Things to Stop Doing – A Professional Outlier’s Perspective

Posted on by johnlwheaton1

I’ve mostly had the experience in my life of being a bit of an outlier. I didn’t understand it when I was younger, but I do now. It’s not something I contrive or try to make happen, it’s just part of who I am, how I think, and how I interact with the world. At this stage of my life, I am comfortable with it.

So, here’s my view on something we need to STOP Doing.

State boards of professional engineering and architecture need to stop mandating continuing education- professional development hours (PDH) for registered design professionals (PE’s, RA’s and similar.)

Am I against education? No, quite the contrary. The very nature of a “professional” and our work, the statutory compliance requirements, ethics, protection of health and public welfare, certification of documents, education, fundamentally require the constant growth and learning with or without PDH’s.

Being a “professional” implies that we are in a category of self-governance, self-learning, training, and needing to stay “sharp” regardless of mandates. The state rules already provide enough accountability to encourage technical competency.

And if a registrant isn’t committed to it, or the very nature of their work as PE, RA, or other type of licensure is just a title at this stage in their career, then that’s okay. We all still must practice only in our areas of specialty. And if we waver from that, we face the consequence of a potential reprimand, civil and even criminal penalties.

Mandatory Professional Development hours might look good on the surface, but it doesn’t define the value of a design professional and their capability. It doesn’t ensure more quality work.

Most of it in my view is just an extra burden. Find the courses, get the hours, check the boxes.

While I do it and seek to make it work to my advantage, to learn, and to find courses as closely aligned to my field and interest as possible, I wouldn’t do it if it was not required. I don’t need it. I get plenty of real and applicable PDH’s every week, month, year, through the nature of the work, literally.

Plus, apart from Industry-Specific seminars from various companies in the building enclosure and components space, try to find PDH’s on that relevant subject matter through the major online players. You won’t find much.

More compliance is just more burden, less value, less trust in allowing professionals to be who they have chosen to be.

This won’t make it stop, but I had to say it. I’ll bet others in this space may feel the same.

Add a comment…

What I’ve Been Up To – The Big Pivot

Posted on by johnlwheaton1

No one has heard from me through this blog in over one year. No posts; no updates. It’s not coincidental. It’s a simple case of energy management, focus, other priorities. Much of it has to do with the “big pivot” at our company Wheaton & Sprague Engineering, Inc., http://www.wheatonsprague.com. I know the term “pivot” is overused, but it’s an appropriate description for what we did starting in July 2023. We made a 180 degree turn on our business. This has been the focus since. I’ve learned a lot in life, and one of them is that I’d rather work to “build the thing” (or rebuild) and then talk about it, rather than talk along the way but not really be able to deliver. This is the “talk about it stage.”

Our business from 1994 to 2023 was primarily a specialty engineering company providing delegated design and engineering to the curtain wall and cladding world. We called this our Building Envelope Engineering Division (BEE). Much of this work was for tall buildings with standard or custom aluminum, metal, and glass cladding in major urban centers. It also included other similar work, and we worked with small, medium and large enterprise subcontractors and fabricators in various regions. We still do, but in different form. I’ll come back to that.

We also maintained a consulting group that was primarily comprised of one person for a few years, and then it grew to 2, 3, 4 and then back down, but it was more of a secondary focus for us. We call this our Building Envelope Consulting Division (BEC.) This work covers broad categories of various building types, forms and surfaces, in the major categories of design, construction, forensic investigation and litigation-claim support.

Along the way at times we tried different things like a Building Structures division that provided primary building structural engineering, and a Building Forensics division which merged all of the above and also a quick response team that could handle emergency failure issues. In 2008 the building structures group couldn’t compete on price with other firms doing only that work, and we shut it down. In the forensic work, we couldn’t really focus enough on that business in the required “horizontal niche” and we shut it down.

What had been the consistent, common thread throughout our history from 1994 forward was building envelope engineering work. This work was delivered primarily by providing structural engineering calculations, shop drawings, fabrications drawings, and thermal analysis (later.) We called this “full service engineering work.” Building Envelope Consulting came along in 2008 through a hire we made. This work got traction over time and remained viable but was a smaller percentage of our revenue.

The full service engineering work over the years provided work on large scale projects, big volume of backlog, often with thousands of person-hours involved. This is what we were know for primarily and where we invested most of our energy. Part of it was intention and part of it was just pure, repeat, sustainable work; energy feeding off of itself, like a hurricane gaining energy as it travels across warm ocean waters.

Over time, we increasingly started fighting various market dynamics. One dynamic was an increase in the number of companies providing similar services, mostly in drafting, but some also in engineering. Another was increased price pressure in the drafting services, which became more of a perceived and actual commodity. In addition, some clients self-perform their drafting work. They only go outside their business if they can’t handle the volume or if they can’t provide the competency on certain categories of work. What happens in this instance is we actually end up competing against our clients. They can typically provide the work at a lower cost recovery rate.

As time marched on, pricing pressure increased. The world got “flatter” and more folks came into the space. Then came 2020. Perhaps the reader may remember a thing called COVID-19, the world-wide pandemic. Everything changed in 2020 and the “rebound year” of 2021. Of course, there’s been strategic shifts and cultural changes since, that are still evolving. One of the big changes was “work from home,” or as it is now termed “remote work.” The demand for building occupancy dropped. The demand for occupancy in major urban centers dropped even more. People began working in all sorts of environments, much of it from home. Demand for virtual work and remote tools soared and was met. What was typically an employer’s market prior prior to 2021 became and employee’s market. Once this door opened, major shifts and movements took place with many leaving their jobs and moving to other companies. It seemed almost like an early western expansion land-grab with unprecedented changes. I mention employer and employee in the context of “business owner with equity” vs “non-owner receiving pay and benefits.” It’s not derogatory, it’s mean to make a point. What had always been the realm of the entrepreneur – owner (I can work from anywhere I want at any time if I choose) became just the opposite. The owner was now saddled in the often empty office, working to maintain course and manage the unprecedented dynamics, while staff members were working wherever they chose, and naming their terms. But that’s the topic for another blog.

Nevertheless, in spite of the above, our BEE business chugged along still providing full-service work at various scales. The work in the BEC business chugged along as well, slowly growing from 2, to 3, to 4.

But finally, inevitably, the dynamics mentioned above, and many, many more variables caught up to us and to themselves. The tail of the building market in our categories started to be visible in summer of 2022. Large design and drafting backlogs of full service BEE work slowly dwindled from September of that year forward, primarily led by lower demand, and increased price commoditization. Clients, also faced with declining demand and staff to maintain, had more and more options from which to choose how to procure their design and drawing needs. Major glazed towers in urban centers slowed to a crawl, if not a stop, except most of those that had been started and financed prior. Interest rates rose, commercial loans came due, leases started to expire, companies needed less space. After 29 years providing full service drafting, design and engineering work, we had essentially ZERO backlog in our drafting service line by June 30 of 2023, even though estimated work had stayed steady. Projects were “delayed” or “on indefinite hold” (whatever that really means.)

So, as it came to be, we made the decision to close our drafting service line and kept only our most experienced senior designer on staff to handle the small volume, system design, product development, and BEC support work. It was a tough decision; 29 years of a primary volume-based service with 8 – 16 people in drafting/design at any given time, now having to be dissolved. We spent the entire month of June and July communicating with hundreds of clients in this space, but to no avail. By the end of July 2023 it was shut down.

Professional engineering worked remained less disrupted since it is less of a commodity due to the smaller pool of registered professionals and somewhat more secure pricing paradigms. While volume dropped somewhat, professional engineering licensing will always be required (until it’s all replaced by AI and “rubber stampers” but that’s another blog as well.)

So our business in July of 2023 became half of it’s prior size in BEE. Thus, the pivot starting August 1, 2023. The pivot was to re-focus on building our BEC business as our primary focus, opening ourselves up to broad categories of building types, shapes and sizes, clad with every type of material on the planet. We maintained our BEE business in structural engineering, system design, product development, and thermal analysis service lines, still providing professional engineering work, and providing shop drawing work on small, boutique projects when requested or when the comps appeared to be viable. For all of the last year we’ve been focusing on building the processes, protocols, new client bases, market segments, all of the infrastructure necessary to support the BEC business, consulting engineering, as a B2B scalable business. We are still working in our “vertical” niche of building enclosure work, but in what we call “radical expansion within our niche.” We work with owners, architects, developers, owner’s reps, other consultants, construction managers, lawyers, insurance companies, manufacturers, suppliers, and more. We can provide services for almost any building type, new or existing, with almost any cladding type, and from sub-grade waterproofing to the roof. We have the people, and the diagnostic and testing equipment necessary to support the work. We have the compliance and statutory entities to perform in multiple states. We still provide BEE work, but in different form and lower volume for now. Our process and senior-level people will allow us to scale BEE quickly if and when demand increases. We also do much ‘cross functional work’ between divisions.

With all of the above came a new location, reducing from 12,300 square feet of office space to 3,920 square feet, still with room to spare for staff in office and staff remote. Yes, we too have a hybrid workforce. We can work from any location via remote workers connected to our home base. We can add satellite offices when it makes sense. I don’t see demand for newly built tall urban glazed aluminum facade work coming back any time soon. I see many other building types and categories still being designed and constructed but they have different looks, types, layouts, and are financed in different ways than prior. I see re-glazing projects, energy retrofits, re-purposed buildings with updated cladding systems. I see brick, metal studs, rain screen systems, foundation walls, roofing and elevated horizontal decks and surfaces. I see buildings in need of repair. I see nothing but opportunity ahead in working to solve bigger problems for owners, who have investments in buildings and properties. Buildings that are important assets to their owners and important places of protection to those working or being housed within the walls. But this is just the beginning. There’s so much more, and we place no limits on what the future may look like in the type of work we do.

The phrase “if you build it, they will come,” has been reverberating in my mind as I’ve been writing this and stewarding the process. That may be true in the Field of Dreams, but it’s not completely true in business. We can build it, and people won’t come if they don’t know about it. We need to tell people about it. We need create visibility and awareness. Creating, or supporting this, is what marketing is all about. In addition, we need to do business development, building relationships with people that make decisions, have needs to fulfill and problems to solve. We need to tell the story, to write about it, to let the world know that we’ve built it, and are continuing to build it. Then they will come. Once they do, excellence, care, solving their problems, will keep them coming, staying, working together.

So, welcome to the new Wheaton & Sprague Engineering, AKA Wheaton Sprague Building Envelope and affiliates. Welcome to our new, 30 year old business. We are all about buildings, building enclosures, buildings in all categories. The best is yet to come

With God all things are possible.

Professional Engineer License Procurement-“Rubber Stamp vs. Value”

Posted on by johnlwheaton1

For those in the construction markets, the built world, and related business, we’ve heard this statement before, “I just need a PE stamp on this project.” It’s such a revealing statement from the buyer.

Purchasing the services of a licensed professional engineer (PE) covers a broad range of value from lesser (“glorified rubber stamp”) to greater (“value added service.”)

The primary responsibility of the licensed engineering professional is to the public; to protect the health and welfare of any person that would use or come in contact with the constructed work. This is a given. The PE also must work to support at least the minimum necessary codified standards of the applicable building code for the project location. Within this context, the client can then receive “the PE stamp and signature” and whatever benefit from the engagement and collaboration as the purchaser of the services.

The “glorified rubber stamp service” is one that meets the minimum standard of being within code while not putting the health and welfare of the public at risk. That’s it. It likely doesn’t engage deeply with, or may not think much about, the client’s needs and value propositions for things like material optimization, cost-to-value ratio, labor savings, and more. It’s more of a “checked box” on the line item. Nothing gained, but maybe something lost. Not many questions asked. Just low cost. Just checked and stamped.

On the other hand, the “value added PE seal,” the one benefiting the client while accomplishing the necessary obligation of the PE, puts “substance” behind the stamp. It’s an expression of the professional’s work. That substance includes a level of thoughtfulness, collaboration, client engagement, interpretation, context, and more. It’s an investment, not just a cost.

To provide appropriate value for the client, the PE stamp on the work product should be saying, “This work product has been delivered in a thoughtful manner, and the expression of the service, relationship, and decisions involved to produce positive outcomes have been validated through this seal and signature.” There should be value received.

What “stamp” are you purchasing?

Engineering Services Providers – Selection Criteria

Posted on by johnlwheaton1

If the low cost professional engineering and consulting services will provide a client the same value as a higher priced cost provider, then by all means, select the low cost option. That’s the best choice. However, this is often not the case. In fact it is almost 100% not the case.

The difference in this category of selecting and purchasing professional services work is the element of interpretive, contextual decisions that impact schedule, materials, labor, and client experience, good or bad. The category of engineering services, the delivery of a professional service manifested in various documented deliverable work products (instruments of services) to a client in the built-world, is both a necessary line item expense and an investment. Why is it an investment? Because it is defining a cost for those subjective, contextual, and interpretive elements. These qualitative elements include categories such as communication, collaboration, client awareness. It also includes quantitative elements (though subject to interpretation) including codified knowledge, material optimization considerations, sequencing, shop and field labor, and more. It’s not a widget that is being purchased as a predefined “hard good.”

I think if clients in the manufacturing, supply, subcontracting, design, contracting, and related markets were made more aware of the differences and values delivered by those of us providing professional services, they could make more informed decisions on the potential cause-effect of their selection and purchase. We do clients a disservice to not explain the nuances between the choices. Conversely, I’ve had the conversations at length with some clients, and even when they acknowledged that they knew they would get a better service that translated into a better outcome, they still chose the low price. We also do our professional services category and peer businesses a disservice to not explain the differences and to compare as if all services are equal. They are not.

If the “low fee” provider will deliver the same scope and positive results, then a client should go with the low fee. If there is something of more value included in the higher fee, then it is up to the provider to define it to the client, make it contextually relevant, and to help facilitate them making the best choice for the specific project. The “right cost” is the cost that is “right in the groove,” no more and no less than it needs to be, for the appropriate results to be achieved. Every dollar spent should yield a return on the investment.

What’s your value proposition?

What I’ve been Up To

Posted on by johnlwheaton1

My business partner and I have been very busy for the last 9 to 12 months on quite a few fronts at www.wheatonsprague.com and affiliates, so here’s an update on some of what’s going on.

EOS

We’ve implemented a new operating system known as The Entrepreneurial Operating System (EOS.) It’s built on a Visionary – Integrator (V/I) relationship with a Leadership team. The “visionary” (Me-“CEO” for us) is the “big idea” person, big relationships, innovation, brand, growth. The “rainmaker.” The Integrator (President and COO for us, Richard Sprague) manages the business, P & L, oversees the leadership team. The “gatekeeper.” It’s built on LMA (lead, manage, account), clarity, Level 10 Leadership meetings, and evaluating placing people in positions under the acronym “GWC” (get it, want it, capacity for it.) There’s no hiding in EOS. It’s all visible, connected, and results driven. People report scorecard values that are developed by the leadership team to asess the health of the business, the department, the project, etc. Meetings are substantive and get traction. I’ve cut my internal business meeting time by 3x to about 6 hours per week.

What has it led to?

We defined as a leadership team our Core Purpose, Core Niche, Core Focus, Core Values. It was hard work, but very gratifying and unifying. The core values, collaboration, integrity, client-conscious, communication, capable, are not aspirational. They are real. They are “who we are” as people and as an organization. This clarifies hiring, staff retention, annual reviews, client types, and more. Our Core Purpose (our “why”) is to Enable Facades that Inspire. Our core niche is engineering, design, science, and consulting for building facades. We also defined our ideal client demographic and psychographic. All of this was done as a leadership team with an implementer. It’s not a “panacea.” The work has to be done. The topics dealt with have to be relevant to the need. But EOS provides a format for a path to sustainable, self managed, growing business not dependent on ownership alone or a charismatic leader playing “hero ball.” We’ve tried different forms or operating systems and EOS is our choice long term. Nothing else has made as much sense as EOS.

What about Creating Structure?

So, I have this registered service mark and brand named “Creating Structure” which is no longer part of our core purpose statement. We still own the brand name. My Podcast still bears the name, and will stay as such. Creating Structure dates back to the start of the company, when our primary purpose was viewed more as structural engineers and designers doing facades, building structures, forensics in a broader manner. But it was time for a change. The new core purpose “Enabling Facades that Inspire” will take us a long way on our journey. At heart, this is who we are- curtain wall, facade, enclosure, architectural component engineers, designers, consultants, scientists. BUT with owning the brand name Creating Structure it gives me and us options as we consider other forms and divisions of the business (stay tuned!)

Welcome New Staff

We’ve been rebuilding our engineering department and I couldn’t be more pleased than to have Mark Enos, PE (December 2021) and Nestor Perez, PE (February 2022) back at Wheaton Sprague. Both men are insightful, pragmatic, solution oriented engineers, that align with our core values, purpose, and niche. They are a great complement to Jeff Cook, PE as our core group of PE’s. Our foundation is strong, and with our other engineers, present, and future, we can build a deeply rooted group that can deliver solutions to clients.

Our Operators

Michael Kohler is our Director of Building Envelope Engineering Operations. Mike leads, manages, and accounts for our delegated design, drawing, BIM, engineering, system design, thermal analysis, area of the business delivering work products to glazing subcontractors, exterior wall subcontractors and architectural metal fabricators.

Paul Griese, is our Director or Building Envelope Consulting Operations. Paul leads, manages and accounts for all consulting activities which includes a variety of design, analysis, investigation, QA, QC, field and shop observations, testing and forensic support and more.

John Wheaton, yours truly, is the Director of Marketing. This position has always been a primary focus for me and will always be linked to the visionary and external role for me whether I do the marketing work directly or through a person, team or outside resource. I also still do a lot of engineering work, support, PE review and stamp, advisement, coaching, and participation in the engineering work. I get to also now communicate with everyone in the business more as “good cop” since I have no direct reports outside of the marketing function. When “in the business” I get to help, support, coach, lead, and interact with our people. The staff in our operating divisions work for the directors. Yes, as an owner of a small privately held business I can make any call I choose if I see a problem, but it is only done with and through my partner and the leadership team.

Richard Sprague, my business partner at WSE and affilates, is President and COO. Richard “runs the business.” All the operators in all the business report to Richard. He is a fine steward, a clear thinker, and a focused gate-keeper. He makes the decisions in the business on what gets done and what does not. Richard leads the EOS L10 meetings for the leadership team. In my work “in the business” I work for him

That’s all for now. Stay tuned for more of my focus and perspectives in market dynamics, trends, the Creating Structure Podcast, thoughts on results vs performance mindset, what I’m listening to, the power of LinkedIn and more

The Least Recognized Design Variable

Posted on by johnlwheaton1

As I stated in my last Blog, time constraints, those things such as schedule, ship date, move-in date, budget (which relates to time available to invest in the design) and other milestone deadlines are part of the design variable equation. What do I mean? I mean that the content, depth, elegance, or otherwise, of a design solution, is dictated by numerous boundary conditions, one of which is the required schedule, budget, and “done date.” However, in my experience, most often this is not viewed as such by the technical professional. “Hey, it takes whatever time it takes to get it done,” is often the attitude.

No. Not true. It takes the time we have allotted, the solution set, scope, and delivery we have sold to the client, and that they have purchased, to get it done. I dive a little deeper with some observations and comments below.

“Parkinson’s Law.” This is the adage that “work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.” This is so true. I have seen it over and over. I don’t think any design, service, or product would ever be completed if it weren’t for deadlines, whether externally or internally imposed.

Do you need a solution in an hour, a day, a week, a year? We can provide that. You may not like the one-hour solution, and patience will wane with the one-year solution. Any good technical professional can tell you something that will work, sketch a solution, or provide a recommendation in a short period of time. It will likely be heavy, bulky, conservative, not elegant, but it will be a solution. If the client has $500 to purchase engineering vs. $50,000, the design will be impacted. If they have a day vs. a week, the design will be impacted. We can’t provide the same level of value and design in both contexts.

If we let design expand into “the void” until we think we’ve perfected it, we will reach the asymptotic stage where the curve flattens out, running almost parallel to the horizontal axis forever, never reaching the desired outcome (whatever criteria we have established.) Remember, there’s no perfect design, no perfect work product, no perfect solution. There’s complete, correct, finished, polished, specified, scheduled, completion of the work product, service, solution. Get it to the defined, specified, standard of care, and ship it.

How about an example from the building industry. Do you want quick turnkey delivery of your building for occupancy? How about a tilt-up precast or pre-engineered metal building? Not an elegant enough design solution? Better modify your timing. Do you want hand chiseled split-face stone, marble floors, custom bronze doors, glass from Europe, stone from Italy? If that’s the more elegant design solution, then get out the calendar and push the move-in date out a couple years.

What about modern tools of technology? Can’t they “hack” the time variable and do more work in less time? Sure, in theory. Those tools can enable a more elegant design in a short period of time. What I’ve found over the years though is that the tools of technology are often misplaced in the mind of the technical professional in this way; they become the thing we are serving rather than them serving us. If you’re my age, you’ll remember when the prediction was that things would go so much quicker the more advanced the tools became. Unfortunately, many lose site of this and use the tools to dive deeper and deeper to a point of diminishing returns, rather than using the tools to advance the design solution more quickly. Step back. Assess. Regroup. Do this often. Plus, there’s this thing called complexity. Simplicity is undervalued. Systems fundamentally create more complexity. The more capable an IT platform, computer, software, the more complexity can increase. Sometimes we need to step back, sketch and idea, assess “1st principles” and re-state the scope and deadline.

Schedule, time to perform, ship-dates, timing, all are part of the considerations in design. Schedule is a design variable. I recommend this be kept in mind when deep in the midst of “the work” and the scope and end goal is getting murky. Keep the end in mind.

Engineering and Value

Posted on by johnlwheaton1

I learned a long time ago that engineering is a means to an end. The process and expression of engineering should deliver value to the client, and the end user, to create safe, serviceable, components, parts, and systems, and in many forms. Engineering is part art, part science. It becomes a way of thinking as we do the work. My familiarity is with building systems and components, building science, structural and systems engineering for buildings, and most specifically for specialty systems know as curtain walls. These systems also are described as cladding, facade, architectural components, and building envelope. I am going to break down some items and factors that I’ve found to be important in executing engineering work in the proper context. It applies to the broad categories of engineering as well as the specialties I’ve noted. Value-based engineering has these types of mindsets and expressions:

Connected: It’s connected with client. It begins with the end in mind. Work backwards from the clients goals and desires, whether labor savings, redundancy, risk mitigation, manufacturing efficiency, optimization, or all of them.

Collaborative: Create a context where we are working in a shared reality with the client. Break down barriers, seek collaborative solutions. A shared reality puts us figuratively in “the same boat” or in “each other’s shoes.”

Competent: The fundamentals have been mastered so that the principles and practices can be utilized in an increasingly elegant manner, and with confidence in the accuracy of the solutions

Codified: One must be aware of the minimum requirements as outlined in building codes, standards, or applicable governing authorities.

Communicative: Keep an ongoing dialogue with the client. Let them know what is being done, inform them of our progress. Use email, instant messaging, phone calls, virtual meetings. Clients appreciate concise, informative, ongoing feedback to support collaboration. Engineers typically struggle with the idea of need to communicate regularly and just the reality of being communicative. Communication is the differentiator.

Concise: Solutions should be understandable, able to be interpreted, and as straightforward as possible to implement.

Clear: Solutions, drawings, reports, sketches, narration, should be clear and logical, simple to understand.

There’s more to this conversation and additional categories to discuss, which I will do in future blog posts. Stay tuned, and thanks for reading.

Work Backwards

Posted on by johnlwheaton1

Clients engage design professionals for the RA or PE stamp, the expertise, the capability, or the capacity. But the value does not reside in the statutory compliance and capability. I’ve met plenty of practitioners that couldn’t engineer client-centered solutions. The reason? Well, there’s a lot of them, but I say it’s mainly from not thinking like the client; not “working backwards” from the necessary or desired solutions. The engineering supports the solution for the client, not the reverse. The engineering has to be satisfied but we have to “think backwards” from the envisioned end result to the start of the design and engineering process.

Think like clients. Think like a builder or a constructor who happens to be an engineer or architect. Get inside the mind of the builder, the glazier, the installer, the fabricator. Get into the “voice of the customer.” Listen. Respect their role. Work to solutions that are simple, sequenced, practical.

We exist for the client; their problem is our opportunity. Their complexity is our unique selling proposition. Every client and every project is unique.

Work backwards to help achieve value.

Start with Zero

Posted on by johnlwheaton1

When my partner and I created the business, we started on day one with zero; zero dollars, two computers, some software, two clients and two projects; one project for him and one for me. We had zero revenue but we had purchase orders. That’s what we worked with. We built systems, tools, applications, and engineered work products that brought value to clients.

Fast forward to now; 25 years later. I’m getting back to this approach; to recommitting to creating new things, new services, practices, and applications, from zero. I mean, being an entrepreneur and business builder, that’s how I started; I took an idea, made it a reality, and built something that never existed prior. That’s what happens in all new businesses in some way; something comes from nothing; from simply an idea.

So we start with zero. We start with our time, our tools, and our existing infrastructure, which is way deeper than it was 25 years ago, and we build. If you want money, you’re going to have to really give me a good reason. How about selling the service and idea to the client first and coming to me with a purchase order? That’s the ultimate litmus test; the ultimate positive ROI.

Starting with zero doesn’t mean we don’t need money. It doesn’t mean we don’t get funding at some point if there’s good reason. But it does provide better accountability around creating new things and it puts everyone in the organization on a level field.

Start with zero and validate from that point forward.

New stuff

Posted on by johnlwheaton1

This morning I got an email informing me that I received my Texas Professional engineering license (PE.) It’s one of 9 or 10 states that I never really pursued or needed. Previously at our company we had another TX PE, but he moved on to another firm a few months ago. I decided it would be best to maintain it myself, and get another staff member registered as well.

The timing was great. We have a Texas client now with 3 new projects. It’s interesting to me how when we pursue certain activities, as a company and as a person, when we take action, expend energy, invest, and build, that stuff happens; stuff we expect and stuff we don’t. Activity produces more activity. It’s action-reaction. And there’s collateral benefit that happens as well. People talk, things happen, lives are touched and results are produced.

It’s good to act, to invest, and to see the results. How’s that going for you? Do something new today and await the results.