CompuServe Messages

Brandon, Earlier today, I sent a message to Andrew McClary containing my view into how and why Architects do not use 3D tools more often. Now, having read your initial messages in this area I will respond to you about your particular point of view. First, let me state that I am a young Architect, who has worked at a nationally ranked firm for nearly six years (since leaving school). During this time, I have researched, selected, and purchased a 3DS workstation (started with 3DS1.0), and trained a number of individuals in it's use. Unfortuntately, *for lot's of reasons*, it has not gotten the use it should until just recently. ————————— You are asking why you cannot sell this service to Architects. Are you interested because you see Architects as representing a particularly lucrative market for 3D work, or because you yourself have ties into the Architectural community? Hard to separate, I bet. I believe the reason Architects do not utilize this technology is mostly because of money. If it costs more to use it, why do it when you already have an established/successful methodology in place? Will it greatly increase the quality of the final product (the actual, physical building). Maybe. Will it increase the quality of any aspect of the process of creating the building. Maybe. Will it cost more than those quality increases are worth. Probably. The problem as I stated to Andrew, is that the way in which this technology interfaces with our process is too time-consuming and problematic. Once the technology matures to a point where it's use is an easy extension of our normal daily process, we will be able to adopt it w/out so much added expense (training, wasted & duplicated effort, etc.) Ok. My view of the situation, right or wrong. I bet we can talk for along time about that! Now, ahem. The WRONG WAY TO SELL ANYTHING IS BY TELLING YOUR CLIENT THEY WILL BE LEFT BEHIND IF THEY DON'T BUY NEW-FANGLED GADGET `X'. Sorry. Didn't mean to yell. You are approaching the problem of selling your service in disbelief that a potential client will not use it just because his competitor may. That's insulting. Different people do things for different reasons. In business, they should always be based on business decisions. It may be that a well placed successful Architectural firm DOESN'T NEED THIS to sell themselves to clients because of other factors inherent in their clientelle, the way they deliver service, or outstanding past reputation. After all, I can ask you why you don't have a MAC/AMIGA/ALPHA/SGI running WAVEFRONT/TDI/ALIAS/TOPAS loaded with 32/48/64/128mb RAM and running through a PAR/BETADECK/VISTA/BAHR-SCAN-CONVERTER. Well? Why don't you. Your competitor down the street has that thing. Isn't it obvious you will lose business to him? Hardly. The long and the short of it is that I will purchase a service, tool, etc. if the value it adds to my operation exceeds the cost of it. Until such time that I can do this economically either in or out of house I won't use it. Perhaps you can break through to these clients which are sitting on the fence. But, to do it, you have to *understand* what they need to accomplish *their* tasks on *their* projects, and sell your service based on their needs seen through their eyes. Not on your view of what you think they need. And since you opened the can o' worms <g>… Yes, the Architectural community has a lot of pride. But do not think your lack of Architectural clients is based on the fact that you threaten them with your superior skills. Rather, they are probably looking at the $ involved and that is why they are not using you at the level you expect. Nobody but another Architect who can offer the entire range of Architectural services can really `steal' business from an Architect. -sigh- Just to set the record strait in case this is all mis-interpreted: This message sounds more negative and upset than I really am. This seems to be a good thread, keep it going! -Mike.