The Monday Morning Building Product Advisor
​Issue #105

Over the past year or so, I’ve seen this “legend” I really liked. It's about how the size of the Space Shuttle’s rocket boosters was based on the width of a horse’s rear end.

In a nutshell, the story goes:

The factory in Utah had to ship the rocket segments by rail to the launch site in Florida. Which meant they had to fit through railway tunnels.

The tunnel width was designed to accommodate two standard railroad tracks. The 4 feet, 8 1/2 inches track width traces back to British engineer George Stephenson. He’d based his design on existing tramways. Those tramways copied the wheel spacing of horse-drawn carts. And the cart width was designed to fit two horses side by side.

So when NASA engineers designed one of the most advanced machines ever, they hit a strange limitation. They were constrained by a measurement used for two horses pulling a cart in 18th-century England.

Ergo, the size of the rocket is based on the size of those two horses’ rumps!

Cool story, right?

But Snopes has fact-checked it, and it’s not entirely accurate.

But I still like the principle:

We inherit constraints we never chose. And then we build entire systems around them. And never question whether they still make sense.

And if you sell building products to architects, you live inside chains like that every day.

Your product is competing inside a system of:

• Details
• Standards
• Bid alternates
• Office masters
• Budget politics
• Personal preferences
• Existing relationships
• Spec boilerplates
• Installer habits
• Liability fears
• And on, and on…

Most of it is inherited, and most of it is invisible until it bites you.

So your strategic question shouldn’t be, “Is this constraint fair?”

Instead, you should be asking, “Should I challenge this constraint, or optimize within it?”

That one question determines whether you’re stuck complaining or end up dominating.

The Two Strategic Mindsets

Mindset 1: Challenging the inherited constraint

This is when you look at a spec, a detail, or a procurement habit and say, “Why is it like this?”

Sometimes that’s the right move.

Architects and specifiers often inherit patterns that don’t fit today’s risk and performance needs. Old “standard” details keep getting reused. And this happens even though they cause the field problems that everyone complains about.

But challenging a constraint could also burn any “relationship capital” you’ve built up. If you do it wrong, you become “the rep who’s always trying to change things.”

You lose trust fast.

Mindset 2: Innovate within the constraint

This is when you stop waiting for the perfect conditions (or stop trying to force them). And you say, “Fine. Let’s build rockets that fit through the tunnels we actually have.”

Most of the time, this is the fastest path to getting some traction.

Because architects are drowning in decisions, deadlines, and liability. We’ll choose the option that feels safer and easier to document. Not the option with the best marketing story.

Constraint-driven innovation is often just this: make the right decision feel like the low-risk default.

How to choose the right mindset

Ask two questions:

1. If yes, don’t fight it head-on. Build a safer pathway through it.
2. If yes, you can often challenge it, but you’ve gotta do it with proof, not persuasion.

The 3 Constraints Crushing Most Reps

Now let’s apply this to the three constraints that I hear from you most often [and see below where you can get the more detailed playbook to tackle each one]:

Constraint 1: “VE (value engineering) is going to kill my spec anyway”

The Reality: You can’t eliminate VE pressure. Contractors are incentivized to reduce cost and risk. If your product looks like a premium line item with fuzzy justification, it becomes a target.

The Reframe: Stop trying to “defend” your spec at bid time. Bid time is late. Your leverage is earlier, and it comes from packaging your spec so it’s harder to attack and easier to justify.

You’re not selling a product. You’re selling a decision that survives contact with precon.

Constraint 2: “Architects aren’t responding to outreach”

The Reality: Architects aren’t ignoring you because we hate you. We’re ignoring you because our inbox is a triage zone. Your message is competing with real project pain.

The Reframe: Your job isn’t to get a response. Your job is to reduce the friction in my decision-making. The outreach that grabs our attention is the kind that helps us decide faster, document more clearly, or avoid a future problem.

Constraint 3: “Spec decisions happen before I’m involved”

The Reality: Firms standardize for survival. They reuse details because they reduce liability. In healthcare, education, and other risk-heavy work, standardization is a form of self-defense.

The Reframe: Stop trying to “get on the next project.” Start trying to get into the firm’s repeatable system. If you can influence the office master detail, the guide spec language, and the Revit library, you stop chasing one project at a time.

Stop fighting the tunnel, start choosing your leverage

All three constraints have this in common...

• VE pressure is the tunnel.
• Architect silence is the tunnel.
• Late involvement is the tunnel.

You can waste your energy yelling at the tunnel, or you can decide what to do with it.

The pattern that wins is simple:

1. Name what is truly inevitable (budget pressure, time pressure, liability pressure).
2. Identify where the real leverage sits (timing, documentation, risk framing, packaging).
3. Shift the decision upstream so your product becomes the easier, safer default.

That’s the difference between reacting and operating.

Reactive reps chase projects. Operating reps shape standards, language, and decision paths.

Your job isn’t to widen the horse

NASA didn’t get to redesign the tunnels.

They still launched.

That’s the mindset shift I want for you this week.

Stop spending your best energy complaining about the size of the tunnel. Focus on creating the kind of spec package, risk story, and upstream presence that makes your product the obvious choice inside the usual constraints.

Want the tactical playbook?

I’ve put together specific, field-ready moves for each of these three constraints… The kind of stuff you can execute in the next five business days.

Reply to this email with the word “PLAYBOOK” and I’ll send you the full tactical playbook.

Pick one move & execute it this week.

​
That's it for this week!

Cheers to building more than just buildings, and see you next week,

Neil "No-horsin'-around" Sutton
​Architect | The Product Rep Coach

=======

P.S. Do you really want inside an architect's head?

When you’re ready, there are 3 ways you can start working with me:

• Product reps: If you want to be better at connecting with architects, hit reply, and let's chat.
• Business owners or Team Leaders: You can book an Architect Connections Training for your team. Hit reply, and I'll send you the details.
• Speaking: If you’d like me to present at an upcoming group meeting, reach out, and let’s talk!

=======
​If this was forwarded to you, go to → mmbpa-newsletter(dot)carrd(dot)co ← so you don’t miss the next lesson.
​=======