1. What is the outlook for the data center sector in 2022? If you ask Google, you’ll get over 87 million results as an answer to that question. The real question is, who do you believe? And while the results from that search have many fine companies with projections all indicating up (i.e., as one company pointed out, “By 2025, 85% of infrastructure strategies will integrate on-premises, colocation, cloud and edge delivery options, compared with 20% in 2020.”), the real driver of data centers is IoT. That, and the fact that sustainability is a driving force behind these facilities as more and more communities become zero-emissions conscious. Suffice to say that AIM, our company, says, “hold on.” We published an article last July Data Center Construction: An Insatiable Market, which tells us of the intense interest in that type of information. So as of this interview, I can tell you that there are 180 projects valued at $9.4 billion in the planning stages going on. I can also tell you that most of these projects are going on at colleges and universities and government buildings. Fire and Police stations are doing their fair share of them as well. But as far as value of projects, sports arenas and convention centers and offices are really where that action is. But, hospitals and clinics on a per average project are huge. The point is, data center growth is still insatiable.
2. With regards to construction, are there more data center projects in the pipeline heading into 2022? According to our data, since 2019, the number of projects has been steady as she goes. While you can say that you had more projects in 2021 than 2020, it was a little less than 2019. But then, 2020 was the year of COVID-19. However, our data point out that the valuations of these projects has increased significantly – telling us that the projects are getting more complex. Actually, the value of these projects was 29% more than those in 2019. And keep in mind that in 2019, there were more projects going on. That tells us there’s more being built into these projects. So, “more” is a relative word. You need a reference point. Compare the specifications of a datacenter pre-COVID with one after COVID. Indeed, compare any category of specification and it’s almost guaranteed it’s different.
3. What are some trends developing in the data center sector, especially any trends that are affecting or will affect the construction industry? Here again, start with Google like we all do. There are great articles on what people think and see as trends, but if you ask us, it’s sustainability. You’re seeing more and more specifications contain requirements for producing a sustainability action plan. You’d rarely see that in the past. In fact, for the projects – all the projects – that we can see, “sustainability” as a requirement is in only 7% of the specifications. But in data centers, it’s 12%. That tells you something, doesn’t it? And don’t forget security. Digital mischief is on the rise and will continue to rise. These data centers are going to not only have to deal with digital security, but physical security.
4. Are there any other important points you think is important to mention when reporting on the outlook for the data center sector? Well, think about this. Every company that exists needs, uses, processes data. Where that processing happens can be in a separate building, in their building, or in a cloud (which is really fed by a building, isn’t it?). We think when we say “cloud” of the sky, but the clouds is really a building somewhere with servers. Where the servers are comprising the opportunities for data centers. Think of this way: your phone is a little data center, isn’t it? Data centers feeding data centers feeding data centers. I’m old enough to remember life without an air conditioner. Nowadays, who among us can imagine life without air conditioning? Life without data and the ability to process it becomes less rich, less fulfilling. I know that’s a point that be argued both ways. Some people think there’s too much. And sometimes there is. But, as long as keep people deep demanding it – and devices are talking more and more to each other – data centers will have a bright future.

The post Data Center Construction: An Insatiable Market Update appeared first on Accountability Information Management.

Accessible public restrooms are integral for any commercial space and are not just for the physically challenged or the aging. However, in addition to meeting today’s rigorous ADA standards, builders, architects, interior designers, kitchen and bath professionals and remodeling contractors must also consider other factors including sustainability, efficiency, hygiene, “well design,” durability, as well as aesthetics. And in the post-COVID world that also means going hands-free as much as possible.

When it comes to designing an ADA restroom, the 2010 ADA Standards (Chapter 6) is the go-to source for making sure to get the basics done right. Many states and local municipalities have also adopted the 2017 ICC/ANSI Standards for commercial buildings. While the 2010 ADA Standards and the 2017 ICC/ANSI Standards are similar in many regards, they sometimes differ in the contexts of scope and technical requirements.

Keep in mind that when undertaking a new construction project or planning to make physical changes to an existing building and the prevailing governing body uses both sets of guidelines, adhere to the more stringent requirements found in either the 2010 ADA Standards or the 2017 ICC/ANSI Standards. Plus, it is important to note that some states guidelines are ”stricter” than others. Please check with your local guidelines to be sure that all requirements are being met. [See Beyond ADA sidebar for other ADA sources.]

The most important details when it comes to ADA compliance design are spacing and measurements of several elements within the restroom.

ADA Design Details

Stylish design and accessibility design are not mutually exclusive. They can coexist within a design vision to create a refreshing, inclusive restroom. Thoughtful selections and creative use of existing space and materials will help. It is all in the details.

Usually, when you consider accessibility design, the needs of people who use wheelchairs is forefront. Wheelchairs vary in size and design and the use of motorized scooters continues to grow. Like wheelchairs, scooters are available in a myriad of sizes. Yet, today’s accessibility standards fail to address these trends and their ramifications on bathroom designs.

Designing an ADA restroom, however, goes beyond accommodating wheelchairs. For example, the needs of people who have sensory disabilities such as blindness or deafness and those who use devices such as canes and walkers. The needs of these individuals may require the elimination of protruding objects from your design and may necessitate the inclusion of a fire alarm that has strobe lighting.

Additionally, consideration for the people who tend to individuals with disabilities, including parents and opposite-sex caregivers, is necessary when designing ADA restrooms. These considerations, for example, have given rise to “family” bathrooms in places like malls and other establishments frequented by consumers who have a wide range of needs.

Defining Terms

Before examining the guidelines within ADA for restrooms, it is important to understand the interpretation of the Codes involved, the requirements of the builders and owners, architects and engineers, all play a role in achieving the desired result. Often, perhaps more often than anyone cares to admit, intense disagreements emerge as to the interpretation of what is and what is not a problem or an issue. These interpretations can often stall a project’s schedule and at times side track it unnecessarily.

No one knows this better than ADA expert James V Vitale, AIA, LEED AP, CASp, RCI. Vitale has been involved in advocating for ADA issues for many years, and is often called upon as an expert witness in these matters.

According to Vitale, projects involve a series of managed tasks/topics related to achieving a specific result/goal. The solution involves issue identification and successful resolution and implementation.

“The methods and means for doing this vary from project to project,” he points out, “but a lot of confusion arises when the terms ‘issue’ and ‘problem’ are used relating to projects. They are very close in meaning. Unless you define your terms, things will go South.”

“Look at it this way,” he continues. “Issues are typically resolvable, whereas problems may often be viewed in a negative light. You see, the word ‘problem’ is often connected with the word ‘solution’ in a person’s mind.”

The goal Vitale emphasizes is to identify the issues associated with an initial goal to be met.

“People’s word choice matters – a lot,” he says. “The  word choice plays an enormous role is facilitating understanding. By defining your terms, the timing and amount of responses can be minimized.”

Mis-understanding can be avoided if definitions are discussed and set at the beginning of every project, but especially ones that incorporate ADA thinking.

ADA Standards

A good starting point when designing for a wide range of abilities, disabilities, and other characteristics, are the ADA Standards. These guidelines about restrooms include the floor space, the toilet height, the space under the sink, the type of faucet used and even the placement of the toilet paper roll!

Basically, you want to make it as easy and pain-free as possible to use the space. Typically, products are designed to be most suitable for the average user. In contrast, products that are designed according to accessibility are designed to be usable by everyone, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design. For example, a door that automatically opens when someone approaches it is more accessible to everyone, including small children, workers whose arms are full, and people using walkers or wheelchairs.

Here are some of the most common ADA bathroom layout guidelines when designing an accessible restroom:

Note: There are separate ADA guidelines for children restrooms. See alternative measurements in tables indicated in each section where ADA makes distinction.

Clear Floor Space

Maneuvering Space – The disabled should be able to easily maneuver to the toilets and sinks within the restroom or stall. For a 30” x 48” wheelchair, a clear floor space of at least 60” diameter is required, allowing a 180-degree turn. In some cases, the available clear space can be supplemented by open space under a fixture to meet the minimum requirement or a T-shaped turning space that is 60” in length with a 36” width.

Mounting Heights – To make accessories such as dispensers and dryers accessible, their operable parts must be located no higher than 48” above the finished floor and no lower than 15”. They should also be fully recessed where possible into the wall to prevent injuries.

Equipment Accessibility – Equipment and accessories should be designed for a forward or parallel approach, as well as for both left- and right-hand access.

Signage – The standard requirement for ADA signs is be on the opening side of the door and should align the reading characters at 48” to 60” above the ground surface. The baseline of the tactile character should measure 16” from the highest tactile character. The tactile character should be used as a compliant sign. As for existing restrooms that are not compliant with ADA standards, there should be a sign that indicates the nearest restroom that is ADA compliant.

For a more detailed explanation of signage requirements, see sidebar Follow the Signs. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Stall Requirements

Doors

Door Swing – Doors must swing out and at least 36” wide to accommodate wheelchair-bound people and be self-closing.

Door Handles and Latches – Door handles must be easy to operate with one hand without pinching, twisting or tightly grasping, and mounted between 34” – 48” above the finished floor.

Door Operation – Door handles should require less than 5 lbs. of force to push or pull open.

For a more detailed explanation of door and door handle requirements, see sidebars Opening Doors and Get A Handle On It! To assist with ADA restroom design, each sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Toilets

Toilet Depth – Wall-hung toilets should have a depth of 56”, while floor-mounted toilets should have a depth of 59”.

Toilet Seat Height – The top of the toilet seat should be installed at a height of 17” – 19” above the finished floor and 16” – 18” away from the sidewall to the centerline of the toilet.

Toilet Seats – Toilet seats cannot be spring-loaded to return automatically to an upright position.

Flush Controls – Flush controls can be manual or automatic. Manual flush levers (if present) must be placed on the open or accessible side of the toilet, which may be on the left or right, depending on the stall design and should require less than 5 lbs. of force to operate. Center, push-button, trip levers are not ADA compliant.

Note: Wheelchair accessible compartments for children’s use shall be 60” wide minimum measured perpendicular to the side wall, and 59” deep minimum for wall hung and floor mounted toilets measured perpendicular to the rear wall.

For a more detailed explanation of toilet requirements, see sidebar The Toilet: Taking Care of Business. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

In-Stall Dispensers

Toilet Paper Dispenser – The toilet paper dispenser should be mounted so that the center of the dispenser is only 7” – 9” in front of the edge of the toilet bowl and unobstructed by the side bar. The opening for the toilet paper dispenser should be 15” – 19” above the finished floor. For an ADA stall, toilet paper dispensers that do not control or limit paper delivery are recommended to keep guests from needing to repeatedly reach for more paper.

Seat Cover Dispenser – Toilet seat cover dispenser should be 15” – 48” above the finished floor.

For a more detailed explanation of in-stall dispenser requirements, see sidebar It’s in the Details: In-Stall Dispensers. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Grab Bars

Properties – An ADA-compliant grab bar must be fully anchored and have a smooth surface that can be easily grabbed. The bar must be 1-1/4” to 1-1/2’” in diameter. Grab bars must have round edges and must return to the wall (or another anchor point) so there are no exposed ends. ADA-compliant grab bars must be securely anchored to the wall, be stationary in their brackets and be able to support 250 lbs. of force.

Placement – The stall must have two horizontal grab bars. One is located off the back wall (on the rear wall above the toilet) 33”-36” from the floor and floor and extending 1.5” away from the wall. Another grab bar 42” length is also used at 33”-36” from the floor off the wall on the side or partition closest to the toilet. A third 18” vertical grab bar may also be added above the grab bar on the side wall.

For a more detailed explanation of toilet stall grab bar requirements, see sidebar Get a Grip On Grab Bars for Water Closets. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Urinals

Placement – The rim of an ADA compliant urinal must be a maximum of 17” above the finished floor.

Depth – Urinals should have a minimum depth of 13.5” from the wall to the outer rim of the bowl.

Flush controls – Flush controls can be manual or automatic operation. Manual controls must be at maximum 48” above the finished floor and should require less than 5 lbs. of force to operate.

Floor space – There should be a clear floor space of 30” x 48” in front of the urinal to allow for a forward approach.

For a more detailed explanation of urinal requirements, see sidebar A “Stand Up” Fixture. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Lavatory Requirements

Sinks

Requirement – There should be at least one sink in the restroom that meets ADA requirements.

Placement – Sinks must be installed with enough clearance underneath for a person in a wheelchair to be able to reach the faucets. The sink basin should be a maximum of 34” above the finished floor, leaving a knee clearance of 27” high, 30” wide, and 11” – 25” deep. Countertop sinks should be installed as close to the edge as possible to allow for easy access.

Height – The disabled should have 9” in height and 17” – 25” in depth of toe clearance without hitting any plumbing.

Exposed Plumbing – Any exposed plumbing should be insulated and padded to prevent any injuries to a person’s legs. A protective panel can be installed to block off the plumbing but must still allow for 8” deep of knee clearance and 11” deep of toe clearance with a 9” height.

 For a more detailed explanation of restroom sink requirements, see sidebar Everything and the Bathroom Sink. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Faucets

Operation – Faucets can be lever operated, push, touch, or electronically controlled. They should be usable with one hand without the need to tightly grasp, pinch, or twist the wrist. Users should be able to turn the lever with no more than 5 lbs. of force.

Depth – The reach depth to the faucet must not exceed 11”.

For a more detailed explanation of faucet requirements, see sidebar “Turning On” Accessible Faucet Design. To assist with ADA restroom design, each sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Soap Dispensers

Placement – Can be manual or automatic. Soap dispensers should be mounted no higher than 44” above the floor. Customers should be able to simultaneously use soap dispensers and faucets without interference.

Operation – Manual soap dispenser button should be used with one hand and should not require over 5 lbs. of pressure to activate it.

For a more detailed explanation of soap dispenser requirements, see sidebar Grasp Should Exceed Reach. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Mirrors

Placement – The bottom edge of the reflective surface of a mirror located above a sink should measure 40” maximum above the finished floor. If the mirror is not above a sink or countertop, it should be located 35” above the finished floor.

Safety – Mirrors should not have any exposed edges that may lead to injury.

For a more detailed explanation of mirror requirements, see sidebar Mirror, Mirror On the Wall. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Hand Drying

Hands Free – Hand dryers and towel dispensers should allow for left-hand and right-hand approaches. If the unit does not allow for both, one of each type is recommended.

Placement – Hand dryers should be mounted between 40”- 48” above the finished floor and cannot extend beyond 4” from the wall. If using a paper towel dispenser, the opening should be at a maximum of 48” above the finished floor.

Clearing – A clearing of 30” x 48” should be provided in front of the hand dryer to allow for a forward approach.

For a more detailed explanation of hand drying requirements, see sidebars Drying Hands Matter: The Paper Towel Dispenser and Integrating Hand Dryers into ADA Restrooms. To assist with ADA restroom design, each sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Trash Disposal

Trash Receptacle – A trash receptacle should be out of pathways and not placed in front of sinks, handrails, hand dryers or paper towel dispensers.

Placement – Recessed trash disposal units should not project more than 4” from the wall and should be mounted with the opening at 27” above the finished floor.

For a more detailed explanation of door and door handle requirements, see sidebar Talking Trash. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Showers

The ADA guidelines indicate that showers must have certain clear INSIDE dimensions, but there are two acceptable styles.

Transfer Shower

Size – An ADA Transfer Shower must have an inside dimension of 36” x 36” with a seat and grab bars and more specifically adhering to the following:

• Must be 36” from center points of opposing sides-no construction tolerance is stated in the code
• Must be 36” from the back wall to the outside of the shower on the wall the seat is mounted on – no construction tolerance is stated in the code
• 36” minimum opening at the entry of the shower from the top to floor
• Clearance of 36” wide minimum by 48” long minimum measured from the control wall

Grab Bars – ANSI calls for vertical grab bar on control wall. Back wall grab bar to extend 18” from control wall; 1.25” To 1.5” diameter, 250 lbs. load rated, not to be placed above seat; mounted at same height where multiple bars used, 33”-36” above finish floor and no more than 6” from adjacent wall.

For a more detailed explanation of shower grab bar requirements, see sidebar Get a Grip On Grab Bars for Showers. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Seat – L-shaped seats placed no more than 3” from front entry and may be folding or non-folding; 250 lbs. load rated; mounted 17”-19” above bathroom finish floor; distance from seat wall to back edge, 2.5” max, to front edge 15”-16”; distance from adjacent wall no more than 1.5”; L-shaped seats to extend 14”-15” from adjacent wall.

For a more detailed explanation of shower seat requirements, see sidebar Take an (Accessible) Seat. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Shower Head – The controls, faucets, and shower spray unit shall be installed on the side wall opposite the seat 38” – 48” maximum above the shower floor and shall be located on the control wall 15” maximum from the centerline of the seat toward the shower opening. Users should be able to turn the lever with no more than 5 lbs. of force.

For a more detailed explanation of shower head requirements, see sidebar ADA Shower Heads – You’re in Control. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

Roll in Shower

Size – An ADA Roll in Shower must be at least 60” x 30” inside dimension.

• Must be minimum 60” x 30” from center points of opposing sides
• 60” minimum opening from top to bottom
• Clearance of 30” wide minimum by 60” long minimum adjacent to opening

Seat – ANSI calls for seat to be provided, optional for ADA. Folding seat placed on side wall no more than 3” from front entry. Same criteria as Transfer Shower Seat.

Grab Bars – Back wall grab bar to extend 18” from control wall

Shower Head – The controls, faucets, and shower spray unit shall be located above the grab bar, but no higher than 48” above the shower floor. Where a seat is provided, the controls, faucets, and shower spray unit shall be installed on the back wall adjacent to the seat wall and shall be located 27” maximum from the seat wall. Users should be able to turn the lever with no more than 5 lbs. of force.

Shower Ramps

Should a change in level be greater than 0.5” and less than 3”, ramps not steeper than 1:8 may be used in existing sites, buildings, and facilities where such slopes are necessary due to space limitations.

For a more detailed explanation of shower requirements, see sidebar Accessible Showers. To assist with ADA restroom design, the sidebar also includes corresponding product information from ADA product manufacturers.

For more information on the 2010 ADA Standards (Chapter 6), explore the standards here.

Additional topics of interest may include:
Aging in Place Legislation Going on Now
Aging in place design: what you need to know for marketing

Note: All images are sources from the 2010 ADA Standards.

The post Examining ADA Restroom Requirements: The foundation for accessible design appeared first on Accountability Information Management.

Using Mentions, Not Projects to Gain Share and Build Awareness with Architects

To say that specifying door hardware is complex is an understatement.

Hinges, pivots and pivot hangers, mechanical locks and latches, door closers etc. can all be specified from different manufacturers! Worse, consider the following “specification” language:

“Door hardware supplier with warehousing facilities in Project’s vicinity and who is or employs a qualified Architectural Hardware Consultant, available during the course of the Work to consult with Contractor, Architect, and Owner about door hardware”.

When such language is used in specifications from companies like Walmart, it’s not just about the hardware anymore! The specification tells you where to purchase the products![1]

In the past, and perhaps because of its inherent complexity as a collection of components, door hardware specification may have been an afterthought in the mind of the architect or a “business as usual” type of specification. They are written and used over and over automatically.

However, with growing security concerns, doors and their allied hardware as one of the main access areas have risen to become something the architect and designer must start paying closer and closer attention to. Besides the natural aesthetics of door hardware, which is the realm of the architect and designer, the same door and hardware specifications take on a different point of view when it comes to safety.

Safety requirements in fact are often in direct conflict with security requirements for a building (getting people out quickly versus locking them down quickly). And, the process goes beyond just the specification. Increasingly, maintenance costs must be factored into the overall thinking – something the architect traditionally left to others.

In short, door hardware is one of the most competitive markets in the building industry.

Opening the Door

So how should a door hardware manufacturer approach the market? Especially in this age of the coronavirus, what strategy should the manufacturer employ when the face-to-face is being buried in favor of the e-conference or tele-conference?

That answer really depends on your point of view – or more accurately, the point of view of the manufacturing company you happen to be working for.

It also depends on the understanding that regardless of the imposition of “no contact” by virus concerns, if you are going to do business, some form of contact is essential to survival with the people who control the specifications: the architect and designer.

In all cases, you must start with a study of the market itself – the actual specifications written by architects. The position of the door hardware manufacturer in that market will determine the answer to those important questions about contact strategy.

Most companies look at specifications and count specifications. This report is about looking not at projects per se, but at “mentions” of a manufacturer in those specifications. In other words, more than one manufacturer competes for a project; if you are going to hatch content strategy, investigating mentions is more beneficial for a couple of reasons.

First, calculating mentions gives you an excellent overview of your competitors – not just the projects. As we will demonstrate, the currency in your battle is architects. The study of mentions will give you which architects you should go after, and which you should avoid. A study of just projects doesn’t do much for that type of planning.

Second, a study of the mentions of companies in a specification produces architects who may have neglected a door hardware specification for a long time. For example, companies merge all the time, and you would be surprised at the number of obsolete specifications written around manufacturers who no longer exist or are doing business under another brand name.

The study of mentions, along with projects, produces a new way of exploring your contact strategies with the people you need to make your advocates: the architects and designers.

Door Hardware Specifications Up Close

In the most recent ConstructConnect database of construction projects (where there are over 511,000 projects in the US and Canada), filtering for “door hardware” in the past 12 months results in 59,432 projects available for such a study. That’s really a lot of projects, which is why specification analysis is critical and must be done before a contact strategy. And it’s a moving number because projects come and go. Architects who command those projects come and go too (don’t forget, architects compete against each other for the very same projects you are trying to get products installed).

From the examination of these 59,432 specifications, there are at a minimum of 39 door hardware manufacturers who compete in the specifications for work (and there are probably more, but you must draw the line somewhere).

Table 1 shows the manufacturers and the number of specifications that are mentioned within the dataset of 59,432. Thus, Hager is mentioned in 24,557, Schlage in 23,973, etc. If you are running ConstructConnect, your numbers may vary depending on the license.

This table shows the number of mentions; that is, it is highly likely that more than one manufacturer may appear in a single project specification. Thus, Hager may be in the same specification as Boomer, or Schlage may be in with ten other manufacturers. This is why mentions for your contact strategy is more relevant than simply projects. While it is true manufacturers compete for a project, they are really competing not for the project, but for the architect’s specification – the mention. That is where the real battle is fought.

Table 1. The 39 Manufacturers and their respective “mentions” in specifications within the 59,432 projects.

In Sweets®, for example, there are only 31 manufacturers listed and none of these are the same manufacturers we are talking about in the current real-time dataset![2] Our 39 manufacturers within the specifications examined, then, “control” the market of door hardware specifications. Within that market are the architects who do the specifying. Your contact strategy is aimed at them – not the project.

From Table 1, you can immediately observe that only a handful of companies control most of the projects and, subsequently, mentions! If you are not one of these handful, your contact strategy for gaining share will be completely different than if you are one of them. In short, your approach to the market (answering the original questions) is dependent on your initial position within the market.

Specification is a Ground War

There is no substitute for “feet on the street.” But, where do you send your army? And when a virus like Coronavirus strikes prohibiting personal contact, what should you do? What should you look for and where should you look?

The father of strategy, of course, is Sun Tzu and his book, The Art of War. In it, he states clearly that if you are going to win any battle, you must make many calculations before the battle is fought. Generals who make only a few lose. He illustrates this by giving you strategies – strategies which can be applied to your own thinking in gaining ground in specifications.

For example, if a competitor is secure in his market and holds a strong position in the specifications, why attack? Look for weaknesses instead. Is that competitor strong in the school market and weak in the office market? What products lineup in the specifications in those markets, and is there room for your products?

Sometimes, attacking when the competition is not prepared works (i.e., in a market where he believes he holds the superior position, but doesn’t, which you can find out with some research).

ConstructConnect is one of the more robust databases of construction that you can use to evaluate such conditions in building your strategy. It takes time and experience to drive the database, but the analysts at AIM are experienced drivers. We looked at the door hardware market to help you explore such considerations.

Meet the Players

There are ten (10) companies in Chart 1 that control most project specifications and subsequently mentions, around 67%. This calculation is based on mentions in the specifications themselves (or, if there are 320,540 manufacturer mentions in the 59,432 specifications, what is each manufacturer’s share of those mentions?).

This is important because specifications typically list more than one manufacturer. Hager, for example, shows 8% in Chart 1. This means Hager, of the 320,540 mentions in the specification dataset, is mentioned in just 8% of the total mentions. Looking at just projects, it is impossible to tell how much “share” they have of projects, since we don’t know who won the project eventually. And, since as mentioned, a manufacturer can be in more than on specification, the mentions in Chart 1 give the door hardware manufacturer a more realistic view of the true battlefield. Here’s why.

Chart 1. Share of “mentions” in the 59,432 specifications, where there are 320,540 mentions of 39 door hardware manufacturers.

If you look at Table 1, you can see Hager has the most project specifications: 24,557. In other words, Hager is specified 41% of the time in door hardware specifications (keep in mind the numbers shift daily in a database like ConstructConnect as projects move in and out of stages).

But so does Schlage (40%) or Ives (40%). However, while they control a lot of specifications, in the battle for the specification of the architect, there are hundreds or thousands of architects writing such specifications! In the total mentions, Hager only has 8% of the mentions. Baldwin, another major manufacturer, is fighting with 28 other companies for mentions.

Thus, there are two ways to look at the door hardware battlefield: by projects, or by mentions. Mentions gives the manufacturer a clearer picture of what must happen in terms of competitors he has to fight – or decides to fight – to formulate a real contact strategy. In other words, don’t chase projects: chase architects.

The Pursuit of Architects

For example, does Hager continue to battle Schlage for specifications? Then both datasets should be examined from each manufacturer to see how many they share, and how many are unique to each company. Or, does Hager elect to go after one of the 28 other company specifications? The same questions must be answered: how many do they share, how many are unique. Then, and only then, can the attack plans be drawn.

Let’s illustrate what we are talking about by looking at the top two companies in door hardware from our list, and just one of the other 28 companies, Corbin Russwin. Further, let’s only focus on the planning stage of a project (remembering we can do anything we want to determine a contact strategy). The Planning stage is always an interesting one because it contains projects that are ripe for such discussion – and for action. In this case, there are 2,439 projects in that dataset with “door hardware” as the filter. Consider Table 2.

Table 2. Three random manufacturers with project and architect counts from this sample investigation of planning projects filtering for “door hardware.”

Table 2 shows us there are 1,097 planning projects where all three manufacturers are mentioned. The fact is, however, only 202 of these projects mention all three manufacturers in one specification.

417 projects are specifying a single manufacturer from this group (they may contain other manufacturers from our list of 39, but we are exploring a potential contact strategy using just these three manufacturers as our example).

Table 2 also shows us there are 778 architects who control these specifications. With some analysis, we can now see which of these architects favor one or more of these three manufacturers.

In fact, 240 architects have only one of these three manufacturers mentioned in their specification!

Armed with such information, depending which of the three manufacturers you want to pretend to be in this theoretical game, you would hatch a very different contact strategy based on your objectives as shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Four random architects and the number of mentions of the door hardware manufacturers from Table 2 planning projects.

Table 3 shows us three random architects from the 778 and the number of mentions in the planning projects for these three manufacturers. If you were any of the three manufacturers, you see H2M is a highly contested battlefield. That firm favors Hager but has specified the other two. If you are any of the three, your contact strategy might be to simply “maintain” your presence with that firm. Or if you have an advantage, you might elect to navigate in a “basis of design” and surpass the leader.

On the other hand, if you are Schlage, you need to decide what to do about United Architects. You clearly don’t have a foothold in the planning projects going on in that firm. Did the firm ever spec you? Why did they stop if they did? Or, why didn’t they ever spec you if they didn’t?

The same is true of Corbin Russin toward Teter a+e and Hager for CS Arch Architects. You can clearly see that if you are going to fight for architects, mentions – not projects – is how you lay out your battleplan.

Note, too, there are many open specifications, or general outlines of what should be used in the entire dataset, where no specific manufacturer is mentioned. In some cases, the decision is left to others like contractors to determine (this is especially true in the planning stage of a project, where manufacturers have yet to be named).

Some door hardware manufacturers consider themselves “residential” or “commercial” or both; some architects have been influenced by such perceptions. This may also limit the manufacturer’s appearance in some specifications, and in a tight market, leaders encroach into the smaller manufacturer’s territory. Likewise, sometimes the smaller company will invade the larger company’s territory trying to steal share.

You can see that developing the right contact strategy to uncover opportunities in door hardware project specification really depends on WHO you are as a company and what you make (or what you want to make), as well as where you think you should be playing. It’s not just about the projects in the actual battle: it’s about the mentions.

Strategy is Everything

Developing a contact strategy for a door hardware manufacturer to approach the market depends on the company’s current position. For example, if you are one of the larger companies, your strategy may be to take share away from one of the other leaders where you now fight for share. In that case, you would fight differently than the company with the least number of project specifications in the dataset trying to gain share. In both cases, however, your competitors will be different depending on the analysis of mentions you conduct.

If a smaller company does take on a larger competitor, it would be risky. If you take on a smaller one, you may waste resources fighting for just a blip in the market share. If the currency is firms, then you must have a clear understanding of how those firms specify.

Some strategies, for example, use “loss leaders” to position themselves as leading innovators in a market, giving up profit for position.

Launching an attack on a larger competitor almost never works. Yet in all cases, creating a contact strategy is essential and a strategy must include consideration of the overall specification marketplace and other factors (i.e., maintenance of the door hardware for example, which almost is never “specified”).

For example, one facility executive noted that standardization of the spec allows their building managers to take a typical selection of repair parts with them on most maintenance calls. Perhaps finding out what the building has in it in a major renovation would work as your strategic position.

Another facility, however, cautioned by saying that standardizing is not appropriate because the purpose of the building shifts over time. Here, perhaps a tenant survey might work to your advantage, where you research what tenants want from their hardware. The facility manager noted that tenants change, requirements change, and that his job is to facilitate these changes without disrupting the purpose of the door and its hardware.

Such dilemmas seem to fall far away from the specification war. However, they become more and more important in the specification process. The key is differentiation, and it starts with mentions – or what is in the mind of the architect.

Brand Preference

Over the years, AIM has studied brand preference of architects – unaided (see our blog about this, What is a Brand?). Unaided preference means that when we do such studies, we do not provide a “list” from which the architect selects. Instead, there are blank lines and the architect fills in what comes to his or her mind when asked “the top brands I specify/recommend” for a product category. One of those categories is Door Hardware.

This research gives manufacturers a way to understand how architects perceive their products and brands, and measure continually how those brand positions change without “helping” them in their choices. It allows us a peek into the “mind” of the architect, which in turn, can help shape your strategy.

In a study of Door Hardware, eight choices appeared 74% of the time in the mind of the architect and 29 other companies account for the remaining 24%.

Chart 2. Brand preference study from AIM shows what is in the minds of architects in terms of unaided recall of door hardware brands. Architects were invited to write in their preference instead of selecting from a pre-loaded list. The result is a closer picture of what’s really in their mind.

Note that Schlage was the “brand” that came most often to the architect’s mind since the architect wrote that name into the first line of the unaided recall research. An immediate question is why does Schlage dominate in brand preference, but not in specification preference?

The answer is obvious and the nature of a brand: it can be preferred, but not selected. You might prefer to drive a Rolls Royce, but you would select something else. Brand preference gives Schlage a tremendous advantage. Hager’s advantage is in its specification strength.

Besides, Brand Preference is measuring – or trying to measure – what’s in the mind of a person. Examining the specifications as we do (and did in this case) is more of a reality check – the actual specifications of the architect.

Furthermore, consider that in some cases, “by client” was what the architect wrote down or “by planner” (in the 29 other manufacturer share of the pie) as his or her preference. In other words, no hardware brand was dominant enough to that architect, so he or she wrote down the words, “by planner.” In other categories, brands (i.e., HVAC) almost cease to exist, as the architect will write “by owner” for the preference or “by engineer.”

It is also important to know that AIM brand preference studies, which have been going on since 2008, show that while brands may come and go, solid brands stay. Sometimes (i.e., like Gruppo became Valli & Valli or Ingersoll Rand became Ives) brands morph into other brands. It’s up to the manufacturer of these brands, however, to make sure the specifying architect or interior designer understand what’s being specified. That’s the battle you fight, and one you can win with the right contact strategy.

Take Aways

We hope this exercise helps door manufacturers or any other category manufacturer to understand the power of specification analysis through mentions, not just projects. AIM is ready to help you. Please call us when you have a question. Thank you for reading our report.

_____________________________________________________

[1] Language like “Provide door hardware from one of the following national or local suppliers.” is followed by a list of 8 suppliers, with additional wording: “This list of suppliers is not exhaustive. All listed suppliers may not supply all specified products. Contact hardware manufacturers for additional authorized local or national suppliers not listed.” Imagine that type of language being used in ALL products in a specification going forward! Maybe a better question is, how long before that happens further complicating the specification process?

[2] For example, the first entry in Sweets under the category for “door hardware” talks about a company that “has been a premier manufacturer of commercial and residential plumbing products, producing a variety of durable, reliable and beautifully designed products for everything from private homes to five-star hotels.” If you Google “door hardware manufacturers” you get a list as one of the results here that is closer to what we find in our database of about 49 companies.

The post Uncovering Opportunities for Door Hardware Through Specification Analysis appeared first on Accountability Information Management.

For paint manufacturers to increase their position in the commercial market, they must continuously evaluate their presence in the designers’ specifications.

The first obstacle is that the paint market is huge. According to a recent IBISWorld[1] research report on the paint industry, there are over 1,000 paint manufacturers in the U.S., and in 2019 they will produce revenue of over $32 billion of paint.

However, this is a marked difference between the number of paint manufacturers that are specified in commercial projects, which is explored in this report. There are simply NOT 1,000 paint manufacturers in commercial specifications.

For example, in current projects going on in the US and Canada from the ConstructConnect database, there are 498,015 listed. If we filter for “Interior Paint” within the specifications and plans, 42,606 projects come up (that doesn’t mean the others aren’t using interior paint by the way, but that these documents call it out specifically).

But if we add (“interior paint*” NEAR “basis of design”) to our search, we end up with 3,084 projects, of which 145 are in the planning stage. AIM identified 10 manufacturers who are specified this way in this group (shown in the chart below with the percentage of specifications where that manufacturer appears).

In other words, Sherwin-Williams and Benjamin Moore are the dominant players in the 145 projects — leaders in the market which, as you will see, are in many specifications.

This is a far cry from 1,000 paint manufacturers. And in the age of disruption, there is no doubt these 1,000 are trying to penetrate the marketplace.

So, how will the leaders hold the lead? How will the wannabes increase their share of specifications? To answer the questions, a thorough analysis of who is specifying what is required!

Besides, the paint market is expected to grow by 1.7% a year. That means companies who are not even in the current specifications will appear, sometimes from out of nowhere.

With so many paint manufacturers and so many options, it is difficult for paint manufacturers to increase their share much less hold what share they have.

There are a lot of choices, and in this digital disruptive world, consuming and creating content or finding a strategy to do that is difficult (see How Much Data Can You Eat).

One of the ways to help grow or maintain business is through specification analysis. Paint manufacturers need to understand 1)how their product is specified, 2)how they are positioned in the designers’ specifications and 3)the overall market before embarking on the right strategy to maintain or penetrate the commercial interior paint world.

Who’s Who in Specifying Paint

Is there an architect who doesn’t specify paint for his commercial project?

Probably not. But there ARE architects who specify one brand over another. Without confusing the problem (see our discussion later of who is actually specifying paint), wouldn’t it make more sense to find out which architects are specifying your competitors (or your own brand) to find the right targets for your strategy?

For example, there are 124 architects in the above group of planning projects we just listed that are specifying interior paint as basis of design. 93% of those architects are tied to a single project. That means you’d have to target a lot of architects.

But, what if you could segment that group into, say, the ones that are specifying the leaders to hatch a flanking strategy? If you did that, you would end up with a target group of 55 architects — a much easier group to handle in a sustained campaign.

Or, what if you just took the architects from the 124 group that were specifying more than one project, regardless of the paint manufacturer they were specifying? That would mean 7% – or nine firms – would be in your target group! There are many ways to fulfill your strategy! The nine architects who are specifying multiple projects by the way were the following:

• Work Architecture Company
• Corgan Associates
• Duvall Decker Architects
• KSQ Design
• McKinnell, McKinnell, and Taylor, Inc.
• MS Consultants
• Omniplan / Dallas
• Southern A & E Architects
• TAP Architecture

Are they on your “hit” list? Has your sales force called on them? Do you think the market leaders call on them? Who should you target? And why? Should the paint manufacturer leaders target all 124, or only those that are not specifying their brand? Should the wannabes target architects who specify the leaders, or others who, like them, are up-and-comers?

These are important questions to answer! Some manufacturers think targeting the largest firms is a strategy. You can see from this analysis that’s a false belief!

In fact, after you define “largest,” you’d be surprised how many other “non-large” architects should be in your sights (i.e., AECOM is one of the world’s premier infrastructure firms, delivering professional services throughout the project lifecycle and has only one of the 145 projects associated with it — not that they are not worth pursuing as a target ). But it all depends on your strategy (see Who’s On First When it Comes to Strategy for an interesting point of view)!

Remember, we were only looking at planning stage projects with a filter (“interior paint*” NEAR “basis of design”) in the above example. To truly understand how to aim and who to target for your strategy, a deeper dive would be required.

Reviewing & Maximizing the Specs

In order to increase a paint manufacturers’ chances of being specified, selected and ultimately purchased, it is important to understand how the specification process works and learn more about how architects and designers are specifying paint products. To do that, AIM looked at that specification market in 2019, when there were 100,170 projects in the U.S. with specifications, and 54% of the projects had a specification for paint in the ConstructConnect database of construction.

Virtually every kind of building is using paint – from schools, to retail, offices, hotels and hospitals.

Overall, over 50% of the projects had a specification for paint, with retail projects showing the highest percentage of projects at 75%.

This indicates there is a vast opportunity for paint manufacturers to begin to maximize their potential for being the brand of choice. For example, you can also target a specific market an analyze the architects doing work in THAT market!

Many manufactures work hard to get their brand in the designer’s specification and to be included in the list of approved brands (the “short list”). For other manufacturers, getting a product into the specification can be a difficult task. Architects and designers do not change or review their specs often. In research conducted and published by Architect Magazine titled The Truth About Specification[2], many times architects re-use or revise existing specifications. In addition, there are many large national established brands in the paint market which makes it difficult for new brands to penetrate the market (as seen in the earlier discussion).

Detailed analysis of the paint specifications indicates there is also a wide dispersion of how paint brands appear in the specifications. Several paint manufacturers can be listed that can be used, or can just list one brand can be listed with no substitution.

For example, in some specifications the architect requires that the contractor select any brand of paint, but all paint needs to be from a single manufacturer. Yet on other specifications, the designer may not only outline the specific brand of paint to be used but will provide extensive details on the color description and code. Many times, the brand of paint is not even in the specification but can only be found on the paint schedule in the plans. Here are a couple of examples.

Brand Preference

Accountability Information Management’s (AIM) Brand Preference Study revealed just how competitive the paint market is.

In this unaided blind brand preference study, architects and designers were asked to list their top three brands of interior paints. There were over 34 different brands or companies mentioned by architects in AIM’s proprietary research with architects that were “involved” with the specification of these products. Although the list of specific brands no doubt shifts over time, the numerous choices designers must choose from still holds true.

What’s interesting, perhaps, is that in Sweet’s today, only four (4) manufacturers are listed: Behr Process Corporation, Sherwin-Williams Company, Wooster Products, Inc., Acoustical Surfaces, Inc. Furthermore, Thomasnet lists only 13 top U.S. manufacturers, and only two of those in that list are in Sweets: Behr and Sherwin-Williams. Thomasnet also lists global manufacturers of paint as well.

Designers have lots of brand choices when it comes paint products. In fact, in the recent search of specs for interior paint, there were often 5 or six different paint brands specified with the option to mix and match brands. Oftentimes, the spec would say the brand of paint was up to the contractor as long as it met certain project or performance goals. On certain types of properties where the designer is focused on achieving a certain look or style, a more detailed specification with specific paint brands and colors will be found.

Using Spec Analysis Strengthen a Brand’s Market Position

To help paint manufacturers evaluate their brand position in the marketplace in order to determine the right strategy, it is important to also understand more about an architect’s level of involvement when specifying paint. How much control or influence does the architect or designer have on selecting a particular brand of paint?

Looking at interior paints, the architects’ involvement in specifying a specific brand or manufacturer can vary based on the project type, the owner’s requirements and the architect’s design preferences.

In AIM’s Architect’s Brand Preference research, the majority or 84% of architects surveyed indicated that they were involved in selecting and specifying the brand of paint. This was less than an earlier study where 91% of architects surveyed indicated they were involved in making brand decisions for interior paints. Does that mean someone else (i.e., interior designer) is doing the specifications?

In addition, of those that were involved in specifying paint, 10% indicated they did not have brand preference. This was a major increase since previous research which indicated only 2% had no brand preference. Brand preference is slipping.

Maybe some architects do not distinguish the difference of one brand over another? Or, is the choice being delegated to someone else in the value chain as mentioned, or simply, not relevant and left to the contractor?

While architects may indicate they have “no preference,” they are, in fact, involved in specifying and recommending interior paint. The architect will weigh in on the type of look or style they want achieve besides performance criteria.

However, due to the abundance of brand options, architects may delegate the brand selection to “others” in the specification path such as the interior designer. Many design firms today maintain a list of “approved” brands that have met specific performance and quality requirements. If a manufacturer is not on “the list,” the chance of being in a specification are limited. It is becoming increasingly important for manufacturers to expose and educate architects on their product features, benefits and other services they offer the market.

Becoming a brand on the architect’s preferred list of brands is key to impacting a brand’s position in the specifications (see What’s Love Got to Do with a B2B Brand, or our own report, What is a Brand?). To be on a firm’s list of approved paint providers, a manufacturer needs to provide more than just a quality product. They need to have a history of top performance, offer premiere service and local support for their brand.

What can paint manufacturers do to enhance brand selection and preference? How can manufacturers convert “no preference” answers into specifications and recommendations for their brands? These are important questions.

Impacting Brand Specification with the Basis of Design

To answer these questions, consider what we know about specifications. The key to gaining ground in specifications is to become part of the “basis of design”[3] or be listed as the brand of choice with no substitutions.

The “basis of design” means that the architect or designer is calling out a specific brand that is used to meet the objectives of the project. To learn more about how often “basis of design” is used in paint specs, we used ConstructConnect, an online construction database, to get a better sense of how interior paints are specified. By searching the projects for “paint with Basis of Design” in specific years, we can see how the specification for “basis of design” and specific brands has changed.

Less than half (39%) of U.S. projects in 2018 with a paint specification also included a brand as the “basis of design.” In fact, this has increased slightly since 2012 where “basis of design” was specified in only 29% of the paint specifications.

This analysis also indicates that while less than 50% of projects with a paint specification have a “basis of design” spec, there are specific brands that consistently appear as the basis of design as shown in the chart below.

Since there are a variety of different brands that are involved in providing paint products to the market, this type of spec analysis can show manufacturers how often their brand is specified as the “basis of design” and if it has shifted over a specific period of time. Note, too, how these three leaders match the earlier analysis of the 145 current projects going on in the planning stage.

Since the market is constantly changing as new and existing manufacturers introduce new products, it is important for a manufacturer to continuously review their position in the project specifications in order to have the right strategy.

While a manufacturer cannot always be sure that they are on a firm’s “preferred” list, they can evaluate how often their brand appears in the specifications and measure how often they are the “basis of the design” or appear in the project paint schedules. If a brand is found in the specifications and is the “basis of design”, they certainly are going to be on the list of “preferred” brands.

The specification analysis also indicates that in some specs a specific brand can be called out. To avoid being replaced by a “less expensive” or a “comparable” product, paint manufacturers may want to strive to be specified as the brand with “no substitutions”. In addition, having a specific paint color or finish specified on a project will increase a manufacturer’s chance of being purchased.

The same research can be done on the any other product categories or on specific brands based on the manufacturer’s needs. AIM can help you design a spec analysis to meet your objectives and look at a particular brand/manufacturer, by territory, competitors, project type, location or by spec area/schedule.

Let us know where your interests are. Thank you for reading this report, and let us know what you think!

____________________________________________________

[1] IBISWorld, Founded in 1971 provides information and market research on thousands of industries worldwide. https://www.ibisworld.com/industry-statistics/market-size/paint-manufacturing-united-states

[2] The Truth About Specification, by John Schneidawind, AIA highlights key findings on an AIA survey of 330 architects on how they select and specify building materials for commercial projects. The article stresses the importance of an architect’s relationship with building product manufacturers and report that 60% of the time the architect already knows which materials an architect is going to use. https://www.architectmagazine.com/aia-architect/aiafeature/the-truth-about-specification_o

[3]USlegal.com defines it as “Basis of design is a term used in engineering, which typically consists of text paragraphs, preliminary drawings, equipment lists, etc. Well-defined requirements consist of a set of statements that could form the basis of inspection and test acceptance criteria. The basis of design documentation and the specification identify how the design provides the performance and operational requirements of the project and its systems.”

The post Using Specification Analysis to Create a Marketing Strategy for Paint appeared first on Accountability Information Management.

The decision on whether to use ceramic flooring verses other types of flooring by architects and designers requires a variety of considerations. According to an article published by Facility Executive[1] titled Choose Flooring Wisely, the facility demands should dictate the flooring choices versus the style or look the architect may be trying to achieve. At the end of the day, the building owner will need to live with the designer’s flooring choices, so function and facility requirements are critical.

But isn’t that what architects should be doing anyway? In How to Align Your Firm with Client Needs[2], Michelle Russo points out that, “When forced to choose, most owners in these sectors the majority of owners want architects to understand the performance of their buildings and the impact on occupants.” In our own proprietary research[3] of facility managers, where we surveyed over 5,000 people who manage commercial, institutional, educational and medical facilities, the majority hire architects and designer because they “understand how we operate, our values, processes, needs, and expectations.” So while previous experience with the project requirements is important, it’s the ability of the architect to relate to the owner/facility manager’s needs – the needs of the building being constructed or managed.

Considerations Involved

In choosing to use ceramic floor tile, designers will first need to consider the volume of foot traffic and other types of rolling traffic the facility requires. In addition, it is important to know how the selection of ceramic tile will impact the building acoustics and the health and safety of the occupants. As with many products used in commercial and residential facilities, the on-going maintenance requirements and cost to purchase and install will have a huge impact on the decisions made about ceramic tile.

According to research conducted by FCNews’[4] the 2018 flooring market sales were $22.98 billion for 19.6 billion square feet of space. The ceramic floor tile sales make up approximately 13% of the sales and square feet. The research also indicates that the price for ceramic tile increased from $.95 per square foot to $1.19. Carpeting/rugs continue to make up the majority of flooring sales—approximately 40%.

One of the biggest pressures ceramic floor tile faces is from luxury vinyl tile (LVT)[5]. The decline or stagnation of the residential building market and the possibility of price increases due to tariffs has also impacted ceramic flooring. The percentage total floor sales that are for ceramic tile has increased slightly since 2003—up approximately 3%.  Ceramic floor tile continues to be a strong choice for designers for both function and design.

Not only do commercial projects use ceramic flooring, but in a recent 2019 Houzz Bathroom Trends Study[6] homeowners most often chose ceramic flooring and ceramic wall covering for their bathroom project. Over 50% of the homeowners used ceramic flooring in their new bathroom with 66% indicated using ceramic tile for the shower walls.

Why does Ceramic Flooring Win Over Alternative Flooring Options?

There are many advantages for architects to specify ceramic flooring over other flooring options. Since the primary reason for selecting any type of flooring should take into consideration the ultimate use and function of the facility occupants, designers need consider the overall benefits of using ceramic floor tiles.

One of the biggest benefits of using ceramic tile is because it is environmentally friendly. Ceramic tiles are made from clay, sand or glass and thus considered to be more of a “natural” material. In addition, ceramic tile can be made of recycled content and can be reused. In many parts of the country, the use of ceramic flooring can also reduce energy consumption by keeping commercial and residential projects exposed to high temperatures cooler than other flooring or provide added insulation.

Depending on the project, designers may specify ceramic floor tiles because they are easy to maintain and can be easily disinfected. Ceramic tile is also a good choice for areas with continuous exposure to moisture. Ceramic flooring is most often found in the kitchen, bathroom, entry way and laundry areas. These are all high traffic areas with exposure to moisture. In addition to ceramic tiles resistance to moisture, they are also allergen resistant and more resistant to fire, rot and fading. and a need for cleanliness.

As of this writing, for example, there are 2,468 projects in the planning stage that are using Ceramic Tile in the ConstructConnect database of construction. Virtually every kind of building is using this product – from high schools, government offices, hotels and hospitals to fire and police stations, warehouses, medical offices and entertainment centers. 16% of these projects are elementary and college facilities. However, there is no one type of building that dominates ceramic tile’s usage. In terms of project value, apartments hold the largest share of planning projects – but that is only 5% of the overall 2,468 total.

Not only does ceramic tile offer designers clear benefits for long term use and care, they also provide designers with numerous style and design options. Ceramic tiles can come in a variety of different shapes, styles colors and even textures. This give designers almost unlimited options offered by a numerous manufacturer. The question is, does the design community know this?

Every manufacturer faces that question about his product, and manufacturers of ceramic tile are no different. With the many ceramic tile options offered to designers, it is important for manufactures to monitor and evaluate their position in architects and interior designers’ product specification choices. That’s where specification analysis can be of use.

Using Spec Analysis Strengthen a Brand’s Market Position

Many manufactures work hard to get their brand in the designer’s specification and to be included in the list of approved brands. For many manufacturers, getting a product into the specification can be a difficult task. Architects and designers do not change or review their specs often.  In research conducted and published by Architect Magazine titled The Truth About Specification[7], many times architects re-use or revise existing specifications. AIM’s Brand Preference Study revealed just how competitive the ceramic floor tile market is. In this unaided blind brand preference study architects and designers were asked to list their top three brands of ceramic tile manufacturers.

There were over 26 different brands or companies mentioned by architects in AIM’s proprietary research with architects that were “involved” with the specification of these products. Although the list of specific brands has no doubt shifted over time, the numerous choices designers have to choose from still holds true.

A brand’s market position is fairly static — unless something disrupts it. In one of AIM’s research reports – What is a Brand – we argued that “Architects are like ranchers when it comes to managing  brands that they specify. While the architect may specify a variety of different manufacturers’ brands (beef), it’s the firm’s name on the door that owner hires — not the manufacturer(s). The architectural firm itself becomes the “brand” and the assurance that the products in that specification offer quality and reliability.”

In another post called “What’s Love Got to do with a B2B Brand?” the author argues one of the key ways B2B people get information about products is from their peers! They pointed out that facilities use a variety of methods to find architect/engineer firms to help them with a particular project or service they need. The cited one of our studies that indicated the method used by the higher percent of respondents was recommendations from peers/associates. Facility management people talk to each other on what works or doesn’t work. The reason they use this method is because it provides them with the most honest feedback on a firm’s performance and the quality of work.

Designers do the same thing, and as a result, designers have lots of brand choices when it comes to ceramic floor tile. In fact, the recent search of specs for ceramic floor tile there were often at least 5 brands and sometimes even more than 10 specified.

On some specs, contractors could basically select any brand that complied with the performance requirements outlined in the specification and did not exceed a certain price per square foot.

To help manufacturers evaluate their brand position in the marketplace, it is important to first understand more about an architect’s level of involvement when specifying ceramic floor tile. How much control or influence does the architect or designer have on selecting a particular brand of ceramic tile?

Looking at ceramic floor tile, the architects’ involvement in specifying a specific brand or manufacturer can vary based on the project type, the owner’s requirements and the architect’s design preferences. In AIM’s Architect’s Brand Preference research, the majority or 62% of architects surveyed indicated that they were involved in selecting and specifying the brand of ceramic tile. This was down from a 2003 study where 90% indicated of architects surveyed indicated they were involved in making brand decisions for ceramic tile.

In addition, of those that were involved, 28% indicated they did not have brand preference. This was a major increase since previous research which indicated only 4% had no brand preference. Could this be that architects do not distinguish the difference of one brand over another? Or, is the choice being delegated to someone in the value chain (i.e., the owner)?

While architects may indicate they have “no preference,” they are, in fact, involved in specifying and recommending ceramic floor tiling. The architect will in fact weigh in on the type of look or performance they want achieve besides functionality.

However, due to the abundance of brand options, architects may delegate the brand selection to “others” in the specification path; such as the interior designer. Many design firms today maintain a list of “approved” brands that have met specific performance and quality requirements. If a manufacturer is not on “the list”, the chance of being in a specification are limited. It is becoming increasingly important for manufacturers to expose and educate architects on their product features, benefits and other services they offer the market.

Becoming a brand on the architect’s preferred list of brands is key to impacting a brand’s position in the specifications. To be on a firm’s list of approved ceramic floor tile providers, a manufacturer needs to provide more than just a quality product. They need to have a history of top performance, offer premiere service and local support for their brand. What can ceramic floor tile manufacturers do to enhance brand selection and preference? How can manufacturers convert “no preference” answers into specifications and recommendations for their brands? These are important questions.

Impacting Brand Specification with the Basis of Design

To answer these questions, consider what we know about specifications. The key to gaining ground in specifications is to become part of the “basis of design.”[8] This means that the architect or designer is calling out a specific brand that is used to meet the objectives of the project. To learn more about how often “basis of design” is used in ceramic tile specs, we used ConstructConnect, (https://www.constructconnect.com/), an online construction database, to get a better sense of how ceramic tiles are specified. By searching the projects ceramic floor tile specifications for “ceramic floor tile with Basis of Design” in specific years, we can see how the specification for “basis of design” and specific brands has changed.

Almost half (47%) of projects in 2018 with a ceramic tile specification also included a brand as the “basis of design.” In fact, this has increased slightly since 2012 where “basis of design” was specified in only 45% of the ceramic floor tile specifications. This analysis also indicates that while just less than half of projects with a ceramic floor tile specification have a “basis of design” spec, there are specific brands that consistently appear as the basis of design[9].

Since there are a variety of different brands that are involved in providing ceramic floor tiles to the market, this type of spec analysis can show manufacturers how often their brand is specified as the “basis of design” and if it has shifted over a specific period of time.

Since the market is constantly changing as new and existing manufacturers introduce new products to the marketing, it is important for a manufacturer to continuously review their position in the project specifications. While a manufacturer cannot always be sure that they are on a firm’s “preferred” list, they can evaluate how often their brand appears in the specifications and measure how often they are the “basis of the design” or appear in the project schedules. If a brand is found in the specifications and is the “basis of design”, they certainly are going to be on the list of “preferred” brands.

Recent analysis of the ceramic tile specs also indicates that in some specs a specific brand can be called out.  To avoid being replaced by a “less expensive” ceramic tile or a “comparable” product, tile manufacturers may want to strive to be specified as the brand with “no substitutions”.

The same research can be done on the other product categories or on specific brands based on the manufacturer’s needs. AIM can design a spec analysis to meet a client’s objectives and look at a particular brand/manufacturer, by territory, competitors, project type, location or by spec area/schedule. Let us know where your interests are. Thank you, and let us know what you think!

______________________________________________________________

[1] Facility Executive, February 2017, John McGrath Jr.,” Choose Flooring Wisely”, https://facilityexecutive.com/2017/02/choose-commercial-flooring-wisely/

[2] “How to Align Your Firm with Client Needs” by Michelle Russo, for the AIA Architect, January 6, 2017.

[3] “What End Users Want (from architects and engineers that is), published by Accountability Information Management, Inc. For information on this report, contact: Patty Fleider, patty@a-i-m.com, or call 847-358-8558

[4] Scoring Flooring: Industry Stats for 2018, Posted July 1, 2019: Volume 35. Issue , https://fcnews.net/2019/07/scoring-flooring-industry-stats-for-2018/

[5] Two articles that may be of interest are 2019 Commercial Flooring Trends: Innovation and Design from December, 2018 that discusses this trend as well as others, and reading what maintenance people read to see what they go through in maintaining the choices of architects, such as Trends in Floor Care for Commercial Buidlings, which cites, “Vinyl Composition Tile (VCT): This is the mainstay of commercial flooring, and its updated form, luxury vinyl tile (LVT) is even more popular. A process used in manufacturing makes it even easier to maintain, as it no longer needs on-site application of a topical finish.”

[6]2019 U.S. Houzz Bathroom Trends Study, research conducted in July 2019 of 1,360 homeowners who had remodeled or added a new bathroom in the last 18 months. http://st.hzcdn.com/static/econ/BathroomUSReport2019Final.pdf

[7] The Truth About Specification, by John Schneidawind, AIA highlights key findings on an AIA survey of 330 architects on how they select and specify building materials for commercial projects. The article stresses the importance of an architect’s relationship with building product manufacturers and report that 60% of the time the architect already knows which materials an architect is going to use. https://www.architectmagazine.com/aia-architect/aiafeature/the-truth-about-specification_o

[8]USlegal.com defines it as “Basis of design is a term used in engineering, which typically consists of text paragraphs, preliminary drawings, equipment lists, etc. Well-defined requirements consist of a set of statements that could form the basis of inspection and test acceptance criteria. The basis of design documentation and the specification identify how the design provides the performance and operational requirements of the project and its systems.”

[9] Interestingly, these three companies – Daltile, American Olean and Crossville – were consistently ranked by architects in our brand preference studies as the #1, 2 and 3 choices. Nevertheless, it is a crowded marketplace. What is REALLY interesting is that Sweet’s reference doesn’t list one of these choices among the 11 they do mention. Is it that the companies believe their dominance doesn’t need such listings? Does it create openings for these other 11 that are in Sweet’s? In one specification for a middle school, Landmark Ceramics, a manufacturer of this kind of tile, is the 7^th choice of acceptable manufacturers behind two of the leaders, and four others. However, they only have three of the projects in the planning stage projects we pulled at this writing, so they have their work cut out for them to convince architects and designers of their preference! Yet the fact they are in the space is a large part of the battle. Leaders in the marketplace are hard to displace, but the way people communicate these days makes it easier than in the past. For a discussion, contact us.

The post Specifying Ceramic Floors – The Battle Between Aesthetics versus Function appeared first on Accountability Information Management.

But what does “quality” really mean? Furthermore, “quality” about what? The lighting? The control system? The entire building automation system (see our report on Building Automation Systems).

According to the recent 2019 lighting survey conducted by Electrical Contactor Magazine[1], electrical contractors who primarily work on commercial, industrial or institutional projects are most often (88%) asked to discuss lighting quality with owners. In addition, the most often lighting trend owners asked electrical contractors about was the quality of lighting products. 63% of electrical contractors indicated owners were very interested in learning about new trends in the quality of lighting, which was higher than owner’s interest in trends for color tuning, energy information, maintenance alerts or software systems.

Without actual proof of quality and performance, it will be difficult for lighting control manufacturers to be on the list of brand options in the specs or more important, become the “basis of design” for a particular project.

Lighting is Complex

In today’s environment, lighting is becoming increasingly complex. Today’s lighting includes a multitude of sensors that must “talk to” each other and the control system, as well as other components that provide extraordinary control to the lighting. The specification of the lighting controls while often intertwined with the lighting itself should give architects and designers pause when thinking about “quality.” Besides, these controls are often tied directly to energy efficiency, an important topic as sustainability is pursued, and other new trends such as occupant health and wellbeing or IoT. Building owners, for example, think about leveraging lighting systems as “the data network infrastructure for smart building applications.”[2] That is going to require data collection from an even more complex networkof sensors than currentlybeing used.

This gives architects and designers a lot to think about when it comes to determining “quality.” So where it used to be enough to be a part of a firm’s “short list,” today it might be better to be named as the “basis of design” or better yet, be on the brand named in a lighting schedule or required with no substitutions. The best way for manufacturers to become “the brand” required is through building stronger relationships with architects/designers. Knowing what architects need and becoming more informed on the process of specifications can help foster strong relationships.

In fact, because of the complexity in lighting controls today, the road to the short list is wide open for manufacturers of these systems, as well as the lighting devices themselves. As you will see in this report, there is no single manufacturer who dominates the category. Furthermore, because of the acceleration of the category itself, disruption has come to lighting as it has to every other category and industry.

This is the opportunity for new manufacturers or existing manufacturers trying to get a dominant position into the specification, a daunting task to be sure. Architects and designers do not change or review their specs often. In research conducted and published by Architect Magazine titled The Truth About Specification[3], architects find the process of writing and preparing specs somewhat routine and boring. Consequently, many times architects re-use or revise existing specifications. In fact, the research found that only 26% write specs from scratch and 57% end up using specs from a previous project—sometimes using the spec with no changes.

Proven Quality & Performance Helps Manufacturers Win

Getting in the spec is only half the battle. In commercial projects, the process from specification to purchase is complex and involves many influencers—architects, owners, engineers, interior designers, contractors and more. All professionals play a role in whether a specific brand ultimately gets purchased. According to an article in Consulting Specifying Engineer titled “Desiging Lighting Systems and Lighting Controls”[4] there are many factors designers must consider when specifying lighting control systems. Not only do they need to specify quality lighting products and control systems, but they most also balance other factors such as local/national building codes, energy requirements and project objectives. The article goes on to stress the importance of starting with evaluating a client’s needs before diving into product selection and lighting designs. Projects can be unique in size, shape, location and other system requirements that impact the overall project requirements.

Proprietary research conducted by Accountability Information Management, Inc. (AIM), a B2B full-service research and marketing firm indicates that 66% of architects/designers indicated that product durability and long-term performance was the most important benefit when selecting a particular brand of product. This was higher than the design appeal/look where only 32% indicated it was “most important”.

Trying to understand “quality” is a tricky concept. What quality means to one architect or designer may mean something else to another. In addition, a designer has to understand and know their client’s definition of quality. Does quality mean durability or does it mean long term performance? Does it mean reliability or free-from defects?

In fact, AIM’s open-ended research through the years continues to indicate the definition of quality can vary by type of product, project and the professional’s needs. Some words architects and owners have used include: consistent, reliable, dependable, performs/functions as required, long lasting, free from defects, durable and many others.

All lighting control specifications will include language requiring the specified products to meet specific industry standards. For example, associations like ASTM, NEMA, IES and others will not only set quality and performance standards but most will test manufacturers products to verify they meet these standards. In addition, lighting control specifications often include quality assurance language or key requirements when it comes to quality. Not only do products need to meet specific building and industry standards but manufacturers must provide proof that the product has performed in similar uses and properties. Architects and designers want manufacturers to have a  history of  performance for a minimum of 5 years.

Manufacturers must provide architects and other designers with the specific information they need on quality before they will become a part of the architects list of approved brands or become the basis of design. The specific information to provide assurance of a specific product’s quality will depend on a specific project and the designers needs. The manufacturer and their representative must take the time to understand the specific architect’s goals and needs of a particular project. By tracking and evaluating brand placement in project specifications, manufacturers can begin to learn how well their brand is penetrating the design market. In addition, it gives them a way to evaluate their position in relationship to competitors.

Spec Analysis is a Way to Evaluate Manufacturer Success/Failure

A comprehensive Accountability Information Management, Inc. (AIM) Architects’ Brand Preference Study revealed just how competitive the lighting control market is. In this unaided blind brand preference study architects and designers were asked to list their top three brands of lighting control products.

There were over 15 brands or companies mentioned by designers that were “involved” with the specification of these products. Although the list of specific brands no doubt shifts over time, the numerous choices designers have to choose from still holds true. Designers have lots of brand choices when it comes to lighting control products. Or do they?

In our studies, 25% to 35% of the time, the architect is delegating the specification of lighting controls to someone else (the engineer, the developer, the contractor). And today, because of the growing complexity, those people are probably sub-contracting the specification to other specialized professions! How is a manufacturer to navigate this path?

Ultimately, it’s the architect who signs off on the plan, which is why manufacturers must do everything in their power to educate that audience not only on products, but to provide the required assistance in the actual specifications themselves.

How Involved is Involved?

To help manufacturers evaluate their brand position in the marketplace, it is important to first understand more about an architect’s level of involvement when specifying lighting control systems. How much control or influence does the architect or designer have on selecting a particular brand of lighting?

Looking at lighting control products, the degree to which architects are involved in specifying a specific brand or manufacturer can vary. It depends on many project variables and specific project needs. As lighting control systems become more complex and need to be integrated into the entire building automation system, often times the architect delegates these decisions to lighting design professionals or an electrical design expert. In AIM’s Architect’s Brand Preference research, only 48% of the architects surveyed indicated that they were involved in selecting and specifying the brand of lighting control products which is a decrease since an earlier study where 62% were involved. This level of involvement continues to decrease as the complexity of the systems increases.

In addition, 24% indicate they did not have any type of brand preference—an increase from 3% with “no preference” in a previous study. Manufacturers of lighting control seem to be neglecting the architects’ education!

While architects may indicate they have “no preference,” they are, in fact, involved at a certain level in specifying and recommending lighting control products. However, due to the complexity of commercial projects, more architects may delegate the brand selection to lighting “specialist” either lighting designer, electrical designer or “others” in the specification path.

Many design firms today, maintain a list of “approved” brands that meet their performance and quality requirements. If a manufacturer is not on “the list”, the chance of being in a specification are limited. It is becoming increasingly important for manufacturers to expose and educate designers on their product features, benefits, quality standards and services they offer the market.

Becoming a brand on the architect’s preferred list of brands is key to impacting a brand’s position in the specifications. To be on a firm’s list of approved lighting control brands, a manufacturer needs to provide more than just a quality product. They need to have a history of top performance, offer premiere service and local support for their brand. What should lighting control manufacturers do to enhance brand selection and preference? How can manufacturers convert “no preference” or “no awareness” into specifications and recommendations for their brands? These are important questions.

Impacting Brand Specification with the Basis of Design

To answer these questions, consider what we know about specifications. The key to gaining ground in specifications is to become part of the “basis of design.”[5] This means that the architect or designer is calling out a specific brand that is used to meet the objectives of the project. To learn more about how often “basis of design” is used in lighting control specs, we used ConstructConnect, (https://www.constructconnect.com/), an online construction database, to get a better sense of how interior lighting products are specified. By searching the project lighting controls and device specifications for “lighting control projects with Basis of Design,” in specific years, we can see how the specification for “basis of design” and specific brands has changed.

Only 25% of projects in 2018 with a lighting control specification also included a brand as the “basis of design.” However, this has increased slightly since 2012 where “basis of design” was specified in only 22% of the lighting control specifications.

Since there are many national and proven brands that are involved in delivering lighting control products to the market, this type of spec analysis can show manufacturers how often their brand is specified as the “basis of design” and if it has shifted over a specific period of time.

For example, in the current construction projects going on in the U.S. and Canada, 22,059 have “lighting control systems” specifically called out in the specification. Sweets, which is often consulted for manufacturers of products used by architects, only has two manufacturers listed under “lighting control systems.” These two manufacturers hardly showed within this dataset of 22,059.

This lack of listings in a source like Sweets underscores how architects “delegate” such specifications to others as noted earlier. However, what is the real story of manufacturers fighting for this category?

The chart shows a sampling. AIM took a random specification for “lighting control systems” and found specific manufacturers mentioned, and then combined them with our own studies in this category. You can see how “wide open” the category is in terms of a dominant manufacturer: there is none. No single manufacturer has more than 28% of that dataset.

The market is constantly changing and it is important for a manufacturer to continuously review their position in architect’s specifications. While a manufacturer cannot always be sure that they are on a firm’s “preferred” list, they can evaluate how often their brand appears in the specifications and measure how often they are the “basis of the design” or appear in the lighting schedule. If a brand is found in the specifications and certainly is the “basis of design” they are going to be on the list of “preferred” brands.

The same research can be done on the other product categories or on specific brands based on the manufacturer’s needs. AIM can design a spec analysis to meet a client’s objectives and look at a particular brand/manufacturer, by territory, competitors, project type, location or by spec area/schedule. Let us know where your interests are. Thank you.

____________________________

[1] Ear to the Ground Eds Offer Us Their Feedback Lighting , Electrical Contactor Magazine, April 2019. https://www.ecmag.com/section/lighting/ear-ground-ecs-offer-us-their-feedback-lighting

[2]“Top 5 Commercial Lighting Trends in 2019” published by Osram, 3.20.2019.

[3] The Truth About Specification, by John Schneidawind, AIA highlights key findings on an AIA survey of 330 architects on how they select and specify building materials for commercial projects. The article stresses the importance of an architect’s relationship with building product manufacturers and report that 60% of the time the architect already knows which materials an architect is going to use. https://www.architectmagazine.com/aia-architect/aiafeature/the-truth-about-specification_o

[4] Consulting Specifying Engineer Magazine, December 2018; https://www.csemag.com/articles/designing-lighting-systems-lighting-controls

[5]USlegal.com defines it as “Basis of design is a term used in engineering, which typically consists of text paragraphs, preliminary drawings, equipment lists, etc. Well-defined requirements consist of a set of statements that could form the basis of inspection and test acceptance criteria. The basis of design documentation and the specification identify how the design provides the performance and operational requirements of the project and its systems.”

The post Quality is Key to Being a Player in Lighting Control Specifications. Or is it? appeared first on Accountability Information Management.

ConstructConnect

According Steel Door Institute[1] in a performance study report entitled “Why Steel,” there are several reasons why steel doors are preferred over other types of commercial doors. Steel and metal doors not only offer long term value, but they out-perform other doors in the ability to offer security, sound reduction, vandal resistance.

They are also easy to repair and can provide other design aesthetics not available in alternative door materials. Steel and metal door manufacturers need to keep architects informed of key benefits in order to maximize their brand’s position in architect’s specifications. That’s always the challenge!

How do Architects Select Metal/Steel Doors?

Architects balance many factors when selecting the type and brand of metal/steel doors. These factors always begin with the specific goals and objectives of the particular project they are designing. Others include:

• Are there security, vandalism or safety issues with this type of project?
• Will the doors be subject to high use where on-going maintenance may be a concern?
• Does the owner have a specific budget or will long-term cost benefits outweigh the initial cash outlay?

In addition to some of the project objectives, architects often select metal/steel doors for the aesthetics or a specific design they are trying to achieve. The more specific product information manufacturers can provide the architect the better. Besides manufacturers themselves, the WBDG (World Building Design Guide) provides a general overview for metal doors. This outlet is a web-based portal providing government and industry practitioners with access to up-to-date information on a wide range of building-related guidance, criteria and technology from a ‘whole buildings’ perspective.

Relationships Matter

One of the best ways for manufacturers to increase their position in the market is build a stronger relationship with architects and designers who specify metal/steel doors. If a manufacturer is not on a firm’s “short list,” it is almost impossible to be listed in a project’s specifications. For example, there are over 47,000 architects in that initial group of projects containing metal doors referenced earlier. How can the manufacturer expect to relate to that amount of people? Who are the main architects specifying metal doors for projects? What kinds of projects are using these products? For example, if education and government are the lion’s share of such projects, are there niche opportunities in the other categories?

These are important questions for manufacturers as they create their go-to-architect strategies.

Architects have many choices in brand when it comes to metal/steel doors[2]. Manufacturers should strive to be named as the projects’ “basis of design” or be the only brand listed with no substitutions. The best way for manufacturers to become “the brand” required is through building stronger relationships with architects/designers. Relationships are key—and manufacturers need to start to develop better relationships with architects.

Manufacturer’s sales reps cannot just give architects a “standard pitch.” Creating a relationship requires more than a customized presentation. It needs an integrated strategy that includes e-mail, mail, phone and perhaps CEU tactics. Manufacturer’s reps simply do not have the time required to pull such integration off, and the manufacturer needs to help them understand the architects needs and specific project goals. The manufacturer can empower reps with such information and tools to provide architects with the information on how their steel/metal door performs in similar projects or situations. They can demonstrate how their brand compares to competitive products in the market.

There are many ways the manufacturer can help, but one of the most effective ways is to take the time to completely understand the specification process and what factors are most important to the architects when they specify metal/steel doors. That requires a specification analysis.

Using Specification Analysis to Evaluate and Strengthen a Brand’s Market Position

Analyzing specifications requires hard work. For many manufacturers, there is always the question of not having the time to conduct such a comprehensive analysis. However,  getting a product into the specification requires such a commitment. There are no “shortcuts.”

For example, architects and designers do not change or review their specifications often. In research conducted and published by Architect Magazine titled The Truth About Specification[3], many times architects re-use or revise existing specifications. In fact, based on a research from the Accountability Information Management, Inc. (AIM) Architects’ Brand Preference Study, the metal/steel door market is a highly competitive market. In this unaided blind brand preference study, architects and designers were asked to list their top three brands of metal door products.

There were over 16 brands or companies mentioned by architects that were “involved” with the specification of these products. Although the list of specific brands has no doubt shifted over time, the numerous choices they have to choose from still holds true.

Architects and designers have lots of brand choices when it comes to metal door products. In fact, a recent spec for metal/steel doors had not only a list of 15 possible brands, but the final design could basically select any brand that complied with the requirements of the project.

One tactic, then, involves meeting the architect to go over that short list. In asking to review the specification for a specific project, the sales rep may offer additional suggestions based on the benefits of their product. Creating a dialogue rather than a monologue leads to communication, and communication opens up opportunities for enhancing the architect’s specification. Another research report on Brand conducted by AIM helps explain the importance of a brand in this process.

First Things First

To help manufacturers evaluate their brand position in the marketplace, it is important to first understand more about an architect’s level of involvement when specifying metal door products. How much control or influence does the architect or designer have on selecting a particular brand of metal/steel doors?

The architects’ involvement in specifying a specific brand or manufacturer can vary. In AIM’s Architect’s Brand Preference research, only 12% of the architects surveyed indicated that they were involved in selecting and specifying the brand of metal/steel doors. Of those that were involved, 46% indicated they did not have a brand preference. This was a major decrease since previous research conducted by AIM, which indicated only 16% had no brand preference. Could this be that the specification of metal/steel doors is complex and architects delegate the decisions on brand to other professionals? Does this mean that the focus of the manufacturer should NOT be with the architect?

While architects may indicate they have “no preference,” they are, in fact, heavily involved in specifying and recommending the metal/steel door products. The architect will weigh in on the type of look or performance they want achieve. If the metal door manufacturer’s rep has created a relationship, that architect will indeed influence the specification.

However, due to the increasing complexity of commercial projects, architects may delegate the brand selection to “others” in the specification path. But, that depends on how the specification is written!

Many design firms today maintain a list of “approved” brands that have met specific performance and quality requirements in the past. If a manufacturer is not on “the list,” the chance of being in a specification are limited. This is why manufacturers must expose and educate architects on their product features, benefits and other services they offer the market on an ongoing basis.

Becoming a brand on the architect’s preferred list of brands is key to impacting a brand’s position in the specifications. To be on a firm’s list of approved metal/steel doors, a manufacturer needs to provide more than just a quality product. They need to demonstrate a history of top performance, offer premiere service and local support for their brand.

What should metal/door manufacturers do to enhance brand selection and preference? How can manufacturers convert “no preference” answers into specifications and recommendations for their brands? These are important questions.

Impacting Brand Specification with the “Basis of Design”

To answer these questions, consider what we know about specifications. The key to gaining ground in specifications is to become the “basis of design.”[4] This means that the architect or designer is calling out a specific brand that is used to meet the objectives of the project. To learn more about how often “basis of design” is used in metal/steel door specs, we used ConstructConnect, (https://www.constructconnect.com/), an online construction database, to get a better sense of how metal/steel doors are specified. By searching the projects metal door specifications for “metal/steel door projects with Basis of Design” in specific years, we can see how the specification for “basis of design” and specific brands has changed.

Only 20% of projects in 2018 with a metal/steel door specification also included a brand as the “basis of design.” However, this has increased since 2012 where “basis of design” was specified in only 10% of the metal door specifications. This analysis also indicates that while the number of projects that have a “basis of design” spec is fairly low, there are specific brands that consistently appear as the basis of design.

Since there are many brands that are involved in delivering metal/steel door products to the market, this type of spec analysis can show manufacturers how often their brand is specified as the “basis of design” and if it has shifted over a specific period of time.

The market is constantly changing and it is important for a manufacturer to continuously review their position in architect’s specifications. While a manufacturer cannot always be sure that they are on a firm’s “preferred” list, they can evaluate how often their brand appears in the specifications and measure how often they are the “basis of the design” or appear in the project schedules. If a brand is found in the specifications and certainly is the “basis of design” they are going to be on the list of “preferred” brands.

For example, in one food chain project, the specifications contain a generic metal door specification without a brand. The architect in charge of that project has 12 other projects going on, a third of which are other projects for that food chain. What is preventing a metal door manufacturer from being the “basis of design” for that food chain?

Only inertia prevents action like that. What manufacturers needs is a contact strategy, and AIM can help. Because it all starts with specifications analysis and a realization that not all rep organizations can do everything. With proper guidance, however, such relationships can not only be created, but maintained for the manufacturer – and the architect – while securing specifications with the greatest value for their clients.

Specification research can be done on the other product categories or on specific brands based on the manufacturer’s needs. AIM can design a spec analysis to meet a client’s objectives and look at a particular brand/manufacturer, by territory, competitors, project type, location or by spec area/schedule. Let us know where your interests are and how we can help. Thank you.

________________

[1]Steel Institute, Why Steel? Performance Study of Steel Doors vs. Wood, Aluminum, and FRP.

[2] Sweet’s has 18 manufacturers listed in the “steel door” category.” In specifications, there are almost always manufacturers listed beyond those 18. Furthermore, those listed as “basis of design” are not always the ones listed in Sweet’s.

[3] The Truth About Specification, by John Schneidawind, AIA highlights key findings on an AIA survey of 330 architects on how they select and specify building materials for commercial projects. The article stresses the importance of an architect’s relationship with building product manufacturers and report that 60% of the time the architect already knows which materials an architect is going to use. https://www.architectmagazine.com/aia-architect/aiafeature/the-truth-about-specification_o

[4]USlegal.com defines it as “Basis of design is a term used in engineering, which typically consists of text paragraphs, preliminary drawings, equipment lists, etc. Well-defined requirements consist of a set of statements that could form the basis of inspection and test acceptance criteria. The basis of design documentation and the specification identify how the design provides the performance and operational requirements of the project and its systems.”

The post Opening the Door to Metal and Steel Door Specification Preference appeared first on Accountability Information Management.

According to a recent research study conducted by Dodge Data & Analytics[1], “Exploding 9 Myths How Architects & Contractors Really Select Building Products,” more than 50% of architects indicated they pre-selected less than half of all the products they intended to use before the building is started.

This is not surprising. In our own proprietary research, depending on the category, the architect will pre-select anywhere between 10% to over 70% of products for a building. In security and fire protection, the architect almost is never involved in specification of specific products, delegating it to a consultant/developer or other non-manufacturer over 65% of the time. Whereas in Siding Materials, the architect has selected brands 90% of the time for his or her specification.

Even when the architect does the pre-selection, is it never one brand. Rather, it is a “list” of brands, with one being perhaps the “Basis of Design.” This way, the architect allows the contractor and owner to be the deciders.

In addition, the Dodge research showed that contractors are successful in getting architects to accept an alternative brand than originally specified 50% of the time! The words “or equal” allow this, and those words have plagued manufacturers for decades. “Or equal” opens the specification door to manufacturers, including even those not on the original specification.

At the same time, those doors also allow a manufacturer the opportunity to introduce and educate designers on the features and benefits of their product and why it is in he specification to begin with, or can be used as “or equal.”

Specification is a Complex Game

With the abundance of information available on the internet, manufacturers often make the mistake of assuming architects know all they need to know about their product or at least can easily find it. But, architects often say they find manufacturers websites hard to navigate and don’t always provide the specific technical information they need to make the best product selections for their projects.

Besides, architects tend to specify products they have used before and are the most familiar with—so the more information and technical information a manufacturer can provide the better.

In fact, today most architects and architectural firms have “standard” specifications and often maintain a list of “pre-approved” products that meet their standards. While it may be difficult to be included on a list of approved products, it is not impossible. Most lists are reviewed on an annual basis and architects love to learn and explore new products.

Continuing Education

CEUs are one of the primary ways of educating designers and getting on the short list. The IDCEC for example lists over 2,300 courses available to architects and interior designers. You can download their list in

Excel® here. Only 3% lof the courses on that list deal with ceilings. Only 1% deal with “acoustical.” AIA itself is in the process or redesigning its website but boasts over 75,000 approved classes. How many deal with acoustical ceiling products is anyone’s guess.

The AIA does have a place where you can view state-by-state requirements. Simply pick your state and the website will deliver the result of requirements. Manufacturers find this CEU channel a convenient way to deliver their content and expose the architect and designer to the products. Our sister company, Interline Creative Group, Inc., is an AIA Provider, and if you’re interested, can help you through the administration and creation of such courses.

The point is that to even be considered for a pre-approved list, manufacturers need to be able to demonstrate the successful use their product and provide some assurance of long-term quality and performance. This is often done in CEUs and through case studies.

Acoustical Ceiling Products

When it comes to acoustical ceiling products an architect has many brand options. Sweets, which is one of the building product sources for the design and construction professional, lists 2800 Products when searching for the term “acoustical ceiling products.” That’s a lot of products! But, those products came from only 23 manufacturers!

Where it used to be enough to be a part of a firm’s “short list,” today it is even better to be named as the “Basis of Design” or ultimately be listed as the brand with no substitutions. This means the contractor has little or no ability to change the product specification without a lot of work.

Spec analysis conducted by Accountability Information Management, Inc. (AIM) indicates that “most” product specifications list a brand(s) or “equal.” In fact, on average, a product specification can list 5 or 6 “equal” brands. This gives the contractor many options when it comes to the actual purchase and use of a specific brand. A Basis of Design specification simply places an additional limiting factor on the ability to change a product out of the spec.

Evaluating Designers Involvement Is Key

To help manufacturers evaluate their brand position in the marketplace, it is important to first understand more about an architect’s own level of involvement when specifying acoustical ceiling products. As pointed out earlier, it can vary greatly depending on the product category.

How much control or influence does the architect or designer have on selecting a particular brand of acoustical ceiling tile?

Today, architects and designers often need to balance the project budget with specific design goals; but, other factors like the type of project, the location of the product within the facility or the need for specific sound control could impact the acoustical ceiling decisions. And like the other products the architect specifies, involvement with acoustical ceiling products will vary.

For example, in restaurant or public facility with many occupants, the type or brand of acoustical ceiling may be influenced by a specific need to limit the escalation of sound at particular peak periods. Or a need to meet a certain look or design can control the product selection.

Brand Preference

A comprehensive Accountability Information Management, Inc. (AIM) Architects’ Brand Preference Study revealed that the acoustical ceiling market is very competitive. In that study (which was open-ended brand recall  brand preference where the architect had to write in the answer without the use of a pre-determined list), there were 17 brands mentioned, five less than there were in Sweets!  Armstrong was the most often preferred brand followed by USG and Certainteed. CertainTeed® is a brand of exterior and interior building products and a subsidiary of Saint-Gobain, one of the world’s largest and oldest building products companies. But specifications carry brand names for a long time (see footnote 3).

While there were 17 brands mentioned by architects for Acoustical Ceiling products in that study, the top three players represented the majority of the acoustical ceiling brands. It is interesting to note, too, that 7% of the architects in our study relegated that choice to the interior designer, project manager, or general contractor (see previous discussion on pre-selection). Although a list of specific brands will no doubt shift over time, there are still numerous brand choices when it comes to acoustical ceiling products. More important, those brands tend to stay in the specifications once they are in for quite awhile!

In AIM’s Architect’s Brand Preference research, only 18% of the architects surveyed indicated that they were not involved in selecting and specifying the brand of acoustical ceiling products. In addition, 11% indicated they did not have any type of brand preference—an increase from 4 % with “no preference” from a previous study. While architects may indicate they have “no preference,” they are, in fact, involved in specifying and recommending acoustical ceiling products to a high degree, making the category competitive. However, due to the complexity of commercial projects, architects may delegate the brand selection to the interior designer or “others” in the specification path as noted earlier.

Brand Spec Analysis Help Manufacturers Get Specified

The key to gaining ground in specifications is to become part of the “Basis of Design.”[2] This means that the architect or designer is calling out a specific brand used to meet the objectives of the project. To learn more about how often “basis of design” is used in acoustical ceiling specs, AIM used ConstructConnect, (https://www.constructconnect.com/), an online construction database. By searching the projects with acoustical ceiling specifications for “acoustical ceiling with Basis of Design,” in specific years, we can see how the specification for “basis of design” and specific brands has changed.

41% of projects in 2018 with an acoustical ceiling specification also included a brand as the “basis of design.” This was an increase since 2012 where “basis of design” was specified in only 34% of the acoustical lighting specifications.

Since there are many brands that are involved in delivering acoustical ceiling products to the market, this type of spec analysis can show manufacturers how often their brand is specified as the “basis of design” and if it has shifted over a specific period of time. The analysis also has the potential to help manufacturer target both architects who are specifying their brand, and those that are not. It is very powerful analysis that can, over time, shape the short list in an architect’s firm.

The market is constantly changing, and the way architects write specifications can also change. In fact, AIM’s spec analysis for acoustical ceiling brands indicated that many times, the basis-of-design manufacturer was not even listed in the specification but indicated the information was located on the drawings. This is another way manufacturers can solidify contractors’ purchase and use their brand in a particular commercial project.

Looking closer at the schedules and plans for the acoustical ceiling products, AIM found that 84% of the projects with acoustical ceiling products also had a finish or ceiling schedule.

In addition, specific “brands” like Armstrong and USG appeared the majority of the times in these schedules.

Specification analysis can assist manufacturers in better measuring their position with architects/designers in the market, and increase the likelihood that the contractor will actually purchase the brand specified[3].

This type of analysis can also become fairly complex when brand names are abbreviated or a particular product number or product line is used rather than the manufacturer’s brand name.

Bottom Line

It is important for a manufacturer to continuously review their position in architect’s specifications and plans. While a manufacturer cannot always be sure that they are on a firm’s “preferred” list, they can evaluate how often their brand appears in the specifications, measure how often they are the “basis of the design” or evaluate how and when they appear in the finish/ceiling schedule. If a brand is found in the specifications and certainly is the “basis of design” they are going to be on the list of “preferred” brands.

The same research can be done on the other product categories or on specific brands based on the manufacturer’s needs. AIM can design a spec analysis to meet a client’s objectives and look at a particular brand/manufacturer, by territory, competitors, project type, location or by spec area/schedule. Let us know where your interests are. Thank you.

______________________

[1] Exploding 9 Myths How Architects & Contractors Really Select Building Products conducted by Dodge Data & Analytics surveyed 170 architects, 150 contractors and 99 manufacturers to learn more about their views on product specification. https://www.construction.com/toolkit/guides/Exploding-9-Myths

[2]USlegal.com defines it as “Basis of design is a term used in engineering, which typically consists of text paragraphs, preliminary drawings, equipment lists, etc. Well-defined requirements consist of a set of statements that could form the basis of inspection and test acceptance criteria. The basis of design documentation and the specification identify how the design provides the performance and operational requirements of the project and its systems.”

[3] For example, in the current database of over 500,000 projects, there are about 9% that specify “acoustical ceilings.” From that group, Armstrong has 39% written into the specification, USG 41%, Certainteed 29%, National Gypsum 29% and Chicago Metallic 18%. But there are least five other manufacturers from the AIM brand preference study in those specifications that comprise 27% of the written specifications within that grouping! As we suggest, it’s complex.

The post How Architects Specify Acoustical Ceiling Products appeared first on Accountability Information Management.

Take interior lighting products. Architects and interior designers have many choices when it comes to the brand and lighting options. It used to be enough to be a part of a firm’s “short list.” Today it might be better to be named as the “basis of design.” Better yet, becoming the brand named in a light fixture schedule or required with no substitutions is probably the best.

The way manufacturers become “the brand” required is through building stronger relationships with architects/designers. How does that work?

The Most Important “P” in the 4 “Ps” of Marketing is Silent

Traditional marketing thought suggests there are 4Ps in a Marketing Mix representing four broad levels of interconnected but independent variables. They are: Product, Price, Promotion, and Place.

This thinking has been entirely wrong because it neglected the silent “P” – Problem. As the pronunciation of some words in English have silent letters you do not pronounce (i.e., the silent ‘d’ is in the word WEDNESDAY), the silent word in the marketing 4 Ps is PROBLEM — so silent, everyone forgot about it.

Many manufactures work hard to get their brand in an architect’s specification. They try different tactics. Some hire specialized firms that call on architects. Others send out projects on spreadsheets to their rep organizations to “pursue.” They start adjusting the 4 “Ps” when things are not working. They play with their price, or they do a promotion, or they “tweak” their product.

The result, however, is that architects and designers become inundated with information. Like all of us, they quickly realize there is only so much time and there is never enough of it.

Time, then, becomes the currency, and deciding how to spend that time on achieving a specification preference becomes the objective. But if you forget the silent “P,” you really will regularly mis-calculate on what you have to do to win in the specification game.

The thing that governs the time of an architect or designer is the problem they happen to be trying to solve – NOT a product trying to be pitched to them. In other words, it’s the PROBLEM, not the PRODUCT.

So how do you gain the time with the architect or designer to gain specification preference? How do you find the problems they are facing?

Solve Their Problems.

Manufacturers depend on their sales organizations to find out about the problems designers face. But that rarely works because the reps are too busy selling and trying to force-fit the product into the thinking of the designer.

Or, as mentioned, manufacturers hire mercenaries, but the results will be the same.

Unless that presentation and pitch solve a problem the designer is having at that time, nothing happens.

Elmer G. Leterman, one of the greatest salespeople who lived, wrote a book (now virtually out of print) called, “The Sale Begins When the Customer Says No” offered the secret:

“The main – in fact, the exclusive—reason for a sale is because something is urgently required by the buyer…The rise of total closings to a new high for the month or year is most desirable. It is secondary, however, to the needs of the person on the other side of the table.”

Therefore, using either your own sales representatives or hired mercenaries doesn’t matter: knowing the problems of your target is really the tell.

Specification Time

Architects and designers do not change or review their specs often. In research conducted and published by Architect Magazine titled The Truth About Specification[1], architects find the process of writing and preparing specs somewhat routine and boring.

Consequently, many times architects re-use or revise existing specifications In fact, the research found that only 26% write specs from scratch and 57% end up using specs from a previous project—sometimes using the spec with no changes.

What that means is the specifications may, in fact, not be solving the problems they are facing NOW.

Furthermore, that routine makes it very difficult for a “new” manufacturer or an existing manufacturer with a new product to penetrate an architect’s specifications — unless the pitch is addressing the problem the designer is currently having.

The article also indicated most architects (approximately 70%) use products and suppliers who they have a relationship with. Often even before the specification is prepared, the architect has already decided on the products they will be using.

So building long term solid relationships with architects is more important today for getting a brand specified or purchased. And the only way to do that is to solve their problems.

To stimulate competitive bids/pricing, architect’s specifications often must contain a list of alternative brands. In most specifications for commercial projects, the specs will contain an average of 5 or more manufacturers. This allows the contractor the ability to “substitute” brands to remain competitive.

Furthermore, the manufacturer with the product that can solve the architect’s problem can utilize the existing spec to CHANGE it! The architect can be shown why the product is BETTER than the specified ones because it SOLVES the problem.

Besides, just because you are “on” the list, it does not mean your product will be purchased. When a brand is among the options presented, there may be a “better” chance at being purchased but your chance could be 1 in 5 or more. With options, contractors may choose the brand that is least expensive or readily available or simply “easier” for them to install. So how do manufacturers increase the probability that their brand will be purchased? Relationships are key.

Build Relationships by Solving their Problem

Manufacturers need to start to develop relationships with architects to provide them with the information they need to make better product selections. First it is important to understand what factors have the most impact on a designers’ brand selection.

Brand selection can vary based on the type of product and project, and often some factors are more critical than others. For interior lighting product,s the demand for the right “look” or the aesthetics needs to be balanced with other needs of the project like functionality, energy savings, or safety.

Sometimes there are also other project objectives or building codes that can impact a designer’s selection on the brand or style lighting. All of these “variables” are problems that the architect or designer is having that a manufactured product can solve.

For example, depending on the type of project, there may be additional requirements for security or energy concerns they are facing. Does your product address those problems?

Evaluating how interior lighting products are specified and what problems those products are solving is essential to helping manufacturers build their brand presence and relationship with architects and designers.

By tracking the frequency and placement of a brand in project specifications, manufacturers can begin to learn how well their brand is penetrating the design market. The specifications actually tell you the type of problems they are facing. What manufacturers should use specification analysis to do is uncover the products specified, figure out the problems those products solve, and then talk to architects about their current problems. In addition, specification analysis gives manufacturers a way to evaluate their position in relationship to competitors.

Spec Analysis is a Way to Evaluate a Brand’s Position with Designers

A comprehensive Accountability Information Management, Inc. (AIM) Architects’ Brand Preference Study revealed just how competitive the interior lighting market is. In this unaided blind brand preference study, architects and designers were asked to list their top three brands of interior lighting products.

There were over 70 brands or companies mentioned by designers that were “involved” with the specification of these products. Although the list of specific brands shifts over time, the numerous choices designers have to choose from still holds true. Designers have lots of brand choices when it comes to interior lighting products.

To help manufacturers evaluate their brand position in the marketplace, it is important to understand more about an architect’s level of involvement when specifying interior lighting products. How much control or influence does the architect or designer have on selecting a particular brand of lighting?

Looking at interior lighting products, the degree to which architects are involved in specifying a specific brand or manufacturer can vary. Today architects and designers often need to balance the project budget with specific design goals; but, other factors like the type of project, the location of the product within the facility or the need for energy efficiency or protection from vandalism could impact the interior lighting decisions.

For example, in a retail or high traffic public facility with many lighting requirements, the type or brand of lighting may be influenced by the need for added security or occupant needs.

In AIM’s Architect’s Brand Preference research, only 23% of the architects surveyed indicated that they were not involved in selecting and specifying the brand interior lighting products.

In addition, 21% indicated they did not have any type of brand preference—an increase from 13% with “no preference” in a previous study.

While architects may indicate they have “no preference,” they are, in fact, involved in specifying and recommending interior lighting products. However, due to the complexity of commercial projects, architects may delegate the brand selection to the interior designer or “others” in the specification path.

Many design firms today maintain a list of “approved” brands that meet their performance and quality requirements. If a manufacturer is not on “the list,” the chance of being in a specification are limited. It is becoming increasingly important for manufacturers to expose and educate designers on their product features, benefits and other services they offer the market that will solve the real problems they are facing.

Becoming a brand on the architect’s preferred list of brands is key to impacting a brand’s position in the specifications. To be on a firm’s list of approved interior lighting brands, a manufacturer needs to provide more than just a quality product. They need to have a history of top performance, offer premiere service and local support for their brand. They should in the end SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

What should lighting manufacturers do to enhance brand selection and preference? How can manufacturers convert “no preference” answers into specifications and recommendations for their brands? These are important questions.

Impacting Brand Specification with the Basis of Design

To answer these questions, consider what we know about specifications. The key to gaining ground in specifications is to become part of the “basis of design.”[2] This means that the architect or designer is calling out a specific brand that is used to meet the objectives of the project, and you will become the basis of design if your product solves a problem!

To learn more about how often “basis of design” is used in interior lighting specs, we used ConstructConnect, (https://www.constructconnect.com/), an online construction database, to get a better sense of how interior lighting products are specified. By searching the project interior lighting specifications for “interior lighting projects with Basis of Design,” in specific years, we can see how the specification for “basis of design” and specific brands has evolved.

Only 38% of projects in 2018 with an interior lighting specification also included a brand as the “basis of design.” However, this has increased since 2012 where “basis of design” was specified in only 28% of the interior lighting specifications.

Since there are many brands that are involved in delivering interior lighting products to the market, this type of spec analysis can show manufacturers how often their brand is specified as the “basis of design” and if it has shifted over a specific period of time. Examining the kinds of products specified, moreover, will help you understand the type of problems these architects may be facing.

The market is constantly changing and it is important for a manufacturer to continuously review their position in architects’ specifications. While a manufacturer cannot always be sure that they are on a firm’s “preferred” list, they can evaluate how often their brand appears in the specifications and measure how often they are the “basis of the design” or appear in the lighting schedule. Further, they can study the types of products being specified to help understand the problems faced by architects.

Indeed, calling up a dozen of the architects in these projects will produce a completely new way of thinking about the products needed to solve their problems.

Such research can be done on the other product categories or on specific brands based on the manufacturer’s needs. AIM can design a spec analysis to meet a client’s objectives and look at a particular brand/manufacturer, by territory, competitors, project type, location or by spec area/schedule. Let us know where your interests are and how we can help. Thank you.

__________________________________

[1] The Truth About Specification, by John Schneidawind, AIA highlights key findings on an AIA survey of 330 architects on how they select and specify building materials for commercial projects. The article stresses the importance of an architect’s relationship with building product manufacturers and report that 60% of the time the architect already knows which materials an architect is going to use.

[2]USlegal.com defines it as “Basis of design is a term used in engineering, which typically consists of text paragraphs, preliminary drawings, equipment lists, etc. Well-defined requirements consist of a set of statements that could form the basis of inspection and test acceptance criteria. The basis of design documentation and the specification identify how the design provides the performance and operational requirements of the project and its systems.”

The post How Manufacturers of Interior Lighting Should Play the Specification Game appeared first on Accountability Information Management.

Designers have many brands to choose from when selecting a brand of wood door to specify for a particular project. In fact, according to Allied Market Research, the interior wooden door market is driven by advancements such as eco-friendly doors, a surge in residential and non-residential construction, and increased expenditure on home remodeling in the developed economies such as the U.S. There’s also an increasing demand for recyclable raw materials, and government support to adopt polyvinyl chloride (uPVC) due to improved energy efficiency properties.

While the look and style of wood doors are often first and foremost in a specifier’s mind, there are other factors designers need to consider in specifying a brand that manufacturers of wood doors should include in their effort to get specified. Many times, their decisions involve trade-offs when balancing all the influencers’ needs — trade offs that may be unnecessary when properly evaluated. Consider the following questions around wood doors:

• Do you select a product solely on the look you are trying to achieve or do you balance decisions on other factors?
• Should brand decisions be based on the goals of the building owner and their budget?
• What type of after sale service does the wood door manufacturer provide? Is that important to your clients?
• Is the manufacturer there to support the product during installation or after the project is complete?
• Is there a specific wood door that meets all the project requirements and should be specified as the “basis of design?”

There are always some choices that are viewed as more critical than others. For wood doors, these choices might be a demand for the right “look” or the aesthetics needed to balance the motif. Or perhaps the project has more of a security focus, with safety AND functionality blended in with the considerations.

Sometimes building codes can impact a designer’s selection trumping the specification decision. Building in Florida, for example, a designer has to pay particular attention to proper door and window construction to reduce water infiltration. Section R613.4 of the IRC and Section 1714.5.1 of the IBC, as an example, require windows and sliding doors to be certified per AAMA/WDMA/CSA 101/I.S.2/A440, Standard/Specification for Windows, Doors, and Unit Skylights.

Evaluating how a product like wood doors is specified is essential to helping manufacturers build their brand presence with architects and designers. By tracking the frequency and placement of wood door brands in project specifications, manufacturers can begin to learn how well their brand is penetrating the design market. In addition, such tracking provides manufacturers a way to evaluate their position in relationship to competitors.

Using Spec Analysis Helps Manufacturers Understand Their Brand Position

The comprehensive Accountability (AIM) Architects’ Brand Preference Study conducted several years ago revealed just how competitive the wood door market is. In this unaided blind brand preference study, architects and designers were asked to list their top three brands of wood doors. That is, they were not provided a “list” of choices. They were asked to “write in” their brand from their memories.

There were over 51 brands or companies mentioned by designers that were “involved” with the specification of these wood doors. Although the list of specific brands has no doubt shifted over time, the numerous choices designers have to choose from still holds true. Designers have lots of brand choices when it comes to wood doors, giving the manufacturer of wood doors a true challenge.

To help manufacturers evaluate their brand position in the marketplace and understand how to penetrate the mind of a designer, it is important to first understand more about an architect’s level of involvement when specifying wood doors. How much control or influence does the architect or designer actually have on selecting a particular brand of wood door?

Often, manufacturers believe that architects and designers have complete control, when, in fact, they delegate that control, or when they do make the decision, it is based on their “short list.”

Looking at wood doors, the degree to which architects are involved in specifying a specific brand or manufacturer varies by several factors. Not only do architects seem to balance the project budget and specific design goals; but, other factors like the type of project, the location of the product within the facility or where the facility is located could impact the brand of wood door in their preference choice.

For example, in a medical facility, the type or brand of wood door may be influenced by an infection control specialist or security professional due to health and safety concerns. Only 11% of the architects surveyed in AIM’s Architect’s Brand Preference study indicated that they were not involved in selecting and specifying the brand of wood doors. So regardless of project, they ARE involved. But, it’s a level that varies enormously.

Consider that 39% indicated they did not have any type of brand preference — an increase from 21% with “no preference” from a previous brand preference study. That means over a third of the architectural specification market has no preference. While architects may indicate they have “no preference,” they are, in fact, involved in specifying and recommending wood doors. How?

They delegate the brand selection to the interior designer or “others” in the specification path. Many design firms today maintain a list of “approved” brands that meet their performance and quality requirements and simply refer to that list. If a manufacturer is not on “the list,” the chance of being in a specification become limited.

Becoming a brand on the architect’s preferred list of brands is one of the keys to impacting a brand’s position in the specification itself. To be on a firm’s list of approved wood-door brands, a manufacturer needs to provide more than just a quality product. They need to have a history of top performance, offer premiere service and local support for their brand.

What should wood door manufacturers do to enhance brand selection and preference? How can manufacturers convert “no preference” answers into specifications and recommendations for their brands? These are important questions.

Impacting Brand Specification with the “Basis of Design”

To answer these questions, consider what we know about specifications for wood doors in today’s environment. The key to gaining ground in specifications is to become part of the “basis of design.”[1] This means that the architect or designer is calling out a specific brand that is used to meet the objectives of the project. To learn more about how often “basis of design” is used in wood door specs, AIM used ConstructConnect, (https://www.constructconnect.com/), an online construction database. By searching project specifications for “wood door projects with Basis of Design,” in specific years, we can see how the specification for “basis of design” and specific brands changed (see chart).

Only 21% of projects in 2018 had a wood door project that also included a brand as the “basis of design.” However, this has increased since 2012 where “basis of design” was specified in only 7% of the wood door specifications. Becoming a “basis of design” is, therefore, increasing — tripling from 2012. But, less than one-third of projects have such terminology — making the market wide open for manufacturers.

This type of spec analysis can also show manufacturers how often their brand is specified as the “basis of design” and if it has shifted over a specific period of time.

The market is constantly changing and it is important for a manufacturer to continuously review their position in architect specifications. While a manufacturer cannot always be sure that they are on a firm’s “preferred” list, they can evaluate how often their brand appears in the specifications and measure how often they are the “basis of design.” If a brand is found in the specifications and certainly is the “basis of design,” they are going to be on the list of “preferred” brands.

The same research can be done on the other product categories or on specific brands conducted in the AIM Architects’ Brand Preference Study. Let us know where your interests are. Thank you.

__________________

[1]USlegal.com defines it as “Basis of design is a term used in engineering, which typically consists of text paragraphs, preliminary drawings, equipment lists, etc. Well-defined requirements consist of a set of statements that could form the basis of inspection and test acceptance criteria. The basis of design documentation and the specification identify how the design provides the performance and operational requirements of the project and its systems.”

The post Getting Wood Doors on the “Preferred” List of Brands in Your Designers’ Specification appeared first on Accountability Information Management.