We’ve heard from many lighting retrofit companies, especially those in states with more rigid lock-down restrictions, that even if their sales efforts get them past the gate-keeper to a live prospect, getting into the facility for an audit has been a non-starter. The contractors seem to get shut down before they can even make a valid, data-driven case.
Thankfully, the retrofit world is gifted with many out-of-the-box, creative thinkers that seem to engineer their way around many of these initial objections. Many have come up with ways of conducting a “virtual” audit using creative digital methods. Often, the results of these methods provide good enough information to make the case for “getting in” more powerful.
Sometimes the “no one gets in our buildings” argument turns out to be an initial, sales-resistant, knee-jerk reaction against having to deal with a salesperson at that moment. This is more or less a convenient excuse to put the salesperson off until later. Sometimes, there are valid reasons that access is being denied (nursing facilities or retirement homes with high-risk occupants being examples).
Before going down the virtual audit path, many contractors attempt to create a credible, data-based example of the potential value that the retrofit can bring to the prospect’s business and point out that a slow time, or an empty building is a perfect time to consider such an improvement to their facility. Top that off with the fact that lighting professionals are considered essential workers in most states along with the pledge that the lighting team will wear appropriate personal protective equipment and follow strict social distancing protocol, and the contractor has fighting chance of sidelining the “no access” objection.
But, if that line of reasoning fails, below are a few ideas for the virtual approach.
Many industry pundits and specifically some utilities and program implementers have suggested that their trade allies partake in virtual audits through some form of augmented reality. Whether it’s a recorded walkthrough using an augmented reality app live stream or a live interaction through a skype call, the approach entails having someone privy to access to the building (engineer or facility personnel) and digitally capture the space with either their “live” auditor co-pilot tethered digitally or record the session complete with digital mark-ups for later consumption by the auditor and project developer.
The pros of this approach include:
The cons include:
I recently spoke to a customer about what they are doing to in lieu of building access and he had some interesting insights. He works for a contracting company that generally quotes high-bay solutions for large warehouse type buildings (1M+ Sq. Ft. and larger).
To generate interest as well as pre-qualify the opportunity, they will take the following steps:
For lighting companies who use SnapCount software, they have gotten used to quickly capturing detailed site data in order to complete an accurate audit enabling them to deliver a compelling, credible and differentiated proposal.
Familiarity with SnapCount has given a few clients the idea that a building engineer could download the SnapCount app and audit the building on their behalf. The SnapCount user can walk the engineer through a quick “how-to” session via web meeting, and allow them to provide an accurate space-based rendition of where all the fixtures reside, their hours of operation and just enough detail to craft a credible proposal. Also, the SnapCount Audit App has recently been ported to operate on a cell phone, so if the engineer doesn’t have access to a tablet, it isn’t a showstopper.
The pros:
Some cautions:
Regardless, you could consider this approach another "tool in the bag" to initiating further engagement with the prospect.
This final strategy was adapted from a recent webinar I conducted with Mark Jewell and need not be limited to only situations where building access is limited.
While the debate whether to offer free audits rages on, the fact remains that conducting thorough facility audits is an expensive cost of doing business for retrofit contractors, especially with little assurance that the effort would result in the customer moving forward.
A perhaps better approach would to be provide a “virtual sampling” of the facility’s 5 most dominant fixture types (quickly discovered via a call or visit to the building engineer) to represent the potential savings available to the facility. This also serves to facilitate a broader conversation around the prospect’s value threshold and the savings that would cause them to move forward with the project without the time and expense of conducting a full-blown audit.
Generating a retrofit proposal with only 5 fixture types offers a powerful proxy of the value available to the prospect. For example, illustrating that the sample proposal would deliver a Savings-to-Investment Ratio of 1.7 (returning $1.70 for every $1 invested) you can quickly understand whether this exceeds or falls short of the CFO’s required investment value threshold. If not, you can be thankful you and your team didn’t waste your time auditing 1 million square feet of manufacturing space. If so, you’ve shown your expertise and have earned the right to take a deeper dive with the assurance that your opportunity is qualified.
For the rainmakers in the lighting retrofit industry, your job is to keep project opportunities constantly moving forward. In the midst of uncertain times that may cause restrictions to facility access, virtual audits offer an additional tool in your bag to qualify and illustrate your value to decision makers.