De-Vendoring AEC software

When Lachmi requested me to contribute to the AECbytes Viewpoint series, I warned her that an article on technology trends, or the rate of adoption of BIM, or the implications of future technology and digital rights on the architect's role wasn't top of mind. She graciously agreed to air out some views on a different topic, the Customer-Vendor relationship. Software companies must put the customer first … and mean it.

Before There Was a Software Industry …

Perspective comes most easily when you have something with which to compare. So it might be useful to remember how software has evolved over time and how an industry has emerged in the process. Before there was an independent software industry, computer manufacturers wrote the mainstream business applications that justified the purchase of their machines. Software that automated product design or building design was outside that mainstream, so pioneering customers employed in-house software development staff to write design applications. Many large companies such as Boeing, IBM, McDonnell Douglas, Caterpillar, GM, Ford, HOK, Skidmore Owings and Merrill, and others authored proprietary CAD software throughout the 70's and well into the 80's.

If, like me, you were a user back then, you have something to compare to today's off-the-shelf design software. First, today's software applications are immensely more powerful, extensible, and productive than those decades-old systems. One has to look no further than the routine act of clicking a mouse, which is an otherworldly experience compared to the user interfaces of those early design applications.

Second, what was once an internal department of teammates, whose sole purpose was to deliver software that allowed you to do your job your way, has turned into a productized, same-for-everybody software industry. Few things are now done your way but rather are available in whatever way the greatest common denominator has pulled them. This packaged sameness stands in stark contrast to the pioneering in-house development staffs that founded our industry.

Finally, software changes and enhancements are often delivered on someone else's schedule—not yours. That schedule may or may not have anything to do with your need for changes or your ability to consume them. There are times when the last thing you want is improvement in a software application that is already good enough, and change for change's sake is no justification. For example, there may be some slick, new features in Microsoft Word that I don't know about, but personally I'm hoping Microsoft leaves Word alone for a while.

So what do these observations have to do with the Customer-Vendor relationship? Consider receiving the benefits of powerful innovations stemming from a competitive software industry, without the attendant packaged sameness or change for change's sake. The relationship between customer and vendor is key to achieving these benefits and eliminating those disadvantages. The software industry, especially in response to AEC customers whose interests and priorities are so varied, must respond by combining our technical aptitude with a few customer-centric concepts.

Eliminating Packaged Sameness

For years, software companies have supplied programming interfaces allowing users to customize applications. Customization, when done well, can be a very a good thing, but it carries some baggage too. With few exceptions customized applications are costly to develop, more costly to support and maintain, and cumbersome to migrate from one generation of technology to the next.

Personalization, on the other hand, is an underserved art. Unlike customization, personalized software requires no additional programming, imposes no surtax on support or maintenance, and represents no challenge to future migration. Simple examples include operational features like personalized hot keys and keystroke recorders/players. Personalized content, often-used parts libraries, and standard document templates are examples of the next level of personalization. Here the work product itself takes on the unique attributes of the company performing the project.

AEC software developers have an opportunity to add another layer of value to personalization. Because our users are creative design professionals, the visual style, quality, and overall appearance of the finished product (whether that is a graphical display or printed material) matter a great deal. Renderings, sketches, and even construction documents would all inherit the author's unique style and artistry if it weren't for computerized rigidity getting in the way. As an example, look at a truly creative application like Piranesi that is all about personalized results reflecting the individual style of the user. This level of personalization is really personal and not just another level of task automation or standards enforcement. As software developers serving the AEC customer, we must put this kind of personalization—a personalization of style—into our applications. Anything short of this remains packaged sameness.

Eliminating Change for Change's Sake

It stands to reason that a relatively new software application leaves a lot of room for improvement. So when a software company launches a new product, we already have a long list of features we want to add in future releases. Assuming we are simultaneously listening to feedback from early adopters, this scenario is actually good, customer-centric behavior.

A few years later that same application may enter a midlife stage where it is less clear if features are being added to benefit the customer or to benefit the vendor through requisite updates and upgrade fees. Perhaps a few years later, well into a mature product stage, the situation becomes much like that of Microsoft Word where many users no longer welcome changes and upgrades. (My apologies to those of you who actually wish for new features in MS-Word. All three of you…) At this stage, if new releases are still happening on a frequent basis, there may be little question as to who is benefiting from them. The situation has likely deteriorated into change for change's sake, and this is hardly customer-centric behavior.

Change for change's sake may be avoided or eliminated, but the solution is much harder than simply wishing it away. First, the software vendor must continuously innovate. What was once a new product will become a mature product and new, innovative products must be delivered in the interim. In this way a vendor always has something fueling the business through this typical lifecycle. Easier said than done. At the same time, and this is where it gets really tricky, the customer has to do his or her part. In addition to guiding the existing product through a complex set of feature choices thus ensuring it is always relevant, the customer must be willing to recognize and embrace innovations and opportunities for the right changes as they occur.

As a customer you are not obliged to buy everything that comes along, but when substantive progress or innovation is presented to you, you must embrace that change. One industry analyst and close friend has observed that AEC customers do not embrace, in fact seek out, technology change at nearly the same pace as their counterparts in other industries. There are many factors underlying that observation, but failing to pursue meaningful change puts any customer at risk; risk from your competition who are quick to recognize and react to the innovation, and risk from your software vendor who may be motivated to change for change's sake. It may help to remember the words of author and activist, Anna Lappé: "Every time you spend money, you're casting a vote for the kind of world you want."

Copping an Attitude

Some time ago a colleague handed me an article in Business Week entitled, "Why High Tech Has to Stay Humble," and subtitled, "The industry can't forget the key lesson of the lean years: Put customers first." It started out as a good article. Find out what customers really need. Make customers co-creators of your product or service. But the more I read, the more I felt this author didn't get it. His telling conclusion was,

"It just goes to show that there's no shame in groveling a bit—if it gets you the business."

Now there's a customer-centric attitude for you. "Let me fake my sincerity (presumably by groveling) just long enough to win your business…"

It has been my experience that few, if any, customers want their software vendor to go out of business. Customers understand we are competing for their business, and we want to win. They understand we have to make some money along the way. A good software company returns that empathy with much the same focus as those in-house, dedicated software teams of the 70's. It just requires an attitude.

Beyond the concepts of personalization and customer-driven change, the concept of a customer-centric attitude must permeate all aspects of a winning software company. Pricing and return policies, tech support policies and practices, hiring and personnel decisions, and even the style of marketing put forth by a vendor are as important as the product roadmap.

A genuinely customer-centric attitude is uncharacteristic of so many software vendors that one could argue we need to de-vendor the industry. Call us software makers, software partners, software developers—anything but software vendors. Vendors sell what they have in stock. Software companies need to become part of the customer's virtual organization—whose sole purpose is to deliver software that allows you to do your job your way. Does that sound like 1975 all over again? I think I saved some of my white, short-sleeved shirts and narrow ties …

About the Author

Mark Sawyer is CEO of @Last Software, the developer of SketchUp. He has been involved in the design software business for over twenty years and held prior executive positions at Graphisoft, Autodesk, and Auto-trol Technology. Mark received his BS and MS degrees in Mechanical Engineering from Purdue University. He lives in Boulder, Colorado and may be reached at marks@sketchup.com.

Note: The views expressed in Viewpoint articles are those of the individual authors and do not necessarily reflect those of AECbytes. Also, no advertising or sponsorship is accepted for Viewpoint articles.

Viewpoints > Issue #18 > Printer-friendly format