Valuable point by @KarlRedmond2 on #ManufacturersPLG - can clients develop their own insights into product performance?
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6722770145560920064?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A6722770145560920064%2C6724270828638339072%29&replyUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A6722770145560920064%2C6726818534757863424%29

I don't think it is too much to ask to be able to make such evaluations. We suggest all sorts of ways in which structured data could be made available to other actors (including owners and operators). https://communities.theiet.org/blogs/948/6985 
But none of this is possible without structured data.

Now the standards are in place, manufacturers can structure their data accordingly and it can be compared - either for specification, substitution, conformity, installation, asset management, FM, replacement and end of life etc etc.
But the first step is #structureddata.

One of the reasons we mentioned the myth 'specifiers don't want to compare products' in the previous article ( https://communities.theiet.org/blogs/948/7012 ) is that there is a fear that if products could be genuinely compared, then this would detrimentally affect some manufacturers.

I'm of the opinion that such an argument is no way to run a business - if manufacturers can demonstrate #compliance, for example, they shouldn't have to compete with non-compliant products. The only reason they do is lack of reliable information. #ManufacturersPLG

So... structure your data. It will help you protect against fraud, inappropriate substitution, inappropriate installation, and more. Clients and Specifiers are already comparing products. Make it easier for them! #ManufacturersPLG

See all posts in the #ManufacturersPLG series here: https://communities.theiet.org/blogs/948