New Organization Aims to Spur Architect-CE Pro Collaboration

I’m not quite sure how this differs from the efforts of CEDIA and CEA/TechHome.

The more the merrier as far as as organizations that want to be a driving force in this cross-discipline collaboration.

As more architects and designers expose clients to these technologies earlier in the construction/remodel process, CE pros will benefit. The architects and designers will benefit from approaches that appear to the homeowners to be less at odds with each other.

It’s about time someone organized an effort in this direction. CEDIA has failed in this effort.

A technology expert is as important to a successful custom home project as the architect, builder and designer. Why our trade is not treated with the same “professional” moniker is beyond me.

Architects should be REQUIRED to have an LV1 plan set to get a home through the city. To this day I still see electrical plans that say “phone line needed at computer modem”. This is PROOF that architects and electricians are stuck in the 1990’s and give our trade as little attention as they have to in order to get a stamp from the city.

Another aspect that needs to be addressed, that I feel CEDIA has failed on, is licensing. Why do you automatically get a LV license if you have a high-volt license? Why aren’t licensed contractors required for CODE? Why is the electrician allowed to tell the builder/architect/homeowner that “low-voltage is easier than high-voltage and good news - we can do both!”

This industry needs to band together and promote some common goals - for the protection of the entire industry. Electricians did this a LONG time ago and it has paid off for them. Their barrier of entry is much higher than ours. Anyone can be an LV guy these days and that has to stop.

These outreach efforts by our industry have failed because no compelling reason (compelling = money)has ever been presented for collaboration.  The ‘let’s be friends and work together has merit, but at the end of the day does not benefit the architect monetarily.’  This group would be wise to learn what effect the LEED strategies are having in the architectural space.  LEED presents a new revenue stream for architects because any building that attains LEED certification must include documentation of the various strategies for Energy and Environmental Design.  LEED accredited architects working for clients that are pursuing LEED certification for their building projects are charging fees for the modeling, documentation, and submittals to the USGBC.  Integrators that generate quality engineering documents for their projects can be of value to LEED AP architectural firms by sharing the documentation that the architect who can use it in the LEED certification process for which they are charging their clients.

Kevin - excellent point, as usual!

Oh great… another worthless organization that takes dues in order to sponsor golf outings and strip club expenses for themselves and give members an excuse to get away from their spouses for emergency, “Raccoon Lodge,” meetings.

Maybe I just live in a more intelligent part of the country where architects & interior designers always call custom A/V dealers before they finish their final plans. Any architect or designer who doesn’t is more than likely setting up shop in a Wallmart.

@Dan Henderson,
I agree with you regarding licensing. However, in NJ you need to be licensed to run any low voltage wires except RG-6 coax. This law was put into place in 2007 to prevent trunk slammers and get more revenue into the governor’s pocket. I just renewed my license, (which took 8 months to originally get due to Ex-DMV workers handling the paperwork), and it cost $75.00.

@ Dave Stevens…Not sure of the accuracy of “more intelligent part of the country”, or by “always call custom av dealers before they finish their final plans”. I also live in the northeast, and I routinely review plans for luxury homes in CT, MA, and other states where it is obvious that no provisions have been made for custom electronics or lighting control. These are not guys in Walmart either.

I agree that many of these organizations have proven to be nothing more than dues collectors, but awareness collaboration are key to getting more of our technologies included in these homes in the planning stage, not as afterthoughts or retrofits.

@dclite: I made the comment, “More intelligent part of the country,” because I simply can’t believe that any architect in this day & age worth his salt would ignore A/V, lighting, or security in his final plans. Again, in NJ, even low voltage has to meet code in order for the homeowner to get a CO.

Then, let’s assume that the architect either ignored or forgot that these issues are imperative to the homeowner. Once the interior designer comes into play, typically the 1st thing discussed is where TV’s and speakers are to be located with the homeowner.

Again, I just can’t fathom the idea that these issues are not as important as running romex throughout the home in any architect’s original plans.

Matter of fact, I don’t know of any architect who is not already associated with a custom A/V company to handle this work for them. I personally have 5 on my dance card who don’t care how I get the job done… all they want to do is not worry about getting a CO in the end and the client has everything they want… interior designer or not.

Lastly, it is more than common practice for high end custom A/V dealers in my neck of the woods to constantly solicit architects to get their business. Usually, builders, GC’s, and interior designers will only use one selected company year after year, and commissions are sometimes paid back & forth for referrals. Only when “their” A/V company screws up a job will they possibly seek out another one.

I also have run into many occasions whereas the builder, GC, etc, gets pissed off when the homeowner insists on only using us instead of their regular A/V supplier because they know we are not going to pay them a commission or bump up our proposal by 10-20% so they get their cut of the action. However, I look at this as a perfect opportunity to replace the company they were originally using with my company.

In any case, the initial premise of this article should have been written in the early 80’s when these factors were not as commonplace as they are today. IMO, any architect or builder who ignores or is not aware how important these issues are, should not have a license to build a bird house.

Dave - great comments! You should spend some time out here in Arizona. Architects here don’t care to work with anyone on design for LV. In fact the typical response is “if the client has someone we will talk to them.”

You are right about builders. Last week I was referred to a client by a past client and I was told “my builder said I have to use his A/V company because he will not stand behind anyone else’ work. I asked the referral if I could at least look at the pricing to tell them if they were getting a good deal and the “bid” they had was one line.. “structured wiring and securtiy…. $15,000” No detail whatsoever. Obviously the builder was getting a nice chunk of that.

The other dynamic to throw in the conversation is that often, the architect is never called to the job because the builder doesn’t want him. Builders like to use “their own plans” and these are often the instances where custom homes get built with absolutely no accommodation for electronics.

I have met many, many builders who refuse to use architects on custom homes for several reasons. 1. They “don’t want someone between them and the client.” One builder told me that he is the person who translates the homeowner’s “vision,” not an architect. One builder told me about a home in Cambridge, Mass. that he had “torn down and rebuilt 3 times during the construction process” because he was working without plans. Then added that “he didn’t care because he was getting paid on time & materials”
2. Builders also hate when they get construction drawings from architects that do not fit in “the real world” in the field. This happens a lot when architects use software for design. For example, rooms that have ceiling heights at 8 feet, 1-13/32 inches instead of just 8 feet.

So in these cases, the homeowner (and the integrator) are the ones who lose.

Thanks Dan for the kind words. I’m presently building a home in Texas for myself, and my builder wanted $25K for pre-wire and couldn’t/wouldn’t break it down for me even though he knows I own an A/V company. Bottom line: I sent out my own guys and completed everything I wanted to do for $11K using only top of the line Liberty wire, cables, etc., versus the contractor grade crap that I’m sure he intended on using.

It sucks being a, “City Slicker!”

I’m pleased to report that CHART has been receiving enthusiastic calls from across the country from architects, builders, interior designers and home electronics planners. We all seem to agree that communication and respect for each others’ expertise will only lead to better results in new home construction and remodeling projects.

As a matter of clarification, please forget everything you know about a typical industry association. CHART is very straightforward. There are no dues, no members, and no egos. All qualified professionals are welcome to participate.

The goal of the organization is singular—to provide clear and concise guidelines about appropriate and correct implementation of home electronics.

As CE professionals, we as an industry must undertake the responsibility to communicate simply and honestly with all stakeholders in home construction and remodeling. Doing so will foster the widespread adoption of home electronics as a de facto standard, not a “luxury” option.

Please feel free to sign up for the monthly CHART newsletter at http://www.theChart.org and/or join the LinkedIn group at http://www.linkedin.com/groupRegistration?gid=2508294

Great energy around this story.  Please allow me to chime in.

CEDIA’s primary goal is to shift the mindset of the homebuilding industry to build better homes and establish the ESC as a primary trade and vital component of the design process.  Architects, Designers, Builders, and ESCs have been cooperating (I use that term loosely) for years, but the time has come to collaborate.  CEDIA has been working with Industry Partners for several years now, and I can tell you first hand that we have made huge strides in raising awareness among Architects, Designers, and Builders about the importance of the proper planning, budgeting, and implementation of technology in the home.
CEDIA has developed over 34 courses for continuing education available to industry partners through national conferences, e-learning, and our Registered Outreach Instructor Program.  All of CEDIA’s outreach education follows strict development criteria and holds a consistent theme to ensure our success in promoting the “ESC” with three key underlying messages: First teach them the basic features and benefits of technologies available so that they can have an educated conversation with their client about technology (Consumers look to Architects, Designers, and Builders as experts regarding the largest purchase they will make in their lives).  Second, expose them to the design considerations, demonstrating the amount of work that goes into proper planning, how to imbed technologies into their supply chain, and the importance of beginning the process much earlier in the project.  Third is the value of working with an ESC, and how to partner with one.

CEDIA is now a “Registered Provider” of continuing education for eight associations;
a.  National Association of Home Builder(NAHB)
b.  American Institute of Architects (AIA)
c.  American Society of Interior Designers(ASID)
d.  International Interior Design Association (IIDA)
e.  American Institute of Building Designers (AIBD)
f.  National Association of the Remodeling Industry(NARI)
g.  Interior Design Educators Council (IDEC)
h.  Interior Designers of Canada (IDC)

CEDIA’s ROI (Registered Outreach Instructor Program) has emerged as one of the most valued member benefits of the Association, as it empowers members to build relationships with their local industry partners.  ROI instructors become registered agents under CEDIA’s provider number and allow them to deliver CEDIA outreach education at local events or “lunch and learns”.  Any ESC that has experienced this business development opportunity will most certainly agree that it has a positive effect on their pipeline.  From 2007 through today, CEDIA has educated 3000 industry partners through this grassroots program alone.

To your point Kevin, CEDIA is educating industry partners on how to incorporate technology into their supply chain, thus building value in their participation.  Architects, Designers, and Builders alike are involved in the process of systems integration at some point (through collaboration or oversight) and should be compensated for their time.  There is no program that CEDIA can create to put money directly in their pocket, nor should the association dictate the financial relationship between industry partners and ESCs.  The onus is on the individual business owner to build value into their products and services.  USGBC has created guidelines that must be followed which would require additional work by the architect, thus additional billable time.  I know of several architectural firms in the U.S. that are incorporating LV plans by partnering with ESCs and charging for them (same approach).  FYI…CEDIA now has a voice within the USGBC and is looking ahead to future revisions of LEED to include more comprehensive technology solutions that would better position the ESC. 

CEDIA has built strong relationships with many of our industry partner associations.  The HTA (Home Technology Alliance) is one example of that. The NAHB and CEDIA have formed an alliance to educate builders about residential technologies and more importantly to get builders and ESCs together to discuss better partnerships.

To address the licensing discussion, I don’t feel CEDIA has failed in the aspect of licensing and continues to invest significant time and resources into this vital initiative.  CEDIA works everyday to ensure our members businesses are not impeded upon by licensing requirements that do not meet the work of an electronic systems contractor.  We not only do this for CEDIA members, but the electronic systems industry as a whole.

During the 2009 state legislative session CEDIA worked on licensing issues to ensure electronic systems contractors would not have to be licensed as an electrical contractor, or complete an apprenticeship program for different services an electronic systems contractor provides.  Some of the states CEDIA has worked in 2009 include Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Massachusetts, South Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin.  CEDIA not only addresses the issue at the state level, but also at the county and municipal level. 

CEDIA works to proactively meet and educate government officials on how the work of an electronic systems contractor is different from the work of an electrical contractor, and why an ESC should not be licensed as an electrical contractor.  Many electrical contractors chose to do electronic systems work or have separate divisions for electronic systems work and we certainly can’t stop that. The bigger and more important battle is to ensure electronic systems contractors can continue in business and not be required to have a license that does not represent the work they do.

Dan, I agree with you completely about the industry banding together.  The definition of association is “an organization of persons with a common interest”.  I believe that all of you hold that common interest.  As this industry has grown it has become more diverse.  CEDIA represents the “profession”, meaning companies and individuals that deliver the Electronic Lifestyle™.  Regardless of your background, or area of expertise you do have a home and a voice within CEDIA.  Our industry is at a crossroads, and if we do not speak with solidarity now, the challenges we face will only intensify.  Our involvement will not be the catalyst to the inevitable   widespread adoption of technologies, the consumer will drive that. We need to ensure that the ESC is THE recognized trade to provide those solutions, and to build a trained workforce to supply the ensuing demand.  If you have energy behind Industry Outreach or our Legislative work, and you feel that your industry association is failing, I would urge you to get involved. You can call me anytime.

Utz Baldwin
CEO - CEDIA

Great post Utz and thanks for the information on the great work CEDIA is doing. How would one become more involved wih CEDIA as a volunteer?

David Nowak
Consultant

Utz - thank you for the great post. I did not mean to diminish the day-to-day work of CEDIA but I still stand by my comment that CEDIA has not done enough for the industry in the realm of licensing when it comes to protecting the interests of the CEDIA business model.

I can only speak for Arizona, but I feel I know the area pretty well. I have been in the custom systems business for 10 years now and can tell you that I have yet to meet an architect that knew what CEDIA was before I explained it to them. We simply don’t have the “foothold” that even single manufacturers do - for example more builders know what Sony “Built-In” is than know about CEDIA.

Also - regarding protecting the CEDIA member contractors: In Arizona if you are a licensed electrician they “throw in” the low-volt license. This is absurd. The reason why so many builders “use their electrician” is because the licensing is included and heck… they are already on the job. I’ve met very few electricians that know anything about low-volt - just ask them what the minimum bend radius is for CAT5 and they will look at you like a deer in headlights. CEDIA would be better server trying to modify the high-volt licensing to not include low-volt - the argument is simple - there is already a low-voltage license which the electrician can get if they want to do low-voltage.

The second thing that hurts “good” CEDIA companies is the extremely low barrier to entry. Many “trunk slammers” work without licensing because in Arizona you don’t need any kind of license for work under $1000.  Many of our competitors don’t even hold a K-67 license - instead they have what ammounts to a “handyman” license. Maybe we should press distributors and manufacturers to only sell to companies with proper licenseing, bonding and insurance?

Enought of my 6am ranting. I’ve got deals to chase!

Take care.

Daniel