The Association of Professional Landscapers responds

It is very fair to say that I am direct when I get my teeth into a particular subject and many followers of Landscape Juice will be acutely aware of the criticism I have heaped on the APL and my perception of their failings toward the UK landscape industry.

You have to remember, the APL formed itself so it isn't burdened with a legacy of a previous life - what you see is what has evolved from a fresh start so any problems it may have now are a direct result of the APL's management or perceived lack of it.

I have had some fairly frank conversations with James Steele-Sargent in the last six weeks on subjects ranging from my criticism of the APL to how the internet works but frustratingly for me, those conversations are and will remain private.

However, I am not one who throws a stone and then hides in a greenhouse. I am fully prepared to stand behind what I have said and I truly believe, if you were to review every article I have written about the APL, that I have followed my view up with a link to an example of what I am discussing - the hardest hitting headline was - Is the Association of Professional Landscapers 'A Dead Man Walking'? - you must be the judge of whether the content of this particular post is a fair reflection or a fantasy I have made up just to throw mud?

I wrote to James in his capacity of the associations Chairman and what follows is his official response.

Dear James

Thank you for giving up your time and allowing me the opportunity to talk to you about the Association of Professional Landscapers APL.

As you are well aware, I have been critical of the APL on Landscape Juice and the way I see it handles itself.

In trying to promote excellence in the Landscaping industry I feel that the APL has only created an 'elitist's group to the exclusion of thousands of potential members who run tight and professional businesses - how would you respond to the view that the organisation has now distanced itself from the ordinary landscaper for the benefit of an exclusive few?

I note from the APL website that you have 170 members. However you have told me that you have around 200 members. Can you say what the exact figure is?

I have had communications from landscapers who tell me that their requests to be considered for membership have not been followed up. I understand that the APL office is currently run by part time Horticultural Trades Association HTA staff. How can landscapers be certain that their enquiries have been dealt with and that their information reaches the right person for consideration?

Members pay a substantial amount of money to the APL as a percentage of their turnover but the APL website gives no indication of what a member receives back for their money. I also understand that any further advice that may be given to members is charged as an extra - can you give me an idea of how any member gets value for money out of their membership?

I touched on the HTA in respect of their part time involvement in fielding initial enquiries to the APL office. I am astonished that there is not a full time member of staff to run the APL office who is both an experienced landscaper and a seasoned business person. Do you feel that it is acceptable for the APL to promote excellence amongst it's members yet runs itself as a part time organisation with unqualified staff?

I understand that the APL is part funded by the HTA . Can you give me and indication of what the APL costs to run and where the income from members is applied? Could you also tell me if the HTA support is vital to the stability and longevity of the APL's continued existence?

The APL website does not inspire a feeling of creativity when one arrives on the site and is not updated or added to regularly. Considering that landscaping is an extremely creative subject, do you not feel that the site should be a fluid and vibrant advert of your members work and do you not feel that members should be able to access information about their industry directly out of the site?

I understand that a business development meeting takes place about once every five weeks and any member who is in need of help will have to physically travel to that meeting. I am also told that a member will have to pay a further fee to attend. With the current era of fast moving and fluid communications via email and the internet, why should your membership have to wait so long for something that is real problem to them and may need their attention quickly?

Why is there not a network for members who can access information and share experience and pitch questions? My research has taught me that business needs to have information available immediately to them and are not willing to wait. Do you think that the current system is right and do the APL intend to bring themselves up to speed and install something on their website that serves the APL membership in real time?

I have recently sent an email to the APL via it's site asking for contact details for you as the APL Chairman but I did not receive a reply. I notice that none of the committee are listed on your site and certainly no contact details are listed. My experience tells me that members need to be able to contact others quickly and efficiently. Do you feel that this is acceptable?

The APL are keen to attend all of the top gardening shows and build highly visible gardens at highly publicised events such as Chelsea and Hampton Court. I notice that there always seems to be the same APL member companies building these gardens. I go back to earlier point about elitism. Would you not agree that the APL has become a vehicle for elitism for a minority whilst the majority are excluded? Can you also say if any of the APL funds are applied to any of the show gardens?

I understand that you attended the Hampton Court as a member organisation of the APL but of course as the Chairman too. Is members money paid to you or any of the APL membership by way of expenses before, during or after the show ?

I am on record by saying that I feel the APL cannot continue to exist in it's current format unless it realises that it needs to change. Members need and deserve full time staff and a constant recognisable contact who is both qualified and experienced in business and landscaping. What does the APL have planned that will refresh the organisation and show it really cares about it's role within the landscaping and horticulture community?

We are in a very difficult trading period for any garden related business and this is a time when your members need your support the most yet I feel, and correct me if I am wrong, that the APL are working behind a very high and inaccessible fence and are frustratingly oblivious to membership needs.

I look forward to hearing from you and please feel free to add anything that you feel is relevant to the debate.

Yours sincerely,


Philip Voice
Landscape Juice
The Landscape Juice Network

The APL response

Dear Philip,

Thank you for your email of 4th August - apologies for the delay in responding, I have been away on holiday. There are a lot of questions here and I have not provided an exhaustive answer for each, but hope the response below is helpful.

Many of your comments and criticisms of APL revolve around information provided in the public area of the website. The APL does see the website as important, but it is only one small part of our communication activity. We are always reviewing and updating how we use it and are currently going through that process again. The public area of the site is designed to help the public find a landscaper they can trust and to point interested non-member landscapers to the APL. We encourage enquiring landscapers to contact the APL, at which point a regional representitive will contact them to explain the benefits of membership and to help them through the application process. The members area of the website is the fastest developing component and contains more detailed support and documents for members.

APL is constantly seeking to increase membership and is absolutely not trying to be elitist. Standards are high, but really represent good practice and nothing more than a customer should expect. With the significant amount of business support now provided by the APL, we work hard with members and take them forwards. We will work with any landscaper that comes to us.

The APL currently has 178 members - not including corporate members.

I am surprised to hear that you have had landscapers saying that their enquiries have not been followed up. If you could send the details to me, I will follow this up and investigate. The reason I am surprised, is that the APL runs to a detailed internal Quality Management System ( this is a requirement within the TrustMark, as well as being important for customer service) with clear procedures for dealing with enquiries, allocating them to the regional Business Development Advisers and assisting in the application process where necessary.
There are at least seven staff members actively involved in running the APL, using skills from across the organisation. HTA Director of Business Development, Tim Briercliffe, takes responsibilty for the development and direction of the APL and Andrew Maxted, Director of Commercial Services, takes responsibilty for recruitment and membership administration. There is a dedicated Specialist Groups Manager, Innes Mathieson, who spends the majority of her time managing the APL. There is also a full time administrator. as well as events, PR, services, information centre and marketing staff who provide a very comprehensive service for the APL. APL operational standards are independently monitored by TrustMark who lay down tough working procedures. APL are firmly embedded within TrustMark and are the only landscaping organisation that is.

Qualified consultants, employed by the APL, are used to deal with specific member enquiries and a suite of advice lines are provided by professionals. Such qualified support services are outstandingly good and are appreciated by members.

Members and enquiring landscapers are provided with detailed information on the 'value for money' of membership and our regional Business Development Advisers are there to make sure members do get their full value. Value for money is demonstrated in a regular leaflet sent to members. Membership subscriptions make up only a limited proportion of HTA's expenditure on the APL, which is supported by HTA funds and external sponsorship.

Thw Landscape Business Improvement Scheme ( LBIS ) provides a powerful benchmarking and business improvement network. Chaired by industry and business experts, these groups have helped many APL members improve the success and profitability of their businesses. A small additional fee is charged to participants ( to make up a significant HTA subsidy ) who receive high quality business consultancy that pays for itself many times over. Many of the members of these groups communicate electronically between meetings and this can be developed further if the members want it and we are considering trialling a discussion forum on the members area of the website. It would obviously not be appropriate for this to be publically available as members would be inhibited from open discussion on the same site where members of the public are searching for a landscaper.

APL Committee details are detailed in the members area of the website.

In terms of members attending shows, we encourage all our members to get involved and will provide them with publicity if they do. This helpd to promote the APL. Not all members will want to build show gardens, but they can still benefit from the exposure of APL that results. APL seeks to fund such ventures ( including the recent APL/SGD garden at Hampton Court ) through external sponsorship, and not membership subscriptions. APL funds are not used to pay for my expenses, or those of any committee member.

You suggest that the 'APL cannot exist...unless it realises it needs to change'. Any successful organisation develops and changes constantly and the APL is certainly not in the business of standing still. The APL has built up a strong and successful formula and there will constantly be new initiatives developed in accordance with the strategy identified by the Committee and communicated to members. Look out at GLEE this year for some new initiatives.

In closing my response I would like to say that I hope this answers your questions, but also to say that I have been disappointed in the way you have mis-represented APL and the antagonistic tone you take on your website. The APL is passionate about being a quality trade association for quality landscapers. We want many more landscapers to be members of the APL and we will continue to provide the very high level of service that our members have come to expect. You claim to want this too, so perhaps it would be more helpful if your website comments were constructive. We, as the APL committee, and the APL team at Theale, work very hard for this industry and mis-representation from you on your website really doesn't help.

I hope we can have ( and look forward to ) a more constructive relationship in the future.

Kind regards,

James Steele-Sargent
APL Chairman

Arun Landscapes
276 Sloe Cottage
Northstoke
Arundel
West Sussex BN18 9LS

Telephone/Fax: 01798 831045
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.arunlandscapes.co.uk

The comments section of every single one of my posts is open for anyone to use - do you think I make relevant points or am I way of beam?

If you want your say on the matter then now is the time.

Comments

[Matt Fitzgerald]

Both interesting points of view. I have always tended to steer clear of landscape trade assoc. because I cannot see how they don't become corrupted. If an assoc. asks members for a fee surely they become reliant on this income. It then becomes hard to remove companies that are dropping below good standards but are always keen to deposit their fees and have the stickers on the vans.

[Philip Voice]

Thanks for your comment Matt

This is one of the reasons why I wanted to encourage landscapers to adopt a voluntary system.

Members who have adopted the 'Green Tick' have made a statement of intent by agreeing to join the Landscape Juice Network and be scrutinised in public.

Business owners are well aware that any negative comments about their business that find their way back to their user profile will be quickly seized upon by prospective customers.

There is no payment to join so no compromise.