It’s time for a funeral.
Mark Twain once commented that “The reports of my death have
been greatly exaggerated.” With all respects to Mr. Twain, I
would like to suggest that continuing reports of the
benefits of the ‘Zero-item’ Walk Through’ have also been
greatly exaggerated.
In fact, I would like to publicly call for the death of the
‘Zero-item’ Walk Through’ or ZiWT for short.
Builders who believe in the ZiWT speak of it in
hushed and reverent tones, as if it were the quest for the
Holy Grail, when in reality, it is no more than a snipe
hunt. At best, it’s a total fantasy; even worse, it’s a
counter-productive, destructive force which undermines your
buyer’s trust, eats away at customer satisfaction levels,
and reduces homeowner referrals.
Zero-Item vs. Zero-Defect
The ‘Zero-Item’ concept is, no doubt, a distant cousin of
the ‘Zero-Defect’ concept, a decades-old quality assurance
approach in which defect or error tolerance was set at zero
in order to set the highest expectation for performance.
(Note: ‘Zero-Defect’ is also a term used by President
Clinton to rather optimistically describe the number of his
congressional supporters he expected to leave his side once
they learned the truth about Monica Lewinsky.)
The ‘Zero-Defect’ concept is certainly viable in the
new-home industry. While it is arguable that any new
home can be delivered defect-free, the ‘Zero-Defect’ target
is an effective method for setting positive expectations for
construction personnel, including sub-contractors.
The ZiWT is another matter entirely. Since many builders do
a poor job with their ‘Zero-Defect’ performance prior to the
walk-through, it is all too often left for the walk-through
supervisor to make up for construction short-comings. In
fact, many builders place so much emphasis on the ZiWT that
the walk-through supervisor will do anything to keep the
punch list as short as possible. In our focus groups,
walk-through personnel tell us that they experience
different types of overt or implied pressure to keep the
punch list short and sweet:
1.
Punch-list length is included in the Performance Evaluation.
2.
Bonuses tied directly or indirectly to average punch-list
length.
3.
Walk-through personnel with very few punch list items are
afforded more recognition at company events, meetings, and
newsletters.
4.
Customer service and operations managers frequently mention
the need to keep punch-lists short.
5.
The walk-thru supervisor is held responsible for making sure
the punch list items are cleared, thereby making short lists
more likely.
6.
The walk-through supervisor does not want to make his peers
look bad by submitting a long punch list. This is
particularly true if he/she is part of the construction
department.
In a ZiWT environment, there is plenty of pressure to produce a
ZiWT, or close to it. Unfortunately, given this degree of
motivation, many walk-through supervisors have developed
procedures to scam the system and make it look like the punch
list items are as scarce as …well, a friendly IRS agent during
an audit. Here’s what they do:
1.
The walk-through person does not bring a walk-through form or
piece of paper on which to record the list. Sound unbelievable?
Here’s a quote from a homeowner at a recent focus group: “When I
asked him if he was going to write these down, he said ‘Don’t
worry, I’ll remember’.”
2.
The walk-through supervisor keeps two lists, one ‘official’ list
for the homeowner, and one for him. Guess whose list is shorter?
This “double-booking” works particularly well with first-time
buyers. This is the most common technique used to make the
punch-list appear small.
3.
Items are grouped. 26 paint touch-ups are listed only once as
“Paint touch-up.” Three broken fixtures are listed once as
“Lights.” Several chips in the countertop are included as
“countertop.”
4.
Walk-through supervisors have been known to ignore relatively
small defects and not point these out to the new buyer. Or, as
related by new buyers during our focus groups, the walk-through
person will “minimize” the defect by claiming “All flooring
looks like that” or (my personal favorite line) “It’s within
industry standard.”
In short, if your system requires a ZiWT, you will get a ZiWT or
damn close to it. But it is clear that a ZiWT does not
necessarily mean that your construction practices are sound or
your quality assurance is above par. It may simply mean that
your staff has found back-handed ways to give you what you want.
These back-handed practices are so prevalent that we now assume
any punch-list item count to be the absolute best case scenario.
In all likelihood, the actual number of items is 25-50% higher
than the ‘official’ list.
Solution: Forget the ZiWT. Reward walk-through and construction
personnel whose buyers report high levels of satisfaction with
the “Condition of home upon move-in,” as measured in post
move-in surveys. Conduct pre-walks 2-3 days before the final
walk-through. Remember that the most impactful issue on future
referrals is not the number of walk-through items, but the
speed with which you resolve the punch-list.
Mirman’s Law: The difference between the ‘official’ punch-list
count and the actual count is directly proportional to the
degree of emphasis placed on the ZiWT.
When customers see two lists or no lists, when they see that
some items do not get written down at all, they lose confidence
in the system…your system! They will not trust what they are
told and, most importantly, they will be hesitant to refer their
friends.
ZiWT sets up customers and builders for weakened relationships
and ultimate failure. It’s time it went away.
|
