CFDA Newsletter

Program Schedules:

Tuesday, August 12- Rising from Ashes Furniture. Images of the furniture in the Rising From Ashes show, due to open at the Arboretum on August 23, will be previewed, explained and critiqued. This is a chance to understand the pieces that will be on view later in the month.

September 6 - Reproduction Furniture. John Gush will show examples of English and South African furniture that he has very exactingly reproduced. His shop is modestly equipped, so John relies on skill and ingenuity to deliver the spectacular craftsmanship evident in his pieces. John's work has been featured on the back cover of Fine Woodworking Magazine. Don't miss this one!

October - Lloyd Natof.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CFDA Meeting Report:

Executive Board Meeting Minutes - July16, 2008

In attendance at Chris Brandel's condo: Jan Sopoci, Rob Frazier, Matt Seiler, Chris Brandel, Antanas Abraitis, Dolly Spragins, Sean Scott and John Kriegshauser

1. Officer + Committee Reports

a. Treasury: Lloyd sent a message that we have about $5000 in the bank with about $2000 in Rising From Ashes fees yet to deposit.

b. Membership: Lloyd sent a second message saying that he had not yet contacted Barry Newstat about the form of the current welcoming packet or whether it had been sent to the new members.

c. Website:

- Matt believes that we should be getting more specific information on who visits our website so we can better understand the character of the traffic we are generating.

- Also we need to check to verify that our show dates are posted on the website.

- The Rising From Ashes website should link back to the CFDA website as should the Deceptive Show website. JK will check to verify this.

2. Deceptive Furniture Show Update--Chris Brandel

- The jury selected 10 strong and 4 fairly strong entries from 42 submissions. They had hoped to receive more furnishings but got primarily furniture.

- More entries are needed. Chris explained that rejected applicants could resubmit and that people who had not submitted are being asked to submit.

Rising From Ashes Show Update--John Kriegshauser, Dolly Spragins

- The show is on track to open in August, but sponsorship is less than expected and budget cuts will be necessary.

- Press packets need to be sent to trade publications and to do this Sean will need current editors and addresses for these publications. JK and Dolly will furnish these.

Nominations for the Board

The current Board consists of:

Antanas Abraitis
Lisa Elkins
Phil Haywood
John Jaqua
John Kriegshauser
Lloyd Natof
Sean Scott
Matt Speer
Matt Seiler
Dolly Spragins

- John Jaqua has not participated so we will consider him off the board

- Possible new candidates are Chris Brandel, Hal Link, Bill Groot and Lisa Brophy, an attorney.

Nominations for officers:

President-Chris would like someone to replace him

Vice President-Jan does not want to run for re-election

Secretary-Matt Seiler would be willing to run for this office again.

Treasurer-Lloyd would like to hand this responsibility off, possibly to Kurt Vannucci.

6. We began brainstorming about ways to improve the CFDA, including the following suggestions, and we decided to continue this discussion at our next meeting.

- Matt Seiler wanted to have a more compelling reason for people to attend the meetings.

- Rob wanted a more focused series of programs including hired outside speakers.

- Chris wanted to borrow the IDSA's idea of networking and advocated events like a pub crawl to promote this. Rob thought we could have a beer pitcher social upstairs at Corosh.

- Lisa wanted to get away from technique based presentations and include field trips.

- Antanas would prefer meeting in a conference room format.

- Dolly thought we could have a retreat to develop these ideas, maybe at Taliesen.

- Chris thought we need to generate a five year plan.

7. Next meeting date Wednesday, October 22

CFDA Minutes - July 8, 2008

Thirteen members in attendance.

The meeting began at 7:15.

Congratulations go out to our president, Chris Brandel, who is freshly back from his honeymoon.

Per Chris, there were 42 entries submitted for the Deceptive Furniture and Furnishings show, with only 14 chosen so far. Ten were very strong and four were marginally strong. The rest of the entries either were not up to expectations, or were what was termed 'ironic'. For instance, a furniture piece which was made in the shape of, say, a food item, isn't deceptive. It's merely an ironic take on the form. And once you're past the initial irony the piece would stand on its own. The intent of the show is to go beyond first-blush irony and delve into deeper waters.

As a result, the Call For Entries has been opened up again, with the hope that the new submissions will help fill in the furnishings portion of the program and not all be more furniture. People are encouraged to submit things like floor or table lamps and other decor-based objects.

Dolly discussed the Rising From Ashes show and the flurry of last-minute activity. So far the idea of coat-tailing with the Wood Utilization Team is paying off high dividends. Television and print media outlets have shown interest in our story, with some surprising nibbles. Extemporaneously, on Friday, August 8th, members of the CFDA met at the Morton Arboretum to be interviewed by local ABC affiliate, Channel 7, as well as cable-based CNBC, to have our story told. The ABC portion aired later that same day and the CNBC interviews will be aired in the coming week(s), to be tied in with their business development segments.

The budget was originally projected at about $30,000. But we only reached half of that goal. As a result we scaled back the printing and other expenses. Our own expectations were reset and are now on pace with operating within the new budget.

John mentioned that he's been in contact with the Mayflower moving company, who may be able to provide one of their new POD systems for our moving needs. More details are to be announced with this, but it could be a promising development.

Sponsorship is still needed and heartily encouraged. If anyone has business contacts and can reach out for a donation of any size please do so.

The venue list is still developing. We were ultimately turned down by the Peggy Notabaert center, but they are open to the future possibility of mining our membership for commissioned seating for the facility. Nothing is on the table at this moment, but the door was left open.

The Chicago Center for Green Technology has expressed a high interest in hosting the show. It is located on the near west side of the city, and more information will be announced as it develops.

John then segued into the Board election process. There are ten people elected to the board each year and we're approaching the time to begin the nomination and voting process. Then, in turn, it will be time to elect the officers of the group. So far Chris has expressed a desire to hand off the job of President to a willing and motivated candidate. Jan is evolving into a new time in his life and is interested in stepping down as Vice President. Matt is amenable to retaining the Secretary position for another year. And Lloyd would very much like to hand the job of Treasurer to another candidate.

If you are at all interested in running for these office positions please be sure to make the next meeting to learn more and to officially put your hat into the ring.

The business meeting concluded at 7:45

Program:

Getting Paid for Design - Bill First, Tim Cozzens and Michael Koehler

Bill First started out by relating two telephone calls he'd gotten out of the blue relating to design. In both instances someone had asked him to provide design solutions for furniture problems. But during the calls there were gaping holes in the details. Was he to be paid for the designs as stand-alone deliverable items? Was he to be doing the design AND the fabrication? And throughout the conversations his 'whiskers began twitching', as it were, as he sensed that there was something amiss with the very questions being asked. The callers were busy telling him what he'd be doing, but were a bit less forthcoming about the finer details of the relationships. Bill sensed that he'd end up doing a lot of work and providing valuable design input and then get cut out of the equation without being paid.

Ultimately he took a pass on both situations, seeing a high likelihood that he would be setting himself up for being taken advantage of. Bill puts in a lot of legwork on the design and presentation phase of the job. He's developed a very sexy vellum bound deliverable item that stands as a design declaration at the time of the customer pitch meeting. In the presentation booklet he includes a cover letter, CAD renderings, a job estimate, and later once its completed, an actual photograph of the completed piece.

But that's an awful lot of work to go through for a situation where the details just don't seem right, and where there are entirely too many unanswered questions. And if the customer decides not to proceed with the job how will he be compensated for the time, energy and effort for having gotten this far? And equally importantly, will he give the client the design booklet without taking any money?

Michael Koehler described similarities with Bill's situations as well as his deliverable items to the customer. He also provides a packet similar to Bill's. But the differences become apparent early in Michael's process.

Michael has developed a business model where anything past the first meeting will be at cost to the client. He meets with the client initially to perform a needs analisys and to get the scope of work. But he sets the expectation with the client at that first meeting that the next ones, as well as the designs that will be provided, will come at a cost. And the design fee gets rolled into the cost of these meetings. Thus he sets the expectation very early with the client that his services are most definitely not free.

Tim Cozzens also likes to, as he says, weed out the tire-kickers early. He has found that staying intentionally ambiguous and nebulous with his details early on has its advantages. He only begins to provide solid, repeatable information once the client has actually hired him for pay. Then he begins sharing details and designs. His belief is that if the client balks at the design fee then they're not the kind of clients that you're looking to work with.

Throughout the presentation the group round-tabled many ideas and tangent thoughts to the what's and the how's of the design process as it relates to being both hired for the job or to be paid even if not hired to do the job. Perhaps the biggest and most important idea that was passed around was the need to have the confidence to walk away from a job. If something doesn't feel right, if the client is sending the subliminal impressions that there are going to be problems or if the nature of the relationship kicks off in an unfortunate way there is no pride lost in simply telling the client that they should seek their solution elsewhere.

Furniture and furnishing design is a partnership between us and the end user. Communication needs to flow simply and easily from both sides. Part of that communication requires that we, as designers, need to embrace a single idea. Namely, setting expectations with the client early on about the fee structure for the work. In most instances it is the client who is seeking US out, not the other way around. And in order to play the game correctly, we need to actually say to the client, in so many words, what the rules of the game will be.

Those rules involve things that we will be doing for the client, as well as things the client will be doing for us. It's very much a two-way street. And embracing that literal, specific communication during the initial meeting is the key to having a happy financial situation during the job.

We talked about charging separate design fees or up-front deposits. Many of us charge an average of $200-500 as nonrefundable design fees for the hours and creativity to come up with the designs. If the client chooses to have us do the work then the design fee is rolled into the value of the job. But if the work won't happen, or if they wish to shop around the design, then we've been paid for the idea and our time. And if the client will not pay the design fee we can either not do any work at all, or we can keep the design and not grant it to the client at all.

We also discussed that what we are providing is actually two separate items that are only marginally connected. The first item is the 'idea of the thing'. We imagine a piece in our minds and then usually communicate that idea on paper. The idea of the thing has a dollar value all on its own, separately and distinctly from any work in the shop. With the idea of the thing the object could be built anywhere on the planet. It can inspire a single piece to be built, or it could initiate tooling for a factory line. Thus we need to understand that our ideas - the talent of our imaginations and creativity - carry a monetary value that's contained purely in and of itself.

The second item is the actual finished good. This is much easier to understand, as it involves raw materials and time on the clock to assemble into something useful. But the work in the shop can only happen AFTER the initial spark of design. It could be our own spark, or it could be somebody else's spark.

The third potential problem is best expressed in terms of project management skill sets. Once the design is signed off on and the work begins that doesn't always mean that things are static. We have all run into situations where the client will want changes mid-stream during the project. Sometimes those changes are negligible and represent no further issues. But other times that can involve huge changes to design or fabrication. Customer requests to change from butt hinges to Euro cup hinges, for example, can derail a production line. It can impact the material thickness, design details and materials dollars. Even a change from Blum stamped steel bottom-mount drawer slides to Accuride full-extension slides can impact the materials cost of a job by several hundred dollars.

So the third piece is for us, as designers and fabricators, to have a handle on dealing with what is known as 'scope creep'. Where the scope of work is being changed mid-stream.

Again, the key to staying on top of this is to communicate very literally and effectively up front that there will be costs associated with change orders. It's up to us to set those expectations and to enforce them during the course of the job.

But throughout the process, it is also our job to be excited about what we're doing. This is an enjoyable process. We should orient our mindsets to ways in which it can stay enjoyable - and profitable - for us as small business owners. And the first step in that orientation is to learn to communicate effectively with our clients.

The program ended at 8:45