THE SYSTEM IS THE GOAL

It’s long been my feeling that this AV industry we love suffers from an odd dichotomy: The industry provides some of the most advanced technologies to public spaces, schools, corporate offices, theme parks, and entertainment events. Yet it does so with almost no infrastructure technology of its own. Other, less glamorous industries have robust and standardised infrastructure. Auto mechanics, doctors, shippers all interact with standardised infrastructure for their fields.

I would like to think that the system is the ultimate goal. That final system that brings a show to life, allows business to run and students to learn. Those systems are the heartbeat of our industry. Yet, the birth of each system is full of roadblocks, dead-ends, bad or cloudy information, and countless other challenges.

This is commonly how a system comes to life:

An end-user either calls a consultant or integrator to design a system. If they are designers, they may even populate many of the needed items in a list for budgeting and internal pre-approval to proceed. They email this to a consultant who has to re-enter everything into their worksheet, then swap and add items to make it a viable and complete system. Manufacturers are called or emailed in order to verify product fit or discuss specialised needs. The consultant then emails lists and documents back and forth with the client until a final system is established.

Then they email their lists and docs to one, or several, integrators – who once again re-enters the items into excel or whatever platform they use. When there are questions, they email, call, and Zoom. The trail of information is vague and disparate. The resulting proposals are all delivered to the end-user, who has the new task of learning how to read the widely diverse formats of presentations. Understanding who is best suited to bring the project to life remains elusive.

If the best possible system is our goal, then why have we left it so hard to accomplish for all these years? It’s 2023 and we are tending to these systems as if it were 1963.

In 2023 it should work like this:

An end-user creates a system concept in a structured platform. They drop in various photos, videos, and drawings of the site. They create its locations, sub-systems and outline the desired functionality location by location. If they are a qualified designer they can search for and populate items into each location from a database of several million AV products. They may get stuck wondering if a processor will achieve a goal, so they click a button to collaborate with the manufacturer who can view the needs, drawings, and requirements. They may suggest a new processor which also replaces other items into the project and is releasing soon, then populate it into the project. The end-user may then pass the project to their consultant who ties all of the core concepts together, validates the engineering and populates the final and detailed item list. Any questions are handled in the discussion thread with the user and logged for future reference.

Now, the end-user or consultant shares the project with one or several integrators. The bid requirements are right there, requests for information is carried out on the platform for clear reference. The integrator proposes various alternates to provide value or to resolve availability issues. These can be easily accepted or rejected. The integrator works in complete privacy as they monitor their margins and implement their installation, travel, and management elements into the project. Proposals are submitted back to the end-user who can evaluate the various values that each provides. They can easily award the project to the best suited integrator. Not just on price as was often the case, but on adherence to design, qualifications, understanding of the project and more – all of which are far easier to identify because of this process.

Once awarded, the end-user and consultant can track installation progress, communicate issues that arise, approve change orders, and more.

Software Dream or Reality?

Collaborative software is not new. Many companies use Slack, Basecamp, Zoom, Teams, Google Sheets and more, all of which allow multiple parties to communicate, collaborate, share ideas, and achieve goals. There are also platforms that handle quoting, inventory, purchasing, and other core elements of projects. Many companies stitch together a combination of these platforms, which can work very well for their particular organisation. But then it is unlikely that all six to 10 parties on a project are sharing that same combination of platforms.

Achieving all of this workflow in a single platform would be ideal if efficiency is a priority. This is what inspires the current direction of Jetbuilt, and the development of a ‘concept to commission’ workflow software with full contribution from all parties working on a project.

If you agree that the reason we are all in this business is to bring excellent systems to life, then it is worth your time to explore collaborative software solutions. Break down barriers that cause your systems to be compromised because of poor information flows. Do not stand for ideas being held back because there isn’t an easy way for them to be presented. Never design an outdated project with yesterday’s equipment when today’s and tomorrow’s could be implemented.

In other words, stop working like it’s 1963. www.jetbuilt.com