software it always shakes out like this.

AutoCAD is best for drafting.
Building Systems is best for designers.
Revit Systems has the tools engineers need.


If I’m right, everybody is going to have to take it up a notch. We will need drafters who understand enough about design to use ABS. We will need designers who understand enough about engineering to use Revit, and engineers’ should be expected to embrace an engineering tool made just for them.

So what’s it going to take? A giant step back, to look at what we really need to deliver. We will have to create new processes based off each deliverable. Proper expectations must be set with owners and architects for these new deliverables. There will be a lot of training involved here no doubt on top of a huge financial investment in software and a new approach to the distribution of software between users.

It’s funny, but for the first time I will be using this blog site as a kind of diary. Chronicling the plans, the successes and failures as I go. Up next time will be my first steps toward a 3-prong approach to CAD dominance. Success, failure or waste of time, we’ll all learn something.