If you make decisions about what to buy for your construction company then you might be interested in knowing how your peers feel about the way sellers approach them. You also might be surprised to learn how other construction buyers find their vendors. Besides telling you if you follow similar patterns as the others, this could also come in handy by offering some new ideas, or, showing you just how far out-of-the-ordinary you might be.
Perhaps you’d be surprised to find out that while 75 percent of construction buyers use word-of-mouth as the primary way to find vendors for the products and services they need, almost as many, 71 percent, heavily rely on general Internet searches. You don’t need to wonder if you are behind the times by not using social media to find vendors because most of your peers aren’t using it either. And, if you find yourself trusting the reviews of total strangers on the Internet when you are making your final buying decisions, then you are not alone. More people trust those reviews than the recommendations from colleagues.
One thing more than half of construction buyers have in common is they want to see the price on the Website. Not only that, they want all the information to be there, including specifications, MSDS and the complete product listing. You can find out all the peculiar details about how construction buyers choose products and vendors by downloading a free white paper from BuyerZone.
For those of you who are actively looking to sell to construction buyers this is most definitely an eye-opening report. Perhaps very telling was the list of things construction buyers view as their most challenging issues. Below, you can take a survey with responses covering the typical answers found in the BuyerZone survey.
The cost to insurance companies when people loose their buildings to natural disasters is perhaps one reason the insurance industry has embarked on an enthusiastic effort to quantify and qualify the worthiness of materials and construction practices used in buildings.
For example, the payouts from hurricane Katrina will total about $60 billion when the calculators stop tallying. That number will even eclipse the payouts from 9/11, the biggest insurance payout in the country’s history up to that time. So, it seems the insurance industry wants to identify the culprits that are running up the tabs. Its sights are set on building materials and the people who install them and it will soon have a brand new, disaster-creating facility that is expected to uncover why buildings fall apart in hurricanes, severe thunderstorms and wind-driven wildfires. According to an article in Engineering News Record:
The Institute for Building and Home Safety (IBHS), a Tampa, Fla.-based insurance industry group whose member companies are sick of paying for losses to buildings that fail in heavy weather are finishing up the construction of a $40-million building materials and assemblies test facility nearing completion in Chester County, S.C.
The insurance industry expects the results of its research at the new facility will lead to a massive reduction in how much it spends every year for roofing materials needed to replace storm-damaged roofs. The reduction in expense will pay for the test facility. You can read all about the engineering marvels associated with the facility at the link above. The fan tower that can withstand 8,000 pounds of thrust and the fire pit that will produce a rain of molten embers are the kinds of features that might even have Hollywood camping out on its doorstep.
But what builders and materials manufacturers should really take note of is the interest here in finding out who, or what are the weak links in building when it comes to natural disasters. As one of the the principle engineers on the job says:
“We need to get rid of all the smoke screens that come up after these events,” said Timothy A. Reinhold, describing how the material manufacturers and installers invariably start blaming each other’s work whenever building systems fail.
I was thinking about “ideas” today and how they seem to arrive on a slipstream of vapor, float across our consciousness and then leave through our ears, since those are the closest exits to our brains. They are often processed in quick order, freeing our minds up for the next task or the next random thought that seems interesting.
It doesn’t seem that most ideas are acted upon. In fact, it seems that most ideas get pushed through a standardized filter and are quickly discarded when they:
Don’t solve an immediate problem;
Can’t possibly make us rich or famous;
Require too much work; and/or
Are something nobody else can see the value of.
In construction companies, ideas offer the chance to look exceedingly brilliant, or amazingly stupid. So, many people just let the ideas flow right out their ears because the risk is just too great.
Over at The Heart of Innovation the writer offers the idea that innovation is often radically helped out by accident. Penicillin, vulcanized rubber and Post-It notes all came about quite by accident. But then, someone recognized the value in the accidents and had ideas about uses for them. They followed through.
(THIS POST WAS UPDATED 7/30/2012 FROM HERE DOWN, TO REMOVE BROKEN LINKS AND INFORMATION PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED FROM THOSE LINKS, AND TO ADD NEW INFORMATION FROM NEW SOURCES ALONG WITH APPROPRIATE LINKS)
Lisa Barone at the Business Insider (she’s no longer there) laments the follow-the-leader syndrome in today’s business culture where everybody is trying to build something on everyone else’s original ideas. She wrote:
You’re noting what’s working from your competitor and you’re finding ways to integrate the same thing into your business. The problem is you’re not bettering what they’re doing. You’re just adding it on like an also-ran. That’s not innovation. That’s reactive catch up. It’s not how you stand out, it’s not how you steal market, it’s not how you create a point of difference for your company.
There seems to be widespread agreement by the people who write about innovation that it’s something that must be fostered from the top down. In her revealing interview with Executive Travel Magazine, Suzanne Fetscher, MFA, president of the McColl Center for Visual Art, an international artists’ think tank in Charlotte, N.C., made it clear the push from the top is necessary, both because the process of inspiring innovation has to be funded, and because it has to be important enough to prevent it from being placed on the back burner for “when there’s time.” She said that’s especially important during tough economic times.
“The natural tendency during uncertain economic times is to look for ways to reduce costs, which for many companies means reductions in advertising, marketing, and research and development. These companies are fundamentally eating their seed corn and setting the stage for even further decline. They are also failing to position themselves for the next upturn, which historically has always occurred.”
Fetscher mentioned these tips for creating and maintaining innovative company cultures:
Leaders must realize the opportunistic and challenging aspects of their own creativity.
Leaders have to recognize that everyone is innately creative.
Creativity and innovation must be built into the company’s processes.
Companies have to foster environments that stress the free flow of ideas.
Companies must make the processes that encourage innovation as accountable as any other business process.
While construction is often hamstrung on the innovation front due to codes, specifications and the “way it’s always been done,” that doesn’t mean it has to be creatively uninspired. Who would have thought that the time worn process of framing a wall could ever be changed, but it was, several years ago to make the framing more amenable to insulation, yielding more energy-efficient buildings. Most industry watchers also point out that construction has a productivity problem, and has for a long time. Innovation on that front, and many others related to day-to-day business practices are ripe for some creativity and fresh ideas.
When I look at the world through my own distorted and filter-ridden lenses, ideas appear to be the things that bring freshness to the view. They are kind of like how the air feels right after the storm has passed – all fresh and cool. Maybe we need to start capturing a few of them before they slip out our ears.
Here’s a problem that just won’t seem to go away and according to Design Chain Associates, a service provider to the electrical industry, prevention of counterfeit electrical products is at best formidable, and at worst impossible. Underwriters Laboratory began a partnership with the U.S. Customs Service as far back as 1995 to train agents in detecting counterfeits, and industry associations that represent manufacturers have been running aggressive ad and public service campaigns reporting on the counterfeit electrical products problem. Still, these products account for between $300 and $400 million of the $1 billion in total counterfeit products sold in the U.S. each year, according to a joint Website sponsored by The Electrical Contractor Magazine and TED Magazine.
This is much more than a U.S. problem. The British Electro-technical and Allied Manufacturers reported in 2009 that other regions in the world have counterfeit electrical products in their supply chains, and in-use, that are large percentages of their total electrical products.
Africa 25 to 75 percent
Middle East 20 to 40 percent
Eastern Europe 10 to 40 percent
According to Robert K. Lowry with Oneida Research Services, Inc., 70 percent of counterfeit electrical products originate in China and up to 25 percent of the products in the electrical supply chain are counterfeit. But he cites other sources too, such as:
Scrap and obsolete products intercepted on their way to disposal or lifted directly from dumpsters;
Products at the end of their service life that are shipped to Asia for disposal because of the more lenient environmental disposal regulations there;
Legitimate product with brands removed or covered over;
Factories running third shifts to turn out lower quality products using less experienced employees and then selling the products at a discount.
The old mindset of “anything to make a buck” is definitely at work here. Besides the losses to the electrical manufacturers who have to compete with cheaper products, there is a danger with products that are not built the way they should be built by using the processes and materials that have proven to make safer electrical products. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission offers some tips for spotting, and dealing with counterfeit electrical products.
Scrutinize the product, the packaging and the labeling. Look for a certification mark from an independent testing organization, such as Underwriters Laboratories (UL), and the manufacturer’s label. Trademarked logos that look different than usual may signal a counterfeit.
Trust your instincts. If the price is “too good to be true,” it could be because the product is an inferior and unsafe counterfeit.
Be extra vigilant when buying from an unknown source such as a street vendor, non-authorized dealer, dollar store, online retailer or an individual. Ask about the return policy. Get a receipt and look for missing sales tax. Businesses selling counterfeit goods often don’t report their sales.
Stay informed. Sign up for CPSC e-mail alerts, so when a dangerous product is recalled, you’ll know about it right away.
Report safety-related incidents to the manufacturer or CPSC.
It’s becoming truer and truer everyday that you really need to know not only who is working at the job site, but what they are installing.
Construction Blog with Information, News, and Commentary