Page 67 - 2016 FGM Annual Report

Measuring Progress
One means to assess the past year is to look at the Higher Ed practice’s vision and strategic goals,
originally established in 2011 and updated annually. Below is the Practice Vision for FY 2017:

HIGHER EDUCATION PRACTICE VISION
FY 2017

I. Vision
FGM is considered a trusted partner in the design of college and university projects. With
dwindling resources and concerns over the long-term health of many higher education
institutions, especially in Illinois, clients and potential teammates seek us out due to our
experience, expertise, process, and well-deserved reputation for satisfying clients by
delivering quality projects on time and on budget.

Success for FGM in the Higher Education practice means that we are building our Higher
Ed credentials by 1) serving as the Architect-of-Record with nationally-recognized
designers on large, complex projects; 2) enhancing our portfolio with smaller
programming, planning, and design opportunities at top tier institutions; 3) self-
performing moderate-sized projects; 4) securing architecture retainer contracts when
appropriate; and 5) developing significant expertise in one or two building types,
enabling us to pursue work as a design architect outside Illinois and Missouri.

II. Goals
To achieve short and long term success as trusted partners in the Higher Education
practice, FGM will undertake the following:

Goal 1: FGM identifies, assesses, and positions itself to win larger project opportunities 6 –
24 months in advance of RFQ/RFP issuance.
In order to gather intelligence on upcoming project opportunities, improve our hit rate,
and develop an appropriate strategy for successfully pursuing targeted projects,
including assembling a project team, FGM must take a proactive approach to business
development.

FY 2017 UPDATE: Without a dedicated Business Development Representative, the Higher
Ed practice relies on more principal-level “prospecting” for opportunities and
networking with BD representatives from trusted partners (e.g. Tom Culliton/KJWW, John
Ross/AEI, Greg Wachalski/Brailsford & Dunlavey) to obtain information about future
pursuits. We will also turn to Caroline Brogan and her staff to research sources such as
the Illinois Board of Higher Education and the Illinois Community College Board.
Obtaining information about future public institution projects in Missouri has been difficult
due to the apparent lack of a centralized information source for pending projects; this
difficulty will be more pronounced with Shelley Simon’s departure, and it is likely our
efforts will be more reactive in Missouri. Steve Raskin has some Higher Ed experience and
could provide some proactive business development effort in Missouri and downstate
Illinois.

Prospecting for repeat work with current clients will be a high priority and will be made a
regular task for principals and project managers engaged on our current projects.

Goal 2: FGM reacts quickly and effectively to project opportunities not previously
tracked following RFQ/RFP issuance from existing clients and targeted prospects.
With proactive business development efforts focused on larger opportunities and
strategic clients/prospects, we will continue to identify smaller project opportunities, and
larger projects that were not identified earlier, only after the issuance of the RFQ or RFP.
These projects are still an integral part of FGM’s Higher Ed practice as we seek new