The Data

The Visibility Deficit

What 700 AI-generated buying responses reveal about how the market actually perceives JE Dunn.

Key Metrics

Three numbers that define the gap

Across 700 simulated buying responses, three patterns emerge with devastating consistency.

0% Confidentiality Friction

314 of 700 responses contain language like "due to the confidential nature of semiconductor projects" or "specific client details are not publicly available." This is the AI's way of saying: I can't verify JE Dunn's claims because there's nothing for me to cite.

0% Hedging Language

More than a third of responses use phrases like "JE Dunn may have experience" or "it is possible that JE Dunn has worked on." The AI is uncertain — not because JE Dunn lacks the experience, but because the evidence isn't structured in a way LLMs can confirm.

0% First-Party Source Dependence

838 of 2,319 analyzed citations point back to jedunn.com. When over a third of all source evidence comes from JE Dunn itself, the AI treats the information as less authoritative — the digital equivalent of "source: trust me."

The compounding effect: These three metrics aren't independent — they reinforce each other. Low third-party citation drives high confidentiality friction, which drives hedging language, which drives lower recommendation confidence. It's a feedback loop that systematically suppresses JE Dunn's visibility.
Competitor Visibility

Turner's shadow across the committee

Turner Construction appears unprompted in 25.7% of all responses — but the distribution across stakeholders reveals where the threat is most acute.

Priya Patel (Procurement)
42%
Diane Torres (Capital Projects)
36%
Kevin Park (SVP Operations)
34%
Sandra Cho (CFO)
23%
Marcus Williams (VP Engineering)
23%
Bob Reynolds (Owner's Rep)
17%
James Okafor (Risk / GC)
5%
The procurement bottleneck: Priya Patel (Procurement) encounters Turner in 42% of her AI responses. She's the stakeholder building the initial shortlist and comparative matrices. If Turner dominates her research, Turner starts the process as the benchmark — and JE Dunn starts on defense.
Source Authority

Where the AI gets its evidence

The source authority hierarchy reveals why LLMs treat Turner's claims with more confidence than JE Dunn's.

Source Category JE Dunn Citations Turner Citations Gap
Unique Third-Party Domains 8 15+ –7+ domains
First-Party Source Dependence 36.1% ~18% 2× higher self-citation
Verifiable Semiconductor Case Studies 1 (LG Chem) 4+ –3+ case studies
Industry Award Citations Deloitte Best Managed (under-leveraged) Multiple ENR, AGC, ABC Award gap
Executive Thought Leadership Pieces Minimal Frequent (panels, bylines) Presence gap
"Confidential client" Mentions 116 appearances Rare Credibility friction
The "confidential client" trap: The phrase "confidential client" appeared 116 times across 700 responses. Every time the AI has to say "JE Dunn reportedly worked on a confidential semiconductor project," it's signaling to the buyer that it can't verify the claim. Turner doesn't have this problem — their project references are public and citable.
The Core Problem

What confidentiality friction actually means

This is the single most important metric in the assessment — and the one JE Dunn can act on fastest.

The Mechanism

When a buyer asks an AI "What semiconductor fabs has JE Dunn built?", the model searches its training data for verifiable evidence. When it finds references to "confidential clients" instead of named projects, it does what any cautious analyst would do — it hedges. The AI generates responses like "JE Dunn has reportedly worked on semiconductor projects, though specific details are not publicly available."

That hedge is confidentiality friction. It's the AI telling the buyer: I can't confirm this.

Why It Matters

In a competitive evaluation, friction is a disqualifier. When Turner's project references are publicly citable and JE Dunn's are confidential, the AI presents Turner with authority and JE Dunn with uncertainty — even if JE Dunn's actual track record is equal or better.

The buyer never sees JE Dunn's real capability. They see the AI's confidence gap — and that gap shapes the shortlist before any human conversation happens.

Deep Dive

Confidentiality friction by stakeholder

The friction rate varies dramatically by stakeholder — revealing where the information gap hurts most.

Priya Patel (Procurement)
69%
Marcus Williams (VP Engineering)
64%
Kevin Park (SVP Operations)
61%
Diane Torres (Capital Projects)
55%
Sandra Cho (CFO)
49%
Bob Reynolds (Owner's Rep)
46%
James Okafor (Risk / GC)
38%
Procurement + Engineering: The two stakeholders who most need verifiable technical evidence — Priya Patel (69%) and Marcus Williams (64%) — encounter the highest friction rates. These are the people building the shortlist and validating capabilities.
The bright spot: James Okafor (Risk/GC) has the lowest friction at 38% and lowest Turner mention rate at 5%. Risk evaluators benchmark against compliance standards, not competitors — a pathway where JE Dunn's OSHA record and safety data can be an asset.