Photos courtesy of Stop Bugging Me Pest Control
Editor’s note: Stop Bugging Me Pest Control, Seattle, Wash., is largely concentrated on treating multifamily residential properties. In the following, guest editorial Adam Palmer, sales manager, Stop Bugging Me Pest Control, shares some of his observations about this type of work and how he would like to see the pest control industry take the lead in transitioning this work from reactive to proactive strategies.
I have been involved in the pest management industry for the better part of 15 years. The vast majority of that time has been spent serving the multifamily market in the greater Seattle area. During this time, the job and the industry have changed significantly. I recall when a suspected bed bug issue was almost unheard of and was escalated immediately to senior management. We never talked about pesticide resistance, and Integrated Pest Management were the new buzzwords in the commercial market. It seemed like the industry was simpler, and the pests we were called upon to deal with were fewer in number and in variety.
Of course, the industry and my perception of it has changed. Pesticide resistance was always just as prevalent back then as it is today – our awareness has just increased. Subterranean termites were rarely, if ever, seen in the Seattle area; now we have full communities requiring regular termite treatment strategies. And bed bugs have become a seemingly permanent fixture for all of us who work in the multifamily world.
But for me, the biggest change to hit the multifamily pest control world is the approach to our programs for our communities – and the paradigm is about to shift rather drastically. If you are not ready for the change – and if your CLIENTS are not ready – there could be significant consequences.
REACTIVE BY DEFAULT. For the past 15 years, the vast majority of pest control programs in the Seattle market (and from what I have seen nationally, in many markets) are generally reactive by default. I want to stress this isn’t necessarily a bad thing – there are situations where reactive programs make the most sense for both PMPs and property management professionals alike. The problem is a lack of recognition of when a program must make the transition from being reactive to proactive. This crucial failure is causing programs to fail, trust to erode, and an overall lack of faith in our industry and the services that we are able to provide. Allow me to illustrate:
Think of a community that you service that has significant roach, ant, bed bug, or other persistent insect issues. We as pest management professionals know that the ideal way to eradicate the problem(s) that exist would be to inspect every unit and utilize some of the great proactive tools in our arsenal (monitors, baits, dusts, IGRs, and others) on a regular basis. We recognize that if we cannot get into every unit at the property, we cannot have a completely accurate picture of what is taking place. Failure to see what is happening in every unit is then relying on tenants to self-report when there is a problem, and we all know that is an imperfect assumption at its best. Without a program where we are getting into every unit with options to treat on a regular basis, we are relying on tenants to drive the pest control program at the community.
Naturally, such an approach is not inexpensive – and our management companies (and often, the owners that they work for) are hesitant to throw that kind of money at the problem. After all, they never had to do that in years past – why should they do it now? What has changed?
A PROACTVE TREATMENT SCENARIO. Now imagine if you will a fictional lease-up community that has just been built in your service area. This could be a 200-unit midrise in an urban setting, and property management wants to be on top of getting all its vendors set up as soon as the doors open. While getting into every unit of the property at a regular interval and proactively monitoring/baiting/treating would still obviously be the ideal from a technical pest management perspective, most of these units aren’t even rented yet. Management would like some exterior bait stations placed for rodent control, and maybe an allotment of 1-3 units on a semi-regular basis (or something similar) to just reactively take care of any issues that come up that their tenants let them know about.
Selling this new midrise community a fully comprehensive, aggressive, PROACTIVE program just doesn’t make financial sense for the community. The odds of property-wide infestations in that first year when they are being serviced are just too low to warrant a program that probably costs ten times more than the reactive program they are looking for. And, as someone who has worked in property management before, I can tell you – they are right to opt for the reactive control in this situation. The cost just isn’t justified.
But when does the cost become justified? This is the key problem. Far too many of our clients STAY on the very basic, reactive program – and we are equally at fault if we let them – for far too long. If and when problems finally progress to the point where the fully comprehensive and proactive program is needed, the relationship between vendor and management has quite often become so strained that the likelihood of investing in a much more proactive solution is quite low – especially when things “got bad” on your watch.
Our customers need to know that the basic, reactive programs that they usually (and often rightly) request when first managing an asset is NOT a proactive approach to pest management at the community. And I promise you that if you don’t explain that to them, no one will – and you will lose their business and the professional relationship that you have built with them. As a property manager, I would try to get away with a reactive program for as long as I could – but the understanding has to be there that the potential for needs to drastically change is always present in a program where tenants are ultimately the drivers of action.
START COMMUNICATING NOW. So, when do you have this conversation with your customers? Now. Property management is a jack-of-all-trades industry – but rarely is the level of competency on each vendor and its needs adequate without an educational component. Reactive pest control programs can only be employed until they no longer make financial sense for the property – and that is where our input as an industry is going to be so crucial in this paradigm shift.
The change from reactive to proactive pest management programs is really a question of financial perspective. Let me present another example to illustrate this point: The brand-new midrise we discussed earlier, with most its units yet vacant and its pest control needs at a minimum – this community’s pest control cost can afford to be very low. They do not have a significant number of units that are down due to pest-related issues (which results in lost rent revenue), and they don’t yet have hordes of negative reviews complaining about pest problems (which result in reduced curb appeal, reputation, and fewer overall leases). This is the most justified time for a low-cost, reactive program.
But once some of those factors start taking place (negative reviews, down units), management has a choice to make. They can opt to keep the same reactive program in place and budget for all of the lost revenue from the effects of that inadequate program, or they can intensify the pest control program to combat the problem. But the money will need to be spent either way. Your wisest clients will opt for the solution that will protect the reputation of the community (and the asset as a whole), and choose to recognize that an aggressive and proactive pest management program is the only financially responsible choice that they can make.
FINAL THOUGHTS. It is absolutely crucial that you educate your customers about their current programs, and have an honest conversation with them about realistic expectations. Providing pest control services in the multifamily marketplace requires participation and input from tenants, management, and PMPs. Allowing tenants to be the most important variable in that equation sets everyone up for failure and disappointment. Take control of those relationships and make it happen!
