Spec busting??? What on earth is all that about?  For the uninitiated, the ‘art’ of spec-busting concerned with taking lighting design documentation, usually produced by a professional design consultant, and then offering equivalent alternative fixtures to the client to save them some money.

What’s wrong with that then?

The problem is that the only people who win are the contractors. Yep, the spec-busters.  Let’s use an example to illustrate why: take a light fixture that has been specified with a value of $100. Let’s say it’s a downlight, for argument’s sake. You can get downlights for $50 or you could spend $200 but the designer has chosen the $100 downlight because that is the one that fits with the project budget which was advised by the client/QS AND that’s the one that the calculations are based on.

All things being equal, the $200 downlight will perform best, the $50 downlight the worst.  The $100 downlight was  chosen and then the design was optimised to make the most efficient use of the product and hence using the minimum number to achieve the required lighting levels. Moreover, the $100 downlight has been properly assessed, we’ve seen a sample, checked the build quality, warranty, quality of control gear and lamp, ease of installation and maintenance. It’s probably from a manufacturer we trust and have used previously. It probably is backed by technical support staff who will be able to provide after-sales service. In short, there was a lot of thought that went into the specification of this product.

Next thing the specification is issued to the contractor for quoting. Here’s what happens: contractor wants to make his quote as competitive as possible and offers the client potential savings on the lighting equipment. He sees a downlight and thinks “a downlight’s a downlight; why do we need to spend $100 when we can spend $50. Or $30″?  Contractor looks good in the eyes of the client (who’s probably wondering why their consultant was wasting their money on expensive fittings in the first place).  But the contractor isn’t passing on the savings to the client. They’ll substitute for the $30 fitting and offer it to the client for $60. The client thinks he’s saving $40 per fitting (and there might be lots of them and hence a lot of money).

But guess what? You get what you pay for.  The client gets a way inferior product that won’t perform nearly as well as that specified. I have never experienced a contractor finding a better value for money fixture than the one we specified. Like ever. Stands to reason doesn’t it? We’re professional lighting consultants, that’s what we do for a living every day. The contractor isn’t.

Who would you trust to choose the lights?

I recently had the pleasure of spending some time with the leadership group of Zumtobel.

Zumtobel is an Austrian lighting manufacturer who produces high quality luminaires servicing the architectural lighting market. The Australian branch of the company is based in Sydney and run by Marianna Jackson.  Marianna’s team that I met has worked with her on average well in excess of 10 years. There is a camaraderie among the team and a genuine fondness and respect for one another that was as delightful to see as it was unusual.  The team were also united behind the product range that they represent, absolutely.

I have been reading Tribal Leadership by Dave Logan et al recently as well as other stuff on heroic versus port-heroic leadership styles.  A strong company culture such as that created and then nurtured by Marianna is very special.  When I asked her about it, of course she played it down but it was evident that she treats her team with respect, provides them with the support and encouragement they need to grow and has fun along the way.

No wonder they stick around.

One of our designers Dave Anderson came across this initiative from the UK Police called Secured by Design.  Despite its unfortunate acronym, SBD talks a lot of sense regarding lighting design in urban areas.

Some key points:

• Improved lighting can be effective in reducing fear of crime, and in certain circumstances reducing the incidence of crime;

• Different lighting sources need to be considered for different environments – the character of the local environment must always be respected.

It states that ‘Research confirms that where public lighting is weak or patchy, increasing the levels and consistency of illumination reduces the fear of crime and makes people feel more secure. The relationship between lighting and crime itself (as opposed to fear of crime) is somewhat more complex, but recent research (Farrington & Welsh 2002, Home Office research study 251) indicates that improved lighting can indeed result in crime reduction, particularly when this has been combined with other community safety initiatives.’

The report also talks about the importance of light quality and advocates white light instead of sodium sources with poor colour rendering.

We believe that good quality lighting is  an essential component of designing for security.  We feel that it is important to design in a way which is respectful to the local community – not assuming everything needs to be ultra vandal-resistant just because an area may be socially disadvantaged.  Provide decent lighting and we believe people will respond favourably, will appreciate the gesture and benefit from the improved amenity.  Its not just good design, it’s respect.