Founded in 2008. The Landscape Juice Network (LJN) is the largest and fastest growing professional landscaping and horticultural association in the United Kingdom.
LJN's professional business forum is unrivalled and open to anyone within within the UK landscape industry
LJN's Business Objectives Group (BOG) is for any Pro serious about building their business.
For the researching visitor there's a wealth of landscaping ideas, garden design ideas, lawn advice tips and advice about garden maintenance.
Replies
My open letter has been well received and I think (and hope) that perhaps there is a high level of agreement for creating some kind of policy for the whole industry.
It is early days but the seeds are germinating.
http://www.landscapejuicenetwork.com/xn/detail/2074886:BlogPost:476...
We have 84 members in the garden design group and 57 in the maint. providers and a whopping 154 members keen to receive leads for new work!
I believe that we all have something to give to the policy group - we will never agree on everything and quite rightly have different views etc but this can be something that would make such a positive difference to our industry and I would therefore urge everyone to join and give input.
I don't think you understand Stuart that the APL are not financially viable themselves and rely on assistance from the HTA - without the HTA's financial subsistence, the APL would not now be operating - the money the APL receives from its membership does not cover all of its costs.
From what I understand, the HTA saved the APL from going broke - is this the right way to run a business, from a group whose goal is to advise its members on how not to run a business?
So, if the APL can forge a partnership with another association without substantial financial backing then one can never rule that out for LJN.
It also pays to remember how the APL started Stuart and that it only has a brief history.
A group of disgruntled BALI members, who were unhappy with the direction and politics, broke away to form the APL - the HTA, who also fell out with BALI (so I understand and I am happy to be put right here) teamed up with APL.
What I am wondering is how much the visible changes taking place have been influenced by the presence of the LJN, my guess is fairy significantly. I used to think that the fact that despite the two significant and several other accreditation organisations out there and that a huge majority of the industry were not affiliated to any group meant that the industry was weakened as a result. My feeling now is that this bizarre position of affairs is the industry's strength and the accreditation groups are starting to realise this also, possibly through watching and studying LJN and other sites and are listening and this can only be good.
BALI did themselves considerable damage last year with shameful published rhetoric and need to get back to basics, whilst the APL were noticeably acting in the right direction and have been able to affiliate themselves into governmental schemes which will attract particular business models. Surely it is now the time to carefully select the business model you desire, stick to it and as such choose the right organisation for you if any. If the existing accreditation groups allowed themselves to select a business model to aim at also rather than attempting to draw in 'across the board membership' it will help the define all the relevant strands of the landscaping industry.
Has there ever been a study of how many 'landscapers' there actually are in the UK? Almost impossible to correctly ascertain, but the vast majority are clearly happy to avoid any form of accreditation. More importantly this means that there is also a huge customer base who don't care / recognise / understand the current accreditation organisations.
Personally I feel that Paul's statement re clients assessing us on our own merits is the absolute basis of every business on here. As I will now be operating as a sole trader my hand written testimonials re my work are the most precious bits of paperwork I have and are ultimately the only flawless and true accreditation needed. When backed up by openly exposing yourself, your ideas and methodology on the LJN, then little else is required - unless you desire contracts with specified accreditation.
Pip, there is a fundamental flaw in this. Most of our clients haven't the faintest idea how to judge the quality of the work they are commissioning. They just don't know what constitutes good and bad landscaping. This is why virtually every testimonial reflects on the contractors politeness, punctuality, 'can do' attitude etc etc. All very important but surely the most important thing of all is 'have they done a good job?!' and that's where accredited bodies come in. They give a proven guarantee that a contractors work is up to a certain standard because they actually look at it regularly. Your testimonials just can't do this.
After all what does'judging us on our own merits' actually mean? How is the client qualified to judge us? Indeed what are our own merits? I've been in this game for over 20 years and met bundles of landscapers who think their work is outstanding when it's actually very mediocre. But then they don't know any better either because they are entrenched in 'their way' of doing things which works for their clients and their business. That's fine but it doesn't necessarily mean that their work is of a high quality.
If client references are not the right way to vet a membership, why is it a pre-requisite of the APL terms of membership?
I wrote to Adam Frost and Jason Lock on the 20th September 2009 expressing my concerns that the APL website stated that all APL members are 'fully trained' and 'qualified' - in my experience and to the best of my knowledge, this was not and had never been the case.
"I am also a little concerned that you are saying that all APL members
are fully trained. Could you please explain this to me. What training
have your members got, I am not aware that there a standard that all
members have achieved across the board. What certificates have you
insisted on so that members can qualify for membership and is an APL
business owner qualified to offer training to his own staff?"
It is interesting to note now, on the APL site, all reference to APL members being 'fully trained' and 'qualified' has been removed - I wonder why? How long has the APL been misleading the market and its potential clients?
It now says...
Be committed to continuous business development
Be actively involved in staff training and development
Is training and qualification no longer a requirement, was it ever a requirement...does this mean that the APL is operating with under-qualified and under-trained organisations? This is an important issue that needs clarifying.
We can see from the list of requirement needed to be a member, there is no mention of every member, or their staff, being qualified of trained.
There is also a statement that says members must 'follow' the complaints procedure but it doesn't say that it must adhere to it.
It is also stated that APL members must 'offer customers an independently backed warranty' but nowhere does it state that this is compulsory...where is the guarantee you refer?
The Association of Professional Landscapers’ Customer Charter states that Registered Members must be:
http://www.landscaper.org.uk/content/customer-charter
* Trading as a landscape business for a minimum of three years
* Independently inspected annually for conformance to the necessary standards
* Members of the Horticultural Trades Association, the trade body of the garden industry, which was established in 1899
Registered members must also:
* Provide at least six satisfactory customer references of completed work within the past two years
* Supply a minimum of two satisfactory trade references.
* Maintain full Employer Liability Insurance cover
* Maintain full Public Liability Insurance cover
* Follow the agreed complaints resolution procedure
* Offer customers an independently backed warranty
In order to encourage continuing good performance, the Association demands that members:
* Be committed to continuous business development
* Be actively involved in staff training and development
Can it be clarified that every APL member does undergo an annual inspection of their 'on-site' work....I know that as a member, we certainly didn't.
p.s. If I've missed the wording on the APL site that relates to any of the above then, for the sake of honesty and transparency, I apologise and I will rectify this immediately.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next