Architectural Practice

Table 10.1 summarises the key themes identified with regards to architectural practice. This summary is then expanded, discussed and compared to literature findings in the remainder of section 10.2.1.

181

ArchitecturalArchitectural values

• Based within the visual arena.

• Want to have some element of control of how the building was changed.

• The architects feel they have to let go and not go back to buildings they have designed.

• The architects do not want to repeat any of their past designs.

• They spent a lot of time on urban design.

• The architects do show an interest in adapting existing buildings where possible.

• They are functionally driven.

• They feel they do too much at the briefing stage.

• They concentrate on setting up frameworks with clients.

• The architectural practice values learning.

• They go back and revisit buildings.

• Partakes in a lot of additional reading and research.

• Sustainability is another key value for the E&SW architects.

• They also show their desire to make sure that the current building stock is sustainable and lasts longer.

• They allow the employees to take ownership of their work.

• Sustainability and how to improve it is high on the agenda.

• Very keen to make sure that their buildings are still appropriate in future years.

• They are very keen to understand how they can make their buildings last longer.

• Very keen to continually learn from their experiences.

• They try and create strong architectural pieces of work.

• The architects work hard at is trying to influence the design.

182

How architects learn

building.

• They learn from every building they explore.

• Interested in communicating with the user during the design phase about how the user will use the building.

• A POE after a year of occupation, this has not been shared with the architect.

• Keen to engage with the users at an early stage in the design process.

• Partakes in lunchtime CPD sessions and internal feedback reviews.

• Learns from visiting other buildings.

• They are keen to learn from the formal POEs.

• Feedback used was in the form of a user group and questionnaire.

• Set up some different informal feedback techniques that they use within practice, including an intranet system.

learn.

• They do not feel there is enough feedback currently available to allow them to learn from their projects.

• Location plays a big part in whether these architects go back to the buildings they have designed.

• Repeat work through framework agreements.

• Very keen to learn from their past projects

• They try to keep architects in similar teams, meaning that they learn from project to project.

• BUS studies.

• POE’s.

• A blog set up in practice and informal communications with clients.

• A sustainability blog.

183

to maintain a ‘studio’ based workplace with limited hierarchy. The Angel architects and the E&SW architects have very strong views about the process of design and making sure that it was ultimately efficient. However the NSP architects are more concerned with making sure that they had a say about the aesthetics of the design. Cuff (1991) suggests that smaller practices are likely to have fewer bureaucratic traits, which is evident here in terms of the set up each practice, this is also suggested by Till (2009) and Yaneva (2009). It is also stated that smaller practices are expected to place a higher importance on the aesthetics of the building (Yaneva 2009), which is also evident within the cases. From this it is possible to deduce that there are going to be significant differences in term of what interests varying sized practices, which needs to be accounted for within the feedback mechanism.

10.2.1.2. Architectural Values

One key element that was explored in each case study was that all the participating practices were keen to continually learn. However, there was a difference in how some of the architectural practices wanted to learn. The NSP architects wanted to learn by exploring other people’s buildings, whereas the other two practices were very keen to learn about their own buildings as well as others.

Continuing to learn about other architects buildings was a key value that was also identified in the general architect interviews, for example when exploring the build-up of experience on projects and the apparent desire to learn from all experiences. From this it is possible to deduce that although different architects want to learn in different ways, there seems to be an overall desire to learn from the current building stock. If the feedback mechanism is going to be successful it has to exploit this desire to learn from buildings in general.

Another topic that was explored was the idea of aesthetics, and architectural practices being visually driven. The Angel architects talked about creating ‘strong buildings’, and how that would improve the customer’s perception of such building. The NSP architects also said that they worked in a visual arena. Aesthetics and the use of visuals to communicate, were also recognised as key values in the general architect interviews, whether it was using “film to showcase the building to its best”

184

architects, suggested that architects should always let go and leave the building alone to evolve, allowing the architect to get on with the next design, whilst not being influenced by the previous project. This is a contentious topic within the general architect interviews as well, as some architects want to avoid going back to the buildings they have created, and other see value in returning. This information seems to suggest that the feedback mechanism needs to hold a repository of buildings, so that it can take into account both points of view.

Sustainability is also an important practice value for all three case study architects. The Angel architects and the E&SW architects both have sustainability mission statements, which they incorporate into every project, and the NSP architects expressed their desire to design sustainably.

Sustainable design was also one of the main values to come out of the general architect interviews.

A number of architects had an interest in how they could make their buildings more sustainable, with current initiatives, such as carbon reduction. However, it was interesting to find that the majority of architects interviewed were also looking beyond this and expressed that the longevity of buildings played a key factor in sustainability: “There is a definite need to address the existing building stock. And there is a need to understand how to make it last longer.” (Architect, Very large practice). This expression of the need to find ways to make the building stock last longer was explicitly linked to improving sustainability and in stark contrast to the literature stating that architects avoid going back to their buildings Heylighen et al. (2007b) relates to the feeling of social responsibility expressed in the literature (Spector 2001). All three of the case study practices also showed an interest in the existing building stock and the potential of adapting buildings, in order to bring them back to useful occupation. Each did suggest that buildings should be adapted if possible, which highlights the implicit understanding that adaptable buildings are more sustainable. This suggests that all of the architects would be interested in a feedback mechanism that informed them in how buildings change so they can make their future designs more adaptable or reuse existing building stock.