Submit Your Suggestions for Viewpoint Team

We are right now building the capabilities to be able to customize the Approver / Reviewer / Submitter labels as well as the Action button labels in order to support the flexibility to call it what you want/need.  

Target delivery will be with the Feb Update  (late Feb)

I just got off a customer demo, PW Campbell Design Build. They objected to "Approver" as a sign-off step. 

It seems “Approver” is getting the most push back but so far I have not heard push back on “Reviewer.” Avoiding GC language and looking at synonyms. AIA Contract Document says the “Contractor” and not the Architect has final responsibility based on what I found.(see attached)

What if:

• Approver is changed to Reviewer, which seems to have the least push back and is more consistent with AIA even though approved stamps are common. In the near future this needs multilevel review. (MEP+)
• Reviewer is changed to Approver or Evaluator, i.e. an individual who judges the completeness of the Submittal per plans and specs.
• I tend to agree with the below comment on Issuer, it sounds like the Submitter that AIA 3.10.2 calls this party

It seems no one wants a word that implies a firm commitment, no surprise...

 Soft labeling is a possible solution but I don’t think we can do that in a SAAS environment?

Tom

Related AIA statement.

Thanks Shawn - really good feedback.  Ultimately we will put in the ability to customize these labels so users can control it how they need.  Short term I think we will go more generic as you have suggested. 

Also - extending the capability of the Workflow is something we will be doing in the near term but it will not be ready in our first release.

Always the challenge…coming up with something universal.

For me, maybe the following alternatives:

Administrator instead of Issuer = Author/manager of the submittal register - to make it purposely feel clerical in nature (but I don’t love my suggestion, I just think Issuer sounds a little synonymous with submitter)

Submitter = Who is submitting the supporting information Ok with me, would also feel comfortable with Subcontractor (but I agree Submitter is pretty clear and more universal)

Contractor Review instead of Reviewer = Who is responsible to provide the information to the customer

Consultant Review instead of Approver = Customer Rep who is a final reviewer in the process

I also agreed with one of the other suggestions made to basically allow to add a new row to the process (so if needed the consultant could add a row and assign it to a subconsultant).

Thanks Jeremy

Shawn Gardener P.Eng, GSC | CHANDOS
Manager, Business Solutions | 9604 - 20 Ave NW Edmonton Alberta T6N 1G1
D: 780.641.0982 C: 780.221.5408 | See Things Differently at chandos.com

We have heard this now from several people that have provided feedback.  

Shawn - ultmately we will allow for customization, but not in the first release - any input on what we could call these that would keep them generic in the near term?   We have have to take into account that we can't use just GC language.  

Current

Issuer = Author/manager of the submittal register

Submitter = Who is submitting the supporting information

Reviewer = Who is responsible to provide the information to the customer

Approver = Customer Rep who is a final reviewer in the process