Switching specification software: a guide for UK practices
What clause-library tools do well, why practices look for something different, everything Avoice does beyond the specification, and how to switch without paying for two tools at once.
What should you look for in specification software?
Most practices are not short of clauses. They are short of time, because coordinating the specification with the drawings and checking it before issue still happens by hand. When you compare tools, look at how much of that work each one takes on.
Avoice is an AI specification platform built for UK practices. It drafts the specification from the project's own drawings, schedules and the practice's past work, in CAWS or Uniclass, then checks the result against itself and the drawings before it goes out. It also runs the rest of the job in the same workspace: building regulations, planning conditions, CDM, tender evaluation, contract administration and practice management. Clause-library tools start from a maintained library and rely on the specifier to assemble and review.
We make Avoice, so this guide gives clause-library tools credit where they are strongest and covers the other routes practices take, not only ours.
A clause-library tool starts from a maintained library and relies on the specifier to review. Avoice starts from project information and adds an automated check before issue.
What clause-library tools do well
Clause-library specification software has been the standard way to write UK specifications for years, and it is worth being clear about what it does well before deciding to change.
Most established tools offer some or all of the following:
- Maintained content, written and updated by the provider.
- Classification, usually Uniclass, CAWS or both.
- Collaboration, with several people working on one specification.
- Masters, so a practice can reuse its most common clauses.
- Model links, through plug-ins for common BIM tools.
- Product data, for adding manufacturer products.
Their real strengths are maintained content, familiarity (contractors and many clients know the documents they produce) and mature co-authoring. Practices with dedicated specifiers and well-kept masters can run a consistent, auditable process on them.
Why practices look for something different
In our conversations with practices, the reason for looking elsewhere is rarely the clauses. More often it is the time spent keeping the specification consistent with itself and the drawings.
- Time goes on coordination
- Picking clauses is the visible part. Checking fire ratings against details, matching door and window types to ironmongery, and confirming the specification still agrees with the drawings after the last revision take longer, and a clause library does not do those checks.
- The drawings still need checking
- A clause library helps you write the specification, and an experienced specifier writes well from it. But it does not read your drawings, so checking that the specification matches them is still done by hand, revision after revision.
- Cost against use
- Licences are often priced per user and package. Practices where architects write specifications only a few weeks a year may pay for seats that are used for part of the year.
- Setup takes time
- Building a master and learning a new tool is a real investment, especially for small teams.
- One place for the project
- Practices that also need QA/QC, construction administration and a project record often prefer one workspace to several tools that do not share information.
A clause library helps you write the specification. It does not check that the specification still agrees with itself and the drawings.
The realistic routes
Practices that rethink how they write specifications usually take one of five routes. Each solves a different problem, so start from the problem you have.
| Route | What you get | Checking before issue | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|
| A smaller package from your current provider | The same content and tools at a lower tier | Manual, by the specifier | Practices that want the same content but less of it |
| Word and an office master | Full control of wording, no licence | Manual; nothing keeps clauses current | Small, repetitive project types |
| A specification consultant | An expert writes the specification for you | Depends on the consultant's process | Large or unusual projects, occasional need |
| Avoice (AI specification) | Draft from project information in CAWS or Uniclass, Practice Voice rules | Automated, spec against itself and drawings | Architects who write and coordinate their own specs |
| Your current tool plus an independent check | Keep writing as you do now, add Avoice QA/QC before issue | Automated, on your existing output | Practices committed to their current tool or to clients who expect its output |
The routes are not exclusive. A practice can combine a writing tool with an independent check.
A smaller package can lower the licence cost, while the drafting and checking work stays much the same. If the issue is the time spent drafting and checking, or defects found after issue, an automated check is the part that addresses it.
Clause-library tools and Avoice side by side
The two approaches overlap on classification, model links and practice standards. They differ most on where content comes from, whether checking is automated, and how much of the project the tool covers.
| Typical clause-library tool | Avoice | |
|---|---|---|
| Approach | Specifier selects and edits clauses from a library | AI drafts from project information; architect reviews and signs off |
| Content source | Provider-written, maintained library | The project's drawings and schedules plus the practice's own past work |
| Classification | Usually Uniclass, CAWS or both | CAWS and Uniclass, output to Word and PDF |
| Practice standards | Masters | Practice Voice: preferred clauses, products and wording turned into rules |
| Automated checking | Varies; often manual review by the specifier | Built-in QA/QC: contradictions, broken references, leftover content, open items, spec vs drawings |
| Open items | Handled by the specifier | Explicit TBCs with reasons, rolled into a per-project TBC register |
| Model links | Plug-ins for common BIM tools | Revit and Archicad plugins |
| Engineering | Varies by provider and package | MEP, structural and other engineering specifications |
| Regulations | Varies by provider | Regulations library for all four UK nations with cited answers, plus a Building Regs Tracker (England) mapping each requirement to its evidence |
| Wider scope | Usually specification-focused | The whole job: planning conditions, CDM, drawing QA, tender evaluation, contract administration, project record and practice management (see FIG. 05) |
| Pricing | Usually quoted per user and package | Quoted per practice, based on team size and modules |
Clause-library tools vary. Check what your current provider offers before comparing, and compare total cost including staff time, not licence fees alone.
How to compare the cost
Licence fees are the visible number, but staff time is usually the larger one. A fair comparison counts, for one typical project: the licence share, the hours spent assembling the specification, the hours spent checking it against the drawings, and the time spent answering tender queries that a check would have caught. Ask your current provider for a renewal quote for your team, and an Avoice quote for the same team, and compare them on that basis.
What Avoice covers beyond the specification
Most clause-library tools focus on the specification. Avoice is a workspace for the whole job, from the first regulations question at brief to valuations on site, with the specification as one part of it.
That matters when you compare cost. A practice moving to Avoice may also be replacing a regulations subscription, a spreadsheet of planning conditions, a CDM register in Word, a tender comparison workbook, a timesheet tool and an inbox full of RFIs. And because every module reads from the same project record, a change in one place can be picked up wherever it matters.
Avoice runs one project record through every stage. Stage spans are indicative.
Beyond the specification, module by module
| Area | What Avoice does |
|---|---|
| Building regulations | A library of nearly 500 regulation and guidance documents across England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, with cited answers that link to the clause they come from. The Building Regs Tracker (England) maps each requirement to the drawing, clause or report that evidences it, and shows the gaps. |
| Planning | Planning conditions read from the decision notice and linked to the clauses, products and drawings each one controls, with a discharge log. |
| CDM | A CDM risk register built from hazards in the drawings, specs and reports. |
| Drawing QA/QC | Drawing review for coordination clashes, missing references and spec mismatches before issue, plus questions answered from the drawings with sources. |
| Schedules | Door, window, finish and FF&E schedules kept in step with the specification as the design changes. |
| Products | A product room with datasheets, lead times and approved alternates, linked to the clause library so the spec follows when a product changes. |
| Tender evaluation | Evaluate levels tender returns side by side, flags outliers, exclusions and qualifications, traces each figure to its source page and drafts clarification questions for each bidder. |
| Contract administration | Submittals and shop drawings checked against the clauses they answer, RFI responses drafted from the project documents and tracked to resolution, site inspection reports drafted from visit notes and photos, and valuations. |
| Project record | A project record of notices, drawing issues, reports and decisions, with a per-project email address for filing project mail into it. |
| Practice management | Timesheets, fees, cash flow and invoicing connected to Xero and QuickBooks, clients, staffing, and tasks and boards. |
Modules share one project record, so information entered once is available across them.
Why one workspace matters
Most coordination errors happen in the gaps between tools. When a fire door's rating changes on the drawings, the clause, the door schedule and the Part B evidence all need to change with it. In separate tools, someone has to remember all three. In Avoice they read the same project record, so the QA check flags the clause and schedule entry that no longer match, and the Building Regs Tracker shows the Part B evidence that needs updating.
The same applies further along. A submittal is checked against the clause it answers, an RFI response can see the drawing and the spec, and the CDM register picks up hazards from the documents you have already written. That is harder to do when the specification lives in a separate tool.
How to switch specification software without paying twice
Many practices are part-way through a contract when they decide to move. The switch works best when you start testing the alternative months before your renewal date, not the week before. The Avoice switching page has a renewal checker and the full offer conditions.
- Find your renewal date and notice period. Check your order form for your renewal date and any notice period, as these vary by contract. Diarise the last day you can give notice, then use the renewal checker to see how the switching offer applies to you.
- Run a check on a live specification. Send a recent specification, written in any tool, to hello@avoice.co for a free QC check. It shows what the check finds on your own work before you change anything.
- Load your practice standards. Upload your own office masters and standard wording. Practice Voice turns your preferred clauses, products and wording into rules, so your standards carry over rather than starting again.
- Pilot on one live project. Draft the next package in Avoice alongside your usual process and compare the time taken and the issues found.
- Decide before the notice deadline. Give notice as your contract requires, keep copies of anything you want to keep, and move the rest of the team across.
Not ready to switch yet? Start with the check
If you are mid-contract or have clients who expect documents from a particular tool, you can keep writing as you do now and run Avoice's QA/QC on what you issue. It flags contradictions, orphan references, leftover content, open TBCs and drawing mismatches on specifications from any source. Because Avoice writes in the same CAWS and Uniclass structures, moving the writing across later is straightforward.
Timings are illustrative. Your notice period is set by your own contract, so check it first.
Get up to 12 months of Avoice free. Sign up to an annual Avoice plan and we won't charge you for the months left on your current contract, up to 12, so you aren't paying for both.
Common questions about switching specification software
What does Avoice do beyond writing specifications?
Besides drafting and checking specifications, Avoice covers the rest of the job in one workspace: a building regulations library with cited answers and an evidence tracker for England, a planning conditions register, a CDM risk register, drawing QA, tender evaluation, contract administration, and timesheets, fees and invoicing.
Is there a cheaper way to write specifications?
Options include a smaller package from your current provider, Word with an office master, a specification consultant, or AI specification software such as Avoice. Compare total cost, including staff time on drafting and checking, not licence fees alone.
Can I switch part-way through my current contract?
Yes. Check your order form for your renewal date and any notice period, as these vary by contract. With the Avoice switching offer, you commit to an annual plan and use Avoice free for the months left on your current contract, up to 12.
Does Avoice support CAWS and Uniclass?
Yes. Avoice writes in CAWS and Uniclass with standard Word and PDF output.
Will contractors and clients accept a specification written in Avoice?
What they rely on is the structure, classification and content, not the software that produced it. Avoice issues CAWS or Uniclass specifications as standard Word and PDF documents. If a framework or client contract names a particular product, check its wording before switching.
Does AI write the specification for us?
It drafts it. Where the drawings do not answer a question, Avoice leaves a TBC with a reason rather than guessing. The architect or specifier reviews every clause and signs off what is issued.
Can I keep my current tool and still use Avoice?
Yes. You can keep writing as you do now and use Avoice's QA/QC to check the output against itself and the drawings before issue.
Where Avoice fits
Avoice is built for practices where coordination and checking, not clause selection, take most of the specification effort. It can replace your current tool outright, sit after it as the final check, or take over the rest of the job around the specification.
Avoice is used by UK practices ranging from sole practitioners to firms of around 100 architects. You can see spec writing and QA/QC on one of your own projects, or send an existing specification, from any tool, to hello@avoice.co for a free check.
Software can draft, compare and flag. The architect and specifier still decide what the project requires and sign off what is issued.
The specification, and the rest of the job, in one place
Specifications drafted from your project information and checked against the drawings, with regulations, compliance registers, tender evaluation and contract administration in the same workspace. Paying for another tool? Get up to 12 months of Avoice free on an annual plan.
This guide is for general information. Features, notice periods and pricing of other specification tools vary; check them with your provider before deciding. Switching offer: up to 12 months free, subject to an annual Avoice plan and proof of your current contract end date. Full conditions at avoice.co/switch.