Professional Practices in the Built Environment

27 - 28 April 2017
University of Reading, UK

Conference Proceedings

Rowena Hay and Flora Samuel

In association with:

VALUE O F
ARCHITECTS

April 2017

ISBN 9780704915725
Value of Architects,
University of Reading,
The Old Library Building
L046, London Road,
Reading,
RG1 5AQ www.ValueofArchitects .org 

Special thanks to our advisory group and reviewing committee: 

Alan Jones Helen Woolley

Andy Von Bradsky Jennifer Whyte
Carrie Behar Johan de Walsche
Casey Rutland Kate Pahl 
David Clapham Martin Sexton
Doina Petrescu Paola Sassi
Edward Ng Paddy Conaghan
Fredrik Nilsson Robin Nicholson
Hans Wamelink Simon Bradbury 

This work was completed under AHRC contract AH/ M008274/1 

Order of proceedings

Introduction
Professional Practices in the Built Environment: supporting the development of collaborative research |
Flora Samuel, Rowena Hay

Session 1: Procurement impacts

Design-led procurement: linking design process with procurement of construction projects |
Hans Haenlein, Hiral Patel
The reluctant supply chain | Irena Bauman
Procurement routes and building performance | Julie Godefroy
Challenges in the business models of creative professional service firms | Marina Bos-de Vos, Bente
Lieftink, Hans Wamelink, Jasper Kraaijeveld

Session 2: Working across borders

Teaching tomorrow’s architects: How relevant are current models of professional education to the
world of global architectural practice? | Stephen Brookhouse
Architects with borders: developing a sharing economy | Nikki Linsell
Joint venture teams | Sunila Lobo, Roger Flanagan

Session 3: Conditions for collaboration

Towards a professional map for specifying and actively measuring behaviours for collaboration |
Elizabeth Kavanagh
The portfolio professional | Alex MacLaren, Neil Thompson
Re-imagining the Future of Cities Using Urban Foresight Techniques: Towards a Smart and Sustainable
Reading 2050 | Tim Dixon, Lorraine Farrelly, Nigel Horton-Baker, Richard Webb

Session 4: Knowledge sharing and POE

A collaborative approach to POE | Kristina Roszynski, Trevor Keeling
Designing with care: Hospice design since 1980 | Peter Holgate, Mura Mullan, Stuart Franklin, Jane
Darbyshire, Julie Trueman
Developing wellbeing valuation practices in the built environment | Kelly Watson
Spaces for interaction: empirical evidence on spatial realities versus supplier mantra | Ziona Strelitz

Session 5: Practice knowledge

The benefits of research for small practice | Dinah Bornat
The City of Time: ‘site, structure, skin, services, space plan, stuff ’ and then what? | Stephen Greenberg,
Andrew Harrison, Steven Smith
Knowledge and architectural practice | Johan Verbeke
Transitioning the Live Project: A managed interface between the architectural academy and
professional practice | Michael Davis, Aaron Paterson, Alessandro Melis, Esther Mercedy

Session 6: Understanding practice

The good client: How architect-client dynamics mediate attention for users | Valerie Van der Linden,
Hua Dong, Ann Heylighen
The client, organization and the project - Architects’ evaluation of energy modelling adoption across
four UK firms | Sonja Oliveira, Martin Sexton, Elena Marco, Bill Gething
Design System Assemblages - the continuous curation of Design Computation Processes in
Architectural Practice | Frans Magnusson, Jonas Runberger
Making space, adding value: locating and defining the ‘creative space’ of spatial production | Elantha
Evans
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Professional Practices in the Built Environment: supporting the

development of collaborative research

Flora Samuel1, Rowena Hay2

1 Schoolof Architecture and the Built Environment, University of Reading, UK

f.b.samuel@reading.ac.uk

2 Schoolof Architecture and the Built Environment, University of Reading, UK

r.hay@reading.ac.uk

Abstract
The nature and value of professional judgment and knowledge is increasingly being called into
question as new technologies give access to new ways of working. This conference provides an
opportunity for practitioners and academics to come together to understand and learn from
different models of professionalism across Architecture and the Built Environment, over time
and across the globe. The conference is part of the AHRC funded Evidencing and
Communicating the Value of Architects project.

Key words: research in practice, collaboration, professional practices

1
P r o fe s s i o n a l P r a c t i c e s i n t h e B u i l t
Environment was conceived as an event to
bring built environment practitioner s
together with academics to discuss the
development of collaborative research on
practice. This may seem a simple enough
objective but experience, developed through
a succession of three Arts and Humanities
Council Funded projects relating to the
development of practitioner research, is that
practice and academia have remarkably little
inter action and their interests and
circumstances are so radically different that
devising a format in which they might actually
talk or make connection with one another is
difficult.
This conference also explores the boundaries
between different types of professional
practice and ways in which they might work
together better to meet the challenges that
impact upon everyone in the construction
industry - poor building performance, lack of
innovation, lack of investment in R&D,
adversarial cultures and related problems
with fragmentation and a lack of
collaboration, combined with a shared duty
and willingness to tackle major issues of the
day through the built environment: climate
change; inequality; the housing crisis; health;
wellbeing and productivity.
The essays in these proceedings are from
both practitioners and academics, sometimes
working together. Whilst they represent work
at the cutting edge of practice research they
vary in the degree to which they conform to
academic norms of writing, but care has been
taken in the editing process to try to find a
middle ground where practitioners and
academics can meet. Readers are invited to
reflect on the problematic cultur al
differences between them both in this
publication and during the conference which
it represents.
Whilst is may be difficult to frame a
conference to attract both practitioners and
researchers it is even more difficult to
engage with practitioners across professional
disciplines, perhaps because they work in
such radically different ways. Despite going to
great lengths to develop a cross disciplinary
conference call and, at that time, having no
architect based keynote speakers and being
based at the University of Reading School of
Built Environment, we received feedback
telling us that our call was ‘too architectural’
to be of interest to other kinds of
professionals. Fortunately a good range of
non-architects managed to get past this issue
to submit abstracts to the conference, but
these cultural differences remain extremely
problematic and point to a need for cross
industry leadership in developing a shared
research agenda (Duffy, 2008).
Perhaps our negative respondents could
accurately smell from a distance that the
project has its foundations in an examination
of the way one body of professional
practitioners approaches the subject of
research - architects. A focus group staged
for the development of the report Architects
and Research Based Knowledge (Dye, 2014)
in which practitioners were asked to say
where they accessed their knowledge
revealed that most of the architects in the
room first asked colleagues at the next desk
and secondly resorted to Google. It seemed
in fact that the very last place that any
practitioner would go to for knowledge was
academic refereed journals despite their high
quality, lack of bias and overall rigour.
Subsequent investigations suggest that the
reasons for this include: lack of time; high cost
and lack of availability of refereed journals;
difficulties in finding the right journal to read;
difficulties in accessing academic language; no
experience of using journals whilst in
education; as well as a general antipathy to
2
academia perhaps resulting from an
education at the height of the theoretical
excesses of deconstruction. This seems set
to change with the advent of Open Access
journals, although this doesn’t get past the
fact that most architects are very visual
people who can find the sheer density of
words in academic journals off putting. A new
initiative by the Edge (supporters of this
conference) and the CIC an industr y
collaboration ‘red top’ for research delivering
key findings to practitioners in bite size
pieces will certainly help.
The Edge’s achievements in spanning the
boundaries between academia and practice
is of note - Robin Nicholson’s tireless
support of our project has meant a very
great deal to us and our work. There is a long
tradition of practitioners, sometimes working
in the context of Universities, who have
purposefully worked to cross this divide.
Grenfell Baines, for example, set up BDP with
this very purpose with the University of
Sheffield. DEGW, whose archive is now in
the Univer sity of Reading’s Special
Collections, were notable in framing
architecture as an interdisciplinary research
discipline, with the value of practice deriving
from architectural knowledge (Duffy and
Rabeneck, 2012) building on the tradition of
Richard Llewelyn Davis and Leslie Martin. So
concerned was Geoffrey Broadbent with the
divide that he set up the shortlived Journal of
Architectural Research in the early 1970s,
ideas from which underpin the development
of the new School of Architecture at the
University of Reading (Farrelly and Samuel ,
2016).
A great many significant figures have
attempted to bridge the gap between
academia and practice of different sorts,
usually with minimal success, but not for want
of trying. The reasons behind this intractable
problem are fleshed out in the book Why
Architects Matter : Evidencing and
Communicating the Value of Architects to be
published by Routledge early next year, part
of the project of the same name that has
funded this conference. Whilst the book
suggests a path for developing architect’s
ability to learn from its mistakes it also
explores the impact of professional
boundaries on developing knowledge and
organisational learning meandering towards
the conclusion that a title matters less than
what it is that a professional actually does,
and that new tasks and new names for those
tasks are evolving that nullify traditional
definitions (Hensel and Nilsson, 2016). With
any luck the same thing will apply to the
interface between practice and academia.
Key to all this is a lack of a shared conception
of what constitutes good practice in the
context of research. How can what
practitioners do be framed in terms of rigour
and research excellence? This has been a long
running battle for the schools of architecture
who have promoted design research
submissions in the UK Research Assessment
Exercises, now the Research Excellence
Framework. It is however really important
that architects present their research
activities in the normative formats used by
other disciplines (Till, 2007), only then can
interdisciplinar y research be fostered.
Architects have, for example, been largely
excluded from debates on housing and
home within the social sciences, including
economics, because of their inability to speak
the same research language. Whilst this may
go against the great - and often unintelligible
- traditions of architectural writing,
architectural research has to be presented in
a format in which it is possible to identify at
the very least, the aims, the methods, findings
and conclusions of a project. This is why,
through a succession of publications, most
3
notably the book Demystifying Architectural
Research (Samuel and Dye, 2015) and the
report Building Knowledge (Hay et al., 2017)
we have tried to frame aspects of practice in
these normative research terms.
While architectural practitioners are often
excellent at developing infographics,
mappings models, participatory processes
and of course design, these aspect of practice
research rarely make it onto the radar of
other disciplines. As Gillian Horn, partner at
Penoyre and Prasad puts it ‘space is not
valued as an expertise’ by researchers
outside architecture. Part of the problem is
that many architects lack confidence in
research writing, they have very little time to
write and, if they do write, they rarely publish
outside their field. We experienced this first
hand in the course of the AHRC ‘Home
Improvements’ project which included a call
to practitioners to develop three embedded
research projects in the field of housing
(Samuel and Coucill, 2014).
The processes of research - literature
r e v i e w s , d a t a g a t h e r i n g , k n ow l e d g e
management, research methodologies, ethical
practice, and the writing of research are
rarely explicitly taught in schools of
architecture, nor are design projects
articulated in research terms. To teach these
things in an accessible manner is one of the
central tenets of the new School of
Architecture at Reading. There are however
some developing models for helping
practitioners develop these skills through
CPD; practitioner PhDs and collaborative
projects but considerably more needs to be
done in this area (Samuel, 2017). Quite apart
from the key issue of practitioners sharing
what they know, developing a mature
publications record can enable architectural
practices start to access the many funding
opportunities available to them and to derive
the many business benefits of research
(Samuel and Dye, 2015).
Professional practices, particularly in the field
of architecture, suffer from a project based
finance system in which resource is rarely set
aside for knowledge development (Lu and
Sexton, 2009), partly because of a well
known absence of business planning. The
result is that many architects who undertake
research do it in their own time, funding it
with their own money. Academic conferences
are costly affairs, often with large delegate
fees which exclude most practitioners at the
first hurdle. We have been able to make this
conference free because of the generosity of
the keynote speakers, the session chairs, the
support of the University of Reading, Leader
Fellowship funding from the AHRC and, of
course, the delegates themselves. By all
accounts practitioners are averse to the
reading of long and complex papers at
conferences – they are hungry instead for
debate and networking. This book of papers
has been produced in advance of the
conference in the hope that delegates will
read it as background to the shor t
presentations and debates at the conference
itself and as an impetus to try to develop the
papers more formally in journals such as
Building Research and Information http://
www.tandfonline.com/toc/rbri20/current and
the new free online ARENA Journal of
Architectural Research http://ajar.arena-
architecture.eu/.
References
Duffy, F. (2008). ‘Forum Linking Theory back
to Practice.’ Building Research & Information
36 (6), pp. 655–58.
Duffy, F. and Rabeneck, A. (2012).
‘Professionalism and Architects in the 21st
Century.’ Building Research & Information. 41
(1), pp. 115–22.
4

Dye, A. (2014). Architects and Research Based
Knowledge. Retrieved from: http://
www.architecture.com/Files/
RIBAProfessionalServices/
ResearchAndDevelopment/Publications/
ArchitectsandResearch-
BasedKnowledgeALiteratureReview.pdf
Farrelly, L and Samuel, F. (2016). ‘Education for
Uncertainty.’ In Research Based Education, 2:
pp, 326–38. London: Bartlett.
Hay, R., Bradbury, S., Dixon, D., Martindale, K.,
Samuel, F., and Tait, A. (2017). Building
Knowledge: Pathways to POE. RIBA/University
of Reading.
Hensel, M. and Nilsson, F. (2016). The
Changing Shape of Practice: Integrating
Research and Design in Architecture. London:
Routledge.
Lu, S. and Sexton, M. (2009). Innovation in
Small Professional Practices in the Built
Environment. Retrieved from: http://
www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/
productCd-1405191406.html
Samuel, F. (2017). ‘Supporting Research in
Practice.’ Journal of Architecture. Retrieved
from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/
10.1080/13602365.2017.1280288
Samuel, F. and Coucill, L. (2014). Home
Improvements Knowledge Exchange in the
Creative Economy Final Report. Retrieved
from: https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/
1.359438!/file/FinalReport4.pdf
Samuel, F. and Dye, A. (2015). Demystifying
Architectural Research: Adding Value and
Winning Business. London: RIBA Enterprises.
Till, J. (2007). What Is Architectural Research?:
Three Myths and One Model. Retrieved from:
http://www.architecture.com/Files/
RIBAProfessionalServices/
ResearchAndDevelopment/
WhatisArchitecturalResearch.pdf 

5
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Design-led procurement: linking design process with procurement of

construction projects

Hans Haenlein1, Hiral Patel2

1 Hans Haenlein Architects

School of Construction Management and Engineering, University of Reading, UK
hans@haenlein.com

2 School of Construction Management and Engineering, University of Reading, UK

h.a.patel@reading.ac.uk

Abstract

Separation of design from construction has led to serious coordination and communication
problems in our industry, which are unlikely to be resolved by BIM without significant changes.
Although collaborative design and construction methods have been developed for major
projects, over 80% of all construction projects still suffer from a divisive risk management culture,
which perpetuates problems of integration between briefing, design and construction. Design-led
procurement facilitates the engagement of trade and specialist contractors in the briefing and
design process. Designers lead the supervision of work on site, thereby bridging the gaps
between briefing, design and construction. Network governance supported by Project Insurance,
instead of Professional Indemnity Insurance, facilitates the optimisation between briefing, design
and construction. A new paradigm has to be established to disentangle long established routines
across the design and construction professions.

Keywords: design-led procurement, network governance, project insurance


6
Public sector procurement in the UK 1994). During the seventeenth and eighteenth
c e n t u r i e s ( W i l t o n - E l y, 1 9 7 7 ) , t h e
In May 2011, the Government’s Construction
interdisciplinar y architectural designer
Strategy was published with the intention of
emerged. The establishment of architecture as
reforming the procurement of public sector
a profession can be seen as an attempt to
projects1 (Cabinet Office, 2011). The strategy
distinguish the Architect from the other
sets out principles for new procurement
building trades. In the eighteenth century the
models to allow designers, consultants and
development of distinct modes of entry to
contractors to work in a more collaborative
architecture through pupillage did just this,
and integrated way. A central tenet is the
providing tr aining in dr awing and
introduction of project-wide insurance
administration, whilst omitting the practical
covering all parties, enabling the sharing of
knowledge and skills of the building trades
liabilities, and up to a 20 per cent cost
(Crinson and Lubbock, 1994). This was
reduction by avoiding contractor charges for
cemented in 1834 with the founding of the
bearing risks passed onto them by the client.
Institute of British Architects (later the RIBA)2
This paper explores the underlying reasons to protect the professional interests of
why the UK construction industry is not architects (ibid). Subsequently many other
collaborative, and presents alternative professional institutions were set up, further
procurement models and insurance fragmenting the construction industry (ibid).
arrangements that may help overcome this.
Discussing problems of institutionalism due to
The first section explores the historical
professionalisation, Murdoch and Hughes
reasons for fragmentation in the construction
(2008) note that participants of a project
industry. The second opens up a discussion on
team come with predefined conceptions of
the complexity of design and construction
their and others’ roles. Scott (1995) asserts
processes. A critique of current construction
that professions exhibit normative, cognitive
procurement methods is then presented,
and regulative control – three pillars of
highlighting their governance shortcomings.
institutions. Professionals exert normative
The final section sets out design-led
control by identifying roles and responsibilities
procurement as an alternative, harnessing the
of actors. Cognitive control outlines who we
benefits of network governance and project
are and what we are expected to do in a
insurance arrangements.
given situation, thus stressing the importance
Separation of design from construction: a of social identities. Regulative controls set out
historical perspective rules, monitor actions, sanctions, rewards and
punishments. The RIB A outlines the
In early seventeenth century England, Master responsibilities of architects – drawing, design
Masons were responsible for building design and supervision (normative control), monitors
and construction (Crinson and Lubbock, architectural education in universities to

1The UK government is the largest client of the construction industry, accounting for about 40% of the industry’s
workload Cabinet Office. (2011, May 31). Government Construction Strategy. Retrieved June 26, 2011 from Cabinet
Office: http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/government-construction-strategy.
2 Theinstitute gained its Royal Charter in 1837 to form the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) (Crinson and
Lubbock, 1994).

7
formalise training (cognitive control) and
controlled entry into the profession through
registration and protection of title (regulative
control). As a result Institutionalisation causes
inflexibility within the project organisation,
whilst the project environment demands
flexibility due to uncertainty.
Another reason for the formation of the
architectural profession was industrialisation3.
Cross (2011) suggests that in craft-based
societies, designing is firmly linked to making,
whereas in industrialised societies making
does not start until design is complete. The
general contractor emerged in the UK
construction industry around 1870 as a result
of increased specialisation due to industrial
revolution; this relieved architects from the
burden of close site supervision, enabling
them to spend more time on design (Hughes,
1992). The general contractor developed a
financial relationship with design and
remodelled the tripartite relationship of client,
designer and craftsmen (Wilton-Ely, 1977).
Furthermore, Hughes (1992) suggests that,
unlike the Master Mason, very few people can
grasp the variety and complexity of
technologies in modern construction. Hence,
there is a need for coordination and
management between different specialisations
as well as between design and construction. A
recent survey by the RIBA (2016) highlights
that collaboration and efficient administration
remain priority issues for architects’ today.
The design process
It is imperative for designers to work with
specialist trades to gain technical know-how
of components while formulating building-
3 Crinson and Lubbock (1994) record that there were individuals who resisted the split between design and
construction. For example, William Lethaby emphasized that the building craft has to be learnt through direct
handling of tools and materials. He saw architecture not only as a form of training in the arts and design, but
encompassing the crafts.
designs. Through various case studies, Cross
(2011) has demonstrated that good designers
operate seamlessly across different levels of
detail – from high-level goals to low-level
physical principles. Fur thermore, in his
experiment of redesigning a bathroom,
Eastman (1970, cited in Lawson, 1983: 33)
concluded that experienced designers learnt
t h e n a t u r e o f t h e d e s i g n p r o bl e m
simultaneously while identifying a range of
possible solutions. Similarly, Cross (2011)
suggests that in the process of designing, the
problem and the solution develop together.
Thus the design evolves as more
understanding of the problem is developed.
Hughes and Murdoch (2001) undertook
detailed analyses of nine plans of work,
including the RIBA Plan of Work, and carried
out consultations with focus groups
representing all aspects of the construction
industry. They concluded that most plans of
work are targeted at producing sufficient
information to enable decision making at a
particular stage. Hence, plans of work are
output focused. These findings are concurrent
with Lawson’s (1983) analysis of the RIBA
Plan of Work. He suggests that it does not
map the design process, as it does not allow
for iteration between work stages. Even the
simplest map of the design process must
allow for a return loop to all preceding
functions. Thus, a tension exists between
working in accordance with a plan of work,
which is often linked to fee stages, and the
iterative nature of the design process.
Lawson (1983), using the analogy of a team
game, suggests that co-operation is crucial in
the design process, as the needs of many
8
stakeholders must be satisfied. Design should
not be seen as a personal, cognitive process
of the individual designer, but rather a social
process of interaction with other participants.
As Bucciarelli (1994, cited in Cross, 2011: 20)
argues, design involves negotiation involving
different participants, each with their specific
knowledge and understanding of the object
that is being designed. Thus, governance
structures should allow coordination through
social interaction, even if the parties are not
bound by contractual obligations.
Complexity in construction projects
Construction projects involve many actors
during different phases, including clients,
designers, consultants, contractors and
specialist trades. Cherns and Bryant (1984)
propose that a temporary multi-organisation
(TMO) is established through which
representatives from different organisations
come together for a particular project and
disperse after its completion. The temporary
nature of construction projects calls for
differentiation in two dimensions: horizontal
differentiation between various organisations
and vertical differentiation between structural
levels (Baccarini, 1996). Construction projects
face organisational complexity through
hor izontal (professions) and ver tical
differentiation (tiers of supply chain). The
governance mechanism needs to coordinate
and control interdependencies amongst these
d i f fe r e n t i a t i o n s . I n t e r d e p e n d e n c e o f
operations across organisational boundaries
gives rise to organisational complexity.
Complexity results in interdependencies
between the constituent parts. Thompson
(2003) discusses three types of
interdependency in ascending order of
complexity: pooled, sequential or reciprocal.
Pooled interdependence relies on the
contribution of each part to the whole. When
output of one part becomes input of another,
they are sequentially interdependent.
Reciprocal interdependence exists when the
output of each part becomes input for other
parts; architect, structural engineer, services
engineer and cost consultants would use each
other’s outputs to produce their work.
Reciprocal interdependencies are most
complex and highly evident in the design and
constr uction process (Walker, 2007).
Thompson (2003) fur ther suggests that
reciprocal interdependence needs
coordination by mutual adjustment and
involves transmission of new information
during the process. This increases the burden
on decision-making and communication. Thus,
organisational complexity in construction
projects will prove challenging for the
governance of construction projects.
Current procurement methods - a
critique
Eccles (1981), through his interviews of house
builders in Massachusetts, has noted the
existence of a “quasi-firm” in the construction
industry. In general contracting, the main
contractor works with a small number of
specialist sub-contractors, in an “inside”
contracting system. This form of governance
balances advantages of market and bilateral
structures, as close coordination and control is
achieved along with some degree of
competition. He fur ther asser ts that a
decision taken within the “inside” contracting
mode is a trade-off between the criticality of
the sub-contractors’ works within the main
programme, and lower construction costs
resulting from a scale of economies. Thus,
inter nal contr acting induces process
innovation. However, lack of product and
material innovation due to bias for process
innovations is identified as a defective
9
incentive of the “inside” contracting system
(Williamson, 1975). Assurance of continuous
relationships is essential for suppliers to make
transaction specific investments in equipment,
systems and employee skills. Internal
contracting limits the number of sub-
contractors. However, it does not pose
incentives for product innovation as there is
no guarantee of continuous work over long
periods of time to recoup investments. In
response, Eccles (1981) argues that as plans
and specifications are prepared by the
architect, product innovation is not in the
hands of the main contractor or the sub-
contractor.
The main contractor may foster product
innovation through design-build procurement
who has ‘single point responsibility for
delivering the required building and associated
services in accordance with defined standards
and conditions’ (Bennet et al. 1996: 3). The
single point responsibility ensures integration
of design and construction, enhancing
buildability and increased certainty of product
delivery. However, design-build projects still
suffer from poor design quality and lack
flexibility to incorporate client changes
(Anumba and Evbuomwan, 1997). Through a
survey of 330 construction projects Bennett
et al. (1996) argue that design quality is not
undermined by a contractor’s commercial
interests alone, but by discontinuity in design
responsibility which sees partly developed
designs handed over to the contractor. In their
survey, the best performance of quality
expectations were in those design-build
projects where Employers’ Requirements
were minimal. Hence, it is not just the
discontinuity between design and
constr uction that affects quality, the
discontinuity in design responsibility also has
its effects.
Latham (1994) argues that trust is essential to
the improvement of performance in the
construction industry. Citing a survey of 180
major construction companies, Latham (1994)
shows that there is a clear appetite across the
industry to develop a partnership approach
to risk management (ibid). Only 15% of
respondents were in favour of apportioning
risk to single parties. If the performance of the
supply chain is to be enhanced, the
gover nance mechanism needs to be
reconsidered. The governance structure
should promote coordination through social
interaction amongst parties, not be legally
bound.
Network Governance
Williamson (1979) describes governance as
an institutional framework within which
transactions are decided. This framework
refers to the regulative lens of institutional
theory proposed by Scott (1995) where
control is exer ted through rules and
regulations. Eriksson (2006) refers to
governance mechanisms as alternative ways
to influence organisations involved to establish
control and co-ordination. Thus the
gover nance mechanism integr ates
differentiation and interdependencies through
control and co-ordination.
Powell (1990) proposes comparative models
of market, hierarchy and network. He
substantiates his model of a network through
examples of various industries ranging from
traditional craft to technologically advanced.
He asserts that the network is a viable form
of economic organisation and is characterised
by reciprocal patterns of communication and
exchanges. He argues against the idea of
hybrid forms occurring along the continuum
of the market and hierarchies, and suggests
that there are distinct alternative forms of
10
gover nance demonstr ated through
collaboration and reciprocity. He concludes
three critical components of a network:
1. Know-how – Tacit knowledge is an
impor tant incentive for craft based
industries.
2. Demand for speed – Flexibility and fast
access to information in a dynamic world.
Information exchanged in the network is
“freer” than hierarchy and “thicker” than
m a r ke t . I n fo r m a t i o n i s o p e n fo r
interpretation and thus can generate new
insights.
3. Trust – High probability of future
association motivates networ k
participants to cooperate. Need for
hierarchical supervision is limited as
opportunism is discouraged. Quality is
emphasised over quantity.
Fenton and Pettigrew (2000) applied network
theory of governance by Jones et al. (1997) to
study the organisation of Arup. They found
that some employees were very active within
the network and others were not. The former
came in frequent contact with each other and
for med closed ties leading to over-
embeddedness. It was difficult to integrate the
latter due to under-embeddedness. Thus, in
order to optimise embeddedness, the social
mechanism should be modified to restrict as
well as extend access. They also argue that
leadership and incentive systems can be useful
alongside social control mechanisms.
Incentives can motivate employees within a
network to cooperate. Leadership can aid to
balance strong and weak ties. Leaders at the
hub of strong ties can influence diffusion of
information within a network.
Network governance exerts control through
social mechanisms and can influence
development of trust among network
members. Lack of trust is considered one of
the key reasons for adversarial attitudes
within the construction industry. Network
governance proposes benefits of coordination
through effective communication. However,
network governance is not widely used within
the construction project environment (Rose
& Manley, 2012).
D e s i g n - l e d p ro c u re m e n t m e t h o d
(proposal)
Design-led procurement aims to harness the
potential of design by bridging the separation
between design and construction through
network governance. In this procurement
method, designers work directly with
specialist/trade contractor s without
intermediation of a main contractor. Trade/
specialist contractors hold direct contracts
with the client and their work on site is
supervised by the designers. Hiley and
Khaidzir (1999) report that architect-led
construction management procurement
method in Germany has proved successful.
Hans Haenlein Architects have employed
design-led procurement in various projects
(Haenlein, 2007a). Architects deal directly with
trade/specialist contractors and hold separate
contracts with these contractors, consultants
and the client.
The School projects – an example
Patel (2011) analysed two projects for a
school client to refurbish chemistr y
laboratories: C Block 1 (phase 1) and C Block
2 (phase 2). The project details of both cases
are given in Table 1. These projects were
selected as they offer polarity as described by
Voss et al. (2002). The architect, consultants
and trade/specialist contractors were the
same in both the cases except for the
laboratory equipment contractor. The works
11
involved in both projects were largely similar,
key difference being in the quantity of work.
While C Block 1 was procured through the
traditional procurement route, C Block 2 was
procured through the design-led procurement
route. 


12
Table 1: School projects details

Procure Budge Final Floo Unit Contrac Actual Defects Professi Fe Cos
ment t cost buildin r cost t period1 completio cleared3 onals es4 t
Proje method (GBP) g cost area per (Weeks) n2 (Weeks) appointe (% inde
ct (GBP) (Sq area (Weeks) d during of x5
m) (GBP/ the cos
Sqm) project t)
C Traditiona 289,00 283,58 289 981 18 25 69 Architect 11 100
Bloc l 0 0 (09/04/1 (02/10/19 (30/01/19 Structura %
k1 990-17/0 90) 92) l 05
8/1990) Engineer

Bldg. 04
Services
Engineer
06
Quantity
Surveyor
C Design- 500,00 468,62 609 770 21 21 31 Architect 11 78%
Bloc led 0 6 (01/04/1 (23/08/19 (06/04/19
k2 procurem (incl. 991- 91) 92) Structura 05
ent Archite 26/08/19 (General l
ct’s 6% 91) Building Engineer
manag works
ement cleared -
fee) 61
weeks–
21/10/199
2)
1. Contract period is as mentioned in the contract document

2. Actual completion is calculated from start on site to the issue of Practical Completion.

3. Defects cleared period is calculated from issue of practical completion certificate to the issue of Making Good
Defects

4. Fees are the professional fees. They are calculated as percentage of construction costs

5. Cost index is calculated by assuming C Block 1 as 100% and taking ratio of cumulative costs of construction and
professional fees.

13
C Block 2 was 22% cheaper and finished
within less time when compared to C Block 1.
Cost certainty existed in C Block 2 by the use
of an ‘open book’ change management system.
Design-led procurement gave rise to
conditions necessary for emergence and
survival of network governance. Social control
of project culture, reputation and inclusive
restricted access induced cooperation
amongst network members. Communication
analysis provides evidence of enhanced
coordination between design and
construction in the design-led project. Defects
were attended promptly by trade contractors;
their commitment increased due to proximity
of the client through site meetings. It is
notewor thy that no explicit financial
incentives were offered to contractors for
cooperative behaviour.
Lead organisation network governance
While undertaking design-led procurement
for C Block 2, the client insisted that the
project should be managed by the architect.
Inputs from network members like structural
consultant, electrical and mechanical trade
contractor were disparate. Also, each member
did not possess requisite skills to coordinate
their work with others. Hence, network
governance had to be brokered. Lead
organisation network governance (Provan and
Kenis, 2007) was employed to facilitate
network level coordination. The architect
acted as lead organisation and undertook the
coordination of network level activities and
decisions. Disintermediation of the main
contractor increased interaction between
designers and trade/specialist contractors, as
well as between trade/specialist contractors.
Along with design leadership, this form of
network governance ensured continuity of
design responsibility as well as integration of
design and construction. Design remained the
sole responsibility of the architect throughout
the project. Buildability knowledge and
specifications were developed by the architect
through discussion and coordination with
trade/specialist contractors.
The client placed the competence of the
architect at the forefront for the design-led
procurement. While outlining current
difficulties faced by the profession and
possibilities of future development, Hiley and
Khaidzir (1999) acknowledge the need for a
change in attitude, knowledge, education and
training. Architectural education should
emphasise the need for appreciating technical
knowledge of other disciplines. The attitude
of passing technical risks onto the main
contractor should be discouraged. Capabilities
to manage the interfaces should be
developed through education and practical
training. The medical Teaching Hospital model
could provide the necessary education,
research and practice metaphors for the
future professional practices in the built
environment (Hans Haenlein Architects,
2009). Such a facility would aim to explore
the interfaces between practice, research and
postgraduate education in Design and
Construction and facilitate their development
in a multidisciplinary context.
This example is not aimed at promoting one
particular profession to lead construction
projects. The main argument is to achieve
integration of design and construction
through design leader ship. Networ k
governance is not attributed to design-led
procurement only. Future research should
examine the compatibility of network
governance with other procurement routes.
14
Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII)
versus Project Insurance
On their appointment on C Block 2, one of
the contractors raised concerns over the
need for a general insurance policy to cover
claims against the client for accidents, or the
inability to establish blame regarding a fault
with any of the trade/specialist contractors.
The client’s insurer confirmed that their
insurance policy covers all these risks.
Project Insurance taken out by the client for
everyone involved in a project, as is the norm
in Germany, provides more cost effective
insurance cover for everyone than separate
insurance arrangements for each professional
and trade organisation. At a stroke it
overcomes the litigious basis of the
construction industry. If the UK construction
industry were to move from practice-based
Pll to project based insurance, small practices
would be able to network much more easily
and be appointed for larger projects
(Haenlein, 2007b). RIBA Small Practices
Group position paper for public sector
procurement highlighted the insurance
requirement as one of the barriers to access
public sector market and suggested adopting
project-based insurance (RIBA, 2011) .
Conclusion
The purpose of this paper is to explore a
procurement route which aims to integrate
design and construction. The literature review
demonstrates constraints of the various
procurement routes for being able to deal
satisfactor ily with the or ganisational
complexity of construction projects. Product
innovation is biased against process
optimisation. However, the potential of ‘design’
to improve efficiency is under stated.
Designers work simultaneously at different
levels of detail. In light of technological
advancements in building systems, input of
specialist contractors is necessary during the
early design stages. Designers need to manage
the interfaces between these systems and
ensure the buildability of their design.
Designing is a social process of achieving
consensus of different interests.
Professionalisation creates boundaries for
roles and further increases the separation of
design from constr uction. Design-led
procurement offers the oppor tunity for
designers and trade/specialist contractors to
work together from inception through to
construction. The effectiveness of this
procurement route is complemented by
network governance. Network governance
balances the conflicting demands of
specialisation and integration posed by
construction projects. Structural
embeddedness of network members enables
social control of their behaviour. Leadership
addresses problems of over-embeddedness
and under-embeddedness by managing strong
ties and bridging weak ties for cross-
fertilisation. Designers can assume leadership
of the network to coordinate inputs of
various members even at the construction
stage. Design evolves over time. Hence,
continuity of design responsibility is
paramount to ensure quality. Cooperation of
trade/specialist contractors is vital for product
innovation and efficiency. Design-led
procurement and network governance are
synchronous to the design process.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Will Hughes for his
guidance in exploring the ideas presented in
the paper.
References
Anumba, C. J. and Evbuomwan, N. F. O. (1997).
‘Concurrent engineering in design-build
15
projects.’ Construction Management and
Economics. 15, pp. 271-281.
Baccarini, D. (1996). ‘The concept of project
complexity - a review. ‘ International Journal of
Project Management. ’14(4), pp. 201-204.
Bennett, J., Pothecary, E. and Robinson, G.
(1996). Designing and building a world-class
industry. Reading: Centre for Strategic Studies
in Construction.
Cabinet Office (2011). Government
Construction Strategy. Retrieved from http://
www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/
government-construction-strategy
Cherns, A. and Bryant, D. (1984). ‘Studying the
client's role in construction management.’
Construction Management and Economics. 2,
pp. 177-184.
Crinson, M. and Lubbock, J. (1994). Architecture
-- art or profession?: three hundred years of
architectural education in Britain. Manchester;
New York: Manchester University Press.
Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking. Oxford: Berg.
Eccles, R. (1981). ‘The quasifirm in the
construction industry.’ Journal of Economic
Behavior and Organization. 2(4), pp. 335-357.
Eriksson, P. E. (2006). ‘Procurement and
governance management - Development of a
conceptual procurement model based on
different types of control.’ Management Revue.
17(1), pp. 30-49.
Fenton, E. and Pettigrew, A. (2000). ‘Integrating
a global professional services organization: The
case of Ove Arup Partnership.’ In Pettigrew,
A. and Fenton, E. (eds.) The innovating
organization. London: SAGE Publications, pp.
47-81.
Haenlein, H. (2007a). ‘The voice of experience:
The Benefits Of Architect-Led Construction
Management.’ RIBA Journal. 114(2), pp. 75.
Haenlein, H. (2007b). ‘The voice of
experience: The Advantage Of Project-Based
Insurance.’ RIBA Journal. 114(5), pp. 83.
Hans Haenlein Architects (2009). International
Centre for Inclusive Environments. PowerPoint
presentation. Hans Haenlein Architects,
London.
Hughes, W. P. (1992). An analysis of traditional
general contracting: CIOB Construction Paper No
12. Ascot: The Chartered Institute of Building.
Hughes, W. P. and Murdoch, J. (2001). Roles in
construction projects : analysis and terminology :
a research report undertaken for the Joint
Contracts Tribunal Limited. Birmingham:
Construction Industry Publications.
Jones, C., Hesterly, W. and Borgatti, S. (1997). A
General theory of network governance:
exchange conditions and social mechanisms.
The Academy of Management Review. 22(4),
911-945.
Latham, M. (1994). Constructing the team.
London: HMSO.
Lawson, B. (1983). How designers think.
London: The Architectural Press Ltd.
Murdoch, J. and Hughes, W. (2008).
Construction contracts: Law and management.
4th ed. London: Taylor and Francis.
Patel, H. (2011). Design-led procurement. MSc
Dissertation. University of Reading: U.K.
Powell, W. W. (1990). ‘Neither market nor
hierarchy: Network forms of organization.’
Research in Organizational Behavior. 12, pp.
295-336.
16
Provan, K. G. and Kenis, P. (2007). ‘Modes of
network governance: structure, management,
and effectiveness.’ Journal of Public
Administration Research and Theory. 18(2), pp.
229-252.
Rose, T. M. and Manley, K. (2012). ‘Revisiting the
adoption of innovative products on Australian
road infrastructure projects.’ Construction
Management and Economics. 30(4), pp. 277–
298.
Royal institute of British Architects (2016).
What Clients think of Architects: Client Survey
2016. Retrieved from: https://
www.architecture.com/Files/
RIBAProfessionalServices/ClientServices/
RibaWorkingWithArchitectsOnlineReport201
6.pdf
Royal institute of British Architects (2011).
Public Sector Procurement RIBA Position Paper.
Retrieved from: https://www.architecture.com/
Files/RIBAProfessionalServices/Practice/
Archive/
MicrosoftWord-10-04-08PublicSectorProcure
ment-RIBApositionpaper.pdf
Scott, R. W. (1995). Institutions and
organizations. London: SAGE Publications.
Thompson, J. D. (2003). Organizations in action:
social science bases of administrative theory.
New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Voss, C., Tsikriktsis, N. and Frohlich, M. (2002).
‘Case research in operations management.’
International Journal of Operations and
Production Management. 22(2), pp. 195-219.
Walker, A. (2007). Project management in
construction. 5th Edition ed. Oxford: Blackwell
Publishing.
Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and
hierarchies: analysis and antitrust implications.
New York: The Free Press.
Williamson, O. E. (1979). ‘Transaction-cost
economics: the governance of contractual
relations. ‘ Journal of Law and Economics. 22(2),
pp. 233-261.
Wilton-Ely, J. (1977). ‘The rise of the
professional architect in England.’ In: S. Kostof,
ed. The architect : Chapters in the history of the
profession. New York; Oxford: Oxford
University Press, pp.180-208.

17
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

The Reluctant Supply Chain

Irena Bauman1
1Bauman Lyons Architects
School of Architecture, University of Sheffield, UK
irena@baumanlyons.co.uk

Abstract

Uniquely leveraging recent advancements in three technologies, Building Information Modelling

(BIM), open source parametric software plug-ins, and digital CNC fabrication, Bauman Lyons
Architects are working with ARUP to develop MassBespoke, a new timber cassette
construction system. MassBespoke merges cutting edge design, fabrication, management and
construction approaches with service delivery models from parallel technology industries, to
enable delivery of high quality custom-designed buildings.

This research and development project aims to enable flexible, distributed manufacture of
customisable buildings in a network of local, low-cost fabrication hubs, enabling widespread
accessibility to a complex yet predictable construction process, independent of the level of
customisation. The system brings increased level of cost and build certainty to early design
stages. Through industry engagement we identified the scope for the system to become a
platform for engaging users and designers with the supply chain at the point of sale, through an
innovative browser based customer facing interface linked directly to suppliers thus enabling a
fully integrated supply chain.

The government believes that new digital tools should help the construction industry achieve
the 23-year dream first put forward by Latham (1994) of integrating the supply chain team to
form a collaborative industry. This paper considers the additional challenges encountered to
realising the full potential of digitisation, and highlights the barriers to achieving integration
despite the availability of the tools. It also considers the impact that digitisation will make on
architectural practice in terms of new skills, new working methods, new partnerships with all
tiers of the supply chain, and the new commercial opportunities it presents in terms of blurring
the distinctions between design service, fabrication, construction, development, management
and even sales.

Finally, the paper offers a critical appraisal of the pitfalls in government policy. Whilst promoting
the benefits of digitising the construction industry, current policy tends to favour large
centralised off-site manufacture which historically proved to be vulnerable to the boom and
bust nature of the industry. MassBespoke offers an alternative model for an ecology of an
integrated network of small scale, low cost, distributed manufacturers.

Key words: digital construction, modern methods of construction, distributed fabrication,

supply chain integration


18
Introduction
The construction industry is notoriously
prone to conflict and waste, through
inefficiencies caused by poor supply chain
integration and antiquated contract based
procurement practices that perpetuate a
culture of conflict. Over the last 30 years’
sequential industry reports attempted to
tackle these issues. Firstly Latham (1994),
addressed for the first time the issues of
unfair conditions, payments and dispute
resolution within the supply chain, followed
by Egan (1998) who identified commercial
processes within the supply chain as a barrier
to improving performance, leading to
underachievement throughout the industry.
Most recently Wolstenholm (2009) identified
little progress against the Latham and Egan
targets. The review made fur ther
recommendations, most notably that the
supply chain should take the lead in
demonstrating that it can create additional
value through adopting ‘proper collaborative
wor king including integr ated, lean
process’ (ibid: 26). Since that report there is
evidence that at the earliest signs of
economic downtur n in 2008 the
construction industry defaulted to type,
becoming more adver sarial and less
integrated (EC Harris, 2013).
Renewed hope of an integrated supply chain
is now being placed in the potential of digital
technologies to succeed where previous
attempts have failed. In July 2013, the
Government published Construction 2025,
Industrial Strategy: government and industry
in partnership, setting out its long-term vision
for the industry. It proposes that by 2025, the
industry should be ‘smart’, that is, ‘…an
industry that is efficient and technologically
advanced’ (p8). The report suggests that in
the coming years, technological advances, and
the emergence of new capabilities such as
the internet of things ‘… will drive a step
change in how we build and how our built
environment operates’ (HM Government,
2013: 32).
In order to suppor t this policy the
Government has invested in Innovate UK’s
programme of research projects Digitising
The Construction Industry (Innovate UK,
2015). The aim is to better-understand the
potential of new, digital technologies in
br inging about a lean and efficient
construction industry through the adoption
of Building Information Modelling (BIM), the
promotion of more collaborative working
practices, and improvements in the quality,
affordability and flexibility of off-site
manufacturing:
BIM technology should be seen as a
‘collaboration' between the construction sector
and the software industries and creates an
environment in which there are opportunities
and synergies for both methods.
(HM Government, 2012: 3-4).
This belief has gained further legitimacy
through evidenced demand for new housing,
which it is believed can only be met through
the improved speed, quality and efficiency of
offsite construction. Industr y is urging
government to introduce further measures
to suppor t acceleration of the offsite
industry and the integration of its supply
chains (CIC, 2013).
Whilst so much hope is vested in the
transformational powers of the digital
technologies, this papers disseminates the
finding from the MassBespoke Supply Chain
Integration research project which
investigated the readiness of the construction
industry to embrace the potential of the fully
digitised construction process and digitised
building systems.
This paper considers both the opportunities
and challenges generated by new processes.
The key findings indicate that whilst the
established barriers to integration of the
supply chain remain relatively unchallenged,
there are now additional barriers arising from
19
the new technologies themselves due to the
manner in which innovation in construction is
diffused across the supply chain (Larsen,
2015). Barriers include the skill deficit in new
digitally enabled processes; the incompatibility
of the short term cost-focused procurement
methods with the long term product-focused
process; lack of incentives to innovate;
immaturity of distributed fabrication
networks; and government policy that
supports investment in technology rather
than in people by encouraging the use of
large, off-site factories (CLC, 2016) that
depend on significant capital outlay and a
secure pipe-line of building land and demand
- non of which can be guaranteed. These are
the challenges that MassBepoke, a distributed,
low cost, low skill entry, digitally integrated
system and process attempt to address and
help to solve.
Discussion
Recent advancements in three technologies:
Building Information Modelling (BIM),
parametrics software plug-ins such as
Grasshopper1 that are open source and do
not require knowledge of programming or
scripting, and the digital CNC method of
fabrication are presenting an opportunity to
truly integrate the entire supply chain from
the point of sale to the customer feedback
loop.
Leveraging these new technologies Bauman
L yo n s A r c h i t e c t s ( B L A ) t a r g e t t h e
requirement for a fast, high-performance and
commercially competitive build process with
MassBespoke (MB), a novel construction
system based on a composite timber
cassette superstructure, driven by Digital
Parametric Framework Modelling. MB
uniquely combines these software
technologies with digital CNC fabrication to
enable direct and flexible manufacture of
customisable building panels through a
1 http://www.grasshopper3d.com/
2 https://www.rhino3d.com/
network of distributed, low-cost fabrication
hubs.
The system, enables exploration of the
technical and economic feasibility of
integrating upstream and downstream
participants in the supply chain of MB.
Although pre-fabrication inherently includes a
number of fragmented suppliers prior to
onsite installation, fully integrating suppliers
into a practical MB supply chain
fundamentally changes the business model of
construction delivery and allows regulatory
control and administrative aspects to be
incorporated into a single integrated process.
Compression of timescales arising from the
proposed constr uction system can
subsequently reduce wor king capital
requirement and financing costs, providing
opportunities for alternative business models.
Through private communications with
Rhino2, the programming platform on which
MB is developed as a Grasshopper plug-in,
BLA have established that there is a strong
industry demand for a framework to bring
users much further into the parametric
design process across a range of applications.
The logical realisation of this capability is
through a browser-based interface. MB offers
the possibility of establishing a network of
digital fabrication facilities that are robust to
fluctuations in demand through effective
management of resources. This is facilitated
by an open digital platform incorporating
Point of Sale that establishes a direct link
between end users and suppliers, enabling
enhanced design solutions, building delivery,
performance and value. Integrating users with
designers and suppliers through a browser-
based interface also introduces a
collaborative aspect to design, specification
and decision-making.
The potential of MB, which is yet to be fully
commercialised, has already fundamentally
20
altered the current business model of BLA
brought about by the possibility of integrating
tiers of the supply chain into single digitised
process. The practice has now set up a
research and fabrication firm MBLab to
enable the system to be continually
developed and improved, and to fabricate
the prototypes leading to the forming a
Home Manufacture Team to develop homes
with the MB system. As architects, we are
developing new skills in BIM, parametric
design and fabrication.
The potential inherent in MB to integrate the
full supply chain can only be fulfilled through
supply chain willingness to engage. The
Supply Integration research, undertaken in
2015/16 with Innovate UK research funding,
explored the technical and economic
feasibility of integrating upstream and
downstream participants in the supply chain
of MB, including users, tier 23 and tier 34
suppliers, using digital parametric framework
modelling to bring forward the design of
critical elements in the construction supply
chain. More specifically the study focused on
the potential for integrating tier 2 suppliers
into a distributed MB supply chain to
become tier 15 suppliers within a joined up
supply chain; the potential to turn MB
technology into an open digital platform with
potential global reach accessible by end
users, designers, suppliers and developers;
and the current capacity in the UK for
distributed fabrication.
The study highlighted a very reluctant supply
chain and revealed several new barriers to
supply chain integration arising from the
digitisation itself, in addition to those already
identified in the traditional construction
3 Tier
2 suppliers refer to ‘designers, constructors and suppliers with a sub-contract with the tier one
contractor’ (Designing Buildings, 2017).
4 Tier
3 suppliers refer to ‘designers, constructors and suppliers with a sub-contract with a tier to sub-
contractor’ (Designing Buildings, 2017).
5 Tier 1 suppliers refer to ‘designers and constructors that have a direct contract with the ultimate
client’ (Designing Buildings, 2017).
processes (EC Harris, 2013). These findings
are considered in turn below.
Specifier is not the Buyer
The greatest barrier identified was in finding
a successful way to incentivise tier 2
manufacturers to invest in intelligent front-
end interfaces and configurators for their
products, be they web based or BIM based
components, which would help enable closer
integration by joining specifiers with real-time
cost information and actual manufacturers
product model data from the outset. The
prevalence of traditional procurement
practices which dictate that the specifier is
not the buyer, mean that tier 2 suppliers are
unwilling to invest in representing their
products in such a way. Due to this there is
also limited scope for products to compete
against each other in the eyes of the specifier.
One possible solution would be to focus on
the data and analytics produced by the
interface, which would be of value to
manufacturers giving them feedback on their
products and generating sales leads. Another
incentive would be to reduce the amount of
‘false leads’ whereby manufacturers spend
time quoting for a particular custom job for it
to come to nothing because of budget
constraints – even an automated rule of
thumb configurator could easily prevent such
abortive work.
Perceptions of distant returns
Despite tier 2 suppliers seeing the potential
benefit of the interface, the development
time was seen by many as too great an
investment and risk for returns that they
perceived to be far in the future. As a result
it was difficult to progress beyond initial
21
discussions with most of them. However,
some tier 2 suppliers were operating on
software systems that were universal
amongst several manufacturers in the same
marketplace. Through further discussions
with the software developers we found
there were already developments in this area
i n t h e f o r m o f s i m p l e we b - b a s e d
configurator tools, and the developers had
seen benefits of offering this as a product to
their tier 2 manufacture customer s.
Importantly, such software developers should
have more to gain from developing this
further compared to individual suppliers.
Complex Products and Systems
Due to the vastly differing nature of each
parties’ requirements it was impossible to
hold meaningful joint workshops. Instead it
was necessary to hold separate discussions
with each party to secure their interest in
being involved. Furthermore, due to
technical complexity and ambitious goals of
the digitally integrated supply chain it was
necessary to hold an initial meeting to
explain the project, explore possibilities, and
gather an outline understanding of the nature
of each suppliers requirements. Follow up
meetings were required to discuss matters
such as technical feasibility. Key lessons are
that it is essential to gauge the strategic
interest of the third parties, particularly the
fundamentals of the marketplace in which
they operate, and to delve deeper into the
third party systems and tools supporting
their operations to understand better how
digitised process might serve them best.
Generally collaboration with tier 3 suppliers
was more forthcoming than tier 2. Potentially
this was because tier 3 suppliers saw a direct
opportunity for selling their products. Some
tier 2 suppliers cited MB’s distance from the
market to be central to their reluctance to
6 https://www.opendesk.cc/
7 https://tylko.com/
even discuss feasibility, let alone to actively
engage in development.
The embryonic nature of the distributed
fabrication network
The downstream distributed fabrication
discussions and suppliers presented mixed
views, and highlighted several issues regarding
the open nature of distributed fabrication.
Many small workshops with the means to
produce the panels, such as a standard CNC
router, assembly space and workforce, often
have fluctuating capacity in their normal
workload. Leveraging this spare capacity
would enable affordable manufacture and
offering benefits over conventional offsite
manufacturing operations including low
additional overheads, low setup costs,
flexibility to cope with fluctuating demand
and potential to manufacture globally or
locally. However there are barriers to
enabling this as digital fabrication capacity is
in its infancy. To release the potential of this
form of fabrication and grow the network of
d i s t r i bu t e d f a b r i c a t o r s w i l l r e q u i r e
simplification and automation of the
computer aided manufacture workflow, the
training of new fabricators, remote quality
control, and the development of easy forms
of interfacing physical operation with cloud-
based central parametric logistics model
systems.
Often these barriers present a catch 22
situation for custom and low volume
manufacturers who already use this method
of manufacture, for example Bespoke
furniture, OpenDesk6, Tylko7, and find that
their products can be priced out of the
market because they cannot attain necessary
quality control without investing in factory
setup, which in turn results in uncompetitive
prices for low volumes.
22
Conclusions
The current survey of smart construction
being under taken by the Construction
Leadership Council (CLC, 2017) identifies
several barriers to adaptation of modern
methods of construction. These include lack
of collaboration and a need for strategic
par tnerships within the supply chain;
immature supply chain with a need to move
towards an automotive-industry model; risk-
averse culture in construction; fragmented
procurement and a need for new models
and a business case for change; and the ability
t o d e m o n s t r a t e b e n e fi t s t h r o u g h
performance data.
This paper suggests that to unlock the
current reluctance of the supply chain to
embrace the unprecedented potential for
integr ation in moder n methods of
construction offered by the new digital
technologies, we need to focus on what will
be the “pull” rather than the “push” factors
for the industry by asking ‘who will want the
system, how it will be accessed and what will
each want to achieve’. It will also be
important to understand the objectives of
tier 2 building product manufacturers in the
market to foster a potential mutually
beneficial ecology. This must consider types
of business model, understanding of the
current market from multiple view points,
technological challenges, and importantly
alternative revenue possibilities. Revenue
models based on licenses, royalties,
subscriptions or some other form or hybrid
of these could form the mechanism by which
MB could be sold. However, there may be
other revenue streams that could be
exploited without the sale of physical goods
being involved. Such diverse streams may rely
on large numbers of users which will have a
significant bearing on choice of development
route.
It will be important to keep in mind what
other Building Product Manufacturers may
see for the future of parametric building
products that can be bought and configured
online. Although the possibility of achieving
this for many products has been within reach
for several years, it has not yet materialised
on any scale, even though there have been
attempts to do exactly that. This may likely be
due to the disconnect between specifier and
purchaser in construction and for this reason
building product manufacturers would be
more interested in collecting valuable data
about who may eventually be buying their
products further down the line, rather than
putting efforts into more intelligent point of
specification solutions. One possibility
therefore is to focus on the interface
generating valuable data and analytics for
manufacturers that would give them useful
feedback on their products and generate
s a l e s l e a d s . A n o t h e r i n c e n t i ve f o r
manufacturers would be to reduce the
amount of ‘false leads’ whereby they must
spend time quoting for a particular custom
job for it to abort - even an automated rule
of thumb configurator could easily prevent
such abortive work.
Most importantly, it is vital to develop
demonstrator projects such as MB to
illustrate to policy makers the real potential
of digital technologies to integrate the supply
chain, and to continue to provide R&D
investment for innovation in small, distributed
fabrication networks. Networks which will be
inherently resilient to fluctuations of demand
in preference to incentivising growth of
centralised factories, which have historically
shown to be very vulnerable to fluctuations
in the market.
References
Construction Industry Council. (2016). Offsite
housing review. Retrieved from: cic.org.uk/
download.php?f=offsite-housing-review-
feb-2013-for-web.pdf
Construction Leadership Council. (2016).
Innovation work stream road-mapping to
improve productivity, capacity and innovation in
23
the housing sector. Retrieved from: http://
www.constructionleadershipcouncil.co.uk/
wp-content/uploads/2016/05/
SG_Roadmapping_Doc_Version-FINAL.pdf
Designing Buildings Wiki. (2016). Suppliers for
design and construction. Retrieved from:
https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/
Suppliers_for_design_and_construction
EC Harris LLP. (2013). BIS research Paper No
145: Supply Chain Analysis into the
Construction Industry. Retrieved from: https://
www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/
uploads/attachment_data/file/252026/
bis-13-1168-supply-chain-analysis-into-the-
construction-industry-report-for-the-
construction-industrial-strategy.pdf
Latham, M. (1994). Constructing the Team.
Retrieved from: http://
constructingexcellence.org.uk/wp-content/
uploads/2014/10/Constructing-the-team-
The-Latham-Report.pdf
Wolstenholme, A. (2009). Never Waste a
Good Crisis: A Review of Progress since
Rethinking Construction and Thoughts for Our
Future. Retrieved from: http://
constructingexcellence.org.uk/wp-content/
uploads/2014/12/
Wolstenholme_Report_Oct_2009.pdf

Egan, J. (1999). Rethinking Construction.

Retrievedfrom:http://
constructingexcellence.org.uk/wp-content/
uploads/2014/10/
rethinking_construction_report.pdf

HM Government. (2013). Construction 2025.

Retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/
government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/210099/bis-13-955-
construction-2025-industrial-strategy.pdf

HM Government. (2012). Building Information

Modelling. Retrieved from: https://
www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/
uploads/attachment_data/file/
34710/12-1327-building-information-
modelling.pdf

Innovate UK. (2015). Supply chain integration

in Construction. Retrieved from: https://
connect.innovateuk.org/web/supply-chain-
integration-in-construction/overview

Larsen, G. D. (2014). ‘Innovation Diffusion

Across Firms.’ In Construction Innovation eds. F.
Orstavik, A. Dainty and C. Abbott. Chichester:
John Wiley & Sons.

24
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Procurement and Building Performance

Julie Godefroy1

1JulieGodefroy Sustainability, UK
julie@juliegodefroysustainability.co.uk

Abstract

The post-occupancy evaluation of buildings repeatedly identifies similar causes to the performance
gap and user dissatisfaction: lack of user considerations in the design process; overly complex systems
and controls; insufficient commissioning, handover and training of end users.

This paper presents a cross-project analysis of Innovate UK non-domestic Building Performance

Evaluation projects which, rather than focusing on design measures, i.e. what performed well or poorly,
looked into how and why building performance was arrived at, i.e. whether procurement processes
influenced the end performance in terms of user feedback and energy consumption.

The analysis concludes that procurement processes do matter for building performance, though
probably not as much as people, collaboration, and simplicity. Some set-ups are more conducive to
delivering better user satisfaction, comfort, and energy consumption. This includes the contractual
framework, team’s roles and responsibilities, as well as more informal factors such as relationships and
individual motivations. The worst performing projects tended to be “normal” projects with aggravating
factors and little incentive or protection through contract. Those achieving the best performance
tended to be “normal” projects with motivated people, incentives, and helpful factors especially
simplicity of design.

Key findings are presented, including a simple “procurement scoring” tool and a list of
recommendations. This recognises that the choice of a procurement route will be driven by complex
factors including capital cost and risk management. The intention is to highlight risks and opportunities
so that, within the selected route, procurement characteristics can be refined to help deliver
operational building performance.

Keywords: procurement, building performance, collaboration, post-occupancy evaluation

25
Introduction 

The post-occupancy evaluation of buildings
regularly identifies energy performance that is
far from the design intent, unsatisfactory
comfort levels, and user dissatisfaction with
controls and operability. This is often attributed
to a set of common factors: lack of user
considerations in the design; overly complex
systems and controls; insufficient commissioning,
handover and training of end-users (Bordass et
al., 1999; CIBSE, 2012; Innovate UK, 2016).
Beyond design issues, this paper looks at the
influence of procurement processes on building
performance and whether trends can be
Figure 1: Overview of the procurement study
Methodology
Overview
The study is based on 41 non-domestic Building
Performance Evaluation [BPE] projects selected
from the Innovate UK portfolio of 51 BPE
projects due to sufficient and reliable data.
Interviews with the wider industry also helped
steer the investigation and test initial findings.
An overall review of these projects helped
identify broad trends between building
performance and key project procurement
factors – see section 3.1.
This led to the identification of the projects with
highest and lowest performance in terms of
both energy consumption and user feedback.
These projects were analysed in more detail in
terms of their procurement process, including
i d e n t i fi e d t o d r a w b e s t p r a c t i c e
recommendations for practitioners from the
design and client side.
Guidance is already available on the comparative
strengths of different procurement routes, with
‘quality’ used alongside r isk, cost, and
programme criteria (Constructing Excellence,
2015), and on best practice design and
procurement processes (BSRIA, 2014; BSRIA,
2013; Green Building Council, 2016). This study
focuses on whether, beyond completion, there is
a discernible impact of procurement routes on
operational performance. 

interviews with project teams if possible – see
section 3.2.
A set of recommendations were produced from
the analysis, as well as a simple “procurement
scoring” tool aiming to highlight conditions likely
to support or hinder end performance – see
sections 3.3 and 4.
Performance indicators
The selected BPE projects reported building
performance consistently, using Building Use
S u r ve y s [ B U S ] a n d m e a s u r e d e n e r g y
consumption reported against CIBSE TM46 and/
o r D i s p l ay E n e r g y C e r t i fi c a t e [ D E C ]
benchmar ks. The following performance
indicators were therefore used to analyse the
BPE sample:
26
 - User feedback:
• BUS comfort index: This takes account
of user feedback on summer and
winter temperature, summer and
winter air quality, lighting, comfort, and
noise.
• BUS satisfaction index: This takes
account of user feedback on the
building design, whether it meets their
needs, and its perceived impact on
health and productivity.
There is a strong correlation between
the two but a large proportion of BPE
buildings scored particularly well or
poorly against one and not the other.
T h e y a r e t h e r e fo r e c o n s i d e r e d
reasonably valid as two separate
indicators.
- Energy consumption:
• Fuel consumption for space heating
and hot water against DEC
benchmark (or TM46, if DEC not
available).
• Electricity consumption (excluding
heating and hot water) against DEC
benchmark (or TM46, if DEC not
available).
In order to allow different building types
to be compared with each other,
consumption was analysed in relation to
benchmark levels rather than in absolute
terms. A brief review was made to check
that relying on benchmarks did not in
itself skew conclusions (Bruhns, Jones,
Cohen, and Bordass, 2011; Bruhns, Jones
& Cohen, 2011).
There was no strong correlation
between how well the BPE buildings
perform for their fuel energy use and for
their electrical energy use.
The impor tance of management for end
performance is obviously significant. The BUS
scores for ‘effectiveness of response to request
for change’ were reviewed as indication of how
well buildings may be managed, or perceived to
be managed. Unfortunately these scores were
unavailable for a majority of BPE buildings and
they could therefore not reliably contribute to
the analysis.
Procurement factors
All projects were analysed in terms of the
following key procurement factors:
Client types
The BPE sample includes a relatively high
proportion of public projects (~55%), the large
majority of which in the education sector.
Private and Joint Venture (JV) projects represent
~ 35% of the projects, with the remaining 10%
in the charity sector.
The sample of BPE projects includes relatively
few private repeat clients. Interviews were
carried out with the wider industry to seek a
more representative perspective of overall UK
construction output (Office for National
Statistics, 2013).
Procurement routes
The majority of BPE projects (63%) were
procured through a design and build contract,
with an additional 24% through traditional
contracts. Other procurement routes
represented a minority (13%): two through
Private Finance Initiative (PFI), one through
construction management, and two through a
mix of D&B and traditional contracts. This is
expected to be broadly representative of the
industry.
Public sector projects were procured in a similar
split to the overall sample. This limits the risk of
them skewing the overall conclusions through
their own characteristics.
Detailed procurement characteristics
The “best” and “worst” performing projects
we r e a n a ly s e d a g a i n s t m o r e d e t a i l e d
procurement characteristics – see section 3.3.
27
Analysis and Findings
Overall Trends
The performance of each project against the 4
performance indicators is presented in Figure 2
and Figure 3, overall and split per client type and
procurement route.
Note – for BUS scores, the higher score the
better. For energy consumption, the lower the
better. 


Figure 2 – Results against user feedback performance indicators. Individual building scores: straight
markers; average scores: round markers.

Figure 3 – Results against energy consumption performance indicators. Individual building scores:
straight markers; average scores: round markers.

28
There is no difference considered statistically
significant in average performance between
different types of clients and procurement
routes. This is consistent with the feedback
received from interviews which tended to
conclude that buildings will on average perform
in similar ways regardless of the procurement
route, the differences becoming apparent when
“good” and “bad” performance occurs.
Detailed Analysis – “Best” and “worst” projects
A total of four “best” BPE projects were
identified which scored well against at least 3 of
the 4 performance indicators for energy
consumption and user feedback, with 3 further
projects of close enough performance; a total of
six “worst” projects were identified which
scored on the lower end of at least 3 of the 4
performance indicators.
The following observations can be made:
There is no strong pattern identifiable in terms
of client types.
T h r e e o f t h e fo u r p r o j e c t s o f “ b e s t
performance” were procured under traditional
contracts and one under D&B. This is despite
the preponderance of D&B projects within the
overall sample and is therefore considered
significant. They are also smaller than the average
BPE project size. The additional projects, with
slightly lower performance, were under D&B.
Four of the six projects of “worst performance”
were procured using a D&B route, one under
PFI, and one under a mix of D&B and traditional
contracts. This is consistent with the feedback
received at interviews. The projects are much
larger than the “best” performing projects, which
may be one of the factors that led to
complexity and to a D&B route for risk
management purposes.
The three projects with the highest energy
consumption and lowest user feedback are
academies, and were procured under D&B or
PFI. The other academy among the 41 BPE
buildings had a similar size and project team but
was procured under a traditional contract and
did not fall within the ‘worst’ projects. Feedback
from interviews supports this finding, reporting
a lack of incentives for end performance,
challenging programmes and budgets, and
reduced input by designers at the detailed and
construction stages.
Procurement Scoring
Informed by the detailed analysis and interviews,
a set of detailed procurement parameters were
defined and a simple scoring developed to
represent their likelihood of supporting or
hinder ing building perfor mance . The
procurement process of individual projects can
then be assessed and illustrated with colour
hues (from green – positive, to red – risk
factors).
It is very much acknowledged that this is to
some extent simplistic. Some contexts will lead
projects towards cer tain routes for valid
reasons. For example, D&B contracts are
typically favoured by clients to transfer risk onto
the main contractor and help certainty of cost
and programme for delivery of a set (more or
less detailed) product. By comparison, traditional
contracts are seen to allow better ‘quality’ and
control by the client and original design team,
but often without the benefits from early
contractor’s involvement in construction
experience and programming and overall
delivery efficiency. This high-level tool intends to
highlight trends and key risks and opportunities. 

29
Table 1: Procurement scoring
Procurement Positive factors Risk factors
parameters

Floor area Notional scale:

(most positive) <1,000m2 - 1-5,000 m2 - 5-10,000 m2 - > 10,000 m2 - Multiple buildings (most risky)

Overall Scale based on client-led or contractor-led control:

procurement route (most positive) Traditional - D&B at late stage, with client-side monitoring role - D&B at late stage without client-
side monitoring role - D&B at early stage – PFI (most risky)

Soft Landings and +2 for Soft Landings throughout the project

collaboration + 1 for lessons learnt from previous projects
+1 for partial Soft Landings
+1 for collaborative approach

Ownership of +2 At least one influential individual highly engaged in

building building performance at design and operational stages
performance by + 1 At least one influential individual highly engaged in
individuals building performance at design or operational stage
+1 some evidence of engagement in building
performance at the design and operational stages

Briefing +1 for simplicity as a requirement in the brief
+1 for user involvement in the brief
-1 for arbitrary or inflexible requirements (e.g.
conflicting Building Bulletins, renewable energy
contribution for planning)
-1 for significant changes to the brief during design or
construction stages
-1 for other risk factor with the brief (e.g. multi-headed
client)

Incenti Design +1 for framework or other repeat client -1 for moderating factor (e.g. framework ending/little
ves and +1 for substantial retention fees post-PC prospect of future work)
construct + 1 for other motivation (e.g. “feel good” factor, local
ion exposure, high PR potential)

Operatio +2 strong incentive (e.g. reward for performance, utilities -1 reported lack of incentive
n a large part of the budget, stretching performance target) -2 disincentive (e.g. normalisation period in PFI
+1 some incentive (e.g. user charge for energy contract)
consumption, not flat rate)

Continuity Continuity of team members and information Changes in team members and organisations (e.g.
departure of individuals, D&B without novation)

Skills and + 2 for early involvement of contractor -2 reported lack of experience in crucial party or with
experience + 2 for reported highly-skilled / experienced team crucial design element
+1 for reported highly-skilled client -2 contractor involved late in design (late E or later)
-1 other negative reported factor

Quality checking +2 commissioning manager directly for client -1 reported lack of supervision / overseeing on site for
appointments + 1 commissioning manager for main contractor either architecture or M&E
+ 1 architectural site monitoring for the client e.g. clerk -2 no supervising appointment on commissioning,
of works architecture, and M&E
+1 M&E site monitoring for the client e.g. resident
engineer

Complexity – BMS, -1 for BMS

innovation, -1 for TWO passive innovations
technology -1 for ventilation with automated openings
-1 for extensive automated lighting controls
-1 for one low carbon technology

Handover and +1 pro-active and skilled facilities management team -1 significant reported issues with handover / training
training, FM * +1 support post-PC -1 significant reported issues with commissioning
-1 lack of experience in facilities management teams
-1 lack of support post-PC
- 1 lack of maintenance contracts

30
 Procurement Positive factors Risk factors
parameters

Other mitigation / +2 feel good factor (e.g. move from unloved/inadequate -1 small change in density / occupation compared to
aggravating factor, facilities to the new building) brief
typically outside the - 2 significant change in density / occupation compared
project team’s to brief
control -2 negative event during design or construction (e.g.
significant budget constraints, project stop / start)

*Management is crucial in practice. It is here under a single category as this analysis focuses on procurement and factors
within the control of people who procure, design and build buildings.

This scoring was applied to the “best” and “worst” projects, as illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4 – Illustration of procurement scoring for projects with highest and lowest energy
consumption and user feedback

The “best” performing buildings tend to benefit
from a number of positive factors, such as
contract type, small building size, simplicity and
highly motivated individuals. The “worst” ones
have a number of risk factors, of which contract
type, briefing and complexity, and few positive
attributes. As projects become more “average”,
risk factors are counter-balanced by more
elements such as independent commissioning,
incentives, or team continuity.
Poor handover and inadequate facilities
management resources and training are
widespread. The contribution of ‘complexity’ to
poorer performance is also clearly visible. These
are not new findings.
The impact of Value Engineering on end
performance was reported in a number of BPE
projects but, without detailed information, it
could not be included in the scoring tool. The
implications on end performance of Value
Engineering M&E items often seem poorly
understood or communicated. Cost cutting
often affected passive design measures, while
complex systems such as low carbon technology
were retained but with modified “ancillary”
systems (e.g. controls, thermal stores). This may
be related to the fact that these complex items
were referred to in specifications or other
project targets while “ancillary” items were less
detailed and more exposed to change.
This study did not benefit from detailed capital
costs information on the BPE buildings.
Approximate information was however
gathered from publically available sources, which
indicates that the best performing BPE projects
did not seem to cost more – instead they seem
on average 10% cheaper per sqm, at

31
comparable uses. This is supported by the fact
that they are simpler, with fewer expensive
systems.
Recommendations
The following recommendations for client
organisations and project teams were drawn from
the analysis.
This does not claim to be exhaustive but to draw
key procurement factors whose influence was
apparent in the BPE projects. To a large extent it
supports existing knowledge on key factors such as
the risks of complexity, the impor tance of
commissioning, handover, incentives, and multi-
disciplinary collaboration, but it adds to the body of
evidence with supportive quantitative data, and
offers recommendations on how procurement
processes can help deliver these recommendations.
1. A good brief
a. Involve the end users or representatives
to inform the brief (see next point)
b. Incorporate lessons from past projects
c. Encourage the team to interrogate the
brief. Targets related to environmental
standards and internal conditions often
lead to buildings which are overly
complex to operate.
2. People matter
a. Design for people: Facilitate end user
involvement from the early stages,
including general users as well as
facilities managers.
b. “Gold dust”: The best performing
projects tend to have an individual
particularly motivated and engaged
with end performance.
c. Continuity
i. Teams and resourcing: Changes
are sometimes unavoidable
(and even desirable), but in
general encourage team
continuity to retain knowledge
and maintain a sense of
ownership. This also helps
lesson learning at project
delivery.
ii. Contracts: Traditional as well as
D&B contracts with novation
help provide a continuity of
designers, but novation can
break the line of
communication and “divorce”
the design team from the client
and/or end user – see point 6
on quality control.
3. Building the team and procuring skills:
a. Involve a contractor early to bring skills
to the project team, allow the
contractor to familiarise themselves
with innovative proposals (if any), and
help instil a sense of ownership and
collaboration.
b. Some elements require par ticular
attention as the skills are not yet
widespread:
i. Detailed design, commissioning
and operation of complex M&E
systems, including BMS and
controls;
ii. Energy consumption prediction.
c. Involve the FM teams early; provide
training and a thorough handover
(ideally recorded as people may move
on).
4. Incentivise end performance throughout
design, construction, and operation, e.g.:
a. Potential for repeat work: This need not
always be a formal framework; indeed
frameworks may not help depending
on the number of contractors and
project pipeline.
b. Reputation, local connection, “feel good”
factor: This may be particularly helpful
32
 for smaller clients (e.g. local clients,
charities).
c. Performance contracting: There is a
growing consensus that contractual
operational targets may be central to
delivering actual building performance.
The BPE buildings do not provide many
examples of this. PFI is in theory a form
of performance contracting however
the two BPE PFI buildings did not
perform well and in one case the
contract actually acted as disincentive
to performance, highlighting the
importance of setting the right targets.
d. Charging users for actual energy usage.
This relies on a suitable metering
strategy and good metering
commissioning and reconciliation. This
can drive operational efficiencies but
will often not be sufficient in itself.
5. Beware complexity, particularly for M&E
systems; protect the design intent with
robust skills and appointments:
a. Keep designs simple. This is a repeated
finding from post-occupancy evaluation.
b. Do not under-estimate the complexity
of M&E systems, including innovative or
low–carbon technologies but also BMS,
controls, and sub-metering.
c. For these M&E systems, avoid relying on
performance-based specifications with
the detailed design and selection left to
the supply chain… or at least keep a
watching brief, including site visits during
constr uction and post-Pr actical
Completion. This should help maintain
the initial intent, protect key elements
from value engineering, and help
coordination of packages. This may
require an increase on current M&E
services and fees and possibly more
vocal M&E engineers on the value on
their services.
6. Quality control:
a. Get what you paid for: Maximise the
value of quality checks already
embedded within most appointments,
focusing on the intent and on
remediating the issues uncovered rather
than taking them as “tick box” exercises
e.g. airtightness tests, BREEAM post-
construction review and credits for
commissioning, Soft Landings,
thermography surveys …
b. Ensure independence / Provide another
pair of eyes: The value of some
appointments can be maximised if they
are client-side, particularly on larger or
more complex projects e.g.
commissioning specialists, site engineers,
clerks of works. In D&B projects client-
side monitoring roles help maintain
direct lines of communication and can
protect the design intent and the focus
on end-performance.
Thanks and Acknowledgements
This study was funded by Innovate UK, who also
funded the individual Building Performance
Evaluation reports which it is based on.
Thank you to all the organisations and individuals
who suppor ted this project through formal
interviews or more informal discussions, advice, and
feedback, and to Hoare Lea, for their support during
the study which was completed elsewhere but partly
conducted there.
References
Bordass B., Bunn B., Cohen R., Ruyssevelt P., Standeven
M., Leaman A. (1999). The PROBE project: technical
lessons from PROBE 2, CIBSE National Conference
Bruhns H., Jones P., Cohen R., Bordass B. (2011).
Benchmarking For Display Energy Certificates, Usable
Buildings Trust for CIBSE
Bruhns H., Jones P., Cohen R. (2011) CIBSE Review Of
Energy Benchmarks For Display Energy Certificates,
CIBSE Technical Symposium, DeMontfort University,
Leicester UK – September 2011
33
BSRIA. (2013). How to Procure Soft Landings. Retrieved
from https://www.bsria.co.uk/services/design/soft-
landings/free-guidance/

BSRIA. (2014). Soft Landings Framework. Retrieved from

https://www.bsria.co.uk/services/design/soft-landings/
free-guidance/

CIBSE. (2012). PROBE Studies. Retrieved from

www.cibse.org/knowledge/building-services-case-
studies/probe-post-occupancy-studies

Constructing Excellence. (2015). Procurement Fact Sheet.

Retrieved from http://constructingexcellence.org.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2015/03/procurement.pdf

Green Building Council. (2016). Delivering Building

Performance. Retrieved from
http://www.ukgbc.org/sites/default/files/UK-GBC
%20Task%20Group%20Report%20Delivering
%20Building%20Performance.pdf

Innovate UK. (2016). Building Performance Evaluation

Programme, Findings from Non-Domestic Projects.
Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/
publications/low-carbon-buildings-best-practices-and-
what-to-avoid

Office of National Statistics. (2013). Output in the

construction industry. Retrieved from http://
www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_302580.pdf

34
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Challenges in the business models of creative professional service firms

Marina Bos-de Vos1, Bente Lieftink2, Hans Wamelink,3 Jasper Kraaijeveld4

1Departmentof Management in the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
M.Bos-DeVos@tudelft.nl
2Institute of Management Research, Radboud University, the Netherlands
b.lieftink@fm.ru.ml
3Department of Management in the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
J.W.F.Wamelink@tudelft.nl
4Royal Institute of Dutch Architects, the Netherlands
jkraaijeveld@bna.nl

Abstract

Recent studies have shown that professionals in the built environment need new or improved
business strategies to survive in increasingly dynamic and competitive environments. To gain
insight into how professional businesses can be successfully reshaped, a profound understanding
of their business models is necessary. So far, business model research in project-based
organisations has focused on large companies that are primarily profit-oriented. Work that
addresses the business challenges of small, creative service firms is extremely limited. This study
aims to develop knowledge around the business models of architectural firms by focusing on
their value propositions, value creation and value capture. Iterating between business model
literature and empirical data from 41 semi-structured interviews with Dutch architects and
clients, architectural firms’ business models were systematically examined regarding their
configurations and outcomes. This resulted in an overview of key business model components,
their interrelationships and accompanying challenges for architectural firms. The study
contributes to theory and practice by the development of a strategic decision making
framework that specifically addresses the business model challenges of small creative service
firms. The framework helps practitioners to enhance their business strategies and to develop
new or improved business models with increased benefits.

Keywords: architectural firms, business model, strategy, value creation

35
Introduction
Professional service firms (PSFs) within the
built environment are challenged to alter or
replace their existing business models as they
transform in response to ongoing societal
and industry-level changes (Hughes and
Hughes, 2013). Some firms take on
innovative roles for which they have to
develop entirely new business models.
Others try to stay competitive on the basis
of established roles. These firms have to
redesign their traditional business models as
their ways of doing business are increasingly
questioned by other industry actors or the
public (Vough et al., 2013).
Although academics are interested in the fact
that PSFs increasingly adopt the logic and
structures of business corporations (Suddaby
and Muzio, 2015), explorations of how PSFs
conduct their businesses remain extremely
scarce. So far, efforts to develop more insight
into the business challenges of creative
professional service firms (CPSFs) have been
primarily under taken from a practice-
oriented perspective (van Andel and
Va n d e n b e m p t , 2 0 1 2 ) . A d e t a i l e d
understanding of the business models of
CPSFs and the challenges that they involve is,
however, crucial for firms that wish to
develop new or alternative ways of doing
business.
In this research, we use business model
theory (e.g. Zott et al., 2011) to analyse the
design and challenges of the business models
that CPSFs employ. We specifically focus on
the business models of Dutch architectural
firms. In the Netherlands, many architectural
firms struggle to uphold viable business
models as the sector suffered severely from
the global economic recession. Between
2008 and 2015, firms saw their turnover
decrease by nearly 50% (Vogels, 2016). Many
of the surviving firms now look for ways to
regain or enhance their competitive
advantage and to become more sustainable.
The research contributes to the literature on
CPSFs and architectural firms by providing a
d e t a i l e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e ke y
components, their interrelations and
accompanying challenges in the business
models of CPSFs. It concludes with the
proposal of a strategic decision making
framework for sustainable value creation and
capture in creative projects. The framework
helps firms to improve their business
strategies from the viewpoints of the own
organisation and the other actors that are
involved. This is especially relevant for
professionals who wish to develop more
competitive and sustainable organisations.
The business model concept
A business model describes the rationale of
how an organisation creates, delivers, and
captures value in relationship with a network
of exchange partners (Afuah and Tucci, 2001;
Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010). Business
models help organisations to exploit business
opportunities by creating value for the
parties that are involved, while generating
profits for the firm and its partners. They
need continuous adaptation to secure the
firm’s competitiveness over time (Teece,
2010). The abstract nature of the business
model concept has proved extremely
valuable to both academia and practice.
Strategy researchers, for example, use the
business model as a new unit of analysis to
study how firms create and capture value
(Zott and Amit, 2013; Zott et al., 2011).
Strategists and practitioners are especially
interested in the opportunity to develop and
increase competitive advantage through the
operationalisation of the business model
concept (Grozdanic, 2016).
Many scholars conceptualise the business
model as a configuration of different sub-
constructs, which are often referred to as
components (Shafer et al., 2005). From his
literature review, Clauss (2016) recognises
three overarching dimensions that explain a
36
firm’s business model, namely the value
proposition, value creation and value capture.
The value proposition represents the
solutions that firms offer to their customers
to solve their problems or fulfil their needs
(Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010). Value
creation refers to how and by what means
firms create value along the value chain. Value
capture explains how value propositions are
converted into revenues (Clauss, 2016).
Each business model revolves around a few
key components that detail the organisation’s
value proposition, creation and capture.
Resources seem a particularly important
component for any organisation’s business
model. They represent the firm’s primary
source of competitive advantage and thus
define its ability to create and capture value.
Resources are the tangible or intangible
assets that are tied to a firm (Wernerfelt,
1 9 8 4 ) , s u c h a s p hy s i c a l , h u m a n o r
organisational capital (Barney, 1991).
Capabilities are firm-specific, organisationally
embedded resources that are built by a firm
to handle its combined resources in the
pursuit of a desired goal (Makadok, 2001).
This type of resource is crucial for successful
value creation and capture over time as they
enable the organisation to adapt to its
environment (Achtenhagen et al., 2013).
Business models of project-based firms
Empirical evidence in existing literature
demonstrates that many organizations use
multiple business models simultaneously
(Aversa et al., 2015). Combining different
business models in a business model
portfolio can be beneficial as it helps firms to
pursue different business opportunities at the
same time (Sabatier et al., 2010). Business
model portfolios are at the core of how
project-based firms work. As each project is
unique, project-based firms typically use
(slightly) different business models in their
projects. Kujala et al. (2010) argue that in
project-based firms, business models thus
exist at the firm level and the project level.
Although project-level business models are
often derived from firm-level business
models, projects also create autonomous
business models that may in turn influence
firm business models (Mutka and Aaltonen,
2013).
The lack of knowledge on business
models of CPSFs
Scholars are currently expanding the
knowledge around the variety of business
models that project-based firms use
(Wikström et al., 2010) and the impact of
project-level business models on project-
based firms (Mutka and Aaltonen, 2013).
However, research remains characterised by a
focus on large organisations that are primarily
driven by the aim to generate profit. Existing
research, for example, paid attention to the
influence of servitization on the business
models of capital goods supplier firms (Kujala
et al., 2010). The challenges that such
organisations encounter in their business
models are very different from the ones that
small organisations, organised around service
delivery and driven by multiple strategic goals
have to deal with (Lu and Sexton, 2006). For
many CPSFs, profit is not a main driver. Firms
especially aim for customer, user and/or
societal value by delivering service quality
(DeFillippi et al., 2007; Ravasi et al., 2012),
professional value, such as the development
of a reputation or the generation of work
pleasure (Bos-de Vos et al., 2016) and
organisational continuity. These goals are also
expressed in how CPSFs compete for work
(Manzoni and Volker, 2017). Figure 1 shows
the theoretical framework that was used in
our study. 

37
Figure 1: Theoretical framework for business models of CPSFs
Research approach and methods
We used a qualitative research approach
(Miles and Huberman, 1994) to develop a
profound understanding of the challenges in
the business model designs of small creative
service firms. From January 2014 until January
2015, we collected data from 41 face-to-face
interviews with representatives of 24 Dutch
architectural firms and 16 Dutch client
organisations. Our sample consists of
architectural firms with different age, size and were checked and approved by the
strategic orientation (Coxe et al., 2005;
Mintzberg, 1979) and includes public, semi-
public and pr ivate clients, such as
governmental agencies, hospitals, housing
corporations, contractors and developers.
The interviews were conducted in three
rounds that each had a specific focus. First,
we used exploratory interviews to develop
an understanding of the contemporary
business challenges of architectural firms. Two
important themes that emerged from this
first round of interviews each formed the


basis of an additional round of in-depth
interviews: the valuation of the architectural
firm’s activities and the coordination of the
inter-organisational collaboration. We chose
to use a semi-structured interview protocol
in the three interview rounds to address the
topics of our theoretical framework, while
leaving room for the respondents to come
up with additional themes. The interviews
lasted 45 ‒ 120 minutes, were fully recorded
and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts
interviewees. Additionally, we studied archival
documents and organised 8 interactive
discussion groups with practitioners. The
purpose was to validate the findings of our
study and to gain additional insights.
The data analysis consisted of several
iterative steps, which we repeated for each
round of interviews. In a first step, the
interviews were thoroughly analysed with the
help of software program MAXQDA. A list
of codes was developed and discussed
among the authors. Specific attention was
38
given to the business related tensions that
emerged within architectural firms and in
their interaction with the client. In a second
step, the findings were visualised in a
framework that integrated key themes and
their interrelationships. Third, the findings
were compared to literature, which resulted
in an update of the framework. The findings
and framework were discussed and updated
monthly in group meetings with the involved
researchers, and validated in the interactive
discussion sessions with practitioners.
Challenges in the business models of
CPSFs
Our data reveal three key challenges that
small CPSFs face in their business models.
First, we recognise clear gaps between the
value propositions of firms and the value that
they wish to capture. We found that firms
often made or agreed with offers that did
not align with their own organisational goals.
The data show that architectural firms
pursued professional goals that were not
included in the value proposition and aimed
for many different goals without having clear
priorities. We found examples in which the
value proposition was based on the client’s
desire to have a limited involvement of the
architectural firm, while the value capture
aims of this architectural firm were much
broader. This, for instance, occurred when
firms needed the work, but were also
passionately driven by their professional urge
to deliver the best wor k possible .
Architectural firms delivered additional
activities or spent more hours than offered
to make sure that their desired level of
quality was met. Several clients argued that
these extra activities or hours are simply
redundant. This suggests that firms would
benefit from a more conscious decision on
whether or not to engage in a certain
project. If a project does not contribute to or
is even harmful to the professional goals of
the firm, it may be wise to reject it. If it is
decided to participate in the project, the
business model should be designed
accordingly. This means that the activities and
costs should be fitting to the proposition that
was made to the client.
Second, the data show that the value capture
of architectural firms is hindered by the firms’
high level of resource dependence. The firms
in our sample needed partners to create
value due to their own size and limited
financial resources. However, they did not
always end up collaborating with partners
that were striving for mutual benefits. We
found examples in which the partner was
unwilling to go along with an appropriate fee
for activities that are typically not performed
by an architect, such as the development of a
business case. We also found instances in
which the partner did not value the input of
an architect, for example in the engineering
stage. This suggests that architectural firms
and partner organisations often differ in
opinion on what activities the architectural
firm should perform and what these activities
are worth. The difference seems largely
related to risks. Contractors argued that it is
because of their own risk-taking behaviour,
that they want to keep things within their
own control. They expected that architectural
firms, who are typically not responsible for
the construction of a project, would come up
with different designs and technical solutions
once they are held accountable for the
construction flaws that might come up. It
suggests that if architectural firms wish to be
involved in activities that go beyond the
scope of their partner’s support, it might be
beneficial to take on more risks, either in
close collaboration or alone.
Third, we found that the value propositions
of firms are difficult to translate into money
at the beginning of a project. The architects in
our sample considered it their professional
duty to look beyond the things that the client
asked for or expected. Their ability to look
further than the original assignment was also
highly valued by the clients in our sample. This
shows that the third business challenge is not
39
about preventing or downplaying the hours
that are spend on this particular kind of
additional work, but about findings ways to
get sufficiently paid for it. The interviewees
argued that the exact opportunities of a
project are often not clear in the beginning. It
therefore seems difficult to agree on a price
without knowing the value that might be
created in the end. This suggests that the
business models of architectural firms may
benefit from a revenue model that allows a
reconsideration of the price in a later stage of
the project.
A decision making framework for
successful value creation in creative
projects
Figure 2: Strategic decision making framework for successful value creation in creative
projects

We translated the business model challenges
of CPSFs into a framework for strategic
decision making, which we are currently
improving and validating with the help of
practitioners. A draft version of the
framework is presented in figure 2. The
framework helps professionals and firms to
identify the key components and
interdependencies of their project-level
business models and to handle the tensions
that come up within these business models
and in relation to the firm’s business model. It
is subdivided into three steps to guide the
user/users towards more conscious strategic
choices. The first two steps are designed to
roughly map the wishes of the firm. The third
step aims to translate these wishes into a
pragmatic approach for value creation and
value capture. 

40
In the first step, questions are asked regarding Discussion
the firm’s value proposition and value capture
goals. What would the firm like to propose to This study contributes to the literature on
the client and what does it wish to get out of CPSFs and architectural firms by highlighting
it? By filling in both ends of the framework, the challenges in the business models of small
the user is automatically triggered to think CPSFs. The findings of our study offer
about the relation between the proposition architectural firms and other CPSFs both
and the value capture goals. Do they match knowledge and tools to improve their
each other or is the firm aiming for goals that business strategies. With the development of
are not included in the proposition to the a decision making framework for successful
customer? value creation in creative projects, the study
specifically adds to the fields of construction
The second step involves the desired
management and project management and
activities and risks by the firm. What activities
helps CPSFs within the built environment to
does the firm wish to perform and what risk
improve their strategizing activities in order
is the firm willing to take? This step is
to enhance financial and professional
designed to make a clear connection
performance.
between the proposition and the activities to
enable the prioritisation of certain activities. Acknowledgements
Are all activities necessary for the proposition
to the customer? The second step also
connects the value capture goals with risks. This study is part of futurA, an ongoing
This helps to evaluate if the goals are realistic. research project on new governance and
business models for architectural services
In the third step, the user is asked to fill in the
(www.future-architect.nl) financed by the
resources, partners, costs, revenue model and
Netherlands Organisation for Scientific
agreements that are needed or already given.
Research (NWO) and a consortium of
This step specifically aims to translate the
industry partners.

rather abstract wishes of the firm into
practical solutions. It is a crucial step in the
decision making process of firms as it helps
to identify the essential difficulties in the
project and seduces the user to think in
alternative solutions. It also aims to convince
the user to rethink the wishes of the first two
steps to arrive at a clear and realistic
approach that really matches the ambitions
and organisational identity of the firm.

41
References
Achtenhagen, L., Melin, L., & Naldi, L. (2013).
‘Dynamics of business models–strategizing,
critical capabilities and activities for sustained
value creation’. Long Range Planning, 46(6), pp.
427-442.
Afuah, A., & Tucci, C. L. (2001). Internet
Business Models and Strategies. New York:
McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Aversa, P., Haefliger, S., Rossi, A., & Baden-
Fuller, C. (2015). ‘From business model to
business modelling: Modularity and
manipulation’. In Baden-Fuller, C. &
Mangematin, V. (Eds.), Business models and
modelling (Vol. 33, pp. 151-185): Emerald
Press.
Barney, J. (1991). ‘Firm resources and
sustained competitive advantage’. Journal of
Management, 17(1), pp. 99-120.
Bos-de Vos, M., Wamelink, J. H., & Volker, L.
(2016). ‘Trade-offs in the value capture of
architectural firms: the significance of
professional value.’ Construction Management
and Economics, 34(1), pp. 21-34.
Clauss, T. (2016). ‘Measuring business model
innovation: conceptualization, scale
development, and proof of performance.’
R&D Management, 00(00), pp. 1-19.
Coxe, W., Hartung, N. F., Hochberg, H. H.,
Lewis, B. J., MaisterU, H., Mattox, R. F., & Piven,
P. A. (2005). Charting your course. Retrieved
from: http://davidmaister.com/pdf/
ChartingYourcourse750.pdf
DeFillippi, R., Grabher, G., & Jones, C. (2007).
‘Introduction to paradoxes of creativity:
managerial and organizational challenges in
the cultural economy’. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 28(5), pp. 511-521.
Grozdanic, L. (2016). How to Win Clients and
Make Money: New Business Models for
Architects. Retrieved: http://architizer.com/
blog/new-business-models-for-architects/
Hughes, W., & Hughes, C. (2013).
‘Professionalism and professional institutions
in times of change.’ Building Research &
Information, 41(1), pp. 28-38.
Kujala, S., Artto, K., Aaltonen, P., & Turkulainen,
V. (2010). ‘Business models in project-based
firms–Towards a typology of solution-specific
business models.’ International Journal of
Project Management, 28(2), pp. 96-106.
Lu, S. L., & Sexton, M. (2006). ‘Innovation in
small construction knowledge-intensive
professional service firms: a case study of an
architectural practice.’ Construction
Management and Economics, 24(12), pp.
1269-1282.
Makadok, R. (2001). ‘Toward a synthesis of the
resource-based and dynamic-capability
views of rent creation.’ Strategic Management
Journal, 22(5), pp. 387-401.
Manzoni, B., & Volker, L. (2017). ‘Paradoxes
and management approaches of competing
for work in creative professional service
firms.’ Scandinavian Journal of Management,
33(1), pp. 23-35.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994).
Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded
Sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE Publications.
Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of
organizations: A Synthesis of the Research:
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Mutka, S., & Aaltonen, P. (2013). ‘The impact of
a delivery project's business model in a
project-based firm.’ International Journal of
Project Management, 31(2), pp. 166-176.
Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business
model generation: a handbook for visionaries,
42
game changers, and challengers: John Wiley &
Sons.
Ravasi, D., Rindova, V., & Dalpiaz, E. (2012).
‘The cultural side of value creation.’ Strategic
Organization, 10(3), pp. 231-239.
Sabatier, V., Mangematin, V., & Rousselle, T.
(2010). ‘From recipe to dinner: business
model portfolios in the European
biopharmaceutical industry.’ Long Range
Planning, 43(2), pp. 431-447.
Shafer, S. M., Smith, H. J., & Linder, J. C. (2005).
‘The power of business models.’ Business
Horizons, 48(3), pp. 199-207.
Suddaby, R., & Muzio, D. (2015). ‘Theoretical
perspectives on the professions’. In Hinings,
B., Muzio, D., Broschak, J. & Empson, L. (Eds.),
The Oxford Handbook of Professional Service
Firms (pp. 1-31): Oxford University Press.
Teece, D. J. (2010). ‘Business Models, Business
Strategy and Innovation’. Long Range Planning,
43(2–3), pp. 172-194.
van Andel, W., & Vandenbempt, K. (2012).
Creative jumpers, Businessmodellen van
groeiondernemingen in creatieve industrieën.
Leuven, Belgium: Acco, Antwerp Management
School.
Vogels, R. (2016). BNA Benchmark 2016,
resultaten boekjaar 2015 (BNA Benchmark
2016, results financial year 2015).
Zoetermeer: Panteia.
Vough, H. C., Cardador, M. T., Bednar, J. S.,
Dane, E., & Pratt, M. G. (2013). ‘What clients
don't get about my profession: A model of
perceived role-based image discrepancies’.
Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), pp.
1050-1080.
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). ‘A resource-based
view of the firm.’ Strategic Management
Journal, 5(2), pp. 171-180.
Wikström, K., Artto, K., Kujala, J., & Söderlund,
J. (2010). ‘Business models in project business.’
International Journal of Project Management,
28(8), pp. 832-841.
Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2013). ‘The business
model: A theoretically anchored robust
construct for strategic analysis.’ Strategic
Organization, 11(4), pp. 403-411.
Zott, C., Amit, R., & Massa, L. (2011). ‘The
business model: recent developments and
future research.’ Journal of Management, 37(4),
pp. 1019-1042.
43
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Teaching tomorrow’s Architects – How relevant are current models of

professional education to the world of global architectural practice?

Stephen Brookhouse1

1Facultyof Architecture and the Built Environment, University of Westminster, UK

S.Brookhouse@westminster.ac.uk

Abstract

The current model of architectural education has its roots in the protectionist professional
norms of the 1960s. Using the sociological perspectives of Larson’s ‘Professional Power’ model
and the traits of professions, this paper considers the reasons why professional education is not
meeting the current requirements of global practice. It then considers the effects of
globalisation and questions the relevance of national restrictive practices in a global marketplace
for both procurement and design professionals, and proposes research into the context of
global practice using Garrett’s perspectives of Globalisation to determine new models of
professional education.

Key words: architectural education, the professions, globalisation, innovation

44
Introduction
The nature of professional practice has
changed significantly due to the impact of
globalisation on the way buildings are
procured. This begs the question: ‘Is
architectural education – as it stands – fit for
purpose?’ To answer this question I will start
by examining the origins of the current
model of architectural education. This is
followed by an interpretation based on the
sociological traits exhibited by professions
and Larson’s classic model of professional
power (Larson, 1977). The paper considers
the effects of globalisation on practice and
architectural professionals and the lack of
alignment between the objectives of global
pr actice and national professional
organisations. Globally-mobile architectural
professionals are, in effect, disenfranchised by
national interests and restrictive practices. A
solution is an international model for
professional qualification that values the
diversity of qualifications and experience of
design professionals engaged in global
architectural practice and recognises their
skills and competence.
The origins of current architectural
education
Many of the international models of
professional architectural education and
qualification – particularly in Commonwealth
countries - have their roots in the UK model
(Architects Registration Board, 2010). Many
others have sought international recognition
through validation from the RIBA (RIBA,
2016). This paper will show how the current
model of architectural education is rooted in
ideas prevalent in the 1950s and 1960s that
do not reflect the reality of global practice,
where stakeholder s in procurement
collaborate across borders and across
professional boundaries.
The schools of architecture, practice and the
institutions all contribute to architectural
education. The RIBA’s recent Education
Review (RIBA, 2015) was right to consider
the way practice could contribute more to
architectural education. However, ‘work’ is still
something that takes place outside the
academy and ‘teaching and research’ takes
place within.
Innovation in architectural education itself is
rare. To paraphrase Bob Shiel from the
Bartlett, ‘[despite] education’s capacity to
inform and transform…the need to deliver
programmes validated by the institutions
leads to the inevitable possibility that schools
of architecture play safe and cease to take
risks.’ (Sheil, 2015: 113). Innovation and
original research are recognised but not at
the expense of meeting agreed content to
minimum standards. Looked at another way,
consider how universities in partnership with
practice might deliver a holistic architectural
education that could be entirely different, and
you will immediately see the controlling
influence of the institutions on its shape and
delivery.
If education generally is determined by its
culture and context then it follows that
architectural education does not sit in an
isolated academic bubble but is directly
influenced by the key stakeholders that hold
the power: the profession in practice and the
institutions.
Surprisingly little has been written about the
architectural profession and what little there
is stops well short of current practice.
Studies tend to portray a parallel history of
architecture where the professional is
45
another artefact (Saint, 1985). The architect is
usually shown struggling against the odds,
alone (Rand, 2007). This image persists today
yet we know that these architects could not
create what they do without a taking their
work beyond the studio and collaborating.
This is particularly true of global practice. If
education is an expression of the culture and
context for practice then what are their
origins and are they still relevant? Are the
principles still fit for purpose?
The profession has carried out a number of
studies. One of the earliest is possibly the
most significant: the 1960 survey which
resulted in ‘The Architect and His
Office’ (RIBA, 1962) - its title clearly caught in
a moment of time. Here the profession was
facing what it saw as a crisis in management,
and a need to change architectural education
to make it more relevant. It gives a window
on to attitudes at the time and the tensions
between the schools of architecture and the
profession. Practice criticised the schools of
architecture for turning out talented
designers with poor technical skills who
lacked any knowledge of the practicalities of
architectural practice and management. This
was particularly important as the survey
revealed that principals only spent about fifty
percent of their time designing, and the rest
dealing with clients, contractors and practice
management. The following quotes from the
time indicate the tone of the report:
Architecture schools….have tended to bring up
architects to believe that architecture is
primarily a matter of self-expression.
(Architects Journal, 1962: 765)
Does the present system of architectural
education take account of the pattern into
which the majority of architects now have to fit?
Or is it influenced [solely] by the idea of the 1-
man practice?
(RIBA, 1962: 49)
The reports recommendations were clear
and included a call for the RIBA to insist that
the schools of architecture ‘relate Part 2
courses to the reality of changing practice.’
undertake ‘research on the changing ways in
which design will be delivered,’ and ‘to widen
the…professional practice syllabus to include
management’ and ‘practical training’ with an
emphasis on ‘office and job management
problems’ (ibid: 13). Lastly the authors called
for the ‘holy grail’ of integration between
practice and the academy:
Education and training should be planned as an
integrated whole 7-year period and practical
training should be co-ordinated with the School
syllabus: both are complementary.
(RIBA, 1962: 13)
In response to the study the RIBA took steps
to make practical experience an integral part
of student training (Architects Journal, 1962).
Six years of education increased to seven, to
include two years in practice. The practical
training log book was introduced and (as well
as a final written examination) the RIBA also
required a written summary of experience
and a 30-minute oral examination (Architects
Journal, 1962). The time allocated to teaching
practice and management was also increased.
The seven year model of a three year
degree, one year’s practical training in
practice, a further two years of full-time
education, and a second year of practical
training concluding with a test of knowledge
and competence, was established as the
norm. Although schools of architecture
appeared to have more freedom in the
content than today, fifty percent of teaching
46
time was spent on design leaving the rest for
history and theory, technical studies and
practice and management (Architects Journal
,1962)1. This is broadly where it has stayed
for almost sixty years, with subsequent
surveys supporting the same view that the
profession lacks specialist as well as wider
management skills (RIBA, 1995; 2005)
Why would a profession behave this way and
fail to innovate? The answer lies in the
sociological studies of the professions.
Johnson (1999) suggests that the professions
demonstrate certain ‘traits’:
• Specialist skills based on defined silos of
knowledge
• Provision for education and training to
deliver these
• A test of professional competence
• A high degree of self-control through
ethical codes of conduct
• The primar y focus on community
interest rather than self-interest
• An organisation to act as custodian of
the silos and to police standards, and
• Mutual recognition by other professionals.
(Johnson, 1999: 22-32)
Although the professions demonstrate an
altruistic intent they need to maintain a grip -
or exercise power - to do so. Larson (1997)
contends that professions behave this way in
order to maintain status and rewards: the
Power model. They do this by determining
the boundaries of working practices to assert
autonomy to prevent outside interference. In
order to achieve this they must have a special
relationship with the State - a ‘regulative
bargain’. The trade-off for ‘power’ is
independence expressed as professional
1 Interestingly, the fifty percent of structured time allocated design teaching was questioned at the time - given the
reality of practice and the lack of managerial skills identified.
disinterest and championing the public
interest. For example: ‘[t]he RIBA champions
better buildings, communities and the
environment….’ (RIBA, 2017)
In 1962 Architects showed a distinct interest
in professional power. They were essentially
operating a command and control model of
practice in the context of a traditional
method of building procurement driven by
the architect-client relationship. The reasons
for this behaviour lie in the key characteristics
of the profession at that time:
• The RIBA operated a mandatory fee
scale
• Architects could compete with other
architects – but not on financial grounds
• They could not advertise
• Architects were not allowed to be
directors of construction companies.
(RIBA, 1962)
Architectural education has never achieved
the integration between practice and the
schools hoped for in the 1960s and, even if it
had, the underlying driving force was the
command and control model that isolated
architectural services with the objective of
justifying a mandator y fee scale: the
‘regulative bargain’. Although autonomy and
independence might be beneficial for
consumers of legal advice or medical care,
architects’ ability to deliver the built
environment has always required a
contribution to its procurement – architects
make drawings so that others can make
buildings. Collaboration, though, would only
dilute the role of the architect, and possibly
the value architects bring to a project. The
command and control model and traditional
47
procurement, with the architect at the top,
justified the mandatory fee scales. Although
the RIBA was forced to abandon mandatory
fee scales in the 1980s many other
jurisdictions maintain some form of
regulation over fees and some functions as
well as the protection of title. (For example,
the Sri Lanka Institute of Architects2).
Global practice
A professional model of practice that was
probably not fit for purpose in the 1960s and
where the ‘regulative bargain’ only has effect
within its own jurisdiction, becomes less
relevant when we consider how architectural
practice and the construction industry have
been transformed by globalisation. Its growth
and reach since the mid-1980s is due to
what Gar rett (2000) calls the four
perspectives of globalisation:
1. The international integration of goods,
services and capital
2. Technical determinism – the shrinkage of
time and space
3. Technical progress – resulting in efficiency
and a greater parity of delivery
4. The ‘big picture’ – the active role of
government driving policies that support
economic internationalisation.
We should recognise that globalisation is not
something that happens somewhere else.
Perhaps Hamelink’s (1995) term ‘glocalisation’
is more appropriate (p5). In the mid-1980s
large US practices, such as SOM and HOK
set up in London with teams of UK
registered architects managed by US
professionals to meet the needs of US
clients, brought here by the growth in global
finance in the City of London. This was not all
one-way traffic – UK practices were also
2 http://www.slia.lk
beginning to exploit opportunities overseas.
The trend has continued – only checked by
global recession. ‘UK PLC’ has targeted the
global construction and infrastructure
markets because the UK has some of the
world’s leading design and construction
consultancies. Annual growth is forecast to be
1.7% in the UK, the US is forecast as the
highest in the G7 at 2.2%, but these are
significantly lower than the Far East at 6%,
and emerging economies at 10% (NIESR
2017). To achieve significant home growth we
have to look elsewhere. Architectural
practice has responded to this challenge. In a
recent RIBA (2015) survey large practices
reported earning 36% of their fees from
overseas projects. Scale need not be a
barrier to entry, for example Aberrant
Architecture, a London-based micro-practice,
is about to export its skills in community
narrative and original design to Hong Kong in
order to tackle problems of declining
shopping mall footfall (per sonal
communication, January 2017).
Global financial trading crosses borders
instantly but global companies, even service
companies, have to touch down somewhere.
Every global project is local to somebody: it
has a context, a site, a climate, infrastructure
and state controls. When we build, we
require materials, transportation, energy,
water and labour as well as the skills and
talents of the project team. What we make
has a lasting local and global environmental
impact.
Markets are becoming more competitive and
global companies are driving into areas
previously untouched by globalisation –
where the lack of state controls, cheap land
and poor infrastructure offer opportunities
to global companies. It is unlikely that ethical
48
concerns will hold back this growth. There
are also concerns with global trade generally:
who we trade with and how we trade with
them; globalisation does not benefit
everyone (Hamelink, 1999).
What Garrett called ‘technical
determinism’ (Garrett, 2000) - the shrinkage
of time and space through the growth of air
transport, satellite communications and the
explosion in the power of IT - coincided with
the internationalisation of finance. The ‘death
of distance’ has given stakeholders the
freedom to work together globally and to do
so effectively. For example, a project in the
UAE, financed by an overseas sovereign
wealth fund could be designed by an
architect in London outsourcing production
drawings to an office in Vietnam, working
with a local delivery architect employed by a
French contractor who is sourcing cladding
from China, lifts from Korea and site labour
from India.
International collaboration can pay dividends
for architects who can see the opportunities
of global practice. Fosters and Farrell have a
global presence driven by the demand for
their exceptional talent, their capacity to
work on major international projects, and
their experience as members of complex
procurement teams. 3 Global ‘super-
consultancies’ such as Atkins now dominate
international infrastructure projects.4 They
can create professional multidisciplinary
teams in-house, representing the
conventional project team, that are flexible,
international and able to deliver innovative
projects such as the Dubai Opera5.
3 http://www.farrells.com
4 http://www.atkinsglobal.com
5 http://www.atkinsglobal.com
Barriers still exist and specialisation – a
natural consequence of complexity – creates
its own barriers. These barriers may be
professional or functional but are generally
restricted by traditional project structures –
that happen to be global. That is also not to
underestimate the fragmentation that can
also occur across projects: global
procurement is not seamless. Projects today
are delivered in ever more complex ways.
However, the structure and sequence of -
design, manufacture, transpor tation and
assembly - though better managed, but has
not radically changed. The way design
information is produced is an example of
what the Susskinds and Susskinds (2015) call
the first stage of information technology:
automation which replicates what was done
by hand but more efficiently. Globalisation
gives suppliers the market scale to allow
them to invest in automated manufacturing
both on-and off-site –empowering both
designer and producer. We can design to
meet local conditions and not rely on
economies of scale. To make this work will
require us to rethink design and delivery
structures with a truly integrated approach –
perhaps closer to aviation than buildings.
So where does this leave professional
architectural education?
In the UK, the RIBA validated courses still
follow the 1962 seven year model. It is
evidence-based: schools must show that they
meet the General Criteria and
Competencies held jointly with the
Architects Registration Board (ARB) (RIBA,
2017). The ‘three-plus-two’ model (RIBA
Parts 1 and 2) of five years full-time
49
architectural education and two years
practical training is the pattern followed by
most schools of architecture internationally
but different jurisdictions control architectural
education and access to the profession in
different ways.
For example, in Sri Lanka the two schools of
architecture follow the ‘three-plus-two’
model. The Sri Lankan Institute of Architects
accredits and validates the courses. Part 3 is
delivered and assessed by the professional
institute itself – not the schools – at the end
of a minimum two years of compulsory
practical training. The SLIA is the statutory
body and the Sri Lankan Architects
Registration Board (ARB) sits as one of two
boards within the Institute (SLIA, 2013: 3)
In Hong Kong, professional architectural
education follows a similar pattern with five
years full-time education at a validated
institution following the ‘three plus two
model’, two years minimum practical training
and a Professional Assessment course and
examination delivered and assessed by the
Hong Kong Institute of Architects – not the
schools - and ‘The (HK) ARB [of the Hong
Kong SAR] has entrusted the Institute with
the administration of this Professional
Assessment’ (HKIA, 2017: 3)
The RIBA validates many international
schools against the General Criteria for Parts
1 and 2 but does not validate Part 3 – the
final test of competence to practice.
The International Union of Architects, the
global federation of national association of
architects from 124 countries and territories
(UIA, 2017), established a Professional
Practice Commission in 1994 resulting in the
UIA Accord on Recommended International
Standards of Professionalism is Architectural
Practice with the intention of providing
‘practical guidance for governments…and
other entities entering mutual recognition
negotiations on architectural services’ (UIA,
2014). The core delivery and standards align
generally with those of the RIBA and could
offer a global harmonisation of architectural
education. However, the UIA Accord
preserves the old command and control
model by harmonising restrictive practices on
a global scale: a ‘glocal’ rather than a global
profession. In effect, the UIA’s objective is to
apply a common set of international criteria
locally but without creating any pathways
across different jurisdictions.
Where does this leave Tomorrow’s
Architect?
The current system of ‘glocal’ restricted
practices, Larson’s Power model (Larson
1999) where the profession strikes its own
‘regulative bargain’ in its own jurisdiction,
effectively disenfranchises designers who
have embraced globalisation. Unpublished
data gathered by RIBA Nor th West
(supported by my experience) has recorded
the profiles of design professionals across the
Middle East and China (RIBA North West,
2017). The data shows a pattern of
international education and global practice
experience. Designers may have obtained a
3-year (Part 1) degree in the UK or Australia,
worked in the Middle East, completed a 2-
year (Part 2) Masters degree – possibly
another 1-year Masters in Sustainable Design
and a further 2-3 years in practice in Hong
Kong or Shanghai. Highly educated with
extensive professional experience they are
victims of Bauman’s ‘liquid
modernity’ (Bauman, 2000 cited in Lee, 2005)
- the ever-changing nature of post-modern
life. Global ‘Architects of Nowhere’ they do
not fit the restrictive criteria of ‘glocal’
institutions intent on preser ving the
‘regulative bargain’. Because different national
professional and statutory bodies do not
readily recognise qualifications from outside
50
their jurisdiction, design professionals who
are highly valued by international practice for
their education, talent and experience cannot
enjoy the professional mutual recognition
that is an essential trait of the professions.
Hamelink (1999) makes the point that
‘[g]lobal citizenship implies knowledge about
the world that is different from what
today’s….educational systems offer’ (p6).
Our global architectural educational systems
are shaped by a context for practice that few
would recognise today - propped up by
national restrictive practices. They do not
reflect the reality of collaborative working
across professional and national boundaries.
Nor is the current system able to truly
innovate by exploiting new methods of
making. A first step to an international
architectural professional qualification would
be for local professional institutes to fully
recognise the achievements and qualifications
of designers who have met the Standards
agreed by the UIA at the equivalent of Parts
1 and 2 through a minimum of five years full
time academic study, without reassessment.
The second step would be to allow design
professionals access to the local assessment
of professional competence, having met the
minimum experience of two years in that
jurisdiction.6
Conclusion
Globalisation increasingly means that the
ethical and public interest principles that
underpin professions are more important
than ever. We should continue to promote
the ethical value of design to improve
people’s lives through architecture and
capitalise on the opportunities offered by
true innovation. There is scope for a new
professional – global in outlook and
instinctively collaborative - able to exploit
these opportunities. In order to shape a new
model of architectural education we need
further research on the context of global
practice. The relevance of Larson’s Power
model and the relevance of the professional
traits should be reassessed. Garrett’s twin
perspectives of Technical Determinism and
Technical Progress are good starting points
to identifying the scale, fluidity and impact of
globalisation on project design and delivery –
what architects do. To remain relevant all
stakeholders should contribute and be
prepared to change.
References
Architects Registration Board. (2010).
Prescription of qualifications: ARB Criteria at
Parts 1, 2 and 3. London: ARB
Garrett G (2000). ‘The Causes of
Globalisation.’ Comparative Political Studies,
33(6-7), pp. 941-991.
Hamelink, C. J. (1999). ‘The Elusive Concept
of Globalisation.’ Global Dialogue, 1(1), pp. 1-9.
Hong Kong Institute of Architects. (2017).
Professional Assessment Handbook. Retrieved
from http://www.hkia.net/en/pdf/PA/
PA_Handbook_revised_2017.pdf
Johnson, T. (1999). Professions and Power.
London: Macmillan.

6 The HKIA currently has a system of Admission of Non-Local Architectural Professionals but this recognises
registered architects who have qualified in other jurisdictions with between 5 and 15 years professional experience
(HKIA PA Handbook (p.16)) The UK ARB, through its Prescribed Examination Route also provides a route for
recognition of overseas qualifications at Part 1 and Part 2. The RIBA Membership Eligibility Assessment Panel
(MEAP) adopts an evidence-based portfolio approach to meeting the General Criteria for parts 1 and 2 plus
professional experience leading to chartered membership.

51
Larson M.S. (1977). The Rise of Professionalism: Sri Lankan Institute of Architects. (2013). How
A Sociological Analysis. Berkeley CA: University to become a Qualified Architect in Sri Lanka.
of California Press Retrieved from http://www.slia.lk

Lee, R. L. M. (2005). ‘Bauman, Liquid Susskind R & Susskind D. (2015). The Future
Modernity and Dilemmas of Development.’ of the Professions. Oxford: Oxford University
Thesis Eleven, 83(1), pp. 61-77. Press.

NIESR. (2017). Quarterly Report, 1st February
2017. Retrieved from http://www.niesr.ac.uk/
publications
Rand, A. (2007). The Fountainhead. London:
Penguin
RIBA. (1995). Strategic Study of the Profession.
London: RIBA
UIA. (2017). What is the UIA? Retrieved from:
http://www.uia-architectes.org
UIA. (2014). Accord on Recommended
International Standards of Professionalism in
Architectural Practice. Retrieved from: http://
www.uia-architectes.org

RIBA. (2005). Constructing Change: A Strategic

Study into the future of the Architects’
Profession. London: RIBA

RIBA. (2015). Education Review. Retrieved

from: http://www.architecture.com

RIBA. (2015). Business Benchmarking 2015.

London: RIBA

RIBA. (2017) What we do. Retrieved from:

http://www.architecture.com

RIBA. (2016). International Schools with courses

recognised by the RIBA. Retrieved from: http://
www.architecture.com

RIBA North West. (2016). Professional Profiles:

Overseas qualifications in International Practice.
Unpublished.

Saint, A. (1985). The Image of the Architect.

Yale NJ: Yale University Press

Sheil, B. (2015). ‘This is a chapter’ in Froud D

& Harriss H (Eds.) Radical Pedagogies: The
After Life. London: RIBA Publishing

52
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Architects with borders: developing a sharing economy

Nikki Linsell1

1Department of Architecture and the Built Environment, University of Nottingham, UK

nikki.linsell@nottingham.ac.uk

Abstract

With the apparent neo-liberalisations and major global restructure towards privatisation, disillusioned
architects have been in search of a new form of public value. In giving the profession agency once
again, the most common solution to-date has been volunteering architectural services, leveraging
professional time and skills for free (or at a large subsidy), so that those who would not usually be able
to afford design services can. But is this pro-bono model an appropriate and efficient mechanism to
allow architects to re-gain its public role?

Instead, via analysing the breaches in existing competition and trade policies that service volunteering
encourages, an initial conclusion could be made that, accidentally, this model has not so much been
working against the power inequalities produced by late capitalism, but paradoxically only going to
extend the arm of architectural corporate control, not reduce it. In fact, by understanding and
acknowledging these mistakes, a move away from accidental monopolies and towards a more ethically
considered form of architectural trade may be possible. Encouraging not ‘exchange’ but a ‘user’ value
based architectural economy, positive alternative ways of sharing architecture may become apparent.
Ones that emancipate the profession from the limits of capitalism, not restrict it further.

Key words: international volunteerism, architecture regulation, development economics, competition

law, effective altruism

53
Introduction
The question ‘should charity work be part of an
architect’s duty?’ was posed in Building Design
magazine in November 2013 where Sam Jacob,
the director of FAT, argued that ‘its in the
architecture’s disciplinary core that social good
needs to be constructed, not in its gestures’. The
article goes on to comment ‘[that] given that
architects are in the wealthiest fraction of the
population, it might be nice of them to give
something back for a change’. And what could
possibly be wrong with architectural charity,
especially those who target the most vulnerable
communities abroad? Well, as More (2016) in his
Venice Bienalle review stated, ‘[n]othing, as long
as the architects are really helping’.
This essay explores whether or not architectural
charity, in its current form, is indeed helping its
own profession find their social voice. The aim
of this paper is to look at the complexity of the
pro-bono practice of architectural international
volunteerism. This will be achieved through an
analysis of the possible conflicts the subsidising
of architectural fees may have on ideas of
licensure, protected professional values and
liberalised trade. Concluding that if architects
want to volunteer their architecture skills abroad
they should also be aware that this could be at
the detriment of the local and global profession.
As Georgeou (2012) emphasises, just because
‘volunteers are value-driven [this] should not be
viewed through the lens of altruism: rather their
activity should be understood in terms of
individual acts of political expression. New
models must politicise volunteers so that they
understand the context of their action’ (p192).
Neo-liberalising a Profession
Architecture, like the other modern professions
(engineering, accountancy etc.), emerged as an
attempt by existing occupational groups to
maintain or increase their social and economic
status (Owen, 2009). As most professions don't
sell tangible goods but sell knowledge, the logic
follows that in order to maintain a high
commodity value, this knowledge cannot be
freely available. As Michael Barrage summarises,
‘occupations attempt to control market
conditions through market closure…those
which are especially successful are the ones who
we have come to call the ‘professions’ (as cited
in Owen, 2009). To achieve this closure, the state
gives the profession their privileged status in
return for an agreement that their - potentially
dangerous - knowledge is used with a social
conscience. According to the Architects Council
of Europe there are three reasons for regulating
professional ser vices: 1) asymmetr y of
information; 2) externalities; 3) the concept of
public good (ACE, 2016).
Evident by licensing acts worldwide the
profession of architecture is typically regulated
either ex-ante (access to the title is regulated),
or ex-post (the function is regulated) (ACE,
2016). For example, in the UK, Australia, New
Zealand and the Netherlands anyone can do
architectural work but only those accredited can
call themselves ‘Architects’ (ex-ante) (Leach,
2015). In the US, as with the more recently
established profession in Uganda, architects are
more tightly controlled to include both title and
practice safeguards (ex-ante and ex-post)
(Architects Act 1996 (Cap 269)). Despite these
var ying licensing acts between countries,
progressive trade liberalisation of architectural
services has meant the architecture profession is
still an inherently mobile one.
Today architectural services can be exported
into foreign markets, characterised by the
following trade models as detailed by the World
Trade Organisations Uruguay Round of trade
negotiations (that led to the General Agreement
on Trade in Services (GATS) (WTO, 1995):
• Cross-border supply (Mode 1) - seen by
out-sourcing drawing-packages remotely to
places like Russia, India or South America
where para-professionals produce the
work (at lower prices).
54
• Consumption abroad (Mode 2) - where a
client requests a foreign architect directly.
• Commercial presence (Mode 3) - a foreign
firm establishes an office in another
country or contractually affiliates with a
domestic registered firm (negating the
need for the foreign architect to become
locally licensed) (Intra-service trade)
• Presence of Natural Persons (Mode 4) -
foreign architects enter into another
country to offer architectural service there
directly.
Then there are Mutual Recognition Agreements
(MRAs). These provide a further facilitating
movement of architectural services across
borders where if a ‘professional can provide
services lawfully in his/her own country, s/he can
do the same in any other country, without
having to comply with the regulations applied in
that country’ (Zarrralli, 2005: 6). Usually annexed
onto Free-trade Agreements (FTAs) they allow
for the sharing of professional monopolies
across geo-political boundaries. Although there
have been previous examples of bi-lateral
agreements between national architecture
bodies (UK-US, 1970-1990), it was the GATS
that enabled the broader expansion of MRAs
and cross-border licensure throughout WTO
member states (WTO, 2009). One of the most
recent is the East African Communities (EAC)
Common Market Protocol’s MRA signed in July
2011 (EAC, 2011). An architect registered in
Kenya is now able to work without further
accreditation or licensure in Rwanda, Burundi
and Uganda and vice versa. Of course, many of
these agreements may not last for very long
precisely because they are annexed to FTAs (e.g.
UK deciding to leave the EU and the breakdown
of TTIP)
As a result of this freer-flowing global market for
architecture services comes challenges for each
individual state regulatory body. How can they
c o n t i nu e t o r e s p o n d t o e x t e r n a l i t i e s
appropriately, or ensure an asymmetrical arena
(where one supplier does not have access to
better information than another) whilst also
suppor ting the introduction of foreign
competitors?
But perhaps the biggest challenge of a liberalised
architecture profession is guaranteeing fair
competition despite the inherent barriers to
entry. The telling report by the OECD and
World Bank in 2007 Architectural Services in
Global Trade in Professional Services describes
the potential size of global trade in architectural
services and asserts that state regulations of the
profession will come under increasing pressure
to revise their laws to ‘remain competitive in the
international marketplace’ (Keune, 2007).
Competing Monopolies
As a result of this conflict between maintaining
professional monopolies whilst also promoting
pro-competitive practices, architecture bodies
have been on the receiving end of numerous
infringement proceedings. As some behaviours
can be viewed as potentially restrictive (e.g price
fixing or recommended fees) they are
considered as fostering anti-competitive
activities. The RIBA lost its battle with the
Monopolies and Mergers Commission back in
1978 (Derbyshire, 2014) and have continued to
balance their fee ‘guidance’ in compliance with
the Office of Fair Trading (OFT). In 2001 the
OFT concluded that the RIBA indicative fee
guidance could facilitate collusion, but in 2003
accepted RIBA's new guidance based on
historical information was acceptable (De
Waele, 2004). In 2004 the recommended
minimum fees of the Belgian Architects
Association was deemed in breach of European
Union competition rules. Similarly, Austria
abolished fee pricing in 2006, Malta abolished
theirs in 2010 and Italy repealed professional
fees in 2012, all bought on by the Services
Directive 2006/123/EC (EU, 2015). In the case
of the United States, Deamer (2016) recently
found similar architecture fee pricing conflicts
and collusionary practices when reviewing the
55
Sherman Antitrust Act (the US version of
competition laws).
Evidently, applying pro-competition logic to the
regulated architecture profession is clearly not
straightforward. Architects have the right to set
prices intelligently, so long as they do this
independently of their competitors (pure tacit
collusion). However, if groups discuss or share
their fees, surpassing rivals ability to compete,
this is an abuse of their collective dominant
position (explicit collusion) and in most
scenarios illegal (Stigler, 1964; Ivaldi et al, 2003;
Levenstein and Suslow, 2013). The reasoning
behind its enforcement is that these fee
collusions deprive other foreign providers with
the possibility of competing on price, an
essential tool for neoliberalised markets to
function efficiently (Davies, 2014).
The importance of monitoring fee collusions
and fair competition becomes even greater with
the increasing exportation of architectural
services from developed into developing regions
(Cronje, 2015). The international architecture
profession risks becoming an oligopoly, a market
structure that allows for just a few groups to
dominate. In the minutes of the 17th General
Assembly of the Commonwealth Association of
Architects (CAA) in 2003, the regional report
for Africa highlights the threat presented by
foreign architects on local African architecture
professions:
Liberalisation of State economies is attracting for-
eign investors. These investors come with a com-
plete package, which includes a design and build
concept thereby marginalising the local consultancy
industry…We should create a platform of under-
standing each other on architectural values or else
see the demise of architects in Africa.
(Appendix E)
The Council of Architecture in India agrees with
the threat of international architectural exports
and has recently ‘stepped up its fight against
foreign architects practicing in India’ (Gupta,
2013). Competition law adherence is generally
seen as ‘economic self-defence of developing
economies against anti-competitive conduct of
foreign-based r ivals, and their local
subsidiaries’ (Fruitman, 2006: 6).
Pro-Bono Exporting
The public interest architect seeks to address
issues of social justice by serving ‘a much larger
percentage of the population than [the
profession] has in the past’ (Bell and Wakeford,
2008). The argument goes that as conventional
architectural practice depends upon clients to
pay for their services, it is the market that limits
the professions capacity to be a force of good
(Bell et al. 2011), due to its inherent inelasticity.
Ignoring the ‘all architects are by their very
nature humanitarian’ argument (Charlesworth,
2014), the charitable architect attempts to ‘give
back’ by donating their skills to a community
pro-bono.
As with the movement of private practice
across international borders, so too has
charitable architectural work expanded to the
international development sector. With the
distinction that the architect is no longer giving
‘back’ to their community. Instead, architects in
stronger functioning markets are able to export
and subsidise their services abroad rather than
donate locally. Often believing that by donating
their services to weaker foreign markets their
altruism will have a greater impact.
Architectural charities operate by leveraging
funds to subsidise architectural services that are
then exported across borders (usually via mode
4, presence of natural persons). This exportation
of pro-bono services is known as international
service volunteerism. The popularity of this
approach to ‘humanitarian architecture’ is best
exemplified by the rise (and fall) of Architecture
for Humanity at the beginning of the millennium
(Charlesworth, 2014). What has followed is a
continued promotion of Global North led
56
architectural charities that offer architectural
skills specifically for developing economic
regions.
This is all despite the very fact that the RIBA in
2009 warned architects not to offer services for
free (Hurst, 2009), a growing criticism of aid
(Bolton, 2007; Moyo, 2009; Foreman, 2012;
Ramalingam, 2013) and in particular the efficacy
of overseas assistance via volunteering abroad
(Lewis, 2006; Georgeou, 2012). In Peter
Devereux’s (2008) Outdated Paternalism or a
Radical Response to Globalisation, at
worst ;international volunteering can be
imperialist, paternalist…self-serving quest for
career and personal development on the part
of well-off Westerners’ (p358). Mark Griffiths
(2014) goes onto warn that as ‘the South [is] an
untapped market, or an area for economic
growth (and therefore neoliberal capitalist
expansion)’ (p5), volunteers in this way are
imagined complicit in the expansion of global
capitalism, not an alternative to it.
Regardless of these concerns, it seems the
current humanitarian architecture zeitgeist is to
continue to focus on developing countries
architecture markets, rather than the professions
wider structural challenges (arguably evident by
the very need for architectural charity in the
first place (Crawford, 1991)). However the
question arrises, does this form of architectural
ser vice expor t, abide by the relevant
jurisdictions competition laws?
Subsidising Cartels
The Union of International Architects (UIA)
recommended guidelines for practicing in a host
nation summarises how to export architectural
services:
Architects providing architectural services on a
project in a country in which they are not regis-
tered shall collaborate with a local architect to en-
sure that proper and effective understanding is
given to legal, environmental, social, cultural and
heritage factors….Where there is no mutual
recognition or free trade agreement between the
relevant authorities of the host country and that of
the foreign architects’ country: A foreign architect
should not be permitted to enter into an arrange-
ment to provide services in another jurisdiction
without the meaningful and substantial participa-
tion and contribution of a local architect in the pro-
vision of the design, documentation and contract
administration services of the project.
(UIA, 2014; also see WTO, 2009: C37)
The majority of charitable architectural service
exporting (via Mode 4) appears to occur
outside of active MRAs (Global North to South
usually). Further, by simply reviewing a number
of architecture charities websites, there is
seemingly little to no evidence that their
projects include local architectural partnerships
(or at the very least they are choosing not to
credit them on their publicity). To make matters
worse, most of these charitable organisations
claim to empower locals and employ as many as
possible within the construction process, that is,
apart from their local architectural counterparts,
it seems. But, is expor ting subsidised
architectural services to developing countries
really a big problem even though it may breach
UIA and regional professional guidelines?
Collusion involves people or companies that
would typically compete, conspiring or working
together resulting in an unfair market advantage.
Exporting a free or subsidised service could
arguably be seen as a form of foreign collusion
against local firms who would be unable to
compete with such low or nonexistent costs
offered by international counterparts. Predatory
low pricing results in fewer opportunities
available to individuals (and, by extensions to
local architecture firms) and the weaker the
incentive to invest in developing local
architectural talent to boost the productivity of
the host society.
In fact, this explicit collusion claim is similar to
the European and US professional bodies
57
infringements for un-competitive fee guidance
within their own jurisdictions. Apart from the
fact that competition law in emerging
economies is weakly enforced and has much
larger negative transformational impacts if not
(Cheng et al, 2013). Due to the good intentions
behind this form of predatory pricing.
One alternative charitable model then might be
- what if a foreign architecture charity subsidised
both the foreign volunteers services and the
local architect’s fees with whom they have
partnered so that more clients would be able to
access design services? But does this not then
fall into the hands of paternalistic criticisms as
detailed by inter national volunteer ism,
international aid and the ‘humanitarian design
the new imperialism’ (Nussbaum, 2010)
critiques? This subsidisation of the local
professions fees could also be viewed as an
abuse of dominance as a local market would be
dependent on a foreign externality. And, if a
volunteer does work with a local firm, but
subsidised the total fees to the client to support
the growth of ‘good’ design access, this cannot
be considered sustainable , nor locally
emancipatory. In fact, this form of palliative
architectural aid (monetary aid with caveats) is a
very outdated and widely hailed as a failed
approach to development (Rist, 2014).
Sharing Economy
Legal mechanisms have been developed as a
way of promoting efficient competition in a
global market to prevent monopolies and
oligopolies that negatively effect users. For the
architecture profession though, they don’t seem
to sit comfortably with either standard private
practice, or its charitable alternative. In fact, it
would not be an absurd assertion that the
architectural profession can never be either
neo-liberal, nor emancipatory in its current form
(Birch, 2015; Lahiri, 2016). Compounded by the
changes as we move into a post-Brexit Trump
world with greater state protectionism,
architects working across borders will need to
be even better educated in the economic, legal
and ethical costs of wishing to export their
services. Understanding the evolving regulatory
requirements of international trade, regardless
of the profit or not-for-profit driven motives, is
becoming ever more relevant.
So, what are the alternatives for those wishing
to do some architectural ‘good’? If it is not
appropriate to volunteer professional services
abroad, is it appropriate to volunteer them at
home? Illich certainly recommends staying at
home, ‘where your clients can tell you to go to
hell’ (Illich,1968). But what if an architect is
specifically driven to help other regions built
environments, or pover ty reduction more
widely. If it is not volunteering their services,
then what?
Well, one could look at the effective altruism
(Singer, 2009; Macaskill, 2015) movement for
guidance. It proposes that rather than just doing
what feels right, we use evidence and careful
analysis to find the very best causes to work on.
Donating a percentage of a salary could perhaps
be the most effective and altruistic option for
architects for example, rather than donating
time. These donations could perhaps provide;
local educational scholarships; local firms with
resources to provide mentorship to young local
graduates; or seed funding for new practices.
Alternatively, more mature foreign firms could
support the sharing of best practice knowledge
through a virtual or physical Community of
Practice (Lave and Wenger, 1998; Greenwald
and Stiglitz, 2014).
An even bolder approach might be one of
turning the ideas and good intentions of
international volunteerism towards the
architecture professions market inefficiencies
and deadweight structural flaws inherent in its
regulated monopolisation. If the guiding principle
of architectural charity is to increase access to
good design then perhaps a focus on charity
closer to home - its own flagging profession -
would be a natural focus. Rather than promoting
58
the subsidisation of architectural services, what
about helping to build a global increase in
demand for architectural skills? Instead of
working towards short term easy to quantify
exchange values for the benefit of profit driven
developers, what about supporting and sharing
research that collectively promote the benefits
of architecture and good design? As Deamer
(2015) reminds us, lawyers and doctors ‘prove’
their user value by providing a clear
demonstrable service, with positive outcomes
well understood by society at large. Architects
need to work a bit harder to achieve the same
appreciation.
What might this form of ‘architectural charity’
look like in practice? Architects in more lucrative
markets who are currently in the luxurious
position to donate their services abroad, instead
could promote the use of a post-occupancy
evaluation tool of their work and the sharing of
the data. The longer term positive impacts of
good design (increased productivity, energy
efficiency, wellbeing etc. (Macmillan, 2006) could
then be clearly demonstrated to the public. A
not-for-profit organisation building a school, for
example, would value the impor tance of
investing in architectural ser vices at the
beginning of a project (Dye and Samuel, 2015)
rather than architectural input being a luxury.
Safe in the knowledge that that investment
would be economically worth it in the longer
term (Duffy and Rabeneck, 2013).
In this context, concepts such as Putnam’s Social
Capital (Dollery et al, 2004) and the embracing
of network economic capabilities of the
architecture industry (Shy, 2001), an attractive
altruism alternative to volunteering could be
proposed. The professional community comes
together to develop and share knowledge for its
own advancement, with the potential to not
only create new demand for architectural skills
but also allow the profession to quantify its
economic and social value simultaneously. But
this will require a profession that works at a
global altruistic scale, not regionally competing
against each other, unintentionally or not.
References
Architects Council of Europe (ACE)a. (2016).
ACE Policy Position: Regulation of Architects. Brus-
sels: ACE.
Bell, B. & Wakedord, K (eds). (2008). Expanding
Architecture: Design as Activism. Metropolis Books
Bell, B., Feldman, R., Palleroni, S. & Perkes, D.
(2011). Wisdom From The Field: A Guide to Public
Interest Architecture in Practice. Latrobe.
Birch, K. (2015). We Have Never been Neoliberal:
a manifesto for a doomed youth. Zero Books.
Bolton, G. (2007). Aid and Other Dirty Business.
Ebury Press.
Building Design. (2013). Should Charity Work Be
Part of An Architect’s Duty? Retrieved from: http://
www.bdonline.co.uk/should-charity-work-be-
part-of-an-architect’s-duty?/5062716
Charlesworth, E. (2014). Humanitarian Architec-
ture: 15 stories of architects working after disaster.
London: Routledge.
Cheng, T., Lianos, I & Sokol, D (Eds). (2013).
Competition Law & Development. Stamford Law.
Crawford, M. (1991). ‘Can Architecture be So-
cially Responsible?’ In, Ghirardo, D. (Ed). (1991).
Out of Site: A social criticism of architecture. Bay
Press.
Cronje, J. (2015). Mutual Recognition of Profes-
sional Qualifications: The East African Community.
Stellenbosch: tralac.
Davies, W. (2014). The Limits of Neoliberalism:
Authority, Sovereignty and the Logic of Competition.
London: Sage.
59
Derbyshire, B. (2014). ‘The Decline And Fall of
Architecture’. Building Online. Retrieved from:
http://www.building.co.uk/the-decline-and-fall-of-
architecture/5066064.article
De Waele, S. (2004). ‘Liberal professions and
recommended prices: the Belgian architects
case’. European Competition Policy Newsletter, Au-
tumn 2014, pp.44-46.
Deamer, P. (2015). The Architect As Worker: Imma-
terial labor, the creative class and the politics of
design. Bloomsbury.
Deamer, P. (2016). The Sherman Antitrust Act and
the Profession of Architecture. Retrieved from:
http://architecture-lobby.org/wp-content/up-
loads/2016/11/2015_Research_The-Sherman-
Antitrust-Act-and-The-Profession-of-Architec-
ture_Report.pdf
Devereux, P. (2008). ‘International Volunteering
for Development and Sustainability: Outdated
Paternalism or a Radical Response to Globaliza-
tion?’, Development in Practice, 18(3), pp. 357– 70.
Dollery, B., Killerby, J. & Wallis, J. (2004). ‘Social
Economics and Social Capital.’ International Jour-
nal of Social Economics. 31(3), pp.239-258.
Duffy, F. & Rabeneck, A. (2013). ‘Professionalism
and Architects in the 21st Century.’ Building Re-
search & Information. 41, p115-122
Dye, A. & Samuel, F. Eds. (2015). Demystifying Ar-
chitectural Research: Adding Value and Winning
Business. London: RIBA Enterprises.
EAC. (2011). Mutual Recognition Agreement for
the Profession of Architecture Under the East
African Community Common Market. Retrieved
from: http://architects.ug/sites/default/files/down-
loads/EAIA-MRA.pdf
European Union (2015). ‘Mutual evaluation of
regulated professions: Overview of the regulato-
ry framework in the business services sector by
using the example of architects.’ Ref. Ares
(2015)4617379.
Foreman, J. (2012). Aiding and Abetting: foreign aid
failures and 0.7% deception. Civitas.
Fruitman, D. (2006). Abuse of Dominance in De-
veloping Economies A Focus on the Issues in Cam-
bodia, Laos and Vietnam. CUTS International.
Georgeou, N. (2012). Neoliberalism, development,
and aid volunteering. New York: Routledge.
Greenwald, B. & Stiglitz, J. (2014). Creating a
Learning Society: a new approach to growth, devel-
opment, and social progress. Columbia University
Press.
Griffiths, M. (2014). ‘I’ve got goose bumps just
talking about it!: Affective life on neoliberalized
volunteering programmes’, Tourist Studies, DOI:
10.1177/1468797614563437.
Gupta, S. (2013, October 3). ‘Architects keep
foreign players out.’ The Times of India. Retrieved
from: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/busi-
ness/india-business/Architects-keep-foreign-play-
ers-out/articleshow/23433916.cms
Hurst, W. (2009). ‘Free work devalues the pro-
fession, says RIBA’. Building Online. Retrieved
from: http://www.bdonline.co.uk/free-work-de-
values-profession-says-riba/3132638.article
Illich, I. (1968). To Hell With Good Intentions. An
address to the Conference on InterAmerican Stu-
dent Projects (CIASP). Cuernavaca, Mexico.
Ivaldi, M., Jullien, B., Rey, P., Seabright, P. & Tirole, J.
(2003). The Economics of Tacit Collusion. Final Re-
port for DG Competition, European Commis-
sion
Keune, R. (2007). Architectural Services in Global
Trade in Professional Services. Sixth Services Ex-
perts Meeting Domestic Regulation and Trade in
Professional Services. OECD & World Bank.
60

Lahiri, N. (2016). Can Architecture Be An Emanci-
patory Project?: Dialogues on architecture and the
left. Zero Books.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1998). Situated Learning:
Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge
University Press.
Leach, N. (2015). ‘The (Ac)credit(ation) card’. In
Deamer, P. (2015). The Architect As Worker: Imma-
terial labor, the creative class and the politics of
design. Bloomsbury.
Levenstein, M. & Suslow, V. (2013). ‘Cartels and
Collusion Empirical Evidence’. In Oxford Hand-
book on International Antitrust Economics, Eds
Blair, R. & Sokol, D. UK: Oxford University Press.
Lewis, D. (2006). ‘Globalisation and International
Service: a development perspective.’ In Voluntary
Action, 7(2), pp13-26.
Macaskill, W. (2015). Doing Good Better: a radical
new way to make a difference. Guardian Books
Macmillan. S, (2006). ‘Added Value of Good De-
sign’. Building Research & Information Journal. DOI:
10.1080/09613210600590074.
Moore, R. (2016). ‘Venice Biennale 2016 - ideas
for real world problems’. The Guardian. Re-
trieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/ar-
tanddesign/2016/may/29/venice-architecture-
biennale-2016-review-norman-foster
Moyo, D. (2009). Dead Aid: why aid is not working
and how there is another way for Africa. Penguin
Books
Nussbaum, B. (2010, 6 July). ‘Is Humanitarian De-
sign the New Imperialism. Does our desire to
help do more harm then good?’ Fast Company.
Retrieved from https://www.fastcodesign.com/
1661859/is-humanitarian-design-the-new-impe-
rialism
Owen, G. (Ed.). (2009). Architecture, Ethics and
Globalisation. London: Routledge.
Ramalingam, B. (2013). Aid on the Edge of Chaos.
Oxford University Press.
Rist, G. (2014). The History of Development: from
western origins to global faith. Zed Books.
Shy, O. (2001). The Economics of Network Indus-
tries. Cambridge University Press.
Singer, P. (2009). The Life You Can Save. Random
House.
Stigler, G. (1964). ‘A Theory of Oligopoly.’ Journal
of Political Economy, 72, 4461.
UIA. (2014). UIA Accord on Recommended In-
ternational Standards of Professionalism in Archi-
tectural Practice. Amended August 2014 at the
XXVI General Assembly, Durban, South Africa.
WTO. (1995). General Agreement on Trade and
Services.
WTO. (1998). Council for Trade in Services, Back-
ground note by the Secretariat. Architectural and
Engineering Services (S/C/W/44).
WTO. (2009). Council for Trade in Services, Back-
ground note by the Secretariat. Architectural Ser-
vices. (S/C/W/303).
Zarrrilli, S. (2005). Moving Professionals beyond
National Borders: Mutual Recognition Agreements
and the GATS. Retrieved from: http://unctad.org/
en/Docs/ditctncd20052_en.pdf
61
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Joint Venture Design Teams: Managing for Effective Collaboration

Sunila Lobo1, Roger Flanagan2

1 Schoolof the Built Environment, University of Reading, UK
s.lobo@reading.ac.uk

2 School of the Built Environment, University of Reading, UK

r.flanagan@reading.ac.uk

Abstract

Design has become an international commodity with the increase in the number of architectural
competitions for premier international projects. In these cases, the design joint venture (JV) team must
work with locally registered organisations to comply with local regulations and codes. But, designers
prefer not to take responsibility for the management of such multi-disciplinary teams. JVs can be espe-
cially problematic in countries where the contractor is ultimately responsible for design integrity. A
new approach is required in the professions, including taking leadership, with a deep understanding of
the issues around digitally-mediated international collaboration (Ramalingam, Lobo et al., 2014) and,
where accountability lies. Yet, little effort has been devoted to exposing designers and engineers to
these issues in managing JVs. Our aim is to unpack these aspects through a study of JVs, working close-
ly with leading international design and engineering consultants. The initial findings show that differing
practices, contracts and perspectives on enabling collaboration in JVs, raises questions on the expecta-
tion of having a single 'charismatic' leader or leadership team. The analysis suggests that it should be
broadened to consider 'authentic' and relational leadership which involves adaptation, a degree of self-
management and relational accountability. The implications for the Architecture, Engineering and Con-
struction (AEC) professions are significant, for effective joint ventures and project delivery. 

Keywords: joint venture, design teams, leadership, relational accountability, collaboration

62
Introduction
Digital business models and digitisation (ex-
tranets, communication technologies, CAD
modelling, etc) have transformed the way work
is delivered in construction (Boland et al., 2007;
Whyte and Lobo, 2010; Lobo and Whyte, 2017).
However, due to resource scarcity and increas-
ing costs; projects are dispersed across the
world, with a resultant highly competitive mar-
ket (Beamish and Lupton, 2009). Joint ventures
have emerged in this context because they al-
low firms to share risks and costs, enter new
markets and to take advantage of partners' ex-
pertise and skills, although having to overcome
cultural barriers (Ofori and Toor, 2009). Due to
this, despite Jack Welch of General Electric's
now-famous strategy of only competing where
it could be ‘number one or number two globally’
(Tichy and Charan, 1989: 114), rivals in some
markets can become collaborators in others.
Design joint ventures where international firms
have to work collaboratively across borders, sys-
tems and practices pose significant challenges in
terms of management and leadership (Dossick
and Neff, 2008; Kellogg, et al., 2006); the latter
aspect has not been studied in detail and is thus
the focus of this paper.
In terms of the general leadership literature,
there has been a shift from a focus on the per-
sonality of the individual leader, as in trait theory
(Handy, 2007) to leadership styles (Giritli, 2004)
and competencies (Dulewicz and Higgs 2005; in
Muller and Turner, 2010), with similar examples
of leadership research in the AEC industry (Fel-
lows et al., 2003; Kasapoglu, 2010, 2014; Mueller
and Turner, 2007, 2010; Ofori and Toor, 2009;
Tyssen et al., 2013). Zerjav et al.'s (2014) work
takes a more relational perspective on leader-
ship as do Painter-Morland and Deslandes
(2015). The purpose of this paper is to review
the literature in terms of extant knowledge, thus
identifying the gap and the focus of the paper
on investigating how to manage JVs for effective
collaboration. The next section reviews the rele-
vant literature.
Literature Review
The following sections briefly review the com-
plexity of coordination on international projects
with high interdependence of work, challenges
facing joint ventures and the existing perspec-
tives on leadership.
Coordination of work on complex projects
The delivery of complex projects involves com-
plex organisation, with complex interactions,
interfaces and interdependence between the
work of different professionals, mediated with
increasingly integrated digital technologies
(Whyte and Lobo, 2010; Lobo and Whyte,
2017). Digital systems compatibility can be an
issue as well as compatibility of other systems,
for example numbering systems and standards.
In some cases joint venture (JV) partners work
in their own systems and formats before trans-
ferring the data to their partners' format for
data exchange, thus increasing complexity, as
data transfer is not always error-free (Whyte
and Lobo, 2010). With tight deadlines, there is
an unrelenting pace to the managerial work
(Mintzberg, 1973); thus, coordination and
project control in the management of complex
projects is a principal focus.
Further, the challenge in working in transnational
teams from different firms, for instance joint
venture design teams; is compounded where
these factors combine with differences in cul-
ture and team attitudes (Syddall et al., 2013). In
these circumstances there is a need for the
'swift' development of trust between team
members whom relationships are often mediat-
ed by digital forms of communication like email
and video-conferencing (Ramalingam, Lobo et
al., 2014). Whilst JVs may be an effective method
of bringing together resources and capabilities,
the reality of implementation is fraught with
challenges.
63
Managing Joint Ventures
Working with local partners in a joint-venture
(JV) with knowledge of local codes and stan-
dards is necessary for international teams to
operate effectively. For example in one in-
ternational project where UK staff were working
on an Australian motorway, they had to quickly
learn the local health and safety rules, and other
aspects such as how ground investigations were
done (Lobo, 2012). Further, occupational knowl-
edge, although in the same profession, can be
quite different across borders, making knowl-
edge transfer problematic (Leonardi and Bailey,
2008). Governance decisions are thus particular-
ly relevant as the terms of a JV are negotiated
(Beamish and Lupton, 2009: 83). Decisions made
during this period are critical, as it is difficult to
make major changes after the JV has been im-
plemented. Among other things, partners need
to consider the division of management respon-
sibility as these decisions can affect JV perfor-
mance.
JVs often break down due to failure to build a
relationship, lack of cross-cultural knowledge and
cost issues. The importance of this is indicated
from the example of a JV between an Asian and
a European firm (Beamish and Ainudden, 2006).
The Malaysian partner had prior experience in
international JVs with European organisations,
however it encountered difficulties in finalising
the deal after 20 meetings with a Finnish firm
due to differences in the culture of consensus
building and straight-talking (Beamish and Ain-
udden, 2006). There are also exogenous factors
like currency risk e.g. the fall of the pound which
if not sufficiently hedged could push a project
off its budget limits.
Beamish and Lupton's (2009) review of 25
years of JV research in management determined
the six main areas that have been investigated.
Of the six, 'Valuing a JV' and 'Measurement of JV
performance' are the least researched. The key
implications from Beamish and Lupton's (2009)
review include ‘the necessity of honesty, trust,
and commitment for the success of the JV, set-
tling disputes by focusing on what is best for the
JV rather than individual partner objectives, and
division of managerial responsibilities according
to the functional exper tise of each
partner’ (p75).
A paper by Syddall et al. (2013), set in the con-
struction industry in Australia, provides a 'JV
Model’ (p10). Using an online survey methodol-
ogy, Syddall et al. (2013) identify 'allocation of
work' as an area that needs further research
because it has led to major problems during the
design phase and issues of coordinating across
disciplines, as a result of incorrect allocation of
work and work packaging.
Problems arising from work allocation were also
highlighted in a study of a major motorway
(DBFO) project in the UK, called Highway,
where two international design firms were en-
gaged in a design JV (Whyte and Lobo, 2010).
Each design firm was allocated work to be done
on one half of a stretch of the motorway; the
two firms only requiring to interface where the
two halves met. Yet there were significant coor-
dination challenges in this international project
context. This included the management of com-
plexity and data exchange, where the design
teams had to share information with each other
and with the client at handover, and accountabil-
ity for the approval process during design
(Whyte and Lobo, 2010). A new approach to
the research of JV teams is required, with a
deeper understanding of the issues around
managing digitally-mediated international collab-
orations between transnational teams (Rama-
lingam, Lobo et al., 2014), as well as where ac-
countability lies.
Syddall et al. (2013) go on to identify, resources
(right people with the right attitude for the right
tasks), collaboration (i.e. collaborative work envi-
ronment) and an appropriate JV manager; as
other key areas to consider for an effective JV.
Yet, little effort has been devoted to exposing
designers and engineers to these issues in man-
aging and leading JVs. It is the latter factor; the
JV Manager, which will be explored drawing on a
case study of an international design joint ven-
ture project to deliver a motorway in Australia.
64
Leadership
While most leadership literature is focused on
outstanding individuals either as transformational
or charismatic leaders with the ability to influ-
ence others e.g. Steve Jobs (Sharma and Grant,
2011) or transactional leaders who are more
task-focused, Küpers (2013) explores a more
relational perspective on leadership1 (Uhl-Bien,
2006). Similarly, Zerjav et al.'s (2014) study takes
a practice-based, relational perspective on lead-
ership during the design process. Their analysis
of video-based interaction in a collaborative
design workshop for a medical imaging centre
(MIC) in the Netherlands, suggests that ‘leader-
ship-as-practice emerged through specific pat-
terns of domain knowledge ownership, frequen-
cy of interactions, actor responsiveness and
cross-disciplinary knowledge brokering’ (Zerjav
et al., 2014, p. 209) with leadership in the col-
laborative design context viewed as a set of
emergent interactive practices (Ibid).
Like, Zerjav et al.'s (2014) scholarship, Painter-
Morland and Deslandes' (2015) research into
the media industry takes a more relational per-
spective on leadership, critiquing the notion of
'authentic leadership'2 where the individual's
identity or traits is seen as fixed, rather than re-
sponsive to the context. Painter-Morland and
Deslandes (2015) argue for a more construc-
tionist perspective, as do Uhl-Bien and Ospina
(2012). Painter-Morland and Deslandes (2015)
further propose that relational accountability
could be a more appropriate way to remain au-
thentic, despite conflicting demands of decisive-
ness and (journalistic) integrity, versus openness
to experimentation and the pursuit of profit.
The empirical research for this paper takes a
constructionist perspective to achieve the re-
search aim and objectives. The next section de-
scribes the method used to achieve the re-
search objective.
1 Relational leadership theory as a framework for the study of leadership as a social influence process through which
emergent coordination (e.g., evolving social order) and change (e.g., new approaches, values, attitudes, behaviors, ideolo-
gies) are constructed and produced (Uhl-Bien, 2006, p. 654).
2Authenticity primarily has to do with being true to oneself, i.e. knowing oneself, being self-aware, and acting in accord with
one’s own true self and one’s values (Painter-Morland and Deslandes, 2015).
3 Exchange rate from www.xe.com on 24 July 2009.
Method

The project context is briefly described before
analysing the interview data.

Project Setting
The Motorway project in Australia was worth
the equivalent of about £300m3 (Table 1). The
project was divided into eight areas, with 26
new bridges being built across its length. A seven
member Alliance Leadership team (the client,
the two design consultancies, two contractors
and two Alliance Managers) governed the deliv-
ery of the project. Efforts were made to con-
duct leadership workshops at the start of the
project to train the Alliance Leadership and to
foster collaboration. As a new railway was being
built concurrently through the centre of the Mo-
torway project, stakeholder management was
particularly complex.
Table 1: Details of the Motorway project
Motorway project
Overall cost AUSD700m (~£311m)
Project Dates 2006-2010
Leadership structure 7-member Alliance team
Innovation 3D modelling used in
delivery and provided as a
deliverable to the client.
The two leading engineering and design consul-
tancies on the Motorway project (Global Design
and Design International - pseudonyms) formed
a Design Joint Venture. Global Design designed
15 bridges and Design International designed 11
bridges, each for different stretches of the mo-
torway. Global Design led the Design JV, with
the 2 Design Director roles filled by Global De-
sign staff. At peak, with about 90 designers as-
65
signed, there was a 5:1 ratio of staff from Global
Design and Design International on the project.
Some Global Design staff working on this Aus-
tralian project were from the UK. Further, the
local Global Design staff on the project were
mainly young and inexperienced (with an aver-
age age of 24).
In the first instance, previous empirical work
conducted on design teams' collaborative work
on Motorway (Lobo, 2012), is re-analysed to
sensitise the researchers to the issues around
the management of design JVs, 22 interviews
were mainly conducted with the design JV;
Global Design and Design International; and in-
cludes members of the Alliance Leadership
team. Data includes pre-interview question-
naires; member check of interview notes and
post-analysis, a report was completed for Global
Design. Data was collected at two different
time-points during the project (October 2008
and March 2009) because theoretical saturation
had not been achieved at the first point of data
collection (which was through UK-Australia
telephone interviews). The second data collec-
tion point was through face-to-face interviews
by the first author, who visited the project site.
Interview data is analysed using inductive the-
matic analysis. 
 fort to train staff:
Findings
The next sections briefly discuss the analysis of
the interview data relevant to managing collabo-
rative work in JVs.
Adapting and Enacting Practices
There were some difficulties around collabora-
tion across the two design firms because some
practices seemed incompatible:
I found it more frustrating than anything else, sim-
ply because I’ve been in Design International a
long time, and there’s a Design International way
of doing things, which is what I’m used to and what
I’ve always done and Global Design have got a few
different, … ideas…. that might be quite valid if
you’re used to doing it, though.
(Civil Design Manager, Design International)

Despite being deeply entrenched in their own
ways of doing things, practices were adapted by
Design International to Global Design’s. This is
because Global Design had more designers on
the project, and this adaptation would help
make the collaboration work.

Despite this, much learning was gained during
the project. For many of the young Global De-
sign staff, Motorway was their first project and
so, learning in areas like technology, teamwork
and actual project experience was gained as
practices were enacted during the project.
Learnt how to use the system; how to be part of
the construction team and being able to grow as a
technician [ins and outs of design and
construction].
(Civil Technician, Global Design)
Learning about Leadership and Contracts

On such major projects, project and team lead-
ership as well as teamwork is crucial to its suc-
cess. The main contractor spearheaded the ef-
…5 day course on leadership (in Sydney) for the
wider Design team. It was the main contractor’s …
idea to do this.
(Senior Project Manager, Global Design).
The data suggests that the contractor realises
the importance of training in leadership skills on
major projects.
Another issue is the set-up of contracts and
terminology used differs greatly between the
UK and Australia:
The way that the Construction Team is set up, is set
up differently to the UK...The contractual arrange-
ments are different; some of the terminology is dif-
ferent... terminology a bit difficult to understand.
(Deputy Alliance Manager)
66
The learning curve for non-local staff can be
quite steep, because institutionalised practices
differed between countries.
Enabling Collaborative work at the Inter-
faces
A mechanism to facilitate collaboration is the
use of intermediary roles. One such role on
Motorway was that of the Design Interface
Manager. The Interface Manager is a conduit be-
tween design and construction as, theoretically,
these two parties seldom if ever, meet. Design-
ers mostly work in one (office) location, while
construction is out on site. The role of a con-
duit between the Design and Construction
teams is to try and bring together the various
expert ‘silos’ for a workable output:
…while I was in the Interface Manager’s role, deal-
ing with the Structural Designers, the Drainage De-
signers, the Lighting Designers, the Pavement De-
signers, interacting with all of those separate silos, if
you like, and getting them to appreciate the com-
peting needs that each design group has, to come
up with something that’s workable …it may sound
simple, but it’s not.
(Design Interface Manager and Intelligent Trans-
port System and Lighting Manager, Contractor
2)
Even the physical co-location of design teams
(and the use of digital technologies) was not
enough to break down ‘silo’-like practices; an
interface or intermediary role was necessary to
act as a bridge between the various expert
groups to encourage collaboration for a com-
bined workable outcome.
Despite this awareness within Global Design
Brisbane, the design teams on Motorway were
co-located only for a period, after which Design
International’s teams returned to their home
offices in Hong Kong and Shenzhen. Working
remotely put pressure on the relationships be-
tween the two design firm's staff. The initial co-
location spawned a good working relationship
between Design International and Global De-
sign staff, which helped in dealing with such
pressure. When the Design International staff
returned to their home offices, the design engi-
neers from Global Design knew that they:
…have to be more clear in drawing mark-ups…
nothing better than having person next to you
(Senior Structural Engineer, Global Design)
Working with distributed teams requires more
precise requirements definitions and specifica-
tions, thus increasing the cost of knowledge
transfer (Leonardi and Bailey 2008). Previous
project experience had made the senior mem-
bers in the project leadership aware of the diffi-
culties that would arise with distributed teams.
Despite this, the Design International designers
were allowed to return:
It’s not the first time I’ve done it…when I was in
the UK I had…Designers in India…the problems
there are probably more communication…I mean,
we did have …Indians in London who would be
communicating with the Indians, but we found that
you had to be very precise, and exact in terms of
the requirements that you have.
(Deputy Alliance Manager)
One learning from this is the importance of
physical proximity to facilitate the coordination
of work, in this case, to have at least one person
locally based to coordinate design work and to
develop relationships:
If a project is as variable as this has turned out to
be, you definitely need that person local – this
would be optimal. If not, at least come over for a
decent period and develop a relationship with the
people who are local.
(Deputy Alliance Manager)
Most of the rest of the Motorway project team
were co-located with the contractor and client,
at a project site office, easing the processes of
communication and co-ordination.
The next section provides a conclusion on the
implications of the initial findings to research,
practice and policy.
67
Conclusion
The analysis suggests that some of the issues
around effective collaborative work in JVs like
co-location could have been negotiated and
agreed when the JV was being set up and
formed, as advocated by Beamish and Lupton
(2009). An interesting insight from the data is
the view of the older, more experienced staff
that leadership and managing the JV can be
taught; while the mainly junior Global Design
staff were finding their own way around working
in such a complex environment, so as to be able
to put their professional skills into 'practice'. Fur-
ther, the Global Design staff took on the re-
sponsibility to communicate design work-in-
progress to the now remote Design In-
ternational teams for (design) integrity, despite
the costs (Leonardi and Bailey, 2008), thus taking
on relational accountability (Painter-Morland and
Deslandes, 2015).
The analysis thus suggests that the notion of
leadership in the design JV teams' context
should be more nuanced; from an individual
leadership traits and competencies perspective
(Dulewicz and Higgs, 2005; in Muller and Turner,
2010; Handy, 2007; Sharma and Grant, 2011) to
consider a more responsive 'authentic' and rela-
tional leadership for collaborative design in-
tegrity, involving adaptation and a degree of self-
management as well as relational accountability.
The next step would be to conduct in situ longi-
tudinal empirical research on the management
of an international JV (IJV) doing collaborative
work. Another aspect would be to investigate
board level leadership in IJVs, the composition of
which has been discussed in a recent paper by
Cuypers et al (2017). The implications for the
AEC professions are significant, both for effec-
tive joint ventures and project delivery.  Küpers, W.M. (2013). ‘Embodied inter-practices
References
Beamish, P. W. & Lupton, N. C. (2009). ‘Managing
Joint Ventures’, Academy of Management Perspec-
tives, 23(2), 75-94.
Boland, R. J., Lyytinen, K., & Yoo, Y. (2007). ‘Wakes
of Innovation in Project Networks: The Case of
Digital 3-D Representations in Architecture, En-
gineering, and Construction.’ Organization Sci-
ence, 18(4), pp. 631-647.
Cuypers, I. R. P., Ertug, G., Reuer, J. J. & Bensaou, B.
(2017). ‘Board representation in international
joint ventures.’ Strategic Management Journal,
38(4), pp. 920-938.
Dossick, C. S., & Neff, G. (2008). How Leadership
Overcomes Organizational Divisions in BIM En-
abled Commercial Construction. Paper presented
at the LEAD, Stanford Sierra.
Fellows, R., Liu, A. & Fong, C.M. (2003). ‘Leader-
ship style and power relations in quantity sur-
veying in Hong Kong.’ Construction Management
and Economics, 21(8), pp. 809–18.
Giritli, H. & Oraz, G.T. (2004). ‘Leadership styles:
some evidence from the Turkish Construction
Industry. ‘ Construction Management and Eco-
nomics, 22(3), pp. 253–62.
Handy, C. (2007). Understanding Organizations.
Penguin. 4th Edition.
Kasapog ̆lu, E. (2010). ‘Leadership behaviors in
project design offices.’ Journal of Construction En-
gineering and Management, 137(5), pp. 356–63.
Kasapog ̆lu, E. (2014). ‘Leadership styles in archi-
tectural design offices in Turkey.’ Journal of Con-
struction Engineering and Management, 140(2).
Kellogg, K. C., Orlikowski, W. J., & Yates, J. (2006).
‘Life in the Trading Zone: Structuring Coordin
tion Across Boundaries in Postbureaucratic Or-
ganizations.’ Organization Science, 17(1), pp.
22-44.
of leadership —phenomenological perspectives
on relational and responsive leading and follow-
ing.’ Leadership, 9(3), pp. 335–57.
Leonard, P. M. & Bailey, D. E. (2008). ‘Transforma-
tional Technologies and the Creation of New
Work Practices.’ MIS Quarterly, 32(2), pp.
411-436.
68
Lobo, S. & Whyte, J. (2017). ‘Aligning and Recon-
ciling: Building Project Capabilities for digital de-
livery.’ Research Policy, 46(1), pp. 93–107.
Lobo, S. (2012). ‘Embedding learning across
projects over time and space’, 28th EGOS Collo-
quium, July 5-7, Helsinki, Finland.
Mintzberg, H. (1973). The Nature of Managerial
Work. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Müller, R. & Turner, J.R. (2007). ‘Matching the
project manager’s leadership style to project
type’. International Journal of Project Management,
25(1), pp. 21–32.
Müller, R. & Turner, R. (2010). ‘Leadership compe-
tency profiles of successful project managers.’
International Journal of Project Management,
28(5), pp. 437–48.
Ofori, G. & Toor, S.U.R. (2009). ‘Research on
cross-cultural leadership and management in
construction: a review and directions for future
research.’ Construction Management and Eco-
nomics, 27(2), pp. 119–33.
Painter-Morland, M. & Deslandes, G. (2015). ‘Au-
thentic leading as relational accountability: Facing
up to the conflicting expectations of media
leaders,’ Leadership, DOI:
10.1177/1742715015578307, p. 1-21.
Tichy, N. & Charan, R. (1989) ‘Speed, Simplicity,
Self-Confidence: An Interview with Jack Welch.’
Harvard Business Review. September–October
1989 Issue, pp. 112-120.
Tyssen, A.K., Wald, A. & Spieth, P. (2013). ‘Leader-
ship in temporary organizations: a review of
leadership theories and a research agenda.’
Project Management Journal, 44(6), pp. 52–67.
Uhl-Bien M. & Ospina S (Eds.). (2012).
Advancing Relational Leadership Research: A
Dialogue Among Perspectives. Greenwich, CT:
Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.
Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). ‘Relational Leadership Theo-
ry: Exploring the social processes of leadership
and organizing'. The Leadership Quarterly, Yearly
Review of Leadership, 17(6), pp. 654-676.
Whyte, J., and Lobo, S. (2010). ‘Coordination and
control in project-based work: digital objects
and infrastructures for delivery.’ Construction
Management & Economics, 28(6), pp. 557-567.
Zerjav, V., Hartmann, T. & Van Amstel, F. M.C.
(2014). ‘A leadership-as-practice perspective on
design in architecture, engineering and construc-
tion projects: interaction analysis of a collabora-
tive workshop, Engineering Project’ Organization
Journal, 4(4), pp. 209-221.

Ramalingam, S., Lobo, S., Mahalingam, A. &

Whyte, J. (2014). ‘Achieving reliability in transna-
tional work on complex projects: new directions
for research’, Engineering Project Organization
Journal, 4(4), pp. 193-208.

Sharma, A. & Grant, D. (2011). ‘Narrative, drama

and charismatic leadership: The case of Apple’s
Steve Jobs.’ Leadership 7 (1), pp. 3-26.

Syddall, T. & Teo, M. (2013). ‘Forming a joint ven-

ture project team for multi-discipline engineer-
ing services in Australia.’ In Wilkinson, Suzanne &
Miller, Garry (Eds.) Proceedings of the 38th Annu-
al Australasian Universities Building Education As-
sociation Conference, The University of Auckland,
Auckland.

69
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Towards a professional map for specifying and actively measuring be-

haviours for collaboration
Elizabeth Kavanagh,1 Rowena Hay2
1Stride Treglown, UK

ElizabethKavanagh@stridetreglown.com

2Schoolof Architecture, University of Reading, UK

r.hay@reading.ac.uk

Abstract

The thrust of the efforts in BIM adoption and implementation has so far focused on the tech-
nological and project procurement to drive the transformation of the construction industry.
However, organisational considerations such as actively measuring relevant behaviours for col-
laboration are deemed essential for collaborative success. The need for enforcing greater col-
laboration among construction project stakeholders have been highlighted over many decades,
and yet, so far, have received little attention. Indeed it is widely acknowledged that tackling soft
issues such as identifying and robustly measuring collaborative behaviours are central to fully
realise the benefits of BIM, fundamental changes in the working practices and inter-relationships
of construction professionals. The suggested range of benefits the industry might gain from such
a shift in working practices include improved efficiency, waste reduction, dispute minimisation
and predictability of project outcomes, amongst others. One of the keys to enhancing collabo-
ration, therefore, is that managers of all participants involved in a given project should actively
measure relevant behaviours for collaboration. In order to define such metrics, however, the
desired behaviours need first to be identified and ‘good’ performance defined. It is suggested
that dedicated mechanisms for monitoring the performance of behaviours for collaboration of
participants are therefore needed. This is critical in order to ensure the required feedback is
triggered. This paper reports on ongoing research project that sought to develop and validate a
profession map, designed to define and actively measure the behaviours required to succeed in
BIM project collaboration.

Key words: BIM, collaborative behaviours, interdisciplinarity 


70
Introduction people to work more effectively together on
construction projects (BIM Task Group,
The call for greater collaboration across the
2013). The use of BIM has been adopted by
construction industry is not new, indeed in
the UK government on publicly funded build-
his 1986 article A Case For More Collaboration
ings and infrastructure with the express aim
Frank Duffy bemoans the negative conse-
of achieving more efficient ways of working
quences of the adversarial nature and ‘turf
(The Infrastructure and Projects Authority,
protecting’ behaviour in the sector. For Duffy
2016). Whilst recognised as a potential cata-
(1986) the development of collaborative
lyst for greater transparency and closer inte-
working would enable the sharing of infor-
gration, the application of BIM technologies in
mation about the requirements of different
and of themselves does not guarantee col-
user sectors and building performance, in-
laborative design practice (Merschbrock and
forming the development of building designs
Munkvold, 2015). Indeed, as Merschbrock
to better meet user needs early on in the
and Munkvold (2015) argue ‘many project
design process, and leading to the develop-
teams struggle with how to work based on
ment of more rigorous criteria and specifica-
the new technology [as] collaborative design
tions for different building types (ibid). Thirty
based on shared information systems … re-
years on, and these recommendations are
quires changing traditional and institutional-
still precedent. Two recent reviews of the
ized work practices and routines’ (p5). Fur-
state of the UK construction industry, The
ther, as Counsell (2012) says ‘communication
Farmer review (2016) and the Morrell
and collaboration are about people … rela-
Commission Report (2015), highlight the
tionship[s] and trust’ (p510). As Mignone et
need for greater levels of collaboration
al. (2016) argue, collaboration depends upon
across the built environment professions in
the creation of an atmosphere of ‘trust,
order to improve productivity, predictability,
openness and honest[y]’ allowing for the joint
and to stimulate research and development.
delivery of ‘the best solution[s] that fulfil
Collaboration is seen as a way to meet the
common objectives’ (p335).
major challenges of the age, including climate
change and building performance through This paper explores issues of collaboration
greater integration between ‘design, product and behaviour change in the construction
manufacture, construction, operation and industry in the context of a move to intro-
asset management,’ the development of duce Level 3 BIM (HM Treasure, 2013), de-
feedback loop mechanisms to ensure that scribed as the ‘holy grail’ of ‘full collaboration
buildings are performing as intended, and to between all disciplines by means of using a
enable the transfer of learning from one single, shared project model which is held in
project to the next (Morrell, 2015: 8). The a centralised repository’ (NBS, 2017). The
greater alignment of interests ‘within the sup- paper reports on a piece of action research
ply chain and between the supply chain and developed by an interdisciplinary group of
the client’ is seen as crucial to reducing frag- practitioners and academics who are part of
mentation in the industry (ibid). the Bim Task Groups’ South West Regional
Hub (Bim Task Group, 2013). The paper is
The development of Building Information
structured around three sections, the first
Modelling (BIM), allowing for the ‘creation,
discusses the outcome of a discussion during
collation and exchange of shared 3D models’
a industry workshop about collaboration and
alongside ‘intelligent, structured data’ is
BIM. The second sets out the research
recognised as playing a key role in enabling

71
project that emerged in response to this
workshop and the conclusions from a litera-
ture review carried out on collaborative
working. The third reports on the develop-
ment and piloting of a ‘collaborative be-
haviour map’ to help practitioners to collabo-
rate more effectively.
“Its all about behaviour”
In 2012 the South West BIM Region ran a
conference for practitioners and academics
in order to discuss emergent issues and op-
portunities of the integration of BIM in UK
construction. Following a ‘world cafe1’ discus-
sion priorities for research and action were
identified. Firstly that collaboration is neces-
sary to implement Level 3 BIM; secondly that
the current construction industry is charac-
terised by an adversarial culture; and thirdly
that this culture is made up of a pattern of
individual behaviours and that change is de-
pendent on the reform of the conduct of
members of the project team.
Three key questions emerged as a basis for
further investigation:
1. How can we change our industry cul-
ture?
2. What does collaboration look like?
3. What are the conditions that would en-
able this change?
In response to these questions a sub-group
of practitioners and academics was formed
to explore issues of collaboration in Level 3
BIM. As the industry is currently charac-
terised by an adversarial culture a hypothesis
was developed that the industry is not aware
of the behaviours required in order to work
collaboratively. Raising knowledge and under-
standing of what successful collaboration
looks like was identified as the first step in
developing a more collaborative construction
industry.
The Behaviours4Collaboration research
group was initiated to explore these issues,
with a membership of university academics
and built environment practitioners2. The
group were supported with seed funding
from the University of the West of England
to create a tool to explain and develop col-
laborative behaviours within the construction
sector, in order to make the most of the pos-
sibilities BIM offers in providing a single plat-
form to enable greater team working and
genuine collaboration.
Behaviours4Collaboration research
The research began by carrying out a review
of the existing literature into collaboration
within BIM and other sectors (Rose, 2014).
Two conceptual frameworks emerged as
particularly influential to the development of
the research. The first, developed by the Pro-
curement/Lean Client Task Group3 (2012),
specifies the behaviours of an 'intelligent
client’. These include ensuring suppliers are

1 http://www.theworldcafe.com/

2 The group is lead by Elizabeth Kavanagh Head of HR for Stride Treglown alongside Oliver Mouland BIM Manager
for University of Bristol and now Laing O Rourke, Paul Fox of Constructive Coaching who has been helping teams
become more collaborative for over 20 years, Juani Swart who is Professor in Human Capital Management at the
University of Bath and an expert in cross boundary working within knowledge workers, Anne Kemp Director of
Atkins and BIM lead, Paul Wilkinson a technology, public relations and marketing expert of PWcom.co.uk, Jill Clancy
formerly Atkins and now Jill Clancy Ltd who has expertise in the ISO 440001 (the international standard on col-
laborative business relationships management systems), Lamine Mahdjoubi Professor of the Built Environment at
the University of the West of England, Jason Underwood Professor in BIM and Construction at Salford University
and Dr Mark Shelbourn Reader in BIM and Digital Technologies at the University of Salford.

3 One of six task groups which developed the Government Construction Strategy (2011)

72
engaged based on their ability to collaborate,
consistency in the procurement models,
strong client leadership, early involvement of
the supply chain, establishment of mutual ob-
jectives, commitment to continuous im-
provement, transparent issue resolution, op-
portunity to innovate through project devel-
opment and implementation, and assessment
of the level of client maturity (ibid: 23). The
second was the concept of ‘process maturity’,
reflecting the ‘degree with which key pro-
cesses or activities are defined, managed and
affective’ typically describing ‘the characteris-
tics of an activity at a number of different
levels of performance’ (Fraser et al. 2003:
320). Boughzala and De Vreede (2015) use-
fully define collaboration maturity as ‘a team's
current capability to collaborate (i.e. people)
where team members effectively communi-
cate (i,e., process), reach shared understand-
ing (i.e., information), and adapt their tasks
(i.e., management and process), behaviours
(i.e., people) and means (i.e., technology and
information) to produce high-quality out-
comes' (p133).
A meta-analysis was then undertaken by
Rose (2014) of industries identified in the
literature as demonstrating collaborative
work cultures, including healthcare, the
emergency services and infrastructure. Build-
ing on the ‘human’ elements identified by
Deutsch and AIA (2011) as impacting upon
BIM implementation, five factor pairings were
identified as commonly occurring within col-
laborative teams across these fields. These
factors are set out below, together with ex-
amples drawn from the literature (Rose,
2014).
1. Trust and respect: building trust and
commitment to partnering was identified
as the most commonly mentioned factor
4 With depth of knowledge represented by the vertical bar of the “T”, but also an ability to collaborate across dis-
ciplines as represented by the horizontal bar
in the literature (Barlow et al. 1998). The
need to invest in these ‘soft issues’ is
widely recognised (Damodaran and
Shelbourn, 2006), as is the problems that
arise in defining and measuring trust
which can only be created by ‘meeting
promises and delivering
performance’ (British Standards Institu-
tion, 2011).
2. Inter-professionalism and “T-shaped4”
people: the need for inter-professional-
ism based on multiple skills, in addition to
expert knowledge of specific discipline, is
highlighted as crucial for T-shaped profes-
sionals to work across disciplinar y
boundaries (Oskam, 2009).
3. Openness and communications: commu-
nication is identified as crucial to collabo-
rations. In the health sector Hall (2005)
found that whilst medical students are
taught to communicate with patients,
they may be less able to communicate
with other medical specialists as a result
of unfamiliar vocabulary, contrasting ap-
proaches to problem-solving, and a lack
of shared values. Being open to sharing
knowledge with those outside of the
immediate team or specialism is seen as
crucial for cross-organisational working
(Grilo et al. 2013; Swart and Harvey,
2011).
4. Common goals and new ways of work-
ing: it is widely recognised that effective
team working depends upon personal
investment in the team’s success through
the clear definition of shared goals (Tar-
ricone and Luca, 2002; McCallin, 2001).
5. Leadership and interpersonal skills: lead-
ership is crucial in the management of
collaborating organisations, in order to
73
 foster collaborative practices through
investment of time, resources and en-
couragement in the team (Suter et al.
2009). Interpersonal skills are also fun-
damental, including the awareness of the
needs of others, sensitivity and caring
behaviour (Rose, 2014).
Developing and piloting the Collabora-
tive Behaviour Map
Having identified aspects that are important
to collaborative working, the next stage of
the research was to communicate this
knowledge into a digestible and user-friendly
format for practitioners. The ‘profession map,’
developed by HR professionals to capture
and demonstrate knowledge, behaviours and
competencies, was used as a model (CIPD,
2017). The strength of this approach is that
the map specifies not just the knowledge and
skills required, but also behaviours. An exam-
ple to explain the difference is below:
Knowledge is information about a subject,
e.g. I understand how to indicate at a
junction when driving a car
below). Specific collaborative behaviours
were mapped onto 5 levels of maturity (0
referring to anti-collaborative behaviours5
and 4 being the most collaborative), and
onto 5 different levels of operation within
the industry (from project contributor to
industry/subject leader)6. The map is intended
to help organisations and individuals to select
the behaviours they wish to target and de-
velop into ‘maturity’ as part of a Behavioural
Charter which is one of the recommenda-
tions of ISO 44001, the international stan-
dard on collaborative business relationships
management systems (ISO, 2017). It also al-
lows each team to develop its own rules of
engagement, and manage the collaboration at
the level they feel is appropriate to them.

Skills are using what I know in a situation,

e.g. I indicate as a standard part of my dri-
ving before I turn into a junction

Behaviours are the way I use my skills,

what you see me do, e.g, whether I indi-
cate in good time or last minute as I am
turning.

This model was developed into a ‘Collabora-

tive Behaviour Map’ which was refined
through stakeholder workshop at the Uni-
versity of Bath that took place in January
2015 (University of Bath, 2015) (see Figure 1

5Anti-collaborative behaviours were included since it may be necessary to flag and deal with these behaviours as
part of a development process.

6 Behaviours were not linked to particular industry roles (Architect, Contractor etc.) but were instead common to
all backgrounds, as the project seeks to create cross industry collaboration.

74
Table 1: The collaborative behaviour map

Leadership/interpersonal impact map

Role Project
 Project Leader Group leader Organisation Industry/ Subject

Contributor leader leader

Enables and uses Embrace Embrace independence

Focussed on overall Seen as an “honest creative conflict independence Leveraging opportunities
4 project goals and Broker” steering others Integrity: I do what I and skills for value
drivers of others towards wider goals Helps to overcome say I will Creates joint ownership
unconstructive Seeks to understand across the team for all
conflict others perspectives team results

Integrity: I do what I Integrity: I do what I say I Creates Long term view of Take decisions based on
say I will in line with will. interdependent rewards commitment to
3 the project goals and Serving needs of others. relationships Ownership of our relationship
drivers of others Courage- sees conflict as Flags and uses actions
opportunity. conflict + uncover Resilience- not giving
Decisions informed by assumptions up on agreed goals
relationships
Resilience

Serving needs of Aims as our own
others Values perspectives
2 Decisions informed Engaging others in mutual
by relationships decisions
Seek to understand Identify ways to
others perspectives collaborate for mutual
benefit
manages relationships
seek to understand
others perspectives
Creates and sustains Identify ways to Collective pain and gain
opportunity to collaborate for mindset,
collaborate mutual benefit (maximises the gain for
Engaging others in all and/or minimising the
mutual decisions. pain for all members of a
team)

Aims as our own Can revert when the Finds opportunities Talks of Makes collaboration
Ownership of our pressure is on to to use individuals interdependence and possible
1 actions company silos. skills regardless of initiates dialogue Remove barriers
Resilience – not role about encourage collaboration
giving up on agreed Enables work across interdependence
goals. silos
Can dip in or out of
the team

Protection of own Protection of own Protection of own/ Protection of Undermines potential of

0 interests- failure to interests- failure to listen company interests- company interests collaboration by taking a
listen failure to listen short term view. Closes
Own aims over those down possibility for
of the team doing things differently.

75
Interdependent goals / new ways of working

Project Project Group leader Organisation leader Industry/ Subject

Role Contributor Leader leader
Expects and Openness to sharing Openness to sharing Able to take multiple
Transparency with further develops resource and resource and knowledge perspectives
4 the full team Openness knowledge Instigates and expects Acknowledge greater good
Natural common mechanisms Instigates and openness Easily talks about values,
language challenges actions expects openess Openness mechanisms behaviours and wider
and behaviours Openness Further develops outcomes
which undermine mechanisms openness e.g. via Challenges using coaching
this. admission of own failings style

Open to shared Welcomes and Represents cross- Deploying openness Representing cross section
values and beliefs ( initiates section of views mechanisms: project of views
3 not just task) communications. Embraces openness bank account, IPI, etc. Integrates and respects the
Develop common Breaking down mechanisms views of others
language separate Volunteers ideas is
Technical talk – commercial enthusiastic and
awareness of interests. supportive of others
when this excludes Approachable – contributions.
others no barriers

Shared goals Encourages focus on Adopt open formats, Gives own time and ideas
rather than relationship and common platforms and readily to those who wish
2 individual ensure transparent processes, to have it.
Open to shared communication is communications Takes long term view:
project object two way and meet strategic not project based.
(task related) the needs of all
Support others to
embrace new
ways of working

Working for “we” Able to identify Encouraging thinking/ Can identify and reduce Shares information readily
1 rather than constraints to working outside the barriers to silo working and considers and uses
working for “me” thinking outside box. and ensure team can appropriate
the box operate communication style and
methods

Determined to Transactional Transactional or short Inconsistent sharing of

0 stick with known approach to term focus on problem information
software/ data relationships and solving Uses one communication
Does not contracts- what can I style with all irrespective of
acknowledge or get out of this their needs
meet needs of
others
Working for “me”
rather than
working for “we”

76
Trust / Respect

Project 
 Project Leader Group leader Organisation Subject/ Industry

Role Contributor leader leader
Getting the job done Giving and receiving Models Exploits failures and Can be relied upon to
as described feedback openly interdependence and mistakes as an maintain a constant
4 Starts with trusting the visible alliances with opportunity for adherence to
Trusts other to do team and resolves trust others improvement collaboration principles
their best until proved gaps as they occur A respected viewpoint
otherwise

Avoids engaging in Problem finding and Presents feedback in a Willing to “Lose” or Able to raise restrictive
gossip transparency in positive manner step aside in order to practices and inhibiting
3 discussion Raises and resolves secure long term wins beliefs within the
Does not allow Leads to Win-Win conflict for the future industry
conversations outside outcomes
of the group

Does not allow Display appropriate Respectful of different Tackles issues but Is known to be
themselves to be body language values and needs of willing to step back supportive figure and
2 distracted from the Invites contentious others from sensitive issues advocate representing
agenda of Trust discussion preventing it finding appropriate others viewpoints
from occurring behind opportunity to raise
closed doors issues

Communicates Discusses colleagues in Encourage a no gossip Acknowledges and Promotes the agenda
necessary information a respectful manner climate respects conflicting that “Trust underpins it
1 Allows needs of others views all”
to be met Maintains integrity of
viewpoint in face of
dissent of others

Blames others for
0 failing Trust
Undermines Trust and Wants to win at all New ideas mean the Does not invalidate
faith in others costs trust is lost if you don’t input of others
Allows blame culture agree Let’s go of the right to
Dissent is subdued and be right
resented Says one thing and does
another
Mixed messages to
industry audience

Ongoing development and dissemination
The behavioural map is intended for use as a
means to describe, discuss, develop and
maintain collaboration throughout the life of
a relationship. The tool is being beta tested
by a number of organisations and this will be
used, along with further stakeholder engage-
ment, to develop a British Standard in collab-
orative behaviours. A further output in de-
velopment is a game which enables feedback
to participants to enable them to develop
their collaborative working. This game could
be linked to a ratings website such as
LinkedIn which would publicise feedback and
enable the individual to gain prestige for their
collaborative capabilities, for example
through using icons and points systems which
could lead to ‘Top Collaborator’ status. The
aim is to transfer academic knowledge about
successful collaboration into a format that is
relevant and accessible to built environment
practitioners, in order to the support the de-
velopment of [much needed] collaborative
behaviours across the construction industry.
References
Barlow, J., Jashapara, A. and Cohen, M. (1998).
‘Organisational learning and inter-firm 'part-
nering' in the UK construction industry.’ The
Learning Organization Journal, 5(2), pp. 86-98.
Bim Task Group (2013) BIM region south west.
Retrieved from: http://www.bim-
taskgroup.org/bim-region-south-west/

77
Boughzala, I. and De Vreede, G. (2015) ‘Evalu-
ating Team Collaboration Quality: The devel-
opment and Field Application of Collabora-
tive Maturity Model.’ Journal of Management
Information Systems, 32(3), pp. 129-157.
British Standards Institution (2011) BS 11000
Collaborative Business Relationships. Retrieved
from: http://www.bsigroup.co.uk/en-GB/
bs-11000-collaborative-business-relation-
ships/>.
CIPD. (2017).The CIPD Profession Map. Re-
trieved from: https://www.cipd.co.uk/learn/
career/profession-map
Counsell, J. (2012) ‘Beyond Level 2 BIM, Web
Portals and Collaboration Tools.’ Information
Visualisation (IV), 16th International Confer-
ence, pp. 510-515.
Damodaran, L. and Shelbourn, M. (2006).
‘Collaborative Working-The Elusive Vision.’
Architectural Engineering and Design Manage-
ment, 2(4), pp. 227-243.
Fraser, P., Farrukh, C., Gregory, M., (2003)
‘Managing product development collabora-
tions - a process maturity approach.’ Journal
of Engineering Manufacture, Part B, 217(11),
pp. 1499-1519.
Grilo, A., Zutshi, A., Jardim-Goncalves, R. and
Steiger-Garcao, A. (2013). ‘Construction col-
laborative networks: the case study of a
building information modelling-based office
building project.’ International Journal of Com-
puter Integrated Manufacturing, 26(1-2), pp.
152-165.
Hall, P. (2005). ‘Interprofessional teamwork:
Professional cultures as barriers’. Journal of
Interprofessional Care, 19(1), pp.188-196.
HM Treasury (2016) Budget 2016. Retrieved
from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi-
cations/budget-2016-documents/
budget-2016
Infrastructure and Projects Authority. (2016).
Government Construction Strategy: 2015-2020.
Retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/govern-
ment/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_-
data/file/510354/Government_Construc-
tion_Strategy_2016-20.pdf
ISO. (2017). Collaborative business relationship
management systems - framework. Retrieved
from: https://www.iso.org/standard/
46559.html
McCallin, A. (2001) ‘Interdisciplinary practice
– a matter of teamwork: an integrated litera-
ture review.’ Journal of Clinical Nursing, 10(4),
pp.419-428.
Merschbrock, C. and Munkvold, B.E. (2015)
‘Effective digital collaboration in the construc-
tion industry - A case study of BIM deploy-
ment in a hospital construction’ Computers in
Industry, 73, pp. 1-7.
NBS (2017) BIM Levels explained. Retrieved
from: https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/
bim-levels-explained
Oskam, I.F. (2009). T-shaped engineers for in-
terdisciplinary innovation: an attractive perspec-
tive for young people as well as a must for in-
novative organisations. European Societies for
Engineering Education. Rotterdam, The
Netherlands European Societies for Engi-
neering Education.
Procurement/Lean Client Task Group. (2012).
Final Report to Government by the Procure-
ment/Lean Client Task Group. Retrieved from:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/sys-
tem/uploads/attachment_data/file/61157/
Procurement-and-Lean-Client-Group-Final-
Report-v2.pdf
Rose, C. (2014). BIM behaviours of collabora-
tion - literature review. Unpublished
Suter, E., Arndt, J., Arthur, N., Parboosingh, J.,
Taylor, E. and Deutschlander, S. (2009). ‘Role
78
understanding and effective communication
as core competencies for collaborative prac-
tice.’ Journal of Interprofessional Care, 23(1), pp.
41-51.

Swart, J. and Harvey, P. (2011). ‘Identifying

knowledge boundaries: the case of net-
worked projects.’ Journal of Knowledge Man-
agement, 15(5), pp. 703-721.

Tarricone, P. and Luca, J. (2002). ‘Successful

teamwork: A case study. Quality Conversa-
tions,’ Proceedings of the 25th HERDSA Annual
Conference. Perth, Western Australia 7-10 July
2002, pp.640-646.

University of Bath. (2015). Juani Swart award-

ed public engagement grant. Retrieved from:
http://www.bath.ac.uk/management/
news_events/news/2015/4-02-Juani-Swart-
awarded-public-grant.html

79
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

The portfolio professional = education + skills + commercial

environment + communications network

Alex MacLaren1, Neil Thompson2

1Schoolof Energy, Geoscience, Infrastructure and Society, Heriot Watt University, UK

alex.maclaren@hw.ac.uk

2Balfour Beatty, UK
neil.bb.bim@gmail.com

Abstract

Inspired by the Edge Commission Report ‘Collaboration for Change’ (Morrell, 2015) and
ongoing Careers-Mapping research by the cross-industry network ‘dotBuiltEnvironment’, this
paper presents a thesis on how, and why, the traditional view of the linear ‘specialist’ professional
does not reflect the reality of the modern employment market. This leads to a concluding
mandate to increase our cross-disciplinary teaching and learning in built environment Higher
Education.

The paper references extant teaching initiatives and innovations across built environment
disciplines, and professional criteria from CIBSE, RICS, CIOB, IStructE, and the RIBA. Links
between professions and the emergence of the transient professional, frequently traversing the
traditional institutional silos, will be discussed. New research from dotBuiltEnvironment will
demonstrate graphically the evidence collected from multiple industry events and contributors,
evidencing that the ‘norm’ in built environment career paths is a world away from the narrow
definitions of institutional membership criteria. Observations will be made on communication
networks; professional development; accreditation criteria and future models of employment.

We propose a ‘portfolio professional’ view, and provide a perspective which posits a

fundamental shift in the operational framework for the institutions of the construction industry.
We conclude by recommending a concerted evolution of built environment institute
operations, and the development and delivery of multi-disciplinary and cross-sector learning in
built environment education at all (lifelong) levels.

This paper is a collaborative endeavour from a group of young professionals across built
environment disciplines, and representing consulting, contracting, policy and education sectors. 


Keywords: digital, construction, education & skills, multidisciplinary, economics

80
Introduction
Interdisciplinary collaboration is imperative
for success in the contemporary built
environment industry. This knowledge sits at
odds with an operational landscape divided
into specialist professional institutions, and
their uncoordinated accredited education
and training. Hill et al. (2013) argue that
fundamental failings lie in the gaps between
professional codes of the different
professions, leading to an ethically incoherent
position in which ‘effective interdisciplinary
wor k is assumed by many to be a
necessity’ (p9) and is suppor ted by
institutional rhetoric, but not codified into
action. Their solution is to propose one single
‘ethical framework for the built environment
professions’ (p22). This proposal is echoed by
Morrell (2015), who argues that the most
profound ethical challenge facing the
construction industry is not the articulation
of social or financial transactional propriety,
but the imperative of sustainability in our
built environment. It is through developing a
shared response to climate change that
institutions can best suppor t built
environment professionals in serving society,
encourage young people to join the industry,
and enable us to win back the respect and
trust of the public (ibid).
At the same time, recent advances in digital
technology and the subsequent effect on
communications, transactions, the sharing of
knowledge and the ability to create and
utilise specialist networks, have democratised
many of the activities previously within the
domains of professional member ship
(MacLaren, 2016). It is possible to suggest, as
Susskind and Susskind (2015) do, that this
fundamental shift in the way professional
knowledge is exchanged will reform the
nature of professionalism itself. In this
situation, the education of future
professionals should also be subject to
significant change. However, as the first
section of this paper explores, the
disciplinary-specific professional institutions
who accredit academic courses are justifiably
concerned with their own longevity as
organisations, and tend to turn inwards to
explore routes for developing education. This
insular perspective is not conducive to
educating inter-professional collaboration and
communication.
In contrast, the membership of such
organisations is increasingly restless. This is
slowly being addressed through cross-
institutional initiatives such as the ‘21st
Centur y PEI’ (professional engineering
institutions) and the acknowledgement ‘that
an [engineer] will move through several PEIs
during their career, depending on where that
career leads them and their professional
focus at that time.’ (Meyrick, 2017). The
flexibility and cross-disciplinary nature of built
environment careers is supported by original
research carried out by dotBuiltEnvironment
presented in the second section of this paper,
mapping the movement of individuals who
navigate between Higher Education (HE),
Further Education (FE) and Continuous
Professional Development (CPD) providers
in order to develop their careers to suit the
developing workplace. It is argued that this
landscape of professional activity contrasts
starkly with the assumed ‘professional role’
inherent in the aims, objectives and operation
of many construction institutions, formed in
the very different economic context of the
nineteenth century.
This emerging scenario (the changing nature
of built environment professionals; the
‘por tfolio professional’), feeds into a
discussion of contemporary transactional
relationships within the construction industry,
reflecting the different economic landscape
within which those individual agents now
operate (the changing nature of built
environment professionalism). This latter
aspect is finally explore via an analysis of the
historic relationship between remuneration,
skills and productivity, that suggests a high
81
incentive to automate previously significant
elements of professional roles within the
next decade (Susskind, 2017; Duffy &
Rabeneck, Hill et al. 2013). The paper
concludes by drawing on economic theory
from Milgrom et al (1990), Pendergast
(1992) and Varian (2013) to explore the
components of transactional relationships
and incentives in order to identify the ways in
which automation is likely to affect the
professions, and highlights the importance of
individuals maintaining a broad contextual
awareness and of retraining in contemporary
skills.
Education
Professional Institutions accredit specific
undergraduate and postgraduate degrees at
higher education institutions (HEI). Some also
accredit fur ther education (FE) and
continuing professional development (CPD)
courses, to suit additional, sub-chartership
levels of institutional membership, for
example Incor por ated Engineer and
Engineering Technician. Seeking the best
employment prospects for their students, and
a clear endorsement of their educational
provision, FE and HE providers develop their
curricula in response to institutional
accreditation criteria. Institutions therefore
bear a responsibility for developing criteria
that support the future marketplace. Their
accreditation requirements prescribe the
parameters for educating the professionals of
tomorrow.
An increased rate of change of the
professional landscape has made this
projection all the more difficult; and all the
more essential. Most fundamentally,
institutions must embrace the necessity of
integrated collaborative working in the
construction industry, and urgently seek to
co-operate and correlate their wildly diverse
accreditation criteria and processes in
support of this.
Institutional accreditations require the
mapping of specific, complex criteria over
curricula spanning several years. The weight
of institutional prescription leads to minimal
options for modular or generalist study,
especially at undergraduate levels. There is an
emphasis on direct subject-specific learning,
and a focus on the carefully-curated
semantics of each criterion, leading directly to
specialised course content specific to the
accrediting institution. Over an extended
period this, coupled with a narrowing focus
of specialisation amongst lecturing academics
(Tennant et al, 2015), has been a contributing
factor in the development of focussed,
abstract, specialist and professionally isolated
degree programmes.
Promisingly, recent revisions to many
institutional criteria have incorporated direct
acknowledgement of the importance of
cross-disciplinar y awareness and
collaborative skills. Auditing a sample of
current accreditation criteria from four
leading built environment institutions,
references to ‘cross- or multi-disciplinary’, ‘co-
p r o fe s s i o n a l s ’ , a n d / o r ‘ t e a m wo r k ’ /
‘collaboration’, appear across all those
sampled. The Chartered institute of Building
Services Engineers (CIBSE) raises these
issues in three criteria (ref: A2, C1, D3); the
RIBA in four of their forty-four points (ref:
GC 5.1, 6.1, 7.3, 11.2); the Royal Institute of
Chartered Surveyors (RICS) in three of their
Assessment of Professional Competence
requirements; and the Chartered Institute of
Builders (CIOB) three times, in their 2013
Framework for Undergraduate Education.
These citations have increased in frequency
with recent revisions. This raised awareness
parallels an increased interest from HEIs in
p r o m o t i n g ‘ G r a d u a t e A t t r i bu t e s ’ o f
professionalism, citizenship and associated
qualities across their disciplinary programmes
(Oliver, 2013). The advent of freely-available
knowledge, peer-reviewed and open for
access via the internet, has reinforced the
demand for univer sity degrees, and
professionals themselves, to deliver skills and
82
abilities, rather than to transfer knowledge;
which is increasingly available without cost,
though of varying quality, online.
Observations of the changing value of a
university education are reinforced by the
2016 ‘Future of Jobs’ Survey and Report from
the World Economic Forum (WEF, 2016).
This international report suggests that the
greatest skills in demand when current
Figure1: Change in Skills demand and composition. Source: Future of Jobs Report (WEF,
2016)

‘Tacit learning-in-action’ and ‘skilled behaviour’
(Eraut, 1994) and are better taught in cross-
disciplinary groups; a forum more similar to
that the students will experience in industry,
and more effectively allowing students to
practise the interpersonal and
communications skills they will require when
operating in their disciplinary role alongside
other specialist colleagues. Institutional
criteria need to recognise the imperative of
offering this type of education in accredited
programmes. This is keenly felt at the
undergraduate level, but remains applicable in
discussions of Further, Post-Graduate, and
CPD education.
s c h o o l - l e ave r s g r a d u a t e f r o m t h e i r
undergraduate degrees or apprenticeship
training will be ‘complex problem solving’,
‘social skills’, ‘process skills’ and ‘resource
management’ (figure 1). These are skills that
by necessity and definition cross disciplinary
boundaries and require a developed
awareness of, and ability to collaborate with,
individuals with different expertise to our
own.

Careers Mapping Evidence
Research by dotBuiltEnvironment (MacLaren
and Birchall, 2016) has highlighted the
increasing number of people returning to
education in mid or late career, to retrain and
update contextual knowledge to support
professional advancement.
dotBuiltEnvironment developed a simple
framework for mapping individuals’ career
paths across a graphical representation of the
silos represented by traditional built
environment institutional memberships
(figure 2). The ‘y-axis’ detailed a series of
professional identities or roles; the ‘x-axis’
indicated time. Red dots were used to
83
indicate education or training, and blue dots were including, seeking to exclude periods of
were paid employment. In each case only work experience or workplace CPD. 

events of a minimum of six months’ duration

Figure 2 : ‘Careers Mapping’ (example) Completed by dotBuiltEnvironment (then ‘BIM2050’),

with attendees at ‘Digital Construction Week’ 2015. The chart shows 12 individuals’ career
paths to date. (source: dotBE, 2017)

What began as a playful way of engaging ASHRAE Technical Conference 2016). It

professionals and eliciting commentaries on
their experience of the construction industry,
became a fascinating visual representation of
the movement of professionals between
disciplines (figure 2). dotBuiltEnvironment has
now run this exercise at multiple events
( D i g i t a l C o n s t r u c t i o n We e k 2 0 1 5 ;
Construction Industry Summit 2016; CIBSE/
should be recognised that the participants
are generally self-selecting, and the events
attended have had a majority attendance
from those engaging specifically with the
digital frontier of current industry activity: the
results cannot be held to accurately
represent a cross-section of the industry.


84
!
Figure 3 : ‘Careers Mapping’ (example) completing the mapping exercise in conversation.
(source: dotBE, 2015)
The charts do reveal trends worthy of
fur ther investigation. Firstly, and most
importantly, a clear spread of ‘educational’
experiences across the x-axis, indicating
engagement with education mid and late
career, and often coinciding with a change in
the y-axis; a move between professional silos.
Secondly, a trend towards construction
project management in later career, especially
from those who began in engineering
education. Finally, the conversations revealed
a requirement for a more nuanced
understanding of professional activity,
requiring the mapping of work in policy and
research; understanding institutional overlap
(widespread, but most noticeable between
CIOB and RICS); and developing differentials
in some areas (site and office based work, for
example). The mapping framework is
cur rently under development and
dotBuiltEnvironment hope to secure funding
to launch an online self-administered version
in 2017-18.
It is apparent that in a fast-changing
workplace, individuals will be required to re-
train repeatedly throughout the multiple
decades of their careers. It is also clear that
professional individuals choose to re-train or
to move into new roles at the boundaries of
their disciplines, or entirely outwith their
previous experience. This may be a result of
the extended working life expectancy, or a
growing under standing, amongst
professionals working in industry, of the value
of a breadth of understanding and skills, and
of tacit, extra-disciplinar y knowledge.
Standing (2011) goes so far as to suggest
that the contempor ar y professional
consciously seeks this transient ‘portfolio’
professional identity;
Alongside the salariat, in more senses than one,
is a (so far) smaller group of ‘proficians’. This
term combines the traditional ideas of
‘professional’ and ‘technician’ but covers those
with bundles of skills that they can market,
earning high incomes on contract, as
consultants or independent own-account
workers. The proficians are the equivalent of the
yeomen, knights and squires of the Middle Ages.
They live with the expectation and desire to
move around, without an impulse for long-term,
full-time employment in a single enterprise. The
‘standard employment relationship’ is not for
them.
(p8)
The contemporary ‘profician’ posited here
calls into question two fundamental tenets of
the c19th professional institution; the division
between ‘skilled workers’ and ‘professionals’;
and the specialisation of professionals into
recognised and delineated roles. To
paraphrase Standing; the ‘standard
institutional membership’ is not for them.

85
Tacit knowledge, and Skills
The division of ‘education’ and ‘skills’ has
previously been equated to higher education
and further education respectively; or in
traditional role descriptors, differentiating the
more highly-educated ‘white collar’ workers,
and their lesser- educated, skills-based
colleagues, ‘blue-collar’ workers (Gallie, 1996).
The industr ial revolution had an
extraordinary impact on the roles of and
demand for blue-collar workers. The current
context of digital revolution, termed by the
World Economic Forum the ‘fourth industrial
revolution’ (2016), is instead most clearly
targeting the functions of ‘white-collar’
workers including those in more complex
administration. These roles may be attractive
to automate in the advancement of machine
learning and the speed, accuracy and
reliability of digital transactions. This is a new
realisation: machines can automate more
than we had until recently believed. The
example of driverless cars explored by
Susskind (2017) is a clear example, leading to
the suggestion that “tasks that require ‘tacit’
knowledge are at greater risk” (p12). This
latter group of roles includes several
functions hitherto undertaken by chartered
professionals from built environment
institutions. In the short and medium term,
members of professional institutions will find
their employment functions parsed and
sometimes replaced by AI. Built environment
institutions will find themselves representing
individual member s whose jobs are
threatened by machination and automation;
perhaps a novel position for professional
institutions, but a scenario very familiar to the
Trade Unions representing those whose jobs
were mechanised and automated decades
ago.
 Transaction costs are bounded by five
Communication Networks
In addition to this potentially fundamental
change in their role as a membership
organisation,i’ ‘Traditional institutions rely on
hegemony of controlling communications
between groups, and of the inherent power
in connecting communities of people- now
democr atised / made open by the
internet’ (Moser, 2014). New technology,
particularly social media, have allowed peer
and client networks to come into being
outside of institutional control, with a speed
and agility that ensures their relevance to
modern practice. Cumbersome institutions
are unable to react so swiftly, and their
imposed bureaucracies and boundaries of
operation can render their networks less
valuable than those emerging externally.
Communications networks threaten to
transform the landscape at both the
institutional network level, and the ‘node’
level- in the role of individual professionals. In
order to under stand the threat to
professional roles from advances in digital
technologies, we can explore the dynamics of
information networks and flow. The following
analysis assumes that business models and
employment structures are influenced by the
nature of their transaction costs in a market:
a fair assumption amongst economic
theorists. Transaction costs characteristics are
introduced to present why information
technology will fundamentally change how
employment contracts are structured and
incentives are designed.
There are two main types of transaction
cost:
1. Coordination costs
2. Motivation costs
a. informational incompleteness and
asymmetries.
b. imperfect commitment.
attributes (Williamson 1985) listed in
Milgrom & Roberts (1992). It is worth noting
that these costs are difficult to identify and
separate from production costs:
1. The specificity of the investments
required to conduct the transaction.
86
2. The frequency with which similar
transactions occur and the duration or
period over which they are repeated.
3. The complexity of the transaction and
the uncertainty about what performance
will be required.
4. The difficulty of measuring performance
in the transaction.
5. The connectedness of the transaction to
other transactions involving other people.
These mechanisms have been studied in
terms of procurement systems. Google’s
Chief Economist Hal Varian (2013) found
that Kickstarter projects (crowdfunding with
the promise of ‘perks’, delivered via an open-
access website) are the optimal routes of
procurement. This demonstrates an
interesting outcome for the design of
incentives for delivering goods and services
(including employment contracts) because
applying an individual’s skill and capacity to
work in this way supports a possible market
place for portfolio professionals. Pendergast
(1999) tested a range of incentive scenarios
and observed that incentives are more
effective in forms of pay for performance and
prize money. Team-based pay was not as
effective. Pendergast also found that agents
still shirk and pursue personal gain to the
inefficiency of the firm, despite using optimal
incentive schemes. This generates an
interesting challenge to current research in
collaborative procurement of infrastructure.
For the purposes of this paper we posit that
the structure of digital crowdfunding
platforms can be seen as a proxy for an
employment mar ket for por tfolio
professionals. If team-based incentives are
not as efficient as incentivising the individual,
and the optimal procurement method for
products and services is via crowdsourcing,
what does this mean for employment and
delivering projects? Are we incentivising
moral hazard in current collaborative
working structures? As technology enables a
major shift in transaction cost profiles, we will
see disruption in current business models?
Perhaps the crowdsource model provides
insight into what a future employment model
looks like for coordinating resources for
delivering projects?
Commercial Environment
As introduced above, the nature of
employment is driven by our commercial
environment. This environment is based on
the configuration of the transaction costs;
however, transaction costs can be difficult to
measure and separate from production costs.
The following (Thompson, 2013) is an
illustration of the outcome of different
configurations of the characteristics of
transactions presented previously.
The aim is to identify roles via the average
remuneration of employees in construction
firms. The data used calculates average
remuneration by dividing the aggregate
remuneration of a firm by the number of
employees. This does not provide information
about the distribution of wages within a firm,
and accounting data can be inconsistent with
the reality of the firms’ operation as figures
are supplied annually.
The current cross-section of employment
patterns is captured in Figure 4. It shows the
average remuneration per employee for
different members of the supply chain. This
analysis assumes that level 2 employees’ work
is infrequent, more complex and requires a
high level of skill (such as a mechanical
engineer). The level 4 employee works more
frequently on less complex tasks and require
less skill (such as a plant operative). 

87

Figure 4: (Thompson, 2013) Level 2 = Tier 1 Suppliers (contractors and consultants), Level 3
= Tier 2 (Contractors and specialist consultants), Level 4 = Plant, material and product
suppliers. SOURCE Financial Analysis Made Easy database. Sample size 327 (not including
firms turning over less than £100,000).
Allen (2006) suggests that lower wages give
little incentive to automate, whilst higher
wages incentivise capital investment in
automation.
This is the crux of a possible crisis for
professionals and their respective institutions,
as the rate of change and base level of pay is
much higher than the other levels. Innovation
is generally a commercial driven factor as a
function of annual labour rates vs rate of
return on capital investment on new
equipment/software. As soon as technology
reaches a price point that is below the
annual rate of employment, the role is
automated (Allen 2006). This is only one side
of the construction wages coin, the other
side is the role of building cycles (Barras,
2009) and the cobweb effect of labour costs
(Ive & Grunberg, 2000). However, this paper
suggests that transaction costs impact both
sides of this dynamic.
This means the professions are possibly next
in line for role automation in the fourth
industrial revolution. Bonekamp & Sure
(2015) introduce the role of unemployment
in Industry 4.0 and Frey & Osborne (2013)
and Bowles (2015) introduce the automation
of some professional roles, but more
research is required to explore the impact of
Industry 4.0 on the professions as most
research in this area focuses on the
automation of low skilled labour.
Conclusion and Recommendations
This paper is written in support of the
emer ging ‘por tfolio professional’ in
construction. We have demonstrated the
emergence of this cross-disciplinary skilled
worker, navigating a career path traversing
traditional specialist silos, and developing
networks, transactions and operations
outwith the provision of the institutions
traditionally designed to provide her with
support.
She is likely to re-train for a sustained period
at several points throughout her career. She
is extremely unlikely to remain with a single
employer for the duration of her career, and
may well explore different and emerging
forms of employment derived from new
transactional behaviours, developed in
response to market forces and digital abilities.
She may find her ear ly-career roles
increasingly taken over by AI as machine
88
learning develops, and as she moves through
her career, she will seek support and
direction in this rapidly-developing scenario
from trusted networks and sources of
knowledge.
Professional Membership Institutions and
Educational Institutions seek to be those
trusted sources of support, advice and
development. We have argued that many of
the founding tenets and assumed behaviours
of these organisations are rooted in a
context no longer applicable to the rapidly-
changing environment of industry operation.
If built environment institutions and higher
education providers wish to continue to be
relevant to this new breed of portfolio
professionals, they must review their aims
and operations in the light of these new
external pressures operating on their
members and putative students.
We recommend that Institutions, as a matter
of urgency, work together to produce
correlated criteria, and to lead the industry in
developing future skills in students and
trainees. We recommend that institutions
(educational and professional) prepare for an
increasingly age-diverse profile of students
and entrants to membership, as individuals
re-train throughout their careers: and actively
prepare for this scenario by providing new
(inter-disciplinary) routes to membership and
more flexible education provision.


Table 1: Recommendations for Construction Institutions

Recommendation Detail Reasoning

• Agree common approaches to To support the acknowledged

Collaborate inter- accreditation
• Adapt criteria to incentivise practice-
institutionally
based, collaborative learning
• Consider new routes to membership
Revise scope of that recognise mid- / late- career-
change
membership • Consider possibilities for membership
parity/conversion between institutions
• Review required support for
Review function / members in a knowledge/sharing
economy
operation • Review support for members who
may imminently face roles being taken
over by AI
• Develop more agile means of
Invest in communicating with membership and
delivering intra-institution CPD and
Communications networking
• Consider provision of resources
freely-available online
requirement for multidisciplinary
skills, in order to meet core
sustainability targets and future
needs.
To support an increasingly transient
inter-disciplinary professional
membership, with a wider age span
and ex-disciplinary ambitions
To advise and support members in
a rapidly developing economic
context, preparing for more diverse
employment experiences
To modernise the operation on
institutions, demonstrating value in
a context where knowledge is
readily available freely online

• Engage with emerging means of To lead the advent of professional

Pilot emerging transacting operations (blockchain, operation in the context of a digital
professional machine learning) economy
structures

89
dotBuiltEnvironment is formed of and
represents early and mid career professionals
across the built environment. We are
aspirational for our industry, whilst admitting
the fundamental failures of our current
operation. Construction is an industry we are
proud to be part of, but we cannot currently
be proud of our output. McKinsey (Changali,
2015) show 98% of projects are >30% over
budget and on average 20 months late. They
also demonstr ate that constr uction
productivity is lacking by 33% when
compared with global industrial average
($25p/h and $37p/h respectively) this
inefficiency represents 2% of global GDP
($1.6 trillion) (ibid). Failures of
communication are at the core of much of
this inefficiency, and we look in vain to our
institutions to lead the way in providing
collaborative platforms for improvement, and
to use their position to develop educational
and professional structures that will benefit
industry.
Returning to the key tenet of the Morell
(2016) report, the effective production of
sustainable buildings and environments is
predicated on an informed, collaborative
wo r k f o r c e o f s k i l l e d p r o fe s s i o n a l s ,
continuously improving their practice. This is
the future we must support. Institutions must
relinquish their roots in protectionist
specialism and profile development, and must
instead develop as we have shown, to
support a sustainable, efficient construction
industry which is able to generate wealth and
wellbeing.
References
Allen, R.C. (2006). The British Industrial
Revolution in global perspective: How
commerce created the Industrial Revolution and
modern economic growth. Unpublished,
Nuffield College, Oxford.
Allen, R.C. (2009). The British industrial
revolution in global perspective New
approaches to economic and social history Y.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Bonekamp, L. and Sure, M. (2015).
‘Consequences of Industry 4.0 on human
labour and work organisation’. Journal of
Business and Media Psychology, v.6, pp.33-40.
Bowles, J. (2014). The computerisation of
European jobs | Bruegel, n.d. Retrieved from:
http://www.bruegel.org/nc/blog/detail/article/
1394-the-computerisation-of-europeanjobs/
Broadbent, J., Dietrich, M., Roberts, J. (1997).
The End of the Professions?: The Restructuring of
Professional Work. Routledge, London ; New
York.
Changali, S., Mohammad, A., van Nieuwland.
(2015). The construction productivity imperative.
McKinsey&Company. Retrieved from: http://
www.mckinsey.com/industries/capital-
projects-and-infrastructure/our-insights/the-
construction-productivity-imperative
CIBSE. (2015). Competence Criteria for
Member (MCIBSE) Factsheet M2 Retrieved
from: http://www.cibse.org/getmedia/
7c84096b-6a31-439a-9551-2d0af0200023/
Factsheet-M21.pdf.aspx
CIOB (2013) The Education Framework for
Undergraduate Programmes. Retrieved from:
http://www.ciob.org/Your-Career/education-
framework
Duffy, F., Rabeneck, A. (2013). ‘Professionalism
and architects in the 21st century. ‘ Building
Research & Information 41, pp.115–122. doi:
10.1080/09613218.2013.724541
Engineering Council. (2014). The Accreditation
of Higher Education Programmes; UK Standard
for Professional Engineering Competence.
Retrieved from: http://www.engc.org.uk/
ahep.aspx
90
Eraut, M. (1994). Developing Professional
Knowledge And Competence. Routledge,
London ; Washington, D.C.
Frey, C.B., Osborne, M. (2013). The Future of
Employment. Presented at the The Oxford
Martin School, Oxford, UK.
Gallie, D. (1996). ‘New Technology and the
Class Structure: The Blue-Collar/White-Collar
Divide Revisited.’ The British Journal of
Sociology 47, pp. 447–473. doi:
10.2307/591363
Hill, S., Lorenz, D., Dent, P., Lützkendorf, T.
(2013). ‘Professionalism and ethics in a
changing economy.’ Building Research &
Information 41, pp. 8–27. doi:
10.1080/09613218.2013.736201
Graham. I. (2000). The economics of the
modern construction sector. Macmillan,
Basingstoke.
MacLaren, A., (2016). Practising Practice: the
professional education of Architects. Produced
as part of a doctoral thesis at the Institute of
Education, UCL (University College London).
MacLaren, A., Birchall, S. (2016). Learning
Together: Preparing collaborative professionals
for future practice in the built environment
industry. CIBSE Technical Symposium,
Edinburgh, UK.
Meyrick, L., Powell, M., Kingham, L. (2017).’
Institution helps launch 21st Century PEI
initiative. ‘ The Structural Engineer v.95, i3; pp.
58.
Milgrom, P.R., Roberts, J. (1992). Economics,
organization and management. Prentice-Hall,
Upper Saddle River, N.J.
Milgrom, P.R., North, D.C., Weingast, B.R.,
(1990). ‘The role of Institutions in the revival
of trade: the law merchant, private judges,
and the champagne fairs.’ Economics & Politics
2, pp. 1–23. doi:10.1111/j.
1468-0343.1990.tb00020.x
Morrell, P., (2015). Collaboration for Change:
The Edge Commission Report on the Future of
Professionalism | Edge Debate. The Edge
Commission, London.
Moser, C. (2014). Architecture 3.0: The
Disruptive Design Practice Handbook, 1 edition.
ed. Routledge, London ; New York.
Oliver, B. (2013). ‘Graduate attributes as a
focus for institution-wide curriculum renewal:
innovations and challenges.’ Higher Education
Research & Development 32, pp. 450–463. doi:
10.1080/07294360.2012.682052
Prendergast, C. (1999).’ The provision of
incentives in firms.’ Journal of economic
literature, 37(1), pp.7-63.
RIBA/ARB (2011) Criteria for Validation 2011.
London: RIBA Publications
RICS. (2014) APC Requirements and
Competencies RICS Pathway, Assessment of
Professional Competence. London: RICS.
Standing, G. (2011). The Precariat: The New
Dangerous Class. Bloomsbury Academic,
London, UK ; New York, NY.
Susskind, D. (2017). A model of technological
unemployment. Retrieved from: http://
www.danielsusskind.com/research
Susskind, R., Susskind, D. (2015). The Future of
the Professions: How Technology Will Transform
the Work of Human Experts. OUP Oxford,
New York, NY.
Tennant, S., Murray, M., Forster, A., Pilcher, N.
(2015). Hunt the shadow not the substance:
the rise of the career academic in
construction education. Teaching in Higher
Education, 20, pp. 723–737. doi:
10.1080/13562517.2015.1070342
91
Thompson, N. (2013). A Market for Lemons
in Construction. Produced as part of a Masters
thesis at UCL (University College London).

Varian, H.R., (2014). Intermediate

microeconomics: a modern approach. Ninth
edition, International student edition. ed.
WWNorton & Company, New York.

World Economic Forum. (2016). The Future

of Jobs (Global Challenge Insight Report).
World Economic Forum.

92
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Re-imagining the Future of Cities Using Urban Foresight Techniques:

Towards a Smart and Sustainable Reading 2050
Tim Dixon1, Lorraine Farrelly2, Nigel Horton-Baker3, Richard Webb4

1 School of the Built Environment, University of Reading, UK

t.j.dixon@reading.ac.uk

2 School of Architecture, University of Reading, UK

l.farrelly@reading.ac.uk

3 Reading UK CIC
nigel@livingreading.co.uk

4 Barton Willmore, Reading, UK

richard.webb@bartonwillmore.co.uk

Abstract
Cities have become a global focus for tackling major climate change and resource depletion issues,
and understanding how we can transition to a more sustainable future. However, strategic thinking
is needed to overcome potential disconnections between short-term planning horizons and long-
term environmental change. Understanding the past, present and future of cities helps us create a
‘possibility space’ for re-imagining the built/natural environments that can be created/re-imagined in
cities. Interdisciplinary-based urban foresight techniques focus on the need to create strategies and
scenarios to deal with future changes. They offer the ability to reach consensus around shared ‘city
visions’; help create innovative thinking and decision-making; promote engagement with city
stakeholders; and link technology/innovation with wider socio-economic issues, which affect the
urban innovation ‘ecosystem’. This paper provides an overview of the evolution of urban foresight
thinking, and examines the development of a specific, co-produced city vision: the ‘Smart and
Sustainable Reading 2050’ project (linked to the UK GOS Future of Cities Foresight Programme)
and the lessons it holds for built environment practice.

Keywords: urban foresight, city vision, backcasting, futures studies


93
Introduction
Today a majority of the world’s population is
urbanised, and this is set to grow substantially
over the next 30-40 years (UN, 2014). In the
UK, 83 % of our population already lives in
cities (World Bank, 2015), and we can see
clear evidence of how a city’s relationship with
its environment and its people create both
challenges and opportunities. For example,
cities are closely associated with problems of
resource depletion, climate change and
growing socio-economic disparity, but also
provide opportunities for solving the same
problems because of economies of scale, and
their role as centres of innovation and social
learning.
Many cities have struggled to cope, however,
with the disconnection that exists between
long-term environmental change and shorter-
term planning horizons, and this has often
meant that cities have taken a relatively short-
term view of the future – for example because
of political resistance, iner tia, lock-in or
fragmented decision-making. But things are
changing. An increasing number of cities in the
UK and internationally have developed visions
of how they see their future to 2020, 2050 and
beyond (Government Office of Science,
2016a). Apart from increasing urbanisation and
the imperative to tackle climate change, part of
the drive for this in the UK comes not only
from the increasing focus on devolving powers
from central government to cities (Cities and
Local Government Devolution Bill (enacted in
2016)), but also from a real desire for cities to
think ahead and develop strategies which will
help them in a transition to a more sustainable
future. These visions (or shared expectations
about a plausible and desirable future) differ in
their shape and form, but they are a powerful
way of promoting discussion and debate,
providing a sense of purpose and mobilising
resources so that a city can plan for, and move
to, a sustainable future (Eames et al, 2013).
Cities are therefore under pressure to take a
long-term perspective. Thinking about the
future, for example, opens up a possibility
space for discussion and debate, free from the
constraints of short-term thinking (Eames et al,
2013). This premise was at the heart of the
recent ‘urban foresight’ Government Office for
Science Future of Cities project, which
developed an evidence base on the future of
UK cities to inform decision-makers, and used
evidence and futures analysis, taking a view
towards 2065, and considering how people will
live, work and interact in our cities 50 years
from now (Government Office of Science,
2016a; 2016b; Ravetz and Miles, 2016). Such an
‘urban foresight’ approach, which is based on a
conceptual framework involving a range of
forward-looking approaches of informed
decision-making, which include considerations
and views of the long term (Kubeczko et al,
2011), can therefore help inform current and
future decision-making in the urban realm
(Eames et al, 2017).
There has also been a move towards co-
creation of visions in the UK. In this sense, ‘co-
creation’ in some cities sees universities being
positioned as key stakeholders and facilitators
in helping to develop a valid city vision. This
standpoint recognises the role of the university
in its wider urban and regional context
(Goddard and Valance, 2013; Hambleton,
2015) and also underpins some of the recent
emergent policy and practice in the UK (for
example, Leading Places Initiative and SIAs).
94
Taking a longer-term perspective has also
found translation through the development of
‘urban transition laboratories’ (set within the
context of an ‘experimental city’ (Evans et al,
2016), and also opens up possibilities for
exhibition spaces or ‘urban rooms’ promoted
by the Farrell Review (Farrell, 2014). In a
foresight-based approach to developing a city
vision, there is therefore a strong sense of
partnership and participation, which also has
ramifications for built environment disciplines
involved in the process of developing city
visions.
This paper outlines the development of a
smart and sustainable 2050 vision (connected
to the GOS Future of Cities study) which is
being developed for Reading, a major urban
area in Berkshire, UK. We explore what is
meant by a ‘city vision’ and we examine some
of the urban foresight tools that can be used
to develop city visions before focusing on the
Reading 2050 vision in more detail. Finally, we
draw lessons and reflections from the Reading
2050 work, and what this means for policy and
practice in the built environment.
Discussion
What is a city vision?
The best city visions are something more than
simply a branding or re-branding exercise.
Although a successful city vision only becomes
a success when the vision is realised, best
practice visions not only clearly link together
strategies, plans and actions, but also integrate
the vision clearly with climate change, energy,
infrastructure, economy and people. Moreover,
successful visions need to be politically viable,
analytically sound, and participatory so that
stakeholders form part of the inclusive process
of formulating the vision. In the UK, for
example, Bristol’s 2020 vision, and its smart city
vision, is based on ‘people, place and
prosperity’, a desire to be a ‘Global Green
Capital’, and an aspiration to be a centre for
smart city thinking. In Canada, Vancouver aims
to be the world’s greenest city by 2020, with
tough targets set for greenhouse gas emissions
and a desire to create a city which is resilient
to climate change. In Denmark Copenhagen’s
vision is based on a target to be carbon-
neutral by 2025, underpinned by a highly
successful walking/cycling policy agenda and a
strong focus on renewables.
More recently, the UK Government Office of
Science Foresight programme on Future Cities
has placed a strong emphasis on the co-
creation of city visions (Government Office of
Science, 2016a), and UK cities have engaged in
this process in a variety of ways through
scenario development, exhibition spaces, and
design challenges. To connect with this work,
the University of Reading partnered with
Barton Willmore and Reading UK CIC (the
economic development company for Reading)
to develop a Reading 2050 vision.
Why do we need a vision for Reading 2050?
Although Reading is not yet officially a ‘city’, it
forms part of one of the most economically
vibrant and connected urban areas in the UK:
Reading, as par t of a wider Reading/
Wokingham urban area (including Arborfield,
Wo o d l e y, T h e a l e ( We s t B e r k s h i r e ) ,
Crowthorne, Earley), has a population of
318,000 (2011 figure), and this is set to grow
to 362,000 by 2037 (Dixon and Cohen, 2015).
This presents big challenges in maintaining its
competitive edge and dealing with the
95
important environmental and socio-economic price is reflected not only in greenhouse gas
issues arising from its continued economic emissions, but also in outdated and congested
growth. Developing a Reading 2050 vision infrastructure, pockets areas of deprivation, and
which is both ‘smart’ (making the best use of a sense that Reading could, and should, be a
technology) and ‘sustainable’ (creating a truly more liveable place.
sustainable city) is an important step in
suppor ting longer-ter m planning and Developing the Reading 2050 vision
development in Reading.
The starting point for our work was not to
Understanding Reading’s past and its present develop a masterplan for Reading, but rather a
are vital to understanding Reading as a place. vision. More formally, a vision is a shared
Reading’s geogr aphic location at the expectation about a plausible and desirable
confluence of the Thames and Kennet rivers, future. In futures (or ‘foresight’) thinking,
and its location 40 miles west of London ‘backcasting’ is often used to generate a
explain the ancient origins of its success as a desirable future, and then look backwards from
trading centre and centre of commerce and that future to the present in order to
manufacturing. The Reading of today, however, strategise and to plan how it could be
is also very different from the Reading of 40 achieved. In other words, a vision or visions of
years ago. Despite its rich history stretching a desirable future are first defined and then
back to the founding of Reading Abbey in pathways (or roadmaps) to that future are
1121, the ‘beer, biscuits and bulbs’ (and ‘bricks’), developed (Figure 1).
for which Reading was rightly famous, have
long since gone. Moreover, its heritage and
culture remain relatively ‘invisible’ to residents
and businesses, despite the fact that Reading is
in the top 16% of the country for its overall
heritage (according to the RSA’s National
Heritage Index), and that important Heritage
Lottery Funding for Reading Abbey restoration
has also recently been won (2016-18).
Figure 1: Backcasting (Source: Natural Step,
Creative commons)
Reading’s strong economic success is based on
its physical and vir tual networks in an
Drawing on previous research which had
increasingly globalised world (Crampton et al,
scoped out retrofit visions for Cardiff and
2010: Dixon and Montgomery, 2015). It is also
Manchester (Dixon et al, 2014) the Reading
a classic example of an ‘under-bounded’ urban
2050 project1 combined elements of a smart
area, where its administrative boundary is
city with those of a sustainable city. This was
smaller than its wider urban footprint.
because Reading already has a long-term
However, vibrant economic activity and a
aspiration to be ‘low carbon’ by 2050, but also
growing population come at a price, and that

1 www.reading2050.co.uk

96
has a strong technology and green technology
focus in its existing economy. Moreover, a 2050
time-horizon provides space to think beyond
today’s immediate problems, and facilitates a
greater sense of strategic thinking by identifying
desirable as well as undesirable outcomes.
A ‘smart and sustainable’ city can be defined as
one:
• Drawing the City event with School of
Architecture students (October 2016)
The three workshops focused on three main
elements of the vision:
• Identity (people and lifestyle)
• Life (place and environment)
• Work (economy and employment)

…that leverages the ICT infrastructure to: Table 1:Visioning events for Reading 2050
• Improve the quality of life of its citizens.
Event Date Purpose Attendees
• Ensure tangible economic growth for its
citizens. Initial Vision December Kick-off 56
Workshop 2014 meeting
• Improve the well-being of its citizens. and scoping
• Establish an environmentally responsible and the vision
sustainable approach to development. Follow Up December Developing 41
• Streamline and improve physical Workshop 2015 the vision
infrastructure. Urban January Picturing 32
• Reinforce resilience to natural and man-made Design 2016 the vision
Workshop
disasters.
• Underpin effective and well-balanced ‘Step Into March Engaging 350
Reading’ 2016 with wider surveyed
regulatory, compliance and governance Public public in (spoke to
mechanisms. Engagemen Reading personally)
t 3000
leaflets
(ITU, 2014) distributed
21,000
engaged on
This definition provided the starting point for social
developing a vision for Reading 2050, with the media
Reading/Wokingham urban area as the
primary focus. To develop the vision, we ran
Each of the workshops used foresight-based
three workshops (Table 1) and a major public
techniques to imagine the future of Reading
engagement event (Figure 2). These were
and they were used to develop three main
supplemented by:
strands of thinking:
• Engagement event with young people
What should a smart and sustainable Reading
(Greys and Greens event) – (November
look like in 2050? (Developing the vision):
2014)
What should Reading look like in 2050, how
• Linking with Reading Museum’s Where’s
will it feel, and what will it be like living there?
Reading heading? Happy Museums Project2

2 http://www.readingmuseum.org.uk/get-involved/projects-consultation/where-s-reading-heading/

97
How do we join smart technologies with
sustainable thinking in Reading to set it apart,
building on the strengths Reading already has?
How do we achieve a smart and sustainable
Reading by 2050? (Developing the roadmaps
or pathways to the future): What do we need
to do, and by when, to achieve the smart and
sustainable vision for Reading? We used
structured roadmaps and matrices to identify
challenges and opportunities.
‘Urban design’ scenarios: The workshops
scoped out the physical changes which could
support the smart and sustainable vision, in the
short, medium and long term. Group work
examined how specific key developments
might emerge and what infrastructure changes
were needed. We used ‘postcards from the
future’ and other visual aids to summarise the
thinking of groups, and these were at the heart
of developing the urban design scenarios (see
Figure 2 below).
Figure 2: Visioning activities for Reading 2050
The process of developing the vision is
therefore summarised in Figure 3.
Figure 3: The Reading 2050 vision process
All the elements of the vision were tested
against six core principles for developing
Reading as a smart and sustainable place to
live, work and play by 2050, ensuring that any
intervention:
• Improves the quality of life and well-being.
• Ensures tangible economic growth.
• Establishes an environmentally responsible
and sustainable approach to development.
• Streamlines and improves existing physical
infrastructure.
• Reinforces resilience to natural and man-
made disasters.
• Promotes and develops good governance
mechanisms.
Reading 2050 Vision
The overall vision is that:
By 2050, Reading we believe a strong vision will
help us to establish our selves as an
internationally recognised and economically
successful city region. A city where low carbon
living is the norm, and the built environment,
technology and innovation have combined to
create a dynamic, smart and sustainable city with
98
a high quality of life and equal opportunities for
all.
Within this vision, three urban design scenarios
were developed, which, in summary, comprised
the following (see Figure 4).
Figure 4: Reading 2050 vision: example images
for the urban design scenarios
‘Green Tech City’
A city that builds upon the established
technology focus of our city. It celebrates and
encourages diver sity through business
incubation units, ‘Ideas Factories’ and a city
centre University campus through which to
exhibit and test cutting edge ideas and
approaches, no matter what discipline they are
emerging from. Retrofitting of existing buildings
and the development of new iconic
architecture will provide some of the greenest
accommodation possible for incoming
businesses, while a Reading ‘Oyster’ card, a
comprehensive cycle network and Urban
Gondolas or a Rapid Transit System connect
the city from east to west, and north to south,
relieving the town centre of congestion.
‘City of Rivers and Parks’
A city that recognises how water has shaped
much of Reading would celebrate its
waterways, opening them up to offer
recreational spaces such as animated parks, a
lido, food production opportunities and city
centre waterside living. Greening the IDR,
through a modal shift in transportation, will
create an enhancing green ring around the city,
as opposed to the current constricting
concrete one, while regular open space and
green roofs provide lungs for the city as we
seek to increase density and improve
sustainability.
‘City of Festivals and Culture’
A city that builds on the success of the iconic
Reading Festival to deliver arts and culture to
people of all ages and ethnicities. Reading
would facilitate community interaction and
opportunity. The music festival will spill out
from the current site, infiltrating the city itself
all year round, through the provision of vibrant
public gathering spaces and street life, diverse
venues and embraced cultural diversity. The
city would integrate, enhance and celebrate
our heritage, bringing it to life through modern
interpretations and uses of space as well as
preservation. Comedy, independent retailers
and pop up shops, street cafes and markets, art
exhibitions, start-up businesses, sporting events,
religious and international festivals, could all be
celebrated and woven throughout the urban
fabric to bring the city to life, intensifying
around key nodal points or community hubs
throughout our suburbs as well as the city
centre.
99
Conclusions: Lessons and reflections
Creating a coherent vision for a city is a
challenging process. It requires resources, a
coherent plan and clear leadership. Often the
visions for cities that have been developed lack
credibility because they fail to connect and link
with existing plans and strategies, and may be
driven from a narrow perspective, or may
simply produce intangible , vague or
unmeasurable goals. Sometimes multiple
visions for cities have also been developed by
different groups, leading to confusion,
fragmentation and over-complexity; and
resistance to change from vested-interest
groups can pose real challenges for co-created
visions. Thinking at city scale therefore requires
thinking across boundaries and across interest
groups, and using imaginative and innovative
ways of engaging with communities (Dixon
and Cohen, 2015). The Reading 2050 project is
ver y much a continuing journey. The
experiences of the Reading 2050 project also
carry important lessons for interdisciplinary
research, and the way in which city visions are
co-created through an urban foresight
approach.
These include:
• Framings of the problem for
transformation: how is the problem framed
from the outset? What is the overall
ambition or goal of the vision?
• Urban foresight activities—how can these
be best developed to include a truly
par ticipatory element, and a balance
between structured activities and ‘blue sky’
thinking?
• Owner ship and leader ship—who is
responsible for the leadership of the vision?
Who ‘owns’ the city vision?
• Vision and implementation – how does the
city vision link with existing local plans and
the aspirations of the city authorities, the
public and other stakeholders? To what
extent do the city authorities support the
vision and its implementation?
• Contrasting partnership ambitions - related
to leadership, can the differing ambitions of
those creating and leading the vision be
reconciled and balanced?
• Structural change and reform (vis a vis
environment and design) - what are the
wider implications of the vision, for
example, in relation to governance
structures and city status?
• Interdisciplinary challenges – how can
different disciplines and different
professionals work with each other, other
stakeholders and the public to help
develop the vision? Can built environment
professionals really think ‘longer term’
beyond the constraints of the present?
Ultimately, urban foresight techniques are not
an alternative to longer term planning, and the
more strategic masterplan approach adopted
in many cities in continental Europe.
Nonetheless, if we are to develop the longer
term, unconstrained thinking that is required to
move to a more sustainable future, futures-
based studies offer us a potentially powerful
set of tools to help achieve this, and mobilise
resources in the best possible way.
References
Crampton, G., Francis-Brophy, E., Meen, G.,
Nygaard, C., Pain, K., and Wadeson, N. (2010).
100
The Reading Diamond: Local Economic Government Office of Science. (2016b). Future
Assessment – Building on Strengths, Meeting of Cities: Foresight for Cities. GOS/Foresight,
Challenges. University of Reading. Retrieved London. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/
from: www.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/local- government/publications/future-of-cities-
economic-assessment-report.pdf) foresight-for-cities
Dixon, T. and Cohen, K. (2015). ‘Towards a Hambledon, R. (2015). Leading the Inclusive City:
smart and sustainable Reading 2050 vision’. Place-Based Innovation for a Bounded Planet.
Town and Country Planning, January. pp. 20-27. Policy Press.
ISSN 0040-9960
Kubeczko, K., Ravetz, J., van der Giessen, A and
Dixon, T. and Montgomery, J., (2015). Towards a Weber, M. (2011). Screening Urban Foresights
smart & sustainable Reading UK 2050: full and Studies Supporting Forward Activities: What
report. Project Report. Barton Willmore pp.54. can we learn for a JPI-Urban Europe 2050+
ISBN 9780993318801 Foresight. European Foresight Platform, Brussels.
Dixon, T., Eames, M., Lannon, S. and Hunt, M. Ravetz, J., and Miles, I.D. (2016). ‘Foresight in
(2014). (eds.) Urban Retrofitting for Sustainability: cities: on the possibility of a “strategic urban
Mapping the Transition to 2050. Routledge. intelligence’, Foresight, Vol. 18 Iss: 5, pp.469 –
490
Eames, M., Dixon, T, Lannon, S., and Hunt, M.
(eds) (2017). Retrofitting Cities for Tomorrow’s UN. (2014). World Urbanization Prospects.
World. Wiley-Blackwell United Nations.
Eames, M., Dixon, T., May, T. and Hunt, M. (2013). Wor ld Bank. (2015). Urban Population.
‘City futures: exploring urban retrofit and Retrieved from:http://data.worldbank.org/
sustainable transitions’. Building Research and indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS
Information, 41 (5). pp. 504-516.
Evans, J., Karvonen, A., and Raven, R. (eds)
(2016). The Experimental City. Routledge.
Farrell, T. (2014). Our Future in Place: The Farrell
Review of Architecture and the Built Environment.
Retrieved from: http://www.farrellreview.co.uk/
Goddard, J., and Vallance, P. (2013). The
University and the City. Routledge.
Government Office of Science (2016a). Future
of Cities: Foresight for Cities. GOS/Foresight,
London. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/
government/publications/future-of-cities-
foresight-for-cities)

101
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

A collaborative approach to POE

Kristina Roszynski,1 Trevor Keeling2
1Cullinan Studios, London, UK
kristina.roszynski@cullinanstudio.com

2BuroHappold Engineering, London, UK

trevor.Keeling@BuroHappold.com

Abstract
This joint paper prepared by Cullinan Studio and BuroHappold considers how architects and
engineers use Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE). This is done by reflecting on their POE of the
Foundry building, which is the home of Cullinan Studios. The paper focusses on the
methodology used and how the knowledge was shared with various audiences. The key lessons
learnt are that doing POE on your own building is a useful way of embedding POE into design
practice; there is a balance to be had between measuring overall performance and evaluating
the success of particular design features; finally, we surmise that openness is important both to
the success of this collaboration and the wider collaboration that is needed for POE findings to
be shared across the building industry.

Keywords: post occupancy evaluation, knowledge sharing, design practice, POE methodology

102
Introduction
This joint paper prepared by Cullinan Studio
and BuroHappold presents a case study of a
Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) of the
Foundry building and puts it in the context of
o n g o i n g P O E p r a c t i c e i n t h e t wo
organisations. Cullinan Studio had radically
tr ansfor med The Foundr y, tur ning a
dilapidated 19th century warehouse into the
practice’s new low energy offices. As client
and architect, Cullinan Studio were in a
unique position to better understand their
buildings performance. Therefore, led by
project partner Kristina Roszynski, they
decided to use this study as a research
oppor tunity to collaborate with Trevor
Keeling of BuroHappold and University of
Reading (UoR) to carr y out a POE.
Subsequently, in 2015, Trevor Keeling carried
out a POE of The Foundry as part of his
Engineering Doctorate, he was sponsored by
BuroHappold and based at the UoR.
Having set the background to the project
and described the basic POE process the
authors focus on three particular aspects of
the POE. Firstly, this paper considers the
intensiveness of observation, measurement
and reflection. POE can extend from visiting
buildings for a day, conducting studies for a
week, or, working and living in architectural
creations. Secondly, it considers the level of
standardisation or specificity of POE, which
can extend from approaches that use
repeatable and comparable measurement
methods to bespoke methods that uncover
new and/or specific problems. Lastly, it
explores issues of knowledge sharing. This
POE has led to a wide range of outputs
including informal advice, industry events and
academic papers. It has also resulted in
modifications to the building and its building
management system.In doing so the multiple
benefits of disciplinary collaboration are
illustrated.
Cullinan’s approach to knowledge sharing
Cullinan Studio is committed to sharing their
experience and ‘lessons learnt’ on the
building and operation of their own
workplace. Central to their design ethos is
the belief that they design places for people.
Therefore, they were happy to place
emphasis on the qualitative experience of
the building as a workplace, rather than the
measurement of quantities of energy use.
Cullinan’s deliberately use a variety of
approaches to sharing knowledge. They
contributed a case study to Retrofit for
Purpose (Penoyre & Prasad, 2014), a
publication intended to provide guidance to
clients and consultants considering a retrofit
of an existing building. Cullinan also uploaded
information to the Carbon Buzz website
(Carbon Buzz, 2017) and Energy Tracker to
formally share the data collected about the
building.
Cullinan Studio have also held a number of
public events such as Green Sky Thinking
Week 2013 - "Retrofit: Do It Yourself?" and
"Mind the Gap: People and Building
Performance" in April 2015 (Green Sky
Thinking, 2017). These have been well
attended by industry professionals, who
engaged in lively debates as a result. Tours of
the building are popular with the public
during Green Sky Thinking week, Open City
allowing people to ask questions about how
they might improve their own homes and
work places.
Cullinan’s principle is to be open about all
aspects of the project to give a full picture of
the strengths and weaknesses of the built
design. They believe that openness will help
103
overcome challenges that the industry faces
in the future. Sharing experiences widely
increases the opportunity to base their
design responses on evidence and learn from
the successes and failures of others. As Paul
Morrell (2015) wrote “The consequence (of
the lack of a feedback loop) is a gap between
how buildings are meant (and probably
promised) to perform, and how they actually
perform in service that in any other industry
would be regarded as a scandal.”
By teaming up with UoR the work was also
disseminated to academic audiences. A paper
was presented at the SuDBE conference
(Keeling et al., 2015) giving a full description
of the POE of seven of the buildings studied.
This paper was then revised and used as one
of the chapters in Keeling’s doctoral thesis.
The Foundry
Having been able to acquire the Foundry, a
dilapidated 19th century warehouse on the
Regent’s Canal in Islington, and two adjacent
buildings for a modest price in the 1990
economic recession, Cullinan Studio carried
out a basic retrofit and occupied the
adjacent buildings whilst pondering on how
to maximise the value of the Foundry. On
reflection there were three phases to this
process: the first working out how Cullinan
Studio wanted to work in their new office;
the second extensive and not always
productive negotiations with the local
authority Planning Department and the very
experienced Conservation Officer who
retired before the project was completed,
and lastly the development of a business plan
that allowed the project to be self-funding.
The first – and decisive – intervention for
the retrofit was a response to the constraints
of the existing building: the leaning and locally
listed south wall that needed stabilising, and
its double-height windows.  The structural
solution that we devised was to insert a steel
frame that interacts with the original
Victorian frame and masonry. This stabilises
the existing building fabric, including the
south wall, and also supports the listed
timber roof trusses.
The key principles for the design of Cullinan
Studio’s workplace was to achieve good
levels of natural light and ventilation.
The design and construction of the project
as a BREEAM Excellent retrofit was
problematic because of a number of special
conditions including:
• The listed brick wall was listing some
300mm over three storeys and the
Conservation Officer would not allow it
to be rebuilt and being listed it could not
be insulated externally
• The building completely filled the site on
both sides so only very limited external
insulation was possible on the street side
at the lower level
• The roof trusses were listed so it was not
possible to redesign the roof. Although
some new insulation was installed.
Being in the adjacent building throughout the
Foundry’s retrofit and working closely with
the contractor, Cullinan Studio were able to
monitor the process quite closely. After 21
years, Cullinans and their tenants moved into
the new building in October 2012.
POE Methodology
The study design and data collection was
carried out as part of Trevor Keeling’s
Doctoral research project at the UoR.
Keeling spent a week at Cullinan Studio
supervising the collection of data about the
104
physical environment and occupant Table 1: Physical variables measured at
experience in the summer. Cullinan Studio Cullinan Studios.
was one of seven buildings visited as part of
the work. The aim of the doctoral research Whole building measures Type of
measure
was to identify the problems that have to be ment
overcome to improve the specification of
Light Lux levels at working Spot and
parameters used to evaluate the experience plane, power spectrum fixed
of indoor environmental quality. (colour) continuo
us
The POE was multi-sensory, looking at spatial Soun Background levels, power Spot
and environmental parameters (Table 1). d spectrum measure
ments
During the week there was a mixture of
Temp Radiant T, air T, air speed, Spot and
continuous data logging, spot measurements, eratu humidity fixed
surveys and physiological measurements. re continuo
us
Physiological measurements (heart rate and
sweat rate) were taken of a number of Air CO2 levels, humidity Fixed
continuo
volunteers. Finally, two surveys were used, us
these had questions based on a hierarchy of
Spati Density of space, room Observat
outcomes, these covered: al depth and height, number ion
of people in a room.
• Overall experience in terms of health, Contr Zone size / extent of Observat
wellbeing and productivity. In ols effect, control usability: ion
par ticular questions about SBS Location, system response
time, degree of
symptoms, perceived effect of the automation, ownership of
building on wellbeing and space

productivity;
• Occupant outcomes, including privacy,
emotions, identity and values;
• Component environmental factors,
including temperature, light, sound, air
and layout
Step by step guide to case study
The physical conditions were monitored
both continuously and by spot
measurements. A general survey was sent
electronically to all occupants at the end of
the week. The following tables provide a
step-by-step guide to the week-long POE.

Day one

Time Action
0900–1100 Orientation and introductions.
Put data loggers in position
1100–1400 Verify information from plans,
take photos, assess controls
1500–1700 1x Sensors study

105
Day two and three Time Action
(minutes)
Time Action 0–5 Introduce person to
investigation. Sign off on
0900–1300 2x Sensors study
permission. Participant to put on
1500–1700 1x Sensors study vest with physiological sensors.
5–10 Set up kit around their desk:

Day four HOBO data logger with CO2
sensor

Spectrophotometer

As per day two and three, except the survey Sound level logger

was launched at the end of the day. Time stamp all recordings
10–15 Check with them about position
Time Action of kit and go

0900–1300 2x Sensors study 15–75 Leave them to continue work

1500–1700 1x Sensors study 75–80 Participant takes off vest. Stop

all equipment
1830–1900 Launch office wide survey
85–110 Participant completes exit survey

Day five
Time Action
1900–1300 2x Sensors study
1300–1400 Send reminder email for survey
1400– Collect data loggers. Take final
photos. Hand out snacks as a
reward. Check equipment.
Ensure all data collected is filed
appropriately.
Overview of physiological measurements
(sensors study)
In addition to the measurements and surveys,
individual par ticipants (of up to 10
volunteer s per building) underwent
physiological measurements throughout the
week. Measurements lasted about one hour
for each person and were followed by a
short survey. This was completed 3 times a
day.
Length of POE
At its crudest, POE consists of visiting a
building, talking to building users and
analysing data. At BuroHappold the largest
resource is people’s time, as a result POE
research has to be carried out in a targeted
and efficient manner in order to generate
the most value. It takes at least one visit to
get a feel for a building. After which, each visit
should be an opportunity to collect new
evidence based upon hunches about how
the building works developed from previous
iterations of evidence collection and analysis.
Keeling spent a week at seven buildings
including the Foundry. This length of time
allowed for the study of seven buildings
sequentially during the summer of 2014,
enabling the comparison of the buildings
using a limited amount of equipment.
However, this approach failed to pick up the
seasonal performance of the buildings.
Neither were the seven buildings exposed to
matching weather conditions during the time
they were monitored, making comparisons
more difficult. Before carrying out the POE
research, Keeling had only visited the

106
Foundry once for a meeting and to review
the building plans; then once the POE week
was over he didn’t go back to the building
again until some time after. On reflection, this
meant that there was little time to reflect
and redirect the study at building specific
problems, or to elaborate the study of issues
that had been tentatively exposed during the
first week.
Level of standardisation
From the researcher’s perspective, the data
collection strategy was driven by the
requirements of the research project, to
understand how building environments shape
people’s experience of their workplace. It
was less impor tant to understand the
performance of buildings, or the effectiveness
of any given design interventions. As a result
a unique survey methodology was developed
and used. This allowed very specific questions
to be answered and created new knowledge.
Consequently, it was only possible to
compare the performance of the seven
buildings rather than a wider database of
benchmarks that would have been available if
a more standard approach had been used.
The focus on the building environment
meant that other building performance issues
were left unexplored. For example, Cullinan
Studio had difficulties with the Building
Management System (BMS) installation which
meant that it was impossible to monitor their
energy performance on-line. This appeared
to result from problems with how the
construction of the building was managed,
and the length of the supply chain from main
contractor to BMS installer. However, there
was no possibility of investigating this issue
further within Keeling’s study. Neither was
data about resource consumption, or fabric
performance collected, so it was difficult to
understand how the building fabric shaped
the environment and the experience of the
occupants.
POE and Soft Landings is something
Cullinan’s has supported across the industry
for over 20 year s. Cullinan Studio’s
experience of formal POE began with the
Centre for Mathematical Sciences in
Cambridge (CMS,, 1996-2003) being chosen
as the final (23rd) PROBE study; measuring
actual energy used, air-tightness and occupant
satisfaction using the Building Use Studies
methodology.
The Foundry POE was defined by specific
and targeted research questions, in particular
the effect of indoor environmental quality on
experience, rather than energy performance
or usability. Later Cullinan Studio employed
this POE philosophy when they were
carrying out the POE of a school. The school
had some very specific architectural features,
and the POE was designed to focus on the
performance of these as well as the
performance of the school more generally. It
was considered useful to focus on what was
considered important about the building to
Cullinan and the client. This approach to POE
aims to study the effectiveness of specific
design features rather than obtain and
compare an overall building performance
score. This approach is targeted so helps to
reduce the scope of the POE and therefore
make it more resource efficient.
The level of standardisation partly depends
upon what is being measured. It is easier to
take a standard approach to items such as
energy use or air quality but less to others
such as the performance of shared teaching
spaces or problem solving why a building
system is failing. It is better to be general
when overall performance is being evaluated,
107
in our POE it was useful to be able to
compare the same measurements across
seven different buildings, this helped us to
normalise results. However, for each building
there were specific problems like windows
that didn’t open, or ventilation systems that
weren’t used. It was only through
understanding these specific problems that it
was possible to identify ways that design
could be improved.
Knowledge sharing
From Cullinan Studio's point of view the
Foundry POE helped to establish POE as a
routine part of every projects.  In effect by
‘living the POE’ it was embedded within the
philosophy of the practice. Their experience
at the Foundry reinforced their belief that
POE has to be set up at the very beginning
of a project, with the client and all design and
construction parties agreeing to participate.  and BuroHappold and therefore they paid
Different audiences have very different
expectation about what constitutes useful
knowledge. The paper for SuDBE dealt with
whether the data collected suppor ted
theories of comfort. Whereas the Green Sky
Thinking event and other presentations to
the professions dealt with the design features
and processes that shape the internal
conditions. As professionals, it is assumed that
the audience is generally looking for ways
that design can be improved they are
therefore generally interested in the appraisal
of individual design features (sometimes
specific products) and the provision of
guidance on alternative specifications. In
contrast, academic audiences are more
attuned to understanding general principles
of operation, and refining and developing
theoretical models, rather than exploring
specific design approaches. Sometimes this
means the needs of designers are not met by
academic research, and knowledge that may
be useful to designers is undervalued by
academia.
Conclusion
This POE happened in the form it did
through a number of unique factors. Cullinan
had a building that they were deeply
passionate about, involved with and keen to
know more about. BuroHappold and the
UoR were looking for buildings to investigate
for their research project. The aims of all
parties were able to exist in parallel and to
some extent align enabling this specific week
long study to take place. The benefit of the
POE was felt by the architect/ occupier
(Cullinan) and the engineer/ academic (UoR
and BuroHappold) teams. In the end, this
particular episode of the POE of the
Foundry was driven by the needs of UoR
for the cost of the equipment and the
researcher’s time. The fractured nature of the
building design profession means that a POE
conducted by one party (structural engineer,
MEP, architect, cost consultant etc.) will
primarily serve to validate particular design
decisions that a particular party is concerned
with. This stops singular POE approaches
from being focussed on all the end users
needs. This begs the question, why should
occupiers pay for POE when it only focusses
on a restricted set of outcomes. For the end
user to be interested in paying for POE it
should be considered as part of the design
process of a specific building, rather than to
support the design process of a specific
professional. Broadly speaking then,
academics want to refine theoretical models,
professional want to improve the design
process and clients want to make specific
buildings better. Only when these needs are
108
aligned will one party value the contribution
of the other.
The length of POE is a balance between use
of resource and the length of time it takes to
get to know a building, its problems and their
causes. A week was long enough to get to
know a building and served the purpose of
the research project. However, for Cullinan
living in their own building, and continually
probing how it operated, was a chance not
only to learn about design but also to embed
POE in the organisations’ culture. Standard
approaches to POE might make it more
accessible. It is often easier to understand the
value of something if it is a well defined
concept, rigour is introduced through
repeatability, and comparisons with other
buildings is made possible. However, buildings
are varied and a standard approach would
have to cover many different aspects of
building operation. This leads to a tendency
for POE to become more complex than is
necessary. Sometimes a more targeted
approach can use less resources, be less
complicated, and still produce important and
targeted results. For these non-standard
approaches to be valuable to the building
profession, it is important that they are
carried out with methodological rigour.
requirement to share information about
buildings, for example on all public projects,
providing an oppor tunity to be more
transparent. More generally it is important
that the various professional institutions
maintain their commitment to sharing both
good and bad practice.
References
Carbon Buzz. (2017). Carbon Buzz website.
Retrieved from: http://www.carbonbuzz.org/
Green Sky Thinking. (2017). Green Sky
Thinking. Retrieved from: http://
www.greenskythinking.org.uk/
Keeling, T., Roesch, E. B., Clements-Croome,
D., & Keelin, A. (2015). Field studies of
occupant experience in seven UK offices.
SuDBE, Reading, UK.
Morrell, P. (2015). Collaboration for Change: The
Edge Commission Report on the Future of
Professionalism. Retrieved from http://
www.edgedebate.com/?page_id=2829
Penoyre, G., & Prasad, S. (2014). Retrofit for
Purpose: Low Energy Renewal of Non-domestic
Buildings. RIBA Publications.

There are different media and different

audiences through which to share
knowledge. The collaboration between UoR,
BuroHappold and Cullinan Studio helped
span the gaps between audiences. Both in
terms of who the audience was, what
information was put forward, and how it was
presented. POE requires a high level of
honesty and trust within members of the
building professions. It involves sharing
information, and seeing other organisations
as collaborators rather than competitors. This
situation could be improved if there was a

109
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Designing with care: JDDK hospice design

Peter Holgate1, Mura Mullan2, Stuart Franklin3, Jane Darbyshire4, Julie Trueman5

1Department of Architecture and the Built Environment, Northumbria University, UK

peter.holgate@northumbria.ac.uk

2JDDK Architects, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

muram@jddk.co.uk

3JDDK Architects, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

stuartf@jddk.co.uk

4JDDK Architects, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

janed@jddk.co.uk

5 School of Design, Northumbria University, UK

julie.trueman@northumbria.ac.uk

Abstract

The architectural practice JDDK has over 30 years of experience in developing and delivering
hospice designs in the UK and Ireland. In responding to calls to address gaps in the knowledge of
design considerations for this typology, the practice’s directors are seeking appropriate methods to
identify, evaluate, and disseminate their good practice in this field (Worpole, 2009). This paper
considers whether existing forms of Post Occupancy Evaluation, particularly processes that
privilege discrete measurements of medical efficiency over the holistic end-user experience, are
applicable to evaluating hospice facilities. As hospice design presents an alternative ‘architecture of
resistance’ to the normative environments of medicalisation, assessing its ‘success’ may benefit from
supplementary or alternative evaluation methodologies. Such approaches could seek to engage
with patient-centred factors of dignity, trust, autonomy, and similar intangible qualities. The practical
output of such evaluation methods could potentially assist in the development of briefs, through
developing common aims and languages, capable of being understood and utilised by all
stakeholders in the development of new palliative care facilities.

Keywords: hospice, architecture, palliative, post-occupancy, evaluation

110
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017
Introduction: establishing a paradigm for
hospice evaluation
After a century or so of slow development, the
hospice movement has become a social
phenomenon of our times. It is a movement
which increasingly – though not exclusively – finds
symbolic expression in the development of a new
building type, to which few contemporar y
architects and designers are able to bring
extensive historical reference, let alone direct
experience. This is new territory for many, and
because it has death – that most mysterious and
irreducible human fact – at its centre, it is
territory that requires sensitive, reflexive kinds of
thinking. Indeed it requires a certain piety and
humility – not always qualities associated with
architects or indeed the medical professional
itself.
(Worpole, 2009, p9)
The hospice presents unique challenges in
evaluating successful building design. The
conception of the hospice has moved from the
idea of a single-function dedicated building,
towards an holistic environment which
encompasses palliative, social, spiritual and
emotional suppor t, as well as physical
environments that seek to improve the quality
of life of patients suffering from terminal
illnesses (Hospice UK, 2016). Consequently, the
evaluation of ‘success’ in hospice design may
demand methodologies that reflect such
complexity. The Newcastle-upon-Tyne based
practice JDDK Architects have over thirty
years of experience in designing and building
award-winning hospices, thereby occupying an
exemplary position from which to define the
terms of reference for this relatively new
typology. Ian Clarke (1962-2015), a Director of
JDDK, ostensibly commenced the
development of this inquiry through a variety
of papers and policies before his premature
death. Clarke’s writings sought to elucidate the
elements of successful hospice design from an
empathetic patient-centred approach. His
essays repeatedly raise the issues of ‘dignity’,
‘choice’, ‘autonomy’, qualities that do not easily
fit the metrics of many post-occupancy
evaluation methods of health-care architecture.
One aspect of this inquiry therefore seeks to
balance the normative ‘medical model’
approaches of healthcare POE methodologies
with a ‘social model’ worldview; a paradigm
which aims to reconcile multiple stakeholders
(particularly, patients and their families) as
active participants in influencing hospice design
(Torrington, 2007; Vischer, 2008; Watson et al.
2016). The inquiry seeks to establish whether
Clarke’s ‘intangible’ qualities can be effectively
captured and applied to the design of hospice
projects.
Hospice design; developing an appropriate
research question and methodology
In recent years, the Maggie’s Centre projects
have helped to raise the profile of the built
environment as a key contributory factor in
good and bad palliative care, as well as
providing case study material for hospice
design studies (Jencks and Heathcote, 2010;
Van der Linden et al., 2016). It could however
be argued that the one-off nature of these ‘star
architect’ led projects does not permit the
development of an iterative and continual
development of hospice design expertise.
Over thirty years of continual professional and
architectural development of hospice design by
JDDK architects has demanded a continual
engagement with the complexity of the health
care milieu in the UK, and has provided the
111
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017
practice with an ongoing critical function in
working with communities of practice to
provide new and alternative approaches to
palliative care. If it has been proposed that ‘the
hospice movement can be seen as part of the
resistance to medicalisation’ (Howarth, 2007:
130), then it may be justifiably argued that
practices like JDDK are truly engaged with a
meaningful ‘architecture of resistance’.
A common purpose of developing socially
beneficial solutions to authentic problems links
the hospice foundation, JDDK Architects, and
the architecture and inter ior design
depar tments at Nor thumbria University.
Student-led desire to engage constructively
with real-life issues has been a continual theme
in architectural education (Jenkins and Forsyth,
2009; Till, 2013). When provided with the
opportunity to self-select their own design
inquiries, many students at Nor thumbria
University elect to develop design projects of
personal and/or familial interest, tackling
themes of cancer care, dementia and similar
health-related topics. JDDK have provided
continual support and mentoring to these
students, and several have gone on to work for
the practice following graduation. Given this
context, this initiative therefore responds a
wide variety of interrelated educational,
professional and societal issues, linked by the
promotion and evaluation of design excellence
as an active factor in the improvement of the
end-of-life experience.
The consequent complex interrelationship of
patients, health-care professionals, pastoral
carers, architects and academics requires
consideration of how all stakeholders could
benefit from consensus and clarity of intention
and purpose. To this end, the over-arching
inquiry seeks to pragmatically determine ‘what
works’ in hospice design, in terms of meeting
the expectations of various participants and
end-users, and in terms of developing a
common purpose and language to deliver
shared expectations through a successful
project. In seeking to synthesise data emerging
from multiple sources (qualitative, quantitative,
experiential etc.), an appropriate methodology
may extend beyond the compound of
quantitative data and reflective evaluation
embedded in evidence-based design
(Verderber, 2014; Phiri, 2015). A functional
output of this inquir y concer ns the
development of a consensual ‘language’ of
hospice design, with the ultimate aim of
applying this to the creation of understandable
and collaborative hospice design briefs.
The application of existing Post-
Occupancy Evaluation (POE) tools to
hospice design
Phiri’s (2015) categorisation and review of
evidenced based design tools for healthcare
design provided an excellent state-of-the-art
overview of existing methodologies (Table 1).
In terms of applicability to JDDK’s projects, the
tools of Categor y 2 (Design Quality
Improvement) appeared to align best to the
architectural and qualitative intentions of this
inquir y in emphasising continuous
improvement of design.
112
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

to the majority of patients or health-care

Table 1: Four Categories of Evidence-Based professionals. Hence, the development of a
Design Tools (after Phiri, 2015, p.4) commonly understood ‘language’, accessible to
all stakeholders, appeared to be compromised
Category Design Tool at an early point. In practical application, the
results emerging from the use of AEDET
1) Improving Premises Assurance Model (PAM)
Evolution differed considerably to those
Compliance with
Activity Data Base (ADB) achieved from a ‘go-along’ interview visit with
Statutory and other
the project architect (see Research
Requirements
Component B below). The latter method
2) Design Quality Achieving Design Excellence
highlighted the tacit knowledge of the
Improvement Evaluation Tool Kit (AEDET
experienced designer, illuminating design
evolution)
decisions and practical expertise, which did not
A Staff and Patient Environment emerge readily from AEDET. In terms of
Calibration Tool Kit (ASPECT) communicative outputs, more practically
Design Quality Indicator (DQI) applicable information regarding hospice design
Design and Risk Tool (DART)
emerged in the accompanying notes than via
the resultant Excel calculation. When viewed
Inspiring Design Excellence and
from a quality of life approach (in lieu of a
Achievements (IDEAs)
medical efficiency focus), the criteria of
3) Enhancing Strategic Health Asset Planning and evaluation of this tool also appeared to diverge
Efficiency and Evaluation (SHAPE) from the patient-centred research aims. For
Effectiveness example, evaluation of ‘Staff and Patient
4) Achieving Building Research Establishment’s Environment’ considers staff and patient
Sustainability in the Environment Assessment Method concerns collectively; however, a recent survey
Architectural Health (BREEAM (conducted for the Sue Ryder charity)
Care Estate Chartered Institution of Building identified personal control of environmental
Services Engineers (CIBSE) TM22 factors as key desirables for the quality of life
Energy Assessment an Reporting for palliative care patients questions (Wood
Methodology (EARM) and Salter, 2013). The identification of patients’
desires for personal autonomy and control
In commencing this inquiry, the AEDET thus emerged from this survey in support of
Evolution (2005) tool was applied to JDDK’s Clarke’s theories. To a degree, the ASPECT
completed Marie Curie Hospice (Newcastle toolkit (which complements AEDET Evolution)
upon Tyne) in order to gauge its practical value appears to respond to this critique, affording
in the comprehensive evaluation of this project. scope for additional qualitative evaluation by
AEDET Evolution relies upon an interpretation staff and patients (NHS, 2008). In expanding
of construction drawings and material upon the theme of ‘Staff and Patient
specifications, demanding a technical Environment’, this structured survey posits
knowledge of architectural graphic standards statements such as “Patients can choose to
and drawing conventions that will be unfamiliar have visual privacy” and “Patients can be
alone”. Relative weightings and a small box for

113
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017
notes encourages some qualitative responses.
However, comfort and control issues again
merge staff and patients together, under
statements such as “Patients and staff can easily
control the temperature” or “Patients and staff
can easily control the artificial lighting”.
In proposing a move to more patient-centred
and qualitative evaluation methods, the
research team were cognisant of ethical
considerations, particularly the sensitive nature
of dealing with palliative care patients and their
families. The practical issue of resourcing this
inquiry has also impacted upon data collection
and analysis. This has resulted in three ongoing
parallel ‘pilot’ initiatives. All three utilise the
Marie Curie Hospice in Newcastle upon Tyne
to provide a central focus for the research.
JDDK’s founder, Jane Darbyshire, deliberately
placed the patient at the heart of this
pioneering design, stating “it is the preservation
of dignity that has been foremost in the minds
of all of us involved in planning the new
centre”. Her approach was reiterated by
Clarke, in his proposition that architects and
designers should “adopt a mindset more
centred on the human experience when
developing the briefs and designs for new
healthcare buildings, and less centred simply on
a processing mindset” (Clarke, 2009). The
Marie Curie Hospice attempted to embody
these aspirations in its architectural response,
hence its choice for the pilot studies
Pilot Research Component A: Semi-
structured interviews
Semi-str uctured inter views are being
conducted with key hospice staff, in order to
uncover emergent themes relevant to hospice
design, as well as elicit responses to the
hospice design and operation. Questions for
this exercise have been drawn from JDDK’s
practical experience (Clarke, 2009), as well as
from literature focused upon the architectural
design of hospices (Worpole, 2009; Verderber
and Refuerzo, 2006). In the ongoing analysis,
initial themes are starting to emerge that may
influence future hospice developments by
JDDK. These themes include consideration of
operational travel distances for nurses,
collaboration and consultation with staff and
patient groups in ensuring ownership and
quality of the completed project, and
de ve l o pi n g m e th o ds o f br i e fi n g an d
communications that can define and compare
the relative costs and values of architectural
elements, thereby enabling clients to make
informed budgetary choices. The latter issue
underpins the requirement to develop a
common language for hospice design, with
clarity of intention and expectation at the
heart of project procurement. Other issues
emerging from the data analysis correlate with
key themes identified in the current literature
of hospice best practice; the identification of
stressors for both patients and staff (Ulrich,
2006; Martin, 2000); judicious daylighting to the
benefit of patient well-being (Sternberg, 2009);
and the continuing evaluation of benefits and
drawbacks in choosing between single, double
and triple occupancy rooms with respect to
the quality of stay. A thematic analysis of all
transcribed interviews will be used to feed
back into the design process of JDDK to
thereby promote better practice.
Pilot Research Component B: Reflective
Practice and the ‘go-along’ interview
The use of the ‘go-along’ interview has risen in
recent years in the fields of human geography
114
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017
and sociology, (Evans & Jones, 2010; Degen &
Rose, 2012; Kusenbach, 2003), linking place to
practice, and seeking to establish working
processes, challenge assumptions, and identify
practitioner approaches. This research method
can therefore support reflective practice,
considering how professionals operate in
action (Schon, 1984). The improvement and
development of hospice design thereby
benefits from illuminating the tacit knowledge
and design processes of JDDK. A ‘go-along’
methodology was therefore adopted to initiate
this component of the research with one of
the academic researchers (Trueman) touring
the Marie Curie Hospice with one of the
hospice’s architects (Franklin). The concrete
manifestation of JDDK’s espoused practice
emerged from the interview. The approach and
entrance to the hospice were designed to
impart a sense of security, whilst offering a
‘welcoming and memorable’ journey into the
complex; the integration of landscaping with
‘domestic’ architectural elements sought to
comfor t patients in these unfamiliar
surroundings; patients’ views determined the
siting of bedrooms to south and east-facing
orientations, and the design of the landscaping
beyond; simultaneously, consideration of
operational efficiencies for staff added another,
sometimes conflicting layer of complexity to
the design process; planning of the circulation
sought to avoid the typological ‘hospital
corridor’ in preference of ‘interesting journeys,
both inside and out’, as well as opportunities
for open and communal interactions; and
prioritising the patient experience led to the
rationalisation and location of staff and service
areas as perhaps a secondary consideration.
Pilot Research Component C: Visual
communications and the visual preference
survey
An aim of this ongoing inquiry is the potential
to generate design briefs through clear
communications methods, comprehensible to
all par ticipants and stakeholder s. As
aforementioned, the architectural graphic
standards of plans, sections and schedules can
create a hegemonic language, highlighting the
need for effective media when communicating
design intentions successfully to all partners.
This was made evident to the research team at
a recent Hospice UK conference. When
viewing architectural plans (Figure 1), some
healthcare professionals dismissed conventional
plans as uninterpretable, one person describing
them as a “spiders’ webs”. Such observations
highlight the aforementioned limitations of
post-occupancy evaluation tools, where
responses assume a knowledge of technical
architectural graphics.
Figure 1: Ground Floor Plan, Marie Curie
Hospice, JDDK Architects
In communicating design intentions, alternative
visual approaches may be better understood
by the majority of stakeholders. The IDEAs
(Inspiring Design Excellence and
Achievements) tool/gallery, developed by the
115
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

School of Architecture Healthcare Research dimensional design tools generate high quality
Group at Sheffield University, offers a ‘solution- and accurate visualisations quickly and cheaply.
based’ approach using photographic exemplars Concurrently, methods of evaluating how the
and template sketches to encour age public reacts to environments are similarly
discussions (see Table 1). Similarly, van Hoof advancing, with a growing body of analysis
and O’Brien (2014) have applied a visual emerging from eye-tracking technologies
methodology to an evidence based review, and (Noland, Weiner, Gao, Cook, & Nelessen,
diagrammatic design principles have been 2017). The development of visual preference
employed in hospice design guidance (Kings methods for brief collation may provide a
Fund, 2012). To this end, JDDK’s thirty years of substantive tool in breaking down
hospice design provides a unique repository of communicative barriers between stakeholders
iterative architectural development in this field, in hospice design and development (Ryan et
and coupled with increasingly accurate al., 2001).
rendering techniques to communicate
intentions (figure 2, 3), this resource could
generate visual preference surveys as a
method of developing design briefs. In
conjunction with Research Component B’s
mining of tacit design knowledge, new digital
communications could be used to engage
patients and professionals in a more immersive
and representative context than conventional
architectural graphics allow.

Figure 3: Image of as-built Marie-Curie

Dayroom, JDDK Architects

Discussion

This inquiry remains a formative, ongoing work

in progress. However, some emergent findings
Figure 2: Predictive rendering of new Marie-
from the semi-structured interviews and the
Curie Day Ser vices Dayroom, JDDK
‘go-along’ interview identify the following
Architects
factors as contributors to the complexity of
hospice design: Patients have increasingly
Visual preference sur veys were chiefly
complex needs and co-morbidities, and good
developed by urban planners, and have been
hospice design needs the flexibility to
utilised in presenting alternative scenarios of
accommodate these individuating patient-
various interventions in the built environment.
centred factors from the outset (for example,
By presenting accurate and contextualised
individual requirements for piped oxygen
visual images, public opinions can be solicited.
supplies). Similarly, the number of patients with
State-of-the-ar t computer aided three-

116
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017
dementia is rising, providing additional
challenges to comprehensive design. Policy and
operational issues remain major factors in the
design process; for example, recent manual
handling regulations demand fixtures requiring
space, manoeuvrability, and storage, leading to
a broader consideration of mobile versus fixed
equipment. Similar ly, infection control
requirements continue to influence material
specification and room transitions; successful
hospice design therefore needs to strike a
balance between an infection risk-averse
approach, and the desire for a welcoming and
homely environment.
Both JDDK and Northumbria University are
embracing the opportunities of developing a
practical and communicable methodology that
can capture the affective, experiential and
intangible values of JDDK hospice designs.
There are several options which the team can
pursue in this inquiry, albeit with some barriers
to progression. Firstly, at this stage, no direct
contact with families or patients has taken
place, in spite of the patient-centred ethos
espoused by the research team. Research
design involving healthcare staff, patients,
premises or equipment place such inquiries
automatically into a high ethical risk category,
hence the cautious and exploratory nature of
the work to date (Northumbria University,
2017). Secondly, in common with other
exercises in post-occupancy evaluation,
pr actical bar r ier s limit oppor tunities;
‘Prohibition by professional indemnity insurers
and a lack of a renumeration framework are
cited as reasons why architects have been
reluctant to assess their completed work
critically, at least in public’ (Torrington, 2007:
517). Simply put, time and labour resources are
required to further support the project. Thirdly,
there is an unresolved question of intellectual
property, insofar as the goal to disseminate
JDDK’s best practice should not compromise
its commercial standing. Operationalising the
good intentions of this inquir y will be
contingent upon resolving these factors.
Notwithstanding, the investigators remain
committed to clarifying the hospice briefing
and design process through a synthesis of the
evidence-based data arising from this inquiry,
acknowledgement of Ian Clarke’s ‘intangible
qualities’, and the reflective expertise of JDDK
Architects themselves.
References
Clarke, I. (2009). Design and Dignity. Retrieved
from: http://hospicefoundation.ie/wp-content/
uploads/2013/04/Ian-Clarke-Design-Dignity-
Essay.-October-2009.pdf
Degen, M.M., & Rose, G. (2012). ‘The sensory
experiencing of urban design: The role of
walking and perceptual memory’. Urban
Studies, 49(15), pp. 3271-3287
Evans, J., & Jones, P. (2010). ‘The walking
interview: Methodology, mobility and place.’
Applied Geography, 31, pp. 849-858
Hospice UK. (2016). What is hospice care?
Retrieved from: https://www.hospiceuk.org/
about-hospice-care/what-is-hospice-care
Howarth, G. (2007) Death and Dying: A
Sociological Introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press
Jencks, C., & Heathcote, E. (2010). The
Architecture of Hope: Maggie’s Cancer Caring
Centres. London: Frances Lincoln
117
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Jenkins, P., & Forsyth, L. (Eds.) (2009)
Architecture, Participation and Society. London:
Routledge
Kings Fund. (2012). Principles of Hospice Design.
Retrieved from: http://www.housinglin.org.uk/
_library/Resources/Housing/
OtherOrganisation/principle-hospice-design-
kings-fund-princes-trust-2012.pdf
Phiri, M. (2015). Design Tools for Evidence-Based
Healthcare Design. Abingdon: Routledge
Ryan, M., Scott, D.A., Reeves, C., Bate, A., van
Teijilingen, E.R., Russell, E.M., Napper, M., &
Robb, C.M. (2001). ‘Eliciting public preferences
for healthcare: a systematic review of
techniques’. Health Technology Assessment, 5(5),
pp. 1-186

Kusenbach, M. (2003). ‘Street phenomenology:

The go-along as ethnographic research tool’. Schon, D.S. (1984). The Reflective Practitioner:
Ethnography, 4(3), pp. 455-485 How professionals think in action. New York:
Basic Books.
Martin, C. (2000). ‘Putting patients first:
Sternberg, E.M. (2009). Healing Spaces: The
Integrating hospital design and care.’ The Lancet,
Science of Place and Well-Being. Cambridge, MA:
356, p. 518
Harvard University Press
NHS. (2008). A Staff and Patient Environment
The Kings Fund (2012). Principles of Hospice
Calibration Toolkit (ASPECT): Instructions, scoring
Design. Retrieved from: https://
and guidance. Retrieved from: http://
www.kingsfund.org.uk/sites/files/kf/principle-
webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/
hospice-design-kings-fund-princes-
20130107105354/http:/www.dh.gov.uk/
trust-2012.pdf
prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/
@dh/@en/documents/digitalasset/
Till, J. (2013) Architecture Depends. Cambridge,
dh_082081.pdf
MA: MIT Press
Noland, R.B., Weiner, M.D., Gao, D., Cook, M.P.,
Torrington, J. (2007). ‘Evaluating quality of life in
Nelessen, A. (2017). ‘Eye-tracking technology,
residential care buildings’. Building Research &
visual preference surveys, and urban design:
Information, 35(5), pp. 514-528.
Preliminary evidence of an effective
methodology.’ Journal of Urbanism: International
Ulrich, R. S. (2006). ‘Evidence-based health-care
Research on Placemaking and Urban
architecture.’ The Lancet, 368, pp.38-39.
Sustainability, 10,(1), pp. 98-110

Van der Linden, V., Annemans, M. & Heylighen,

Northumbria University (2017). Ethics and
A. (2016). ‘Architects’ Approaches to Healing
Governance. Retrieved from: https://
Environment in Designing a Maggie’s Cancer
www.northumbria.ac.uk/research/ethics-and-
Caring Centre’. The Design Journal, 19(3), pp.
governance
511-533.

Van Hoof, J., & O’Brien, D. (2014). ‘Designing

118
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

for dementia’. Evidence Based Design Journal,

1(1), pp. 1-38.

Verderber, S. (2014). ‘Residential hospice

environments: Evidence-based architectural
and landscape design considerations.’ Journal of
Palliative Care, 30(2), pp. 69-82.

Verderber, S., & Refuerzo, B.J. (2006). Innovations

in Hospice Architecture. London: Taylor & Francis

Vischer, J.C. (2008) ‘Towards a user-centred

theory of the built environment.’ Building
Research and Information, 36(3), pp.231-240.

Watson, K.J., Evans, J., Karvonen, A., & Whitley, T.

(2016). ‘Re-conceiving building design quality: A
review of building users in their social context.’
Indoor and Built Environment, Vol. 25(3), pp.
509-523.

Wood, C., & Salter, J. (2013) ‘A time and a

place.’ Retrieved from Sue Ryder:
www.sueryder.org/About-us/Policies-and-
campaigns/Our-campaigns/Dying-isnt-working/
~/media/Files/About-us/A-Time-and-a-Place-
Sue-Ryder.ashx

Worpole, K. (2009) Modern Hospice Design: The

Architecture of Palliative Care. London:
Routledge

119
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Developing wellbeing valuation practices in the built environment

Kelly J Watson1

1Manchester Urban Institute, University of Manchester, UK

kelly.Watson@manchester.ac.uk

Abstract

Wellbeing has emerged as an influential agenda in the built environment in recent years,
promoting the social and, significantly, the economic aspects of triple bottom line sustainability, a
three-part framework encompassing environmental, social and economic priorities. With a
proven business case, it embodies an accessible and affirmative goal for occupants and
practitioners alike, compared to the technical discourse of restraint that surrounds energy
efficiency. As the property market increasingly demands user-centred environments, evidence-
based design proven to deliver wellbeing outcomes for end users is essential. The challenge of
capturing and communicating this evidence to a range of expert and non-expert audiences is
therefore a topical professional concern. This paper presents a novel wellbeing valuation
approach. Consisting of a validated multi-item scale to measure the wellbeing of building users
and its monetisation using techniques from the social impact sector, it has the capability to
communicate the value of design in a powerful and transformative manner. Wellbeing valuation
is a nascent practice that provides the professions with opportunities to collaborate with end
users and develop new knowledge about building performance and experience, enhancing the
ability of practitioners to shape the built environment in positive ways.

Key words: building users, post-occupancy evaluation, social return on investment (SROI),
valuation, wellbeing

120
Introduction
The “business case” for promoting wellbeing
in the built environment has emerged as an
increasingly influential agenda in recent years
(Alker et al, 2014; Jones and Grigoriou, 2014),
promoting the social and, significantly, the
economic aspects of triple bottom line
sustainability. It offers several interesting and
useful counterpoints to the prevailing
preoccupation of the commercial property
sector with energy efficiency and anticipated
energy bill savings in the long-term, often not
realised in practice (Vischer, 2009). Wellbeing,
however, embodies an accessible and
af fir mative goal for occupants and
practitioners, being about the experience of
real people using buildings rather than expert
knowledge about building performance. It is
also an inherently positive agenda that aims
to make people feel at their best and able to
flourish in their built environment (Puckett,
2015). By comparison, the much longer
standing focus on energy efficiency in post
occupancy evaluation can be both
exclusionary to non-experts due to its
technical language and leave out important
aspects of the lived experience of buildings.
Mobilising the support of the end users of
design for an agenda that is necessarily about
self-restraint and changing embedded
behaviours can be extremely problematic. In
short, the wellbeing rhetoric has significant
appeal across professional practitioner,
designer and client audiences, as well as for
individual end users.
The growing prominence of wellbeing across
academic , industr y and policy built
environment circles (McGregor et al, 2017;
Peasgood et al, 2017; Nicholl, 2015) is
reflected in the development of a wide range
of new valuation practices in the design and
construction sector, with a range of
associated guidance, frameworks and metrics
now available (Alker et al, 2014; Francis et al,
2016; Wheeler et al, 2016). The recently
published Stoddart Review (2016) makes a
clear call for the commercial sector to
recognise and take advantage of the role that
workplaces play in employee wellbeing and
productivity and, thereby, corporate success.
Evidence has existed for several years that
investing in appropriate and considered built
environments which produce very modest
improvements in each individual’s wellbeing
will add up to a very considerable return
overall once aggregated (Alker et al, 2014).
As the proper ty mar ket increasingly
demands user-centred environments, having
the capability to supply evidence-based
design that is proven to deliver wellbeing
outcomes for end users is essential for
practitioners. The challenge of capturing and
communicating this evidence to a range of
exper t and non-exper t audiences is
therefore a topical professional concern, and
requires an evaluative shift away from
measuring building performance towards
measuring the outcomes experienced by
people (Watson et al, 2016). The aim of this
paper is to present a novel wellbeing
valuation approach for practitioners and
designers to harness the uplifting and
i n c l u s i o n a r y m e s s a g e o f we l l b e i n g ,
disseminate the value of their design product
and thereby shape the built environment in
positive ways. The approach has been piloted
in a set of case buildings, including
commercial offices, non-clinical healthcare
centres and university buildings, as outlined in
the following sections.
121
D e fi n i n g w e l l b e i n g i n t h e b u i l t
environment
Whilst increasingly used across a variety of
industry and policy sectors (What Works
Wellbeing, 2016; O’Donnell et al, 2014;
Michaelson et al, 2009; Shah and Marks,
2004), the term “wellbeing” lacks clear
definition in the built environment arena.
Typically, wellbeing is considered synonymous
with mental health (Cooper et al, 2008;
Evans, 2003; Halpern, 2014). It is also used
pragmatically, relating to comfort and indoor
e nv i r o n m e n t a l q u a l i t y i n t h e b u i l t
environment, although this generally denotes
a lack of negative problems caused by the
indoor environment rather than it promoting
an improved state of comfort. Many studies
define wellbeing as a combination of health
and comfort (Bluyssen, 2010; Steemers and
Manchanda, 2010), or health, comfort and
happiness (Xie et al, 2016). The inclusion of
happiness suggests that wellbeing refers to
something broader than a combination of
health-related and pragmatic needs being
fulfilled.
A great deal of academic work in the social
sciences seeks to define wellbeing from a
broader perspective, par ticularly in the
disciplines of economics, psychology and
sociology. Two key definitions can be
identified in the existing research: hedonic
wellbeing and eudaimonic wellbeing (Deci
and Ryan, 2006; Joshanloo and Ghaedi, 2009;
Ryan and Deci, 2001; Ryff and Singer, 2006).
Hedonic wellbeing relates to happiness and
perceived quality of life, whereas eudaimonic
wellbeing relates to a fuller psychological
concept of one’s life having purpose and an
individual having the capabilities to function
effectively to this end. This is known as self-
determination (Ryan and Deci, 2011), or
flourishing (Shah and Marks, 2004). Taking this
fuller notion of wellbeing into consideration
suggests that a wider definition of wellbeing
outcomes in the built environment is
required that goes beyond health, comfort
and happiness. A hedonic view of wellbeing
in buildings identifies established subjective
wellbeing measures of Satisfaction and Affect
as most relevant (Pelenur and Cruickshank,
2013). However, eudaimonic wellbeing is not
taken into account in this model and remains
u n d e fi n e d i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e bu i l t
environment. Employing concepts of self-
determination, wellbeing can be defined as
cognitive satisfaction (related to goal
accomplishment), the presence of positive
affect (and lack of negative feelings), in
combination with the psychological needs of
competence (personal ability), relatedness
(social ties) and autonomy (personal control
and resilience) (Reis et al, 2000). This can be
represented by measures of Satisfaction,
Affect, Competence, Relatedness and
Autonomy. Health and comfort are excluded
from this conceptualisation of wellbeing in
the built environment as they are separate
concepts and represent other, discrete
outcomes produced by buildings.
Wellbeing valuation in practice
A novel wellbeing valuation approach is
presented which consists of:
(i) a validated multi-item scale to
measure and quantify the wellbeing
outcomes of building users in an
objective and cost effective manner,
and
(ii) monetisation of wellbeing results
using techniques from Social Return
on Investment (SROI), a social impact
methodology, to produce transferable
reporting metrics.
SROI is a methodology designed for the not-
for-profit sector to measure and account for
122
a wider concept of value for the attainment
of multi-bottom lines. It was originally
developed in the US by the Rober ts
Enterprise Development Fund (REDF) in the
mid-1990s. It has been further developed by
the New Economics Foundation (nef) in the
UK since the late 1990s with a widely
applicable stakeholder emphasis and a
standardised methodology. It is based on
traditional cost-benefit analysis and assigns a
monetary value to social returns using
financial proxies, which are compared against
the level of investment to produce an SROI
ratio of costs to social outcomes. An SROI
analysis can be retrospective or prospective,
encompass the value generated by an entire
o r g a n i s a t i o n o r f o c u s o n s p e c i fi c
programmes or projects. It is one of the
most developed social impact methodologies,
being designed to measure the outcomes of
an intervention, rather than solely tracking
outputs (Watson and Whitley, 2016). Its
monetisation technique facilitates the
comparison of otherwise incommensurable
benefits across different activities. Based on
real data, the results are disseminated using
‘return on investment’ language that is
familiar with investors and commissioners. It
is widely used in the UK social enterprise
sector to evidence organisational impact and
is endorsed by the Cabinet Office.
The wellbeing valuation approach has been
piloted in a set of case buildings, including
commercial offices, non-clinical healthcare
centres and university buildings, and over the
next year it will continue to be rolled out
across further case buildings from these
typologies to generate a comprehensive
evidence base. Whilst at an early stage of
development, it represents a framework that
can capture the business case for people-
centred design and has the capability to
communicate its value in a powerful and
transformative manner. Its application as part
of a wider building evaluation programme
would ensure that wellbeing outcomes of
end users are being measured, alongside
more traditional post-occupancy evaluation
activities such as collecting environmental
sensing data, and investigating end user
satisfaction with the building. The two
elements of the wellbeing valuation
approach, the multi-item scale and the
monetisation of the results, are outlined
below.
The multi-item scale
The development of the multi-item scale was
based on the fuller, psychologically-informed
definition of wellbeing outlined above which
is made up of five components: Satisfaction,
Affect, Competence, Relatedness and
Autonomy. It was developed in reference to
two existing, academically developed and
validated, multi-item scales for measuring
wellbeing more generally in individuals, i.e.
not in relation to the built environment. The
first scale is the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental
Wellbeing Scale (WEMWBS) (Tennant et al,
2007) and the second is the Questionnaire
for E u dai mon ic Wel l bein g ( Q E WB)
(Waterman et al, 2010). Both scales are
made up of a set of Likert style items, where
respondents rate their agreement on a five
point scale. The WEMWBS is made up of 14
positively worded items, and whereas the
QEWB is made up of 21 items with a
mixture of positive and negative wording. The
items of the WEMWBS and QEWB were
categorised according to the wellbeing
c o m p o n e n t s o f S a t i s f a c t i o n , A f fe c t ,
Competence, Relatedness and Autonomy,
and three items were selected for each
component to produce a 15 item scale, a
combination being from the WEMWBS (10
items) and the QEWB (five items). The
wording of the selected items was modified
for application to building users, the items
123
rearranged into a random order and Table 1: The Building Wellbeing scale
assigned a five point Likert scale, as seen in
both the WEMWBS and QEWB, using the
labels “Strongly disagree” to “Strongly agree”.
The first version of the multi-item scale is
shown below (Table 1). Responses to each
item are added up to produce a wellbeing
score out of 75 per individual, and by taking
an average across all participants, an average
wellbeing score is produced per building.

The scale is being piloted in a set of case

buildings, including commercial offices, non-
clinical healthcare centres and university
buildings, and validated using the Rasch
model in an iterative manner. This means
small changes can be made to the scale items
as required before the next pilot. Early
analysis has shown good fit to model
expectations, as would be expected from a
scale that is based on two pre-existing and
academically validated scales. The final set of The multi-item scale represents a simple and
pilot studies and associated validation is cost effective method to quantify the
scheduled in 2017. Redundant items and wellbeing outcomes produced by a built
items that show misfit to the model, for environment for the end users. It can be
example due to gender bias, will be removed distributed as part of a survey, which could
from the scale to produce a final, validated also include questions to collect basic
version. The most up-to-date version of the demographic information, the average time
scale will be presented at the Professional spent in the building, and other data of
Practices conference in April 2017. interest.

Valuation using SROI

The quantitative wellbeing scores produced

by the scale are monetised using impact
reporting techniques from the Social Return
on Investment (SROI) methodology.
Assigning a value to wellbeing outcomes is
anticipated to enhance transferability
compared to typical post-occupancy
evaluation summaries, facilitating the
dissemination and implementation of findings
within the design and construction industry
(Watson and Whitley, 2016).

124
The SROI methodology has six stages as set
out in The Guide to Social Return on
Investment (Nicholls et al, 2012):
1. Establishing scope and identifying key
stakeholders
2. Mapping outcomes
3. Evidencing outcomes and giving them
a value
4. Establishing impact
5. Calculating the SROI
6. Reporting, using and embedding
The third stage of the SROI methodology is
used to place a value on the quantitative
wellbeing scores. A suitable financial proxy
identified in HACT’s ‘Guide to Using the
Wellbeing Valuation Approach’ (Trotter et al,
2014) values wellbeing at £36,776 per
individual per year. The financial proxy can be
adjusted according to the time spent in the
building under study, e.g. a daily or weekly
value would be better suited to employees in
an office, whereas an hourly value makes
more sense for visitors of a shopping centre
or healthcare centre. The value of wellbeing
to an individual is therefore £100.69 per day,
or £4.20 an hour. The adjusted financial
proxy is multiplied by the average time spent
in the building per end user, and by the total
number of end users, to produce the total
value generated by that building in wellbeing
outcomes over a one year period. The
inherent subjectivity of the valuation process
requires that it is made fully transparent, a
core principle of the SROI methodology
(Nicholls et al, 2012).
The total wellbeing value is then multiplied
by the quantitative wellbeing score gathered
during the user survey, which is inputted as a
percentage to remove deadweight from the
total. For example, a wellbeing score of 50
out of 75 represents a score of 66.7%. It is
also possible to consider attribution at this
point, that is, the proportion of wellbeing that
can be attributed to the building as opposed
to other factors like FM, organisational
culture, or human factors. This information
can be gathered during the wellbeing survey
by asking end users how much of their
wellbeing they think is due to the building
design. An average is calculated and removed
from the total, producing a final impact-
adjusted valuation for wellbeing.
Another useful metric can be calculated by
dividing the wellbeing figure by the building
costs, i.e. the design fees, contract sum and
the furniture, fittings and equipment (FF&E)
cost, to produce an SROI ratio. The SROI
ratio represents the return generated by the
building in wellbeing outcomes for the
building users in a year, per every £1 spent.
Further ratios can be projected at useful
time points to inform maintenance and re-fit
decisions, such as after 10 years at which
point a re-fit is typically required, and after 60
years, the typical life time of building design.
Whilst discounting is not prescribed by SROI,
it is usually considered appropriate in the
design and construction industry and HM
Green Book discounting rates can be applied
to the valuations. The resulting ratios
represent the return generated by the
building for the building users over a
specified period, per every £1 spent.
The wellbeing valuation approach produces a
range of quantitative summaries and
monetised metrics, as shown below for three
case buildings from the pilot study (Figure 1,
2, 3 and Table 2).
125
 Figure 1: Wellbeing scores

Figure 3: Wellbeing results by theme


Figure 4: Wellbeing results by item

126
Table 2: Wellbeing valuation table

Wellbeing valuation table

Annual value Annual value
Hours
Building Financial proxy Proxy per Annual value Wellbeing Wellbeing produced Attribution Attribution produced minus
Building spent per Outcome Impact per year
users description visit produced score score % minus description proportion deadweight and
visit
deadweight attribution

Case building
£36,766 p.a., or
1 10,559 2.01 £4.20 p.h.,
£404.93 £4,275,652.11 62.96 0.84 £3,589,267.42 £2,512,487.20 £2,512,487.20
adjusted for Primary
Case building Wellbeing 0.70
average number data
2 13,578 2.41 of hours spent in
£485.51 £6,592,290.86 63.38 0.85 £5,570,485.78 £3,899,340.05 £3,899,340.05
Case building building per visit
3 11,033 2.03 £408.96 £4,512,055.68 60.00 0.80 £3,609,644.54 £2,526,751.18 £2,526,751.18 


Discussion and conclusions play a defining role in the emerging wellbeing

sector in commercial property is a likely
The wellbeing valuation approach presented prospect. However, there is also a high
represents an innovative blend of quantitative chance that such a wellbeing market would
measurement and financial reporting, with be dominated by rudimentar y scoring
the capability to communicate the value of systems which promote superficial quick-
design in a powerful and transformative fixes, rather than considered and evidenced
manner. Its application as part of a wider built environment interventions. Crucially, the
building evaluation programme would ensure approach presented in this paper combines a
that wellbeing outcomes of end users are eudaimonic conceptualisation of wellbeing
being measured, alongside more traditional with financial valuation techniques from
post-occupancy evaluation activities such as SROI. As a result, it has the potential to go
collecting environmental sensing data, and beyond purely hedonic experiences to
investigating end user satisfaction with the c a p t u r e t h e i n fl u e n c e o f t h e bu i l t
building. Furthermore, its calculative nature environment on psychological functioning, yet
offers something new when looking at user communicate this rich under standing
experience and, crucially, can tap into the effectively to a wide range of audiences.
monetised language around the “business
case for wellbeing”. The rapid rise of the Evidently, there are plentiful opportunities for
wellbeing agenda in the built environment both research and practice to drive learning
suggests that user-centred priorities are about wellbeing outcomes in the built
gaining ground alongside tr aditional environment. There is a need to promote a
economic and environmental imperatives in wider, psychologically-informed definition of
the design and construction industry. The wellbeing in the built environment and to
significance of wellbeing to the commercial develop rigorous approaches for its capture
proper ty sector is set to intensify as and measurement. There is currently a lack of
organisations and end users alike, demand robust wellbeing measures for post-
people-friendly spaces that help them feel occupancy application in buildings, and
and operate at their best. This requires new overcoming this gap is critical for the effective
methodologies that are able to capture transfer of new knowledge into replicable,
meaningful human experience, rather than evidence-based design for the advancement
technical building perfor mance , and of wellbeing in future development.
communicate this learning in an effective Wellbeing valuation is currently a nascent
manner. That financial valuation will come to practice in the professions, but one with

127
considerable potential to drive collaboration
with end users to develop new knowledge
about building performance and experience,
and enhance the ability of practitioners to
shape the built environment in positive ways.
References
Alker, J., Malanca, M., Pottage, C. & O'Brien, R.
(2014). Health, Wellbeing & Productivity in
Offices: The next chapter for green building.
London: World Green Building Council.
Bluyssen, P.M. (2010). ‘Towards new methods
and ways to create healthy and comfortable
buildings.’ Building and Environment, 45, pp.
808–818.
Bond, L., Kearns, A., Mason, P., Tannahill, C.,
Egan, M., & Whitely, E. (2012). ‘Exploring the
relationships between housing,
neighbourhoods and mental wellbeing for
residents of deprived areas.’ BMC Public
Health, 12, pp. 48-60.
Burton, E., Mitchell, L. and Stride, C.B. (2011).
Good places for ageing in place:
development of objective built environment
measures for investigating links with older
people's wellbeing. BMC Public Health, 11, pp.
839.
Cooper, R., Boyko, C. & Codinhoto, R. (2008).
Mental capital and wellbeing and the physical
environment. UK: Foresight Science Review.
Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (2006). ‘Hedonia,
eudaimonia, and well-being: an introduction’.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, pp. 1–11.
Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S. and
Brown, C. (2011). ‘The social dimension of
sustainable development: Defining urban
social sustainability.’ Sustainable Development,
19, pp. 289-300.
Dixon, T. and Woodcraft, S. (2013). ’ Creating
strong communities: Measuring social
sustainability in new housing development.’
Town & Country Planning, pp. 473-480.
Evans, G.W. (2003). ‘The Built Environment
and Mental Health;. Journal of Urban Health,
80, pp. 536–555.
Francis, R., Alker, J., Ford, N., Kershaw, J. &
Laski, J. (2016). Health, Wellbeing & Productivity
in Retail: the impact of green buildings on
people and profit. London: World Green
Building Council.
Halpern, D. (2014). Mental Health and The
Built Environment: More Than Bricks And
Mortar?, London: Routledge.
Jones, S. & Grigoriou, E. (2014). Wellbeing
Matters: Assessing views on the impact of the
built environment on wellbeing. London: Feeling
Good Foundation.
Joshanloo, M. & Ghaedi, G. (2009). ‘Value
priorities as predictors of hedonic and
eudaimonic aspects of well-being’. Personality
and Individual Differences, 47, pp. 294–298.
McGregor, A., Aguilar, A.M., and Lockhart, V.
(2017). ‘Environmentally Smart Design:
Designing for Social Wellbeing across the
City and in the Workplace.’ Architectural
Design, 87, pp. 48-55.
Mitchell, L. and Burton, E. (2006)
‘Neighbourhoods for life: Designing
dementia-friendly outdoor environments’.
Quality in Ageing and Older Adults, 7: 26-33.
Michaelson, J., Abdallah, S., Steuer, N.,
Thompson, S. and Marks, N. (2009). National
Accounts of Wellbeing: Bringing real wealth onto
the balance sheet. London: New Economics
Foundation.
128
Nicholl, A. (2015). The impact of built
environment on wellbeing. Retrieved from:
http://brebuzz.net/2015/09/25/the-impact-of-
built-environment-on-wellbeing/
Nicholls, J., Lawlor, E., Neitzert, E. &
Goodspeed, T. (2012). A Guide to Social Return
on Investment. UK Cabinet Office.
O’Donnell, G., Deaton, A., Durand, M.,
Halpern, D. and Layard, R. (2014). Wellbeing
and Policy. London: Legatum Institute.
Preston, L., Cantrell, A., Paisley, S., Peasgood, T.,
and Brazier, J. (2017). Housing and Wellbeing: A
rapid scoping review of review on the evidence
on housing and its relationship to wellbeing.
Retrieved from: https://
whatworkswellbeing.files.wordpress.com/
2017/01/report-scoping-review-of-reviews-
wellbeing-and-housing-jan-2017.pdf
Pelenur, M.J. & Cruickshank, H.J. (2013).
‘Investigating the link between well-being and
energy use; an explorative case study
between passive and active domestic energy
management systems’. Building and
Environment, 65, pp. 26–34.
Puckett, K. (2015). Get happy: wellbeing in
buildings. Retrieved from: http://
www.bdonline.co.uk/get-happy-wellbeing-in-
buildings/5073975.article
Reis, H. T., Sheldon, K. M., Gable, S. L., Roscoe,
J., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). ‘Daily well-being: The
role of autonomy, competence, and
relatedness’, Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 6, pp. 419-435.
Ryan, R.M. & Deci, E.L. (2001) ‘On happiness
and human potentials: a review of research
on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being.’
Annual Review of Psychology, 52, pp. 141–66.
Ryan, R. & Deci, E. (2011) A self-determination
theory perspective on social, institutional,
cultural, and economic supports for autonomy
and their importance for well-being. Human
Autonomy in Cross-Cultural Context.
Springer.
Ryff, C.D. & Singer, B.H. (2006). ‘Know Thyself
and Become What You Are: A Eudaimonic
Approach to Psychological Well-Being’.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 9, pp. 13–39.
Shah, H. & Marks, N. (2004) A Wellbeing
Manifesto for a Flourishing Society, London:
New Eonomics Foundation.
Steemers, K. & Manchanda, S. (2010). ‘Energy
efficient design and occupant well-being:
Case studies in the UK and India.’ Building and
Environment, 45, pp. 270–278.
The Stoddart, Review (2016) The Workplace
Advantage: The £20 billion key: why the office
environment is key to productivity. London:
Raconteur.
Tennant, R., Hiller, L., Fishwick, R., Platt, S.,
Joseph, S., Weich, S., Parkinson, J., Secker, J., &
Stewart-Brown, S. (2007). ‘The Warwick-
Edinburgh mental well-being scale
(WEMWBS): development and UK
validation.’ Health and Quality of life Outcomes,
5(1).
Trotter, L., Vine, J., Leach, M. & Fujiwara, D.
(2014). Measuring the Social Impact of
Community Investment: A Guide to using the
Wellbeing Valuation Approach. London: HACT.
Vischer, J. C. (2009). Applying Knowledge on
Building Performance: from evidence to
intelligence. Intelligent Buildings International,
1(4), pp. 239-248.
129
Waterman, A., Schwartz, S., Zamboanga, B.,
Ravert, R., Williams, M., Agocha, V., Kim, S., &
Donnellan, M. (2010). ‘The Questionnaire for
Eudaimonic Wellbeing: Psychometric
properties, demographic comparisons, and
evidence of validity.’ The Journal of Positive
Psychology, 5, pp. 41-61.

Watson, K. J., Evans, J., Karvonen, A. & Whitley,

T. (2016) ‘Capturing the social value of
buildings: the promise of Social Return on
Investment (SROI)’. Building and Environment,
103, pp. 289-301.

Watson, K.J. and Whitley, T. (2016) ‘Applying

Social Return on Investment (SROI) to
buildings.’ Building Research & Information, 35
(1).

What Works Wellbeing (2016) Wellbeing

Public Dialogues: What you have told us and
what we’re going to do. London: What Works
Centre for Wellbeing.

Wheeler, J., Huggett, E. & Alker, J. (2016)

Health and Wellbeing in Homes. London: UK
Green Building Council.

Xie, H., Clements-Croome, D., & Wang, Q.

(2016). ‘Move beyond green building: A focus
on healthy, comfortable, sustainable and
aesthetical architecture’, Intelligent Buildings
International, 8, pp. 1-10.

130
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Spaces for interaction: empirical evidence on spatial realities versus supplier

mantra
Ziona Strelitz1

1ZZA Responsive User Environments, UK

ziona.strelitz@zza.co.uk

Abstract
What are the conditions in which people interact? The built output of recent decades of UK
procurement reflects the supply chain’s promotion of flagship buildings, with the critical mass to confer
image on their occupiers, and incorporate social facilities intended to attract occupants and promote
their interaction. An associated argument rests on another proposed benefit of scale: with big buildings
able to accommodate more people, they are postulated as increasing the opportunities for user
interaction, both planned and spontaneous. The contingent proposition is that this adds value to the
occupant organisation – the more so as a greater number people is further assumed to increase the
scope for productive synergies.

Referencing examples of buildings predicated on this basis – including a notable trend in submissions
for building awards, this paper questions these projected advantages of scale. Drawing on systematic
user research in the form of post occupancy evaluations and briefing studies, the analysis offers
pointers to relevant, sustainable development, involving aspects of location, scale, building form, and
relevant amenity.

Key words: interaction, location, scale, facilities, work-life


131
Introduction: Supply chain tenets
Whether owned or leased by occupant
organisations, UK workplace buildings represent
two types of business sector: the resident
organisations themselves – encompassing
multiple sectors, and the businesses allied to
property development and management. The
latter involves a significant supply chain of
developers, financiers, planners, sur veyors,
lawyers, architects, engineers, interior designers,
furniture manufacturers, landscape designers,
graphics specialists, facilities managers, as well as
more recent specialists like change consultants.
Collectively, these enterprises exert a significant
influence on the operational conditions of
occupant organisations and their individual
members, as well as constituting a measurable
commercial force in their own right – greater
still when associated suppliers like trade
contactors are factored in.
Business has an inherent impetus to sell. In the
UK since the mid-80s, the cluster that provides
and services workplace buildings has proactively
stimulated demand for new accommodation, by
advocating distinctive benefits that organisations
can attain through the occupancy of the
buildings and spaces it seeks to deliver, and
adopting the operational modes (or “ways of
working”) that these buildings are geared to
support. Whilst it is far from atypical for supply
chains to lead their customers, and whilst the
trend to premises modernisation and renewal is
relevant to business evolution in any event, this
paper sets out to question some widely
espoused propositions that shape what is been
built.
Referencing observations from practice and
empirical user studies, it particularly challenges
the promotion of large-scale buildings, and the
promise of increased interaction associated with
the expanded population that big space can
house. It also questions the effectiveness
attributed to high-end workplace facilities (that
the critical mass entailed by large-scale
developments can help enable), in “attracting,
retaining and motivating staff ”. Aimed at
deflecting previous conceptions of the building
productivity equation away from the first costs
of procuring space, to projected HR and
employment benefits, the latter claim for a
building’s role on business performance has
become a veritable supply chain mantra. This
argument is widely suppor ted by a cost
apportionment ratio of 1:5:200, or variants, that
presents the differential costs of procuring
buildings, running them, and conducting activity
inside, with the latter presented as orders of
magnitude the largest. Despite academic critique
by construction economist (Hughes et al, 2004;
Ive, 2006), this is invoked to position workplace
provisions intended to appeal to users as
purposeful business strategy.
Premises consolidation
Recent decades have seen a trend to large
organisations, that were formerly spread over
numerous buildings or locations, accommodating
t h e i r o p e r a t i o n s i n s p a t i a l l y u n i fi e d
concentrations. Invariably this enables businesses
to align their workspace to contemporary
standards. There are also financial benefits.
Considerable savings can flow from releasing
even one building, and occupying another or
fewer buildings more efficiently (Strelitz, 2012b).
This may involve an increase in “static
density” (density of the layout). Or, recognising
that everyone is not present in the building or at
a workstation all the time, it may be based on
intensification of “dynamic density”, a measure
of the number of individuals having access to
work in a building without designated space for
individuals’ exclusive use. PwC offered a far-
reaching example of this soon after the
millennium, in vacating Temple Cour t in
Birmingham, and consolidating all of its West
Midlands practice in Cornwall Court close by.
This established a paradigm for PwC’s future
workplace strategy and premises procurement,
and one that has been widely followed (BCO,
2004; Birmingham Post, 2014). A decade later,
encompassing vastly more space in the same
city, Birmingham City Council moved from over
80 separate buildings to eight, all new or
refurbished (Strelitz, 2012b). Highly significant
though the capital flows relating to such moves
are, they involve more than the cost of the real
estate. Spatial concentration also poises
occupiers for substantial contingent savings in
facilities management, relative to the input
132
required to run disparate and / or dispersed
buildings.
But consolidation offers scope for more than
premises renewal and savings. Increased scale is
a likely feature where operations that were
physically separate are aggregated spatially, and
the economies of scale that inhere in this
facilitate the provision of high-end staff facilities.
Where workplaces are relocated to less costly
areas like industrial estates that are typically less
well served, whether to save on property costs
or achieve a larger footprint, facilities like in-
house cafés, restaurants and gyms may be
deemed relevant to compensate for the
absence of local amenities. But conspicuous
provision of in-house facilities is also evident in
richly served central locations, underscoring the
provider view of such facilities as important
planks of occupier organisations’ “human
resources” offer.
Such provision has been in marked evidence in
r e c e n t d e c a d e s ’ fl a g s h i p w o r k p l a c e
developments, and prominent in candidates’
submissions for workplace awards. As a judge of
office awards around the turn of the millennium,
I ogled at BA’s then awe-inspiring campus at
near Heathrow, including a running track,
barbeque deck, hairdresser, beauty salon,
s u p e r m a r ke t , b a n k , r e s t a u r a n t s , c a f é s ,
refrigerated storage for staff ’s on site grocery
deliveries (BCO, 1999; Ross, 2012). Such
provision became a trend. Other award-winning
large-scale building and campuses reflecting this
progression included the (soon to be late)
Enron’s generously designed and stocked “pit
stops” on every office floor, and its lavishly
appointed gym – replete with then newly stylish
mauve LED lighting – in London’s Grosvenor
Place (Barrow, 2012; BCO, 2001); Goldman
Sachs with its climbing wall in the City of
London (BCO, 2002; The Economist, 2005),
Clifford Chance with its high level infinity pool
overlooking Canary Wharf (BCO, 2005), and the
amenity-rich RBS campus at Gogaburn (BCO,
2006).
These facilities had considerable effect in
establishing and reinforcing the respective
occupier organisations in the workplace
industr y’s awareness. Notwithstanding the
intention for such provision to confer
competitive advantage in the labour market
(Clifford Chance, 2015), their traction with staff
warrants questioning. Further, the well-publicised
difficulties encountered by a business like BA
following its move to Waterside, with strikes by
cabin staff and baggage handlers, and issues with
its in-flight catering contractors, indicates the
limited effect of office accommodation on
business productivity – even when it lifts the bar,
signalling a caveat on the presumed positive
impact buildings on business performance.
The provider’s view of work-life
In 2005, an innovative study considering the
question of work-life and offices (Strelitz,
Edwards and Ben-Galim, 2005; Strelitz and
Edwards, 2006) registered that this involves
pressures on workers, irrespective of their
gender, household situation and life stage. The
research identified two main ways in which
organisations related to the issue: employment
terms like flexible schedules, and physical
facilities – both fixed, like cafés, gyms and
workplace nurseries (the latter, relatively
uncommon), and loose-fit, like table tennis and
pool tables. Physical provisions are tangible ways
in which employer organisations can seek to
differentiate themselves. Further up the supply
chain, developers incorporate workplace
amenities to position their schemes
advantageously with tenants. This is perhaps
most clearly articulated in the concept, design
and branding of the Chiswick Park office
development as Enjoy-work (Chiswick Park,
2015). The following excerpt from a 2015
conference programme Workplace: retaining
London’s talent shows the interplay of these
perspectives:
… how London is creating workplaces
which compete globally in this hyper
competitive market. … In this current
climate, cities are having to work harder to
attract and retain fresh talent. Companies
are increasingly recognising the importance
of the workplace in attracting the most
talented and innovative workers.
(New London Architecture, 2015)
133
Wellbeing and factors that promote it
The supply chain’s promotion of productivity as
associated with, if not deriving from, workplace
design continues, as demonstrated in the titling
of the recently published Stoddart Review’s The
Workplace Advantage: the £20 billion key: why
the office environment is key to productivity
(The Stoddart Review, 2016). Meanwhile, the
industry has embraced the parallel theme of
employee wellbeing. This is signified both in the
World Green Building Council’s publication,
Health, Wellbeing and Productivity in Offices:
The next chapter for green building (World
Green Building Council, 2014), and in wide
c u r r e n t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n c o n fe r e n c e
programmes.
There is now considerable evidence
from multiple sources, of ways that physical
workspace can promote building occupants’
wellbeing, with the most recognised factors
relating to thermal, lighting and acoustic
experience. The following quotation, from a
participant in the post occupancy evaluation of a
building that users generally evaluated very
positively in respect of internal environmental
conditions, flags up further factors (ZZA, 2015).
The building itself and the
surroundings have a positive
effect on my working day. I have
a better journey to work, come
to a bright space, have a happy
team, and it’s easy to circulate.
It’s a thousand times better, and
has a very positive effect on me
mentally. I smile! It promotes a
shift in culture. Plus I walk up
and down stairs thirty times a
day. I feel healthier and happier
with my team.
This individual’s reference to pedestrian
movement in the building identifies a factor that
is now increasingly recognised as relevant to
wellbeing. It points to suite of strategies that can
promote “Active by design”, including numerous
aspects of stair design: ready visibility, convenient
positioning for ease of access, prominent siting
relative to lifts, and benefitting from natural light
and external aspect.
The quotation’s reference to “journey to work”
is a significant addition, introducing location, a
factor extraneous to the building’s design, but
fundamental to any building’s overall proposition
for use. Prevalent attention on the topic of
workplace wellbeing tends to focus on aspects
of the building itself – internal environmental
comfort, facilities like showers to support
people who travel to work by active modes like
cycling and running, and ergonomic aspects like
height-adjustable, and now “walking”, desks. It
also includes facilities management factors, like
“healthy snacks” in vending machines, fruit bowls
in working areas and other soft provisions.
However, a wider view that considers user
experience more holistically identifies workplace
location both as the pre-eminent factor affecting
work-life balance (pivotal in wellbeing), and the
factor that most determines workplace selection
when people are otherwise free to choose
where they work (Strelitz, 2011).
The above case-study also points to the
important aspect of scale. Whilst the quotation’s
reference to “bright space” does not make it
explicit, the building discussed is scaled and
configured for user comfort. Comprising two
wings, both 12 metres deep from the glazed
external perimeter to the edge of the central
atrium, the space is suffused with daylight. In
addition, the mixed mode ventilation system
incorporates operable windows, with “traffic
lights” that inform users when the building is in
natural ventilation mode. Internal environmental
conditions are often considered as “hygiene”
factors – taken for granted when they function
well, and provoking reaction only when they
irritate. However, focused research can
demonstrate their positive effect on users’ sense
of wellbeing, and in this evaluation most
interviewees reported their workspace as
enhancing their wellbeing (75%), with the rest
saying it makes no difference (25%). In contrast,
they were less affirmative on the effect of
facilities on their wellbeing (57% “positive”; 39%
“makes no difference”), indicating that the
impact of spatial quality can outweigh that of
tangible facilities in users’ estimation.
The design also facilitates positive social effects.
At a height of ground plus three-storeys, and
134
with 8414 square metres gross internal area, this
is not a large-scale building. Rather, it is
sufficiently compact to provide a realistic and
meaningful community to people who work
there. Various design features promote this
further – the central staircase which most
inhabitants use in favour of the lifts, the easy
visibility across the interior into all wings, and the
unifying role of the shared kitchen and soft
seating areas that serve both wings on each
floor. In this context, the quotation’s reference
to “happy team” is grounded in spatial reality,
rather than management platitude.
Drilling down: impacts of location
Agglomeration has potent impacts on people’s
lives. Economic clustering in urban centres
pushes residential accommodation towards the
periphery, resulting in long commutes across
conurbations. Agglomeration at the scale of an
organisation’s own workspace involve the
concentr ation of previously disper sed
operations in one place. Whether in a single
building or campus, and despite the likelihood of
being well sited for some workers’ residence,
such moves almost invariably extend others’
journey to work, with negative impacts on their
time, logistical interfaces, and the tone of their
day. Workplace agglomeration can heighten the
challenges people encounter in reconciling and
meeting their interests and commitments in the
work, household, and personal domains. When
the frame of reference is the building, these
negative effects fall outside typical
considerations of workplace wellbeing. In
contrast, fuller research on user experience
shows that the demands and unpredictability of
longer commutes generate stress about meeting
responsibilities, both in and out of work, in a
reliably timely way (ZZA, successive proprietary
workplace studies, unpublished).
Drawing on interview data, the report, Liveable
lives (Strelitz, 2010) presents composite case-
studies of characteristic challenges that people
face in juggling their lives, accentuated by
physical distance between home and work. In all
the scenarios described, the individuals are
technologically equipped, as well as having
considerable discretion, to work at home, but –
despite a prevalent industry view that solo or
“non-transactional” work is not germane to
physical presence at work – feel drawn to their
workplace.
A follow-up study explored the range of places
in which people work, and the reasons that
underlie where people who are free to choose
their workplace, choose to work (Strelitz, 2011).
One component of this – an online survey with
a sample 17,800 of business owners and senior
manager s from over 60 countr ies
(independently of prior knowledge of where
they worked) – demonstrated an extensive
incidence of working in third places: 52%
reported working in a “business centre or
lounge”, and 48% in “informal spaces” for any or
all of the time. A complementary suite of
interviews, with 86 people working in business
centres, café or library settings, identified the
reasons for their selection of these as places to
work (Strelitz, 2011). The findings highlight
people’s impetus to work in a communal setting
away from home – for much if not all their work
activity, and their choice of venue as relating to
convenient location, to support productive
work, easier work-family interface, and work-life
balance.
Compartmentation is part of this; separating the
spatial zones where different activities are
undertaken, and where different social networks
are involved in the activity. This impetus for
separation detracts from the relevance of non-
core facilities in workplace buildings. Many
people lack the time, flexibility and / or
inclination to use a gym at work! This challenges
one of the advantages ascribed to
agglomeration: the facilities intended for staff
attraction and retention. Separately, a succession
of studies with people in their workplace
indicates a preference for stepping out of the
building where there is feasible choice – for
fresh air, a change of scene, to do an errand,
choose lunch from the outlet you select today,
or a wide variety of other reasons reflecting
people’s wish for autonomy (Strelitz, 2017). This
challenges a key proposition of large-scale
buildings, of which high-end on-site amenities
are a correlate.
135

Interaction and community: effects of scale
The benefits of increased interaction and cross-
fertilisation that are ascribed to large-scale
buildings also warrant empirical challenge. Much
has been made of “serendipitous encounters”
and functional synergies in spawning value, and
the proposition that the larger the building
population, the greater the range of functions
likely to be represented within it, and the
increased likelihood of both effects. This thinking
is evident in the rationale for the new 79,000
square metre Francis Crick Institute at Kings
Cross (The Francis Crick Institute, 2010).
The overall contemporary focus of interaction,
and parallel interest in “activity-based working”,
has seen an efflorescence in the range new
interior settings, conceived and designed for
varying work modalities. Whilst some cater for
solo work, the emphasis has been on spaces for
interaction – formal and informal, and
expressing considerable variety in their
configuration, style and identity. Complementing
and enriching the formerly limited suite of work
settings centred on rows of desks, corridors of
offices, and conventional meeting rooms, such
provision offers the supply chain an engaging
three-dimensional opportunity, enlarging and
enriching its scope of work, and poising its
output for media presence, peer awareness and
recognition.
In 2011, a study of workplace transformation
involved an occupier that had moved against the
mar ket trend – disper sing rather than
agglomerating (Strelitz, 2012b). It also involved
moving from a newer, better appointed building,
to smaller, older, simpler space. Designed by a
well-recognised architect, the vacated building –
comprising 1,650 workstations in Grade A
accommodation, and including a gym, shop,
beauty salon, and even a music room, as well as
a large staff restaurant and extensive breakout
space – had been commended in a national
workplace awards scheme (BCO, 2004). Inside
of eight years, the occupier had transferred its
operations to a series of long-standing technical
facilities where space was available. A post
occupancy evaluation with the staff who had
moved to one of these centres – far smaller and
simpler than the building they left, and with few
facilities apart from an internal rest area and
picnic table outside, had counter-intuitive results.
Comparing the impact of the second building to
the first, most employees evaluated the new
workplace positively or as making no difference.
This suite of measures included: “Improves the
scope for the work you do on an individual
basis”, “Improves the scope for team work”, and
“Feel comfortable and ‘at home’ when you
come to this workspace”.
On the face of it, these findings may seem
surprising, but two key reasons underlie them.
One is location: on vacating the first building,
staff could choose to work in the available
workplace closest to where they lived. The
second is physical scale: the building people
moved to represents a significant reduction – no
voluminous foyer, no bank of turnstyles, no long
floor plates. It is easier and quicker to enter and
exit. The small entrance lobby and single flight of
stairs also facilitate popping out for a breather.
The reduced scale is also better aligned to a
sense of community. Whereas the large building
they had occupied previously had felt
anonymous, here people know who works
around them. The findings show compactness
trumping relative luxury, with the comparison
typified in the comment that:
Now we’re no longer rattling around in
the Marie Celeste.
Drawing on empirical knowledge of what
matters to building users, these findings
challenge the supply chain perspective on the
projected benefits of scale, and the relevance of
high-end facilities that big scale facilitates. They
affirm other findings from successive workplace
studies that indicate: people’s tendency to
adhere to elective association with whom they
have a specific affinity – sitting at lunch with
direct colleagues or friends from previous teams,
chatting to other cyclists in the bike shed, and to
opt for simple, conveniently sited, “classic”
settings that they feel comfortable to use in a
work environment (ZZA, successive proprietary
workplace studies, unpublished).
136
Conclusions: Pointers to relevant,
sustainable development
This paper highlights location and scale as critical
factors in workplaces that appeal to users, for
whom geographic dispersal and smaller scale
are more resonant than large-scale
agglomerations. The resultant benefits of
convenient access, internal comfort, and sense
of community outweigh a relative absence of
non-core facilities. The notable explosion in the
development of “co-work venues” and “hubs”
since Why Place Still Matters in the Digital Age
was published in 2011 (Greater London
Authority, 2015) lends the research on people’s
choice of “third places” as work venues that
contributes to these conclusions additional
import. Often developed in legacy buildings, this
rapidly increasing stock of contemporar y
wor kplaces, frequented by independent
workers, small scale operations, and corporate
organisations, underscores the appeal of
locationally distributed, smaller-scale workplaces,
with a strong sense of community, permeability
and cultural frisson (Strelitz, 2012a), and
predicated on user choice – in where to work,
where and with whom to undertake elective
activities, and how to conduct their lives in more
manageable ways. The property supply chain is
already taking cues from the commercial
opportunities that this market represents; there
is much of substance here for them to learn.
References
Barrow, B. (2012, February 23). For sale: glittering
remnants of Enron. The Telegraph. Retrieved from
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/
1385757/For-sale-glittering-remnants-of-
Enron.html/
Birmingham Post (2014, May 14). British Council
for Offices 2014: Recognition for history of
excellence and innovation in office design.
Birmingham Post. Retrieved from http://
www.birminghampost.co.uk/business/
commercial-property/british-council-
offices-2014-recognition-7117909/
British Council for Offices [BCO] (1999). BCO
Awards - Winners 1992-2001. Retrieved from
http://www.bco.org.uk/Awards/Winners/
1992-2001.aspx/
BCO (2001). BCO Awards - Winners 1992-2001.
Retrieved from: http://www.bco.org.uk/Awards/
Winners/1992-2001.aspx.
BCO (2002). BCO Awards - 2002 Winners.
Retrieved from: http://www.bco.org.uk/Awards/
Winners/2002.aspx/
BCO (2004). BCO Awards - 2004 Winners.
Retrieved from: http://www.bco.org.uk/Awards/
Winners/2004.aspx/
BCO (2005). BCO Awards - 2005 Fit-Out of
Workplace Award. Retrieved from: http://
www.bco.org.uk/Awards/Winners/2005/Fit-Out-
Workplace2005.aspx/
BCO (2006). BCO Awards - 2006 Corporate
Workplace Award. Retrieved from http://
www.bco.org.uk/Awards/Winners/2006/
Corporate-Workplace2006.aspx/
Chiswick Park (2015). Chiswick Park enjoy-work.
Retrieved from: http://www.enjoy-work.com/
Clifford Chance (2015). Our Canary Wharf office.
Retrieved from http://www.cliffordchance.com/
careers/experienced_lawyers/u_k/
our_canary_wharfoffice.html/
The Economist (2005). Up the wall. The
Economist. Retrieved from: http://
www.economist.com/node/3909004/
The Francis Crick Institute (2010, June 21). UK to
take unprecedented step in international science
leadership. Retrieved from: https://
www.crick.ac.uk/news/press-releases/
unprecedented-step/
Greater London Authority (2015). London open
workspaces. Retrieved from: https://
www.london.gov.uk/priorities/business-
economy/for-business/business-support/london-
workspaces/
Hughes, W., Ancell, D., Gruneberg, S. and Hirst, L.
(2004). Exposing the myth of the 1:5:200 ratio
relating initial cost, maintenance and staffing costs
137
of office buildings. Proceedings 20th Annual
ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2004,
Edinburgh, UK. Association of Researchers in
Construction Management, Vol. 1, 373-381.
Ive, G. (2006). ‘Re-examining the costs and value
ratios of owning and occupying buildings’.
Building Research & Information, 34(3), 230-245.
Strelitz, Z. and Edwards, M. (2006). Getting it
together: the work-life agenda and offices.
London: British Council for Offices.
Strelitz, Z., Edwards, M. and Ben-Galim, D.
(2005). Family-friendly offices: The policy, practice
and legislative context. London: British Council for
Offices.

New London Architecture (2015). Workplace:
retaining London’s talent. Retrieved from http://
www.newlondonarchitecture.org/programme/
events/2015/september-2015/workplace-
retaining-londons-talent/
Ross, P. (2012). ‘British Airways Building by Niels
Torp in Heathrow, UK. ‘ The Architectural Review.
Retrieved from: http://www.architectural-
review.com/buildings/british-airways-building-by-
niels-torp-in-heathrow-uk/8633352.article/
World Green Building Council (2014). Health,
Wellbeing and Productivity in Offices: The next
chapter for green building. Retrieved from http://
www.ukgbc.org/resources/publication/health-
wellbeing-and-productivity-offices-next-chapter-
green-building/
ZZA (2015). Lloyd’s Register’s GTC at Boldrewood:
Post Occupancy Evaluation, Report to Grimshaw
Architects, Confidential, ZZA Responsive User
Environments, June 2015.

The Stoddart Review (2016). The Workplace

Advantage. Retrieved from: http://
stoddartreview.com/wp-content/uploads/
2016/12/
TSR_WorkplaceAdvantageFinal_SinglesWeb.pdf/

Strelitz, Z. (2010). Liveable lives. Regus

Management Limited.

Strelitz, Z. (2011). Why place still matters in the

digital age: Third place working in easy reach of
home. Regus Management Limited.

Strelitz, Z. (2012a). Energy, people, place:

sustainable urban paradigm. Hexham,
Northumberland: SHP.

Strelitz, Z. (2012b). Improved productivity at lower

cost: evidence from research on workplace
transformation. London: ZZA Responsive
Environments ©, Telereal Trillium.

Strelitz, Z. (2017). The Physical Workplace and

Work-Life Balance: Perspectives from Practice.
Lewis, S., Anderson, D., Lyonette, C., Payne, N.
and Wood, S. (Eds.). Work-Life Balance in Times
of Recession, Austerity and Beyond. Abingdon,
Oxon and New York: Routledge.

138
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

The benefits of research for a small practice

Dinah Bornat1
1ZCD Architects

School of Architecture Computing and Engineering, University of East London, UK

db@zcdarchitects.co.uk

Abstract

The context for the research presented in this paper, is a growing interest in achieving
positive outcomes for health and wellbeing in new residential developments. In
particular it focuses on children and their ability to play outside safely and be
independently mobile. There has been a sharp reduction in both play and children’s
independent mobility in recent years ‘with significant consequences for the health and
physical, social and mental development of children’ (Shaw et al. 2015). However, this
area suffers from a lack of available evidence and data that industry can draw on for
policy and good practice.

This paper explores the experience of engaging with and carrying out independent
critical research for our small practice ZCD Architects. It looks at the challenges and
benefits, as well as the wider outcomes for academia and industry. A discussion of the
project shows how it helped our practice to create new knowledge and expertise,
providing competitive advantage as well as underpinning the practice’s philosophy of
designing buildings and communities for the people that use them.

Key words: practice research, health and wellbeing, play, residential design

139
Introduction
A presumption in favour of sustainability
set out by the National Planning Policy
Framework is an overarching principle,
within which new housing developments
are required to support ‘health, social and
cultural well-being’ (NPPF, 2012). In
practice, the industry is not consistently
delivering on this aim, and a recent
report by the UK Green Building Council
called for ‘a concerted effort to shift the
market towards a focus on the mental,
social and physical health and wellbeing of
the people who occupy the homes we
build and retrofit’ (UKGBC, 2016). The
same report highlights the importance of
the external environment as a major
contributor to health and wellbeing
outcomes as well as social interaction.
For children, health and wellbeing is
critical, but this is not being addressed in
today’s policy and practice. An all-party
parliamentar y repor t highlights the
problem; ‘Constraints on children’s
opportunities to play have increased in
recent decades, with a proportionate
impact on their wellbeing, future life
chances and, ultimately, the health of the
nation, with social and economic
ramifications that are detrimental to
society.’ (Clark et al. 2015). This paper
explores the relationship between design
and layout of external spaces in
residential developments and the issues
of health and wellbeing, play and
children’s independent mobility . The
research concludes that children may be
the key to unlocking the problem and
therefore the generators of community
life. Schemes that support extended
unsupervised play show better use by
adults too (Bornat, 2016). At the same
the paper provides an opportunity to
reflect on the potentials and pitfalls of
research in a small architectural practice;
it looks at how gaining new knowledge
can lead to project opportunities, by
establishing a unique offer to new clients
and organisations.
Research Context
The background to the research starts
with Jane Jacobs’ analysis of streets as a
space for congregating and forming social
ties (Jacobs 1961). Her contemporaries,
Donald Appleyard (1981) and William H
Whyte (1980) continued with the work
by developing obser vational tools,
focusing on public space, and watching
carefully how people behaved. This work
in the US has formed much of the
foundation of contemporar y urban
thinking.
Whyte’s work had a strong influence on
the architect and urbanist Jan Gehl whose
office has carried out public space studies
over decades, influencing the planning
and design of public spaces in cities
around the world in the process. Gehl’s
aim was to reduce the emphasis on the
car and improve the street for
pedestrians, cyclists and social activity.
Much of his work, focuses on commercial
and retail areas and the opportunities
that streets and squares offer for creating
public life (Gehl, 2011)1. Gehl picks out
social use of space as distinct from the
necessary day-to-day activities such as
domestic chores and travelling to work
or school, highlighting its importance.

1In Life Between Buildings (2011) Gehl distinguishes between necessary, optional and
social use of space. He suggests that social activity evolves from the optional use of space
and that this type of behaviour varies according to the location. In external residential
spaces social activity tends to arise from a common interest or because people know each
other. In city centres and streets social activity is generally ‘more superficial’.

140
There is less studied in relation to public
space in residential areas, although Clare
Cooper Marcus and Wendy Sarkissian’s
(1986) book, Housing as if People
Mattered, is an excellent and thorough
analysis of external spaces in housing
schemes across the UK and US. Now
largely forgotten, it gives specific guidance
on how to design external spaces to
foster sustainable communities.
In the UK and more recently studies, by
CABE (CABE, 2007) and Homes and
Communities Agency (HCA, 2015) use
resident surveys to focus on levels of
satisfaction and perception of local
neighbourhoods . Alongside this, work
from organisations such as Social Life,
who have worked with L&Q and
Berkeley Homes, aims to give a clear
argument for the benefits of social space
in residential area (Social Life, 2015;
Berkeley Group, University of Reading
and Social Life, 2015). There is an
oppor tunity for the architecture
profession to build on this work to bring
design thinking to the issue of social
space rather than start from scratch
every time.
My interest in the work began as a
volunteer and early organiser of a Play
Street in Hackney, helping the borough’s
streets team establish the planning and
legal framework. Although there was
much anecdotal evidence about lack of
street play we realised there was no data
available for the borough to rely on. I
offered to carry out a study at University
of East London, which was immediately
accepted.
The research project, methodology
and process
The research project, Housing Design for
Community Life, started as a pilot carried
out during the first academic terms of
2014, at the University of East London
within the authors’ 15 MArch design unit.
It drew on a similar study, carried out by
Mike Biddulph (2011) at Cardiff
University which looked at the social use
of home zones versus traditional street
layouts and their impact on social
interaction, using Gehl’s system of
obser vation, timing and recording.
Another point of reference was a review
of children’s play on ten Joseph Rowntree
housing estates in which observations
and inter views were car r ied out
(Wheway and Millward 1997). Our aim
was to give Hackney valuable evidence as
to where children were playing out in
estates across the borough.
The observational work was carried out
over the October half term holiday, the
weather was warm for the time of year.
Permission was sought and permission
was received from each of the estate
managers. University ethical approval was
forthcoming as students would not be
interacting with residents, or gathering
any personal data.. In line with similar
studies, the residents were not informed,
as it is known to influence behaviour. If
asked, the students were told to say they
were carrying out a traffic study. For the
pilot study, students worked in pairs or
threes on six separate estates in Hackney.
The estates were built between 1930 and
1980 and were a mix of deck access and
medium rise blocks. They were asked to
gather twelve hours of data for each
estate, choosing what they felt was an
appropriate location to observe from.
They filled in tables by hand recording
the number of people viewed, their age,
method of transport and time spent in
view; whether briefly, 3 minutes, 5
minutes or longer. They augmented Gehl’s
methodology by noting when children
were playing or travelling unaccompanied
by an adult.
The field data revealed mar ked
differences between the levels of use on
141
each estate and formed the basis for an
exhibition. The students presented laser-
cut models of each estate at 1:500 scale,
and sections at 1:100 to show the
relationship between internal and
external spaces. They also developed
estate plans that mapped categories of
external space for degrees of public,
private and shared use.
The maps provided a deliber ate
departure from conventional landscaping
layouts, movement plans and use
classifications, and presented external
space in such a way as to distinguish all
public shared spaces and to visualise
connections. We speculated that the
layout of the spaces and relationship to
the buildings might have some influence
on social activity and time spent. External
spaces were categorised as follows;
public/shared space, communal space,
inaccessible space such as planted areas,
private space, car parking and roads. In
doing so we were investigating both
Wheway and Gehl’s principles of how
people, particularly children, use external
space. During the research we drew on
the support and advice of Rob Wheway,
a children’s play consultant who attended
the critique and exhibition. Wheway is
pleased that further work is being carried
out which validate his principles.
At the exhibition held at Netil House in
Hackney, the students presented their
findings to industry professionals which
included a number of housing
associations and architects, as well as
representatives from Hackney Council. A
handful of residents personally known to
us were also present. We discussed why
some spaces worked better than others
and what could be done to improve the
public realm on the estates, particularly
for children. The key finding was that
playing out was occurring in some estates,
challenging prevailing anecdotal evidence.
It highlighted an issue which is slowly
leading to change across the borough.
Housing Design for Community Life
The exhibition resulted in support from
the Homes and Communities Agency
(HCA) who were able to leverage
funding from National House Building
Council (NHBC) foundation for further
research. By this stage it was clear that
there was a demand for evidence about
the design of external spaces in new
housing developments; from land
acquisition, through masterplanning and
delivery to neighbourhood management,
as well as the seemingly less tangible
issues of community resilience, health and
well-being. With the HCA’s advice, we
identified ten recently completed
schemes to study across England that
represented a variety of design and
layouts.
Consistent field data was achieved by
employing two researchers for the
project, with each scheme yielding a
minimum of 24 hours of data. The
observational period was extended to a
minimum of twelve hours over two
separate days. Working over the summer,
data was gathered at weekends, after
school or during the day in the school
summer holiday period. Study days were
chosen for when the weather was fine.
The researchers were positioned at
separate locations on the same scheme,
each with a good field of view. Time
spent outside was calculated more
accurately by recording time in the space
and time out, giving values far in excess of
the previous study.
142
The researchers filled in tables, by hand, external spaces are networked together;
recording the following information: and the relationship of front doors,
conducive to creating neighbour ly
Age group (estimate) connections. Perhaps unsurprisingly the
Pre-school (under 5) car-free shared spaces with direct access
Child (5-12) to dwellings were best used.
Teenager
 Once the field data had been gathered it
(13-19) was entered into spreadsheets from
Adult which a series of graphs were created.
Elderly (over 65) The most fruitful results were scatter
graphs comparing the three schemes for
Time into view overall numbers of social use, time spent
Time out of view outside and children’s use of the space
for both play and independent mobility.
In a group or alone The graphs revealed that children are the
most dominant users of external space in
Activity carried out residential areas; their numbers far in
Passing through excess of the ward demographic figures
Hanging out from the ONS.
Domestic chores
Talking The schemes where children were seen
Observing others playing out for longer were ones which
Play had a generally high degree of social
Supervision of children playing activity3. These schemes ranked higher in
the mapping analysis as well; the best
Way of moving used schemes had a networ k of
On foot connected open spaces that were more
Bicycle directly accessible and well overlooked by
Pushchair dwellings. These findings chimed with the
Scooter existing research and the maps brought
Mobility scooter the data to life, allowing us to start
defining key urban design characteristics
New maps were developed for this study for better social use of space.
that categor ised exter nal spaces
according to four factors, developed from Project outcomes
the theories of Wheway, Whyte and Gehl
as well as reflecting emerging principles The project has had impact on the
from the study: car-free shared spaces2 housing industry by providing an up to
that have direct access from dwellings date source of evidence generated that
appear ; whether the space is well can be used as the basis of design and
overlooked by homes; how well the policy, at a time when the impact of

2I define car free shared spaces as public or communal spaces shared with other people
where cars are not able to drive or park. This is distinct from shared surfaces which are
spaces that people share with cars
3 It should be noted that external spaces are less well used by elderly people, both for
passing through and staying longer. We are now developing our research to focus on
intergenerational issues with this in mind.

143
external space on wellbeing is starting to
be taken very seriously and is a useful
starting point for further work in this
area. Write up of the project report took
12 months, during which time the author
discussed and disseminated the work,
c r e a t i n g a n e t wo r k o f i n d u s t r y
professionals that lead to invite to panel
discussions, round table events and
presentations. The project also led to
contacts with developer s, housing
associations and local authorities. Early on,
Jo McCafferty, a director at the London
architectural practice Levitt Bernstein
recognised the project’s potential as
‘pushing at an open  door’. Her interest
and support for the project has led to
continued collaboration and a mutually
supportive relationship for our practices.
Levitt Bernstein gave graphic design input,
helping to create a professional
publication and promotion advice. It is
endorsed by a forward from David
Montague the chair of the G7 housing
group and chief executive at L&Q.
A limited budget meant that a launch
event or large print run was not possible.
Instead the author targeted other events
to publicise the research, and used the
online publication tool issuu. User metrics
show that the research has been
downloaded several hundred times by
people around the world.
The project also had an impact on
teaching and on the students who
conducted the research. The pilot study
carried out at University of East London
was a structured start to the year for the
postgraduate students, but one that
quickly lead to a new body of knowledge,
starting a discourse within the unit about
how different people use space in and
around buildings. Field data gathering was
straightforward and inexpensive: needing
no more equipment than a pen, paper
and a watch. The students had the
opportunity to critique their own data
and develop graphical techniques for
presentation. The programme provided
the students with a new skill and offers
repeat teaching potential.
The project has also had significant
impact on our practice formed in 2013
with a strong track record in domestic
design. We made a strategic choice to
embark on the research project as a
means of entering a new sector, housing,
as despite entering and sometimes being
shortlisted for a number of competitions,
we had yet to be commissioned for a
housing scheme. From a commercial
point of view we saw research as both a
potential source of income and a unique
selling point in what is a highly
competitive market. It also enabled us to
develop our network. Above all else
though, it was a chance to do something
we believe in, connecting good quality,
sensitive design to projects with a social
purpose.
The outcome of the project is that we
now possess a degree of authenticity and
credibility that is valuable to new clients; it
is a tangible way of aligning ourselves with
their aims and objectives. A significant
o u t c o m e i s t h a t we h ave b e e n
commissioned to design a multi-unit
social housing scheme , using the
principles of the research. Invitations to
make presentations, participate in panel
discussions and contribute to publications
are now reaching a steady trickle as our
expertise in this forum becomes better
known.
Collaborations with other organisations
have also begun; we were invited to
deliver an event with the Policy Studies
Institute . #Hackney2026 brought
international speaker s and UK
professionals together to develop the
concept of the child friendly city in the
borough. This is developing into an on-
going project likely to influence policy and
144
practice in Hackney and potentially across
London. The research publication
continues to be well read online and will
be re-published under the NHBC banner
later this year.
Conclusions
This paper described the development
and publication of a research project and
the benefits this has brought to our small
architectural practice. By tapping into an
area currently lacking in evidence, we
identified a need in the housing sector
that had the potential to provide our
practice with a competitive advantage
and a credibility underpinning our work.
We exploited the authors’ dual role as
teacher and practitioner, and used our
skills as designers and lateral thinkers to
bring the research data to life and
present a credible pilot project and
exhibition. Eventually this was brought
into our practice where we developed it
into a convincing research project,
obtaining enough funding to make it
viable.
Our practice invested a considerable
amount of time in the research,
equivalent to 10% of annual turnover,
which is comparable to other speculative
work such as entering competitions. In
the shor t ter m this has led to
commissions in what is a highly
competitive market. In the long term we
hold onto evidence that is valuable to the
industry.
We have learned that the support of
others is vital and not only helps to
enrich the project as it develops, but also
works to build a strong network and the
potential for future collaboration. The
spirit of the project has positive
connotations and is attractive to clients
looking to resolve some of the issues
associated with the long-term
management of their neighbourhoods.
For larger architectural practices it offers
a tangible justification to what they often
struggle to do; explain to clients that the
layout and design of housing schemes is
crucial to their success.
Our practice will continue with our work
in this field, broadening it to include inter-
generational issues and looking to secure
further funding, this time working in close
collaboration with other companies. The
experience has been positive and has
provided us with a clear direction for the
practice that we believe offers huge
potential in the long term.
References
Appleyard, D. (1981). Livable Streets.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Berkeley Group, University of Reading
and Social Life (2015) Creating Strong
Communities. Berkeley Group: Surrey.
Biddulph, M (2012) ‘Radical streets? The
impact of innovative designs on activity in
residential streets’. Urban Design
International, 17(3), pp. 178-205.
School of City and Regional Planning,
Cardiff University. URBAN DESIGN
International (2012) 17, pp. 178–205.
Bornat, D. (2016). Housing Design for
Community Life: Researching how residents
use external spaces in new developments.
London: ZCD Architects.
CABE (2007). A sense of place. What
residents think of their new homes.
Retrieved from: http://
www.designcouncil.org.uk/
Clark H, et al. (2015). Play – A Report by
the All Party Parliamentary Group on a Fit
and Healthy Childhood. Retrieved from:
http://www.royalpa.co.uk/
145
Cooper Marcus, C. and Sarkissian, W.
(1986). Housing as if people mattered: Site
Design Guidelines for Medium Density
Family Housing. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Gehl, J. (2011). Life Between Buildings:
Using Public Space. London: Island Press.
UK Green Building Council (2016) Health
and wellbeing in homes. London: UKGBC.
Wheway R., and Millward, A., (1997)
Child’s Play: Facilitating play on housing
estates. Retrieved from: https://
www.jrf.org.uk/report/childs-play-
facilitating-play-housing-estates

Homes and Communities Agency (2015) Whyte, W. H. (1980). The Social Life of
Quality Counts – feedback from residents. Small Urban Spaces. New York: Project
London: HCA. Retrieved from: http:// for Public Spaces.
www.gov.uk/government/publications/
affordable-homes-programme-quality-
counts

Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of

Great American Cities. New York: Random
House.

Shaw, B., Bicket, M., Elliott, B., Fagan-

Watson, B., & Mocca, E (2015) Children’s
Independent Mobility: an international
comparison and recommendations for
action. London: Policy Studies Institute.

Social life (2015). L&Q shared outdoor

spaces: what works? London: Social Life.
Retrieved from: http://www.social-life.co/

146
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

The City of Time: ‘Site, structure, skin, services, space plan, stuff ’ and then
what?

Stephen Greenberg1, Andrew Harrison2, Steven Smith3

1Metaphor

sgreenberg@metaphor.eu

2Spaces that Work

aharrisonuk@hotmail.com

3Urban Narrative
ssmith@urbannarrative.com

Abstract

DEGW was an international research based design company that pioneered new ways of thinking
about architecture for over four decades from its foundation in 1971. A central idea informing
DEGW’s research and design was that buildings should be understood not merely in terms of fixed
forms and spaces (as most architects are trained to do) but as interconnected building and user
systems that change over time. The idea, also articulated by Stewart Brand in his landmark TV series
and book ‘How Buildings Learn,’ was that a buildings are composed of the site, shell, services, scenery
and stuff each changed and adapted by their users over different periods of time.

In this paper three former directors of DEGW explore how this shift in conception of architecture
from spatial to temporal has been refined and developed through their creative work in three
specialist disciplines. Through a series of case studies the topic is explored by:- Andrew Harrison in
learning environments; Stephen Greenberg in arts and cultural space; Steven Smith in urbanism and
the city. They conclude that in all these areas of work a temporal understanding is the key to creating
deeper emotional and functional engagements between people and place.

Key words: practice knowledge, spatial to temporal conception of space, people and environment 


147
Introduction
DEGW was an international research-based design
company that pioneered new ways of thinking about
architecture and the built environment. The firm was
founded in London in 1971 and was in continuous
operation until its eventual merger with Davis
Langdon and later AECOM in 2011.
The themes running through many of the issues
explored by DEGW over four decades of practice
relate to the introduction of information technology
and its subsequent social and organisational
consequences. It would be a mistake, however, to
assume that this focus was completely clear in the
early days of the practice. It took a long time for
DEGW to realise and then to articulate the idea
that buildings, especially office buildings, are
essentially based on layers of differing longevity.
Their idea was that architecture and interior design
should be understood not as finite objects, rather as
speculations about what might or might not be
needed either in the immediate or more distant
future. Unfortunately, putting this insight into practice
was difficult, as the information available on which to
make the case for possible future projects tended to
be largely derived from precedents or from what
came to hand at the time during each “design
process”. In the early decades of the rapidly evolving
IT revolution this was particularly problematic,
especially given the extended time horizons and
slow processes that were inherent in the design and
delivery of individual office buildings.
Figure 1: The DEGW diagram
An image that articulated this key DEGW idea is
what became known as The DEGW diagram (figure
1). This consists of a series of houses within houses,
with each house representing a different
constructional or occupational layer of a building.
Each ‘house’ in the diagram represented in turn the
‘Site, Structure, Skin, Services, Space Plan, Stuff ’. The
diagram was useful in explaining that a building is not
a fixed object but is rather a set of assembled
systems that changed over time but at differing rates.
Once understood in this way, the design of a building
could be seen as the engagement with one or more
of these changing systems. The consequence being
that we have to ‘design for change’ not permanence.
For many architects this insight was a shocking
revelation quite contrary to their training and
sensibilities as aspiring creators of unchanging
architectural masterpieces.
The idea proved seminal to other thinkers such as
Stuart Brand (1994) who demonstrated how the
best outcomes are often achieved in flexible, simply
designed buildings and spaces that can
accommodate change over time.
The DEGW diagram captured a series of positions
about the way organisations use space and the
nature of the office and workspace they might need.
These ideas included the early adoption of the open
plan office to later ideas about business lounges, hot
-desking and remote working. It soon became
apparent that this new way of thinking about
buildings and the environment in terms of systems
and time rather than form and space was relevant to
many areas of architectural and environmental
design beyond the narrow world of the workspace
and office.
Close attention to the implications of the DEGW
diagram leads to conclusions that dissolve the
boundaries between urbanism, architecture, and
interior design and additionally that specialised spatial
typologies for different activities become less and
less useful. The closer we look the more architecture
disappears as a discrete discipline and the more that
we analyse how space is used the less specific it
needs to be.
This diagram remained, however, essentially building-
focused. It described:
• A conception of architecture as nestled systems
of different durability
• A contrast to the idea of architecture as fixed
spaces and fabric of solid and void
• A systemic rather than spatial conception
• Architecture as a spatial order containing and
expressing the systemic order of the institution it
houses
• A building being subject to variable rates of
change from the diurnal to the once in a century
148
• A concept of space that embraced the potential
of information to subver t the need for
synchronicity and collocation and hence to
revolutionise conceptions of what space is for
What has happened post-DEGW, as the internet
age has taken an ever-greater hold on organisations
and culture, is the continuing development of this
train of thought to take into account the following
changes:
• Synchronicity and co-location are increasingly no
longer essential to institutional order
• The systemic order of an institution is no longer
tied to specific locations and buildings
• We can work anywhere
• The organisation has left the building
• Spatial architecture no longer holds a monopoly
of providing organisational order efficiency and
convenience
• The connection between form and function or
efficiency, effectiveness and expression is
dissolving
• There is a shift from architectural to urbanistic
forms of organisation
• A shift from centres to distributed quarters
• A shift from headquarters to hubs, clubs and cafes
• Adoption urban descriptors and language (town
squares, interior streets etc) for giant scale
interior design projects
• A search for narrative and meaning in
organisations, interior spaces, buildings and urban
space
• An architectural retreat from relevance into
gratuitous abstraction in an increasingly placeless
world
• A cultural realignment in which architecture has
lost its leading status as the mother of the arts
This paper tells the story of how three DEGW
partners have developed the DEGW diagram in
separate but related areas of practice. In the City of
Time Steven Smith founder of urban narrative
discusses the application of the building of time idea
to urbanism and cultural space. In the City of
Learning Andrew Harrison founder of Spaces that
Work explores how this same idea is influencing
new thinking in educational space. In the City of
Memory Stephen Greenberg founder of Metaphor
describes how his work has developed the DEGW
diagram in an exploration of exhibition and museum
design that is increasingly engaged in propositions for
urban regeneration and the creation of meaningful
forms of urbanism.
The City of Time
Steven Smith- Urban narrative
The concept of the city as being composed of
multiple interdependent systems, each of which is
changing at different rates, provides a dynamic model
of the city in which change is constant.
It provides a contrast to an architectural conception
of the city composed of fixed buildings and open
spaces where change is controlled and rare.
To explore this idea we might think of an axis with
the most rapidly changing systems at one end and
the slower changing systems at the other. The axis
can be divided into two groups. The Ephemeral City,
at one end of the axis, includes all the rapidly
changing systems while those that change more
slowly are collected together as the Material City at
the other.
The Ephemeral City
The Ephemeral City includes the infinitely complex
confusion of fleeting events that make up the bustle
of urban life. Changing slightly more slowly are the
temporary props that support and surround events.
These may include shop displays and exhibitions that
endure for a few days or weeks. More enduring still
are the installations such as markets that come and
go, hoardings, advertisements and signs that may
endure for a short while and temporary structures
that might last for a few years.
The Ephemeral embraces the daily parades of
commuters, the setting up and taking down of
countless stalls and markets, rituals of opening and
closing, of the repeated small dramas of daily life and
work; of feast days, holidays, carnivals, and the
performance of local and national identity and the
symbolic enactment of governance.
Paradoxically although these aspects of the city are
short lived themselves, regular re-enactment may
endure for generations, even outlasting the
apparently durable architecture and spaces in which
they occur.
The Material City
The Material City includes those aspects of the city
that change much more slowly, so slowly indeed that
they are often assumed to be permanent. These are
the conventional concerns of architecture and town
planning. This part of the axis includes architecture,
149
that might exceptionally last for hundreds of years,
public space, monuments, infrastructure systems
each of which change more slowly, and finally to the
city’s underlying landscape and topography that
changes so slowly that it appears to be permanent.
The changes to these parts of the city are slow
compared to the ephemeral elements but they do
gradually change none-the-less.
Architecture is continuously, cleaned, patched,
repaired, adapted and reinvented from the day of
completion to its eventual decline to ruin. The
surface of public space wears away, is excavated and
replaced, monuments endure but even they are
eventually torn down or moved, infrastructure is
constantly reinvented requiring change to public
space as the surface is dug up and replaced over and
over. Finally the topography of the city, though
apparently durable, slowly changes and is periodically
dramatically remodelled by human force, nature or
chance.
Consequences
There are two important insights that arise from this
shift from a conception of City of Space to the City
of Time.
The first is the realisation that the purpose of the
city is ephemeral. It is about conversation,
performance, exchange, display, trade festivals, events
and all the other fleeting experiences that provide
the foreground to urban life. From this it is clear that
the purpose of the material city is merely to provide
a frame and ornament to the ephemeral. It does not,
by some remarkable alchemy, induce it, as many
planners and architects seem to believe.
The second insight is in respect of city governance
and, by extension, town planning. The first focus of
city governance should be on the hosting and
curation of the temporary changing life of the city to
established a viable ephemeral culture. Only then
should the secondar y concern of providing
meaningful ornament to the events, including defined
public space and architecture, become important.
Additionally architecture and the design of public
space should defer to the form and patterns of the
ephemeral and not seek to impose its arbitrary
geometries upon it.
This hierarchy, placing the ephemeral above the
material, may seem counter intuitive. In fact it
reconnects urbanism with its ancient roots in which
the founding of cities and making architecture was
the outcome of complex ceremony and ritual
directed at bringing good fortune to the enterprise.
We no longer have traditional vernacular
connections with ritual to deploy in the making of
architecture and cites. Our modern condition
imposes upon us the creative opportunity and duty
to invent relevant ephemeral festivals of art, culture
and exchange, which provide meaning and validate
our identity. It is these new patterns of behaviour
that should guide us in the invention of the
contemporary material city.
Case Study- Southbank Centre London
These thoughts about the City of Time gradually
developed during work on a number of urban
narrative projects with Southbank Centre, in central
London, over a period of five years.
The Southbank Centre is the largest integrated arts
foundation in the world. Created in 1951 for the
Festival of Britain, the 8.5ha site on the Thames
Embankment includes the Royal Festival Hall, Queen
Elizabeth Hall, Purcell Room, the Hayward Gallery,
and the Saison Poetry Library.
The Southbank Centre is an organisation whose
deep cultural output and audience engagement
requires that they are skilled in curating an
experience that embraces every dimension of time
from the most ephemeral to the most enduring
across the architecture and landscape of their entire
site.
The Centre’s Festival programme, led by Artistic
Director Jude Kelly, provides the cultural framework
for a diverse programme that challenges and inspires
engagement, dialogue and debate between
audiences, performers and visitors. Our role has
been to create the spatial logic to support the
Festival, and to exploit underused space so that
festival inspiration reaches every corner of the site.
In addition we explored how the Queen Elizabeth
Hall, Purcell Room and Hayward Gallery, (now
renamed the Festival Wing), could be restored and
reinvented to suppor t contempor ar y ar ts
programming. We proposed a series of low cost
temporary interventions as part of the festival
progr amme to test ideas before making
commitments to expensive permanent alterations.
Working with dozens of artists, designers and
makers, roof gardens have been planted; hidden
spaces opened up for events; lost outdoor gallery
150
spaces re-inhabited; temporary staircases have made
new connections and transformed patterns of
movement; paint, banners and graphics have
invigorated the buildings; and pop-up restaurants
have been located in recycled containers and
abandoned temporary structures.
Through our collaboration, the Southbank Centre
has rediscovered the radical architectural ideas that
inspired its creation. The ground-breaking 1960s
architects conceived the site as a concrete landscape
primed for the overlay of ar tworks, graphic
installations and ephemeral additions. Fifty years on,
festival interventions reveal the power of these
founding architectural concepts and bring them
vividly to life.
We prepared the architectural brief and carried out
the technical feasibility study for the refurbishment
and adaptation of the Festival Wing. This analysed the
conceptual ideas in terms of engineering viability,
established a project budget, and evidence to
support a successful bid to attract major Arts
Council UK funding. The work provided the basis for
a selection process to choose the architects and
consultants to take the project forward to the design
stages.
The methods we have explored with the Southbank
Centre have enabled the organisation to develop a
coherent narrative for the site as a whole. Public
spaces and buildings are integrally connected to the
remarkable architectural legacy, and festival
programming continues to create a dynamic hub in
the cultural life of London.
At the Southbank Centre we encountered a client
who completely and intuitively understands that
great places generate compelling narratives. These
can be communicated through live encounters
between people, and through performances, events,
exhibits and installations.
For this organisation public spaces and architecture
merely provide locations and scenery around
encounters, and are only thought to be successful if
they support and amplify the drama.
Their focus on the ephemeral above the material in
city-making provides profound lessons for all those
engaged in the creation of cities, especially for those
whose training suggests an inversion of this way of
apprehending the experience of the city.
The City of Learning
Andrew Harrison - Spaces That Work
Radical change is happening in the commercial
workplace, driven by the impact of global, regional
and local economic imperatives, the impact of
technology and changing expectations both of
people entering the workforce and people already
working who now have different goals and
expectations about their work life. As Duffy (2008)
stated ‘information technology has overturned the
two great iron laws of twentieth century work and
office buildings and cities that were built to
accommodate it: synchronicity and the collocation of
activities’ (p16).
Approaches to learning in educational settings are
also changing radically. IT has fundamentally changed
how we learn. Collecting, analysing, displaying and
disseminating knowledge typically involve IT:
retrieving information has become an IT function;
students often consider the Internet, not the library,
their information universe. Rather than trying to
know everything, students and faculty increasingly
rely on networks of peers and databases of
information.
At all educational levels traditional teacher-centred
models, where good teaching is conceptualised as
the passing on of sound academic, practical or
vocational knowledge, are being replaced with more
student-centred approaches which emphasise the
construction of knowledge through shared situations.
The increasing diversity of student populations has
also prompted a new, more tailored, approach to
learning. Barr and Tagg (1995) suggest that this shift
from an ‘instruction paradigm’ to a ‘learning paradigm’
has changed the role of the education institution
from ‘a place of instruction’ to ‘a place to produce
learning.’ This is partly driven by changing educational
requirements. The shift to a knowledge driven
economy is driving demand for a more qualified,
highly skilled, creative and flexible workforce. There is
less emphasis on factual knowledge, and more on
the ability to think critically and solve complex
problems. Knowles (1984) argues that, in the
modern world, the most socially useful thing to learn
is the process of learning.
In 2002 DEGW began to use the concept of the
‘learning landscape’ to describe the totality of
learning spaces on campus – whether that campus is
a school, college or university. In a later study
commissioned by the UK Higher Education Funding
151
Councils the learning landscape was defined
(Dugdale 2009; Thody 2011) as the ‘complete range
of physical and virtual spaces where learning takes
place’, which includes both physical and virtual,
formal and informal landscapes.
It was this wider learning landscape that was the
focus of research for the book Design and the
changing educational landscape: space, place and the
future of learning (Harrison and Hutton, 2014).
Involvement in a wide range of UK and international
learning environments projects since leaving DEGW
– at the level of campus design, building projects and
individual learning spaces – provided ample evidence
that across all learning sectors there is a clear move
towards the spatial, societal, generational and
pedagogical blending of all aspects of learning into
one seamless experience: institutions blending with
other institutions, institutions creating two separate
institutions in a symbiotic relationship and even,
occasionally, institutions creating hubs in networks.
What emerged from this research was the
imperative to break down the boundaries between
learning spaces and experiences still further –
considering funding, policies, organisational silos as
well as the typically rigid spatial boundaries – to
create ‘learning centred communities’ included a
wide range of hybrid community-based learning
spaces that spanned the worlds of formal education,
the workplace and leisure and culture.
Learning beyond the boundaries of the traditional
campus environment was a theme that was further
developed by two other DEGW alumni. Andrew
Laing, in his 2015 paper with Jonas Nordquist
Designing spaces for the networked learning landscape.
Within the context of medical education they
explored the learning landscape at four scales:
classroom, building, campus and the city. They found
that that there are major disjunctions or
discontinuities in the level of innovation at the
different scales. Relatively higher levels of innovation
is taking place at the level of the classroom and the
library, and also at the scale of the building but they
found a relative lack of innovation in thinking evident
in the learning environments at the scale of the
campus and the city and a fundamental lack of
integration of thinking across all of the scales. Their
conclusion was that the design of the learning
landscape needs to be considered now less in terms
of singular learning spaces and much more in terms
of networked connected learning environments
across multiple scales. The focus in the future will be
on the provision of spaces that are connective,
permeable, and networked (physically and digitally),
to provide flexible and adaptable environments for
mobile technologically enabled users.
Shirley Dugdale, in her 2017 paper with Brian
Strawn focused on the Innovation Landscape Their
Innovation Landscape approach ‘seeks to create an
environment where innovation can be supported,
socialized, built, and tested anywhere and
everywhere.’ Dugdale and Strawn went beyond the
physical learning spaces to stress the importance of
incentives and policies within the institution and the
wider community as well as the resources and
information systems that support knowledge sharing
and academic excellence such as library and IT
systems, institutional repositories, research data
management, or vir tual learning communities
development.
Internationally increasing importance is also being
given to spaces that support knowledge transfer,
innovation and direct engagement with industry in
universities. University-linked innovation spaces vary
greatly in terms of scale, range of settings, services
and technology available within the space and the
level of university engagement with the activities that
go on within the space. At one extreme, the
innovation centre can be seen as an independent
business incubator that brings revenue to the
institution through rentals and perhaps short-term
overflow space for research teams or newly created
university business start-ups. At the other extreme,
the innovation centre can provide a spatial focus for
the integration of research and business on campus
and create opportunities for students at all levels to
work on ‘real-world’ problems with people from
other parts of the institution and beyond.
In recent years there has been a distinct move away
from the cloistered or gated urban university
campus towards a more open, visually permeable
and physically ‘porous’ model that better integrates
the learning environment with the surrounding
locality. The boundaries and spaces of the university
are blurring with those of the city, enabling different
combinations of students, staff, researchers, research
partners and visitors to access facilities at different
times by way of ‘hubs’ and thresholds managed for
safeguarding or security purposes.
But even more opportunities for innovation await
outside of the campus. Opportunities to rethink the
boundaries between schools, colleges and
universities, the workplace and museums and
galleries and other cultural institutions.
152

In many ways museums already lead the way in the
creation of blended learning environments that meet
the needs of very diverse learning communities. The
Natural History Museum in London, for example, is
not only a highly regarded research institute but also
delivers a wide range of school activities, linked to
key stage levels, to engage children with the big ideas
of science and nature in an inspiring location. This is
extended to family activities such as self-led museum
trails, hands-on activities and shows and talks, and
adult activities for informal learners – lifelong
learning. The Museum also runs two Masters
programmes in taxonomy and classification and
there are more than 250 PhDs and other
researchers based at the Museum’s Darwin centre.
Traditional categories of space in the educational
estate are becoming less meaningful as space
becomes less specialised, boundaries blur, and
operating hours extend toward 24–7 and the wider
city is fully embraced as a vital part of the
networked learning landscape. The learning
experience will become increasingly multi-layered
with learning spaces providing a number of flexible
activity zones to support learning, living and working.
Users will be able to choose appropriate places,
settings and technology for the tasks they want to
achieve or the experience that they want to have.
The City of Memory
Stephen Greenberg- Metaphor
Looking back, Design for Change looks like
something that took place in slow motion, like seeing
a film from the 1970’s that no longer has the pace
that you remembered. Everything has speeded up
including our perceptions. As a result Frank Duffy’s
Broadgate work, created in the moment of rapid
change that ‘big bang’ presaged, now seems
incredibly slow and captured in a particular moment.
In the time line of Duffy’s world you can see how
DEGW was always looking for the next techno
wave that we would ride. What we could not have
known was that the frequency of that wave would
accelerate so rapidly. The paradox here is that in
parallel, John Worthington was recycling space and
place over the longer term with seminal projects like
the Merchant City in Glasgow. Now, twenty years
later, this is a mature example of regeneration as it
moves from artists, through boutique hotels and
hipsters to developers. We cannot understand
Hoxton without the Merchant City, nor can we
understand co-working spaces without the in-depth
work on organisations and how people work that
preceded it.
The relevance of ‘Design for Change’ emerges as we
ask where we fit within these rates of change
brought about by rapid technological acceleration.
One of my own contributions to this exploration
has been simultaneously at the most intimate level of
‘scenery’ and also at the largest, the city scale. I
added another layer to the house diagram - story.
The Damascene moment came when I introduced
exhibition design to DEGW. I discovered that we can
make environments with film, audio, photography,
graphic design, artefacts and theatre. The scenery got
a whole lot richer and more complex. It wasn’t long
before I made another connection and saw that
narrative and mediated space would be an even
bigger transformer if deployed at an urban scale.
Rather than just furniture, colours, touch down
spaces, the museum landscape opened up a whole
new world for city making.
Since then I have argued that the city of stories
presents real possibilities that have yet to be realized.
The development world hasn’t picked this up. The
narrative city still eludes us, for example just take a
DLR to City Airport - we still live in ugly. The
furthest development can get is to ‘character areas’
and brand spaces, but there’s not a whole lot of
meaning there.
More recently I have explored how these two
worlds, the story-based and the city quarter, join
together. Viability now resides in space that is
programmable by the hour, day, week, month, style,
health needs, wealth and national curriculum.
The Heritage Lottery Fund requires Activity Plans
with applications for cultural projects that set out
how many of these objectives should be realized.
One can see how these could be extrapolated on a
larger scale, a point that would not be lost on Frank
Duffy. These time-based mixed-cohort, mediated
activities can be measured; income and expenditure
calculated and therefore their value and return on
investment understood.
Case studies Paisley and Uig
Two case studies illustrate how narrative, memory,
identity and social history are levers for creating new
kinds of public and civil realms for capacity building,
training and regeneration and the models that can
be used for measuring success.
153
These case studies are both in Scotland:
Paisley is an example of post-industrial decline and
Uig in the Hebrides of rural decline.
In both cases culture offers a way out, buildings and
spaces are occupied in new ways over time - by
hour, day, cohort, activity, income stream, season,
special event and festival.
The project in Uig is a centre for the remote island
of St Kilda, a double UNESCO world heritage site,
uninhabited, that only a few thousand people can
visit each year depending on the weather. So this
project also uses technology to take visitors there,
and to experience the story of this unique last
hunter-gatherer community in Europe that ended in
August 1930, when the government ordered it to be
evacuated.

Paisley was one of the richest towns in the world in
1900, famous for the print that takes its name. Now
it is ravaged by post-industrial decline and it is hard
for residents to feel connected with the
consummate artisan skills of their grandparents
when faced with structural unemployment and
casual labour. As in Uig new futures and new
economic models are being explored.
How Paisley and Uig’s futures are conceived, thought
about, described, tracked and funded require new
kinds of design thinking, with new methodologies.
These methodologies contrast markedly with those
used by a developer in place making which all to
often lead to soul-less environments where
everywhere looking the same irrespective of country
or continent.
Conclusions
• The DEGW diagram remains a potent idea
for developing new thinking about
organisations of many types and the spaces
they use and need
• A shift in design thinking to consider the
environment as a context of continual
change is becoming ever more necessary in
response to the dynamics of the
accelerating information technological
revolution
• There is a necessity to redefine the role of
architecture (and architects) in this
emergent context
• Three different practices are developing the
core DEGW diagram in different areas of
specialism but find increasing areas of
overlap and synergy between their area of
practice
• The experience of these three practitioners
suggest that the individual building or space
is become a less and less meaningful unit of
analysis and is being replaced by design
discussions about networks, connections,
overlapping functions and above all about
creating design narratives to give new types
of organisations and spaces purpose and
meaning
References
Barr and Tagg 1995. From teaching to learning: A new
paradigm for undergraduate education. Retrieved from:
http://ilte.ius. edu/pdf/barrtagg.pdf
Brand, S. (1994). How Buildings Learn. London: Viking
Press.
Duffy, F. (2008). Work and the City. London: Black Dog
Publication.
Dugdale, S., and Strawn, B. (2017) Crafting an
Innovation Landscape. Retrieved from: http://
er.educause.edu/articles/2017/2/crafting-an-
innovation-landscape
Harrison, A., and Hutton, L. (2014) Design for the
Changing Educational Landscape: Space, Place and the
Future of Learning. Oxon: Routledge.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E.F and Swanson, R.A. (2011).
The Adult Learner: The definitive classic in adult
education and human resource development. London:
Elesvier.
Nordquist, J., and Laing, A., (2015). ‘Designing spaces
for the networked learning landscape.’ Medical
Teacher, 37(4), pp. 337-343.
154
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Knowledge and Architectural Practice

Johan Verbeke1
1KU Leuven (Belgium) and Aarhus School of Architecture (Denmark)
johan.verbeke@kuleuven.be

Abstract

This paper focuses on the specific knowledge residing in architectural practice. It is based on the
research of 35 PhD fellows in the ADAPT-r (Architecture, Design and Art Practice Training-research)
project. The ADAPT-r project innovates architectural research in combining expertise from academia
and from practice in order to highlight and extract the specific kind of knowledge which resides and is
developed in architectural practice (creative practice research).

The paper will discuss three ongoing and completed PhD projects and focusses on the outcomes and
their contribution to the field. Specific to these research projects is that the researcher is within
academia but stays emerged in architectural practice. The projects contribute to a better
understanding of architectural practice, how it develops and what kind of knowledge is crucial.

Furthermore, the paper will develop a reflection of the level of research methods and will explain that
the research methods and processes in creative practice research are very similar to grounded theory
which is an established research method in the social sciences.

Finally, an argument will be made for a more explicit research attitude in architectural practice as it is
the central place of innovation and development in the architectural discipline.

Keywords: creative practice research, ADAPT-r, research by design, architectural knowledge

155
Introduction
Research by design has been discussed in
schools of architecture for many years. One of
the early efforts to better integrate research
and design was initiated by Halina Dunin-
Woyseth through the introduction of a PhD
programme in the early 1990s at the School of
Architecture in Oslo (AHO) (Dunin-Woyseth
2008). In RMIT Melbourne, Leon van Schaik
developed a long-standing program of research
initially through a Masters’ and later on a PhD
programme, with a focus on researching ‘what
venturous designers actually do when they
design’ (Van Schaik and Johnson, 2011). In 2000
TU Delft organised a crucial conference on the
topic , cover ing innovative research in
architecture school studios and in practice
(Langenhuizen, van Ouwenkerk, and Rosemann
2001). Between 2005-2010 a series of research
seminars took place at Sint-Lucas School of
Architecture in Flanders, with the express aim of
boosting research activities, and as a forum
through which to understand, develop and
validate explorative, expressive and speculative
design methodologies and outputs that are
unique to architecture. These workshops have
been captured in a series of publications
produced between 2005-2013, charting the
growth and development of research by and
through design at the Sint-Lucas School
(Janssens et al. 2006; Hendrickx et al. 2008;
Verbeke 2008). These seminar s were
complemented with 2 major conferences: The
Unthinkable Doctor ate in 2005 and
Communicating by Design in 2009 (Verbeke
and Belderbos 2007; Verbeke and Jakimowicz
2009).
The development of research in architecture
has also been discussed across European
architecture schools, with the development of a
consensus of how research by design should be
defined. Indeed, the author heavily contributed
to the development of the EAAE Charter on
1 www.adapt-r.eu
Architectural Research (EAAE, 2012). The
charter was approved by the EAAE General
Assembly after a series of preparatory meetings
and includes the following paragraphs:
In architecture, design is the essential feature. Any
kind of inquiry in which design is the substantial
constituent of the research process is referred to as
research by design.
In research by design, the architectural design
process forms the pathway through which new
insights, knowledge, practices or products come into
being. It generates critical inquiry through design
work. Therefore research results are obtained by,
and consistent with experience in practice.
(EAAE, 2012)
Research by Design was further developed in a
paper by Verbeke (2013), setting out a concern
to explore the nature and processes of
architectural design, as well as illuminating
examples drawn from the Sint-Lucas PhD by
Practice programme.
It was within this context, building on a rich
pedigree of work and in par ticular the
experience with RTS and the focus of the RMIT
programme on the process of design, that the
ADAPT-r – Architecture, Design and Ar t
Practice Training-research – programme was
born.
The ADAPT-r project brought together seven
partners in a project funded under the Marie
Curie scheme of FP71. The project ran between
2013 and 2016. The partners were Sint-Lucas
School of Architecture (KU Leuven,
coordinator), RMIT Europe, Glasgow School of
Arts, University of Ljubljana, University of
Westminster, Aarhus School of Architecture and
the Estonian Academy of Arts. The project
156
targeted venturous practitioners and pulled
them into an academic environment where they
developed their PhD research. The project
hosted 35 early stage researchers (PhDs) and 7
experienced researchers (post-docs). The
development of the research questions and
methods was explicitly based on the creative
work researchers undertook in practice.
The overall objective of the project was to
create critical mass in creative practice research.
Up till the ADAPT-r project, endeavours in
schools of architecture in Europe towards
research by design, creative practice research
and artistic explorations were fragmented, never
embedded in an international undertaking and
we r e m o s t l y i n i t i a t e d by i n d i v i d u a l s .
Furthermore, the project aimed to create a
large amount of cases which could be studied
and learnt from in order to deepen the
methodological understanding.
Within the ADAPT-r project the research
fellows have been stimulated to explore their
past projects as case studies and to reflect upon
their communities of practice, transformative
triggers, public behaviour, tacit knowledge and to
explicate their methods. These areas can be
seen as lenses through which pieces of the
research puzzle come into being. In most cases
these initial puzzle pieces are complemented by
mappings and other insights that contribute to
the overall knowledge generated by the
research.
During their research, most of the ADAPT-r
fellows went through a series of mappings of
their practice, of their projects, of how they
relate to other practices, etc. These mappings
can be seen as a form of coding which is
custom in Grounded Theory (Charmaz, 2014).
Grounded Theory is a research method which
does not start from a hypothesis, but instead
builds on the data/information at hand and
develops a theory through thematic coding. We
will later argue that the function of the
mappings of practice is very similar to that
which is done in Grounded Theory.
The following section describes three of the
research projects which took place within the
context of the ADAPT-r programme.
Three Cases of Creative Practice Research
1. Siv Helene Stangeland
Siv Helene Stangeland is one of the partners in
Helen & Hard, one of the leading architectural
offices in Norway. Siv obtained an ADAPT-r
fellowship at the School of Architecture in
Aarhus, Denmark where she undertook her
doctoral research.
The research started just after Helen & Hard
defined their relational design approach in a
monography published in 2012. The term
relational design was introduced to define a
design philosophy, a methodology and the
characteristic capacities of what the office
understands to be ecological architecture. The
doctoral research started with an exploration
and mapping of the different epochs of growth
of the office. Eight periods were defined.
Throughout the research the focus has shifted
towards knowing and articulating the spatial
aesthetic and experiential qualities of the design
itself. The beautiful drawings of Siv played a
crucial role in exploring these understandings.
Through the research process, the many
projects of the office were explored, mapped
and the crucial elements highlighted through the
development of key words. It became apparent
that drawings were a crucial tool in finding and
explicating these elements. The drawings helped
to reveal new insights of the practice, the
underlying forces and values. As Strangeland
states in her thesis:
On one level this research is expanding the
knowing of the intrinsic ecological potentials of
architecture which lies in its relational nature and
157
how a better explication of these spatial aesthetic
capacities may contribute to produce
environmental well being. On an other level it lifts
this knowing to a very pragmatic field of operating
and practicing in a market, and the conditions and
frameworks which can care for and protect this
unique professional knowing.
(Stangeland, 2016)
Figure 1 below shows one of the many
mappings Siv Helene was producing in the
beginning of her project,. Figure 2 shows one of
Figure 1: Mapping of Epoch 5 in the development of Helen & Hard (Image by Siv Helene
Stangeland)
the wonderful drawings which helped to
highlight key elements of projects. The different
lines, wilding and weaving, play a key role in
developing the understanding. As will be clear
from these drawings, which were made by her
during the research project, they focus on
elements which would never have emerged
when the researcher was not the designer as
well.
Siv Helene Stangeland successfully defended her
doctoral research in Aarhus in February 2017.
158
Figure 2: A drawing by Siv Helene Stangeland trying to explicate elements of one of the projects of
Helen & Hard.
2. Eric Guibert
Eric Guibert is part of the practice sens which is
based in London, UK. He obtained an ADAPT-r
fellowship at Sint-Lucas School of Architecture
(KU Leuven) in Brussels.
As explained in an upcoming book chapter by
the author, the doctoral research of Eric
Guibert, Designing like a Gardener, is deeply
rooted in his practice. It intends to explore
through the design and realisation of projects
how a gardener’s conception of space as
microclimates – in which plants, and people (or
vice ver sa) might thr ive – has been
subconsciously transferred to the discipline of
architecture in the past projects of his practice,
as well as how it could be further and more
rigorously applied in future ones. During the
stage of theory building, the methodology of the
gardener has been defined as a manual of
elements, tools, ways and principles that aims to
design with the agency of life in order to
support diversity and express a dialectical
aesthetic.
The project star ted with exploring and
investigating the projects of the practice. And
then it proceeded through mapping key
elements and concepts in these projects. There
are three crucial activities which have played a
key role in developing this project:
• Eric Guibert developed many interesting
watercolour paintings (see figure 3) that
take the form of sections, perspectives and
axonometric, as well as diagrams. These
paintings allowed Eric to talk or ‘interview’
himself about the crucial elements in his
projects and activities. These have been
crucial in coding and categorising the
themes in the body of work and the design
actions, as well as clarifying a number of
concepts used such as the balance between
composition and improvisation and its
relation to diversity and control. Alongside
writing, the paintings have also become a
159
 main tool through which to structure these
concepts into a theory.
• A number of ongoing projects have been
used to produce more data about the
practice’s designs and the design process,
but also to test concepts and theories
generated through the research. This
iterative approach not only helped to
generate additional data, but also triggered
further artistic explorations which helped
highlight crucial elements for Designing as a
Gardener.
• During winter 2015/16 Eric needed to write
an internal report as part of the doctoral
procedures. This triggered several versions
of theory building, helping to develop
certain aspects of the study that had
remained hidden before they were revealed
Figure 3: One of many watercolor drawings by Erik Guibert in which he tries to capture and
communicate key aspects of his practice and understanding.
and articulated in the creative process of
writing. The iterations in writing, and the
discussions with the supervisors, helped him
to push the borders of his understanding
into the definition of a repertoire of tools,
and the ways of using them, that forms the
core of the practice and design
methodology. Eric is now developing the
first draft of the PhD, and is working
towards developing a theory, building on his
codes and categories and adding new ones
to understand the elements and principles
behind his design practice.
Eric Guibert is currently in the final phases of his
doctoral research and intends to submit later in
2017.

160
3. Ana Krec
Ana Krec is part of the office svet vmes which is
based in Ljubljana, Slovenia. She obtained an
ADAPT-r fellowship at Sint-Lucas School of
Architecture (KU Leuven) in Brussels. svet vmes
was founded in 2010 and is one of the young
and dynamic offices in Slovenia. The website of
the office mentions the goal of the practice as
‘to redesign the existing and create new ‘spaces
in-between’; spaces that teach, inspire and
connect people2.’ The practice developed by
doing several low cost interventions in schools
in Ljubljana. One of these, the renovation of the
main entry hall in Ledina Grammar School,
2014, is shown in figure 4.
At the start of her doctoral research, Ana Krec
explored her past projects and tried to map the
Figure 4: Loggia renovation of the main entry hall Ledina Grammar School, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia
(image by Matevz Paternoster).
2 https://www.svetvmes.si/about
many cases and put her interests in perspective.
In her practice svet vmes she was engaged in
several projects which were located in school
buildings and which tried to exploit the
potential of left-over spaces which were not
really used by students and staff. At a certain
moment she started coding each of the
projects, trying to explicate key issues, elements
and concepts that played a key role in the
development of these projects (see figure 5).
This process was repeated in a later phase. As
an outcome she became much better aware of
the potential of these spaces and also about the
driving factors of her practice. Key concepts
emerged and shine a new light on the work. She
is currently almost half way in her research and
tries to further explore and contextualise her
ideas and initial findings. 

161
Figure 5: Example of the mappings and coding which Ana Krec developed in order to extract key
concepts to better understand and explain her experiences in svet vmes.

Conclusion from new data), focused coding and categorising

(incomplete understanding raises questions, fill
When looking in more detail at the above
properties with categories) and theory building.
doctoral projects it becomes clear that each of
These iterations continue till the categories
them includes aspects of mapping and coding of
reach saturation. During the research, initial
the data included in architectural projects and
results and obtained data are constantly
drawings. This is in line with the EAAE (2012)
compared and systematically improved.
charter for research which states that for
research by design ‘the architectural design These iterations are very similar to what
process forms the pathway through which new happened in the research by Siv Helen
insights, knowledge, practices or products come Stangeland, Eric Guibert and Ana Krec. It is
into being.’ through many coding iterations (in the inclusive
interpretation to include mappings and visual
Grounded Theory was developed by two
structuring of data) that new knowledge and
sociologists, Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss
theories come into being. This is the reason why
(Glaser and Strauss 1967). The purpose was to
it is proposed to start using the term Designerly
develop theories which are grounded in the
Grounded Theory (DGT) for the research
data, which fit the data, which work in practice
process which has a research by design
and which are relevant to the field of research.
approach.
Charmaz (2013, figure 1.1) structures these
processes in the following way: data collection, Furthermore, the above examples give clear
initial coding (examples present in the data or cases where architectural practice is crucial for

162
the research; in fact, it is the place where the
‘data’ comes into existence. Hence, research by
design, creative practice research and designerly
grounded theory value architectural practice as
the central place of innovation and development
in the architectural discipline. They build on
experience, insight and understanding which
emerges from the act of designing and creating.
Consequently, it is clear that the ADAPT-r
project deepened our understanding of how
research by design or creative practice research
can be positioned and developed.
Finally, the above cases show that practitioners
value their better and deepened understanding
of what they are doing and what is happening in
their practice. Hence, the field of architecture
should stimulate and foster undertakings which
develop a more explicit research attitude in
architectural practice as it is the central place of
innovation and development in the discipline. It
could help us all to reach another level of
understanding.
Acknowledgement
The work leading to this chapter has received
funding from the People Programme (Marie
Curie Actions) of the European Union s
Seventh Framework Programme
(FP7/2007-2013) under REA grant agreement n
° 317325.
Furthermore, the author wants to thank Siv
Helen Stangeland, Eric Guibert and Ana Krec for
providing the inspiring images.
References
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing Grounded
Theory. 2nd edition. Introducing Qualitative
Methods. London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.
Dunin-Woyseth, H. (2008). ‘More Than a
Quarter of a Century; The Doctoral Programme
at Oslo School of Architecture and Design:
Notes on the Development of Education since
1981.’ FORMakademisk 1 (1): pp. 3–18.
EAAE. (2012). EAAR_Charter on Architectural
Research. Retrieved from: http://www.eaae.be/
old/web_data/documents/research/
120903EAAECharterArchitecturalResearch.pdf
Glaser, B and Anselm S. (1967). The Discovery of
Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative
Research. Chicago: Aldine.
Hendrickx, A., Janssens, N., Martens, S., Tomas
Nollet, S.T., Den Berghe, J.V and Verbeke, J.
(2008). Reflections 7. Brussels, Belgium:
Hogeschool voor Wetenschap & Kunst.
Janssens, N., Martens, S., Verbeke, J. and De
Meyere. N. (2006). Reflections 3. Brussels,
Belgium: Hogeschool voor Wetenschap & Kunst.
Langenhuizen, A.M., J. van Ouwenkerk, and J.
Rosemann, eds. (2001). ‘Research by Design.’
Proceedings of the International Conference on
Research by Design. Faculty of Architecture, Delft
University of Techology, in Cooperation with the
European Association for Architectural
Education. Delft: Delft University Press.
Stangeland, S. H. (2016). Wilding and Weaving
(PhD Thesis). Aarhus: Denmark.
Van Schaik, L, and Johnson, A. (2011). By Practice,
BY Invitation: Design Practice Research in
Architecture and Design at RMIT, 1986-2011.
Melbourne: onepointsixone. http://
www.blurb.com/books/3599320-the-pink-book.
Verbeke, J. (2008). ‘Research by Design in
Architecture and in the Arts.’ In Reflections, 10–
16. Reflections 7. Brussels, Belgium: Hogeschool
163
voor Wetenschap & Kunst. http://
arch.kuleuven.be/publicaties/reflections7.

Verbeke, J. (2013). ‘This Is Research by Design’. In

Design Research in Architecture, An Overview, pp.
137–60. Ashgate Publishing Limited.

Verbeke, J, and Belderbos , M. (2007). The

Unthinkable Doctorate. Retrieved from: http://
arch.kuleuven.be/publicaties/unthinkable-
doctorate/view

Verbeke, J, and Jakimowicz, A. (2009).

Communicating (by) Design. Retrieved from:
http://arch.kuleuven.be/publicaties/
communicating-by-design

164
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Transitioning the Live Project: A managed interface between the

architectural academy and professional practice

Michael Davis1, Aaron Paterson2, Alessandro Melis3, Esther Mecredy4

1 School
of Architecture and Planning, University of Auckland, New Zealand
m.davis@auckland.ac.nz

2 Paterson Architecture Collective (PAC)

School of Architecture and Planning, University of Auckland, New Zealand
aaron@p-a-c.nz

3 Heliopolis
21
Portsmouth School of Architecture, University of Portsmouth, United Kingdom
alessandro.melis@port.ac.uk

4 School
of Architecture and Planning, University of Auckland, New Zealand
emecredy@gmail.com

Abstract

This paper sets out a case for establishing an alternative model of practice between the
architectural academy and professional practice. This model of practice offers a learning focused
alternative to commercial architectural enterprise. This proposal extends from reflections on a
series of ‘live’ projects run through the design studio at the University of Auckland’s School of
Architecture and Planning since 2007.

The discussion consists of three parts. The first introduces the live project and its place in
architectural education. The second provides an outline of the specific ‘triple focus’ live project
that has emerged within the Auckland studio. It includes a discussion of the issues encountered
and learnings gained in the transitioning of live projects from academic to commercial
environments to date. The final part presents an unfolding model of practice as a managed
interface through which these challenges are being met and the learnings implemented. The
intention of the text is to stimulate a detailed discussion of how live projects might be
transitioned from the speculative space of the academy to realisation on site whilst continuing
the learning of the students involved.

Keywords: live project, architectural academy, professional practice, managed interface

165
Introduction
This paper sets out a case for establishing an
alternative model of practice between the
architectural academy and professional
practice. This model of practice offers a
learning focused alternative to commercial
architectural enterprise. This proposal
extends from reflections on a series of ‘live’
projects (Charlesworth, Dodd and Harrisson,
2012) run through the design studio at the
Univer sity of Auckland’s School of
Architecture and Planning since 2007.
The paper consists of three parts. The first
introduces the live project and its place in
architectural education. The second provides
an outline of the specific ‘triple focus’ live
project that has emerged within the
Auckland studio. It includes a discussion of
the issues encountered and learnings gained
in the transitioning of live projects from
academic to commercial environments to
date. The final part presents an unfolding of
practice as a managed interface through
which these challenges are being met and
the learnings implemented. The intention of
the text is to stimulate a detailed discussion
of how live projects might be transitioned
from the speculative space of the academy
to realisation on site whilst continuing the
learning of the students involved.
Part 1: Architectural pedagogy and the
live project
The ‘studio’ is the dominant core of
architectural education (Burke, 2013: 216),
denoting both a space and a type of design
focused, integrated learning. At the University
of Auckland, studio-based courses comprise
most of the five-year professionally
accredited architecture progr amme .
Emphasis falls on learning through doing, with
design unfolding through the making of
drawings and models in relation to tutor-set
topic frameworks. This is a form of social
learning where pedagogical privilege is given
to peer-to-peer interactions. The projects
produced range from the highly speculative
through to ‘real world’.
‘Live’ projects reside at the real end of the
spectrum and are so called because they
have real clients, briefs, sites, timelines and
constraints. Internationally, the live project is
set in relation to a long history of tension in
the discipline. The estrangement of the
academy and the profession is well
documented by Boyer and Mitgang (1996),
who demonstrate that although professional
education has been fully integrated into
academic life over the last century, the values
and rewards of these two cultures have
never fully reconciled. Acknowledging this
tension, the live project is situated at the
intersection of architectural design pedagogy
and professional practice, engaging students
in collaborations with a range of
stakeholders, pressing toward the realisation
of buildings, and acting as the vehicle for
higher-level academic design research (Davis,
2015).
The field of the ‘live project’ incorporates
both international breadth and local
peculiarities (see for instance - http://
liveprojectsnetwork.org). Design-build studios
like Samuel Mockby’s Rural Studio, originally
based in Auburn, Alabama, involve real
projects to meet immediate needs within
socially and economically challenged
communities (Oppenheimer Dean and
Hursley, 2002). Students grapple with every
aspect of architectural production from
design through to building their projects on
site. The live project studios of Esther
Char leswor th, Mel Dodd and Fiona
Harrisson, occurring largely in the United
Kingdom and Australia, engage community
groups and industry partners in a social and
ethical design agenda and represent a
166
commitment to expand the role of design
education beyond the academy (2012). The
learning potential this type of project
presents is well documented, but just how to
transition live projects beyond the academy
is seldom discussed.
The ‘project office’ is often gestured toward
as an entity through which live projects are
delivered by staff and students in partnership
with external agencies, government and
industry (RMIT University, 2011). However,
the specific processes by which the project
office runs, its relationship to its host
institution or how it navigates issues of
compliance, liability and economic viability
are not disclosed.
L o c a t e d w i t h i n M o n a s h U n i ve r s i t y,
Melbourne, the Monash Architecture Studio
(MAS) is a research office that has
undertaken urban and housing consultancy
for government agencies, the development
industr y and the professional design
community. Monash argues its position within
academia demands rigorous scholarship and
allows it to ‘… engage with a wide range of
difficult issues - social, political, economic and
environmental - and that may not have an
immediate commercial application by
industry’ (Monash, 2017). These offices have a
long tradition in architectural education but
overall, there is scarcity of discussion
regarding the staging of deliverables,
contractual structures, fees and their
distribution, and the continued involvement
and learning of students downstream from
their initial investment in the project. This
paper seeks to address this dearth by
stimulating a detailed discussion of how live
projects might be transitioned from the
1 Projects to date: Muriwai Surf Life Saving Club (2007); Housing New Zealand (2008); EcoTech (2009); Confucius
Institute (2010); Kaipatiki Project (2011); College Rifles Rugby Club (2012); Akarana Golf Club (2013); Fletcher
Developments (semester 1, 2014); Samson Corporation (semester 2, 2014); Sunset Beach Surf Life Saving Club
(semester 2, 2015); Huia Settlers Museum (semester 1, 2016); Metlifecare (semester 2, 2016).
speculative space of the academy to
realisation on site.
Another concern identified within live
project pedagogical discourse is the type-
casting of clients as ‘community’ organisations.
While it legitimises this kind of client
accessing the curated design labour (Deamer,
2015) inside architectural studios, it creates a
question mark over commercial or personal
enterprises doing the same. Perhaps the issue
lies in different perceptions of the civic role
of the University. Whilst engaging community
groups without the financial means to access
architectural services is commonly accepted,
extending this to engage with the wider
construction industry is a more contested
argument. Yet, if the mandate of the
University is to be the critical conscience of
our broader cultural condition, and by
extrapolation, create a demand for high
quality built environment, this necessitates
engaging with those who significantly impact
it – councils, developers, funding bodies and
other financially enabled organisations.
Part 2: A triple focus live project
Figure 1: "Muriwai Surf Club" 03 Feb 2015.
Photograph by Kenneth. Li.
Since 2007, the University of Auckland’s
School of Architecture and Planning has run
at least one live project focused on the
realisation of a building every year1. The ‘triple
167
focus’ live project is so called because it has
evolved to address three distinct parties –
the academy (which seeks a more critical
engagement with the architectural discipline),
the profession (which seeks a more
pragmatic engagement with the differing
material, economic and social forces that
shape architecture) and the market (with its
complexity of fluctuating demands) (Davis,
2015).2
Triple focus live projects that progressed
toward built form were the Muriwai Surf Life
Saving Club (fig. 1); College Rifles Rugby Club
(in consent); and the Akarana Golf Club (in
consent). From the final presentation to the
client, this process involved the shortlisting of
a range of appropriate architectural practices
to deliver documentation and construction,
organising and attending introductor y
meetings between architectural practices and
clients, facilitating discussions regarding
practice selection and organising for a few of
the best performing students to work on the
project within the selected architectural firm
(fig.2).
Figure 2: The transitioning of triple focus
live projects towards built realisation since
2007.
The shortcomings of this process have been
manifold and are covered in Academy-
profession-market: Confronting the tension
through the live project (Davis, 2015). They
have included a misalignment between the
desire for the continued learning of the
students and the commercial imperatives of
the practices concerned; through to the lack
of continued involvement and reward for the
staff involved. These projects absorb a great
deal of unpaid time and expertise in order to
get them to the point where they may
become fee-paying prospects. For practising
architects working in the academy, each
project brought to this point before being
delivered to a commercial architectural
practice is a lost opportunity in terms of
career development, research outcomes and
financial remuneration. However, this process
has also avoided self-evident conflicts of
interest; professional and financial risk;
potential project resourcing quandaries; and
the oversight of an increasingly risk-averse
host institution.
In response to the issues above, the Sunset
Beach project, instigated in 2015, represented
a shift in approach. For the first time, at the
outset, we expressed to the client a desire to
be considered for the architectural contract
to develop the design coming out of the
studio and follow the building through to
completion. In doing so we had to seriously
confront how to transition speculative studio
outcomes into developed design and manage
the subsequent documentation and delivery
of the project. This was achieved by
par tnering with a trusted architectural
practitioner who could provide capacity for
the realization of the project. This key role
168
was filled by Wade Jennings, a former
colleague, who was about to be installed as a
partner at CPRW Fisher. Our bid was
submitted but was unsuccessful, losing out to
a local draughtsperson.3
Acknowledging the value of partnering with
a professional sympathiser convinced of the
value proposition of the live project, we again
engaged Jennings to run a live project for the
Huia Settlers Museum in 2016. As a
commercially active local practitioner,
Jennings’s involvement established credibility
with the client and helped us to negotiate an
ongoing commitment. Setting out an
agreement to make studio involvement
contingent on continued work is now seen
to be critical in retaining a level of ‘ownership’
as project outcomes move beyond the
studio. The potential to leverage projects out
of the academy through partnerships with
professional sympathisers, and the need for a
body or entity to manage this relationship,
has led us to speculate as to an applicable
practice model.
Part 3: A managed interface between
the architectural academy and
professional practice
On the basis of the collective experience of
the triple focus live project, and after
protracted consultation, Mike Davis and
Alessandro Melis decided to establish a
charitable trust titled Unit Y4 in 2016.
Current projects run through Unit Y include
a new building for the Huia Settler’s Museum,
a church alteration in Meadowbank and a
pool complex at College Rifles Rugby Club.
Unit Y operates as an intermediary between
the academy’s institutional constraints and
the profession’s commercial imperatives. The
following outlines the key principles of Unit
Y’s operation in the hope of catalysing
constructive discussion.
1. Legal Framework
Unit Y satisfies its registration as a charitable
organisation5 (The Charities Act, 2005) and is
accountable to the following objectives;
• To provide ‘real world’ opportunities for
students and recent graduates to develop
practical knowledge and skills that will
support their transition from academic
environments into the building industry.
• To support community organizations as
they address changes in the economic,
built and natural environments they
operate in relation to.
• To foster in the community an awareness
of the health and well-being benefits of,
and thus to create a demand for well-
designed and well-built buildings and
spaces.
A level of benevolence offered by Unit Y’s
legal status as a charitable trust and its
relationship to the academy makes Unit Y an
attractive option for community bodies.

3 The contract went to a draughts-person because of local relationships and a perceived cost-effectiveness. The
learning to come from this was that the governing board must be engaged with the live project as it develops
through the design studio, or if not feasible, then ensure that the board representative acting for the client
accurately represents the direction of the board.

4At the time of writing the trust deed is being implemented. Detailed reasoning for the decision to set up a trust
over another form of enterprise (such as a limited liability company) lies beyond the scope of this paper.

5Specifically as it is established for the ‘advancement of education’ and ‘other purposes beneficial to the
community’ - category 2 and 4 of the Charities Act.

169
However, the legal status of Unit Y as a trust
does pose difficulties in managing conflicts of
interest and the payment of trustees for their
time and input.
2. Scope of works
An agreement is set out between the client6
and Unit Y, which details that studio
involvement is contingent on continued
work. Upon completion of the live project
studio, Unit Y is engaged in two different
ways:
• Clients engage Unit Y to document studio
outcomes or produce critical architectural
content. Content produced includes
expressions of interest, feasibility studies,
brief development, site and spatial
research, typological investigations and
front-end design proposals.
• Clients engage a Unit Y partner practice.
This architectural firm assumes the
contractual role of the architect and
employs Unit Y to provide resource for
the project. Through the partner practice
model Unit Y provides the content above
and further labour resource as the
projects reach consenting, documentation
and delivery. Partner practice selection is
based on their ability to provide technical
capacity, the scale of project and a trusted
relationship with Unit Y.
3. Project programme
Initially, Unit Y leads the design contract with
a partner practice assisting. As the design
becomes progressively fixed the resourcing
for the technical delivery of the project
increases. The partner practice then assumes
the lead role, managing the workflow and
technical aspects of the project. This model
allows a gradual transfer of project
6Community groups have been identified as our target market. However, architectural services of the Unit Y are
available to a range of clients, be they charities, community groups, developers or architects.
responsibility between these two parties
based on the skills and experience required
(fig.3) whilst offering all involved ongoing
‘ownership’ of the project.
Figure 3: Generic pattern of project
organization and division of responsibility
between Unit Y and partner practice.
4. Value proposition
Clients receive intellectual capital injected at
the front end, through the twelve week live
project studio. This upfront and unpaid
content for the client builds impetus behind
their projects and operates as a base for
funding applications, community consultation
and provocation for governing boards (Davis,
2015). Once approval and funding is secured,
a briefing document and fee proposal is
drawn up by a Unit Y partner practice.
Positioned to engage with issues of
compliance and delivery, the partner practice
provides a necessary commercial interface,
underwriting insurances, providing logistics
and practice protocols. Subcontracted to the
partner practice, Unit Y tests, resolves and
documents a chosen design strategy (or
strategies), through a series of intensive
design and research phases. This thorough
design investigation allows for a well
considered and co-ordinated project
programme and mitigates issues
downstream.
170
5. Project resourcing
Unit Y manages labour and provides
technology, resource and locality for duration
of project.
• Labour: There is full and fair remuneration
for all work conducted through Unit Y.
Students and graduates are employed
through a series of short-term contracts,
allowing Unit Y to balance staff capacity
and project phasing. Intensive work
phases operate during breaks in the
academic calendar allowing students to
continue their lear ning without
interr upting their education. Core
per sonnel str ucture the wor kload,
provide necessary leadership, technical
over sight and manage project
deliverables.
• Locality and infrastructure: The location of
operations is principally the School of
Architecture’s Open Media Lab (OML), a
digital media, fabrication and research
suite . To comply with Univer sity
regulations and maintain access to this
resource, work conducted by Unit Y must
have clear academic outcomes. All
projects runs through OML are indexed
to a research paper or deliverable and
operate outside of term time, when
resources are not in use.
6. Roles and responsibilities
Trustees can be employed by the Trust to
carry out the responsibilities below. All
financial transactions will be detailed and
declared. No representative of a partner
practice will be a Trustee, mitigating conflicts
of interest and allowing us to dissolve
relationships in case of dispute.
Within Unit Y
• Trustee A will act as an academic & client
liaison. Their responsibilities include
engaging clients and managing client
expectations, academic studio co-
ordination, managing research outputs
and retaining oversight as the project
progresses.
• Trustee B will act as student & public
liaison. Their responsibilities include
managing learning outcomes, academic
studio and project co-ordination, handling
communications, academic
documentation and project publication.
• Trustee C will act as a legal and financial
advisor. Their responsibilities include
drawing up employee contracts, managing
trustee protocols, billing and invoicing.
• Trustee D: Unit Y is in the process of
establishing proof-of-concept in the form
of built work. Once attained Unit Y will
engage a fourth trustee who will act as a
client and funding liaison, connecting Unit
Y with prospective clients and connecting
community groups with funding bodies.
Within the partner practice:
• The representative of the par tner
practice liaises with the client and Trustee
A throughout the project. As lead
contractor they manage project delivery,
supervising daily workflow of Unit Y
employees and providing technical
knowledge where appropriate.
171

Figure 4: Relationship between parties
7. Continued learning environment
Unit Y offer s a continued lear ning
environment for students and graduates
through two avenues:
• Unit Y employee(s) within OML. Within
the partner practice model outlined
above, a representative from a partner
practice manages a group of Unit Y
employees and provides necessar y
technical over sight. This wor k is
conducted within OML, minimising
overheads for the partner practice. This
learning focused space offers students
and recent graduates the opportunity to
develop practical knowledge and skills to
support their shift from formal education
to industry.
• Unit Y employee within partner practice.
Within smaller partner practices without
the resource to devote to student
over sight, an experienced Unit Y
employee is embedded within a partner
practice to complete a specific role within
a project. This relationship allows the Unit
Y employee to benefit from practice
resources and knowledge, whilst carrying
no overheads for the partner practice.
The learning outcomes of this are in line
with academic research outcomes,
publishing paper s on live project
pedagogy (such as this) or publishing
designed outcomes of the project
enquires.
Conclusion
Situating itself within the wider trajectory of
live project pedagogy, this paper highlights a
scarcity of discussion regarding the specific
processes necessary to transition the live
project from an academic to a commercial
environment. A reflection on ten years of
experience gained from our own attempts to
transition ‘triple focus’ live project outcomes
to built realisations within the Auckland
studio, has lead to the establishing of a
managed interface between the architectural
academy and professional practice.
Unit Y, positions students and recent
graduates at its core, utilising and validating
their skills and expertise. It partners with
professional sympathiser s to satisfy
compliance and delivery and it optimises
under-utilised resources and infrastructure
within the academy to create a space of
reflexive questioning and exploration. This
unfolding practice model exists above as a
set of enumerated principles, some of which
have been proven out, some are currently
proving out and some are yet to be tested.
By no means exhaustive, these principles
offer operational ideas in the hope of
stimulating a discussion on the critical
framework, legal framework and physical
space necessary to generate original and
tangible architectural knowledge and services.
References
Boyer, E. & Mitgang, L. (1996). Building
Communities: a New Future for Architecture,
Education and Practice. Princeton: Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
172
Burke, A. (2013) Curating School Cultures:
Studios in the Context of School Agendas.
Designing/Education (pp. 212 – 221).
Melbourne: The Association of Architecture
Schools of Australasia.

Charlesworth, E., Dodd, M. and Harrisson, F.

(2012). Live Projects: Designing with People.
Melbourne: RMIT University Press

Charities Act (2005). Section 5(2A). Wellington:

Department of Internal Affairs. Retrieved from:
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/
2005/0039/latest/DLM345006.html

Davis, M. J. (2015). Academy-profession-market:

Confronting the tension through the live project.
Applied Collaborations. Christchurch: The
Association of Architecture Schools of
Australasia.

Deamer, P. (2015). The Architect as Worker:

Immaterial Labor, the Creative Class, and the
Politics of Design. London: Bloomsbury.

Hursley, T. & Oppenheimer Dean, A. (2002).

Rural Studio: Samuel Mockbee and an
Architecture of Decency. New York: Princeton
Architectural Press.

Monash University (2017). MAS (Monash

Architecture Studio). Retrieved from http://
www.artdes.monash.edu.au/mas/

RMIT University (2011). The Project Office

(Learning and Teaching Investment Fund Final
Project Report). Retrieved from http://
mams.rmit.edu.au/gherxc4r26zg1.pdf

173
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

The good client: How architect-client dynamics mediate attention to

users
Valerie Van der Linden1, Hua Dong2, Ann Heylighen3

1Research[x]Design, Department of Architecture, KU Leuven, Belgium

valerie.vanderlinden@kuleuven.be

2College
of Design and Innovation, Tongji University, China
donghua@tongji.edu.cn

3Research[x]Design, Department of Architecture, KU Leuven, Belgium

ann.heylighen@kuleuven.be

Abstract

Due to the increasing complexity of architectural practice, gaining insight into future users’
perspectives presents a particular challenge for architects. Architects’ main reference point to
obtain information about users is often the client. Moreover, architects indicate that a ‘good’
client is key to the project’s success. Yet, architect-client relationships can be highly diverse,
depending on the project type, procedure and phase. This paper sets out to study how different
architect-client dynamics mediate attention to users in the design process. An ethnographic
study provides insight into the daily professional practice of three diverse architecture firms in
Belgium. Based on observations of project meetings and interviews with architects and clients,
we identify four types of relationships: client absence, substitution by a developer, client
consultation, and (long-term) engagement. Architect-client dynamics can result in conflicting or
aligned ambitions. Extracts from the fieldwork illustrate how these can hamper or stimulate
attention to future users in the design process. The insights presented in this paper contribute
to untangling architect-client dynamics and can be useful to improve collaboration and
knowledge transfer in design practice. A constructive relationship between architects and clients
can provide an opportunity for enhancing their mutual ambitions to integrate use-related
qualities in the design.

Keywords: architectural practice, client, ethnographic fieldwork, knowledge, user experience

174
Introduction
Due to the complexities in present-day
architectural practice, attention to user
experience is often crowded out by the
varied and complex requirements architects
need to consider. Moreover, in many projects
there is no longer a one-on-one relationship
between the designer and occupant of a
building. This makes gaining access to future
users’ perspectives difficult for architects,
which possibly endangers the
appropriateness of the design. Especially
when future users differ considerably from
designers, the gap can be hard to bridge
(Crilly, Maier, and Clarkson, 2008).
This paper starts from the observation that
clients are often the number one reference
point for architects to obtain information
about future users, entrusted for their
expertise and assumed ability to represent
building occupants (Van der Linden, Dong,
and Heylighen, 2016a). However, ‘the client’
can take different forms: an end user, a team
of representatives, the head of an
organisation, someone from the technical
department, a developer … just like ‘the
architect’, ‘the client’ is often a construction of
different individuals. Distributed tasks and
knowledge along with differences in interests
and ambitions pose another challenge to
fruitful collaboration (Buse, Nettleton, Martin,
and Twigg, 2016; Cuff, 1992; Green, 1996;
Ivory, 2004; Thyssen, Emmitt, Bonke, and Kirk-
Christoffersen, 2010).
Architects often mention the importance of
having a ‘good client’, which seems to refer to
knowledgeable parties, who have figured out
what they want and are easy to collaborate
with, or as Cuff (1992) explains:
After choosing the architect for a commission,
excellent clients, while demanding and ready to
stand their ground, remain open-minded and
flexible. Unlike ordinary clients who may be
more rigid or in some cases spineless, the
clients who produce outstanding buildings have
a clear set of guiding values. Simultaneously,
they are willing to take advice, add to the
budget, and remove themselves from the
architects’ intimate area of expertise, the
manipulation of form.
(p233)
Apart from the diversity resulting from the
circumstances of and parties engaging in a
professional relationship, differences can also
result from changes induced by the project’s
course. Cuff (1992) observed architect-client
relationships being built and taking different
forms: ‘courtship’ (in the schematic design
phase), ‘building rapport’ (during design
development), ‘unveiling boundaries’ (related
to construction documents), ‘avoiding
disputes’ (during bidding or negotiating) and
‘constr ucting progress’ (related to
administrating construction contracts)
(p173-174).
In this respect, briefing and design are
acknowledged as iterative activities, part of a
social process (Collinge and Harty, 2014;
Green, 1996; Yaneva, 2009), where architects’
and clients’ social worlds collide (Siva and
London, 2011), knowledge is mediated
through materials and individuals (Koch and
Thuesen, 2013) and requirements unfold
during design, even in competitions (Kreiner,
Jacobsen, and Jensen, 2011; Van Wezemael,
Silberberger, and Paisiou, 2011). Negotiating
experiential aspects is not self-evident, it
demands full immersion in actual use
situations (McDonnell and Lloyd, 2014).
In short, the relation with the client – as the
main source of knowledge about future users
– can be very different depending on the
project type, procedure and phase. This
paper aims to understand how these
dynamics influence knowledge exchange,
with an eye to promoting architectural
qualities for the benefit of users. Based on an
ethnographic study, we outline four different
types of relationships between architects and
clients that can dynamically take form during
the design process. We analyse how the
175
socio-material setting (constituted by the
interactions of individuals and design
materials) of each of these relationships
facilitates or hampers attention to future
users’ needs.
Methods
The results presented in this paper are based
on insights from an ethnographic study
carried out in three architecture firms in
Belgium. The first author visited each firm
over a six-week period, and studied four to
five projects that architects were working on
at the time. This resulted in almost 400 hours
of observation and 16 interviews1 with
architects, project partners and clients. Table
1 displays the firms and empirical material
collected. The firms and projects were
Canvas Architects
firm
 6 architects
details
Ghent
128h observation
data
 6 interviews
collection 4 projects
fall 2015
impression

(working
models)
Table 1. Overview of the firms and data collected during the study
1One of the interviews at ArchiSpectrum was conducted in the context of an earlier exploratory study (see Van
der Linden, Dong, & Heylighen, 2016a). Because of its relevant and complementary content (offering an additional
perspective), it was included in the data set.
chosen to cover a broad range of project
types and procedures. For a more elaborate
motivation and illustration of the research
methods, we refer to a methodological paper
based on the study in the first firm (Van der
Linden, Dong, and Heylighen, 2016b).
The overall analysis focused on architects’
‘designerly ways of knowing’ (Cross, 1982)
about users, attending to the socio-material
mediators in architectural practice. Below we
report the particular aspect of architect-
client dynamics, identifying four types of
relationships we obser ved during the
fieldwork. The results are illustrated with
quotes from the interviews, translated from
Dutch by the authors. For reasons of
confidentiality, names have been replaced by
pseudonyms.

studio:ratio ArchiSpectrum
9 architects 100+ collaborators
Brussels Brussels + 2 other locations
129h observation 139h observation
5 interviews 5 interviews
5 projects 5 projects
fall 2014 spring 2016
176
Results
Absence
A first type of architect-client relationship
that was observed is client absence. During
the competition stage, for example 2 ,
participating architects are typically not
allowed to engage with the client, due to the
procedure aimed at guaranteeing equal
chances for all participants. Information
exchange is usually limited to a few briefing
sessions. Answers to additional questions are
distributed to all participating architects,
which makes architects very careful in their
phrasings, protecting their concept whilst it is
i n d e ve l o p m e n t . T h e s e i n fo r m a t i o n
exchanges thus can hardly be classified as a
dialogue.
Left to an often voluminous and technical
project definition, architects indicated that
they have difficulties in fully understanding
the client’s question. Being forced to
interpret the brief without the possibility to
check with clients is a major source of
frustration. Based on the limited resources
they receive, architects try to estimate which
values they will target – a choice which holds
great (financial) risks.
If you’re doing a competition, you don’t know.
You’re doing something, then you’re submitting,
a n d t h e n … Yo u n e v e r h a v e d i r e c t
communication with the user or client. And
that’s a major difficulty in competitions. So it
can happen… First, it’s very hard because it’s
difficult to interpret certain things in the project
definition. But also, you can totally miss the
mark, right. It can be a reason for them just to
say ‘yeah, we’re not doing this’, finished. And
2 We elaborate here on the situation of competitions, since the majority of the projects observed were granted
through some kind of competition formula. However, architects in our study also had the feeling there was ‘no
client’ in cases where they were commissioned by a central committee without knowledge about the daily
operation (e.g., in the case of a new school). Architects indicated that this felt like “working around a paper”, which
lasted for the duration of the design process.
then you’ve lost.
(Team head at ArchiSpectrum)
Trying to cope with uncertainties, architects
often invest resources in finding out client
preferences. A lack of information may
prevent them from pursuing par ticular
(innovative) concepts, leading them to play it
s a fe by s t i c k i n g t o a c o n s e r v a t i ve
interpretation of the brief. When left in the
dark about (aspired) user experiences,
architects come to rely on knowledge gained
from previous projects and their own
imagination.
We also saw other situations where an
emphasis on user experience in competition
briefing documents offered architects
guidance. In the open bid for a care facility
for people with a severe mental impairment,
Canvas Architects received a booklet with
the portraits of three residents, documented
through photos and stories (Figure 1). This
unusual ‘day in the life of ’-style reportage
offered a glimpse into an unknown world
and was therefore much appreciated by the
architects, who used it to their advantage.
The client explained:
It turned out, with the four teams who were
selected and then read the portraits, that it
moved people. It worked…
– Did they refer to it specifically?
Yes yes, to outdo each other, of course. (laughs
out loud) [...] In most of the designs you felt
that they’d given it some thought. Yeah, sure.
Especially with the current designers we really
had the feeling they got it.
(Client)

177
Figure 1. Extracts from the booklet “through the eyes of the residents”
Substitution
A second type of architect-client relationship
we observed, occurred when a developer or
contractor acted as a substitute client, for
example in design and build contracts. In
public-private par tnerships, where the
contractor is responsible for the financing,
and sometimes also the maintenance and
operation of a building, the public client was
often ‘absent’ during the competition stage
(as discussed above), and excluded from
direct discussions with the architect. In these
circumstances the developer’s voice and
opinion is heard louder than the client’s. This
can be problematic not least because each
party brings their own programme that
evolves in the course of the design process
and can be difficult for architects to integrate.
Further, in the competition stage, architects
now have a partner in interpreting the
(public client’s) project definition. We
witnessed developers joining forces with
architects in order to figure out the public
client’s preferences through various channels.
However, the resulting assemblage of
interpretations and impressions about the
client’s preferences can hamper architects in
developing a coherent vision on user
experience.
In projects where a contractor or developer
acted as a substitute client, there seemed to
be more attention to technical and
commercial aspects in the design process,
often suppressing architects’ aspirations for
user experience or what they perceive as
architectural quality. This even seemed to
impact on representation styles, as we
observed more realistic renders compared
to atmospheric collages architects produced
in more architecture-oriented competitions.
Coping with a dual client and vision can be
difficult for architects. Open bids can force
architects and contractors in rivalling roles,
where architects try to realise what they
perceive as quality and contractors try to cut
costs, leading to the pursuit of different goals
instead of a shared ambition. An architect
testified how the developer constantly
178
pushed them to increase the density on the
site, even when this action was against the
wishes of the family who owned the land.
The original programme was this percentage of
townhouses, this percentage of assisted living
flats, this percentage of apartments [...] But
they’ve been fiddling around and juggling with
those percentages during the entire course.
(upset) Yeah, it’s been terrible [...] It’s purely
driven by profit. At a certain point they’d talked
to a local real estate agency, who said ‘well no,
townhouses really sell poorly’, so suddenly all of
the townhouses had to be eliminated(!) Then
the family heard the townhouses were out,
w h i l e t h e y d e fi n i t e l y w a n t e d a n
intergenerational housing project.
(Project architect at studio:ratio)
Consultation
The end of a (successful) competition stage3
usually marks the start of a dialogue between
architects and clients. At the start of setting
up their relationship, architects and clients
often visit the client’s current building (if
available) and relevant reference projects.
Visits prove valuable for knowledge
exchange, as they allow for the building a
shared frame of reference and specifying
expectations through situated cases. Further,
architects and clients usually organise regular
meetings (e.g., every two weeks) when
developing the design up to the point of the
application for the building permit. During
these meetings clients instruct architects
about changes to be made, and architects
have the opportunity to consult with their
client on the interpretation of abstract
notions (e.g., ‘active education’) and the
relative importance of different requirements,
in order to take the design a step further.
3 Of course, when there is no competition, clients can be consulted from the project’s outset.
4 Collaboration improved when the contact person had more practical knowledge, allowing interaction on equal
terms. Often this person then became the architects’ ally, promoting the design with decision makers.
5 Client workgroups seemed to be an indicator of a human-centred tradition in the client organisation.
Everything on paper is open to interpretation
for me. I really prefer just hearing ‘so, how are
you going to do that [storing ingredients for
cooking classes]? do you need a fridge? and
how big should this fridge be? or do you need a
cold store? isn’t that better’ – ‘oh, a cold store,
yeah, then we can store the drinks for lunch in
the refectory there as well’. These are all things
that come up. Yeah, who’s going to describe a
cold store in a school? No-one. But if you ask
the question, then they say ‘oh well, that’s right,
that would be a real solution’.
(Interior design head at ArchiSpectrum)
D i r e c t c o m mu n i c a t i o n o f fe r s m a ny
opportunities for incorporating user values in
the design. First, it allows for the tuning of
ambitions. On a more practical level,
architects are able to obtain detailed,
contextual scenarios about users’ daily
activities from client committees,
representatives4 or even client workgroups
organised to consider particular aspects5.
Architects and clients jointly exploring
problems and solutions in a designerly way,
where architects’ proposals elicited new
insights and made questions evolve. So client
consultation went together with client
learning, facilitated by the architects, who led
the discussion as experts on aspects like
materiality, and guided clients in reading
design documents. Clients adopted architects’
vocabulary just like the client’s vision was
adopted in the architects’ narrative.
I think we’re in a good dialogue [...] It’s also true
that, during the design process or coming about
of a design, something happens with the client
too of course, right, with us. You get thinking
again yourself too, and that’s a continuous
interplay. Sometimes, well, you’re putting things
179
differently than at the start. At the same time, it
sharpens a bit the choices you make.
(Client)
Engagement
A final type of architect-client relationship
identified is (long-term) engagement, where
architects invest notably more effort in ‘good’
clients. ‘Good clients’ were seen as those who
were knowledgeable, passionate and/or
returning clients, resulting in the creation of a
shared ambition. Often this started with the
client’s deliberate choice of an architect with
an eye to collaboration – looking for a
perfect match in terms of content and style.
For example, in some care projects, clients
had deliberately chosen architects without
experience in care and expected them to
co-develop their concept with them.
In frequent collaborations architects
understood questions at a faster rate, but
client expectations were also higher. As the
relationship does not end with one building,
architects stay involved after realisation. This
results in collective learning throughout the
process, as choices are evaluated and
decisions are made. The fact that architects
are confronted with the post-occupancy
situation is quite exceptional.
Well, of course we’re being pretty hard
confronted with it. Because when you’re building
the third phase [of the project], they come and
bother you about the first and second phase.
And that’s…. awkward. Yeah, it’s super awkward,
because you’re being confronted with
operational stuff, or mistakes… or flaws. It’s not
always ‘mistakes’ but things that could’ve been
better, and that’s very inconvenient of course.
Sure. Otherwise you’re rid of that. It’s
operational and we’re architects. (shrugging)
Well we don’t know.
(Team head at ArchiSpectrum)
6 We observed that this higher level of engagement applied for the contractors involved as well.
A similar dynamic was witnessed with
particularly passionate or visionary clients,
infecting architects with enthusiasm. Canvas
Architects, for example, developed a close
relationship with a client with a revolutionary
vision on dementia care. This relationship
affected their way of working, e.g., meeting
reports were seldom made, in favour of
i n fo r m a l c o m mu n i c a t i o n . T h e c l o s e
relationship was however challenged at times
when contractual issues came up.
For [our client]… the personal aspect is very
important. In that sense [our client] didn’t only
look at the architectural proposal, but also at
the team [...] ‘will this person be able to
understand me? will I be able to engage in a
conversation? will we get along?’ [...] Due to a
change in the scale, we had to question our
contract [...] we sent a proposal and then we
got the reaction that they were actually a bit
shocked (laughs) by our proposal. So very
suddenly you’re being torn out of this personal
context, and it becomes business-like. Because
you’re still dealing with money of course.
(Partner at Canvas Architects)
In both examples clients had a stronger
position and were more demanding in terms
of content and dedication. Architects6 were
more ‘bound’, not only in the sense of having
to meet these expectations, but also in the
positive sense of being more entrusted an
particularly motivated to stay involved in the
project.
Discussion & conclusion
In order to gain a better understanding of
clients’ role in the (lack of) attention to users
in architectural practice, this study examined
how architect-client dynamics work. Four
types of relationships (client absence,
substitution, consultation and engagement)
were identified, with particular socio-material
180
characteristics that hamper or stimulate
attention to users.
• When clients were absent little attention
to user experience was observed, unless
in the (rare) case it was presented as a
main source and consideration in the
brief. This highlights the importance of
briefing documents as they can put a
spotlight on user experience and provide
a guiding principle during design.
• In situations where a developer acted as
a client substitute, architects’ attention
seemed diverted towards more technical
and commercial aspects. Conflicting
ambitions can hamper realising use-
related qualities in the design.
• W h e n c l i e n t s a r e av a i l a b l e f o r
consultation, impor tant oppor tunities
exist for aligning ambitions and
exchanging knowledge, including rich
information about user experience. Both
architects and clients can take the lead in
bringing experiential issues to the table.
The format of the dialogue plays an
important role in the extent to which
this knowledge can be tapped (cf.
Collinge and Harty, 2014).
• Engaged collaboration with the client can
draw architects closer to users, as clients
can involve architects in establishing an
ambitious vision regarding users and
confront them with users in person. This
can possibly induce a more permanent
change of mind, when architects take this
experience on board in other projects.
These findings complement related research
such as Cuff ’s (1992) analysis of phases in
the evolving social relationship with a
particular client (more or less situated during
client consultation), by extending the scope,
including design phases with different levels
of client presence and taking into account
the multifaceted construction referred to as
‘the client’. The findings challenge prevailing
7As we observed, ‘the architects’ are often an ad-hoc team composed for the design project, featuring people with
different expertise, tasks and tools, from within or even across firms.
assumptions about how architects relate to
users through the contact with clients,
illustrating dynamically formed types of
relationships beside regular architect-client
consultation.
The study is limited in the sense that only
Belgian architecture firms were studied,
whereas practices can differ in regions with
other regulations, procedures and attitudes.
The diverse and fragmentary empirical
material enabled insights into architects’ daily
experiences, but the findings cannot be
generalised to draw conclusions about
particular procedures. Architects were the
point of departure - an additional study
focusing on clients’ experiences of briefing
and collaborating with architects would be
very valuable. Moreover, in this paper ‘the
architects’ were considered as one party. At
an individual level, a firm’s organisational
structure can increase the distance between
individual architects and the client and users,
due to the chain of contact persons,
distributed tasks and dispersed information.7
If one aims to develop strategies to support
attention to users in design, it is important to
consider (the often problematic, as we
observed) knowledge sharing in architecture
firms. Finally, the notion of user experience
was not deepened through the analysis, but
will be elaborated elsewhere on the
particular aspects architects refer to during
design.
The study confirms the problematic situation
of knowledge about users’ actual interactions
with buildings trickling back into the design
process. Related research has identified
strategies to capture user experience such as
a user-centred theor y of the built
e n v i r o n m e n t ( V i s c h e r, 2 0 0 8 ) , u s e r
participation in the design process (Blundell-
Jones, Petrescu, and Till, 2005) or post-
occupancy evaluations (Cooper, 2001) – yet
all of them have a limited uptake in
181
architectural design practice. Paying attention
to the client’s role (as a sensitizer, instigator
and key informant about use) in such user-
centred strategies could be a direction for
future research.
The insights presented in this paper
contribute to untangling architect-client
dynamics and can be useful to improve
collaboration and knowledge transfer in
design practice. A constructive relationship
between architects and clients can offer
opportunities for enhancing their mutual
ambitions to integrate user values in the
design.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the
participants for granting access to their daily
professional environment and for the time
and effort devoted to explaining their work,
motivations and concerns. This research
received funding from the KU Leuven
Research Fund, Flanders Innovation &
Entrepreneurship, and through a PhD
Fellowship of the Research Foundation –
Flanders (FWO).
References
Blundell-Jones, P., Petrescu, D., & Till, J. (Eds.).
(2005). Architecture and Participation.
Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.
Buse, C., Nettleton, S., Martin, D., & Twigg, J.
(2016). ‘Imagined bodies: architects and their
constructions of later life.’ Ageing & Society, in
press. doi:10.1017/S0144686X16000362
Collinge, W. H., & Harty, C. F. (2014).
‘Stakeholder interpretations of design:
Semiotic insights into the briefing process.’
Construction Management and Economics,
32(7–8), 760–772. doi:
10.1080/01446193.2014.894247
Cooper, I. (2001). ‘Post-occupancy evaluation
- where are you?’ Building Research &
Information, 29(2), 158–163. doi:
10.1080/09613210010016820
Crilly, N., Maier, A., & Clarkson, P. J. (2008).
‘Representing artefacts as media: Modelling
the relationship between designer intent and
consumer experience’. International Journal of
Design, 2(3), 15–27.
Cross, N. (1982). ‘Designerly ways of
knowing’. Design Studies, 3(4), 221–227.
Cuff, D. (1992). Architecture: The story of
practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Green, S. D. (1996). ‘A metaphorical analysis
of client organizations and the briefing
process.’ Construction Management and
Economics, 14(2), 155–164. doi:
10.1080/014461996373593
Ivory, C. (2004). ‘Client, user and architect
interactions in construction: Implications for
analysing innovative outcomes from user-
producer interactions in projects.’ Technology
Analysis & Strategic Management, 16(4), 495–
508. doi:10.1080/0953732042000295801
Koch, C., & Thuesen, C. (2013). ‘Knowledge
sharing in construction partnering -
Redundancy, boundary objects and brokers.’
International Journal of Project Organisation and
Management, 5(1–2), 156–175. doi:10.1504/
IJPOM.2013.053150
Kreiner, K., Jacobsen, P. H., & Jensen, D. T.
(2011). ‘Dialogues and the problems of
knowing: Reinventing the architectural
competition.’ Scandinavian Journal of
Management, 27(1), 160–166. doi:10.1016/
j.scaman.2010.12.003
McDonnell, J., & Lloyd, P. (2014). ‘Beyond
specification: A study of architect and client
interaction.’ Design Studies, 35(4), 327–352.
doi:10.1016/j.destud.2014.01.003
Siva, J., & London, K. (2011). ‘Investigating the
role of client learning for successful architect-
182
client relationships on private single dwelling
projects.’ Architectural Engineering and Design
Management, 7(3), pp. 177–189. doi:
10.1080/17452007.2011.594570

Thyssen, M. H., Emmitt, S., Bonke, S., & Kirk-

Christoffersen, A. (2010). ‘Facilitating client
value creation in the conceptual design phase
of construction projects: A workshop
approach.’ Architectural Engineering and Design
Management, 6(1), 18–30. doi:10.3763/aedm.
2008.0095

Van der Linden, V., Dong, H., & Heylighen, A.

(2016a). ‘From accessibility to experience:
Opportunities for inclusive design in
architectural practice.’ Nordic Journal of
Architectural Research, 28(2), 33–58.

Van der Linden, V., Dong, H., & Heylighen, A.

(2016b). ‘Capturing architects’ designerly
ways of knowing about users: Exploring an
ethnographic research approach.’ In P. Lloyd &
E. Bohemia (Eds.), Proceedings of DRS2016:
Design + Research + Society - Future-Focused
Thinking (Vol. 8, pp. 3229–3243). Brighton:
Design Research Society.

Van Wezemael, J. E., Silberberger, J. M., &

Paisiou, S. (2011). ‘Assessing ‘quality’: The
unfolding of the ‘good’ - Collective decision
making in juries of urban design
competitions.’ Scandinavian Journal of
Management, 27(1), 167–172. doi:10.1016/
j.scaman.2010.12.005

Vischer, J. C. (2008). ‘Towards a user-centred

theory of the built environment.’ Building
Research & Information, 36(3), 231–240. doi:
10.1080/09613210801936472

Yaneva, A. (2009). The Making of a Building: A

pragmatist approach to architecture. Bern:
Peter Lang.

10

183
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

The client, organisation and the project - Architects’ evaluation of en-

ergy modelling adoption across four UK firms
Sonja Oliveira1, Martin Sexton2, Elena Marco3, Bill Gething4

1 Department of Architecture and the Built Environment, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
sonja.Dragojlovic-Oliveira@uwe.ac.uk

2 Schoolof Construction Management and Engineering, University of Reading, Reading, UK

m.g.sexton@reading.ac.uk

3 Departmentof Architecture and the Built Environment, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
elena.Marco@uwe.ac.uk

4 Department of Architecture and the Built Environment, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
bill.Gething@uwe.ac.uk

Abstract

This paper examines how architects evaluate the process of implementing early design energy
modelling tools in their design practice. Recent industry, policy and academic discussions high-
light the need for broadening the application of energy analysis across the design professions
and within earlier stages of design particularly in reference to addressing the performance gap.
Whilst some architects engage in energy analysis discussions early in design, in most cases build-
ing services engineers carry out modelling and simulation tasks often at late stages of design.
Recently, however, a number of large architecture firms have begun promoting and reporting in-
house use of energy modelling early in design. Effects of broadening energy analysis on archi-
tects’ design practice as well as on architects’ conceptions of energy are, however, poorly under-
stood and largely unexamined. The paper draws on prior study conducted by Oliveira et al.
(2016) utilising a large data set including semi structured interviews and focus groups with 35
participants across four large UK architecture firms. The analysis applies theories on evaluative
practice in order to understand the formal and informal influences, use of specific procedures
as well as disciplinary sovereignty that may inform the process. Findings indicate energy model-
ling, whilst evaluated as beneficial, is often approached with caution viewing the client, organisa-
tion and the project as determining its initial, ongoing or sporadic use. The study contributes to
emerging discussions on energy analysis in architecture as well as the growing agenda on pro-
fessional judgement and roles of design professions in the built environment. There are also im-
plications for UK built environment energy policy as well as the international energy agenda in
particular regarding the performance gap.

Keywords: architecture, design practice, energy modelling, evaluation, performance gap

184
Introduction
Recent UK Constr uction Str ategies
2016-2020 and 2025 call for adoption of col-
laborative practices, targets for BIM Levels
2/3, client capacity building as well as
achievement of stringent energy standards
(HM Government 2013; 2016). Within the
architecture context, in parallel to the rapidly
developing BIM agenda, there has been a
growing focus on enabling in-house energy
analysis. Increasing energy performance
standards, as well as a need to better address
issues between modelled and actual energy
use in buildings, have led to calls for greater
engagement and collaboration between
design professions across design, construction
and operation phases (Morrell, 2015). The
American Association of Architects (AIA)
published a guide for architects on integrating
and implementing energy modelling tools
and processes within their design practice,
suggesting involving architects in energy ana-
lysis at early stages of design is critical to
bridging the energy performance gap (AIA,
2012; Eijadi, 2008).
Whilst energy analysis has traditionally been
the domain of the building services engineer
(Hetherignton et al., 2011), top international
architecture firms have started promoting
the use of in-house energy modelling tools
such as Sefaira. The purpose of this paper is
to examine how architects across four UK
firms evaluate the implementation of energy
analysis, practices often associated with build-
ing services engineers. There have been few
empirical accounts of architects or other de-
signers approaches or experiences of imple-
menting energy modelling tools within their
design practice (exceptions include Zapata-
Lancaster and Tweed, 2016). In addition,
though a number of large firms report on
developing in-house energy analysis and
modelling, limited work has examined the
effects or evaluation of energy modelling ad-
option on architects’ design practice.
The paper draws on prior study conducted
by Oliveira et al. (2016) utilising a larger data
set including semi structured interviews and
focus groups with 35 participants across four
large UK architecture firms. The analysis ap-
plies theories of evaluative practice as advoc-
ated by Lamont (2012) in order to under-
stand the formal and informal influences, use
of specific procedures as well as disciplinary
sovereignty that may inform the evaluative
process of adoption. The following sections
outline the key approaches within scholarship
on architects use of energy modelling tools,
as well as the theoretical underpinning of
evaluative practices in design settings.
Architects approaches to energy analysis
Whilst there has been limited research
analysing architects’ adoption and use of en-
ergy modelling tools, recent studies begin to
account for how leading design firms develop
knowledge on types and range of energy
modelling tool parameters (Zapata-Lancaster
and Tweed, 2016; Naboni, 2013; Weytjens
and Verbeeck, 2010). Zapata-Lancaster and
Tweed (2016) draw on an ethnographic
study of architecture firms in England and
Wales to examine how modelling tools such
as IES and TAS are experienced by design
professionals. They suggest designers tend to
initially rely on experiential knowledge rather
than simulation tools, viewed mainly as valida-
tion mechanisms rather than exploration
tools. General site conditions and constraints,
as well as the building potential, tend to be
explored initially during early stages of design
with modelling viewed as a way to evidence
achievement of targets. Naboni (2013) maps
key modelling tools promoted by leading ar-
chitecture practices. His study identifies two
main categories of ways in which modelling
technology is promoted by large in-
ternational architecture firms. The first cate-
gory is described as ‘semi-digital designs’ per-
ceived to be developed ‘according to the ar-
chitect’s knowledge of sustainability, experi-
ence and sensitivity to climatic contexts and
185
human factors’ (Naboni, 2013: 5). The second
category ‘fully digital designs’ are argued to be
‘driven by environmental data’ (Naboni, 2013:
5).
Soebarto et al. (2015) conduct surveys with
architecture firms in the USA, UK, Australia
and India finding that in most cases architects
recognised the importance of early stage en-
ergy modelling, however, largely did not im-
plement it in their design practice. According
to Soebarto et al. (2015) most architects did
not view energy modelling as their responsi-
bility, viewing all the technological advance-
ments on energy modelling as largely outside
their domain, and the responsibility of other
experts. Their study suggests greater empha-
sis needs to be placed on energy perfor-
mance within architecture education and
professional development of architects.
Weytjens and Verbeeck (2010) review six
energy modelling tools including Ecotect, IES/
VE – Sketch-Up, Energy10, eQuest, HEED,
and Design Builder highlighting the level of
user-friendliness to architecture practice. Ac-
cording to Weytjens and Verbeeck (2010)
most of the tools reviewed did not show
adequate applicability of ease and user
friendliness in most architects’ design deci-
sion-making processes. Their study concludes
that the main limitations of tool features re-
late to poor communication and visualisation
of the output results.
Other scholars have tended to focus on
strategies to enable greater and more user
friendly adoption, such as developing new
frameworks of workflow. Negendahl et al.
(2015) propose a new approach that takes
account of whole building energy ‘agent –
based’ optimisation applied in the early de-
sign stage. Their study suggests that agent-
based optimisation algorithms allow for user
intervention during optimisation. Østergård
et al. (2016) also propose a new simulation
framework that enables proactive intelligent
decision making in early design stages. Lin
and Gerber (2014) propose a multi-discipli-
nary design optimisation framework that
provides more fluid feedback to architects.
Their study tests the applicability and usability
of the framework through a series of exper-
iments suggesting the use of performance
barriers is required.
Whilst Negendhal et al. (2015) and Lin and
Gerber (2014) focus on providing approach-
es that enable user friendly interfaces with
early stage energy modelling, Grinberg and
Rendek (2013) suggest workflow mapping in
a BIM environment is needed. Their suggest-
ed workflow map draws on twelve parame-
ters argued to enable better communication
and improve decision making early in design.
According to the mapping, practitioners are
able to identify points in the schedule where
modelling activities, budgets and design work-
flows clash. Shi and Yang (2013) argue a re-
configuration of conventional architectural
approaches that emphasise spatial experi-
ence, aesthetics and form is required. Their
study suggests a performance driven ap-
proach needs to develop in order to extend
current conventional practices.
Most research analysing architects’ approach-
es to energy modelling suggest difficulties lie
in disconnects between tool data based de-
sign parameters, and ways architects practice
design, often reliant on rules of thumb, expe-
rience and professional judgement. Discus-
sions also mostly focus on resolving the dis-
connect by suggesting solutions through re-
configuring tools or architects’ way of practic-
ing design. There is a lack of analysis on the
context within which architects’ work, part of
larger design teams, project teams as well as
client relationships and the possibly significant
part this context can play in the way archi-
tects evaluate energy modelling adoption. In
addition, there is a paucity of theoretical dis-
cussion or consideration, viewing technology
and tools largely through an objective techni-
cal lens (exceptions include Zapata-Lancaster
and Tweed, 2016). The following section out-
lines the theoretical framing of this study re-
flecting upon the analytical benefits of an
evaluative practice led approach.
186
Evaluative practices in design settings
Evaluation and its underlying practices are
viewed across social sciences as the underly-
ing foundation to social and intellectual activ-
ity (Camic et al., 2011). The use of tools and
constraints are seen as one aspect of evalu-
ation whereas evaluative practices are
viewed as a way of assessing the worth of an
entity (Lamont, 2012). Evaluative practices
are seen as a complex array of rules, distinc-
tions and social conventions (Douglas, 1986)
that underpin social behaviour Moeran and
Garsten, 2013). For some scholars, evaluation
is about the negotiation of values, where
value is seen as the ‘merit of a product in
terms of its overall estimation in which it is
held’ by those who evaluate (Moeran and
Garsten, 2013: 6). Other scholars have for
some time considered issues such as how
practitioners examine their own practice in
divers settings (Williams, 1988).
For some scholars, evaluation is about the
negotiation of values where value is seen as
the “merit of a product in terms of its overall
estimation in which it is held” by those who
evaluate (Moeran and Garsten, 2013: 6). La-
mont (2012) indicates evaluative practices
can undergo several estimation processes
such as: categorisation and legitimation. Cat-
egorisation is mainly seen in terms of de-
termining in which group an entity belongs,
whereas legitimation is viewed as the recog-
nition by oneself and others of the value of
an entity (Lamont, 2009). At a minimum
evaluative practices are concerned with cat-
egorisation by determining how entities are
classified (Zuckerman 1999). In most do-
mains categorisation is determined through
quantitative means by classifying, ranking and
ordering (Wijnberg 2011).
In creative domains where evaluative prac-
tices are not restricted to the use of quantit-
1According to the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) Sefaira offers ‘computer simulation of building
energy use given a description of its architecture, lighting and mechanical systems, occupancy and use, and local
weather— is a powerful tool for architects and mechanical engineers.’
ative assessment, evaluation is examined
through analysing formal and informal influ-
ences, disciplinary sovereignty and use of
specific procedures (Lamont 2012). Lamont
(2009) draws attention to the importance of
disciplinary differences as an important as-
pect of evaluative practices. Influences for
instance are mainly described as formal and
informal in terms of the judging person or
evaluative process (Lamont 2009). Informal
influences are discussed as perceived ex-
pertise, reputation and accomplishments of
person evaluating.
The architectural domain is argued by some
scholars to provide a particular type of eval-
uative selection system based on intuition
and sense-making (Kreiner, 2012). In an ex-
tensive study of architectural competitions
Kreiner (2012) points to the role emotion
and intuition play in determining and legitim-
ating the final outcomes. Similarly, Ronn
(2009) discusses the role emotions such as
uncertainty and indecision play in architec-
tural contexts where peer review is under-
lined by negotiation, power struggles and
professional expertise.
Research setting and method
The study focuses on the implementation
and experience of a recently developed en-
ergy modelling tool Sefaira1 across 4 UK ar-
chitecture firms. Although used by architects
in the US since 2010, application in the UK
context has been more recent. The four case
study firms (Studios A, B, C and D) were
chosen because they were all in the process
of implementing the use of Sefaira in their
organisations at the time of research, and are
widely viewed as leaders in the field of en-
vironmental design and thinking in architec-
ture.
187
Data collection and sampling strategy Table 1: Overview of Cases

The research methods draw on qualitative, Firms Sefaira No. Peri Types of Locati
multiple case, comparative analysis, employed (ap- adopti of od projects on
in order to explore how different settings prox, on par- of dis-
approach a similar issue (Ragin, 1989). 35 no. timesca tici- data cussed
em- les pants colle
participants took part in interviews and focus
ploy- ctio
groups across the four firms in four UK loca- ees) n
tions. This paper draws on a previous study
(Oliveira et al. 2016) using a larger dataset. Studio Adopted 8 June Resident Londo
Interviews and focus groups conducted by A in 2014 2015 ial, n,
(320) across all - Mixed Bristol
the first author were semi-structured and
offices Sept use and
addressed the following themes: the role and starting in 2015 Retrofit
background of participants within the organ- London in
isation, learning approaches to using the Jan 2014
modelling tools, reasons for using the tool,
Studio Adopted 3 Oct Retrofit Londo
and methods for sharing ‘modelling’ know-
B in 2013 in 2015 n, Bath
ledge with the client and building services (155) Bath and -
engineer. Interviews and focus group sessions in 2015 in pres
lasted between 45 and 60 minutes. By speak- London ent
ing to a range of architect roles, broader in-
Studio Adopted 16 Jan Resident Londo
sights into effects of energy modelling on
C across all 2016 ial and n,
design practice were gained. This reduced the (300) offices in - Educatio Bristol,
risk of bias to a particular architect-role, 2015 Feb nal Manch
whilst also adding breadth and depth to the 2016 ester
analysis by drawing out multiple perspectives
Studio Adopted 8 Marc Educatio Bristol,
and experiences of the energy modelling D across all h nal and Plymo
tool (see Table 1). (125) offices in 2016 Mixed uth
2013 use

Data analysis

Once all the data had been collected the

analysis focused on rereading the data to gain
an understanding of key issues and develop-
ments. The data was then analysed thematic-
ally and arranged in descriptive and analytic
categories (Mason et al. 2011). Three Initial
descriptive categories were identified: 1) Or-
ganization, 2) Project and 3) Client (see Table
2). Within the categories further sub-themes
were examined including: organisation hier-
archical loops, motivational blockages, client
dependence, existing project design drivers
and uncertain effects.

188
Table 2: Overview of initial descriptive Table 3: Themes within the evaluative cat-
coding key categories egories
CATEGO ORGANI THE THE
Themes Coding examples RIES ZATION PROJECT CLIENT
Organization “It seems senior managers in USE OF Deferring Explaining Protecting
Emphasis on: hier- some teams see this as a dis- to others as moral position
SPECIFIC
archical loops, ex- traction…taking away from good
project time..and the pro- PROCEDU
isting work struc-
tures gramme…so junior staff are RES
in the hands of senior man-
USE OF Justifying Dismissing Cautioning
agers (Studio S Participant 5)”
FORMAL/ client value to
INFORMA interests self, project
Project “My view is that I think a lot
L Validating or firm
Emphasis on: moti- of people ... it's not that they
CRITERIA project Finding
vational blockages, can't be bothered, but they
motivators barriers
uncertain effects feel like somebody else will
deal with the problem” (Stu- DISCIPLIN Maintaining Restoring Retreating
dio A Participant 2) ARY Established known
SOVEIRGN professiona educationa to
Client “I'm an architect and it's use- l l principles
ITY
Emphasis on: client ful to have this information at Project And accepted
dependence, pro- my fingertips, but I regard it as design industry
fessional bound- a sort of an indication which workflows convention professiona
aries gives some insight to what the s
consultant in the future will l roles
say” (Studio F Participant 2)

The second stage of analysis focused on ex- Findings

ploring themes in relation to literature on
evaluative practice and in particular categor-
ies of: use of specific procedures, use of
formal criteria and disciplinary sovereignty as
advocated by Lamont (2012) (see Table 3).


The findings from the preliminary analysis
suggest that users within the four firms por-
tray overlapping approaches to evaluating
learning, using and sharing outputs of early
stage design energy modelling in their prac-
tice. These approaches were grouped under
three main evaluative categories: Use of spe-
cific procedures, Use of formal and informal
criteria and Disciplinary sovereignty. The find-
ings are discussed in relation to these cate-
gories in issues such as Organisation, Project
and the Client. 

The Organisation


Participants’ discussion of their role in their

organisation and the particular project(s)
where energy modelling technology was
used mainly involved deferring responsibility
to others. For many participants there was a
perceived reliance on others from within and
outside the organisation to enable them to
learn how to use energy modelling technolo-

189
gy effectively as part of their daily practice.
When discussing their role in an organisa-
tion/project and learning/use of the technol-
ogy, participants often discussed being de-
pendent on client engagement and/or inter-
est from their firm’s management team.
Thinking about energy, and testing its pro-
jected consumption through energy mod-
elling tools was viewed as being dependent
on how their organisation perceived and ap-
proached client project aspirations and prior-
ities. Participant 2 in Studio A noted how ‘(in
our organisation) there are more important
things other than the energy consumption of
the building’ and ‘in order to get the right
shape and size of a building’ there is ‘little
perceived need to consider energy require-
ments.’
In addition to perceived organisational inter-
ests and engagement, participants often dis-
cussed being dependent on senior manage-
ment’s views of their role in the firm and ac-
cess to ‘learning’ a new technology in a
project. Participant 5 in Studio C explained
how senior management in his firm and
within his project perceived the use of ener-
gy modelling in early deign as potentially inef-
fective use of otherwise pressured ‘design
delivery’ time.
It seems senior managers in some teams see
this as a distraction and taking away from
project time as well as the programme…so
junior staff are in the hands of senior managers.
(Studio C Participant 5)
For others the technology was mainly used
to justify predetermined design decisions of-
ten made pre-planning stage. In addition, es-
tablished organisational existing workflows
were described to determine and justify a
particular design view or approach. Partici-
pant 3 in Studio C described a project where
window placements had been determined
prior to any energy analysis taking place.
…so the technology didn't exactly have as
much effect as it could have done because (we)
implemented the thinking before we used it, so
it was post-justification…
Similarly, in Studio A Participant 6 discussed
how the project was constrained by planning
application requirements and pre-established
glazing ratios, noting how using the technolo-
gy regardless of output would have little or
no effect on the design. Participants often
noted how potential design improvements
offered by using the tool would be often dis-
counted. For many participants, issues of es-
tablished workflows were closely related to
project roles.
The Project
Learning about energy modelling was ex-
plained as motivated by personal interests
largely for the benefit of the project, wider
societal good and the environment. In all four
firms, the technology was perceived as bene-
ficial and driven by the firm’s perceived in-
vestment in licensing the product for ‘project
use’. However, when discussing how learning
would be applied in an actual project, partici-
pants often discussed difficulties in knowing
how and where to apply knowledge gained.
For example, although the technology was
discussed as being beneficial and useful, many
participants seemed uncertain how it could
be applied effectively in their project. For
Participant 2 in Studio A, the technology was
‘not a game changer’ as it didn’t change the
way that (one) thinks about what a sensible
move is to make in design in terms of energy
efficiency. Similarly, in Studio C the technolo-
gy was viewed as not changing the approach
but mainly viewed as providing justification
for established working methods.
Not necessarily, no 'cos I had already had a
basic understanding of how it all worked, so not
necessarily did it change my approach, or un-
derstanding; it was a very useful tool to prove
the thinking behind what we were trying to
do…
190
Participants also discussed the lack of oppor-
tunities to implement ongoing use of the
technology. In Studio A, Participant 8 ob-
served how the technology had never been
fully implemented in projects, although there
was awareness of benefit and value. Partici-
pant 23 in Studio D discussed how the firm
had spent a lot of time investing in ways to
implement the technology usefully, changing
protocols and work processes across
projects. For instance, studio D developed a
‘mapping’ document that would highlight
prompts or items of ‘design knowledge’ that
was needed in order to make useful the out-
puts from a tool. However, as some projects
‘lasted several years’ by the time another one
came along whereby the tool could be used
the knowledge was ‘out of date’.
 disciplinary sovereignty as is often suggested.
The Client
Many participants viewed their role as need-
ing to embrace ‘future thinking’ and ‘future
proofing’ in order to maintain their position
in an ever evolving industry. Participant 1 in
Studio A noted how architects did not nec-
essarily need more knowledge about energy
modelling but needed to understand numer-
ic information that would come out of the
energy analysis and to prepare for future leg-
islation (for instance more rigorous energy
standards). Participant 6 in Studio A dis-
cussed his involvement in a large in-
frastructure project in London that was due
for delivery in 2020, appreciating the need to
future proof and think ahead. Participant 2 in
Studio B viewed the technology as another
method of communication ultimately adding
value to the design outcome:
…It gives you another, I guess, tool in your tool-
box to be able to carry out high level, early as-
sessments and also communicate to design
team members and the client why certain early
design decisions might have an energy impact
and why it might be more or less favourable to
push the design in certain directions…
 shown in this paper to be justified as advoc-
Similarly, the technology for Participant 2 in
Studio C was viewed as ‘producing pictures
and reports that are client friendly, making
people aware of the design constraints.’ Al-
though value, opportunity and benefits were
frequently highlighted, participants also dis-
cussed potential risks and liabilities. Many
participants discussed not being able to share
information with building services engineers
early in the design process.

Discussion and concluding commentary
The findings suggest that energy modelling in
architecture practice across the four firms
investigated is largely evaluated using specific
procedures and informal criteria rather than
For instance, when discussing their organisa-
tion’s adoption of the tool, participants often
deferred the ‘evaluation’ to others such as
‘senior management’ or other design profes-
sionals; or in some instances the wider pro-
fession. Similarly, when justifying the use of
the tool and evaluating its effect at a project
level, most participants would discuss the
effects of the tools as a moral, societal bene-
fit and good. In addition to use of specific
procedures, informal criteria were often ap-
plied when evaluating the learning process at
the level of the organisation or project. In
most cases client interests determined
whether and how energy modelling was ad-
opted or adapted in a project or even an
organisation. Personal ‘learning value’ to one-
self was often dismissed.
Unlike a previous study by Oliveira et al.
(2016) that used a similar dataset but drew
on an institutional analysis, an evaluative prac-
tice perspectives focuses attention on the
means through which architects evaluate ‘the
worth’ of energy modelling adoption in their
practice. Similar to Zapata-Lancaster and
Tweed’s (2016) study, architects are found to
rely on experiential and tacit knowledge,
ated or conditioned by ‘senior management,
‘client interests’ or a broader ‘moral good’.
191

There are also implications for the ‘evaluative
practice’ literature, specifically in providing
extended empirical insights into ‘informal’ in-
fluences. Whilst Lamont (2009) discusses in-
formal influences as perceived expertise,
reputation and accomplishments of the per-
son evaluating, this paper reflects upon the
content of an organisation, project and client
as providing a means through which archi-
tects evaluate. This paper focuses on the ar-
chitecture profession in the UK, acknow-
ledging that studies of other built environ-
ment professions involved in energy model-
ling, and other cultural contexts will enable
further insights. Research is required to de-
termine the extent to which particular evalu-
ative practices are emphasised in certain
firms, and whether a dominance of a particu-
lar approach enables wider use and greater
effect. In addition, further research is required
to understand specific characteristics of ap-
proaches to workflow and workload within
each firm’s organisation, project and client
relationships context specifically related to
evaluation of energy modelling adoption.
References
AIA. (2012). American Institute of Architects
(AIA) 2012, An Architect’s Guide to Integrat-
ing Energy Modeling in the Design Process.
Camic, C., Gross, N., and Lamont, M. (2011),
Social knowledge in the making: The Universi-
ty of Chicago
Press.
Douglas, M. (1986), How institutions think:
Syracuse University Press.
Eijadi, D (2008), Energy modeling 101: What
is energy modelling and why has it become
such a critical
component of architectural design, Architec-
ture Minnesota, 34.1
Gething, B. (2011), Green Overlay to the
RIBA Outline Plan of Work, London, United
Kingdom: RIBA.
Grinberg, M., & Rendek, A. (2013). Architec-
ture & energy in practice: implementing an
information sharing workflow, In 13th In-
ternational Conference of the International
Building Performance Simulation Association.
Hetherington, R., Laney, R., Peake, S., and
Oldham, D. (2011). Integrated building design,
information and simulation modelling: the
need for a new hierarchy, Building Simulation,
14-16 November 2011, Sydney, Australia.
HM Government (2013) Industrial Strategy:
government and industry in partnership,
Construction 2025
HM Government (2016) Industrial Strategy:
government and industry in partnership,
Construction 2016-2020
Kreiner, K. (2012). " Organizational Decision :
Mechanisms in an Architectural Competition",
in A. L. J.
R. H. Bingley, (ed.), The Garbage Can Model
of Organizational Choice: Looking Forward at
Forty.
Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.
399-429.
Lamont, M. (2009). How Professors think:
Inside the curious world of academic judg-
ment, USA:
Harward University Press.
Lamont, M. (2012)., Toward a comparative
sociology of valuation and evaluation, Sociol-
ogy, 38(1), 201.
Lin, S. H., & Gerber, D. J. (2014). Evolutionary
energy performance feedback for design:
Multidisciplinary design optimization and per-
formance boundaries for design decision
support, Energy and Buildings, 84, 426-441.
Mason, J., & Dale, A. (2011). Creative Tensions
in Social Research: Questions of Method. In
192
Understanding Social Research: Thinking Cre-
atively about Method. (pp. 1-26)., London
SAGE
Morrell, P (2015), The EDGE Commission
report collaboration for change, The Edge
Moeran, B., and Garsten, C. (2013), Business
anthropology: Towards an anthropology of
worth,
Journal of business anthropology, 2(1), 1-8.
Naboni, E. (2013). Environmental Simulation
Tools in Architectural Practice: The impact on
processes, methods and design, PLEA 2013.
City: 29th Conference, Sustainable Architec-
ture for a Renewable Future, Munich, Ger-
many10-12 September 2013.
Negendahl, K., Perkov, T., & Kolarik, J. (2015).
Agent-Based Decision Control—How to
Appreciate Multivariate Optimisation in Ar-
chitecture, In Modelling Behaviour (pp.
371-382). Springer International Publishing.
Østergård, T., Jensen, R. L., & Maagaard, S. E.
(2016). Building simulations supporting deci-
sion making in early design–A review, Re-
newable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 61,
187-201.
Ragin, C. (1989). New Directions in Compar-
ative Research, Cross-National Research in
Sociology, ed. by ML Kohn. London, Newbury
Park, New Delhi: SAGE, 57-76.
Ronn, M. (2009). "Judgement in the Architec-
tural Competition–Rules, Policies and the
Dilemmas."
Nordic Journal of Architectural Research,
21(2/3).
Sinclair, D. (2012). BIM Overlay to the RIBA
Outline Plan of Work. London, United King-
dom:RIBA.
Sullivan, L. (2012). The RIBA Guide to Sus-
tainability in Practice. London, United King-
dom.
Soebarto, V. I., Hopfe, C., Crawley, D., & Rawal,
R. (2015). Capturing the views of architects
about building performance simulation to be
used during design processes. Conference
Proceedings Building Simulation, International
Building Performance Simulation Association
Shi, Y and Yang, W. (2013) Performance-Dri-
ven Architectural Design and Optimization
Technique from a Perspective of Architects.
Automation in Construction, 32, 125-135.
United States Green Building Council (USG-
BC), 2015, Building energy Modelling and Se-
faira, available onhttp://www.usgbc.org/educa-
tion/sessions/trends-building-energy-model-
ing-and-sefaira-demonstration-4978817 [ac-
cessed May 2015]
Weytjens, L., & Verbeeck, G. (2010). Towards'
architect-friendly' energy evaluation tools, In
Proceedings of the 2010 Spring Simulation
Multiconference (p. 179). Society for Com-
puter Simulation International.
Williams, J. E. (1988) “Mapping Evaluation
Theory: A Numerically Developed
Approach.”Dissertation Abstracts In-
ternational, 49(9), AAT 8825488,
Wijnberg, N. (2011). "Classification systems
and selection systems: The risks of radical in-
novation and category spanning." Scandina-
vian Journal of Management, 27, 297-306.
Zapata-Lancaster,G and Tweed,C (2016)
Tools for low energy building design: an ex-
ploratory study of the design process in ac-
tion, Architectural Engineering and Design
Management, 12(4)
ZeroCarbonHub. (2014),Closing the gap be-
tween design and as built performance end
of term report.
Zuckerman, E. (1999). "The categorical im-
perative:Securities analysts and the illegitim-
acy discount." American journal of sociology,
104(5), 1398-1438.
10
193
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Design System Assemblages – the continuous curation of Design

Computation Processes in Architectural Practice

Frans Magnusson1, Jonas Runberger2

1,White arkitekter AB


SRE In the making
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden
frans.magnusson@white.se
2White arkitekter AB

Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden 

jonas.runberger@white.se

Abstract
This paper maps design systems, a mode of operations formulated by Dsearch, a design
computation R&D unit at White arkitekter AB. The authors also discuss the organisational learning
resulting from facilitation of architectural design with computational methods and development of
bespoke workflows. Two design system cases are described using assemblage theory, as developed
by Manuel DeLanda. This materialist ontology is found useful, both in terms of research reflexivity
and descriptive clarity. The authors critically assess their position as insider action researchers; rather
than perceiving academic knowledge as necessarily distinct from practical, the paper shows that
knowledge produced in design practice, research and development in practice, and academic
research, differs in degree - not in kind. Design computation management is considered an
emergent mode of architectural practice, beyond the specific aspects of form making - bridging
project, development and research dynamics. The research and design methodologies laid out here
should be read as steps towards an epistemological foundation for prototype driven organisational
learning with respect to design computation in architectural practice.

Key words: architectural practice, design computation, assemblage theory, action research,
prototype

194
Introduction
This paper maps the assemblages of
professionals, communities, tools, methods,
design concepts, code, algorithms and systems
emerging in projects and feeding back into
methodology within architectural design
computation practice. Investigating design
systems, a mode of operations formulated by
Dsearch (Runberger and Magnusson, 2015), an
in-house design computation R&D unit at the
large architecture firm White arkitekter AB; the
authors account for the organisational learning
involved in facilitating architectural design with
computational methods and the development
of bespoke workflows for these methods. Two
design systems are described in functional
terms and in chronological sequence, so as to
capture the historically contingent nature of
these entities. SOfFTA is a design driven
development mapping neatly onto one
architectural commission, albeit with changing
conditions over time. Urban Values is
developed as a support system distributed
over many interested parties.
As practitioners within Dsearch, the authors
will critically assess their position as insider
action researchers (Brannick and Coghlan,
2007) as well as what kinds of knowledge can
be produced in design practice (Hensel and
Nilsson, 2016). In this paper, case material is
discussed using assemblage theor y, as
developed by Manuel DeLanda (2006). Rather
than using idealist notions such as categories
and essential qualities, morphogenetic
processes define and explain populations of
individuals. Other materialist thinkers such as
Andy Clark (2008), Bruno Latour (2005) and
Levi Bryant (2014) let us conceive architectural
practice as a social process mobilising non-
human entities alongside humans (Callon,
1984), allowing the researcher to attribute
humans, artefacts, and environment distributed
agency. The authors find this world view
valuable for describing and managing the messy
reality of daily practice.
Design computation management is here
considered an emergent mode of architectural
practice, beyond the specific aspects of form
making, performative design or process
optimisation - bridging project, development
and research dynamics. This discussion is
connected to a perceived potential of the
design system assemblages as vehicles for new
forms of organisational learning. One aim for
Dsearch, is the continuous development of
new knowledge - in addition to methods and
procedures. Rather than perceiving academic
knowledge as necessarily distinct from practical,
the authors propose to place practice-based
academic knowledge on a continuum together
with several other types of data, information
and knowledge. The ambition of this paper is to
exemplify how this approach plays out in
practice.
Insider Action Research and Prototypical
Processes
Organisational research scholars Teresa
Brannick and David Coghlan mount a defence
of researchers being native to the situation
under study. They argue that “as researchers
through a process of reflexive awareness, we
are able to articulate tacit knowledge that has
become deeply segmented because of
socialisation in an organisational system and
reframe it as theoretical knowledge and that
because we are close to something or know it
well, that we can research it.” (Brannick and
Coghlan, 2007, p60). The approach behind this
paper aligns well with Brannick and Coghlan’s
definition of insider action research as
epistemologically subjectivist, but within an
objectivist ontology. This implies that any object
of study is independent of the researcher, but
what she can know in a specific situation is
determined by her vantage point and
interaction with the object.
An insider position obviously brings several
advantages in terms of access to and pre-
understanding of the studied situation, but also
195
requires heightened reflexive sensibilities
towards personal and cultural biases of the
researcher and her community. One method
to achieve this reflexivity is formulated by
management scholar Mats Alvesson; he
suggests the use of “theories which challenges
common sense, not only for the direct
application but also for encour aging
perspective on one’s own lived reality and thus
facilitating looking upon things in a more all-
sided way…” (Alvesson, 2003, p186). For this
research, as well as for design and development
at Dsearch, DeLanda’s assemblage theory is
one such challenge.
The parallel engagement in both design
process and method development requires an
iterative mode of operation, which requires
different modes of development, and enables
different modes of learning. Direct learning by
doing, using already established computational
design methods and applying them in a specific
project can be regarded as single-loop learning,
as defined by Chris Argyris [Argyris (1999),
pp68-71). When operating both directly and at
a method development level, double-loop
learning is important, in the way that design
systems as assemblages also effects the
guidelines and systems directing work within a
practice. This in turn requires a continuous
development and testing of prototypes, where
final objectives are still blurred, and cannot be
specified – reflected in the general prototypical
nature of operation adopted by Dsearch, as
opposed to a specification driven development
process (Schrage, 1999). The research and
design methodologies laid out for this paper
should be read as steps towards an
epistemological foundation for prototype
driven organisational learning with respect to
design computation in architectural practice.
Design System Assemblages
Design systems comprise physical and
computational models and drawings; the
human actors of the project and the groups
they form - design team, r&d team, specialists,
clients, external consultants, etc; but also design
issues, policies and contracts; in addition to
methods and tools – bespoke and
conventional. Of course all aspects above are
present in any project; it is the use of scripting
to embed intellectual work in code, making it
explicit, durable and operational, that gives
meaning to the curation of these system
assemblages as a design task transcending
project engagements. This task requires a
sensitivity towards existing as well as emerging
communities of practice (Wenger, 1999) so
that the embedded intellectual work is not lost
in standardisation. The nexus of this curation
lies at the meta level of tailoring the
assemblage properties for each specific project
- designing design workflows.
Manuel DeLanda defines assemblages as
“wholes that are irreducible and
decomposable” (2011, p185). This means that
wholes have an agency that cannot be fully
explained by the agency of their parts, and
conversely: each part has agency that is not
fully explained by its relations within the
assemblage. DeLanda states that these relations
of exteriority let assemblages accumulate or
lose parts without automatic loss of identity;
neither at part or whole level. Such contingent
historical processes are how assemblages are
formed and maintained: a population of
components (themselves assemblages at a
lower level of complexity), come together as
an individual in a stable arrangement with
emergent qualities and agencies.
DeLanda gives us two parameters to analyse
the identity of assemblages; territorialization
and coding. “The more homogeneous the
internal composition of an assemblage and the
better defined its outer boundaries the more
territorialized its identity may be said to
be” (2011, p187). A territorialized system can
for instance display sharp boundaries by
requiring specialist knowledge of its users.
Coding then determines the potential for
196
change in territorialization, highlighting the
power of design computation to decode the
previously very change resistant world of cad
software.
the SOfFTA Design System
Developed over a number of generations, this
design system provides the workflow for a
complex and site-specific piece of urban
furniture – part of a winning competition
(titled SOfFTA) for the Forumtorget square in
Uppsala, Sweden. The extended development
time over several years reflect conditions
external to the project, such as the ongoing
construction of an adjacent building. This has
affected the assemblage in several ways, facing
updates of software, new design team
constellations, new client representatives and
SOfFTA
an extended tendering process. The urban
furniture – a 65 meter long bench with a
continuously shifting section, negotiates a
border between different ground levels.
Currently at the start of final production and
assembly, the bench will be constructed from
planar cut sections of quartz composite and
glass. With an important objective to allow for
formal design decisions very late in the process,
producer final design revision is underway
integrating producer specific constraints. This
implies that organisational logic is more
strongly coded than form in the
morphogenetic process. On the level of the
design artefact, this is a highly territorial
assemblage made of relatively similar
components with an intricate but clearly
defined boundary.

197
Workflow
The current design workflow is based on a
number of two-dimensional polyline sections
and control curves manually manipulated in the
geometric modelling application Rhino ,
processed through a Grasshopper script to
generate fabrication outlines, allowing overall
control of the form as well as detailed control
of all seating configurations. This allows for a
slight deterritorialization of the workflow
where a designer can focus on producing
different ergonomic seating section curves
without having to understand downstream
Seating configurations
Digital and physical models

processes in the script. Here, the section curve
is strongly coded, so that it stays geometrically
intact in the interactions with other design
elements.
A digital solid model is generated solely for the
purpose of design evaluation in renders and
3D prints. Overall the workflow reflects team
organisation and design task with boundaries
defined by the Rhino/Grasshopper design
model, but deterritorialized and decoded just
right to invite specialists and host project
members to interact with the design at
specified interfaces.

198
History
The 1st generation of the design system
assemblage was set up for fast conceptual
development and representations to be
included in the competition proposal. A directly
manipulated Rhino geometry was transformed
into sectioned lamellas through the associated
Grasshopper script. A highly territorial setup,
the definition was developed by Dsearch, and
used by a Dsearch specialist as part of the
Competition proposal
Early experimentation
competition team consisting of architects,
landscape architects and artists.
After the competition win, a designer with
advanced modelling skills but limited
computation experience was introduced into
the design team, deterritorializing the 2nd
generation of the assemblage. Early form
experimentation through the use of Rhino with
the T-Splines plugin allowed for easy formal
variation, but this approach was abandoned
due to lack of parallel global and local control.

199
Once geometrical principles were established,
a new design model was set up, using two-
dimensional Rhino splines for elevation and
plan control of the eight control points of each
lamella section polyline, generated and
organised in the Grasshopper script. In order
to achieve further control of specific seating
configurations, a number of manually set Rhino
spline control sections were introduced, and
the earlier splines were used to control the
transition between different sections. This
coding of geometries in the morphogenetic
process was traded for a deterritorialization of
the workflow. As the need for parallel design
and computation development intensified, in
particular due to contextual considerations and
the integration of structure, the design
Control splines
Models & prototypes for design reviews
development was from this point re-
territorialized within Dsearch.
In generation 3 the assemblage was again
opened up for the integration of a furniture
designer and a furniture producer, enabling
advanced development of production aspects
as well as seating configuration for comfort.
This process was carried out through a series
of five design reviews, each based on
incremental development of the design system.
During these sessions, issues such as form,
materials, lighting, detailing and production
aspects were coded by decisions based on
digital representations, physical models and full-
scale mock-ups.
200
In generation 4, client side project leaders for
the overall construction process of the square
joined the assemblage, and automated
procedures for tender and construction
documentation were developed. This stage
ended with the completion of the tendering
process. The currently initiating 5th generation
entails the production. This includes final
adjustments to the design systems due to
feedback from production tests with the actual
machines to be employed, as well as a final
design revision of the overall form.
Automated documentation
Realtime display
the Urban Values Design System
While supporting a relatively simple task, to
quantify and display information such as floor
areas and ownership in realtime while
sketching building volumes; this system exhibits
complexity in that it presents several parallel
workflows and interfaces. The contingent
nature of its development is highlighted by the
number of commissions and inter nal
development instances at White involved (so
far 12).

201
Workflow
The current workflow is based on direct
manipulation modelling of building volumes in
Rhino, together with structured input of
parameters from a spreadsheet. This
information is then processed in a
Grasshopper script which executes a change in
the model visualisation and the data report. As
one example, floor use data determines the
building volumes to be sectioned into
sequence of floors with specific area types. On
screen the floor volumes are colour coded by
use type and the area data is summarised in a
heads-up display. Textual data is sent to Excel
for further aggregation.
Workflow
Grasshopper is in this case fully controlled by
an external user interface, removing the
necessity to be familiar with GH scripting.
Dividing control between Excel, Rhino and the
user interface creates a somewhat
heterogeneous workflow; but because the
reliance on software that are standard at
White, the design system is still accessible for
any colleague after a short introduction. To set
up the system on the other hand, requires the
installation of many individual software
modules per design team member.
History
The system history starts with a colleague
developing a script for early stage urban
studies and shortly thereafter leaving White.
The principal of commission A contacted
Dsearch to assist in the use of the script.
Having seen it in use before, the principal had a
good conceptual understanding of what it
could deliver, but no means to operate it in
terms of documentation, user interface or
personal Grasshopper experience. Considering
the unstructured state of the Grasshopper
script the decision was made to develop a new
script from scratch. The assemblage thus
survived scrapping what at first glance could be
regarded as ‘the object’ by maintaining intent,
user and project context. At this point floors
would only be distributed above ground; this
rather specific feature was present in the
system from day one because of the
demanding topography in which its original
host project was set.

202
!
Commission B, also set in difficult terrain, had
the need to combine the system with other
workflows in Grasshopper. To simplify the use
of the Grasshopper script it was packaged into
a cluster, essentially a black-box where users
have less understanding of its internal workings.
Clustering could be described as territorializing
the script by giving it sharper boundaries,
making it easier to instantiate in a project
context, but at the same time it is also re-
inserted into a larger more heterogeneous
project assemblage. Black-boxing is also a form
of coding, making the script more resistant to
change.
Cluster
Commission C, set on flat land, demanded the
ability to handle complex building programs
and produce spreadsheet reports via a web
service for further downstream aggregation.
The introduction of an external user interface
turned the visual aspects of the Grasshopper
script into back-end eliminating the need for a
cluster and the script was again
deterritorialized. A head-up display was
developed to get instant visualisation of the
model data. This development phase produced
a workflow that with its strongly coded
realtime feedback on geometry could facilitate
a more exploratory, decoded, approach to the
building modelling.
Commission D, set on a slight incline, had
specific modelling intentions regarding ground


levels and basements. This required for the first
time in the system history an option to not
subtract the terrain from the buildings; an
example of the contingent and historically
determined nature of this kind of development.
In contrast with commission C, where the host
project implementation was carried out by a
colleague involved in the system development
and also seated at a desk within visible range
from the lead developer; commission D, set in
another country, involved a more complex
project organisation and implementation
coordinated over the phone. Greater local
complexity at longer distance from the
development team led to risks being assessed
differently. Subsequently, data exchange
between Rhino and Excel was rolled back to
an earlier version using a plug-in, removing the
necessity to register team members at a web
service.
Discussion
In addition to provoke reflexivity in research
approach by challenging common sense,
assemblage theory also explains composite
arrangements and messy situations. This
attained ontological sensitivity could be
brought to bear on design activities at all levels:
where does the boundaries of any given object
really lie? Applying this theory to the case
material gave rise to the insight that the
analysis of an object is also always an analysis of
its immediate situation. Despite being housed
203
in a materialist ontology, the way to know an
assemblage is to put it into action, something
for which designers are well prepared.
Brannick and Coghlan point to the sentiment
of Mats Alvesson that observing participant is a
better term to use than participant observer.
“Participation comes first and only occasionally
is complemented with observation in a
research-focus sense” (Brannick and Coghlan,
2007 p66). This term strongly resonates with
Schön’s reflective practitioner (Schön, 1983);
arguably both roles are approaching the same
stance towards knowledge from the positions
of academia and practice respectively. The
authors hope to have shown that knowledge
produced in design practice, research and
development in practice, and academic
research, differs in degree - not in kind. The key
difference lies in specificity; not all knowledge is
relevant for all audiences. If the responsibility of
an observing participant is to react to a
situation where knowledge of wider use is
produced and ensure that documentation is
carried out in a way that allows for further
curation - a reflective designer could also pro
actively engage in arranging such situations
towards specific knowledge outcomes.
References
Alvesson, M. (2003). ‘Methodology for close up
studies – struggling with closeness and closure.’
Higher Education, 46(2), pp. 167–193.
Argyris, C. (1999). On organizational learning.
Wiley.
Brannick, T., & Coghlan, D. (2007). ‘In defense of
being “native”: The case for insider academic
research.’ Organizational Research Methods,
10(1), pp. 59–74.
Bryant, L. (2014). Onto-cartography: An ontology
of machines and media. Edinburgh University
Press.
Callon, M. (1984). ‘Some elements of a
sociology of translation: Domestication of the
scallops and the fishermen of st brieuc bay.’
The Sociological Review, 32, pp. 196–233.
Clark, A. (2008). Supersizing the mind:
Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension.
Oxford University Press.
DeLanda, M. (2006). A new philosophy of society:
Assemblage theory and social complexity. A&C
Black.
DeLanda, M. (2011). Philosophy and simulation:
The emergence of synthetic reason. Bloomsbury
Academic.
Hensel, M. U., & Nilsson, F. (2016). The changing
shape of practice: Integrating research and design
in architecture. Routledge.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An
introduction to actor-network-theory. OUP
Oxford.
Runberger, J., & Magnusson, F. (2015).
‘Harnessing the informal processes around the
computational design model.’ In Modelling
behaviour (pp. 329–339). Springer.
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How
professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Schrage, M. (1999). Serious play: How the world’s
best companies simulate to innovate. Harvard
Business Review Press.
Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice:
Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge
university press.
204
 Professional Practices in the Built Environment, University of Reading, 27-28th April 2017

Making Space, adding value; locating and defining the ‘creative space’ of spatial
production.

Elantha Evans1
1Department of Architecture, University of Westminster, UK
e.evans@westminster.ac.uk

Abstract

Ideas are born within a mental ‘creative space’ and are valued across creative disciplines.
However, as architectural practice frantically responds to demands of time, economy and style,
the value of such ‘creativity’ and ‘space for creativity’ is often overlooked or treated as an add-
on. Despite expectations on architects to improve the built environment, neither ongoing
changes to the role of the architect, nor imminent changes to educational structures recognise
and value the imagination as key to the synthesis of professional knowledge and design vision.
  As part of a larger research project exploring the relationship between mentally imagined
space and physically experienced place, this paper focuses on defining and locating the mental
‘creative spaces’ within invisible structures of creative practice. The findings of focus-groups with
architects, artists, students and educators from a range of disciplines identify themes linked to
invention and synthesis within the design process; exploring where these ‘spaces’ exist within
design methodologies, practices and educational structures. Discussions and analysis are guided
by underlying concepts such as ‘the outside’, ‘third space’, ‘rhythmanalysis’ and ‘undirected
thought’. Conclusions will be used to reassert the salience of, and need to protect the ‘creative
space’ within modes of architectural practice and educational pedagogies.

Key words: architecture, creativity, neuroscience, pedagogy, undirected thought

205
Introduction
The design (or experience) of physical space
involves two imaginations (Pallasmaa, 2014);
one to visualise the geometric space (or to
see it) and the other to imagine possible
inhabitations (or to notice them). Prior and
ongoing research suggests that this second,
empathetic imagination is harder to access
and activate. This could be one reason why it
is often less considered and sooner dropped
from the agenda in the context of ongoing
external pressures on the practice of
architecture. If we agree that the ideas and
imagination inherent to architectural design
also involve the intellectual capacity to link
mentally imagined space with physically
experienced place, then it is necessary to
give some consideration to locating and
nurturing the intellectual or ‘mental creative
space’ where ‘architecture’ is conceived and
developed. The wider research project aims
to elucidate and valorise the relationship
between institutional and pedagogic
structures, creative practices and the location,
emergence and activation of ‘mental creative
space’. It will investigate, using mixed
methods, the location of this ‘space’ in both
pedagogic and practice-based structures as
evidenced in their tangible matter (for
example br iefs, cur r iculum, rhythms,
institutional hierarchies) and manifest in
praxis. Are there reciprocal relationships
between where and how we practice
architecture, the designs we produce and the
contemporar y trend to objectify
architecture? Do these isolate the lived
experience of place from the accepted
norms and expectations of the creators of
our built environment?
This paper describes a pilot focus group
carried out to gather the views of individuals
from across a range of arts disciplines, and
presents the main findings in terms of the
research questions and methodological
implications for how future research may be
carried out. The broad aim of this study was
to better understand how mental processes
are enabled in the working methods of
practitioners from different disciplines, and to
move towards a clearer location and
definition of ‘mental creative space’ within a
range of creative practices.
Moments are those instants we would each,
according to our own personal criteria,
categorise as ‘authentic’ moments that break
through the dulling monotony of the ‘taken for
granted’… Moments are ‘revelatory of the
totality of possibilities contained in daily
existence…. Moments are those times when
one recognises or has a sudden insight into a
situation or an experience beyond the merely
empirical routine of some activity. A moment is
a flash of the wider significance of some ‘thing’
or event – its relation to the whole, and by
extension, our relation to totality.
(Shields, 1999: 58)
The specific objectives of the pilot study
were threefold:
1. To generate initial themes and concepts
linked to the research aims that could be
refined and further explored in future
research;
2. to explore whether harnessing the views
and experience of professionals from
other (non-architect) ar tistic and
educational disciplines would inform the
wider research aims within an
architectural context;
3. to determine whether focus groups as a
research method provide an appropriate
or useful contribution to the wider study.
Methods
Study Design
This study used a qualitative focus group
methodology. Focus groups are a form of
‘group interview’ in which participants discuss
a group topic introduced by the researcher.
Focus group discussion falls between
‘conversation and meeting’ and capitalises on
206
the dynamics of the group communication to Individuals own self-descriptions are
generate qualitative data (Kitzinger, 1995). illustrated in Table 1.
While individual interviews are useful to
probe an individuals’ experience in depth and
not nuanced by the views of others in the
room, focus groups encourage a more
spontaneous discussion, less constrained by
the intense inter viewer-inter viewee
relationship in one-to-one interviews. They
also enable participants to explore themes
that are most interesting and relevant to
them, using their own vocabulary and
pursuing their own priorities (Kitzinger, 1995).
By including individuals from a range of
disciplines in this group, it was hoped that the
exchange of anecdotes, experiences and
viewpoints would provide rich information
relevant to the study aims, and a comparison
to those focus groups planned for later in the
study which would be made up from
homogenous sets of people from separate
disciplines (for example; architects, clients,
students, tutors). A focus group was also
preferred in this instance for its potential to
open-up the subject and spark debate,
hinting at themes and methods for future
research.

Recruitment and participants

The study made use of a weekend residential

research ‘retreat’, during which twelve
individuals from a range of creative and
educational disciplines - including an
educator/academic, an architect/educator,
two authors, three artistic directors/curators,
two artists, an artist/farmer and an academic
psychologist/amateur artist - came together
to explore a variety of common interests and
ongoing projects. These individuals were the
participants in this focus group session, they
were informed about the nature of the study
and the wider research aims. They were also
assured of their anonymity in the reporting
of the study and their freedom to withdraw
at any time. Prior to the focus group, each
gave informed consent to participate and for
the focus group to be audio-recorded.

207
Table 1: Focus group participants self-described roles

No. Self-description
1 I am a trained and practising architect and designer, I have also been known on occasion to
direct and produce installations and choreographies
2 I am whatever I do or don’t do in my spare time, I make my living as a scientist, I am a jobbing
scientist, I am a psychologist
3 I am a practising artist
4 I am currently executive director of a renowned gallery
5 I have a fine art practice, a studio practice which is focused on drawing, painting and
printmaking, and I have shifted in the last few years, I now make films as well which I really love
and there has been a shift to working more with people
6 I am a writer by profession, began as a journalist
7 I juggle many practices that range from writing to podcasting and broadcasting and curating
spoken word events, festival events and I enjoy giving talks, anything that is subversive or
counter-culture has always drawn me in
8 I am curator at an art gallery and wrote my PhD on remove the ‘other’ theoretically and in
reality from the [art] equation and what motivates us to make and how do we make meaning if
we are not speaking to an ‘other’
9 I currently work as a director for a print workshop, the thing that all my experiences and works
have in common is that I make order of things, I pull things together to make things happen
10 I read and I think and I talk and write or make things happen and at the moment I mostly do
that at a University
11 My main activity is farming, running a very small farm which is also set up as a small community, I
see myself as a custodian of this piece of land
12 I realised that I don’t really like making things but I do like this role of dreaming about
possibilities and then making them happen, sometimes

208
Data Collection
The focus group lasted 2.5 hours and was
structured around the following topic guide
questions:
• Can you describe, define or locate
mental ‘creative space’ within your own
artistic / creative practice?
• How do you access it? And can you
describe the conditions of its appearance
/ disappearance?
• Do you think there is a parallel between
the moment of ‘cognition’ when viewing
art or experiencing architectural space,
and that place or moment of ‘invention’
in your practice?
• Do you think there is there a need to
protect this ‘creative space’ within
different modes of ‘artistic’ or inventive
practice and educational pedagogies?
• What do you think is at stake in each of
our disciplines?
The focus group began with a brief
introduction to the wider research study and
introductions of the participants to one
another for the purposes of the session (this
may differ from formal roles or previous
understandings and relationships between
participants) (Table 1). Next, several paired
themes were introduced using selected
quotes read aloud from across a variety of
disciplines; including writings on science/art,
romanticism/classicism, professional/amateur,
lived/imagined, education/pr actice ,
production/process, slog/eureka and
visualisation/improvisation. These acted as a
stimulant for group discussion, and provided
the group with some guidance as to the
expected tone for the session. Participants
were then asked to consider the above
questions which were interjected as
appropriate to the natural flow of the
conversations. An additional topic guide was
developed and fur ther, shor ter quotes
chosen prior to the focus group, in order to
probe and prompt discussion where needed.
The setting aimed to be infor mal,
consideration was given to the spatial layout
and all participants were encouraged to
share their views.
Data Analysis
The focus group was audio-recorded and
transcribed. The audio was listened to again,
and the transcript re-read for familiarisation
alongside notes made during the focus group
itself. The data were analysed thematically.
Initially, descriptive open codes were noted in
the margins of the transcript; any emerging
thoughts about impor tant concepts or
patterns were noted down as memos.
Themes were compared across the
participants and through the focus group to
determine any patterns that could inform the
research questions set out at the start. For
future analysis of multiple focus groups, a
copy of the transcript will be given to
another researcher to descriptively code, and
then both sets of codes will be discussed,
refined and an initial coding framework
agreed. The transcript will be inputted into
NVivo (NVivo, 2012), a qualitative data
management software. Following further
discussion, codes will then be refined and
grouped into higher order categories and
themes – becoming more abstract and less
descriptive.
209
Table 2: Focus group participants sample quotes
No. Quote
1 On what ‘it’ is: to find a better name for it… stuck with creative mental spaces and I am not
sure that is exactly what it is… not what creativity is but where it happens and what enables it
to happen… in the invisible often not discussed structure of creative practice.
4 On ‘creative space’: interesting in being in space, I trained as a ballet dancer as a young man,
studied literature and then fine art… interested in people... I am obsessed by why we are here.
I feel that the excitement of things is the possibility of the attuning of being in space, things
coming into focus or tuned.
1 On how we see ‘it’ in our practice: locate the individual mental creative spaces that exist, or that
we create within each of our modes of practice and in the education of our discipline, so you
could call this the moment of creation, eureka, synthesis, vision, conceptualisation, insight,
intuition… or perhaps this just doesn’t exist in the way you work, maybe it’s a process, a place, a
distraction, something else that influences you.
4 On the translation of thought to output: I find it constantly depressing that I think I have got an
idea and as soon as it comes out it’s not quite there.
2 On play, professionalism and process: Play is a really interesting issue in psychology, with play in
children as a twilight zone between the inner and the outer and as the well-spring of creativity.
6 On what matters: For me and for most writers, especially for novelists and in non-fiction, the
important work is done during the editing.
3 On discussion about studio space and working method: The place where you do your thinking
might be different from the place that you do your work.
10 On ‘multi-purpose’ space, what this means for creativity and whether this contradicts or provide
a different viewpoint to the idea that you need separation or distinction of spaces in order to
activate ‘mental creative space’: The medieval library was not a silent place as everyone read
aloud and libraries are like that [again] now, they are creating sofas where you can talk about
things, that homogenisation is really interesting.
10 On space: I am a person who tends to think that I don’t think much about the spaces that
surround me but it occurs to me that I do. I think I am continuality in search of community, I
believe in community and I believe in community politics and I believe that places should
somehow not stifle communities.
6 On scene change: The classic thing is just going for a walk to clear your head and realise that
there is a bigger world out there than this thing you are concentrating on or the problem you
can’t solve.
10 On the relationship between power and the production of knowledge: The post-war
universities funding was set up to fund knowledge as independent of policy driven initiatives, it
has increasingly been brought back into policy driven initiatives by whatever government is in
power. In order to get research funding, you have to sign up to something which is very clearly
government defined.
9 On where creative space is: I have just made a note about where my creative space is and I
think it is where there is no noise and I don’t mean silence, I mean none of my noise there.

210
Findings and Discussion
Four findings have been identified from the
initial analysis, discussed in more detail below:
• There was a tendency of participants to
veer towards a commentary on the
physical space they inhabit whilst
working, despite an attempt by the
author to re-focus the conversation on
the ‘abstract’ or ‘mental’ space under
scrutiny.
• There was a recurrent theme of
‘distraction’ or finding an ‘other’ place to
enable ‘creativity’.
• The nature of a focus group made for a
varied and enlightening conversation but
it was difficult to elicit feedback of direct
relevance to the research questions.
• Future methodological approaches have
subsequently been considered.
Physical and mental space
[L]ocate the individual mental creative spaces
that exist, or that we create within each of our
modes of practice and in the education of our
discipline, so you could call this the moment of
creation, eureka, synthesis, vision,
conceptualisation, insight, intuition… or perhaps
this just doesn’t exist in the way you work,
maybe it’s a process, a place, a distraction,
something else that influences you.
(Table 2, no.1)
Given the researcher emphasis on the
abstract, ‘latent’ spaces of ‘creativity’, the
salience of physical spaces in the discussion
was unexpected. It is possible that
par ticipants were influenced by the
knowledge of the study’s aims and of the
researcher as an architect; the conversation
repeatedly returned to physical space despite
a concerted effort to elicit views about the
abstract mental space for creativity. But, it is
also possible that this affirms or clarifies the
impor tance of a relationship between
‘physical’ and ‘mental’ space in line with the
research questions. One of the main findings
was a clear expression by the participants of
the importance of a stable physical ‘studio’
space in enabling access to a ‘mental’ or
‘abstract’ creative space. They described their
physical ‘studio’ or ‘office’ space as essential to
them being able to then access the ‘mental’
space for their artistic practice (either there,
or elsewhere); they also emphasised the
importance of being able to control and
change their physical space at will as an
impetus for creativity; a distraction or a
change of scene within familiar surrounds, in
the pub or café or staring at the sea. This
implies ownership and/or regular inhabitation
of a personal work area combined with the
opportunity to leave it at will.
The classic thing is just going for a walk to clear
your head and realise that there is a bigger
world out there than this thing you are
concentrating on or the problem you can’t solve.
(Table 2, no.6)
All participants were educated in an era
when regularly inhabited, personal ‘studio’
space was the norm (whether shared or not)
and have continued to practice in this
manner. Their artistic practices had been
developed before the onset of ‘neoliberal’
thinking and its incor por ation into
architectural design and space production
(Spencer, 2016). What effect does the shift in
wor king methods which result from
inhabiting ‘smooth space’ - or hot-desking -
instead of personal permanent inhabited
space have on the subsequent production of
space? The spaces for ‘the production of
space’ inevitably affect the ability of an artist
or designer to access and practice the
‘mental’ or ‘abstract’ space as ‘other’ (as there
is nothing to be ‘other’ from); is the
development of the ‘abstract creative space’
subsequently therefore hindered by physical
surroundings? How might we be able to
investigate the effect this has on our built
211
environment as ultimate output of this
inhabitation and working process?
Rather than democratic in any familiar sense,
the equalization of things – simultaneously the
heterarchical drive of the market... is a mode of
power that serves the expansion of
neoliberalism and its forms of thought.
Interpretation and critique are disenfranchised.
The social cannot be prioritized over the
commercial. The public cannot be favoured over
the private. The subject cannot be afforded
more concern that the object.
(Spencer, 2016, p.127)
There is an additional understanding of artist
studio spaces as belonging to a ‘community’
and a further implication of social isolation
through neoliberal manipulation that could
negatively impact upon access to the ‘mental
creative space’ for design processes. It was
interesting however that participant no.10
saw the blurring of boundaries of defined
spaces for activities as an opportunity for the
promotion of community and interaction
rather than as isolating people and thinking
from one another. This leads on to the
additional question of how we inhabit space
in relation to how it was designed, and what
socio-political conditions mean that one or
the other dominates? Will it be the
unexpected occupation of neo-liberal
workspace as truly social which is its
downfall?
The medieval library was not a silent place as
everyone read aloud and libraries are like that
[again] now, they are creating sofas where you
can talk about things, that homogenisation is
really interesting… I am a person who tends to
think that I don’t think much about the spaces
that surround me but it occurs to me that I do. I
think I am continuality in search of community, I
believe in community and I believe in
community politics and I believe that places
should somehow not stifle communities.
(Table 2, no.10)
Methodological Reflection and Future
Work
In light of the diverse conversation stimulated
in the focus group, the author is considering
whether to include additional individual
inter views or questionnaires in future
research; to pin-point responses to specific
questions more carefully and to include the
opinions of a larger number of participants
from each homogenous strand (architects,
educators, students, clients etc.). The
classification of participants might be useful in
terms of their generation in order to explore
further the change from personal to shared
physical space, its impact on ‘mental creative
space’ and subsequently on the production of
our built environment.
In parallel to the qualitative research, the
author would also like to further explore
whether it is possible to draw upon the
theories and writings of philosophers and
thinkers such as Henri Lefebvre and Maurice
Blanchot to help to define and elucidate this
ephemeral subject and experience.
…work is a work only when it becomes the
intimacy shared by someone who writes it and
someone who reads it, a space violently
opened-up by the contest between the power
to speak and the power to hear.
(Blanchot, 1982, p.37)
Lefebvre’s (2014) Toward an Architecture of
Enjoyment also describes an architectural
imagination that mediates between thought
and action; thinking about architecture and
thinking architecturally about how we inhabit
the world. In The Space of Literature,
Blanchot (1982) circles the void surrounding
the moment of cognition (Blanchot, 1982)
and later debates the experience of the
outside with Foucault (Blanchot, 1990).
Any purely reflexive discourse runs the risk of
leading the experience of the outside back to
the dimension of interiority; reflection tends
212
irresistibly to repatriate it to the side of
consciousness and to develop it into a
description of living that depicts the “outside””
as the experience of the body, space, the limits
of the will, and the ineffaceable presence of the
other.
(Blanchot, 1990, p.21)
It was not clear from the focus group what
the impact of the ‘loss’ of our ‘mental creative
space’ might be on the different artistic or
design practices discussed and so parallels
could not be made with the processes which
result in the production of our built
environment. The larger question of whether
there may or may not be a need to protect
the ‘creative space’ within modes of
architectural practice and educational
pedagogies remains.
[Capital] kills artistic creation, creative capacity.
It goes as far as threatening the last resource:
nature, the fatherland, the roots. It delocalises
humans. We exhibit technology at the slightest
suggestion. Yet technologies do not emerge from
the living. Communication? It remains formal, we
have seen: content? Neglected, lost, wasted
away.
(Lefebvre, 2004, p.63)
Implications
We are facing an overhaul of the rhythm of
architectural education and where the
construction industry is realigning itself with
other more powerful priorities driven by
time and money rather than quality and
inhabitation. The ongoing RIBA Education
Review, which includes a ‘compact between
practices, students and schools of
architecture in order to better define the
working relationship between graduates and
employers in professional practice, and
provides tangible benefits for both’ (RIBA,
2016: 1), considers much about professional
practice experience but little about the
importance of the space for imagination and
exper imentation in developing an
architectural brain. Industry and practice
concern themselves primarily with meeting
the demands of developers and investors; as
architects, we should take some time to re-
define the function and input of architects in
the construction industry to include adding
value to the experience of the built
environment. It is here that the relationship
between the experience of space and the
influence that has on our capacity to
subsequently design space needs to be
clearly articulated through future research.
There is an opportunity at this moment in
time to protect and maintain a space for
invention and cognition in our practices. This
could add real value to the built environment
and our experience of it.
Acknowledgements
I would like to acknowledge the support of
the Kestle Barton Arts Centre, (with Arts
Council Funding) for hosting the focus-group
as part of a weekend research workshop in
October 2016 and for providing the audio-
recording of the session. I am also grateful to
the ten par ticipants who made this
preliminary research possible by sharing their
thoughts and practices.
References
Blanchot, M. (1982). The space of literature. (A.
Smock, Trans.). Lincoln, London: University of
Nebraska Press.
Blanchot, M. & Foucault, M. (1990). Michel
Foucault As I Imagine Him / Maurice Blanchot:
The Thought from Outside. (B. Massumi & J.
Mehlman, Trans.). New York: Zone Books.
Dewey, J. (2012) How We Think. Connecticut:
Martino Publishing.
Froud, D. & Harriss, H. (Ed.). (2015). Radical
Pedagogies: Architectural Education and the
British Cultural Tradition. London: RIBA
Publishing.
213
Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research:
Introducing focus groups. BMJ: 311(7000)

Lefebvre, H. (2004). Rhythmanalysis: Space,

Time and Everyday Life. (S. Elden & G. Moore,
Trans.). London: Bloomsbury.

Lefebvre, H. (2014). Toward an architecture of

enjoyment. (R. Bononno, Trans.). Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.

Mallgrave, H. (2011). The Architect’s Brain:

Neuroscience, Creativity and Architecture.
Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

Pallasmaa, J. (2014). Space, place and

atmosphere: Emotion and peripheral perception
in architectural experience. Retrieved from:
http://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/Lebenswelt/
article/view/4202

RIBA. (2016). The Compact: 2016. Retrieved

from: https://www.architecture.com/Files/
RIBAProfessionalServices/Education/2016/
TheCompact2016DraftForFeedback.pdf

Shields, R. (1999). Lefebvre, Love & Struggle:

Spatial dialectics. London & New York:
Routledge.

Spencer, D. (2016) The Architecture of

Neoliberalism. Bloomsbury: London.

214