In the March issue of Natural Stone Specialist magazine, Alan Gayle, who writes a Marketing column, criticised Stone Federation Great Britain for not making the most of the marketing opportunities offered by CE Marking (you can read his column at the end of the comments below). The Federation feels the criticsm was unjustified. Jane Buxey, the Chief Executive, has responded (see below).

Dear Alan,

Just by way of background, I did not read your column initially but the Federation was contacted by several members who felt I should respond as Stone Federation was mentioned and felt that the information should be corrected and clarified as they felt that the Federation otherwise may be felt to be lacking knowledge for appearing not to understand the remit of CE Marking.

My opinion is not at issue here as I have not given it. I am merely stating a fact as instructed. I am not giving my opinion or that of the Federation, merely stating and clarifying fact. I do not think anyone would be interested in my opinion, I leave that to you as a columnist. I merely wish to ensure facts are correct when Stone Federation’s name is mentioned and do not want to confuse anyone reading the column into thinking that the Federation does not understand the CE Marking facts. Whilst I am flattered that you would be interested in my opinion, I am not presuming or wish to give it, I am merely clarifying facts. You are the columnist and it is your opinion that people read. I am not a marketing expert and do not purport to be one. What I am paid to do, and in this instance have been asked to do by several members, is to ensure that Stone Federation’s reputation is maintained and that any insinuation that the Federation does not know or understand about CE Marking is corrected. Fact is fact; opinion is opinion.

There is no counter argument that needs putting forward as I am not disagreeing with your opinion. In the main, people agree that ATOL protected holidays are a good thing and I always book them myself. I also agree that FSCS is a good system and indeed Stone Federation is signed up to a contract under this and I am confident that it will fully protect the Federation should it be needed. I think that I understand that you are just using the ATOL and FSCS to show that when schemes are understood and established they are seen to add value to the supplier and the customer.

I also agree that CE Marking (and BES 6001) are not as recognised yet – but they all need to start somewhere. ATOL has been going for 40 years and FSCS for 15 years – CPR less than three years.

However, the fundamental point is that the other two schemes differ in that they are there to pick up the pieces when something goes wrong. CE Marking doesn’t have this role. It is there to indicate that the product meets certain basic standards and that it can be legally placed on the market in all EEA (European Economic Area) countries. To clarify again (and this reference comes from the CPA): “In summary, CE marking is a passport that enables a construction product, irrespective of its origin, to be legally placed on the market of EEA member states. It means that a construction product meets certain minimum standards for health, safety and economy of energy. It is NOT a quality mark. The difference between a quality mark and the CE mark is that the certification system upon which quality marks operate is determined by the legal owner of that quality mark (eg BSI), whereas the CE mark represents a common approach to conformity that is recognised in all countries making up the EEA.”

Therefore, just to clarify, the purpose in writing is to say that the facts you used are incorrect, namely comparing protection of services with product declaration. CE Marking does not offer a full protection to a contract involving stone and therefore to imply this in an article by directly comparing it to two other schemes in different industries which do offer this, is misleading and could cause confusion. The Federation welcomes the mention of CE marking as a positive but to compare it with non-comparable schemes is not helpful and confusing. I wish we could have an ATOL or FSCS protected 'stone' scheme but to my knowledge there are none that exist so far but if you know of one, I stand to be corrected.

I am very aware of both the merits of both the FSCS and ATOL. The Federation has signed up to the FSCS in the knowledge that we are protected for in the contract we have with the company concerned if anything goes wrong. I only go on holidays that are ATOL protected in the knowledge that I am certain that if anything goes wrong, I am fully protected. This is not the case with CE Marking and to compare them in the same article is misleading. This is the point that is being made. I am certain that many of those involved in the stone industry wish there was a scheme comparable to the FSCS and ATOL but as far as I'm aware, this is not the case

Your implied criticism of the Federation for not doing enough about awareness, or marketing as you term it, which I clarified was not our role, was disappointing as the Federation and many of the member consultants have spent a lot of time and effort in writing articles and giving seminars to help to educate clients in its use.

Any criticism of the role of publicising CE Marking should be taken up with the DCLG and / or trading standards. If you do contact them to take up this matter, we would welcome any feedback that you get please. The Federation has only stepped in as we agree with you that there is little or no publicity of CE Marking and its impact on the construction industry including the natural stone industry.

Here’s hoping that one day the stone industry will have its own 'ATOL' or 'FSCS'.

Kind regards,

Jane Buxey, Chief Executive.
Stone Federation Great Britain

John Bysouth, a long-term member of SFGB and elder statesman of the stone industry, also responded. He wrote:

I read Alan Gayle's article in the March issue of Natural Stone Specialist magazine, and whilst I understand what he is saying I feel Stone Federation Great Britain is being unfairly maligned regarding CE Marking.

SFGB has spent hours discussing how CE Marking would affect our industry and how to get the message out to the wider world. There was considerable discussion internally as to the correct interpretation of  the ruling, and also as to what was and was not covered by the rules.

A booklet was finally published setting out all the facts and informing the members of the stone industry what their responsibilities are and the information they have to provide to their customers.  In addition seminars have been held for architects to inform them of the new rules and their responsibilities when specifying stone (or any other materials).

What more are we expected to do? SFGB does not have the resources of the BRE.

There is an old saying that 'you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink'.

I think the SFGB has done a good job in informing those people who need to know about CE Marking – at least we bother which is, I understand, more than some of our European friends do.

Regards,

John Bysouth.

What Alan Gayle wrote in his column:

This month I am making a bit of a diversion from my usual format. I want to make some observations and comments about what we can learn from consumer marketing.

First let me explain the jargon.

Consumer marketing, known as ‘business to consumer’ marketing (B2C for short) is marketing aimed at private individuals – the consumer.

The biggest players in consumer marketing are international companies such as McDonald’s, Barclays and Unilever, whose brands include Persil, Walls, PG Tips and a whole host of others you would recognise.

‘Business to business’ marketing, on the other hand, (often shortened to B2B) is, as the name suggests, aimed at other businesses rather than the end user. A subcontractor, natural stone quarry or marketing agency like mine are all examples of B2B because 95% of our customers are other businesses.

OK. Now that’s understood, let me ask you: Have you booked your summer holiday yet?

As I’m sure you’ve noticed, at this time of year the travel industry goes into advertising overdrive.

Next question: Do you know what ‘ATOL protected’ means?

It seems whether it’s Thomas Cook, Thomson or anyone else, they end their adverts with ‘ATOL protected’. And we all know what ‘ATOL protected’ means. We all want it and we’re even willing to pay extra for it. Why? Because although we hope we’ll never need it, we feel safer knowing we’re ‘ATOL protected’.

How did we become convinced it is a ‘must-have’ of our package holiday?

Well, Thomas Cook, Thomson et al, certainly play their part. But just saying ‘ATOL protected’ at the end of ads doesn’t have any value unless we already know what ‘ATOL protected’ means.

Which brings me to the lesson we can learn from this aspect of consumer marketing. ATOL is an industry governing body building value for its industry (in this case travel agents) by communicating directly to the industry’s customers. That’s you and me.

And ATOL is not alone. Another example is the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS). This has a consumer awareness campaign telling us that if a bank fails we can claim back up to £85,000 of deposits from FSCS.

Benedict Cumberbatch, who voices the radio ads for FSCS, ends them by saying: “You’ll probably never need us, but it’s good to know that we’re here.”

The FSCS is funded by and serves the banking industry, but those adverts are aimed at the banks’ customers, not the banks themselves.

I believe the idea of marketing directly to your customers’ customers is something that should be adopted right here in the building industry.

I’ve done some work relating to BRE’s BES 6001 standard recently, and while that standard itself is no doubt first class, the fact that the vast majority of the customers (main contractors, architects and clients) of BRE’s customers (building product manufactures) have never heard of it is, in my opinion, a terrible shortcoming on BRE’s part.

Dozens of manufacturers have paid BRE to achieve this standard and now they have to educate the building industry about the value it adds because, unlike ATOL, BRE hasn’t done so.

The same can be said of the Stone Federation and CE Marking. I know Stone Federation has run several workshops on CE Marking, but in my experience it’s pitiful how few of the stone industry’s customers (contractors, architects and clients) have any awareness of CE Marking or how it should benefit them.

When CE Marking and BES 6001 are as recognisable and desirable to architects and contractors as an Agrément Certificate, these standards will be adopted and promulgated throughout the industry. Until then, I think there is some (marketing) work to do.