I’ve
been in my role, with Melink Corporation, as a Sales Engineer just over 1.5
years.  I want to ensure it’s understood
that I am certainly no expert in the “Construction World” but I do have
tangible experience.  This article’s
content is based on my first-hand experiences, real-world applications I’ve
dealt with and conversations I’ve had.
Thus, these opinions are largely subject to my own with some additional
input from outside articles and research.

My first week into this role was a mix of emotion, to say the last.  It was during this week that my manager (whom I see as an industry expert and mentor) expressed to me [something along the lines of], “Eric, you’re dealing with one of the toughest verticals Melink works within [New Construction].  I’ll be honest with you – you’re going to learn so much but you’re really going to have to learn to love frustration.”   Yes, you [reader] likely share my same sentiment – skepticism, surprise and curiosity; though, it didn’t take long to understand what he meant.  I was “christened” nearly the very first project I dealt with.  Long story short, despite our product being hard specified by the hired designing Mechanical Engineer, our product was ultimately “value engineered*” for a cheaper alternative.  Echoing my feelings earlier, I was surprised, curious and frustrated.  I became aware of the “Achilles heel” of the New Construction world – the bidding process (which is influenced by cost).  Cost is, and always has been, the deciding factor in mostly all aspects of a new build project.  It makes sense, until you dig deeper.

Everyone
is guilty.  Even the product
manufacturers should hold themselves accountable in this regard; they/we are
just trying to play the ‘game’ and stay in business.  In his article, “People Are Cost-Driven with
Kitchen Equipment but There’s an Adage of Buy Cheap, Buy Twice”, Andrew Seymour
interviewed a chef by the name of Hayden Groves.  Mr. Groves is quoted as saying some buyers
are too “Excel spreadsheet-driven” and end up trying to shave off costs when it
might not be the right move for the business.
First hand, I’ve seen this happen, as explained earlier.  Our controls can often be eliminated for a cheaper
alternative that cannot do the same thing, thus cannot produce the same results
as our technology.  This decision is
often made without any discussion or pragmatic decision process.  Who makes this decision?  Ultimately, it should be the owner or
whomever holds the checkbook and it often is; in this case, I understand.  The owner can do what he/she wants to
do.  Unfortunately, often it’s a ‘bidder’
who is trying to win the project by competing solely on cost.  Again, I want to reiterate that this doesn’t
happen every time, but it does happen way more than it should.  Yes, I am saying that if a trusted designer
hypothetically specifies a Rolls-Royces then you’ll likely see most bidders
price out a Toyota Camry (Toyota’s are great vehicles – I own one!).  Yes, they both have engines and four wheels,
but they are uniquely different and have glaringly different features,
components and thus, different values.
Without going down this rabbit hole, I’ll just say it’s the principle of
the matter…that matters.   Attending an
industry conference this past week, I had the chance to sit down with
consultants and manufacturers.  This
exact discussion was brought to the table as a point of frustration for the
consultants.  They share my frustration!  This is a broken process and research support
this argument.  Consulting-Specifying
Engineers recent publication (www.csemag.com), provided the top
10 HVAC systems and BAS challenges.  The
top challenge, comprising 79% of respondents, is the inadequate budget for a
good design. Conversely, this same research shows that 96% of specifying
engineers can agree that product quality is paramount when comparing products,
above all else; these are the engineers that are hired for their expertise to
ultimately design and specify products to accompany the design, to meet an
owner’s and/or architects’ goals.  Yet,
here we are.  A battle between the desire
to specify based on quality but ultimately being sold on what is cheapest.

So,
how does a whole industry change?
Perhaps by “eating the elephant, one bite at a time” as they say.  One often overlooked and unquestioned factor
is that of aftermarket and post install support.  It’s imperative that we all make sure to
mention our product’s warranties and service/support on the front end of the
process, as the lack of either could potentially be a major headache on the
backend.  If I never mentioned Melink’s
warranties/service in my discussions, they would never get asked about; this is
shocking.  A 2016 McKinsey study proves
that service and support reign most important in terms of purchasing factors

Hayden
Groves, also harps on warranties/support.
He said, “You should look for manufacturers’ warranty too. If a
manufacturer gives you a minimum standard of a year but somebody else gives you
five years, that’s a huge belief in that piece of equipment”, says
Hayden.  Speaking of Rolls Royce…

“The quality is remembered long
after the price is forgotten.” – Sir Henry Royce of Rolls Royce

*Value
Engineering = “Cost Cutting”

CITATIONS

1. Pelliccione, Amanda. “2019 HVAC &
   Building Automation Systems Study.” Www.csemag.com , Equal Opportunity Publications, Inc,
   16 Jan. 2019, bt.e-ditionsbyfry.com/publication/?i=559857.

• Seymour, Andrew. “’People Are
  Cost-Driven with Kitchen Equipment but There’s an Adage of Buy Cheap, Buy
  Twice’.” Foodservice Equipment Journal,
  30 Nov. 2018, www.foodserviceequipmentjournal.com/people-are-cost-driven-with-kitchen-equipment-but-theres-an-adage-of-buy-cheap-buy-twice/.
• McCrory, Wilson, et al. “How to Unlock
  Growth in the Largest Accounts.” Www.mckinsey.com, McKinsey & Company,
  Sept. 2016, www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/how-to-unlock-growth-in-the-largest-accounts.