Technical oversight of online analysis instruments in major projects

Let me start by sharing some of my personal feelings. Due to my work, I often go to design institutes, engineering companies, and customer sites to engage in technical exchanges and discuss various technical solutions. Throughout the communication with the other party, what impressed me the most was that I acquired a great deal of knowledge and experience. This included information on the manufacturing processes, their characteristics, the features of the instruments used, as well as the technical requirements. I also saw that many project owners and engineering designers made every effort to provide technical clarifications and engage in discussions regarding the project, taking into account various aspects such as performance, reliability, maintenance, and cost. But there are other situations as well: for example, when discussing technology with users, some people keep asking about prices, as if they can immediately determine the exact amount for the purchase contract or budget ； For example, some people will worry about whether your instrument performs well or poorly in certain situations; especially when it performs poorly, they think it’s entirely the fault of the manufacturer of the analyzer ； Again, some people ask instrument manufacturers to prepare the instrument design specifications for them or on their behalf, without likely taking into account the specific conditions and environment of the project ； Again, some people adopt an academic attitude and spend a lot of time discussing with you the specific structure of the instrument, the advantages and disadvantages of its principles, and even its past achievements ； For example, some people particularly like to compare products from Company A with those from Company B, and such comparisons often involve comparing product specifications in a similar manner to the strategy used in Tian Ji’s horse racing contest ； …… I’m not saying that this way of discussing things is bad, but when a instrumentation manufacturer communicates with users or designers regarding specific projects, time is limited, and the users or designers present also have varying technical backgrounds. The goal for everyone should be to discuss the application of specific projects, with users or designers providing instrument manufacturers with information such as process conditions, application environments, sample characteristics, and analysis requirements ； Instrument manufacturers, on the other hand, should focus on the specific applications of the projects, provide a brief overview of the product features, detail the application solutions, and offer practical technical guidance and recommendations to users or designers. The interactive communication will be very effective; there can even be debates or arguments as people hold onto their own views and counter those of others, and such an approach will enable both parties to gain something and improve. Meanwhile, a top-down approach to communication or presenting via PPTs may not be very useful for the technical solutions of specific projects.

Going to the site in person is the best way to solve problems. Where there is competition, there is a need to compare options. The improvement of technology lies in its economic value, which is why people always ask about the price.

This post was last edited by qugd on 2017-4-18 at 12:11. Let’s talk more about the suppliers. The supplier could be a manufacturer, an agent, or even a shell company with no capability to carry out any projects. Some large suppliers, who are often also manufacturers, pay attention to aspects such as technology, sales, and service when selling their products in China. Although competition is becoming increasingly fierce, considering the capabilities and reputation of the manufacturers themselves, they generally do not focus solely on price. When following up on projects, they do not focus solely on business aspects; instead, they pay attention to practical applications, on-site conditions, and technical characteristics, and communicate with clients or designers to gain a thorough understanding of their needs. Based on these actual requirements, they handle the technical, business, and service aspects of the project. As for some agents, especially those that can only handle business matters, since they focus mainly on maintaining interpersonal relationships with clients or designers rather than on communication related to technology and services, they rarely assign staff dedicated to these areas; at least, the level of technology and service provided does not meet the actual requirements of clients. When communicating with users or designers, these agents often promise to take on any task or overcome any difficulty, but when it comes to actual project execution, they fail to accomplish many things or do them poorly. In some large-scale projects today, users as well as designers or general contractors often learn about products and services through manufacturers. However, during the bidding process, for various reasons, they do not purchase directly from the manufacturers; instead, they use agents to handle the business transactions. Apart from certain interest-related factors, the main reason is the limitations in payment methods and business terms, which force companies to rely on different types of agents for their procurement needs. Given that there may be a disconnect or incomplete connection between manufacturers and users as well as the design contractors in terms of understanding, communication, and exchange of information, it is quite normal for some issues to arise during project execution. However, regarding these unsatisfactory aspects, users and designers sometimes consider them to be problems related to the execution phase; in such cases, the issues that arise in the project can be addressed objectively. But in many situations, users, designers, or the general contractor fail to fully understand that the problem lies in the execution phase or the methods used, and as a result they tend to attribute the issues to the manufacturer or its local representatives. If domestic users or the design general contractor can anticipate potential problems during the execution of the business contract, then in the business or technical discussions, the business agent who is directly involved in the bidding should be designated as the sole entity responsible for carrying out the project. This entity would then bear the responsibilities and address any issues, thereby imposing constraints on its duties and obligations. This approach could yield very good results for the users or design general contractor, as well as for the manufacturer. If this can be done, it should reduce many business and technical issues arising from bids at low prices.

I’ve been following several large projects recently, some owned by state-owned enterprises and others by private companies. During the project development process, since online analytical instruments were the main focus, there was considerable interaction with the owners and the supervisors in charge of online analytical instruments at the design institutes. During the project follow-up process, it is essential to create a shortlist of suppliers. Determining who or which party is responsible for compiling this shortlist proves to be a complicated task, and suppliers in the same category also strive hard to have their products included on the list. Today, many online analyzers have seen varying degrees of development in terms of principle, application, structure, accuracy, and maintenance; meanwhile, their configuration is related to both the process conditions and the properties of the medium being analyzed. The client usually brings in various potential suppliers separately to conduct technical/product discussions and to learn about each supplier’s capabilities (sometimes the aim is actually to understand the basic principles and applications of the analyzers produced by these different manufacturers). Since different manufacturers focus on different aspects during these presentations and discussions, they sometimes emphasize the advantages of their own products, downplay those of their competitors, and exaggerate the shortcomings of others. The personnel on the client’s side may, due to differences in their professional knowledge, be unable to evaluate the products of different manufacturers objectively and comprehensively; they might also struggle to understand and discuss specific applications in detail. In a sense, this is akin to trying to understand an elephant by touching only its parts. In situations like this, if the instrument supplier deliberately misleads users or designs things in favor of a particular product or application, it becomes difficult to avoid ending up harmed. For us, as instrument suppliers or manufacturers, it is indeed not easy to be responsible to our customers while also trying to satisfy our company – it is a very challenging task. If we are not responsible, during the bidding process we only meet the minimum technical and commercial requirements specified in the bidding documents. Especially for some private enterprises, which lack or have fewer comprehensive commercial and technical regulations like those in large state-owned enterprises, various technical and commercial pitfalls may arise in areas such as supply, equipment provision, services, and operation and maintenance. In the end, it is these enterprises that suffer, particularly those business agencies that settle for minimal standards, making promises first before finding reasons to fail to fulfill them – such behavior has surely been seen many times by everyone. However, due to the abusive terms in the business agreements and dishonest practices in the payment process employed by many Chinese companies, many manufacturers are reluctant to sign direct business contracts with owners or general contractors; they also consider offering reduced services, maintenance, and support due to difficulties in collecting payments. In fact, in many projects, the problems arising from the setup, installation, use, maintenance, and support of online instruments on the part of the project owner or general contractor are something that can be anticipated from the very beginning of the project. Attempting to drive down prices aggressively and failing to fulfill contractual obligations in good faith are inevitable consequences of a lack of attention to technical integrity and commercial honesty.