How successful a solution is often boils down to how effective the planning was. This holds even more true in the sophisticated world of Smart Home/Home Theatre technology, where there’s frequently a “let’s just jump in and do it” mentality, which often leads to delays, added expense and shortfall in versatility/expansion capability.
Why are the majority of prospective clients so reluctant to pay for Smart Home/Home Theatre designs? I’m confident that when the same client has presented a bill by an architect for a house design, the client doesn’t think twice.
Why is the architect’s time and effort valued by default, but the same mentality not applied to our industry?
I’m going to use the same architect analogy for the quotation process: An architect provides building plans to the builder, who is then in a position to provide a quotation for the work.
How can a quotation precede a solution design? In our mind, it can not. We always do a solution design to figure out what is required in order to provide a quotation.
We hope that this mentality changes as the industry matures in South Africa.
Some examples of our designs at quotation time below:
