BuiltEnvironment

Teaming is not a new trend

I read an article yesterday about teaming. It said that teaming is a growing trend, that we're seeing more and more of it today, that it's not just adding a local firm to a national project, and that teams are generally two or three firms.

I had to laugh; I thought to myself, "where has this person been for the last 20 years?"

Those of us pursuing work in the public sector -- whether local, state or federal -- have been teaming for decades, and teams are sometimes up to 10 firms or more!  The diverse reasons for teaming (among others) include:

1.  Your firm doesn't have all the technical disciplines required for the project.

2.  A small "boutique" firm already has a great relationship with the client.

3.  The project's minority goals have specific numbers for Hispanic, Asian, African-American, Native American and women-owned firms, requiring a team of at least four firms (if the prime fills two of these categories).

4.  Your firm lacks the specific local knowledge required for the project.

5.  Another firm has the expert in a specific technical discipline.

And these are just some of the reasons for teaming, and some of the ways that teaming decisions/selections have been made for the 25+ years I've been in this business.

The article's confidence in reporting the ideas described above made me wonder if the author generally worked in the private sector, where one firm, or a team of two or three firms, might be the standard.  A/E/C/Environmental firms don't generally give away large chunks of a project unless there are minority goals or other factors that require it, and these rarely seem to happen in the private sector.

Chaos theory

Sorry my Friday posting was late.  I hope the extra posting makes up for it.

We've all heard about the need to accept, deal with and perhaps even master change.  And we've all heard that change is the only thing we can count on.  In my own experience, both of these ideas are true.

Well, I've been reading The 500 Year Delta by Watts Wacker, Jim Taylor and Howard Means.  And I'm learning more and more about chaos!  The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that marketers in the A/E/C/Environmental arena will be better equipped for success in the future than anyone else because we have learned to be the island of calm in the midst of chaos.

I don't mean to suggest that anyone in an A/E/C/Env. firm who waits until the last minute to give marketers the RFP is doing anyone (including themselves, the marketer or the firm) any favors.  I really DO believe in procedures, respect for others, the necessity of communication, etc.  But having learned to respond to chaos better than the folks around us is why marketers can always pull a rabbit out of the hat when others just want to throw the hat on the floor and stomp on it.

SBA: Staying relevant

On Wednesday, I was at a Dallas public hearing of the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) public, intended to collect information and opinions on small business issues including adjusting size limits for small business (both staff size and revenue), grandfathering of small business certification for a few years after the firm passed the standard, including as small businesses firms that were more than 51% owned by Venture Capital firms, and other topics.

There were a lot of empty chairs.  In the first hour, it seemed that 50% of the folks signed up to speak had not shown up.  Most of the speakers represented firms that manufacture a product or provide services such as accounting and human resources assistance.

I saw three owners of engineering firms, but only two spoke.  I was a bit surprised.  Since so many A/E firms are certified small businesses owned by minorities and/or women, I would have thought more of them would want a say in something that would impact their success as directly as this issue.

In the past, SBA has taken small business set-aside projects and given them to big firms that misrepresented their status.  New rules of the type discussed here on Wednesday would legalize this type of bad behavior, which has already become institutionalized!

We keep hearing that the recovery of the American economy is built on our small businesses.  We must not implement rules that make it harder for small businesses to succeed.  SBA must remain true to its founding principles or it will cease to have relevance, in which case we might need to eliminate it and develop a new agency with a clearer mandate.

There are a few cities where these public hearings are still in the future.  If you are a small business owner, or anyone who believes in fair play, you should attend and speak out against these potential rule changes.

End of soapbox!

What's in a name?

Lately, there's been a discussion and a series of SMPS Marketer articles about the titles Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) and Director of Marketing (DOM), as well as how a firm determines which it needs, if the firm is ready for a CMO based on the kinds of strategic questions the firm faces, etc.

I have found both the articles and the discussion very interesting, and I'd like to weigh in on this discussion.

If you look at branding, strategic communications, the elevation of marketing to a respected firm activity, and other potential challenges, you will discover that the effort to solve them can probably be led equally well by either a DOM or a CMO.

I believe the issues that guide the choice of CMO or DOM have more to do with demonstrating the level of the firm's commitment to these challenges and solutions, and the level of internal and external communications required to implement the new choices, systems and procedures.

I believe the CMO title indicates a much stronger commitment to these changes on the part of the firm's owners and managers.  Such a commitment at the top can help staff accept that change is forthcoming and encourage them to participate rather than resist.

Fair is fair!

The US Small Business Administration (SBA) is currently holding public hearings about business size standards relative to eligibility for small business set-aside programs and projects.

In the recent past, there was an attempt to increase the size standards.  In many disciplines, such an increase has been needed for some time.  Apparently, while the vast majority of comments were positive and supportive, the SBA decided to cancel the effort with no satisfactory explanation being given.

A plan has now been put forth that would allow firms which have already grown to exceed the size standards to be "grandfathered."  This would provide a multi-year window during which firms that have grown beyond the maximum size allowable by the standards could continue to compete as a small business, taking contracts away from "real" small businesses.

Come on, folks!  Fair is fair!  There is no reason why a design firm of 125 people, billing $12 million annually, should be allowed to compete as a small business.  Those firms that have reaped the benefits of set-aside programs and grown to exceed the size standards need to step aside and let - or help - other firms avail themselves of the same opportunities.

Please check with your local SBA office.  If there is a hearing in your area, please attend and help block this unfair plan to help large businesses at the expense of small businesses.

OK.  I'll climb down off my soapbox now.

Marketing is not an event . . .

I saw a very interesting quote the other day:  "Marketing is not an event; it is a process."  I thought to myself, "All right!  Somebody gets it!"

Think of a circle.  Somewhere on the circumference (anywhere, actually) is a place called "position."  One-third of the way around is a place called "propose."  One-third further is a place called "produce."  This is the ongoing marketing cycle.

At any given time, with a current client, you produce one project, propose on a second, and position your firm for a third.  And producing a high-quality project is the best, most successful way to position yourself.  See?  The circle is continuous.

Operations folks are frequently too focused on producing to think about proposing and positioning.  Marketing staff are generally over-committed and often have no idea how the firm performs the work they help win.  Firm principals and managers generally understand all three stages, but are usually so strongly pulled by one that they may neglect the other two except in extreme emergencies.

What's the solution?  It's different for every firm.  Sometimes it means you have to market more projects for fewer clients.  Sometimes it means you have to say "no!"  Sometimes it means you have to train more people in client relationship skills.  Sometimes it's a mix of all three, and some others as well.  You have to find the balance, the solution that works for your firm.

Putting it together

Thursday evening, I saw a musical review called "Putting It Together," a collection of the music of Stephen Sondheim, my favorite composer for the musical theatre.  It reminded me that the secret to successful marketing also lies in how you "put it together!"

For exaple, if I'm developing text for a website, the client's message has to be coordinated throughout the site. In addition, the website has to coordinate with other printed materials, in both the verbal and visual aspects.  If I'm developing a series of brochures, they all need to look like they belong together, and even the packaging should share one or more visual elements. If I'm preparing people to make a presentation or attend a trade show or conference, it might involve making sure everyone is singing the same song in the same way.

Anything you produce for your firm or client involves multiple components that have to work together to communicate your message.  And whatever the package, its ultimate success lies in how you put it together.

Learning more about blogging

I'm sorry this posting is late, but I'm also a cabaret performer and I have a regular gig on Monday night, so I work until midnight and the night ends very late.

So here I am with this blog that's just a few weeks old.  I'm enjoying the writing, and I'm getting interesting and thought provoking questions both here and via my direct email.  And wouldn't you know... just like real life... it turns out there's a lot more to learn about blogging.  I have to learn about RSS feeds and syndicating the blog and all sorts of other things.

A lot of the sites I've found so far tell you about how to set things up, but they don't tell you the basics of what things are and why you should care about them or want them.  So, if anyone reading this knows of a really good site to learn all about blogging, I'd seriously appreciate the input.

Thanks.

Brochures -- Yes or No?

I'm currently developing a corporate brochure for an engineering client, and I'm reminded of recent discussions regarding whether or not printed brochures still have value.  Many think that technology (i.e., the Internet, dvd brochures ) has made brochures irrelevant.

I think it's great to have someone view your firm's website, finding information on your mission, philosophy, administrative and project history, staff, clients, testimonials, etc.  But when you go to conferences, not everyone carries a laptop around all day; some don't even bring it to the conference.  So they can't look at your dvd right away and they can't check out your website that evening.  What do you do?

Or perhaps you're a small new firm without much of a track record yet, and what would be most apparent in your website would be what you don't yet have rather than what you do.

Brochures can be a very effective way to communicate what you want without inadvertently showcasing what you lack.  And modern reproduction technology can allow you to update often, print in small quantities in-house and reprint often without crying over how many copies of the old brochure you're trashing.

Indeed, it seems to me that technology has given new relevance to the brochure as long as it is a well-thought-out part of your marketing strategy.