PSB&J says report on Zumwalt’s departure “inaccurate”

February 3rd, 2010

Florida Trend reports today:

A spokesperson for PBSJ Corp. has responded to a story that was included among the links in Tuesday’s Daily Pulse summary of Florida business news. C.L. Conroy, president of the Conroy Martinez Group, says the story, reported by Dan Christensen in the Broward Bulldog, an online site, inaccurately reflected the circumstances of CEO John Zumwalt’s resignation. Conroy says Zumwalt’s decision to resign was part of a succession plan established a year ago, and not the result of pressure from “a group of unhappy employee-shareholders,” as Christensen reported based on an anonymous source. “Zumwalt’s transition will happen when the company, which has an executive search under way, identifies an appropriate replacement, with the target date being no later than the end of the company’s fiscal year, Sept. 30, 2010. The timing of the announcement is a result of the company’s pending annual shareholders meeting next week. John is currently on the company’s proxy as a candidate for the board of directors, for which he continues to serve as chairman,” Conroy says. “To say Mr. Zumwalt is leaving ‘amid scandals’ is solely the opinion of the writer and not at all a fact,” says Conroy. “The PBSJ Corporation is self -investigating an overseas matter involving its international operations. The executive team has already been cleared of any involvement by the investigation, as reported in the company’s recent 10K filing with the SEC.”

PBS&J’s Zumwalt Stepping Down

February 2nd, 2010

According to Florida Trend, John Zumwalt of PBS&J is stepping down.

The boss of one of Florida’s biggest government contractors has announced he’s stepping down. The news comes weeks after embarrassing disclosures about his personal involvement in a corporate pay to play scandal, and disclosures about possible corrupt payoffs overseas by company officials. “After a decade of my executive leadership through the best of times and through difficult times it is now time to plan an orderly transition to a new CEO,” said PBS&J chief executive John Zumwalt. Zumwalt will continue as chairman of PBS&J’s board of directors. A company source told Broward Bulldog that Zumwalt was forced out by a group of unhappy employee-shareholders. PBS&J spokeswoman Kathe Riley Jackson denied it.

Highway Trust Fund reauthorization in limbo

January 5th, 2010

On December 19, President Obama signed a third extension of the Highway Trust Fund legislation that would otherwise have expired on September 30, 2009. The latest extension is through February 2010.

This is the same exercise the legislative and executive branches go through every time federal surface transportation funding comes up for reauthorization. That we’re used to it now doesn’t make it any less painful or troublesome to the industry.

In my recent report, PSMJ’s 2010 AEC Firm U.S. Market Sector Forecast, I noted in the chapter entitled “10 Issues Likely to Affect Your Firm in 2010” that the reauthorization issue was also on the list in the 2009 edition, adding, “[Let’s] hope it doesn’t make the list next year as well.”

Here is an excerpt from that section of the PSMJ Forecast:

[Last fall,] Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minnesota) attempted to pass a $500 billion, six-year transportation plan that was eventually set aside amid the health care and climate change debates.

[Immediate Past President of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)] Wayne Klotz says the reauthorization issue is critical for firms across the industry, even those not in transportation, as its effects reverberate throughout the AEC professions.

“If they let the legislation expire and pass a continuing resolution, as they did at the end of the last bill, people will lose their jobs all around the country,” says Klotz. “It happened last time. That’s why we’re making such a strong push to get this done.”

A lack of authorizing legislation could handcuff departments of transportation, forcing them to delay work on large, long-term projects. “Under our own state laws, DOTs can’t commit to a project unless they can show a revenue stream to fund it,” Klotz says.

The length of the delay will make a big difference in its impact on the industry, Klotz adds. “If they negotiate and can come up with something in March or April, that’s one thing,” he says. “But if it gets tied up in mid-term elections and shoved out until 2011, that’s a horse of a different color.”

Which is it going to be? Klotz says he has no idea. But, he says, the industry can’t even maintain the current, insufficient level of activity without a transportation funding mechanism in place.

Predictably, other AEC industry organizations are lining up to support passage of the new legislation. In a position paper, the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) (Washington, DC) says, “While ACEC supported the investments for transportation in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, that funding has largely been directed to simple resurfacing projects, and much more needs to be done to address the serious backlog of more significant improvement projects.”

ACEC says that a new surface transportation bill, with dramatically increased multi-year funding guarantees, is necessary to allow states to invest in major design and construction projects.

The group cites a National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study that says a minimum $225 billion in annual investment from all sources (including federal, state and local) for the next 50 years is necessary to upgrade existing systems to a state of good repair and create a more advanced surface transportation system. “The U.S. currently invests $85 billion annually from all levels of government, less than 40 percent of what is necessary,” ACEC says.

Oberstar’s bill would be a step in the right direction, but it won’t be an easy fight. For the transportation industry’s sake, we hope it won’t be a long one either.

PSMJ’s 2010 AEC Firm US Market Forecast — One Month Later

December 12th, 2009

Have you ever noticed how most market researchers never publicly review the accuracy of their predictions? They just put the material out there for people to consume, then do it all over again the next month, year, or decade, as if they were doing it for the first time.

It’s a defense mechanism. In market research, you put yourself out on a limb…and hope nothing comes along to snap it while you’re out there.

If the product of the market research is a for-sale book, it is usually left up to the buyer to determine whether the researcher’s conclusions were worth the money spent…and potentially spent again on the next version of the same product. If the research is a focused internal project, however, you can bet that some person or persons (i.e., managers) will “grade” the findings.

If you’ve ever done a large research project, you may relate to this. You may know the feeling of figuratively holding your breath in the weeks after your research is done and the product is submitted. The last thing you want is for something you’ve projected, predicted, or recommended to be proven false by a change of events, shocking revelation or other disaster. Especially within a few days or weeks of making your bold proclamations to the world (or your boss).

It is almost as bad to omit some area of critical importance that you could have — and should have — included.

When I read recently about the Dubai debt crisis, the first thing I did was rush back to PSMJ’s 2010 AEC Firm U.S. Market Forecast – the book I wrote and PSMJ published last month — to see what I had said about Dubai. I remembered the matter of heavy debt in Dubai coming up as I researched for a brief overview section on the state of the international markets, but I didn’t recall exactly what I’d chosen to include.

This is what we published in the report:

Reports on Dubai are mixed.

Emirates Business reports, “Dubai business leaders are bullish about the fourth quarter and about 61 percent of them expect improvement, according to a monthly survey conducted by Dubai Chamber of Commerce and Industry. Even as liquidity continues to remain a challenge, several ‘signs of recovery are being noticed’ after the slow business activity registered during the month of Ramadan as well as the summer holidays.”

However, engineering and construction consulting firm Mouchel (Surrey, UK), finished the year ended July 31, 2009, $23.5 million in the red. Much of that figure came from taking a hit on bad debts in Dubai.

“We have been adversely impacted by the deteriorating economic environment in the region. Currently, there is minimal demand for infrastructure development, particularly in Dubai,” said a company statement.

Phew! Imagine if I’d chosen to omit the part about Mouchel. The entire message on Dubai would be different.

No, I didn’t exactly fire a warning shot that the debt situation in Dubai was about to collapse. But I covered that base and can certainly stand behind what I wrote. As of mid December 2009, Dubai World, the government-owned investment company responsible for much of Dubai’s rapid growth, is weighted down by about $60 billion in debt it can’t repay. This financial crisis has temporarily crippled the construction market in Dubai, and talk of a fourth-quarter rebound is clearly out of the question. Yet, some areas of Dubai’s economy remain strong and its long-term chances for pulling out of the tailspin are good.

Another recent news item caught my attention and sent me sprinting to the Forecast. Several sources reported that commercial loan defaults have surged in 2009 and may continue to grow in 2010 and even into 2011. This news didn’t resonate worldwide the way the Dubai debt crisis did, but it is a matter of greater concern to the U.S. commercial construction industry.

In the Forecast, I wrote:

With business conditions as they are, credit continuing to be tight, and commercial property values depressed, it forms the potential scenario for a rise in defaults on commercial mortgages.

Bloomberg News reported on August 31, 2009, that “the default rate on commercial mortgages held by U.S. banks more than doubled in the second quarter from a year earlier amid falling rents and occupancies for malls, office buildings and warehouses.”

Some fear that a rise in commercial mortgage defaults could set off a crash similar to the one that occurred on the residential side.

We hit this theme throughout the book, sufficiently (in my opinion) sounding the alarm on this issue.

In fairness, this concern is expressed by just about everyone monitoring and reporting on the U.S. construction market. However, in this case, as well as the case with Dubai’s debt, I’m comfortable with what I presented in the report.

I’m writing this blog entry not for horn-tooting or back-patting reasons – it’s not as if the Forecast predicted some catastrophe akin to the housing crisis or bank meltdown (or that the Steelers would lose five straight games!). The point is to give you an inside look at the process and output of the Forecast we published last month, as well as into the mind of the author. And, for those who bought the book, to provide an update of its contents.

It is also a good exercise for me as it will improve the process and the product for future forecasts I might do.

I’ll review the book’s findings occasionally in this space over the next few weeks and months, even offering a mea culpa, as necessary. In the meantime, I’ll be out here on this limb, holding my breath.

Available now! PSMJ’s 2010 AEC Firm U.S. Market Sector Forecast

November 13th, 2009

For the second consecutive year, PSMJ asked me to write a forecast book for the AEC Industry. PSMJ’s 2010 AEC Firm U.S. Market Sector Forecast offers AEC firms a look at trends, key issues and expectations for what is likely to be an evolutionary, if not revolutionary, year for the industry.

The book is available now, in time for AEC firms to plan for 2010.

Chapters include “Ten Issues Likely to Affect Your Firm in 2010,” U.S. and world markets overviews and sector-by-sector forecasts for AEC firms in 2010. It also provides a prediction of the best and worst markets for 2010, as well as recommended success strategies.

Here’s the introduction:

In the late summer and early fall of 2008, as the AEC industry looked hopefully ahead for signs that the recession would be short and mild, the U.S. economy took a series of body blows that sparked talk of a modern-day Great Depression. Bank failures, rampant inflation, unstable pricing and the ever-worsening housing slump had the nation and the world reeling.

These dire predictions, it seems, were overblown. By the third quarter of 2009, the economy had halted its freefall and emerged from the recession, prices had stabilized and even single-family housing showed sparks of a recovery.

Despite the recent positive signals, 2009 has been a challenging year, both for the economy as a whole and for many firms in our industry. Unemployment continued to rise, eventually clicking over the 10 percent mark in November, even as the economy jolted back to life. In 2009, we witnessed massive layoffs and hiring freezes, canceled and delayed contracts, withering numbers of opportunities against greater levels of competition, price wars and firms selling out or closing.

Yet, amid these hard times, some AEC firms thrived. With all that’s stacked against them, how could these companies enjoy fast-rising revenue, better-than-average profit, stout backlog, and record growth? What did they do right that many other firms did not?

There is no single answer. Some success stories are from firms positioned in a favorable niche – health care or the federal government, for example. Other winning firms are diversified enough to withstand the downturn in a few market sectors, or they have such rock-solid client relationships that the little work being done is still going to their shop. For some, success is simply a matter of operating at a level of efficiency that allows them to weather even the worst of storms. More than likely, it is a combination of the above.

This brings us to 2010, a year that most economists and experts view as one of slow transition back to a robust economy and a healthy industry. Some pain will continue, they tell us, particularly in non-residential construction sectors such as office and hospitality. In its 6th Annual Construction Web Event, market research firm IHS Global Insight said the nonresidential construction market will drop 25 percent in 2010. Other markets won’t suffer as badly, they say, but the boom times are still somewhere off in the distance.

Knowing where the experts see the markets heading is valuable information, even if much of it is conjecture. Firms with insight into the direction their primary markets are going – up, down, or sideways – can better hone their planning process as they allocate marketing and production resources for the coming year. This knowledge, and the actions it inspires, can be the difference between being a casualty or a winner in 2010.

What this information should not do, however, is send firms scurrying after the latest hot market while they abandon sectors that have cooled. As firms succeeding in the downturn have proven, it is best to capitalize on current conditions – whatever they may be – by leveraging and improving upon your strengths as a professional services provider.

Also, while this book focuses almost exclusively on 2010, it is important to keep long-term trends in mind. Predictions that health care and K-12 will be off their games in 2010 may prove correct, but demographics and other drivers indicate that both are good long-term bets.

At the same time, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) stimulus package may be propping up some market sectors. When it goes away, markets benefiting greatly from ARRA could dry up unless a new source of revenue has filled in to replace it.

ARRA is a recurring theme in this book. Though it didn’t live up to initial expectations, ARRA still played a major role in revitalizing the economy and the AEC industry. Expect more of the same through most of 2010, just to a diminishing extent with each passing quarter.

Finally, this is not a book by economists, but by researchers. It is the product of conclusions drawn from interviews with industry practitioners and experts, vast amounts of secondary research on the industry and its markets, and the projections of the industry’s most respected economists.

We hope you enjoy this publication and, with its help, you have a successful 2010.
— Jerry Guerra
November 6, 2009

New Post Testing – Twitter & LinkedIn

November 3rd, 2009

Testing to see if this post appears on both Twitter & LinkedIn.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nunc ac lobortis nunc. Integer tincidunt magna rutrum lacus gravida viverra. Mauris tortor augue, accumsan vel dictum ac, fringilla eu metus. Sed quam ipsum, malesuada a feugiat quis, tincidunt at neque. Donec at nisl mauris, faucibus feugiat risus. Phasellus porttitor posuere tortor, id ultricies elit feugiat at. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Donec ullamcorper sollicitudin odio sit amet tincidunt. Cras metus nulla, suscipit et venenatis ac, egestas in neque. Cras ut laoreet justo. Proin adipiscing ultricies mauris at faucibus. Vestibulum suscipit, nibh eu venenatis hendrerit, diam arcu lacinia metus, in congue nibh lectus vitae sem. Ut tempus consectetur ligula, sed tincidunt erat dictum et. Nulla a nibh vitae neque scelerisque pellentesque et adipiscing velit. Nullam erat nulla, aliquam euismod vulputate id, dictum nec mauris. Vestibulum viverra lobortis mattis.

Duis eleifend lectus at nunc iaculis lobortis. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Nam metus urna, semper id euismod at, laoreet sit amet risus. Nulla congue, velit eget scelerisque vestibulum, arcu neque dapibus justo, a euismod nisi ipsum vitae urna. Curabitur sagittis molestie purus, vel euismod metus semper sit amet. Nullam eget dui nec velit cursus suscipit. Ut a justo fringilla neque aliquam vulputate vel non turpis. Ut a odio nec lorem elementum viverra a non dolor. Ut bibendum turpis in nunc commodo semper sollicitudin massa tincidunt. Proin porttitor orci a nisl tincidunt eget semper felis accumsan. Nulla dignissim consequat mi, eu pretium dolor dapibus ac. Curabitur et metus felis, sit amet malesuada nunc.

Merrick & Company profiled on AEBL.org

September 28th, 2009

Merrick & Company is a 500-person full-service engineering, architecture, design-build, surveying, and geospatial solutions firm. Approaching its 55th year in business, the firm is a consistent presence among Engineering News-Record’s 500 Top Design Firms (147th in 2009). In fiscal year 2009 (ending March 31, 2009), its net revenue topped $100 million, reflecting a 20% year-over-year growth.

In an economic climate in which A/E firms are cutting staff and losing market share, Merrick has added nearly 150 people in the past 18 months with 25 more positions currently advertised. In sharing his thoughts about the company’s success and his 30-year affiliation with AEBL, Merrick Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer David Sprenkle says, “We refuse to participate in the recession.”

For more about this member of the Association of A/E Business Leaders, go to www.aebl.org.

“Selection Success!” should have a spot in your AEC firm library

September 8th, 2009

“Selection Success!” by Lori Stanley and Hilari Weinstein, is a thorough primer on the science and art of winning a qualifications-based selection (QBS) process. As with many of the “how-to” books you’ll find in our industry, the book offers its highest value to the novice, walking the reader through the fundamentals of submitting a statement of qualifications (SOQ), preparing and delivering a presentation, and shining in the interview. Yet, it also provides sparks of ideas and inspiration for even AEC firm veterans.

The authors, as expected, are industry veterans themselves. Stanley spent nearly two decades in the contracts administration section for the City of Phoenix prior to beginning her own consulting company, Selection Solutions Consulting. Weinstein, the principal of High Impact Consulting, is a speaking and presentation coach who writes for Southwest Construction magazine and serves on the American Council of Engineering Companies’ Leadership in Engineering Administration Program.

Writing in “Selection Success!” is crisp, clean and to the point. The authors also provide a useful notes section at the end of each chapter.

The book delivers solid advice on the go/no-go process…in particular, discouraging firms from submitting when they aren’t qualified to do so. It also offers excellent recommendations on how to develop a winning SOQ. A highlight in this section is the suggestion to use matrices to illustrate qualifications, both project and personnel, in the SOQ text.

A few things that may have added to the value in these areas — a more in-depth look at how different industry firms arrive at go/no-go decisions and a discussion of the distinction between requests for qualifications and requests for proposals.

The chapters on visual aids, rehearsing and presentation delivery are the sweet spot of “Selection Success!” In these three chapters, the authors’ true expertise comes out. Stanley and Weinstein impart concrete tips, in rapid fire, that range from the simple things we know but often forget to time-tested secrets of the speaking/presenting trade (e.g., control the audience’s gaze, keep an open stance).

I also like the way the book spends considerable time discussing the need to rehearse for presentations, debunking the usual excuses that team members consistently employ — excuses many of us have used.

A personal presentation pet peeve that isn’t addressed head-on in “Selection Success!” is the tendency of firms to rely on technological tools over strong content in presentations. I’m reminded of a recent municipal project in which the owner brought in all six applicants to present. The winning firm was the only one that didn’t use PowerPoint slides.

But that is nitpicking. “Selection Success!” should be in the libraries of most AEC firms, bottom line. You can find it on amazon.com and barnesandnoble.com. Published by Mill City Press, it is also available at www.selectionsuccess.com and lists for $44.95.

AEBL Summer Symposium Offers Leadership Tips, Great Value, Beautiful Locale

July 21st, 2009

The Association of A/E Business Leaders (AEBL) is offering a deal for AEC industry managers that sounds almost too good to be true. The group’s two-day 2009 Summer Leadership Symposium features a quintet of heavy hitters in the leadership coaching arena at the picturesque Inn on the Lake in Canandaigua, N.Y., with a member registration fee of just $375 ($425 for non-AEBL-members).

The symposium takes place August 24-25.

The faculty features John Zumwalt, the CEO of ENR Top 30 firm PBS&J; John Engels, president of Leadership Coaching, Inc.; Sherri McCardle and Jim Ramerman, co-authors of “Why Dogs Wag Their Tails”; and Michael Lillibridge, a nationally renowned psychologist. (Program summary below.)

AEBL Board Member Wayne Wegman, P.E., president of Passero Associates, says, “The quality faculty and low cost are what set this event apart. These are leadership consultants that work all over the world, making as much as $400 or $500 an hour, and our attendees will get a half-day from each, over the course of two days, as well as dinner at a very good restaurant and a cocktail hour, for $375. The value is outstanding.”

The venue is impressive as well. The Inn on the Lake is a full-service resort in the heart of the Finger Lakes. The discount rate for conference attendees is $169 per room, per night (plus tax).

Wegman adds, “It’s also going to be a great place to network. On Monday evening, the 24th, we’ll have the session leaders and all the conference attendees meet to network, ask questions and learn more about their best practices.”

Another plus for attendees is that AEBL is intentionally keeping the event relatively small, with only a limited number of spaces available. The goal is to ensure that all attendees get sufficient attention and opportunity to network, learn and ask questions.

For more information, go to the Summer Symposium page on the AEBL Web Site.

The sessions:

Running a successful business in tough economic times
Sherri McCardle and Jim Ramerman – Co-Authors of “Why Dogs Wag Their Tails”

Developing Leaders
John Engels – President of Leadership Coaching

Leaderships
John B. Zumwalt, III, PE – CEO of PBS&J Corporation

People Map Training
E. Michael Lillibridge, Ph.D., Nationally recognized Psychologist

Lunch and cocktail reception/dinner included on Monday – breakfast/lunch included Tuesday

What To Do With Client Survey Results

July 11th, 2009

Following up on the July 8 blog, “More on Client Surveys,” here is a recent e-mail exchange I had with an AEC-firm marketing professional:

LaTonya Whitaker of consulting engineering firm Hankins and Anderson wrote: “I was recently reading your blog post, ‘Do You Really Know What Your Clients Think of You’ and was wondering what your thoughts were on what to do with the actual survey data. How do you formulate the appropriate messages to your clients based on their responses?”

Here was my reply (omitting the introductory niceties, thank yous, etc., but adding an additional thought in brackets):

In most of the surveys I’ve done for AEC firm clients, there are two levels of external response. The first is to provide a general overview of the survey results to everyone who participated. This response is usually a one- to four-page summary of the results, very basic and highlighting the key points. Sometimes we will send this to everyone the client targeted for the survey, not just those who participated, to maximize the marketing benefit. (And sometimes, it’s a two-page summary to participants and one-page overview letter to everyone else…you get the idea.)

You want to be honest in these summaries, addressing the good and not-so-good results, but you want to do it with as positive a spin as possible. For example, if the results for “communications,” were not as impressive as you’d like, note this in the summary, but also mention that the firm recently established a new response policy to ensure improved communications. Obviously, if you hear something seriously negative about the firm or someone in it, you don’t want to explicitly share that in this overview summary.

Depending on the results, we may also do a press release, newsletter article or magazine article pitch. This data is often great for repackaging in your marketing program.

The second level of response addresses specific issues identified by specific clients. If one of the respondents (assuming it’s an open survey, not a blinded one) said that the project manager on their last job did not keep them adequately apprised of the job’s progress, the PIC or firm president should contact that client directly, apologize/get more information, and tell the client what steps the firm is taking to correct the issue.

You’ll also want to address the results internally, usually with one or two meetings. This can be company-wide, principals-only, or (preferably) both. We always include recommendations in our surveys. This would be the venue to discuss those recommendations and implement the ones that make sense. There’s nothing more frustrating for us than to find out that the survey work we did was set aside and never addressed.

[I recall a survey we did several years ago for an engineering firm, during which some of our client's clients said they loved the work that this firm did, but were dissatisfied with their landscape architecture providers. This inspired our client to buy a landscape architecture firm they knew and liked, which allowed them to capture an entirely new revenue stream with many of their existing, satisfied clients.]

Your question is a good one and it speaks to why client surveys are such a valuable tool (especially when they’re done correctly). It offers several opportunities to make contact with clients and prospects, while helping the firm improve external and internal operations.

The bottom line is, do something with the results and use common sense in how you disseminate the information.

Have any readers had different experiences or do you have additional advice?