Here are the popular vote results for the 2013 Best Construction Blog competition.
You can see all the entries and visit the relevant blogs here.
Judges will combine assessment of the popular vote with the overall design, writing quality and effectiveness of the blogs in deciding the 2013 Best Construction Blog. We'll share the judge's decision on April 15.
Friday, February 01, 2013
Here are the popular vote results for the 2013 Best Construction Blog competition.
Posted by Mark Buckshon at 12:24 PM
Sunday, December 30, 2012
Lots of the old postings are cached. I for example recovered the blog listing directory. Images are a problem, though, and manually uploading and reinstalling the cache would be a truly massive job (and not really a wise thing for someone who has to oversee a real operating business!)
However, there may be some good news here, as well. It seems someone has developed an automated script on a program called Python. I am certainly not a web programmer, but I also know how to source inexpensive programming talent offshore. (Won't announce the specific details because of political sensitivities, but I'm currently paying someone in Bangladesh $1.00 an hour for some development work!)
Target date to "officially" launch the new constructionmarketingideas.com is still Jan 2. You may catch some sneak previews as I work through the process.
Posted by Mark Buckshon at 5:04 PM
Saturday, December 29, 2012
While the rebuild is under-way, you are visiting the "old" blog, maintained since its start. Note that many links and references to specific posts will automatically redirect here -- but unfortunately, except in some rare circumstances, the original text is gone, for good.
I expect the new constructionmarketingideas.com blog will be ready for viewing by January 2. Stay tuned.
Posted by Mark Buckshon at 8:42 AM
Thursday, December 27, 2012
I managed not only to crash the "new" blog at constructionmarketingideas.com -- I also deleted virtually all of the blog's content and (to make things really bad), the backup system failed.
This means about three years of blogging history have gone "poof" along with relevant hyperlinks and other stuff.
All is not completely lost. This "old" blog remains in operation, and while we cannot recover the links and content (at least unless I can get some exceptional technical help and have extreme luck), there is room for continuity here -- and behind the scenes, I'll be working on rebuilding the other blog site.
In the meantime, if you end up in an endless loop looking for something that is no more, you can try emailing me and I might be able to recover the relevant files or documents for you. No guarantees, unfortunately.
(Fortunately this disaster doesn't impede the business's other sites and projects, which remain in place.)
Posted by Mark Buckshon at 11:55 AM
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
|Burgin Construction won the 2012 Best Construction Blog competition|
The annual Construction Marketing Ideas best construction blog competition nominations have opened. You can nominate your favourite blog, or your own. All qualifying blogs receive a positive review in the Construction Marketing Ideas blog, along with relevant hyperlinks and social media references.
There's no cost to enter the competition or if your blog is selected as a finalist.
We reserve the right to decline entries if they appear to be spam-blogs (splogs) or are created primarily for search engine optimization. The blogs also must relate to the architectural, engineering and construction community, be updated at least weekly, and have enough content to be judged independently.
Here is the nomination form.
Posted by Mark Buckshon at 6:13 AM
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
However, the largest problem occurred mid-day, when our wonderfully effective part-time employee dedicated to collecting old accounts asked me to speak with a client who had agreed to pay the bill, under duress.
On hearing the client'a story, Kathy asked if I would take the call. I did. And I quickly understood how a series of events led to a potentially brand-burning misunderstanding.
We earn a significant percentage of our print advertising revenue through special features and project profiles. Often the architects, owners and sometimes the general contractors support the initiative. Sub-trades and suppliers advertise because they want to associate with the successful project and sometimes because they believe they have a degree of obligation to keep their clients (the owner or general contractor) happy.
Some publishers abuse client/supplier relationship process in developing these features. They imply relationships which are not there, and play on the guilt and sense of obligation of subs and suppliers to purchase extremely overpriced and ineffective advertising.
This sort of unethical behaviour is not in our repertoire. We have a stringent no-pressure policy (a 'no' is really a 'no') and don't exaggerate relationships, while working with the clients to develop truly effective advertising.
But something went way off the rails in this case.
Our sales rep had indeed obtained the owner and architect's permission and support for the feature. The major general contractor for this project has a policy not to interfere nor support our features. In other words, the contractor won't bad-mouth us, but certainly would not want us to suggest any sort of endorsement. Nevertheless, the contractor makes available sub-trade information, allowing us to contact the various suppliers for the project. (This isn't a secret or specialized list as you could find the same information without explicit permission if you know where to look.)
The salesperson contacted the project's electrical contractor, and suggested a really good ad would involve a photo of the contractor's crew on the job site. The contractor agreed, and committed to a quarter-page ad.
The sales rep showed up with his camera on the appointed day, to find that he could not access the job site because of security clearance issues, and in fact, the photos could not be taken. The electrical contractor, to say the least, wasn't happy -- having spent money on special T-shirts for his crew.
I only found about the problem today, some three months after the incident. I asked the sales rep why I didn't know about this beforehand."The contractor signed off on the ad, and we ran the feature," the sales rep said.
I haven't received other client complaints about the sales rep's work -- and the idea of taking the photo of the electrical contractor's staff would have, if executed, indeed provided a worthy and useful advertising message (and morale boost for the contractor's employees). So I can't get too mad at him.
I then reviewed the advertising proof sign off form. A good question is whether the photo incident happened before or after the sign-off. But wait . . . was there a sign off? It seems the contractor returned the form by fax (we have the fax identification information to prove that), with the "okay" box checked, but without a signature . . .
Without hesitation, I told the contractor that we would not expect the invoice to be paid. The issue isn't the possible loss of money -- the contractor would, in fact, have paid the bill -- but the loss of reputation. We do not want people to feel they've been misled or mistreated -- and the evidence here is strong enough to suggest that, even though we meant no harm, the client would have good reason to feel abused.
This isn't a great story to share. It doesn't reflect any miracles or inspirations. We probably could have handled the situation better from the start, and accepting a write-down because of a screw up is part of business.
Yet, in its simplicity, the story reflects how businesses survive difficult situations and preserve their brands and reputations. We cannot tolerate dissatisfied clients, so angry that they would use the word "scam" to describe our business. Nor should we panic and attack individuals within our businesses who, acting in good faith, are caught in awkward situations. The challenge here is to listen, respect, learn, and adapt the business model and go beyond paying lip-service to the words "customer satisfaction" to truly understanding our responsibilities when things don't go right.
So today, indeed, proved to be a bad day. I also think it has set the stage for excellent days ahead.
Posted by Mark Buckshon at 9:22 PM