CSI Cincinnati
The Construction Specifications Institute
Inside this section...
CSI Cincinnati Receives 2 Awards at CONSTRUCT 2011
Beougher named State Architect
Now Available:The CSI Practice Guides
Views expressed in these News and Views articles do not necessarily reflect the views of the CSI Cincinnati Chapter or the Construction Specifications Institute.
CSI Cincinnati Receives 2 Awards at CONSTRUCT 2011
CSI Cincinnati received 2 institute awards at the CONSTRUCT 2011 and the Annual CSI Convention in Chicago in September.
Communications Award: David S. Proudfit, FCSI, CCS, AIA received the Communications award for outstanding effort for development of the CSI Cincinnati website.
Outstanding Chapter Commendation: The Cincinnati Chapter was awarded this commendation for their efforts in 2011 meeting the designated pre-requisite core and supplemental criteria established by the Institute.
Congratulations to all involved!
Beougher Named State Architect
 |
Please join us in congratulating Lane J. Beougher, FSCI, CCS, CCCA, AIA, LEED AP, as the new state architect. After serving on an interim basis since mid-February, he was appointed State Architect by Robert Blair, director of the Ohio Department of Administrative Services (DAS), in early June.
Lane joined the State Architect's Office in 2005, most recently serving as program services manager, and led the energy services team from April 2007 through September 2009. Prior to joining the State Architect’s Office (SAO), he accumulated 25 years of facilities planning, architectural design, specifications preparation and construction administration experience in the private sector. Most recently, he was an associate and senior project architect with the Columbus office of Braun & Steidl Architects and graduated with a bachelor of science in architecture from The Ohio State University.
A Fellow of the Construction Specifications Institute, Lane serves as Secretary on the Institute Board. He is a LEED Accredited Professional and is a founding member of the Central Ohio Chapter of the U.S. Green Building Council. Lane is a former president of the Columbus Chapter of the American Institute of Architects (AIA), currently serving as the chapter’s delegate to the AIA Ohio Board and is vice chair of the national Public Architects Committee. In addition, Lane was recently appointed by Governor John Kasich to serve as a member of the Ohio Cultural Facilities Commission for a term ending Dec. 31, 2013.
The State Architect's Office, an office within the General Services Division, oversees the design and construction of facilities for state agencies, boards, commissions and institutions of higher education. For more information about SAO, go to http://ohio.gov/sao.
Now Available: The CSI Practice Guides
Introduced in January, the CSI Practice Guides are a brand-new library of comprehensive references specifically and carefully designed for the construction professional. These essential references examine important concepts and best practices integral to a particular aspect of the construction process. Each book includes access to a password-protected website with bonus content including a PDF of the book and copies of CSI format documents such as Masterformat®, UniFormat™, and SectionFormat/PageFormat™
 |
The CSI Project Delivery Practice Guide provides fundamental knowledge for the documentation, administration, and successful delivery of construction projects. It serves as a pivotal starting point for understanding CSI’s core values. It will be the main source document for those studying for the Construction Documents Technologist (CDT) certificate beginning in fall 2011. Member Price: $75. Non-Member Price: $90. Learn more, or order.
 |
The CSI Construction Specifications Practice Guide is focused on the roles and responsibilities of the specifications professional in meeting the challenges of the changing world of construction. It covers topics such as writing quality construction specifications, product selection, BIM, IPD, and more. It also is a valuable study aid for the Certified Construction Specifier (CCS) Exam. Member Price: $66.00. Non-Member Price: $80. Learn more, or order.
 |
The CSI Construction Contract Administration Practice Guide presents a thorough overview of standard contract documents and their use in successfully administering construction projects. It is also a study aid for the Certified Construction Contract Administrator (CCCA) Exam. Member Price: $66. Non-Member Price: $80. Learn more, or order.
 |
OTHER PERSPECTIVES, OPINIONS, EXPRESSIONS, IMPRESSIONS, THOUGHTS AND IDEAS ABOUT THE NOBLE PROFESSION OF SPECIFICATIONS WRITING-- OPEN FOR, AND SEEKING DISCUSSION |
 |
by Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI, CDT Hixson Architecture Engineering Interiors Cincinnati Chapter, CSI |
4 Weeks of peSPECtives
No. 157 - The Student, the Graduate and the Intern in The Architectural Profession (Before
No. 156 - Let's Re-Visit "Education
No. 155 - The Price of Making a Difference
NO. 158
FACT
Take the computer out of the equation, for a moment. Did [or can] architecture and building construction exist without the computer?]…… But if there is no computer, et. al., what is left? And then, take knowledge of construction methods and materials, and suitable depiction/documentation of required project work away, and what have you got? Well, what?
To follow the traditional AIA list of project phases [chart below], it is easily seen that several distinct block of time, and effort are required; and within each is the knowledge skill, and talent of creating a design concept, documenting it and executing it.
1 Project Programming |
2 Schematic [Preliminary] Design; Presentation Level Dwgs |
3 Design Development |
4 Production of Contract Documents; Working Dwgs Specifications |
5 Bidding and Contract Award |
6 Construction of Project Work |
Phases 1 and 2 are the areas of instruction in most architecture school curricula. These, of course, terminate in a design concept and the traditional rendering [in college work] and may appear in any of numerous formats [electronic, manual, varied media, etc.] The design itself is highly generalized, incomplete and exists at a stage where detailed work, depth of construction knowledge [methods and materials] are required. But the instruction stops and no further development of the concept is required. [There is little if any instruction in Phases 3, 4 and 5; no participation in Phase 6].
At this point, it is necessary to “dissect” [develop a series of mental pictures of how the building parts to be built and interconnected] the project by developing documentation of various parts and constructions. Here the construction knowledge and adaptive application come in to play. Detailing is required to piece the construction together on the working drawings [again in any of many formats despite current appearances and high use of computerization]. The student/graduate/intern then is required to draw upon their knowledge of methods and materials and apply and incorporate them [in revised form] to the project at hand. With no instruction in these areas, there are scant resources to draw upon and hence the young professional comes to frustrating impasse.
FACT: This is the state of affairs right now [as you well know].
As attrition eats away at office staffs, the current graduate/interns [and the students] will be in position to run the office and attempt to do the necessary work-- and there is a good chance they will be inadequate to the need. Then what? With no meaningful background, knowledge, instruction, explanation and experience to call upon, the deliverables will be toxic and highly risky to the continued existence of the office. With the resulting questionable documentation, and more and more architects and owners opting out of on-site activity by the architects, the situation is of the life of the profession and the state of construction becomes an issue of grave concern-- to both professionals, their younger staffers, students as the future professionals and, yes, the Owners [the value they receive for money-spent].
Remedies? Yes, there are some if the numerous “interested” parties will come to grips with reality by giving more attention to the practical and less to presentations and dreamy drawings.
Is CSI included n all this? Absolutely!! The background and experience of every member [including product representatives and their construction information] is invaluable and should be made available. The knowledge and expertise, to say nothing of the programs and documents available [on drawings in addition to the trove of specifications information] are immeasurable, AND there is a vital need for an expanded role for CSI, early-on, in the fundamentals of all documentation.
FACTS: Indisputable!
NO. 157
THE STUDENT, THE GRADUATE AND THE INTERN IN THE ARCHITECTURAL PROFESSION [before CSI]
In the current frenzy to produce projects in record time [coupled with the equally frenzied computer and software industry], the design professional have abandon specifications and provided increased production by in-place staffs. The computers industry continues to pump out need machines and programs-- I am not sure all of these are necessary except to generate confusion, and sales. Of course that industry can do as its pleases, it is the impact on the construction industry that is most questionable-- and of concern.
Far too many students/graduates/interns are left out of touch with the reality the whole of their profession. Hence the future, in their hands has a dark cloud over it. Will we get to the point where designer professionals are irrelevant and discarded? How the, are projects produced? We have a system of three documents tied together to produce the documentation essential for construction. They are meant to and are formulated to support each other without repetition-- the proverbial supplementary and complimentary. How then do you ignore, discard or deem one of these documents to be useless! cumbersome! Valueless? And so kept in such disdain that its production seems needless?
We have talked long and often about education that precedes the CSI programs-- that fundamental information and understand that must lie with all persons associated with construction [especially the design professionals]Following is a brief and incomplete synopsis of the suggested program-- the first step. This needs refinement, and many viewpoints, but it also needs to be done. Below is the :seed” of the program which will, I feel certain, will find many supports and advocates-- those who KNOW what is needed and what CSI can do, we must look around at what is, and ahead to what is coming—and not delude ourselves or imagine that this problem does not exist.
It is NEW!!! Does that mean bad? Has it been tried before, in this form? No matter, let’s start to accept and develop the premise NOW, for a better tomorrow and a more viable CSI, the prospect of more members and young professionals better prepared to solve problems and work as fully rounded staffers,
SUGGESTED PREMISE: A high priority CSI supported program which makes direct contact with architectural and engineering students, provides information about specifications and other construction documents-- handouts; information sheets; flyers, short instruction paper; and simple short informational items. Distributed through the Chapters, along with requests to address students [and related graduates and interns] of various levels and provide information for each level, as well as quality Q&A sessions.
Developed and written jointly by member committee and CSI staff, printed and sent to chapters who are mandated to contact ALL appropriate educational facilities in their area [universities, community and technical colleges, etc.] to augment any instruction or to introduce specifications fundamentals and uses.
If they have no interest in CSI, or specifications, [because of the lack of information] we need to reach out TO them and illustrate the need for specs, and the best route for education [to gain suitable background information] and specifications concepts, etc. With that we can also introduce the drawing oriented information, books, standards, interfacing, etc. that CSI has, to complete the documentation package.
It is difficult to predict what will happen, from little interest, to defiance, to a request for more formal broad-ranging instruction. No, CSi is not being asked to set up its own school, but rather it is being asked to start to fill an obvious and unthinkable need which will directly aid everyone in or coming to the construction industry [the future of in place personnel, etc. is left to another effort.]
We realize this may be very new, presumptuous and intrusive, but it is needed, NOW, and is something that will develop into something to the good of all. In adding this program and information needs to be aggressively sold, needs NCARB, etc. acceptance [to match requirements and NAAB standards] in a realistic manner, and by expertise that only CSI has.
We seek your understanding; your realization; your insight, and support-- and ancillary thoughts and ideas contributed by those we carry and feel they have a point to add to the effort.
We need to talk more, soon, and seriously!
NO. 156
LET’S RE-VISIT “EDUCATION”
I really think we need to re-visit education from the beginning to the end [of former schooling that is!] How did it get so darn complicated and involved? Tell me there isn’t still a need for readin’, writin’ and ‘arithmetic? We now have college graduates [including athletes] who can’t read-- maybe that’s why they don’t understand what a contract means! We have people who drive like the devil, but barely pass the written test-- if at all.
We have people pretending to be doctors-- now there is dumb on both sides of that! We have college curricula where you can trace a list of courses through, get a degree and have almost a meaningless education [the proverbial, basket weaving, intramural sports administration, psychology of inter-fruit fly relations, etc. But RWR—give me a break.]
We have some students who take advanced courses, but are miserable failures socially. We have some so distractible that frat life, etc., overtakes and overwhelms them and “college” takes on an entirely different meaning [besides, who pays their way?- dumb on 2 sides there, too].
And the schools don’t deserve any kudos either. We want to educate the whole person! Whoa! That’s great, BUT what will they be capable of doing after? We teach-- we don’t train students for their professions! What? How do you establish any valid criterion that makes that work except the dumbing down of your intent? “OH, we only teach to a ____________ level, and not to the full extent!” Then who does? And what is that level for doctors, lawyers, engineers-- and architects? How do you teach part of the work of a profession and not other parts? [How do train product representatives using half or less of available product information?] “Oh, we leave that training to the employers!” OK! Now do the employers understand that? Is the degree granted asterisked to note the shortchanged academic work? Oh, and do the employers buy into this?
Many larger employers, out of necessity, actually take college graduates and re-train them to make them functional in the relevant field of study—BUT every employer is not capable of doing this-- i.e., some folks simply have to work and produce!
The United States is falling shamelessly short of the education achievement of other countries—why? Don’t we care anymore? Something over 55% of all teachers have a Masters-- so why is the instructional work of these folks, in all too many cases, so lax? In a society where a skilled construction trade worker can earn a higher income than a full PhD professor, we need to look around. What are our values? Trade workers need not be demeaned for their skill and effort, but surely neither should college professors, who see fit to work and teach, [despite tenure] be penalized. As well as their students!
Money is the common denominator in all this. But how about this-- allocate money to assist students with education but demand/require that their education meet established [and not watered-down] standards along with teaching standards. Bad educational results and/or bad teaching, no funding!! BUT we also have to get academics off their path of pure theory and get them to educate in a manner that both educates in general, but also to specific professional goals and standards-- and then stick to them. We need to look at the whole student and not how we can 1] move ’em on with minimum effort and low skills, 2] get the most money out of or for them, and 3] dismiss responsibility at any level and on any one’s part for failure. We need a new educational perspective, top to bottom!
Part of this may well lie in professional organizations like CSI, which have a unique and deep expertise and the capacity to pass it along to appropriately involved students. Obviously, we can’t change the entire system, but we can provide some help and insight for new professionals, coming along, to avoid further degradation of the system and documents. Why not? We can provide the fundamentals, the practicality, the experience and the basic motivation for production of quality products. Action by similar organizations affects the entire industry and assists all levels and types of activities to the good of all. If we can teach specs, and have other, related resources available already, can we not also teach drawings and documentation overall? No one else seems interested in this, which, if it still ignored, will plague good construction documentation concept, fundamentals and deliverables. If not? Not the brightest of futures!
NO. 155
THE PRICE OF MAKING A DIFFERENCE
Everything, and I guess everyone has a price! In life, we come to learn, not so much in those words, but the rough experience that tells us, over and over-- to gain something you usually have to give something back or up! That may even apply to those who are independently wealthy, through mere inheritance, but the power and impact comes out more in those that work for their money.
But, strangely enough, we humans are always very reluctant to pay the price. Sometimes we travel miles (using the dearly pricey gasoline of today) to save a nickel on a bunch of carrots! We feel sooo satisfied, never seeming to equate the cost of the gas against the savings of the carrots!
Another of the wonderful old saws is the proverbial, “You’ve got to spent money to make money!” Staying with the gasoline “thing”, don’t you spend the cost of gasoline to get to work to make your weekly money? See! And your pay reflects the cost in human terms!
But you can also “spend” time, brain-power, skill, talent, information, ingenuity, and in many instances what you spend is shared but never really leaves you-- you just sort of peel off a copy for others, and keep the resource as yours. And there are, of course, the other times!
The “other times” are those where you must literally spend [and perhaps never see again] some of your financial resources. College tuition could fall into this category, until you see your youngsters graduate and find success-- but your money spent, there, comes back as pride, satisfaction, love, and a really good feeling [none of which jingles in your pocket as new cash on hand. This can even be tuition, etc. spent on yourself!
In industry and commerce, spending to make money, is somewhat different. Here, as investments, there are R&D efforts that flop; product creations that fall short; the cost of testing and meeting regulations; loss due to not being to market first; plants built but never occupied; and ideas [even from high corporate mines] that never pan out. Money lost? In a way, knowledge is gained [small comfort] but usually some lesson is taken away and impacts some other similar situation [to its good!].
Venturing forth into unknown or untried endeavors also extracts a risk of money lost [to at least some degree]. But with decent forethought, development, preparation and planning [also a cost] the ability to enhance one’s impact, influence and success is the due reward. When there is expertise and knowledge available and left unused, nothing is gained; nothing is made better. Benign neglect is the product that accrues.
At times venturing out or “reaching out” to perceived success in a new area or effort is beneficial to the standing entity and both enriches and enlivens the organization-- and its membership [often drawing participation out of more and different members]. New products are a constant—always! Something new invented or evolved! But most of the time this involves spending money to make money; the alternative is to grow stale, reclusive, bogged-down and slowly approaching loss of value, credence, influence and membership [in general called, “failure”].
Whether product, system, material, new techniques or revised procedures, some block of instruction is required. Education is a continual process! That is rather well known and fact [necessity?], but when that education starts has become an issue. Why? Knowing new things does not necessarily negate or override the older information. In fact the first and elementary education is what forms good working habits, depth of knowledge, flexibility in application and well-founded choices and decisions.
Simplistically, we don’t start reading a book in the middle—rather we work through the beginning which is almost without exception the background, setting and character development for the rest of the information. In some cases this is chronological, but nonetheless has a scheme involved—progression of adding fact on fact. This leads directly to planning—both long- and short range , and the introduction of new and added programs. Not every program need be pursued at the same rate for all time; many can and are perpetuated simply by their success. But things and times changes. It is here where we must react, and act in accord with obvious new situations, work programs, and level of education.
The risk of failure exists, and must be addressed. So new programs as we all know, need to start small, with growing vision which can modify them as needed in the future. They will need nurturing and perhaps modification. BUT, the new programs must get started!!! If well directed and supported in the beginning and with appropriate on-going care, the difference[s] will come!
 |
Thomas R. Yocum, Esq., CSI
Managing Member
Benjamin, Yocum & Heather, LLC
Attorneys at Law
ACCEPTING RESPONSIBILITY IN AN AGE OF DENIAL
No denying it, we live in an age of denial. I am reminded of a quote by Woody Allen that a husband should always deny to his wife that he is involved in an extra-marital affair, even if his wife catches him in bed with another woman. “Deny it, because that’s what she wants to hear.” Refusal to admit a mistake and take responsibility leads to many undesirable consequences. Richard Nixon could attest to that.
Accepting responsibility is considered a trait of a great leader. Leaders do not achieve a loyal and inspired following by placing blame on others around them. Leaders take responsibility even when it is not their fault and encourage their team to succeed. This is true whether applied to a sports team or a business.
Similar principles apply on a construction project. Much has been written about partnering and other cooperative approaches to construction, but at the core is the notion of each participant in the construction process taking responsibility for their duties and actions. Unfortunately, financial considerations often outweigh willingness to accept responsibility and notions of fairness. Sometimes, an element of pride slips in as well.
In our personal lives, we all would rather purchase goods and services from someone who stands behind their product or service and honors warranties, etc. If something is wrong, they make it right. While in the short term, it costs them: in the long term, it is good business. It can make the difference between gaining a customer for life, and losing a customer who in addition bad mouths the company and causes it to lose other prospective customers as well.
Doing the right thing is good business. But doing the right thing doesn’t stop with how a business treats its customers. I was somewhat amused when a subcontractor client recently asked me to review a proprietary subcontract agreement that a general contractor was insisting be utilized. The agreement, with attachments was about 50 pages long. It was in a font size so small as to be barely legible. One of the attachments was the general contractor’s “Code of Business Ethics” which included a provision stating that it would “Deal honestly and fairly with clients, suppliers, vendors, contractors, and financial partners.” Many of the subcontract provisions were not fair to the subcontractor. Was this “Code of Ethics” only for lip service or for real?
Actions speak louder than words. Companies that are in this industry for the long haul and seek to be viewed as honest and fair earn that reputation through their actions. While somewhat trite, it is still very true that “Honesty is the best policy.”
Thomas R. Yocum, Esq., CSI
Benjamin, Yocum & Heather, LLC
300 Pike Street, Suite 500
Cincinnati, OH 45202-4222
(513) 721-5672
Web site: www.byhlaw.com
e-mail: tyocum@byhlaw.com
 |
curmudgeon: A crusty, irascible, cantankerous old person full of stubborn ideas or opinions |
 |
By Sheldon Wolfe, RA, FCSI, CCS, CCCA Minneapolis-St. Paul Chapter BWBR Architects St. Paul, Minnesota
Etched in Stone |
What is the value of a signature? More to the point, what is the value of a "wet" signature? Although some states have taken steps to modernize the requirements for certification of construction documents and other legal documents, others are mired in practices that haven't made sense for a long time.
Of those states that allow something other than a manual signature to certify documents, some allow only software encryption, while others allow a facsimile of a signature. The result is a mix of methods, requiring design professionals to verify requirements for each state. To make things more interesting, states and local agencies are inconsistent in the way they interpret or use state statutes.
What really makes sense? Is a wet signature necessary? What does it prove?
The history of wet signatures is nearly as old as writing. Centuries ago, when few people could read or write, laws allowed a person to sign a contract merely by making an "X" or other mark. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that many documents were explained in terms not used in the documents, then used against those who "signed" them, the argument being that they agreed to the terms, even though they could not read them. Those laws are still with us, and remain subject to abuse.
Despite what is permitted by statutes, many architects and engineers refuse to make use of alternative methods of certification, and insist on manually signing documents. If wet-signed documents are required by statute there is no point in arguing, but when facsimile signatures are acceptable, there is no reason to continue using wet signatures.
With today's technology, I can go to the builders exchange, get a certification page, create an image of a signature, and put that signature into another document. After copying or printing, it will be virtually impossible to tell if copies of the new documents were produced from an original with a wet signature. Heck, I could have done the same thing years ago with old-fashioned cut-and-paste.
Consider a document that has a wet signature. Unless you were present when the document was signed, you can't tell if it had been signed by the person whose signature you see, or by someone else. So what does it prove? Should we take it a step further, and require notarization? Then we would have a signature, and a notary seal. But does that really prove anything? Not really; all it would prove is that a person with proper credentials - which might have been forged - signed the document.
It reminds me of a M*A*S*H episode, when Radar asked the colonel to sign a document, then initial his signature to show that he signed it.
Electronic and digital signatures
The terms electronic signature and digital signature often are used interchangeably, but there is a difference. To make it interesting, each state has its own definitions, and rules for how they are used, while the federal government has definitions and rules that apply to interstate commerce.
In general, an electronic signature is any electronic thing that is used to show that the intent the person who uses it is to sign a document. In common definitions, it can be a symbol, a process, or even a sound. In many cases, the symbol is a facsimile of the person's signature, reproduced as an electronic image, typically a jpg image or an electronically reproduced document bearing a "real" signature. Most of us use a form of electronic signature without thinking about it; any time you use an ATM or pay a bill online, you are using a process that indicates you agree to making that particular transaction.
In contrast, a digital signature is a form of encryption that can be used not only to verify the origin of a document, but to indicate if the contents have been changed. In practice, it is more "real" than a wet signature. For example, someone could alter the content of a fifty page paper document without much trouble, and with little chance of detection, as long as the page with the signature was left intact. Although technically possible, it is extremely difficult to break the encryption and alter a digital document. Digital signatures would appear to be the best certification method, but I doubt that many firms have the necessary software. Even if encryption were used, it's likely that many recipients would be unfamiliar with it, and would insist on "real" signatures.
Use of both electronic and digital signatures is essential for today's commerce. If we still relied on wet signatures, there would be no ATMs, eBay, or credit cards. We would be required either to appear in person, or to send paper documents with wet signatures (which are easily forged) for every purchase and bank deposit. Not quite what we've become accustomed to!
Federal and state governments not only approve, but encourage the use of both electronic and digital signatures. The Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (ESIGN) states that "electronic" means form, and that a contract or signature “may not be denied legal effect, validity, or enforceability solely because it is in electronic form”.
The Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) required federal agencies to use electronic forms, electronic filing, and electronic signatures to conduct official business with the public whenever possible. A practical result many of us enjoy is electronic filing of our income tax returns, if anything related to the IRS can be considered enjoyable.
Certification of construction documents
Given the widespread acceptance of electronic signatures, requiring wet signatures for construction documents simply doesn't make sense. Beyond that, the statutes that govern certification of construction documents vary widely from one state to another.
Of the states I have worked in, most have a single licensing board for all design professionals, but one has one board for architects and another for engineers and surveyors. In that state, the governing statutes are similar, but not identical.
Some states require the use of a seal, while others allow an electronic image of the seal. Some require wet signatures, others do not. Some require that all drawings be signed, while others allow signatures to appear on only the cover page. All accept a single certification page for project manuals. When wet signatures are required, the number of copies required, and the purposes for which they are required vary. As if that weren't confusing enough, interpretation can vary within a state.
I think we're making progress, but until you know what is required, find the applicable statutes, and then ask the agencies you're working with what they require.
© 2011, Sheldon Wolfe, RA, FCSI, CCS, CCCA, CSC
Follow me at http://swconstructivethoughts.blogspot.com/
http://twitter.com/swolfearch
 |
Spec That!
Gary Beimers, FCSI, CDT Grand Rapids Chapter |
A humorous look at MasterFormat |
|
Seen at McCormick Place, Chicago during CONSTRUCT 2011
Gives new meaning to . . . 14 46 00 – Limited-Use/Limited-Application Elevators NOTE: be sure to specify flexible piping in Div. 22, specially if the installation is pit-less |
Gary Beimers, FCSI, CSI is president of GLB Consultants of Grand Rapids, Michigan, and an "at large" member of CSC. He has been part of the MasterFormat expansion and implementation team.
