On New Construction, Who Is The Long Term Customer: Building Owners, Or GC?

Avatar
Brian Rhodes
Mar 31, 2017
IPVMU Certified

A member submitted this question:

"This is a question for both integrators or building owners/ end users:

    • During the new construction process, do the integrators work for the building owners/ end users or do they work for the GC?
    • For end users: Do integrators work for you during construction, or do they work for the GC?

Any and all responses to this question would be helpful. "

Avatar
Brian Rhodes
Mar 31, 2017
IPVMU Certified

In my experience, it depends on who 'brings the integrator in' to the project.

Generally the GC has the long term relationship with the integrator (especially if they have a relationship over multiple projects), but the integrator tries to pick up the building owner in the process.  

But if the building owner brings the project/ specifies the integrator, then that relationship is the essential one that 'gets priority'.

(2)
Avatar
Michael Silva
Mar 31, 2017
Silva Consultants

The construction contract can be written in one of two ways. The first way is for the security/surveillance systems to be included in the construction documents. This makes the GC responsible for the work, and he or she normally has full control over which integrator is hired to do the work. In these cases, the integrator works for the GC throughout the construction phase and until expiration of any post-construction warranties. During this period, the GC is the integrator's customer. After the warranty period, the GC exits the picture and the owner may choose to hire the integrator directly to perform maintenance and make system upgrades.

The second way is for the construction documents to specify that the security/surveillance systems are to be "provided by owner". In this case, the integrator contracts directly with the owner, making the owner the integrator's customer. The GC has a duty to work cooperatively with the owner's integrator, but has no contractual responsibility for the outcome of the integrator's work.

While most integrators prefer the second approach, it can dilute responsibility for the overall project and can create real problems for the owner if things go wrong. For this reason, many experienced owners prefer to funnel all work through the GC, making him totally responsible for everything, including the security/surveillance systems.

(3)
Avatar
Ross Vander Klok
Mar 31, 2017
IPVMU Certified

Depends on how it is set up from the outset.  We have had the best luck when they work for the GC, but we play an active role in the process.  Meaning they listen to us.  

Most often we are brought in after the fact and the entire project has been done outside our corporate standard.  The we get a phone call something along the lines of "Hey we just finished this $20 million site.  How are you guys going to lock the door?"

(1)
(3)
(4)
JH
John Honovich
Mar 31, 2017
IPVM

"Hey we just finished this $20 million site. How are you guys going to lock the door?"

Sorry, I voted that funny :) (and informative)...

(1)
Avatar
Ross Vander Klok
Mar 31, 2017
IPVMU Certified

Funny when it happens to someone else, absolutely!   When it happens to you?  Not so much.  

Things have drastically improved for us over the past couple years, but it literally would go down exactly like that.   We would answer back that we would need a locksmith to come out and take care of it with appropriate hardware, not only would there be no budget, whatever we chose would not match the aesthetics of the facility.

By teaming up with the GC and integrator at the start of the project we have been able to avoid major clusters like we used to have.

(2)
UI
Undisclosed Integrator #1
Mar 31, 2017

At the end of the day the integrator eventually ends up owning the install.

The consistency of product delivered is much greater if through the owner as there is a direct line of accountability.  The owner is getting what they want under that model.  I find that through a GC there is a disconnect as the integrator is so far down beneath the GC and beneath even them by being under the EC.  Further, it is much less cost to the owner by being direct in that there is not an EC mark-up and a GC mark-up on top of the integrators sell price.

Mr. Silva makes a point above that inexperienced owners prefer to put the integrator under the GC to streamline the process.  This is absolutely true and I understand the desire to do so.  However, there is definitely a cost premium for this piece of mind as toolbox talks, pre-task forms, warm-ups, gathering conditional waivers, incessant coordination meetings, and other time burners are real costs which will apply and will of course have two additional layers of mark-up applied.  GCs also tend to call out the integrator to perform minor tasks or tasks that the site is not ready for... again another cost that gets applied.

 

oK
oleg Kush
Apr 03, 2017

I would recommend other route. When budding on project GC is usually contact point. After receiving job we would ask meeting GC and owner to get more specific details or totally change scope by our suggestion. All prices go through GC where he would add managing fee. 

After client receive move in permit...GS is out and we completely take over with service contracts. 

This way GS always takes our bid by preferance. As we don't step on his managing profit as at the end of day he is on hook for things going wrong way.

New discussion

Ask questions and get answers to your physical security questions from IPVM team members and fellow subscribers.

Newest discussions