Building product manufacturers face many challenges when trying to get their products specified. Matt Johnson, Head of Software for ARCOM, producer of AIA MasterSpec, has identified five major mistakes that product manufacturers make. There‘s clearly a predisposition to try and find a solution that allows the same formula that works in other industries to be applied to specifications, at least in a very general sense. Many manufacturers and platforms have based their success on webpage hits, downloads, conversion rates, and repeated views. All are familiar, and all have at least some limited benefit, but the results are never what companies were expecting to see when they applied that familiar template to influencing specs.

Companies who are less experienced with engaging the specification process will often embrace that familiar approach first, try that for a few years, and then they don‘t get the results they were expecting. Once they‘ve taken a shot at the familiar first and seen that the ROI isn‘t close to what was expected, there‘s more of a mandate to really dig in and understand how it all works.

To engage the challenge of specifications effectively requires learning more about the process itself, and this can be a challenge to communicate effectively. Without the education of how specifications are produced, what‘s really possible when it comes to building a successful program to influence specifications can‘t hold a candle next to a solution that sounds so much easier and familiar.

In MasterSpec, there are over 860 sections and well over 10,000 individual product types. Each product type has their own list of minimum requirements and these are generally drawn up to allow the majority of the products in a particular category to be included. A lot of the decisions about which products to cover and what are the minimum requirements come from input from MasterSpec MARC and MERC committees (representing the top 1% of specifiers in the US), as well as the industry trade associations they work with.

Mistake #1: Marketing to A/E's without understanding the specification process.

The project manual and specifications are legal documents that require the contractor to select from the final list provided, or have a substitution reviewed and approved by the A/E. Manufacturers not on the original list:

• Lose out on jobs where the rep isn’t aware
• Create additional work for Contractor
• Create additional work for the A/E
• Are often judged more “harshly” by the A/E because they delay the process

From an ROI perspective, direct intervention from a sales rep to request a substitution is the most expensive and least effective way to influence the specification process.

Mistake #2: Assessing value without understanding market share.

The specification industry has never had an equivalent to a Nielsen Rating system that measured where the specifications that actually resulted in projects at the bid stage were based on. There are 2 measurements available:

• What Master Specification System are A/E firms relying on at the beginning of the specification process? 22 of the top 25 architectural firms use MasterSpec according to Architectural Record.
• What is the original source of commercial specifications at the bid stage?86% of all commercial construction specification sections begin with either MasterSpec, SpecText, SpexPlus or BSD.
• Keying in on “what spec writers am I calling on in the bid stage” allows you to target what A/E’s are using to create specs.

Mistake #3: Using shotgun marketing instead of targeted marketing.

Shotgun marketing is more product awareness oriented. It's a matter of repetition of pursuing multiple channels, of establishing product awareness and recognition through a whole series of investments and its oriented toward the initial product selection. Whereas the targeted marketing that we are discussing today, is more AE and owner needs oriented. It is based upon project objectives and it's delivered through a product selective channel.

So why can’t we use corporate web sites, directory sites, to reach the 93% of specs that begin with MasterSpec and BSD? Well, the answer of course is that you can. Making your product information available on your corporate site is a given. No discussion. You should do it. What about a directory site that lists manufacturers and products by Masterformat number? If you’re not finding much difference at the end of the pipeline, with what’s getting specified in the commercial construction jobs you’re seeing, I’m hoping you’re aware of why that is. Both Master Specification Systems provide pre-screened list of manufacturers and products within a “closed” system, specifically designed to spare the A/E from having to do that individual research.

The average commercial project will have over 100 sections and approximately 700 product types. 700 product types listed in spec x 5 manufacturers per type X 5 minutes research= 291 hours of research or more than 7 weeks of work. If you‘re familiar with the math, it becomes clear quickly why A/E‘s pay someone else to provide these lists. There will always be that great one on one contact and awareness that comes from working with a product rep directly, lunch and learns, trades shows and so on that also gets you in the specs.

Mistake #4: Providing specifications that meet your needs, not the A/E's.

What is a “single source” (proprietary) manufacturer spec? This is “tightly written” specification language provided by the manufacturer designed to look “open”, but cannot be fulfilled by any competing product. Language and layout are often such that it is difficult to add competing manufacturers without substantial rework. If you‘re investing in single source specs, you‘re probably getting very little back on your investment, and will find they are often heavily edited when you do see them in commercial work. It‘s exceptionally difficult to explain to someone who is not familiar with how specifications work, why anyone in their right mind would pay to provide a specification that might result in work going to a competitor.

Mistake #5: Providing only Revit objects to influence the specification

Are you providing small specifications and expecting big projects? To avoid the error of providing small specifications when you're aiming for big projects, the manufacturer needs to know more about specifications. Writing a small guide spec is not particularly demanding. It involves spending time listing all the manufacturers products and plugging in some boilerplate language to cover the quality assurance and the installation. Now depending on your product type, and the type of projects you're targeting, a small specification may be enough. However, if you have big plans, for product placement on large projects, you may need full length guide specifications that are designed to serve as AE project specifications.

Why doesn’t providing only Revit models successfully influence the specification? Because the architects don’t just use Revit. A Revit model that only includes contractor detail is useless to a specifier, because it’s “too heavy”. Commercial specifiers need generic product types.

As a building product manufacturer, avoid the 5 costly mistakes of trying to influence the Specification Process. What process does your company use to increase chances of product specification?