CSI would like to make note here: "CSIs Board has openly acknowledged that the CDS rollout was not communicated well at the outset; the CEO has publicly taken responsibility, and the Board has held him accountable. What has changed is the commitment going forward: members will hear about significant developments from CSI first, and regularly, as CDS evolves."

Board Acknowledges Concerns, Members Await Action

At CSI's June 27 national board meeting, two Fellows of the Institute—Greg Markling and Holly Jordan—had the opportunity to address the board on behalf of the membership.

Markling, a Distinguished Member, Lifetime Member and former CSI president, delivered a prepared statement outlining what he described as years of growing member frustration with several organizational initiatives, culminating in the rollout of Dynamic Standards.

Regarding the new licensing model, Markling argued that many members view the rollout as "the most egregious breach of trust" between CSI leadership and its membership. He urged the board to consider terminating or significantly modifying the current business arrangement surrounding Dynamic Standards in an effort to rebuild trust within the organization.

According to architect Amy Baker, principal of Amy Baker Architect, who spoke with Building Enclosure, the board acknowledged the concerns raised during the meeting but did not announce any immediate policy changes.

"The takeaway was essentially, 'We hear you,'" Baker said. "But members are still waiting to hear what actions, if any, will actually be taken."

New CSI Board Chair Reports that Rebuilding Trust is the Board’s Highest Priority

The new Board chair, Jarrod Mann, sent a post-meeting message to all members, recapping the Board discussion and action steps. He acknowledged the poorly communicated CDS rollout has created issues, and that there is a plan to address it and move CSI forward.

“This year, that trust was tested when the CDS rollout was not communicated well at the start. The CEO acknowledged that publicly, and the Board has held him accountable to address the issues that remain and build better clarity and understanding of CDS going forward. The Board is listening to concerns from across the membership, and the specifier community specifically, and has tasked the CEO and a subgroup of the Board to explore options.”

Transparency Remains a Central Issue

Since the licensing controversy began earlier this year, members have repeatedly requested additional information regarding the decisions that led to CSI’s changes in ownership structure of Construction Information Network (CIN) and the rollout of Dynamic Standards.

Baker said members have sought access to board meeting minutes and other records in an effort to better understand how the licensing changes were approved.

She argues that CSI's bylaws provide members with rights to inspect certain organizational records, while noting that members have largely been unsuccessful in obtaining the information they have requested.

"There are still a lot of unanswered questions," Baker said. "We've sent letters, emails and requests, but many of those questions have never received direct answers."

CSI would like to make note: "CSI has said the volume of individual member questions and comments to CSI and the Board has been significant, and they are committed to answering member questions publicly and systematically through its own channels so the entire membership benefits, rather than responding to individual requests privately."

Dynamic Standards Rollout Receives Mixed Reaction

CSI has continued demonstrating its new Dynamic Standards platform through webinars and online presentations, emphasizing future capabilities and the benefits of transitioning the standards into a digital environment.

Baker, who hosted an online watch party during one of CSI's recent demonstrations, said many attendees used the Q&A session to ask practical questions about the software's current functionality and its cost.

Among the concerns included:

• Whether the software currently performs searches as efficiently as traditional Masterformat books or searching a MasterFormat pdf.
• How firms can justify significantly higher licensing costs if only a handful of employees will regularly use the platform.
• How CSI can justify charging extremely high licensing costs by basing it on firm revenue rather than the most common “per seat” software pricing.
• Whether organizations are effectively paying today for features that have not yet been released.

CSI has addressed some common questions directly in its publicly available FAQ, at csiresources.org/standards/cds-faq.

To be fair, Baker acknowledged that moving standards into a digital platform has potential long-term value, depending on functionality of the software itself and its integration with other platforms.

"I think there is value in making this information more accessible online," she said. "But many members feel the software was introduced before it was fully ready."

"The industry is changing rapidly with AI, digital tools, and new workflows. The Board's priority is ensuring CSI leads that change rather than following it — keeping MasterFormat, UniFormat, and OmniClass current and useful, both as stand-alone standards and when embedded within the tools the industry already uses,” said Mann. 

Markling Outlines Specific Concerns

In his statement to the board, which has been published across multiple channels, Markling identified several issues that he believes have fueled the ongoing controversy surrounding Dynamic Standards.

Among them were concerns that the software launched before it was fully functional, that the pricing model differs substantially from other industry software licensing models, and that firms are required to disclose annual revenue information when purchasing subscriptions. He also questioned the limited communication leading up to the rollout and expressed concern that the organization's ongoing litigation with industry partners could further damage CSI's reputation.

Despite his criticism, Markling also emphasized that many members are not opposed to the concept itself.

"Dynamic Standards could prove to be a valuable and useful tool in our industry...if it is properly priced, it actually works, and the [End User License Agreement] is not burdensome or ambiguous," he wrote, adding that the issue extends beyond software and "is about nothing less than the soul of this Association."

Governance Questions Expand Beyond Licensing

While the controversy initially centered on Dynamic Standards and its licensing model, member concerns have increasingly broadened to include CSI's governance and election procedures.

Baker pointed to recent questions surrounding the organization's board elections, saying members have sought explanations about how qualified candidates recommended by the nominating committee ultimately did not appear on the final ballot.

Those concerns were echoed publicly by Cherise Lakeside, FCSI, SCIP, senior specification writer at RDH Building Science and host of the ARCAT DETAILED Podcast. In a recent LinkedIn post, Lakeside questioned whether the board election process complied with CSI's bylaws after qualified candidates were reportedly excluded from officer races in favor of existing board members.

Lakeside also questioned the board's decision to allow the newly elected treasurer—who previously served as Gulf States Region director—to complete her term as Region director as well as taking on the treasurer position rather than filling the regional vacancy as is required by the bylaws. She asked whether allowing one individual to effectively occupy both positions was consistent with CSI's governing documents and whether it represented "a clear manipulation of the election and board seats."

Her post concluded with a call for greater accountability from CSI leadership, writing that members continue to seek "acceptable answers" regarding both the election process and Dynamic Standards.

Lakeside emphasized that her criticism stems from a desire to see CSI succeed, writing that it "breaks my heart to watch it all falling apart" and encouraging members to conduct their own research into the organization's governance and business decisions.

Baker echoed that sentiment during her interview with Building Enclosure.

"We want to see CSI succeed," Baker said. "Most people believe there's value in modernizing the standards, but we need leadership to move beyond saying they hear us. Members are waiting to see action."

CSI would like to add here: "CSI has heard these concerns directly. The Board acknowledged at the June 27 meeting that the nominations process, while followed correctly per CSI's bylaws and governing policies, was not well communicated — and that members weren't satisfied with how it was explained. The Governance Committee has been tasked with reviewing both the process and how it's communicated going forward. As Mann wrote to members following the meeting: "The Board heard the concern about single candidates per position on the ballot. The process was followed correctly, but it was not well understood by membership, and communicating it more clearly is the Board's responsibility to address."

What's Next?

Several issues remain unresolved, including the outcome of ongoing litigation related to CSI's licensing model, additional financial disclosures that may appear in future tax filings, and whether the board will implement any governance or licensing changes following member feedback.

While frustration remains high among many members, both Baker and Markling emphasized that their goal is not to undermine the organization.

Markling concluded his address by urging the board to recommit to member engagement, transparent governance, and investment in the standards and educational mission that have defined CSI for decades.

"We have work to do, and we are doing it. The Board has committed to honest answers on where we've fallen short, concrete action on pricing and governance, and investment in the standards and educational mission that have defined CSI for decades. We are on the right path, and we are committed to doing that work together with this community,” said Mann. 

Statement from Mark Dorsey, CEO, Construction Specifications Institute

The June 27 board meeting was a working session with real outcomes. The board heard directly from volunteer leaders about a wide range of issues, notably leadership. Improving trust means being candid where we've fallen short: the spring nominations and elections process followed CSI's bylaws and governing policies correctly, but it wasn't communicated clearly enough and members weren't satisfied. The Governance Committee is reviewing both the nominations and elections process and how we communicate it. In addition, a board subgroup is actively working with The Construction Standard to evaluate pricing and access options for CSI Dynamic Standards (CDS) to address the needs of the individual specifier. 

Technology and operational improvements that have frustrated members since early 2025 are being addressed, with service rollouts expected this fall. We have heard the feedback, and the work to address it is already underway, though we recognize that work takes time to show up in ways members can feel.

What is already showing up is momentum. The board is encouraged by the progress made in a short time, and more importantly, by what the digital format makes possible going forward. Our first major release — CDS 26.1 in August — will include significant updates and the addition of several new industry verticals, and this format puts us on a path to incorporating feedback and delivering updates far more frequently than books and PDFs ever allowed. CSI welcomes the feedback we've received and acknowledges that a transition of this scale takes time. We are committed to bringing every segment of this industry along with us.

The February 2026 launch of CDS was not communicated well, and that created real confusion across the specifications community. That is on us, and we own it. Improving how we communicate with members — systematically, proactively, and through the channels where those conversations are already happening — is a commitment the board made at the June 27 meeting and one CSI staff alongside the Board are actively executing on. We will not always get it right immediately, but we are moving in the right direction. Please read the full report on the Board meeting from Board Chair Jarrod Mann here.