[jwholden]

I do my jobs well and NEVER have a customer complain about the job not beeing done right (not starting on time yes, often). I sometimes wonder if I would be better off doing less quality work and increasing my sales volume and assume that I will just get a few more callbacks. What the heck, I can sweet talk people as well as anybody.

How do you run your business?

A) Blow the work out and keep prices down by having adequate volume to support your overhead and profit margins. You can tolerate a few crooked trees on a project or a paver walk with some puddling. It's not my problem unless I get called on it.

B) Your concern is quality and you expect your clients to pay more for your attention to detail. You realize that you will never domintate the market but will always have enough work to pay the bills and have a comfortable lifestyle.

I am not trying to put either approach in a bad light but will admit that I am a type B person and am biased in that direction. I do realize that there are many ways to run a business and should not get stuck on one mindset. As the Marines say 'Adapt and overcome.'

[Stonehenge]

I think it's a worthy question, and I used to do like you. I'm not saying that know I know better, or anything like that. Just that now I do different.

When I started I paid attention to details. Every detail. Every bit of stray dirt in the yard. Every brick cut had to be perfect. I started noticing that my competition, both small, unknown companies like me, and large well-known companies seemed to have less attention to the minute details. So it seemed that I was in what my economics profs would have called diminishing returns. That is, for the extra X effort I was putting into a project, the return in perceived quality or customer satisfaction was going down per unit of X.

So I sought to strike a better balance between the two. At the same time, I looked to make efficient those things that were inefficient (like putting materials on a tarp).

Are we doing projects that are lesser in quality? I dunno. Our clients still seem to love us, and they are the ultimate arbiter.

[jwholden]

I am trying to cut down on my diminishing retrums as well. I have relaxed quite a bit on raking out lawns after seeing the c--p that other companies get away with in upscale neighborhoods where I thought quality was improtant. There are certain areas where I still refuse to cut corners, such as cleaning up the jobsite, planting trees and shrubs at the correct depth and facing the right direction, and for the love of god keep the jobsite organized (I hate wandering around looking for a tool or a plant that was placed in an inappropriate spot, yes it still happens).

[Stonehenge]

You should never cut corners regarding planting at the correct depth or facing the plant material - to me that's part of basic quality. But don't make 4 adjustments on the plant to make sure it's straight. Check in one direction, check 90 degrees from that direction, adjust and move on.

But think of this: what if every customer you had was presented with the option of having you regrade and reseed, or they could do it themselves to save money. Do you think they'd take you up on it?

Also, does my asking unveil the fact that you aren't charging for that kind of cleanup post-install? Make it a line item on your bid. Many will ask to remove it so they can do that themselves and save $$. I say 'Go right ahead.' Then I'm not messing around with the putsy stuff that takes forever and earns you nothing...

[agla]

Great subject.

Having worked for a wide variety of landscape companies, I think it really depends on a few variables.

The first is you and your goals. Are you shooting for growth? Can you manage lots of people? Do you truly know what high quality is? Those are going to limit you (generic you, not JWH) whether you want to be "high end" or not.

The second thing is whether your market is really going to support the kind of quality, precision, and craftsmanship that you want to put out. Are there enough sophisticated clients that are going to recognize the difference and are willing to pay for that difference? Is that niche full, empty, or does it have some room?

If you want to live in the "high end" niche, you can not do anything else because you are only as exclusive as your least exclusive job. No one perceives a company that does a beautiful job as a "high end" company if they see them sticking a commercial slam job somewhere. They are seen as a commecial company that did a good job rather than a high end company that did a commercial job. In other words, you need brand name recognition.
You have to have a solid pricing system with no negotiating price other than by reducing quantity or size. You must be perceived as needing the job less than they need you. You will only be competitive with other very exclusive companies. That is a tough row to hoe. It is my opinion from much observation and experience that to do this successfully is an all or nothing proposition. It is the only way to get paid for that extra effort.

I think that there is a much bigger market in the almost, but not quite high end. There are more clients, less precision, less skilled workers, and less time spent on the job. You can manage more without killing yourself. You will have to be more price competitive.

Thirdly, you are always limited by your ability to get, train, keep, and manage help. I think this is the most limiting factor to most landscaping companies. Managing help is partly nature and partly nurture. You can learn it a little, but if you do not have "it", you ain't gonna get it and you won't grow.

I have seen individuals that were completely inept at landscape skills run very successful companies because they could manage people. You can not simply hire people to manage your help because you have still got to manage them.

I always hear newer guys say that they are going to grow by hiring people to manage various parts. They think that all they have to do is get more work, throw an ad in the paper, fill positions, and it will take care of itself. I see hundreds (not exagerating) of 3-4 man companies that can not grow, no matter how much equipment they buy. They believe that if they only had (fill in the blank) they would make more money. All they do is cause more expense while billing out the same four guys by the fifty or so hours they work each week.

[diginahole]

Ya.... what Agla said and.... "It is always faster(read cheaper) to do it right the first time.

[Stonehenge]

Good subject, great post.

I've said this before, and I'm pretty sure I know what it means about us and what we do. I would have to say that we aspire to be the 'high end' agla speaks of. While we aspire to that, for now I'd have to say that we are in the 'close but not quite' category.

Living in that domain while aspiring to more, I think there is a learning curve or development curve to get to that point. (At least I hope there is, because if you have to start there, I've already screwed up.) I've been trying to build a body of work, and at the same time working with the local media (not in advertising, BTW) to develop our reputation or place in our market.

Aspiring to those bigger and better things (and I realize I may be derailing the original gist of the thread), I recognize that many times it's the attention to the details that provides part of the separation. For that I'm trying to instill in my men that very thought - the difference between the good companies and the great companies is how we do (fill in the blank with the current task).

I also realize that being a good leader is a requirement. I've heard it said that you have to work like you don't need the money. When I think back on the moments in time when I was a really good leader, one that people would follow through fire, they were when I was totally relaxed about the job, or could really care less. Those were the times when I took a genuine interest in developing people (which is something I dearly enjoy, when I have the time), over hard-driving to complete tasks.

I continue to remind myself to do those things, and it's the pressure of the day-to-day that has me forgetting them, slipping into the hard-driving mode to get things moving. One of these days I'll get there.

And I think Paul hit the nail on the head awhile ago - kinda. He said to build the company large, you just have to decide to do it (ala Tony Robbins). I think that's right on, but I might tweak it to say that you have to commit to it. Just like you commit to laying all that sod the day it gets delivered, no matter what, you commit to developing your people, managing your company, at any cost.

Ok, I'm getting a little long winded here - Agla must've hit a hot button or something...

[jwholden]

I would have to say that now that we have a third category, almost high end, that is where I am and will choose to reside. I see the high end companies that take service to the nth degree and see wasted motion. Though they are getting top dollar for what they do.

We have some high end nurseries around here, such as Twombly's (ever heard of them Agla, kind of like Weston Nurseries). These nurseries sell to the upper crust but have employee turnover like it is nobody's business and their jobs do not impress me, though they love to throw in some large caliper trees (5-10") because they can.

I will admit that when I started out I thought I was going to take over the world but quickly realized that employees are my greatest weakness. However, after some time at this and other sites and over ten years of experience my style of 'leadership' is changing.

I am trying to get away from the go go go style and into the work smart not hard style. I realize that a new guy has to be shown how to do everything right the first time and then complimented on how well he is doing it. I am not competing with my employees over who can dig a hole quicker, I know I will be back tomorrow to finish the job and they may call in sick because they are tired. I have had too many idiots decide not to show to have much faith that my crew will show tomorrow, and need to screen my potential employees better.

I enjoy working in upscale neighborhoods because these people have taught me that you do not have to micromanage to be successful. I am drawn to people who possess quiet confidence and the ability to guide rather than manage as much as I am repulsed by people who are outspoken and controlling.

Anyway, almost upscale is what I was trying to describe in my original post. When I referred to blowing out the work I am referring to any company that does over one million dollars of work a year. I do not think those guys have time for perfectionism...though I'm sure I touched a nerve somewhere with that statement.

[Stonehenge]

I would expect that you may hear from a few members on that last note....

And by that same token, I will say that I believe that to truly do a great job managing, you need to instill in your employees the same excitement and enthusiasm as you have for the job. Once you've done that, you can do the million dollars per year and still have perfection, because that's what all of your people want to do.

[Tim]

My 2 cents on this is to simply tell the workers to do the job like they are working for their family, but not like they are doing it for their grandmother! I want my work to be viewed as being above par, but not Mercedes meticulous. Fast, efficient, and neat! It really helps when the workers want to take pride in their work too. I think Agla stated and categorizes our haunts and options concerning the business alternatives well. Crappy work can be some what successfully marketed if it is accompanied with heavy advertising, and massive volumes at discounted rates. But is'nt it much easier to do less work, with better profit margins, and then benefit from word of mouth advertising instead? Tim

[Paul]

I will admit that when I started out I thought I was going to take over the world but quickly realized that employees are my greatest weakness. However, after some time at this and other sites and over ten years of experience my style of 'leadership' is changing.

The only reason for this is due to pay scale, if you where able to pay your people a higher pay rate you would attract a better class worker, but in order to do this you really need to raise your prices or find a way to increase production, start a second or third crew and what to manage not do the labor your self.

Our trade should be paid a livable wage, I would like to see all landscape labors making 35K and up a year. Take some time an figure out what your customers should be paying for the work we do...........

[jwholden]

Paul,

I started out in grounds maintenance and frankly had no clue what people were paying. My first job at a 'big' nursery was extremely dissappointing financially but I learned a ton. I think we all base part of out business model on where we worked before.

After beeing on my own for 10 years and finally taping into a decent labor pool I realize that paying people more will attract a better employee that comes to work because they want to. I am in the first year of doing 100% design and install work and already realize that prices must go up to keep the company profitable. I am also constantly trying to find ways to work efficiecntly and avoid repetitive motion. A company must be profitable first and formost and then all the other goodies follow - well paid employees with bennies, air conditioned trucks, second crews and beeing able to step (a little bit) away from the day to day part of it.

Thanks for the input,

John

[Paul]

Maybe I'm being a bit harsh, but look at the other trades that are working in your area...... Carpenters, plumber, heavy equipment operators, ....... see what I mean these guys are making 35K and over but , landscape labor averages about $15* per hr. If we payed them as an industry $20 to $25 per hr, they might be more willing to take charge. Now I'm talking from what I hear others are paying their employees, mine get paid union scale, they see the benefit of higher wages and bennies. That carries over to the job they do. Wouldn't it be nice if the industry paid like that? People would look up to us and our people, instead of looking down.

[agla]

If there are more jobs than employees then you can hang out all kinds of money and still not get a qualified person to apply for the job. I realize that most of the country is supposed to be in hard times as far as employment goes, but where I am there are those that can barely tie their shoes and then those that have their own business. Pay $15 or $25 or even $50 per hour and the clone of the guy you fired last week at $12 is going to show up and nobody else.

In this market those that are capable of running a crew are either self employed or they have moved on to a cleaner easier job that pays the same or better.

I'm sure that in other areas that will work fine, but not here. I have the feeling that it is not much different in Trumbull.

PS. Where are you located, Paul?

[jwholden]

To put things in persepective

In Trumbull a laborer gets from 10-14 and hour, a foreman would be 15-18, and a guy who can take the truck with a couple guys and do darn near whatever you want is close to 20 an hour.
As I think about where I am and talk to Mr. Stonehenge/Market Dominear (sp?) the foreman for 15-16 an hour sounds like it might be worth a try in the near future. I would love to promote form within but frankly my guy(s) have no ambition for greatness, just steady pay without the boss yelling at them all day.