I’ve been working more and more in the site selection space over the past 3 years. The methodologies are all consistent and are returning some interesting and unique opportunities for our clients which is always exciting. But as I dig in more and get deeper it’s amazing how the core analysis fundamentals were developed over 25 years ago and are still in use without significant change or modification. What worked then still works now. This includes the data elements used, the scoring and weighting, the cities that generally come out ahead, and even how the results are presented.
Yes, technology has advanced and made everything faster, sexier and more accurate. But deep down it’s all 25 years old or more.
This is a broad problem across real estate that can best be seen in the general state of web technologies in the sector – namely there aren’t many. In what other area of business are there billion dollar entities that interact daily with companies relying on Excel as the cutting edge tool of choice? What common web enabled applications are in use? Welcome to real estate.
Ultimately these two themes merge to indicate a tremendous opportunity for innovation and disruption. But it also implies a desire by clients to focus on the day-to-day activities and buying “experience”. As service providers – isn’t it to your advantage to start the disruption? To clients – don’t you feel like it’s time to start expecting more?
Hmmm… I’m not sure where you going with this. In my experience, “because it still works now” is a solid reason to stay the course. Clients want accurate solutions delivered with the pace of their existing process. The business tools at hand help us illustrate a variety of solutions–but they don’t replace our energy and creativity. In my book, “if the Microsoft Excel shoe fits, wear it”. Change tools, not for the sake of change, but when they work better, delivering more accurate results with less effort.
Selecting an appropriate solution is based on a client’s specific agreed upon methodology, goals and overall strategic fit. Pushing the bleeding edge of technology doesn’t change the NPV of a given solution or change the MCDA weighting in favor of one solution over another. Innovation and disruption should not come at the expense of resolving a client defined problem, on-time and on-budget.
The problem that I see is too many say: “I’ve always used Excel and it’s worked fine so why try anything else.” The thing that technology really enables is different – and in the case of location – more accurate or more detailed solutions than were possible before. It’s the mentality of never even trying something newer and over time being so stuck to the old way that you think anything new isn’t worth it no matter how great.
Staying the course is fine, but it also leaves you open to being leapfrogged. If someone figures out not just how to do it better – but that what you do is unnecessary given some new way of thinking then you’ve hurt yourself by not being open to change or evolving as you go. It’s the groundbreaking thinking that’s so important to keeping competition at bay.
Also, here when I talk about Excel it’s largely in reference to companies using it as a database. No matter how good your Excel file is, it’s woefully out of date and can’t possibly be reliably maintained no matter how diligent or proactive you are. Just can’t be done. Doesn’t need to be bleeding edge, but even technologies 10 years old, free and proven is a 10x improvement.