Digital or hardcopy?

As marketing budgets continue evermore to feel the squeeze, is there an opportunity to save costs by cutting hardcopy literature? Maybe not yet, says CIMCIG’s Chris Ashworth.

Every time a plan is hatched to produce a grand piece of technical literature, it’s invariably followed by an equally grand debate; do we need it, can we make it thinner, should we print fewer copies, wouldn’t it be cheaper to rely instead on users downloading it from the Web? Well, latest research conducted by Competitive Advantage suggest that there’s still a need for hardcopy literature, although the trend towards PDF (portable document format) is increasing.

In compiling the Construction Media Index we asked respondents if they used PDF or hardcopy literature. Most used both, but PDF more than hardcopy. PDF was used by just under 80 per cent of respondents, while hardcopy was used by more than half.

Our findings showed that contractors use the PDF format a little less frequently than others, and architects more than most. Hardcopy is most used by surveyors (including quantity surveyors), followed by contractors and interior designers, then engineers and architects. In terms of preference, PDF is more popular with all categories, although hardcopy remains popular with roughly a third. Preferences match usage.

When asked if there was still a role for hardcopy literature the response came back a resounding, ”yes” from all groups bar interior designers, where only just over half concurred. Almost three-quarters of other categories said, “yes”. As favourable as this was, it wasn’t as positive as it was when we last surveyed architects two years ago. Then, all respondents stated that there was still a role for hardcopy literature. Now, only 76 per cent support the same view.

So, hardcopy and digital literature are both required. Should you therefore simply produce the same document in different formats? No. Both need to be designed to recognise the different ways in which they will be used.

Digital is about fast access to information, probably downloaded from a website. It allows the use of quick search facilities. Its disadvantages are poorer representation of colour, and the need to print documents if they’re to be kept for reference, taken on site, or shown to a client or contractor.

Hardcopy is about quality. It facilitates the presentation of your company and products, in print and in pictures, to a far higher standard. Hardcopy format is easier to read, to browse, to show others, and to file with other papers.

Perhaps the growth in popularity of the Kindle, iPad and other flat-screen reading systems will lead to the emergence of new document formats that extend beyond the current limitations of PDF and, in so doing, sound the eventual death-knell for hardcopy literature. But until then I’d keep those stocks of literature for now.

 

Author Chris Ashworth is a member of the organising committee for CIMCIG and founder of Competitive Advantage Consultancy, which specialises in market research and training for the construction industry.

Editor's note

Thank you to Chris and Competitive Advantage for sharing this research. As previously revealed in Print versus online – communicating with architects, product directories are still used by 83 per cent of architects, and whilst the online version is almost twice as popular as the hard copy, a significant proportion of architects use both. This independent survey also confirms RIBA Product Selector to be the most popular product directory. Our own research shows that four out of five recipients of RIBA Product Selector claim to have specified a product having first identified it in the printed directory. Indeed, RIBA Product Selector continues to be requested by all of the top UK practices listed in the AJ100 2010.

 

Back to top