When a site pleases me, I let the manufacturer know; when it displeases me, I do the same. I will now let the manufacturer know how I feel about logging in! I agree about remembering my “user ID” and “password” to the point where I have used “password” as my password on these sites. It probably does nothing for their perceived security. Maybe they’re afraid that I’m an industrial spy, will hack in and discover their secrets?
I have a few canned responses saved as e-mail drafts. When I run into a site that requires log-in, doesn’t have the info I need, is hard to navigate, etc., I just grab the appropriate text and send it to the company. I like to end them by saying that since I can’t find what I want on their website, I’m going to a named competitor’s site, where I know I can find what I want.
The response has been surprising! Many times I get an e-mail back within a couple of days, and I’ve even had a few call by phone. Some manufacturers actually do want to give us what we need; they just need help knowing what that is.
I am currenty converting my firms documents from MF95 to MF04. When I’m in doubt regarding the new number to use for a specialized item, I call the mfr. Surprisingly every mfr. I’ve called so far (maybe 3-4) doesn’t have a clue…their old number or their new number for their product. Not very encouraging?!?
Suggestion for consideration:
Suppose a good housekeeping seal of approval be established for websites that meet a certain level of quality. Guidelines could be set forth on a website setting forth what architects, engineers, specifiers, construction professionals are looking for when they visit a construction product vendors website. These guidelines could encompass Colins manufacturer’s area page [with Colins approval] and, of course, most of the points raised by this thread.
To qualify for this seal, a manufacturer would submit a simple application which would be reviewed against the standards set forth. If acceptable, the right to use the seal would be granted to the manufacturer for use on their respective websites.
These types of quality or award winning seals abound elsewhere, why not on construction product vendors websites. It appears to be a win-win-win-win situation. Vendors win by having a useful website for construction industry users and gives them a better image. Users win by having a website worth their limited search time. The seal producer wins by providing a good, professional service. It also gives Colin, and others, a tool to use to encourage vendors to produce quality websites.
The seal producer could be this 4Specs Discussion Group, a CSI chapter, or, preferably, the SCIP organization, if they are interested. SCIP is looking for additional industry exposure, its membership are users, and it is a board based, unbiased professional group.
Just a thought.
Any suggestions for a name for such a seal?
Is there any interest at SCIP?
Ron
brillint brillant brillant. I will volunteer to assist in this effort. I will talk to John Regener and see if this is something he envisions SCIP to do
Good ideas come around! Immediate Past President of SCIP, Dane Dodd-Hansen, gave a presentation on that very subject at Ecobuild/National Specifiers Conference in Orlando on June 20th this year. He will be covering some of the same material at Ecobuild Federal in Washington DC on December 14. He used the “Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval” as an example. I, who sometimes read the magazine, noted that not only does Good Housekeeping approve - they guarantee quality. I doubt any of us wants to do the latter, but the idea of identifying quality sites, and possibly charging for the privilege, should be investigated further. If you’re interested, and can get to DC, come to Ecobuild and talk to us.
Ron,
“Mr. Goodspec” would not quite fit.
How about “Mr. Straightpoop”?
The governing body for developing web standards is the W3C (World Wide Web Consortiu-www.w3.org). They publish standards and have tools to “validate” websites that are “compliant” to the protocol or standard employed by the web developer. Examples would be compliant CSS, compliant HTML or XHTML, and so forth.
I foresee this product presentation, information, and selection website accreditation program as being something similar. The W3C program has been a great success in that industry.
It would be an interesting project, to define or describe performance based web design and presentation criteria that addresses the specific need of the individual A/E/C professional making product selections.
Questions abound. Should it be like the LEED program, with varying degrees of compliance? Or like the W3C’s program, where it meets the criteria, or it doesn’t…
The title of the program should probably have a three letter acronym, that seems consistent with everything else out there issued by the AIA and CSI 
Tom:
Mr. Goodspec has a nice ring to it but it might convey too much emphasis on specifications.
As much as I would like to see a good guide spec offered on a vendors site, I am also looking for other information. I would suggest the criteria include what all levels of the construction industry are looking for. I always review installation instructions to see if what not to dos are present and to be sure it is flagged in Part 3 of the spex. Green products and LEED information is also helpful.
But you raise an interesting point. Some of the most effective advertizing is based on personas; ie, Ronald McDonald, the DoughBoy, Mr. Clean, Jolly Green Giant, etc. Rememberable slogans are also effective. Wheres the beef! has always stuck in my memory over the years. And, there is a combination of both; ie, Take a bite out of crime has both a good slogan and an character image [the dog].
The website police image is obviously not the image we would want.
Ron
PS: “Mr. Straightpoop” does get right to the point, however.
Great discussion!
Two other pieces of information I would like to find easily on websites are: Area served by company, and manufacturing location.
Several times I have a discovered a great product to spec on a project, only to discover that my ‘area’ is not served by that manufacturer.
Most web sites have a list of area reps, or distribution centers, but rarely do I find the manufacturing plant location. Specifying products manufactured closer to the project location makes sense with current gas prices.
I also want an easy to use product search box on every web site. Sometimes I know a model number etc. and am trying to verify if that particular model still exists, or if it has been redesigned, or replaced with a new product. Even sites that have a product search box option often negate the usefulness of this tool by requiring spaces, hyphens, or case sensitive inputs.
I am equally frustrated with the log in requirements and password folly. When time is of the essence, I go elsewhere rather than mess with it. I have done as Sheldon suggests, but not consistently . . . however, I will begin to send emails to those websites that are most offending, and those that are excellent. If they really really have to know who I am, I would think that my email address should be ALL that is needed, EVER!!
One last suggestion, could manufacturers create two websites? Have a website designed for the general public, full of whiz bang commercials and long intros, and create a second website, just for us technical folks, serious, functional, and linked directly from 4-Specs, so that when they get a “hit,” they know that it is from a spec writer or serious user. If they want, perhaps the two websites could be two parts of the same whole, or linked together.
Tom, my idea is “Prefered SCIP[or CSI] Website”
Im in the middle of a hearty e-mail exchange as we speak with the marketing guy and the regional manager of a well-know manufactured wood casework company. Their web site requires log-in/registration and so I sent (what I thought was) a cordial e-mail explaining my concerns. I happened to mention that one of their primary competitors allows unrestricted access to the literature and spec.
In one of their responses It was suggested that I e-mail direct to the guy who would then send me the spec section I needed via return e-mail. I explained that we need the information when we need it, sometimes at 11:00 on a Sunday morning, and guessed that he would not be at his desk to respond to my e-mail at that time.
In another I was told that, once you complete the log-in registration process the first time, then a special password can get you into the system next time without having to register again. I explained that I already have too many passwords / codes to remember and for sure would not remember my special one from them when I needed it.
What I did not do was included a direct reference to this particular discussion thread! I remembered it after I sent my last reply. However, unless I miss my guess, Ill hear from them again and then will Suggest that they come here to see other opinions of their process, without having to log in to read them..
I will avoid using a company that makes me “log-in” I cant remember all the passwords and do not want to be bogged down when I am in need of information, whatever time of day or week it is. Also, if the website doesnt provide technical specification assistance, it is virtually of no value to me.
For when they call Mr. Frank back again, I’ll offer some general commets;
If you are trying to “sell” me a product, doesn’t it make sense to make it easy for me? And what I want, when I need it? [won’t “bother” you otherwise]
I don’t really care what number contact I am on your web site! And you don’t need all the information about me-- that is available from a zillion other clandestine sites.
The customer is always right!!!
Hear hear regarding website logins. Make them optional! On a well-designed site, with good product data reachable within 3 clicks, I’m happy to leave my contact info behind. Just don’t demand it as a condition of making your information available! And don’t make me login when I return. A typical project manual has several hundred major products in it. Don’t waste my time!! In short, don’t let marketing drive the website. Talk to sales!
Regarding product data: Pecora’s is very easy to reach, cleanly written, and easily saved to my product data sheet folders neatly organized and approved by the MF04 police.
Sins not to be forgiven: Product data that plays games with obscure ASTM tests to make products look like they do what they don’t.
About guide specs: Most manufacturer’s guide specs … aren’t good. If you aren’t going to hire an experienced professional specifier to write your guide specs, just give me a cleanly written product data sheet. I’ll write my own specs anyway.
Amen, Phil!
Pecora has to be good,on-line as they have lousy representation in our area-- short/cryptic, caustic, non-responsive, irritating and quite condensending.
And don’t let your marketing guys design your website if you want specifiers to use it!