BuiltEnvironment

Robotics and construction — is this the future?

Years ago, if you couldn't figure out something about your computer, a colleague or a friend would tell you, "Go ask your 12-year old!" There were a lot of 12-year olds, and some even younger kids, who seemed to know a lot more about computers than any other folks, with the exception of programmers and IT managers.

For these kids, computers were the natural way. They didn't have to think about it. Many of them didn't even remember a time when there were no computers.

Just like learning a foreign language. To become really fluent, you must learn to think in the foreign language rather than thinking in English and translating in your head. Which means starting young.

The other afternoon, working at an Austin coffee shop, I met Aviv Levy, who is affiliated with a California company that teaches robotics to young kids, in schools, camps and other venues. I think this is a great thing because children don’t have preconceptions causing negative impacts on learning. They learn quickly many things that grown-ups find improbable, or even impossible.

At Aviv’s suggestion, I checked out the company’s website, www.robolink.com, and found programs for kids in grades 4-12, with classes taught in schools and camps. There is even a program, Vex IQ, which transforms the typical STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) learning into robotics challenges involving teamwork, robot skills and programming.

I know there are many smart people working in the field of robotics. They have learned to make robots that handle a number of repetitive, mind-numbing activities on assembly lines in all kinds of factories all over the world.

But the average person still isn't sure he or she is in favor of robots doing jobs that could be done by people who get paychecks — assuming, of course, that people want to do those jobs and had (or could acquire) the knowledge required to do so.

So it's probably better to "get" those people when they are impressionable children, when they are still capable of pretending and inventing all sorts of improbable things just because.

Aviv then told me about his new Austin start-up called RoboCode Kids, which will provide classes in robotics and computer programming for kids in grades K-12.

One of RoboCode Kids’ primary products is Rokit Smart, which — much like Vex IQ — also transforms the typical STEM learning experience into robotics challenges involving teamwork, robot skills and programming.

We started talking about robotics and engineering, and I started wondering if there was (or would be) some way the design/ construction industry might use robotics in the future. Here’s what developed in my brain over the last few days.

As robotics advances, and we can build more assured accuracy — tighter tolerances — into robotic machines and the computers that control them, and deploy them wherever they are needed, it might become possible for some construction tasks (perhaps drilling or welding) to be robotized.

And not to downplay the brains currently working on this, but it will probably involve people who are still so young now that they will think of robots as a “natural” part of their world.

As those youngsters grow up, their focus won’t be on “can a robot do this?” so much as on “how can I design and build a robot that will do this?” For example:

• As buildings get taller and taller, designing and building robots that can work on the 300^th or 400^th floor might become important.
• As we move toward building factories on the moon and larger asteroids — science fiction again becoming fact, the question of how to design and build robots that can work in vacuum will become important.

President Woodrow Wilson is reputed to have said, "I not only use all the brains that I have, but all that I can borrow."

Much of what we take for granted today was imagined in the science fiction of 50-100 years ago. As we move into a future that looks increasingly like yesterday's science fiction and fantasy, we must not be afraid to borrow brains — even if we borrow them from a 12-year old.

It's not about a brain's age, but about its content.

If I knew then what I know now . . .

Melody Siebel of Westwood (multi-disciplined surveying and engineering) in Eden Prairie, MN, graciously consented to be the third subject of this interview series, which is designed to present the perspectives of relative "newbies" to the A/E/C marketing world.

Here are Melody's answers to the five questions I posed.

How long have you been in a marketing position in the A/E/C industry?

A little over one year now (started April 2014).

What do you think are the two or three most important things you’ve learned in the past year on the job?

Brand is a very critical element to our success, especially since we have offices across the nation. We’ve recently refreshed our brand, which is a process that really demonstrates the importance of having all of our online and print documents, promotional items, and everything in between consistent across the board. Inconsistencies can quickly create confusion about the brand.

It’s important to get our name out there in the industry. Whether that’s attending events/networking, having a strong LinkedIn presence, sending out press releases or having the best resume- everything counts. In April, we held a seminar at our office on transit oriented development (TOD). We had a great turn-out; many of our clients attended the event. These kinds of things help build awareness with the right people in the industry.

Having a strong marketing and communications department is vital to the company's success. Although it might not seem like press releases and updating our Facebook status is doing anything for us in the short term, I have seen it make a difference in the long run. At the end of the day, it’s all about getting our name out there and helping our business development team attract new clients.

What things do you wish you had already known on your first day in this position?

How different it is from the B2C marketing I was used to. Also, I wish I would have had some experience coming in to this, but you’ve got to start somewhere, right?

What has surprised you the most about the A/E/C industry?

How diverse it is; the people, expertise, and the experiences we all have. From engineers to surveyors to planners, and from marketing to human resources, we all bring a ton of experience and expertise to the table.

What has surprised you the most about the position of Marketing Coordinator?

It’s very different from the B2C marketing which I was involved with before I came to Westwood. Now that I’ve been doing this a little over a year - well - it’s what I know and this seems to be the “normal way“ of doing marketing to me now. It’s also very fast-paced and there are many different avenues you can go down. From proposals to event coordination, and from social media to press releases, there is a lot you can make of it.

Many thanks to Melody for sharing her perspective on these questions.

I'm always looking for new voices for this series. If you're a marketing coordinator in an A/E/C firm who has been in that role around a year, and if you'd like to answer these five questions, please drop me a line at [email protected]. I'll be happy to include your thoughts.

Blogging, writing, speaking, sharing - here's why I do it

I have worked in the A/E/C industry since 1978, and moved into my first marketing role in 1984. Since then, I have worked in a variety of marketing roles, from coordinator to manager to corporate director to self-employed independent consultant.

In the last dozen years, I have written articles and books, and spoken to marketing and technical groups from Washington DC to southern California and from south Florida to Alaska. Many of my more recent sessions have been webinars, including one set of five webinars for a business group in India.

My "portfolio" includes 125 published articles and 51 presentations — and this is the 181st blog post. Almost all of this writing and speaking has been on A/E/C marketing-related subjects — the "win work" portion of the "win work/do work" cycle.

I have been paid for fewer than one-third of these items and barely broke even on most of the conference presentations.

So why did I do it? Why do I still do it? Why am I constantly seeking out new opportunities to do more of the same?

I do it for two reasons.

First of all, I find that I get huge satisfaction from sharing the knowledge I have acquired and the insights I have discovered. It doesn't matter what I'm sharing — whether elementary or advanced — or with whom I'm sharing. If I'm sharing what I have learned, making someone else's journey a bit easier and smoother, I'm a happy camper.

I believe very strongly that if you want to be recognized for your knowledge and expertise, you have to be willing to share with others, whether you get paid a lot, a little or not at all.

Second, every time I give a session or share my writings with a group or individual, I receive at least one piece of constructive criticism. It's not always positive, but it's always constructive.

For example, after a recent presentation, someone commented that I was reading my slides. I looked at my slide show and realized that I was putting my entire presentation into the slides — every word, every observation. This went back to a time when I would give out the slide show as my hand-out, so I tried to be as complete as I could.

But now that I prepare a separate hand-out, I have gone back to a slide show that is just an outline from which to speak. I assume the smart people in my audience will decide what is important to them and take notes. If they email or call me later, in addition to answering their questions, the discussion also brings me new information and/or a new perspective.

So in thanks for what I get out of my writing and speaking, I offer my readers FREE copies of my published writings, as follows:

eBooks

• Differentiation — can you be truly unique if you are just like others?
• Go/No Go — the hardest decision of all
• Mentoring — benefits for protégé, mentor and mentor's firm
• Planning — No plan? No way!
• Proposing  — what I've learned in 30 years of proposal writing
• Success — thoughts on achieving it and maintaining it

Samples

• Go/No Go evaluation — projects  — short form
• Go/No Go evaluation — projects — long form
• Go/No Go evaluation  — clients
• Debriefing — sample procedure
• Debriefing — sample questions

If you are interested in having any of these publications or samples FOR FREE, please email me at [email protected] with your complete contact information. I will email you the .pdf files.

Being clever — being stupid

I am a big fan of the author, Mercedes Lackey. In a book called "Owlflight," which she wrote with Larry Dixon, I found:

"Half of being clever is making certain you are not being stupid."

That made me stop and think, which is what it ought to do. So many times when we think we've had a clever idea, it is just that we haven't had time to think it through and discover just how stupid an idea it might be.

My current "go-to" online dictionary (www.merriam-webster.com) provides me with the following definitions:

Clever — intelligent and able to learn things quickly; funny in a way that shows intelligence.

Intelligent — having or showing the ability to easily learn or understand things; or to deal with new or difficult situations

Stupid — lacking intelligence or reason; slow of mind

I have learned in my almost 65 years that when some new idea sounds really great and I wonder why nobody else ever thought of it, a good night's sleep will often reveal the following:

• It's not really such a great idea.
• It's not such a new or original idea.
• Other people DID think of it.
• Upon considering, they realized the idea was stupid, rather than great.

I have had a blog for 10 years and been a member of LinkedIn for a long time, but I joined Facebook much more recently. Yes, I know, I know, I came very late to the party, but that's not the point I want to make.

I frequently read something on Facebook that gets my emotions in turmoil. Generally, it's something about politics or a social issue. And what I read often makes me dash off an immediate response that is most often harsh in its judgment and definitely rude in its language.

But Facebook has taught me to stop and reread my responses before committing my words as a new post, a reply to an existing post, or a personal statement when I "share" something I read and liked.

Most of the time, when I finish writing my response and reread it, I delete it completely. On occasion, I edit and commit the post, but I have learned not to let my emotions trump my brain.

In other words, I have learned to recognize when I'm being really clever and when I'm just being really stupid! At this point, it only works for me about 75% of the time, but the percentage is getting better all the time.

Even those (now few) political or social areas where I still comment with my heart on my sleeve, I do it less and less often. I try to remember to ask myself,

"Do I really want to enter the fray on this one? Do I really know what I'm talking about on this subject?"

So I get jumped on for my Facebook posts less and less often, which means I'm remembering to think before I write, or at least before I commit to the post.

Hopefully, my new "think before you publish" attitude will improve the way I am seen on this blog and LinkedIn, as well as on Facebook.

All those people who said "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" obviously weren't thinking of me!

Strategic planning — who is included?

Every time a firm asks me for help with strategic planning, we go round and round about who should be included in the strategic planning session.

Firm #1 thinks that the Strategic Plan participants should be limited to firm owners — those who have a financial stake in the firm. After all, they are the ones with the most at risk. Unfortunately, this assumes that direct financial risk is the only risk that matters.

Firm #2 thinks that the group should be expanded to include all firm officers. This expanded group would have an understanding that the risk is broader than simply direct financial risk. This broader risk may include risk to the brand or to the firm's standing in the local and extended business communities, or to the technical challenges of a catastrophic failure of computer system security.

Firm #3 thinks the group should also include all division, department and project managers because they are the ones who will be implementing the plan and directly monitoring its success. The people responsible for making the plan work must know how decisions were made.

Firm #4 thinks that the plan should be drafted by an outside consultant, with input from owners, officers and senior managers. This still begs the question of who attends the planning session to work through and approve the plan.

In a Jan.-Feb. 2011 Harvard Business Review article entitled, "The CEO's role in business model reinvention," Vijay Govindarajan and Chris Trimble wrote:

"Thirty percent of participants in any strategy discussion should be younger than age 30, because they are not wedded to the past."

I have known and acted on this understanding for quite a few years.

As discussed below, younger staff and those newer to the firm will not be shackled by the choices made in previous planning sessions. In addition, they are less likely to be caught up in "we've never done that before" or "we've always done it this way" attitudes.

My personal preference is to have either the firm's marketing leader or an outside consultant act as facilitator for the planning session, and to include the following participants.

• Owners — they have the greatest risk because of their direct financial ties to the firm.
• Officers and/or C-level leaders — they are responsible for firm policy and practices, which will determine how the plan is implemented.
• Division and department managers — they are leaders in plan implementation and need to know the thought process behind every decision and ultimate strategy
• Project managers — they are the "front-line" staff with primary responsibility for the firm's relationships with its clients
• Firm newcomers — these individuals will not be bound by previous decisions, and may have insights based on their experiences at other firms
• Under 30s — these are individuals you may have already identified as "rising stars," those you hope will become the next generation of firm leaders; including them in strategic planning is a great retention tool, confirming their importance and high standing in the opinions of the firm's leaders

I think the last two participant types are particularly important because, having not been part of previous strategic sessions, they will not know what you discussed and rejected last year. And sometimes, an idea that was rejected a year or two ago might be just what the firm now needs given changes in the marketplace and your specific market sectors.

If you want help with strategic planning activities, please contact me and let's talk about how I can help. You can reach me at [email protected] or 559.901.9596.