Chapter 5

Stakeholders: Who Makes the Decision, Who Blocks the Way, Who Takes the Blame

Compiled by Guangdong Fortune Stone New Material Co., Ltd.

Key Points

• The success or failure of a facade retrofit project does not lie in the material itself, but in whether the key people nod in agreement.
• The client fears taking the blame, the design institute fears bearing responsibility, the construction party fears rework, the supervisor fears unclear records, and residents fear disturbance. The material scheme must eliminate each party’s concerns one by one.
• Identify the key people and deliver the right materials at the seven stages of project initiation, design, drawing review, procurement, construction, acceptance, and operations and maintenance. Replace single-point decision-making with multi-point agreement to push the flexible stone scheme forward to implementation.

5.1 The Demands, Risks, and Communication Entry Points of the Five Roles

A facade retrofit project is not purely a technical issue, but a human issue. Who selects the material, whether the scheme passes, and how the money is allocated—behind these are the demands and concerns of five roles. The client, design institute, construction party, supervisor, and street/community residents each have their own demands and fears. Only by understanding each party’s “decision-making power” and “blocking power” can communication entry points be found.

5.1.1 The Client: The Person Who Makes the Decision, Most Afraid of Taking the Blame

The client’s real situation is: limited budget, but the renovation effect must be “visible”; leaders urge progress, residents urge results, and the construction party urges payment; what they fear most is being held accountable if problems arise after renovation. Government clients fear audit problems and resident complaints; property management or owners’ committees fear cost overruns and resident dissatisfaction; commercial clients fear affecting business and losing value in appearance.

There are three communication entry points: compliance is ready—standard basis and test reports can be provided at any time; the economic account has been calculated clearly—it is not just a comparison of material unit prices; safety is guaranteed by the material’s light weight and system approach—detachment risk is far lower than ceramic tiles.

Script for the client: “Three things for the flexible stone scheme are already packaged: standard basis is complete, drawing review can pass; life cycle cost has an account to calculate, budget is controllable; self-weight is only one-fifth of ceramic tiles, no detachment hazards. You only need to make one decision: use flexible stone, or continue using ceramic tiles.”

5.1.2 The Design Institute: The Technical Gatekeeper, Most Afraid of Bearing Responsibility

The design institute’s real situation is: drawings must be produced quickly, but responsibility must be small; unfamiliar with new materials, afraid that drawing review will not pass and that problems will arise later and be held accountable; tends to choose familiar materials, even if they are not the optimal solution.

The three things the design institute cares about most: whether it can pass drawing review—are there standard bases, atlas references, and test reports; whether problems will occur—do performance data support it, is the construction process mature, is there later maintenance assurance; whether it is easy to draw—are there reference node details, are material specifications easy to label, are there supporting construction atlases.

Script for the design institute: “Flexible stone is not a new material without standards; it is already classified in JG/T 311 and JC/T 2219. We provide test reports, system construction atlases, and completed project cases. You can directly reference it as a flexible facing brick system; you do not need to invent nodes yourself.”

The design institute holds technical gatekeeping power; if drawing review does not pass, the project stalls. Therefore, delivering standards, atlases, and cases to the design institute is essentially sharing the responsibility risk for the design institute.

5.1.3 The Construction Party: The People Who Do the Work, Most Afraid of Rework

The construction party’s real situation is: workers do not know how to work with new materials, efficiency is low, and schedule is delayed; unfamiliar with materials, quality is uncertain, and rework is easy; rework means losing money, being scolded, and losing reputation. The three things the construction party cares about most: whether it is easy to work with—how fast workers learn, whether tools are easy to use, how many processes there are; whether rework will occur—whether bonding is firm, whether hollowing and detachment will occur, whether acceptance can pass; whether payment is smooth—whether material supply is timely, whether construction area is calculated clearly, whether change orders are easy to process.

Script for the construction party: “Flexible stone construction is simpler than ceramic tiles—no cutting machine, no thick-set, no long curing period. Workers can get started after one or two days of training, and efficiency is two to three times that of ceramic tiles. The manufacturer provides technical briefings, on-site guidance, and after-sales support. Follow the process, and rework problems are the manufacturer’s responsibility.”

Flexible stone’s thin-set process and special tools have been verified in actual projects. For example, the flexible stone special cutting device independently developed by the compiling unit integrates cutting, fixing, pushing, and dust removal. Workers can operate it without professional cutting experience, lowering the operation threshold and reducing rework risk from the tool level.

5.1.4 The Supervisor: The Person Who Signs, Most Afraid of Unclear Records

The supervisor’s real situation is: after signing, if problems arise, responsibility must be borne; new materials have no acceptance basis, and they do not know how to sign; what they fear most is materials without test reports and construction without concealed works acceptance records. What the supervisor wants is not “convenience,” but “clear responsibility and traceable records.”

Script for the supervisor: “The acceptance basis for flexible stone is ready-made: products are tested according to JG/T 311 or JC/T 2219, construction is accepted according to GB 50210, and bonding strength is confirmed by on-site pull-off tests. The manufacturer provides a full set of test reports, construction record templates, and acceptance checklists. You sign according to the process, and responsibility boundaries are clear.”

The supervisor holds acceptance signing power. Providing acceptance standards, record templates, and test reports is essentially helping the supervisor complete the record-keeping work in advance.

5.1.5 Street, Community, and Residents: Most Easily Overlooked, Most Not to Be Offended

Residents’ real demands are: construction should not be too noisy, too dirty, or too long; after renovation, it should look good, be durable, and nothing should fall off; what they fear most is construction accidents, toxic materials, and problems recurring after renovation. Streets and communities fear resident complaints the most. If residents are dissatisfied, the project can stall at any time.

Flexible stone has three friendliness factors for residents: construction-friendly—no cutting, no heavy equipment, low noise, little dust, little waste; life-friendly—short schedule, no odor, segmented construction possible, does not affect normal life; safety-friendly—light self-weight, low detachment risk, no sharp edges, fire rating up to B1 or A2.

Script for residents and streets: “The flexible stone used in this renovation weighs only one-fifth of ceramic tiles and will not detach and injure people; construction noise is low and waste is little; the schedule is half that of traditional schemes. The renovated effect is close to stone, but maintenance costs are much lower.”

The sample wall is the most direct communication tool. Letting residents touch, see, and compare is more effective than a hundred explanations.

Table 5-1 Overview of Core Demands, Risks, and Communication Entry Points of the Five Roles

Case: “Passing Each Person’s Approval” for a Facade Retrofit Community Exterior Wall Scheme

In a southern city old residential community exterior wall renovation, the original scheme was to remove walls and reapply ceramic tiles. Residents worried about ceramic tile detachment, the design institute worried about drawing review, and the client worried about budget overruns. After the flexible stone manufacturer entered, it advanced in four steps: first, submitted standard basis and node atlases to the design institute, and the design institute confirmed that drawings could be produced; then calculated the life cycle cost account for the client, proving that the total cost was controllable; subsequently, made a flexible stone sample wall at the community entrance, and residents no longer objected after seeing it; finally, promised technical training and on-site guidance to the construction party, eliminating rework concerns. The scheme gained five-party approval within two weeks, and the renovation schedule was shortened by about half compared with the original scheme.

Case insight: There is no “one-time persuasion” shortcut in facade retrofit projects; only by resolving each party’s fears one by one can the scheme be approved as a whole.

5.2 Key Person Timeline: Connect with the Right People at the Right Stage

Each stage of a facade retrofit project has different key people, and key people at different stages control different matters. Finding the wrong person and delivering the wrong materials will stall even the best scheme.

5.2.1 Project Initiation and Design Stage: Connect with Government Clients and Design Institutes

At the project initiation stage, the government client or owners’ committee determines the budget and renovation scope. At this time, compliance schemes and case lists should be provided to explain that flexible stone conforms to the policy direction of urban renewal actions, helping the client include flexible stone in the scheme during preliminary argumentation. At the design stage, the design institute determines materials and system approaches. At this time, standard bases, construction atlases, and test reports should be provided so that the design institute can directly reference them.

5.2.2 Drawing Review and Procurement Stage: Connect with Drawing Review Companies and Client Procurement

At the drawing review stage, the drawing review company verifies compliance. At this time, standard bases, test reports, and complete document chains should be submitted in advance to avoid being returned at the drawing review stage. At the procurement stage, client procurement determines brand and price. At this time, a life cycle cost account should be provided so that procurement sees not just material unit prices, but comprehensive cost advantages.

5.2.3 Construction and Acceptance Stage: Connect with Construction Parties, Supervisors, and Quality Supervision Stations

At the construction stage, the construction party and supervisor determine quality and progress. At this time, technical briefings and on-site training should be organized, and node practice guidance should be provided to ensure construction according to drawings. At the acceptance stage, the supervisor and quality supervision station determine whether to pass. At this time, acceptance checklists, construction record templates, and test reports should be provided so that acceptance personnel can check according to the process and sign smoothly.

5.2.4 Operations and Maintenance Stage: Connect with Property Management and Residents

At the operations and maintenance stage, property management and residents determine reputation and repeat purchases. At this time, after-sales visits, repair commitments, and cleaning and maintenance instructions should be provided. A facade retrofit project does not end upon delivery; later reputation directly affects the next order.

Table 5-2 Key Person Timeline for Facade Retrofit Projects

Case: Bid Opportunity from Early Intervention at the Project Initiation Stage

When a district facade retrofit project was still in preliminary initiation, the flexible stone manufacturer learned that the owners’ committee was worried about “both improving the facade and fearing budget overruns.” The manufacturer, together with the design institute’s scheme team, prepared a flexible stone thin-set scheme and investment estimate in advance and included them in the project proposal. When the project was formally procured later, the technical parameters had already been set according to the flexible stone system, and the manufacturer successfully won the bid. Although competitors also participated in bidding at the same time, they were excluded because their schemes did not conform to the preset parameters.

Case insight: Intervention at the initiation stage has the lowest cost and greatest effect. Waiting until the bidding announcement is issued to enter is already too late.

5.3 Four Principles for Promoting Facade Retrofit Implementation

5.3.1 Multi-Point Agreement, No Single-Point Decision-Making

Facade retrofit projects have no “single-point decision,” only “multi-point agreement.” The client’s decision does not mean the project is implemented; any party among the design institute, drawing review, supervisor, and residents shaking their heads is enough to stall the project. The key to promoting flexible stone is not to win over one person, but to make every party nod.

5.3.2 Resolve Fears First, Then Discuss Product Value

Every party has its own fears: the client fears taking the blame, the design institute fears bearing responsibility, the construction party fears rework, the supervisor fears unclear records, and residents fear disturbance. No matter how good the product is, as long as fears are not resolved, decisions will not move forward. The communication sequence should be to first deliver a “reassurance pill,” then discuss “value points.”

5.3.3 Deliver the Right Materials at the Right Stage

At the initiation stage, give policy messaging; at the design stage, give standard atlases; at the drawing review stage, give test reports; at the procurement stage, give cost accounts; at the construction stage, give technical briefings; at the acceptance stage, give acceptance checklists. Delivering materials at the wrong stage is not only ineffective but also consumes trust. The key person timeline should be dynamically updated, tracking to people and matters.

5.3.4 Speak with Data, Prove with Samples

Empty talk is not as good as data, and data is not as good as physical objects. Test reports, cost comparisons, and bonding strength pull-off data solve the “dare not use” problem; sample walls, completed photos, and on-site visits solve the “never seen” problem. Data builds trust, samples close distance, and both are indispensable.

Case: Sample Wall Dispels Dual Concerns of Residents and Supervisor

Before entering a facade retrofit project, residents complained most about “what if ceramic tiles fall off,” and the supervisor worried about “how to accept new materials without standards.” The manufacturer made a two-square-meter flexible stone sample wall at the community entrance, labeling material weight, fire rating, and test report number; at the same time, submitted an acceptance checklist and construction record template prepared according to GB 50210 to the supervisor. After the sample wall was displayed for a week, residents no longer objected; after the supervisor confirmed the acceptance chain was complete, agreed to enter the next process.

Case insight: Data and samples solve different roles’ problems; one display cannot replace item-by-item connection.

5.4 From “Persuading the Client” to “Making Every Party Nod”

The logic of traditional building material sales is to “win over the client”; once the client nods, the deal is set. Facade retrofit projects are obviously not like this. After the client makes the decision, the design institute can gatekeep technically, the drawing review company can veto compliance, the supervisor can refuse to sign, and residents can complain and stall. If any party vetoes, the project may return to the starting point.

Therefore, the focus of flexible stone promotion must shift from “persuading the client” to “making every party nod,” requiring three transformations:

First, the decision-making subject changes from “one person” to “five roles.” The communication list must at least cover the client, design institute, construction party, supervisor, and street/residents.

Second, the core capability changes from “relationship maintenance” to “interest balancing.” Relationships can only solve the client’s side; interest balancing can solve the demands and risks of five parties.

Third, the source of risk changes from “client replacement” to “any party’s veto.” There is still room for maneuver when the client is replaced, but resident complaints or supervisor refusal to sign may directly stall the project.

Table 5-3 Differences Between Single-Point Decision-Making and Multi-Point Agreement

Case: “Property Management Nod” in a Commercial Facade Retrofit Project

In a street-front commercial building exterior wall renovation, the owner initially selected aluminum panels, but the property management company opposed it, believing that construction would require large-scale scaffolding and affect merchant business. The flexible stone manufacturer provided the property management with a thin-set scheme: use gondolas for local operations, construct in zones and sections, and merchants do not need to suspend business; at the same time, provided material combustion performance reports to meet fire protection review. After the property management recognized it, the owner immediately adjusted the scheme, and the project was completed on schedule.

Case insight: The “blocker” in the intermediate link often determines the final scheme. Helping the intermediate link solve difficulties will tilt the final decision toward you.

Decision Reference for Facade Retrofit Offices

Decision Matter

Whether the stakeholder coordination mechanism for facade retrofit project exterior wall material schemes should be adjusted according to the “multi-point agreement” framework for the entire process from initiation to operations and maintenance.

Situation Assessment

The decision chain of facade retrofit projects is jointly constituted by five roles, and any party holds a de facto veto power. The client has project initiation and procurement leadership, but fears audit and complaints most; the design institute has technical gatekeeping power, but fears drawing review failure and later accountability most; the construction party determines on-site quality and efficiency, but fears rework and losing money most; the supervisor holds acceptance signing power, but fears unclear records most; streets and residents have public opinion and stalling influence, but fear disturbance and safety accidents most. Single-point decision-making is no longer valid in facade retrofit scenarios; multi-point agreement is the realistic path for project implementation. Intervention at the initiation stage has the lowest cost and greatest effect; once materials are delivered at the wrong stage, they are not only ineffective but also consume trust.

Optional Paths

Path one: Maintain the traditional “win over the client” model—fast decision-making, low cost, but veto by any link among the design institute, drawing review, supervisor, and residents may cause project stagnation.

Path two: Establish a multi-point agreement mechanism according to “five roles and seven stages,” resolve fears party by party, deliver the right materials stage by stage, and build trust with data and samples—steady project advancement but higher preliminary investment.

Path three: Implement tiered strategies—key projects managed through the full multi-point agreement framework, general projects focusing on the client with key intervention at key nodes, balancing efficiency and risk control.

Decision Recommendations

It is recommended that facade retrofit projects regard “multi-point agreement” as the basic framework for advancing exterior wall material schemes. Specific operations: at the initiation stage, assist the client in including the flexible stone scheme and investment estimate in the project proposal; at the design stage, submit standard bases, node atlases, and test reports to the design institute; at the drawing review stage, ensure the document chain is complete and closed; at the procurement stage, provide life cycle cost accounts; at the construction stage, organize technical briefings and on-site training; at the acceptance stage, provide acceptance checklists and construction record templates; at the operations and maintenance stage, establish after-sales visit mechanisms to accumulate materials for repeat purchases and reputation. Acceptance indicators are implemented according to the unified standards throughout the book: bonding strength ≥0.4 MPa, hollowing rate ≤5%, flatness ≤3 mm. The compiling team recommends that enterprises adopt “resolve fears first, then discuss product value” as the communication sequence, and build sample walls at key nodes, replacing empty talk with physical objects.

Risk Warnings

The biggest risk is underestimating the veto power of intermediate links. After the client agrees, the design institute refuses drawings, drawing review returns, the supervisor refuses to sign, or resident complaints stall the project—any of these situations is enough to nullify previous work. If intervention is not made in advance at the initiation stage, when the bidding announcement is issued and you enter again, the parameters may have been locked by traditional materials. Delivering materials at the wrong stage is equally dangerous: delivering cost accounts at the design stage or policy messaging at the acceptance stage are both mismatches—not only ineffective but also consuming trust. In addition, sample walls and data materials cannot replace each other; doing only one and ignoring the other will still leave some roles unconvinced.

Reflections on Stone, Insights on Fortune

In facade retrofit projects, materials are hard power, and communication is soft power. Hard power determines whether you can enter; soft power determines whether you can stay. Treat each party’s greatest fear as your own matter to solve, and the scheme will naturally go through.

What truly blocks a scheme is never the material itself, but the little concern in people’s hearts. When concerns are eliminated, decisions move forward; when concerns remain, even the best product will stop on paper. Make the client not take the blame, the design institute not bear responsibility, the construction party not rework, the supervisor have a basis to sign, and residents live with peace of mind—only when all five parties nod is the project truly opened up.

As the compiling team, we believe: multi-point agreement is not compromise, but the wisdom of engineering implementation. Use data to build trust, samples to close distance, records to define responsibility, and results to respond to doubts—the weight of a material is ultimately weighed in people’s consensus.

References

[1] Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development. Standard for Construction Quality Acceptance of Building Decoration: GB 50210-2018[S]. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2018.

[2] Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development. Flexible Facing Brick: JG/T 311-2011[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2011.

[3] Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. Modified Inorganic Powder Composite Building Facing Sheet: JC/T 2219-2014[S]. Beijing: China Building Materials Industry Press, 2014.

[4] Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development. General Code for Building Fire Protection: GB 55037-2022[S]. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2022.