The Monday Morning Building Product Advisor
​Issue #108

The architect just asked for your help reviewing a substitution request to replace your product... What do you do?

The contractor's "equivalent" product costs half as much. But it also has twice the lead time issues.

But you can't say that in the substitution review. Can't say it's junk. Can't even really explain why your product is fundamentally different without sounding defensive.

So you write up a technical comparison.

You send it to the architect...

…and then you wait.

Because your fate isn't in your hands anymore. It's in the architect's hands. And whether they fight for your product or not was decided months ago.

What happens on the architect’s side

Here’s what happens when a substitution request hits my desk.

On a gloomy Tuesday afternoon, I'm already juggling fire marshal comments on 2 projects. I have an owner meeting in an hour. Plus, that consultant who was late last week… is still MIA.

Then I get an email from the CM: "Proposed substitution - equivalent product, $180,000 savings."

I've got maybe 20 minutes to review this before I need to decide if it’s approved.

I pull up the spec. I look at the substitute. And…

Huh! I can’t quite seem to remember why we specified the original product 6 months ago.

Was it thermal performance? The aesthetic? Or, was it ‘cuz the rep did a good job presenting it?

The contractor who submitted the substitution is betting on this very thing... That I won't be able to quickly explain why the difference matters. That the substitute looks "close enough" on paper. That I don't have time to dig deep.

They're often right.

And it’s not because I don't care…

It’s because I need your help documenting why I chose your product specifically for this project. Without that, I have to start from scratch.

And I don't have time for that today.

The spec problem you’re creating

Here’s what usually happens during design:

• You send me your guide spec. [Dude! C’mon! It’s got like 30 pages with every feature, every performance number, and every testing standard.]
• Anyway… I go through it…
• Delete what doesn’t apply
• Copy the relevant sections into our project manual
• Move on to thing #1,327 on my to-do list

6 months later, the contractor proposes a cheaper option.

Your spec for flooring says: “Slip resistance coefficient of 0.65”

Their product: “Coefficient of 0.58”

Your spec for lighting says: “CRI of 95, R9 value of 90”

Their product: “CRI of 90, R9 value of 85”

Your spec for door hardware says: “Grade 1 heavy-duty with 1 million cycle rating”

Their product: “Grade 1 with 800,000 cycle rating”

Does that difference actually matter? For this building? This use? This owner’s goals?

Your spec doesn’t tell me. So I’m guessing.

And when I’m guessing with limited time… that $180K savings looks pretty good.

“OK, yeah, I get it, Neil! So what SHOULD I give you?”

Alright… settle down there, Sparky.

Here’s some ideas for you…

Connect your product to goals I’ve already committed to

I’m not specifying your resilient flooring because I love flooring.

I’m specifying it because this is a hospital and we need to meet specific infection control protocols. Because the facility manager has aggressive sustainability targets. Because slip resistance in clinical areas is a documented patient safety requirement.

Help me write that into the spec.

Instead of: “Flooring shall have slip resistance coefficient of 0.65”

Write with me: “Flooring in clinical areas shall meet slip resistance requirements per healthcare safety standards and achieve coefficient of 0.65 or better to address patient safety concerns documented in the facility risk assessment.”

Now, when the substitute shows up with worse performance, I’m not just comparing numbers. I’m seeing that accepting it means we’re compromising documented patient safety requirements.

That’s something I can fight for.

Tie it to the design intent I’ve documented

We spent three weeks on the facade design. The owner loved the large-format glazing. The natural light in the lobby.

Your system enables that. The substitute… might not.

Help me write: “System shall provide large-format glazing to maximize daylighting as shown in Design Development documents dated [date] and approved by owner.”

Now your product isn’t just meeting technical requirements. It’s enabling design the owner approved.

Reference the coordination we’ve done

Your access control hardware integrates with the building security system. We coordinated with the security consultant. The IT department specified server requirements. The owner approved the access protocols.

Help me write: “Door hardware shall integrate with building security system per Division 28 specifications and provide remote access control functionality per owner’s security protocols approved [date].”

Now “equivalent” doesn’t just mean “meets numbers.” It means “works with the building we actually designed.”

When the substitution request arrives

It’s Friday afternoon. I forwarded you the substitution to help me determine if it’s truly equal to yours. I need to approve it and include it in the last addendum by noon on Monday.

I’ve got maybe an hour before I leave for my kid’s soccer game.

Don’t make me do research

What doesn’t help: Sending me 47 pages of technical data.

What helps: One page I can read in 2 minutes. 3 bullet points showing how the substitute doesn’t meet this building’s specific needs. Ready-made language I can copy into my rejection letter.

Remind me what the heck I was thinking

“You solved 3 challenges during design:

• Lobby glazing the owner approved
• Precast panel interface
• LEED performance

The specified system addressed all 3. The substitution meets thermal requirements. But it would mean design changes for the lobby. And it might require precast modifications.”

Oh right! Now I remember.

Make rejection take ten minutes, not an hour

If rejecting this substitute takes 2 hours of work… I might just approve it. I’ve got bigger problems.

If it takes 10 minutes because you gave me everything I need… I’ll probably reject it.

Make rejection the easier path.

When it's time to be honest

Sometimes the substitution is actually fine for this project.

And I can tell when you’re fighting it anyway, just to protect your sale. And I’m sure you can guess what that does… Yup! It makes me trust you less.

I’ve worked with reps who fight every battle. Who argue against substitutions that genuinely work. And I stop asking their opinion. I no longer copy them on substitution requests.

Compare that to a rep who tells me, “I reviewed it. For this application, in these spaces, with these use patterns… it would work. The performance differences don’t matter here.”

I still rejected it.

But I remembered that honesty. And on the next project, when that rep said a substitution was problematic… I believed them.

That’s why trust matters.

What to do this week

If you’re working on specs now:

Stop sending generic guide specs. Ask me:

• What are the key project goals this needs to support?
• What design intent does this enable?
• What did you tell the owner about performance?

Then help me write specs that document those answers.

If you’ve got projects heading into CA:

Create a simple folder with:

• One-page summary of why your product was selected
• Comparison template I can use in ten minutes
• Ready-made rejection language
• Your cell number: “Call anytime.”

Give it to me now. Before I need it.

Here’s what I’m trying to say…

I’m juggling a dozen priorities every day. Making 100s of decisions under time pressure.

When a substitution hits my desk, I’m wondering, “Does any of these differences really matter?”

If you’ve done the work during design…

• Helped me document project-specific requirements
• Connected your product to goals I care about
• Created tools I can use quickly

… then the answer is obvious. I’ll fight for your product.

If you haven’t… I’m guessing. And when I’m guessing on the fly with limited time… the savings look pretty good.

You choose which scenario you want.

The reps whose products make it through construction make it easy for me to see why their product matters. They gave me tools to defend it. They connected it to things my client cares about.

They did the work during design that makes CA easy.

Not (just) because it helps their sales numbers. But because it helps me deliver better buildings.

And when you help me do that… we both win.

​
That's it for this week!

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

Neil "Mind like a steel trap… usually" Sutton
​Architect | Speaker | The Product Rep Coach

=======

P.S. Getting specified is maybe half the battle. If you want your products to get installed, stay engaged throughout construction. Offer installation support. Check in regularly. Make yourself valuable beyond just getting the spec.

Something to think about.

P.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 about coaching options.
• Business owners or Sales 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.
​=======