News Extra
often why they will offer a service to supply the plants as well. Where is a line drawn, though? Does it end with plants or can they legitimately supply other materials as well? The debate showed two sides of the same coin, because there have also been cases in which the contractor has provided garden design as a ‘free service’, which effectively cancels out the need for a professional designer – and many designers have lost business because of this. Designers are offering a premium service, and it is
undoubtedly a hard time financially for them, but they (as with any company) must promote value to their business. If the client isn’t willing to pay, be prepared to walk away. If you are choosing the plants and doing the specific research, you can charge a fee – it’s not just your skills as a designer they are paying for, it’s your business, time and knowledge. Communication in the landscape gardening industry just isn’t good enough. As clear in any industry, everybody likes to run their business in their own way.
Regardless of this, we need to realise that the landscape gardening industry is operating in a hugely under-regulated way, and the select few who choose to be part of an association need to understand that they can act as role models for the industry as a whole. Wherever you think your duty ends and the contractor/ designer’s begins, – and as a businessperson you will be able to draw your own boundaries, but with a firmer realisation and understanding of where your peers are drawing theirs.
The main problems with designers supplying materials are that they can no longer be impartial as a project manager if they are also a supplier and there becomes a grey area over who is liable for any of these materials.Who pays for a plant replacement if it dies when a designer has supplied but a contractor has planted? If a designer has charged for a design fee and then a percentage of the contract sum for project management, why are they then taking even more from the contractor’s bottom line by creaming off the top by supplying the most profitable elements of a project? Surely by charging a percentage of the contract sum, they would still be making a profit even with the contractor supplying everything? If this continues, the contractor will ultimately need to increase his labour rate, therefore making the client essentially pay twice. Designers are vital to my business, and I don’t mean to have a dig at them – I just want to see a more even playing field brought into play.
When it comes to plants, and sometimes pots, furniture and sculpture, it can be very important for designers to spend extra time sourcing, choosing and checking these items. The fairest way to the client, to cover the time and input for doing this, is to sell them to the client. Charging separately for sourcing time for these final elements is not something most clients will swallow, and not all contractors will commit the same focus to quality control to justify the mark-up.
In principle, Andrew [Wilson] is right – garden designers should stick to garden design; if they are struggling to make that pay then they should be charging more. I realise that in the fairly rarefied atmosphere of the upper end of the London and South East market (that I largely work in) it is easy to talk about this with the luxury of choice and that for many this may be the only way that they can survive. I am also aware that many people will take this as hypocritical, because I am engaged in contracting and design build. My point is that it is better to strike a clear position rather than cherry-pick the bits that suit you. Although this allows higher profit levels, I see a number of disadvantages. First off I think it offers clients a confusing situation, secondly (and linked) is the matter of liability envelope…and who takes responsibility if something goes wrong.
David Dodd The Outdoor Room 12
April 2014
Bradstone News Extra.indd 12
Rae Wilkinson Rae Wilkinson Garden and Landscape Design
WHAT ES DE ATTEN YING... SA WERE
For a professional everything must begin and end with the client.The SGD is very clear in its Code of Conduct that all financial transactions must be transparent – the client must know, understand and agree to the use of his or her money.The SGD supports its members in achieving and maintaining the highest professional standards, but it is not about micro-managing their businesses for them. Given adherence to the Code of Conduct, designers are free to make a living as they think best and in ways that they believe best serves their clients.They are also free to choose to work with those contractors who best fit their business model and professional standards.
Juliet Sargeant Chair of SGD
In my mind there is a growing disparity between the size of projects and budgets available for the established South East and particularly London-focused landscapers and designers compared to the rest of the UK. Most APL members run much smaller businesses and need to be as flexible as possible in their business structures and the way they work with designers.The smaller guys did seem to get forgotten as the debate immediately swept into the world of £100,000 plus landscape projects! So if we want to bring the whole industry into this debate then maybe we need to acknowledge the amazing variety of businesses we have and incorporate it into future planning.
John Wyer Bowles and Wyer David Sewell The Gardenmakers Ltd.
www.prolandscapermagazine.com
19/03/2014 14:08