Self accreditation

Some of you will be aware that there has been an awful lot of coverage (mainly by Hort Week) about business accreditation and membership to landscaping associations. A recent article quoted BALI CEO, Sandra Loton-Jones as saying that landscapers who are not VAT registered devalues the landscaping industry. BALI have tried to put right the damage this comment has caused by writing to me to say that the comment was one taken in isolation in a longer interview and was inaccurate in the context it was written. Indeed, the HW journalist tried to soften the impact as well and said, "BALI no doubt meant in the reference to companies that are not VAT registered that many customers would not like to work with a contractor that is non-VAT registered when they should be - the sort of companies that could be described as rogue traders." Today Hort Week have published another article that is advising the general public to only use landscapers that are accredited by either the APL or BALI. I am forming the view that HW deliberately trying to stir up debate by mixing two issues. There are unscrupulous people who seek to sell services that they clearly do not have the skills, equipment and experience in. There are also some who take money and never intended to carry out the work. There are also thousands of small businesses and one-man-band operations who are being tarnished with this same brush and no attempt is being made by HW to put any daylight between the two categories - it's irresponsible and pretty dangerous too, especially as some of these people are consumers of the HW publication. In today's article - Public advised on landscape accreditation as rogue-trader complaints soar to 4,000 - HW quote Essex-based landscaper Paul Downer as saying, "If you wanted a plumber you'd look for Corgi-registered; for landscapers you should look for BALI or APL [Association of Professional Landscapers] registration and for driveways, Marshalls approved. The contractor will be vetted and fit for purpose." Once again there is the implication that non-members of these organisations are not fit to carry out landscaping or gardening work. The Landscape Juice doctrine is to be honest and transparent when selling yourself and your business skills. The best way that any individual or small business can convince a potential client that they are the right one for the job is to show the client examples of work already completed and not talk themselves up to something they are not. Adopt your own voluntary customer charter There are a number of ways that you can assure potential clients that you are honourable and honest - one of these methods is to adopt the Landscape Juice Voluntary Customer Charter. It's a simple document but delivers a powerful message - that you will do exactly what you say you will, when you say it, at the price you promised and with a quality that you have already demonstrated you can achieve. What is more, you will agree to an independent inspection should circumstances dictate. I would encourage everyone to adopt this scheme and create a page on your own website with a clear link so that clients who visit your site can get a real feeling of intent. Make sure that you send a copy of this document with every quote or eestimate. If anyone needs help on how to upload then give me a shout.

Hort Week are shooting themselves in the foot here. The industry needs such a magazine and if some of the editorial staff continue in this vein they will be alienating themselves from the vast core of the industry. BALI are failing to temper their case and making themselves more and more inclusive in the view that this is the right way to go whilst actually they again are also alienating themselves from massive sectors of people within and outwith the industry. They are also treading on thin ice legally - there are many many people in the industry with the highest qualifications and experience and ongoing contracts who for various reasons have not turned to accreditation, to even hint that because of this they are 'rogue traders' is a sure fire way of turning these people into the view that BALI are an enemy not a possible source of help. The small but loud section in BALI advocating such wording are doing real damage to their organisation as a whole, which needs to be there particularly for the commercial sector etc.,

They are not the only organisation which has suffered tremendously by way of poor PR management. As the PR sector of an organisation becomes stronger they tend to skip along in the false believe that this is strengthening the organisation as well, more and more PR always leads to hasty decisions to publish something that should never have left the room in which it was uttered. We only have to look at modern UK politics to understand the effect this has on the people it is trying to convince.

The APL on the other hand are being much more refrained and this is very much to their credit. As Robert Dulson comments illustrate they seem to be doing considerable work to link in with workable ideas in a way which may ultimately assist us all in the industry long term. I personally wouldn't join, but these are for reasons which are more to do with the particular sector I work in and the business model adopted.

The 'rogue trader' debate on how to proceed has been highlighted on here a lot and the truth is that at present the only way forward is in the educating of the potential clients not the denouncing of huge swaths of the industry which will only be counter productive and may damage the huge middle section of the industry who actually keep the industry alive. Such commentary as seen in Hort Week from BALI stems from 'knee jerk' responses - read through a LJN thread on such issues and you can watch the tempering process leading to a more sensible tailoured argument. The transparency of the LJN is now a real force within the industry and other organisations should be learning from it. By the way the LJN VCC is a brilliant idea, thanks Philip.

Replies

The Perfumed Garden November 20, 2009 at 8:44am

Phil, the link to vcc isn't working
PRO

Phil Voice November 20, 2009 at 8:54am

It's OK from this end Simon...you may have clicked whilst I was editing?
Sustainable Land Management November 20, 2009 at 1:40pm

Bang goes my subscription to Hort Week. The recent article has really chosen their path for them, even though I agree with the general sentiments regarding the need for some form of accreditation the simple fact is that both the APL and particularly BALI only reflect a certain sector of the whole of the landscaping industry. Forester's and Arborists have their own well developed accreditation and those on the Estate Management and broader Land Industry professions can also. Some of us can refer back to the qualifications and charterships obtained but whatever else, very foolish of Hort Week to enter this debate on the back of BALI and APL Press releases, who surely only reflect a single figure percentage of those actually operating in the industry!!.
PRO

Phil Voice November 20, 2009 at 5:02pm

Here you go Dave - http://www.landscapejuicenetwork.com/forum/topics/customer-charter
Robert Dulson November 21, 2009 at 10:16am

Well, it seems like a case of making comment without thinking. I wonder how Sandra Loton-Jones rates me within the landscaping sector, I am a member of The Association of Professional Landscapers, not VAT registered because I choose to keep my business small and recently was selected as one of 'Britain's top 100 Tradesmen' in a campaign run by the Government's Trustmark Scheme. I am relieved to be a member of APL which is part of the HTA and not BALI based on the CEO's comments.
PRO

Phil Voice November 21, 2009 at 10:29am

It concerns me that Hort Week seem to be deliberately stirring this up and mis-defining what a rogue trader is.

There is an implication (aimed at LJN??) that we are all rogue traders because many of us are not members of an 'accredited' organisation.

What HW (and BALI) should be highlighting is the illegal and unskilled trader - something I think that all of us would support too I am sure?
Pip Howard November 21, 2009 at 11:17am

Hort Week are shooting themselves in the foot here. The industry needs such a magazine and if some of the editorial staff continue in this vein they will be alienating themselves from the vast core of the industry. BALI are failing to temper their case and making themselves more and more inclusive in the view that this is the right way to go whilst actually they again are also alienating themselves from massive sectors of people within and outwith the industry. They are also treading on thin ice legally - there are many many people in the industry with the highest qualifications and experience and ongoing contracts who for various reasons have not turned to accreditation, to even hint that because of this they are 'rogue traders' is a sure fire way of turning these people into the view that BALI are an enemy not a possible source of help. The small but loud section in BALI advocating such wording are doing real damage to their organisation as a whole, which needs to be there particularly for the commercial sector etc.,

They are not the only organisation which has suffered tremendously by way of poor PR management. As the PR sector of an organisation becomes stronger they tend to skip along in the false believe that this is strengthening the organisation as well, more and more PR always leads to hasty decisions to publish something that should never have left the room in which it was uttered. We only have to look at modern UK politics to understand the effect this has on the people it is trying to convince.

The APL on the other hand are being much more refrained and this is very much to their credit. As Robert Dulson comments illustrate they seem to be doing considerable work to link in with workable ideas in a way which may ultimately assist us all in the industry long term. I personally wouldn't join, but these are for reasons which are more to do with the particular sector I work in and the business model adopted.

The 'rogue trader' debate on how to proceed has been highlighted on here a lot and the truth is that at present the only way forward is in the educating of the potential clients not the denouncing of huge swaths of the industry which will only be counter productive and may damage the huge middle section of the industry who actually keep the industry alive. Such commentary as seen in Hort Week from BALI stems from 'knee jerk' responses - read through a LJN thread on such issues and you can watch the tempering process leading to a more sensible tailoured argument. The transparency of the LJN is now a real force within the industry and other organisations should be learning from it. By the way the LJN VCC is a brilliant idea, thanks Philip.
PRO

Phil Voice November 21, 2009 at 11:31am

A good post Pip.

I have been trying to get BALI, APL and SGD around the 'virtual' table for some time. To be fair to Adam Frost and Jason Lock [APL] they have both accepted the invitation and are up for the debate. Annabel Downs [SGD] and Richard Gardiner [BALI] refuse to take part.

It is now time for unity in the landscape and horticulture industries and the development of a single policy and direction. Yes it may lead to licensing and compulsory training but it is something I would support if it meant recognition for anyone who takes their business seriously.
Steve Snedeker November 21, 2009 at 1:23pm

Mr. Buttinsky here - Hi. My first post -

One inevitable result of economic hard times will be a sort of Darwinian effort to assume or solidify importance by the surviving businesses, organizations, even magazines - whatever. In the US, where I live, much of the organization of companies by the states has already occurred. Most states now have Landscape Contractor Boards who determine who can work for more than $500 contracts. (Maintenance has been separate, although, of course, moves are being made to rectify this as well.) These boards are amazingly mature already - with enforcers, compliance officials, courts, investigators and even criminal statutes, all in place and very effectively rendered.

Lots of folks chaffed at the creeping state control - many still do. The irony of free enterprise meeting the needs of the state to make money clash at this particular juncture is one way to view it all. Make no mistake - it is a virtual monopoly of control. Now, this does indeed act to benefit the consumer when problems arise - also make no mistake here, either. The boards literally adjudicate satisfactory results, and not even always or invariably to the consumer's benefit.

I recall beginning this trade back in the early '70's, myself. We were pretty much all "gardeners", outside of the long-established Landscape Architects. Now we are "landscapers" and it was all morphed into professional labels in very short order in North America. To tell the truth, while I welcomed being considered more legitimate, I wonder if we have lost some of the spontaneity and pleasure in our trade. As it stands now, any nonconforming business, artisan or craftsman is a criminal when he takes on work for more than $500. Nor can he even sign contracts. I'm not sure what we have gained, frankly. I know what we have lost.

My caveat is to gauge what rewards we gain by complying with those who want to arrange us in neat little boxes. There is much in our trade which is avante-garde, risky and a lot of fun. Some of that is even the personalities of those we work among. Lining up for conformity just rankles my feathers and I have been a licensed contractor in 3 states. I'm not sure it is so good.
Steven Callaghan November 21, 2009 at 2:20pm

In an effort to support Phil in what he has been trying to achieve, we offered stands at The Hard Landscaping Show to APL, BALI and SGD on a free of charge basis.

The good news is that the APL will be present at the show and will even be presenting a seminar - we have heard nothing as yet from SGD and unfortunately we were told that BALI have "too much on" on the 24th and 25th of March 2010 and are unable to attend.

Given the wide ranging support we have had for the show from the industry as a whole, i.e. landscapers, designers and suppliers, you will all no doubt draw your respective conclusions from this.

I should add that Hort Week have also been supportive and have offered sponsorship of both the seminar sessions and the show in general and we are very pleased with the encouragement they have given us all the way up to their Publishing Director - credit where credit is due!