Draw yourself? Like picking up Detail magazine and copy the hell out of it?

Non Sequitur - thank you on clarification on the job responsibilities, very helpful...

I wouldn't rule it out. In past recessions, I saw a lot of firms bringing in freelance people to fill in gaps created when they cut staff. The firms had work that they needed done, but they weren't comfortable hiring a permanent person. A lot of the work the freelance people did was spec writing.

Most spec writers I know are freelance and doing really well, much better than all us poor saps with our (permanent) contracts...

Curious to know if people would rather work with a freelance spec writer, or one in house (assuming of course your firm has enough work to be able to keep one busy full- or part-time).

Yes if anyone has feedback, I would be curious to know more. I got the impression that people preferred work with one in-house given that person knows the office standards. But I assume if you work with a certain office enough, you get to know their standards. We have a designated spec writer (me) so we only use an outside person if I am absolutely underwater. I don't have a ton of experience as a spec writer yet so I can also see that as a drawback for me.

There's benefits and drawbacks of both. In house we often get so swamped specs are hurried at the last minute. 3rd party we end up trying to get them changes just before issuing since we push design right up to deadlines. This can be rough if you don't properly set expectations. I don't think we've yet found a 3rd party spec writer who necessarily wants to do another job with us.

Our outside spec writer used to work with me at several previous firms, so they know how I want things. We use this person for all of our spec writing assignments and get a consistent result.  I think a willingness to actually take on writing specs would somewhat mitigate your inexperience with them nowadays. I know of very few people that want anything to do with working on specifications. I'm not sure if it's fear or disinterest. Whatever it is, most firms seem very willing to subcontract out spec writing.

"... most firms seem very willing to subcontract out spec writing." 

This is at the heart of my question and I agree that most firms are willing to do it ... but the question is would they rather not subcontract it out if they could get it in house? 

Around me, most firms are subcontracting out to a handful of consultants ... however, most firms aren't happy with the service they're getting and would rather have someone in house if they could find someone to hire. Most of these people I've talked with are experienced enough to have worked in an office at some point that had a full-time spec writer on staff (myself included). I'm curious if that is a fairly common sentiment, or if it is more local or regional. We've seen a lot of the spec writers (both in-house and consultants) around here retire in the last 5 years or so. Not a lot of people coming up to replace them at the moment.

Having been a mostly in-house spec writer, and done a little bit of contract spec writing on the side, my experience is that it's very dependent on the size of the firm - large firms almost always have in-house spec writers; small firms only have one if one of their PAs/PMs happens to be able and willing to do it on top of their project load; medium-sized firms break about 50/50.

I don't think I'm being clear enough in what I'm asking (my fault, not yours). I do appreciate everyone's comments though. 

I'm not asking what types of firms or sizes of firms are likely to have in-house spec writers, nor am I asking for people's experiences working with in-house or outside spec writers. Instead, I'm asking whether you would want an in-house spec writer, or if you would prefer to have a third-party consultant (assume no issues with keeping them busy, and assume they are a dedicated spec writer not simply a PA/PM that can manage the task). 

Putting it another way ... most firms are happy to contract out structural work to structural consultants. Some firms have structural engineers in house ... but I don't hear a lot of firms wishing they had structural engineers in house like I do for spec writers (at least the city/region where I'm working). Conversely, not many firms would imagine getting rid of the interior designers they have on staff, and then start subcontracting that work out to consulting IDs. Does that help clarify my question?

If I take off my spec writer hat and imagine myself as a firm principal, my knee-jerk preference would be in-house spec-writing, but I would have to math out the difference in cost of avg cost per project x projects per year for consultants vs cost of a full-time employee for the same year.

Spec writing is not a very sexy job; you don't make the design decisions and don't see the building being built. I see all of the sets that we put out which means I can track trends and spot potential liability issues in how we, as a firm, document our intent. I advise the principals on where we need continuing education. All of the new grads now want to be Designers, and don't seem to care much about the nuts and bolts of how to put together a set. 

We prefer to have an in-house spec writer as do many of the firms in my area. The principals here understand that specs are legal written documents and are unwilling to trust a stranger with that responsibility. Even in the most stressful of times, we hired a freelancer that used to work for us.

Every side spec writing job I've done was either for a firm I used to work for, or for PA/PMs from the same firms doing their own small side jobs.

We prefer to have an in-house spec writer because we mostly go after publicly-funded or -subsidized projects and their designer selection process favors that. If we didn't have that particular consideration we wouldn't be unwilling to outsource spec writing, but we would be picky. Criteria: 1. They should have at least 15 years of experience in architecture, and preferably at least half of that should be working in firms, and not as a sole proprietor; 2. They should have past experience specifying for the relevant project type and location - example: if it's a courthouse in Maryland and the client is planning to go for LEED v4 Silver, I would look for a spec writer who has worked on a public projects in Maryland, and preferably has worked on some LEED v4 projects; 3. CSI CCS certification is highly preferred. I'm not a great fan of certifications in general, but this is such a specialized area with picky standards and a lot of risk - it's worth getting somebody proven by testing to have that threshold of spec writer fluency. Passing the ARE does NOT indicate that a person knows much more about spec writing beyond what goes in which division, and membership in SCIP or CSI is kind of like membership in AIA: just organizations - not measurers of minimum competence.

In its ideal form, my office would have a full-time spec writer in-house. The next best thing would be a blended position.  In a blended scenario, someone with the experience and technical ability to appropriately write specs would do some other tasks to fill gaps between spec writing assignments. In the real world, we are probably years away from having the workload and revenue to support either of those things.  For that reason, we subcontract spec writing work to someone we know and trust.  Most firms in my region are in a similar position because they are small.  Out where I am, 25 people is considered a big architecture firm, 48 employees makes you an industry giant.

I sure do.

I thought that was common too.

"Using details from other offices...is not kosher! The firm or the stamping architect holds the rights to them..."

Possibly true in Canada, not true in the US - the section of the US copyright law for architectural designs covers the overall design and specifically states details are not covered.

taking are reusing other work from other firms is heavily frowned upon here but I don't know about the legality. What matters is that if you have to rely on details from other offices to complete your work... then your current office is super shitty. Every decent office has a database of details and/or projects for new-hires to browse if they need to copy/paste details.

Details are proprietary and belong to the office that produced them, not the draftsman.  I consider it theft of IP if someone were to take CAD/BIM and reuse elsewhere.