New Study Finds Adoption of Dimming Systems to Be Increasing

By Craig DiLouie, Lighting Controls Association

Posted January 2005

Adoption of dimming systems is slowly increasing as lighting industry participants seek benefits of greater flexibility and energy savings, according to a new study conducted by ZING Communications, Inc.

The 2004-2005 Dimming Study, co-sponsored by the Lighting Controls Association, explores attitudes in the specification distribution and contractor sales channel by providing and analyzing survey data from architects, lighting designers, engineers, electrical and lighting distributors, and electrical contractors. The 219-page study is based on a survey distributed to 4,317 industry participants with a 6.7% response.

“The Study’s results validate what we, as various manufacturers of dimming equipment, have believed to be true for some time,” says A. J. Glaser, President of HUNT Dimming and the Lighting Controls Association.

The research suggests that the use of dimming systems is steadily increasing, largely due to lighting industry participants specifying and recommending dimming systems to their clients primarily to provide the benefits of flexibility and energy savings in their projects. The research further suggests that dimming is being used in a broader range of spaces and applications, such as personal control and global control that includes integration with other building systems.

“Flexibility has become a staple need in lighting projects,” says Glaser. “It’s similar to the computer industry maxim, ‘smaller, cheaper, faster.’ Flexibility ensures that the lighting can adapt to multiple uses of the space and can be tuned to occupant needs, which can increase productivity. Conversely, lack of flexibility can often detract from an otherwise successful installation.”

Lighting industry participants largely agree that dimming is perceived as a “green” technology, that daylighting/daylight harvesting is becoming more important as an energy-saving strategy, and that today’s manufacturers offer “good products and services.”

“Dimming is fast becoming the low-hanging fruit in legislated energy savings,” says Glaser. “We have seen previous codes first address occupancy sensors and automated lighting control panels. Dimming, in particular daylight harvesting, will likely be next. The energy savings potential is tremendous.”

In addition, lighting designers, architects, engineers and electrical contractors generally regard most types of dimming strategies and equipment to generally meet their performance expectations, with low-voltage master controllers and programming, personal dimming control, centralized dimming control and dimming panels scoring highest.

The research further suggests that distributors are motivated to sell dimming systems and believe that dimming equipment generally raises profit on a project. Electrical contractors are highly comfortable installing dimming equipment and believe they make a good profit on projects that feature dimming.

The three most significant barriers to specification and adoption of dimming systems, say respondents, are cost, complexity of design and installation, and variation in dimming performance by manufacturer and ballast type. A majority of market participants anticipate that they would experience higher sales if these barriers were removed. The research suggests that distributors, in particular, anticipate that their sales would at least double.

“The industry is working to break down barriers to adoption through organizations such as the Lighting Controls Association ,” says Glaser. “We have already made extraordinary progress in ensuring interoperability between products from different manufacturers. I believe that dimming systems are going to continue to become more sophisticated and open in architecture, allowing better integration and compatibility with existing building systems and components. Adoption of dimming will continue to increase and we will see more installations in smaller building applications as the technologies become commonplace and more critical as a component in a successful energy program.”

Which market participants are most influential in selection of various types of dimming equipment?
The research suggests that, overall, engineers and, to a somewhat lesser extent, lighting designers, are most influential in selection of most types of dimming products, although there is indication that electrical contractors are highly influential in selection.

Respondents were asked to rate their own level of influence in selection of dimming ballasts, dimming panels, light sensors, occupancy sensors (when used with dimming system), and dimming controls (wallbox dimmers, etc.).

Respondents were also asked to identify the market participant who most often specifies the dimming systems in their building projects, as well as which market participant who most often commissions the dimming system.

Combined, these metrics indicate a relative degree of influence over specification, selection and commissioning of dimming equipment for each of the respondent groups studied.

Lighting design respondents, on average, rate themselves as highly influential ( >4.0 weighted average rating) in selection of dimming ballasts (4.3), dimming panels (4.2) and controls (wallbox dimmers, etc.) (4.3). A majority of lighting designer respondents (80%) report that they themselves most often specify dimming systems in their projects. More than one-fifth of lighting designer respondents (22%) also report that they most often commission the dimming system, although less than one-third (31%) report that manufacturer technicians most often commission the system, and about one-fifth (19%) say the electrical contractor most often commissions the system.

Architect respondents, on average, rated themselves as highly influential in selection of controls (wallbox dimmers, etc.) only (4.1). Less than one-half (47%) report that they themselves most often specify the dimming system, although more than one-fourth (27%) report that the engineer most often specifies the system. In addition, 40% of architect respondents say they commission the system as well, while about one-fourth (26%) report the electrical contractor most often performs this task.

Engineer respondents, on average, rate themselves as highly influential in selection of all equipment types: dimming ballasts (4.6), dimming panels (4.6), light sensors (4.6), occupancy sensors (4.5) and controls (wallbox dimmers, etc.) (4.5). A majority of engineer respondents (93%) report that they themselves most often specify the dimming system. In addition, 41% of engineer respondents report that they also commission the dimming system, while about one-fourth (26%) say the electrical contractor most often performs this task.

Distributor respondents, on average, do not rate themselves as highly influential in selection of any equipment type. Less than one-half (46%) report that the engineer most often specifies the dimming system, while about one-fifth (19%) say the lighting designer most often specifies the system and less than one-fifth (17%) say the architect most often specifies the system. Less than one-half (47%) report that the electrical contractor most often commissions the dimming system.

Electrical contractor respondents, on average, rate themselves as highly influential in selection of light sensors (4.0) and controls (wallbox dimmers, etc.) (4.0). Further results may be surprising. Less than one-half (46%) say they themselves most often specify the dimming systems in their building projects, and 60% say manufacturer technicians most often commission the dimming systems in their projects.

There appears to be disagreement between the three players on the design team (lighting designers, architects, engineers) about who is most influential in product selection and who most often specifies the dimming system. The most critical question is, “Who most often specifies the dimming systems in your building projects?” since it allows an objective view beyond subjective self ratings regarding influence. The engineer is most often cited by all other surveyed market participants as the party that most often specifies the dimming system (100 score), compared to the lighting designer (55), architect (35) and electrical contractor (25). Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the research suggests that the engineer is the most important specifier.

There appears to be further disagreement about the importance of the electrical contractor. Respondents representing the design team, in general, do not perceive the electrical contractor as very influential. When asked who most often specifies the dimming systems in their building projects, those who indicated the “electrical contractor” included only 3% of lighting designer, 7% of architect, 2% of engineer, and 13% of distributor respondents. However, 46% of electrical contractor respondents say they themselves most often specify the dimming systems on their building projects. This seeming disagreement may be explained by the fact that the electrical contractor may engage in substitutions, putting them in a position of choosing the dimming system. It may also indicate that electrical contractors are responsible for specification in a significant number of projects in which there is no other design authority—that is, no architect, lighting designer or engineer involved in the project. The latter proposition, if true, would indicate a much higher degree of overall influence for the electrical contractor than is otherwise suggested by the research.

It’s further interesting to note that while electrical contractors are credited with most often commissioning the dimming system by 19% of lighting designer, 27% of architect, 26% of engineer and 47% of distributor respondents, 60% of electrical contractor respondents report that manufacturer technicians most often commission the dimming system.

Table 1. What is your level of influence over selection of each of the following types of dimming products (including manufacturer) on a typical lighting project, on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “not influential,” 3 being “somewhat influential,” and 5 being “very influential”?

What are the leading motivators for market participants to specify or recommend dimming systems?
The research suggests that flexibility, energy savings and client request are the top motivators across the entire lighting sales channel for market participants to specify or recommend dimming systems.

Respondents were asked to rate the importance of various motivators to specify or recommend these systems on a scale of 1 to 5, which 1 being “not important,” 3 being “somewhat important” and 5 being “very important.” The motivators include, “give occupants personal dimming control,” “client requests it,” “add value to the design,” “energy savings,” “obtain utility rebates and incentives,” “ability light the space for different uses (flexibility),” “mood setting,” and “extend lamp life.” Ratings were compiled to yield a single weighted average response for each motivator for each group of respondents. If the motivator received a score of 4.0 or higher, it is considered to be of high importance.

Lighting designer respondents, on average, rate the ability to light the space for different uses (flexibility) (4.5) and mood setting (4.3) to be of highest importance. Lighting designer respondents are the only respondent group to consider mood setting to be of high importance.

Architect respondents, on average, rate the ability to light the space for different uses (flexibility) (4.6), client request (4.5), energy savings (4.4), and giving occupants personal dimming control (4.1) to be of highest importance. This respondent group considers the highest number of motivators to be of high importance. It is the only respondent group to regard giving occupants personal dimming control to be of high importance.

Engineer respondents, on average, rate client request (4.2), energy savings (4.0), and the ability to light the space for different uses (flexibility) (4.0) to be of highest importance. This respondent group has similar motivations to architect respondents, although engineer respondents consider giving occupants personal dimming control to be only somewhat important.

Distributor respondents, on average, do not consider any of the motivators to be of high importance. “Energy savings” ranked highest (3.9).

Electrical contractor respondents, on average, consider energy savings (4.0) and client request (4.0) to be of high importance when specifying or recommending dimming systems. This suggests that electrical contractors, when placed in a position of specifying or recommending dimming to clients, on average regard dimming primarily as an energy-saving strategy.

None of the respondent groups rate extending lamp life, obtaining utility rebates and incentives, and adding value to the design to be of high importance.

Table 2. How important are the following reasons that you specify dimming systems in building spaces, on a scale of 1-5, with 1 being “not important,” 3 being “somewhat important,” and 5 being “very important”?

*Distributors and contractors were asked, “On a scale of 1-5, with 1 being ‘not important’ and 5 being ‘very important,’ what is the importance of each of the following factors to your decision to recommend dimming systems to your clients?”

What is the prevailing trend in adoption of dimming systems? What are the major trends in use?
The research suggests that the use of dimming systems in building spaces is slowly increasing. The research further suggests that lighting designers, architects and, to a lesser extent, engineers are bullish on the trend, while distributors and electrical contractors are less bullish in their outlook, possibly due to their being engaged in a broader scope of lighting transactions than lighting designers, architects and engineers.

In addition, the research suggests that there is a perception of dimming as a “green” technology, that manufacturers offer “good products and services,” and that daylighting/daylight harvesting is becoming more important.

In a series of questions, various market participants were asked about the penetration of dimming systems. Lighting designer respondents report that they specify dimming systems in an average 79% of their building projects; architect respondents report that they specify dimming systems in an average 77% of their projects; and engineer respondents report that they specify dimming systems in an average 49% of their projects. (These numbers may sound high.) Distributor respondents report that, on average, 35% of their customers purchased dimming systems over the past year. Electrical contractor respondents report that they install dimming systems in an average of 24% of their building projects.

Respondents were asked how they would characterize the trend in use of dimming systems in building spaces, given a choice of rapidly increasing, slowly increasing, holding steady, slowly decreasing or rapidly decreasing.

All lighting designer respondents (100%) say that the trend is slowly or rapidly increasing. Three-fourth (75%) say that it is slowly increasing, and one-fourth (25%) say that it is rapidly increasing.

Similarly, all architect respondents (100%) say that the trend is slowly or rapidly increasing, with about two-thirds (67%) saying it is slowly increasing and one-third (33%) saying it is rapidly increasing.

Seventy-nine percent (79%) of engineer respondents say that the trend in use of dimming systems in building spaces is slowly or rapidly increasing, while about one-fifth (21%) say it is holding steady. About two-thirds (64%) say the trend is slowly increasing, while one-sixth (15%) say it is rapidly increasing.

Distributors are the only respondent group that sees the trend decreasing. Seven percent (7%) of distributor respondents say the trend is slowly decreasing. Less than one-third (30%) say it is holding steady. Less than two-thirds (63%) say it is slowly or rapidly increasing. About one-half (48%) say the trend is slowly increasing, while one-sixth (15%) say it’s rapidly increasing.

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of electrical contractor respondents say the trend in use of dimming systems in building spaces is slowly or rapidly increasing. One-half (50%) say it is slowly increasing, while about one-fifth (19%) say it is rapidly increasing. Less than one-third (31%) say it is holding steady.

To further identify general trends related to dimming, respondents were given a list of statements and asked to what extent they agreed with them on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “don’t agree,” 3 being “somewhat agree,” and 5 being “totally agree.” The result was a series of weighted averages for each statement that are reflective of the average opinion of each respondent group. A rating of 4.0 or higher indicates that the statement, on average, has a high level of agreement by the respondent group.

“Costs are coming down.” Lighting designer respondents, on average, have a low agreement with this statement (2.8), while architect and engineer respondents somewhat agree with it (3.0 and 3.2, respectively). Distributors and electrical contractors were asked whether they agree with two statements, whether dimming ballast costs and dimming controls costs are coming down. Distributor respondents, on average, somewhat agree that dimming ballast costs are coming down (3.1) but have a low level of agreement that dimming controls costs are coming down (2.9). Contractor respondents, on average, somewhat agree that both costs are coming down (3.2 and 3.1, respectively).

“Components are interoperable/Different manufacturers’ products work well together as a system.” All of the respondent groups, on average, have a low level of agreement with this statement: lighting designer respondents (2.6), architect respondents (2.8), engineer respondents (2.7), distributor respondents (2.0) and electrical contractor respondents (2.8). Of all the statements, this engendered the lowest level of agreement, suggesting a perception that there has been insufficient progress to either make various products successfully interoperable, or educate the market about advances in interoperability.

In a later question, lighting designers, engineers and distributors were asked how well various manufacturer services typically meet their performance expectations on a scale of 1 to 5. The respondent groups indicated that they regard manufacturers’ “interoperability with other manufacturers’ products” to fall short of meeting their performance expectations (2.4, 2.0 and 2.4, respectively).

“Daylighting/Daylight harvesting is becoming more important.” This statement scored in the top three statements in regards to level of agreement. Respondents from the design team perspective, on average, all have a high level of agreement with this statement: lighting designer respondents (4.0), architect respondents (4.6) and engineer respondents (4.1). Distributor respondents, on average, have a low level of agreement with this statement (2.0), while electrical contractor respondents, on average, more than somewhat agree with this statement (3.9).

“Specifiers have enough education to specify dimming systems properly.” This statement earned the second lowest level of agreement among all respondent groups. Engineer and distributor respondents somewhat agree with this statement (3.0 and 3.2, respectively), while lighting designer, architect and electrical contractor respondents have a low level of agreement with this statement (2.7, 2.9 and 2.7, respectively). Further, electrical contractor respondents, when asked specifically to what extent they agree with the statement, “Specifiers rarely provide enough or accurate-enough information on drawings,” indicated that they more than somewhat agree with the statement (3.6).

“Contractors can install today’s dimming systems without difficulty.” This statement earned the third lowest level of agreement among respondent groups. The design team, in turn, gives only lukewarm agreement to contractors’ ability to install dimming systems without difficulty. Lighting designer and engineer respondents have a low level of agreement with this statement (2.5 and 2.9, respectively), while architect respondents somewhat agree with the statement (3.1). Distributor respondents, on average, similarly have a low level of agreement with the statement (2.7). Electrical contractor respondents, however, on average more than somewhat agree with it (3.7).

In a later question, “lack of skilled labor to install and commission equipment” was presented to respondents as a supposed barrier to specification and adoption of dimming systems, and respondents were asked to rate its importance on a scale of 1 to 5. All respondents except for electrical contractors rated this as somewhat or more than somewhat in importance as a barrier: lighting designer respondents (3.4), architect respondents (3.2), engineer respondents (3.2), distributor respondents (3.0), and electrical contractor respondents (2.9).

“Giving personal dimming control to occupants is a priority for end-users.” Architect, distributor and electrical contractor respondents, on average, somewhat agree with this statement (3.2, 3.1 and 3.6, respectively), with electrical contractor respondents, it’s interesting to note, having the highest level of agreement. Lighting designer and engineer respondents each have a low level of agreement with this statement (2.9 and 2.8, respectively).

“Dimming is a ‘green’ technology.” This statement earned one of the three highest levels of agreement among the respondent groups. Architect and engineer respondents, on average, have a high level of agreement with this statement (4.2 and 4.1, respectively), while lighting designer and electrical contractor respondents, on average, more than somewhat agree (3.9 and 3.6, respectively). Distributor respondents, on average, somewhat agree with it (3.0).

“Energy savings are fairly predictable with dimming systems.” Distributor respondents, on average, more than somewhat agree with this statement (3.7), while lighting designer and electrical contractor respondents somewhat agree with it (3.1 and 3.3, respectively). Architect and engineer respondents have a low level of agreement with the statement (2.9 for each group).

“Dimming systems are reliable.” While no respondent group has a high level of agreement with this statement, it scored fourth in level of agreement among respondent groups. Lighting designer, engineer and electrical contractor respondents, on average, more than somewhat agree with this statement (3.9, 3.8 and 3.8, respectively), while architect and distributor respondents somewhat agree with it (3.3 and 3.2, respectively).

“Manufacturers offer good products and service.” This statement earned one of the top three highest levels of agreement among respondent groups. Lighting designer respondents, on average, have a high level of agreement with this statement (4.0). All other groups more than somewhat agree with it: architect respondents (3.6), engineer respondents (3.8), distributor respondents (3.8) and electrical contractor respondents (3.5).

“Manufacturer sales reps are knowledgeable and responsive.” This statement did not receive as enthusiastic agreement as that given to the manufacturers’ products and service. All respondent groups, however, more than somewhat agree with this statement: lighting designer respondents (3.3), architect respondents (3.6), engineer respondents (3.7), distributor respondents (3.3), and electrical contractor respondents (3.6).

“Distributors have all the education they need to sell dimming systems effectively.” This statement was posed only to distributors; respondents, on average, more than somewhat agree with this statement (3.8).

“My company earns a good profit when it sells/installs dimming systems.” This statement was posed only to distributors and electrical contractors. Both more than somewhat agree with this statement: distributor respondents (3.4) and electrical contractor respondents (3.5).

Table 3. Please review the below statements related to dimming systems specified for building spaces, and indicate how much you agree or disagree with the statement on a scale of 1-5, with 1 being “don’t agree,” 3 being “somewhat agree,” and 5 being “totally agree.”

What markets, lamp types and types of equipment are commanding the most specification dollars?
The research suggests that lighting designer and architect specification volume is devoted primarily to commercial spaces such as offices, retail, etc., while engineer specification volume is devoted primarily to institutional spaces such as government, schools, hospitals, etc.

The research also suggests that lighting designers and architects are seeing specification dollars most often dedicated to dimming of incandescent lamps, while engineers are seeing specification dollars most often dedicated to dimming of fluorescent lamps.

In addition, the research suggests that lighting designers and architects most often specify dimming systems for localized applications such as training rooms in their projects, while engineers most often do not specify dimming systems at all.

The research further suggests that lighting designers and engineers most often specify preset-type controls for dimming systems that they specify, while architects most often specify non-preset-type controls.

Finally, the research suggests that lighting designers, architects and engineers most often specify dimming systems that are not integrated with other types of building systems such as occupancy sensors, HVAC, security/proximity, telephone/communications, and PC/networks.

Respondents in the lighting designer, architect and engineer groups were asked to indicate the percentage of their specifications by building space type, lamp type, localized vs. facilitywide systems vs. no dimming system, preset vs. non-preset type, and systems that are integrated into other building systems vs. those that are not.

Forty-four percent (44%) of lighting designer respondents report that, overall, their specification dollars are dedicated to commercial spaces such as offices, retail, etc. The remainder is devoted to residential (single-home, multi-family) (30%), institutional (government, schools, hospitals, etc.) (22%) and industrial (manufacturing, warehouses, etc.) (4%). Regarding lamp type, lighting designer respondents report that their specification dollars, overall, are dedicated to incandescent (57%), fluorescent (35%), HID (3%) and other (5%). Specification dollars are most often dedicated to dimming systems for localized applications such as training rooms (47%), followed by facilitywide dimming systems (lighting control integrated with other types of building control systems) (32%). Lighting designer respondents report that, overall, they do not specify dimming systems in about one-fifth (21%) of their building projects.

Table 4. Overall, what percentage of your dimming specification dollars are for each of the following building spaces …? (Numbers must add up to 100%.)

In addition, for those projects where dimming systems are specified, lighting designer respondents report, on average, that they specify preset-type controls in 70% of their dimming specifications. Lighting designer respondents, on average, integrate the dimming system into other types of building systems such as occupancy sensors, HVAC, security/proximity, telephone/communications, and PC/network in 39% of the dimming systems that they specify overall.

Forty-four percent (44%) of architect respondents report that, overall, their specification dollars are dedicated to commercial spaces such as offices, retail, etc. The remainder is devoted to residential (single-home, multi-family) (35%), institutional (government, schools, hospitals, etc.) (18%) and industrial (manufacturing, warehouses, etc.) (3%). Regarding lamp type, architect respondents report that their specification dollars, overall, are dedicated to incandescent (50%), fluorescent (42%), HID (4%) and other (4%). Specification dollars are most often dedicated to dimming systems for localized applications such as training rooms (58%), followed by facilitywide dimming systems (lighting control integrated with other types of building control systems) (19%). Architect respondents report that, overall, they do not specify dimming systems in less than one-fourth (23%) of their building projects.

In addition, for those projects where dimming systems are specified, architect respondents report, on average, that they specify preset-type controls in 45% of their dimming specifications. Architect respondents, on average, integrate the dimming system into other types of building systems such as occupancy sensors, HVAC, security/proximity, telephone/communications, and PC/network in 28% of the dimming systems that they specify overall.

Table 5. Overall, what percentage of your dimming specification dollars is for each of the following types of lighting …? (Numbers must add up to 100%.)

About one-half of engineer respondents (49%) report that, overall, their specification dollars are dedicated to institutional spaces such as government, schools, hospitals, etc. The remainder is devoted to commercial (offices, retail, etc.) (38%), industrial (manufacturing, warehouses, etc.) (7%) and residential (single-home, multi-family) (6%). Regarding lamp type, engineer respondents report that their specification dollars, overall, are dedicated to fluorescent (54%), incandescent (39%), fluorescent (35%), HID (5%) and other (2%). Specification dollars are most often dedicated to dimming systems for localized applications such as training rooms (37%), followed by facilitywide dimming systems (lighting control integrated with other types of building control systems) (12%). Engineer respondents report that, overall, they do not specify dimming systems in about one-half (51%) of their building projects.

In addition, for those projects where dimming systems are specified, engineer respondents report, on average, that they specify preset-type controls in 56% of their dimming specifications. Engineer respondents, on average, integrate the dimming system into other types of building systems such as occupancy sensors, HVAC, security/proximity, telephone/communications, and PC/network in 42% of the dimming systems that they specify overall.

Table 6. Overall, in what percentage of your building projects do you specify …? (Numbers must add up to 100%)

How motivated are distributors to sell dimming systems? What is the current level of penetration of dimming sales with their customers? How is dimming equipment typically ordered and quoted?
The research suggests that distributors are fairly motivated to sell dimming systems and that the presence of dimming equipment generally raises the profit margin on a project. However, while a majority of distributors have a lighting specialist on staff, a minority have a controls specialist on staff, the research suggests, and distributors may need more education.

The research further suggests that distributors most often quote materials for a dimming product quotation through manufacturer-supplied bills of material and price.

In addition, the research suggests that distributors typically order dimming ballasts and controls from the manufacturer rather than keep them in stock. Distributors are most often able to satisfy requests with off-the-shelf items versus dimming components that must be customized for special application needs.

Distributor respondents were asked to estimate the percentage of customers who purchased lighting dimming equipment over the past year through their distributorship. Distributor respondents were also asked whether they have a lighting specialist and a controls specialist on staff; how motivated their salespeople are to sell dimming systems; and whether dimming systems generally raise or lower their profit margins on projects. In addition, distributor respondents were asked how dimming products are quoted, what percentage of dimming ballast and control orders typically are from items in stock compared to items that must be ordered from the manufacturer, and what percentage of dimming orders do customers want a dimming system that includes components that must be customized for special application needs versus off-the-shelf items.

Distributor respondents estimate, on average, that 35% of their customers have purchased lighting dimming equipment over the past year through their distributorships.

About six out of 10 distributor respondents (61%) report that dimming systems generally raise their overall profit margin on a given project. More than one-fourth (28%) say dimming systems have no effect, while about one in 10 (11%) say dimming systems reduce their overall profit margin.

In an earlier question, when distributor respondents were asked to what extent they agree with the statement, “My company earns a good profit when it sells dimming systems,” respondents, on average, say they more than somewhat agree with the statement (3.4).

In a later question, however, “insufficient margin on goods sold” was presented to respondents in a list of supposed barriers to adoption of dimming systems; respondents were asked to rate its importance on a scale of 1 to 5. Distributor respondents, on average, regard insufficient margin on goods sold as somewhat important (3.1). This suggests that while distributors may earn a good profit on dimming systems, they would consider a high profit more motivating.

A majority of distributor respondents (86%) report that they have a lighting specialist on staff, while forty-one percent (41%) say they have a controls specialist on staff. Sixty-eight percent (68%) say their salespeople are very or somewhat motivated to sell dimming systems, including dimming ballasts and controls. More than one-half (53%) say their salespeople are somewhat motivated to sell dimming systems, while one-sixth (15%) say their sales people are very motivated. In contrast, about one-third (32%) say their salespeople are not very motivated.

In another question, distributors were presented with a list of statements and asked to what extent they agreed with each statement on a scale of 1-5. In response to the statement, “Distributors have all the education they need to sell dimming systems effectively,” respondents, on average, more than somewhat agree with it (3.8).

In a later question, however, “lack of education to properly sell dimming systems” was presented to respondents in a list of supposed barriers to adoption of dimming systems; respondents were asked to rate its importance on a scale of 1-5. Distributor respondents, on average, regard lack of education to properly sell dimming systems as more than somewhat important (3.8).

Forty-four percent of distributor respondents (44%) report that a manufacturer-supplied bill of material and price is how they quote dimming systems for a majority of dimming product quotations. Less than one-third (31%) say the distributor creates the bill of material and requests a price from the manufacturer. About one-fourth (24%) say the electrical contractor creates a bill of material and supplies it to the distributor.

On average, distributor respondents report that 83% of their dimming ballast sales and 64% of their dimming control sales are ordered from the manufacturer vs. items currently in stock.

On average, distributor respondents report that 66% of their dimming orders are off-the-shelf items versus components that must be customized for special application needs.

How often do electrical contractors install dimming systems, and how often do they receive callbacks on operating problems with dimming systems after installation?
Electrical contractor respondents, on average, report installing dimming systems in about one-fourth (24%) of their building projects.

The research suggests that they earn a good profit when doing so. In an earlier question in the study, when asked to what extent they agree with the statement, “My company earns a good profit when it installs dimming systems,” respondents, on average, say they more than somewhat agree with the statement (3.5).

In addition, electrical contractor respondents, on average, report that they are called back by the customer to fix an operating problem with the dimming system on about one in 10 projects (9%). This is slightly higher than the number reported by electrical contractors in another study, the 2004 Commercial Lighting Market Attitudes Study, in which respondents say they are called back to the job site after installation due to lighting system operating problems in an average of 7% of their industrial/commercial projects.

What are the most important barriers to specification and adoption of dimming systems, and what market participants typically present roadblocks to adoption? What would be the impact on sales if the major barriers against adoption were removed?
The research suggests that the three most significant barriers to specification and adoption of dimming systems are cost, complexity of design and installation, and variation in dimming performance by manufacturer and ballast type. A majority of market participants anticipate that they would experience higher sales if the most important barriers were removed. The research suggests that distributors, in particular, anticipate that their sales would at least double.

The research further suggests that a significant number of lighting designers, architects and engineers regard the electrical contractor and the owner/client as presenting the most significant roadblocks to the realization of their specification of dimming systems.

Respondents were asked to rate the importance of supposed barriers to specification or adoption of dimming systems on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “not important,” 3 being “somewhat important,” and 5 being “very important.” The result is a weighted average for each barrier by respondent group that is representative of the respondent group. A rating of 4.0 or higher indicates that the barrier is of high importance.

The list of barriers included “initial cost,” “complexity of design and installation,” “lack of confidence in interoperability of components,” “low product reliability,” “lack of skilled labor to install and commission equipment,” “long perceived payback period,” “lack of customer demand,” “commissioning required,” “dimming performance may vary by manufacturer and ballast type,” “lack of confidence that the system can easily integrate future control technologies,” “resistance from other participants in the sales channel,” “insufficient margin on goods sold,” and “lack of education to properly sell dimming systems.”

All respondent groups regard initial cost to be of high importance: lighting designer respondents (4.2), architect respondents (4.0), engineer respondents (4.0), distributor respondents (4.0) and electrical contractor respondents (4.0).

In an earlier question, respondents were given a list of possible trends and statements about dimming, and asked to what extent they agree with each statement on a scale of 1 to 5. When asked to what extent they agree with the statement, “Costs are coming down,” lighting designer respondents, on average, have a low agreement (2.8), while architect and engineer respondents somewhat agree with it (3.0 and 3.2, respectively). Distributors and electrical contractors were asked whether they agreed with two statements, whether dimming ballast costs and dimming controls costs are coming down. Distributor respondents, on average, somewhat agree that dimming ballast costs are coming down (3.1) but do not somewhat agree that dimming controls costs are coming down (2.9). Electrical contractor respondents, on average, agree that both costs are coming down (3.2 and 3.1, respectively).

Besides initial cost, only one other barrier is considered to be of high importance, and by only one respondent group. Architect respondents, on average, consider complexity of design and installation to be of high importance as a barrier to specification of dimming systems.

However, nearly all of the respondents, on average, found nearly all the barriers to at least be somewhat or more than somewhat important.

“Low product reliability,” “lack of skilled labor to install and commission equipment,” and “commissioning required” are the three least important barriers.

Respondents were asked to estimate the impact that would occur on their specifications of dimming systems if the most important barriers were removed.

Three-fourths (75%) of lighting designer respondents say they would specify dimming systems more often or much more often if their most important barrier to specification was removed. More than one-half (54%) say they would specify dimming systems more often, and about one-fifth (21%) say they would specify dimming systems much more often. One-fourth (25%) say they would not specify dimming systems more often.

Eight-five percent (85%) of architect respondents say they would specify dimming systems more often or much more often if their most important barrier to specification was removed. Sixty-four percent (64%) say they would specify dimming systems more often, and about one-fifth (21%) say they would specify dimming systems much more often. About one-sixth (15%) say they would not specify dimming systems more often.

About three-fourths of engineer respondents (73%) say they would specify dimming systems more often or much more often if their most important barrier to specification was removed. About one-half (51%) say they would specify dimming systems more often, and more than one-fifth (22%) say they would specify dimming systems much more often. More than one-fourth (27%) say they would not specify dimming systems more often.

A majority of electrical contractor respondents (80%) say they would specify dimming systems more often or much more often if their most important barrier to specification was removed. Forty percent (40%) say they would specify dimming systems more often, and forty percent (40%) say they would specify dimming systems much more often. One-fifth (20%) say they would not specify dimming more often.

Distributors were asked to estimate the impact on sales rather than specification. If the most important barrier were removed, to what extent would their dimming sales increase? Options included same as current sales, double current sales, triple current sales, 4x current sales, 5x current sales and more than 5x current sales.

A majority of distributor respondents (94%) believe their sales would at least double if the most important barrier were removed, whereas six percent (6%) believe their sales would stay the same. Forty-four percent (44%) say their sales would double, about one-third (32%) say their sales would triple, one-sixth (15%) say their sales would quadruple, and 3% say their sales would increase 5x.

Lighting designer, architect and engineer respondents were also shown a list of market participants and asked which typically presents the most roadblocks to their realization of their specification of dimming systems. The list included: lighting designer, engineer, architect, consultant, manufacturer sales rep, building contractor, electrical contractor, distributor, manufacturer, owner/client and “none of the above.”

Thirty-eight percent (38%) of lighting designer respondents, less than one-half of engineer respondents (46%) and about one-fourth of engineer respondents (26%) regard the electrical contractor to present the most roadblocks to the realization of their specification of dimming systems. One-fourth of lighting designer respondents (25%), 38% of architect respondents, and 39% of engineer respondents consider the owner/client to present the most roadblocks.

Table 7.How important are the following barriers to specifying dimming systems, on a scale of 1-5, with 1 being “not important,” 3 being “somewhat important,” and 5 being “very important”?

*Distributors and contractors were asked, “How important are the following barriers to adoption of dimming systems, on a scale of 1-5, with 1 being “not important,” 3 being “somewhat important,” and 5 being “very important”?”

To what causes do lighting designers, architects and engineers attribute alterations to their specification intent? How often do electrical contractors engage in substitutions of dimming items, and for what reasons?
The research suggests that lighting designers, architects and engineers regard budget/cost, delivery/availability and contractor preference for a substituted system to be the most significant reasons the actual installed dimming system may differ from that of the original specification intent.

The research also suggests that electrical contractors believe they do not very often substitute to the original dimming system specifications. When they do, they say it is primarily because of budget/cost and positive experience with the substituted system, presumably due to its being easier to install (higher profit on the job) or demonstrating a high degree of reliability (less likelihood of a callback).

Lighting designer, architect, engineer and electrical contractor respondents were asked, for those occasions that the actual installed dimming system differs from the initial specification intent (design integrity), which three factors are primarily to blame. The list of possible factors includes “budget/cost,” “delivery/availability,” “specification error,” “system compatibility issues,” “load compatibility/types,” “substituted items are simpler to install and configure by contractor,” “contractor had a bad experience with the specified system,” “contractor had a positive experience with the substituted system,” and “other.”

The lighting designer respondents’ top three factors are budget/cost (89%), positive contractor experience with the substituted system (39%), and system compatibility issues (30%) and substitutions of items that are easier to install and configure by the contractor (30%).

The architect respondents’ top three factors are budget/cost (92%), delivery/availability (69%) and contractor having a positive experience with the substituted system or a negative experience with the specified system (38%).

The engineer respondents’ top three factors are budget/cost (79%), substitution of items that are easier to install and configure by the contractor (42%), and delivery/availability (37%).

Electrical contractors were shown a list of equipment types and asked how often they substitute against the original specifications for each type on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “not often,” 3 being “somewhat often,” and 5 being “very often.” The result is a weighted average response for each item that is reflective of the attitude of the respondent group. The list of equipment types included dimming ballasts, dimming panels, light sensors, occupancy sensors (when used with dimming systems to trigger on/off or dimming action), and controls.

Electrical contractor respondents, on average, say they do not substitute any of these items very or even somewhat often. They substitute light sensors most frequently (2.8), followed by controls (2.7), occupancy sensors (2.6), dimming panels (2.4) and dimming ballasts (2.3).

Electrical contractors were asked, for those occasions that they substitute items against the original specifications, why they do so, choosing from a list of possible reasons. The reasons include “budget/cost,” “delivery/availability,” “substituted system did not require programming,” “specification error,” “system compatibility types,” “load compatibility types,” “substituted items are simpler to install and configure,” “reputation of substituted manufacturer,” “bad experience with the specified system,” “positive experience with the substituted system,” and “other.”

Electrical contractor respondents report that budget/cost (38%) and positive experience with the substituted system (38%) are the most important reasons they substitute.

How do market participants rate various dimming strategies and equipment types in terms of performance?
The research suggests that lighting, designers, architects, engineers and electrical contractors generally regard most types of dimming strategies and equipment to generally meet their performance expectations.

The research further suggests that distributors see some or less than some interest in the market for various dimming strategies and equipment types, based on their sales.

Finally, the research suggests that electrical contractors are more than somewhat or highly comfortable with installing various dimming equipment types.

Respondents were shown a list of dimming strategies and equipment types and asked to rate how well they typically meet the respondent’s performance expectations on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “didn’t meet expectations,” 3 being “met expectations,” and 5 being “exceeded expectations.” The result is a weighted average response for each strategy or equipment type by respondent group that is reflective of the attitude of the respondent group. A rating of 4.0 or higher marked the result as being of high importance. The strategies and equipment types listed were daylight harvesting, wireless dimming, lumen maintenance dimming, personal dimming control, centralized dimming control, dimming panels, low-voltage master controllers and programming, analog dimming ballasts (0-10VDC, phase control), digital dimming ballasts (DALI, etc.), scheduled dimming, HID bi-level dimming, system integration with other building control systems, and home automation.

No respondent group identified any single dimming strategy or equipment type as highly meeting expectations (4.0 or higher rating).

The four top rated strategies and equipment types across all respondent groups are low-voltage master controllers and programming, personal dimming control, centralized dimming control and dimming panels.

Several ranked below 3.0 and therefore are rated by various respondent groups as failing to fully meet their expectations. These include daylight harvesting (lighting designer and engineer respondents, 2.9), wireless dimming (architect respondents, 2.7 and engineer respondents, 2.6), digital dimming ballasts (lighting designer respondents, 2.9), and HID bi-level dimming (lighting designer respondents, 2.5 and architect respondents, 2.8).

The lowest four ranked strategies and equipment types across all respondent groups are wireless dimming, HID bi-level dimming, daylight harvesting and analog dimming ballasts. <