* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Achievements and Challenges - Interdisciplinary Design for the Built
Survey
Document related concepts
Postmodern architecture wikipedia , lookup
Interior design wikipedia , lookup
Russian architecture wikipedia , lookup
Contemporary architecture wikipedia , lookup
Green building on college campuses wikipedia , lookup
Metabolism (architecture) wikipedia , lookup
Construction management wikipedia , lookup
Urban design wikipedia , lookup
Performance-based building design wikipedia , lookup
Architectural drawing wikipedia , lookup
Mathematics and architecture wikipedia , lookup
Green building wikipedia , lookup
Christopher Alexander wikipedia , lookup
Architecture wikipedia , lookup
Architecture of the United States wikipedia , lookup
Architect-led design–build wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Interdiscipl inary Design: Achievements andChallenges TheDesignProfessions in Transition TheQueen'sBuilding, Emmanuel College, Cambridge Friday,12tnSeptember1997 Conference organisedby TheMartinCentre,University of Cambridge Department of Architecture in associationwith University of Cambridge Department of Engineering Cambridge Programme for Industry |IHln t +l I tl Interdisciplin ary Design : Achievements andChallenges The DesignProfessions in Transition T h eQ u e e n ' B s u i l d i n gE,m m a n u eCl o l l e g eC, a m b r i d g e Friday,12thSeptember 1997 Programme 09:30 Registration, TheatreFoyer,Queen's Building Coffee, Harrods Room,SecondFloor Exhibition, Seminar Room,Ground Floor 10:00 Welcome RobinSpence, ReaderinArchitectural Engineering University of Cambridge Department ofArchitecture Introduction to the Conference JohnMartin,Conference Chairman Chairman of Trustees, OveArupFoundation 10:15 Beyondthe environmental tradition: Lessonsfrom the pastfor the architectureof the future DeanHawkes, Professor of Architectural Design, WelshSchoolof Architecture '11:00 Coffee, Harrods Room 1 1 : 3 0 S e s s i o n1 : C h a n g i n P g r o f e s s i o nR a lo l e s Changingconstructionculture Richard Saxon,Chairman, Building DesignPartnership Multidisciplinary work- a professionalvocation Michael Dickson, Chairman, BuroHappold Discussion 13:00 Lunch,OldLibrary 14:00 Chair:Professor AndrewSaint,University of Cambridge Department of Architecture Session2: Modelsof Interdisciplinary Collaboration Threedifferentwaysof workingand the buildingsthat wereproducedby them SamPrice,Paftner, PriceandMyersConsulting Engineers Landscape, climateand materials JamesBurland, Architectural Director, ArupAssociates Discussion 15:10 Tea,Harrods Room 15:30 Session3: CaseStudies Thatroof etc. SophieLe Bourva,Structural Engineer, OveArupand Partners Designteamsandhow theywork GraemeJennings, Partner, PToARTS Discussion 16:30 GroupDiscussions A) Changing Professional Roles:Harrods Room,SecondFloor B) Modelsof Interdisciplinary Collaboration; Queen'sBuildingTheatre C) Education for Teamwork in Design:SeminarRoom,GroundFloor 1 7 : 1 5 C l o s i n gS e s s i o n 17:30 Conference ends - winewillbe serued. Seminar Room:Exhibition openuntil1B:15 Interdisciplin : ary Design Achievements and Challenges The DesignProfessions in Transition T h eQ u e e n ' B s u i l d i n gE, m m a n u eCl o l l e g eC, a m b r i d g e Friday, 12thSeptember 1997 Speakers Dean Hawkes has been Professorof Architectural Designat the Welsh School of Architecture since1995. Previouslyhe was a University Lecturerin Architecture at Cambridge,Fellowof DarwinCollege,and,from 1980-1989, Directorof the MartinCentre.His most recentbook. The Environmental Tradition, was publishedin 1996. RichardSaxon is Chairmanof BuildingDesignPartnership, the multidisciplinary firm which has been at the forefrontof interdisciplinary practicesince the 1960s.He is the authorof two bookson atriumbuildings, Chairmanof the ConstructionIndustryBoardGood PracticePaneland Past Presidentof the BritishCouncilfor Offices. MichaelDickson has beenChairmanof consulting engineersBuro Happold since1996.Sincefoundingthe firmwiththe lateSir EdmundHappoldin 1976, he has been involvedin a wide rangeof civiland structuralintegrated commissions, includingthe Queen'sBuildingin whichthisconferenceis being held.He has beena CouncilMemberof the lnstitution of StructuralEngineers, and is currentlya memberof the lnstitution's TaskForceon Environmental Guidelines. Sam Price is a structural engineerandjointfoundingpartnerof consulting engineersPriceand Myers,who haveworkedcloselywith many leadingfirms of architectsincluding,most recently,MacCormacJamiesonand Pritchardand van Heyningenand Haward.He is a visitingteacherat the CambridgeSchoolof Architectureand the IDBECourse.He is a Fellowof the lnstitutionof Civil Engineers and an HonoraryFellowof the RIBA. James Burland has beenArchitectural Directorof Arup Associatessince 1994. From1985to 1990he workedwith PhilipCox in Sydney,Australiaon a wide varietyof projects,includingthe OlympicStadium.Recentprojectswith Arup Associatesincludethe Manchester Millennium Stadium,Johannesburg Stadium, a new collegefor DurhamUniversityand new buildingsat StockleyPark. Sophie Le Bourva is a structuralengineer,whosetrainingin Franceincludeda three-yearfirstdegreein architecture. She joinedOve Arup and Partnersin 1989 groupof PeterRice.She has participated in the BuildingEngineering in a numberof high profileprojectsin Franceand the UK, includingthe LilleTGV Station.She has recentlycompletedthe IDBECourseand is a TechnicalTutorat the Architectural AssociationSchoolof Architecture. GraemeJennings is an architectand partnerof ProArts,an independent consultancy specialising in arts and heritageprojects.Formerlywith DEGW in Londonand in Milan,he is alsoconsultant to the BritishCounciland a member of the panelof assessorsof the Arts Councilof England.He was a memberof the firstIDBEcohort,wherehis thesisdealtwith DesignTeamWorking. Interdisciplin aryDesign:Achievements andChallenges Discussion Groups:16:30to 17:15 GroupA: Professional Changing Roles(HarrodsRoom) Chair: Dr Mike Murray(AMEC) Rapporteur: Paul Kirby(IDBE) Questions for consideration: Are professional too tightlyconstrained? boundariesand territories What new or enlargedprofessional rolesshouldbe considered? How can changebe facilitated? Group B: Models of lnterdisciplinary Collaboration (Theatre) Chair: Joannavan Heyningen(van Heyningen& HawardArchitects) Rapporteur:GilesOliver(IDBE) Questions for consideration: Are new modelsuseful- interdisciplinary firms;partnering; construction management? Or are conventionalmodelsa more effectivemeansto createquality? What are the barriersto betterteamwork? GroupC: Education for Teamwork in Design(SeminarRoom) Chair: David Owers (DavidOwers Associates) Rapporteur: RobinSpence(Universityof CambridgeDepartmentof Architecture) Questions for consideration: Are currenteducationalmodelsuseful? What is neededto improvethem? How can desirablemodifications intothe existing be incorporated processof change? Interdisciplin aryDesign:Achievements andChallenges Discussion Groups:16:30to 17:15 GroupA GroupB GroupC ChangingProfessional Modelsof Interdisclipinary Educationfor Teamwork Roles Collaboration in Design HarrodsRoom I 9 Theatre SeminarRoom Mike Murray,Chair Paul Kirby,Rapporteur Joannavan Heyningen,Chair DavidOwers, Chair Giles Oliver,Rapporteur RobinSpence,Rapporteur Tom Barker / Jean-MarcBarsa^y' ChristianBeltor;) ' TrevorButler ^/ AdrianCampbell/ @ine ,/ EmmaCarmichael / ElainePsyiss ../ MichaelDickson John Eaton Paul Evans "/ '/ Karl Fitzgerald Neil Francis ,/ Michael Cteeson4 BryanGuttridge ,/ AnthonyHopkins Paullnnes / Jim Mellish ColinMoses Kevin Myers David Pearce ./ DanielPhillips{ Tony Rea AndrewSaint RichardSaxon Mike Sharpe MikaTsuchiya Andrew Watts r' RobinWilson RichardYoung PaulAkhurst NigelAtkinson Sean Billings PhilipBroadbent-Yale Lucy Bulivant James Burland Chis Croft RobertDoe DamianEly StuartFoley ChristopherFrench GarethGardiner RussellHall Christopher Jones PeterJones ChristopherLawler SimonLawrence SophieLe Bourva JonathanLouth MatthewLovell PhebeMann JacquieMilham RichardMoss DenisOwen AndrewParker Sam Price Paul Redman Paul Richens PeterSharratt PeterSmith Mark Standeven John Summerill Tom Taylor DeborahThomas ChristianTopp RichardBurdett NigelChallis RogerChantrelle DerekClements-Croome PhilipCooper Dina D'Ayala BleddynDavies KeithDawson AndrewDerbyshire Maria Fan BenedicteFoo Max Fordham DianeHaigh Dean Hawkes Bruce Huxtable GraemeJennings CallumMacBean PaulMcCombie SebastianMacmillan John Martin RobertRansom SandiRhysJones ElizabethSadler HilarySmyth MartinSymes Man Yuen Tsui PaulWellings-Longmore AnthonyWillats InterdisciplinaryDesign: AchievementsS. Challenges BEYOND THE ENVIRONMENTAL TRADITION: LESSONSFROM THE PASTFORTHEARCHITECTURE OFTHE FUTURE Dean Hawkes. Universitv of Wales Cardiff University of Cambridge Departrnentof Architecture INTEGRATED DESIGN IN THE BIIILT ENVIRONMENT CONFERENCE EmmanuelCollege, Cambridge SeptemberlD7 Beyond the Environmental Tradition: Lessons from the Past for the Architecture of the Future Dean Hawkes Welsh School of Architecture Universify of Wales Cardiff Abstract This paperexaminesthe propositionthat knowledgeof pastdesignsplayl an importantrole in the designof new buildings. Earlierwork by the author on the idea of the stereotyp€as an aid to environmentaldesign is reconsideredand the environmentalUpology is extended to incorporaterecentstagesin the evolution of the office building. The paper concludes with a discussionof the implicationsfor integrateddesign practisewhich are implied by the shift in the aims and methodsof environmentaldesignwhich this analysisreveals. Introduction For many years, as teacher,researcherand practitioner, I have been preoccupiedby the relationshipbetween,in convenient,albeit imprecise,terminology, ut and scierrcein the creationof buildings. In the field of environmentaldesign, where much of my work has been located, it is particularly important to be clear about this relationship between the environmentalfunction of the form and fabric of a building - the very material of the ot of architecture- and the role of mechanicalsystems of environmentalcontrol - which are, in most manifestations,primarily questions of technology or science. In both my academic and professional work I have found that these questions are frequently illuminated and informed by referenceto past instances. In other words that the production, perhaps even the invention, of solutions to presentproblems benefits from historical understanding.My aim in this paperis to put this hypothesisto the test. The Environmental Tradition In 1995 I published a collection of essays, on themes in the theory and practice of environmentaldesign, under the title of The EnvironmentalTradition.. The Foreword to the book was written by Robert Maxwell who, with more eloquenceand insight than I can muster, suggestedthat the essays, "never oversimplify in the attempt to assert a general 'oconsciousof the loose fit, that alchitects theory of scientific design" and that they are, know only too well, betweenform and perforrnance:a spacein which cultural pressures can produce strangedistortions." These observations, in my view, identify something essential in defining and understandingthe nature of architecture. First, that it is not susceptible to reductivist, "scientific" theories of design, and, second, that the ostensibly predictable, technicallybasedaspectsof architecture- such as environmentaldesign - are conditioned as much by "cultural pressures",in the broadestmeaningof the term, as by logical analysisand precise calculation.Over twenty yearsago I first publishedmy argumentfor the existenceand use of 'stereotypes'in design. There, referring specifically to the problem of the design of 'Evolutionary Tale' in which I tracedthe office buildings in the early 1970s,I sketchedan development of the British office building from the turn of the century through the descriptionof six distinctstereotypes. The operationalargumentfor the stereotypeis that, as I wrote all those years ago, "...it is simply a generatlyheld notion about the natureof a good solution to any recturentdesign problem..." which plays "... a creativeroleby allowing the designerto begin ".. from a reasonably confident position." In addition, the definition and characterizationof these particular office building stereotypes allowed me to make an observation about the transformationof environmentaldesign in the twentieth century which they reveal. This is most strongly illustratedby the comparison of the first and last types defined. In the first the relatively loose relationships between its components - plan form, floor-to-ceiling heights, window sizes,the type of mechanicalplant, and the broad notion of comfort of the time - permitted a free adaptationof its broad characteristicsin the design of any specific 'ttteory' of 'Integrated building. On the other hand the last type - based on the 70s 'scientifically' determinedset of relationships Environmental Design' (IED), rests upon a 'comfort' which, becauseof its closed logic, between, form, construction, plant and prohibits inventive elabonation. 2 'stereotype'lies in, "... the realizationthat the latest But the most useful function of the stereotype does not supersedeall others. There is, in fact, a store of accumulated experiencewhich containsall (new emphasis)previous solutions. This view demandsa return to earlier stereotypesto see what they offer as potential solutions to present-day problems... The searchshouldbe for the most appropriatesolution .-. the first step would be to examine the store of stereotypesrather than simply to accepta single current notion t', The emergence of the Modern Movement, with its rejection of history, shifted the theoreticalground towards the idea that designs could, and should, be based upon the 'scientific' understandingof 'first principles'. But 'hard-line' modernism has long been under critical scrutiny, as is demonstratedby, for example, Alan Colquhoun's important 'objective', 'systematic' essay 'Typology and Design Method'. The casefor a wholly basisfor the productionof architecturenolonger has credencein the theoreticaldiscourse. We may, therefore, look again to the possibility of history, properly understood and analysed,playing a part in the production of inventive solutions to the problems which confront contemporarypractice" At this point I should stressthat this is not an argumentfor nostalgic revivalism. The intention is to makethe datacontainedin the historical record availableto the contemporary practitionerin a way which helps to develop designs which combine effective technical performancewith an appreciationof the "cultural pressures" which bear crucially upon all architecfureof significance. I should also say that I am not proposing the establishmentof an 'Institute of ArchitecturalMorphology', attractive though such an idea might be to university administratorsin thesedays of ResearchAssessmentExercisesand the likes. I am mindful of the wisdom in Robert Maxwell's stricturesabout the dangersof "general theory" and of the needfor "loose fit ... betweenform and performance". The best way to make the point is through the rnedium of buildings. It is in the realisationof designsthat the abstractionsof theorv arebest illustratedand validated. Case Studies To keepthe discussionwithin reasonablebounds and to give the paper some consistency of focus I will use examplesof recentdesignsfor British office buildings. My original set of stereotypespre-datedthe emergenceof the atrium office building. Since the late 1970s this has becomeone of the most clear cut and effective forms for office design - a potent demonstrationof the value of the stereotype. In 1978 Richard MacCormac and I published a short article in the RIBA Jounnl in which we developed the fundamental typological distinctionof courts and pavilions which l,eslie Martin and Uonel March articulatedin the 1960s, the very cornerstoneof what has now grown into the Martin Centre. By adding a $azed roof to the court form we demonstratedthat it would be possible to achieve a configuration of office space which would be comfortable and energy efficient in the British climate. In essencethe glazed courtyard combines the advantagesof the traditional narrow plan o{fice building with those of the deep plan type, whilst avoiding their disadvantages. In addition to this direct reference to Martin and March's theoretical studies, we were equally influenced by specific buildings, such as Wright's l-arkin Building and Aalto's RautataloOffice Building, both of which have top-lit centralspaces. In ottrer words we were searchingthe store of precedent,exactly in the mannerproposed in 'Types, Norms andHabit'. At aboutthe sametime Arup Associateswere working on their design for Gateway Two at Basingstoke- proof of the zeitgeist? This is widely regardedas the seminal atrium office building in Britain. Unlike many of its successorsthis is daylit and naturally ventilated, with air-conditioningrestrictedto specialisedlocal areas. The project architectat Gateway Two was Rab Bennetts,who now practisesas BennettsAssociatesand has continuedto develop and refine the Gateway theme in subsequent buildings. The Powergen HeadquartersBuilding at Coventry is a subtle typological transformation of Gateway in which linear , daylit, naturally ventilatedoffice spacesflank a long atrium. The office spacesare open to the atrium and the facadesreflect the difference between their northerly and southerlyorientationsin their detaileddesign. The point in illustrating the Powergen Building is to show how the stereotypeserves to inform the production of a design which responds to the specific conditions of programme and site. The building is securely based on the authority of the atrium type, and on the technicaland socialattributeswhich it possesses,but it is a creativereinterpretation,not a slavishrepetition. The design of comfortable,energy-savingoffice buildings may be approachedin many ways. Feilden Clegg's recently completed Building 15 at the Building Research Establishmentdemonstratesthe continuing validity of the traditional narrow plan office as it is transformedby the superimpositionof the apparatusand devicesof passive solar design. 4 Again the distinction betweennorth and south is clearly expressedin the design of the facades, but here the traditional elementsare supplementedby the expressedventilation stacksand light shelves. In termsof the stereotypeargumentthis building shows how new knowledge and componentsmay transforrr an existing type, investing it with a new level of performance. In this, perhaps,we can identify the emergenceof a new stereotype. That is, indeed, explicitly the intention in BRE's requirement that the design should be replicable. Myfinal'Case Study'is theFriary ProjectatMaldonin Essexdesignedby Greenbergand Hawkes. This project consists of two buildings in the historic centre of Maldon and, unlike Powergenand Building 15 on their on-urban sites, was conceivedwithin all of the constraintswhich aretypically imposed in such situations. One of the buildings housesa branchof the County Library and offices for the County Social ServicesDepartment. The design of the offices respondsto the specific structure of the department, with a mix of cellularandopen plan spaces. In itsfundamentalsthe building is a traditionalnarrow plan type. In comparisonwith both Powergenand Building 15 the facadedesign is much more conventionalwith regularly spacedwindow openings and a completeabsenceof external devices. The principleswhich underly the building are those which are codified in the LT Metlnd of low-energy design, developed in Cambridge by Nick Baker and Koen Steemers. The aim is to establishthe dimensionsof windows, in relation to the size and orientationof the spacesthey serve, to optimisethe balanceof energy used for lighting and spaceheating. In this building thereis a cleardifferencebetweenthe small windows on the north facade.which serve the cellular offices, and the larger openingsto the south-facing open plan offices. Incidentally, the LT Method was not directly applied in the design processof the building, but its principleswere sufficiently understoodthrough many years of academicassociation with Baker and Steemersfor them fundamentally to inform the design. In comparison with Building 15, this design represents a less radical transformationof the narrow plan stereotype,but is, nonetheless,effective in achieving its environmentalgoals. In evolutionary terms it is, perhaps, close to the subtle variations which Darwin detectedin the beaksof his finches. But I suggestthat such small variations are as valid in architecturalevolution as they are in nature. 5 Conclusion In conclusion I want to make two principal points, one of practice,the other of theory'stereotype' was written just when the objectives and My original paper on the idea of the methodsof environmentaldesign were beginning to be challengedby what we then called the'energy crisis'. Then the almost unchallengedassumptionwas that the environmental functions of buildings would increasingly be met by mechanicalplant, rather than by the form and fabric of the building, and that this would determineand changethe nature of the relationship between the membersof the design team. It is, in the present context, not insignificantthatthe last'stereotype'in my original typology was basedon the principles 'Integrated Environmental Design.' Now, after two further decadesof evolution that of assumptionis no longer valid. Increasinglywe see, as my threeCase Studiesshow, that the primary environmental parametersare often again addressedby the uchitectt're of the building, and that the relationship of fabric and plant is, in such buildings, fundamentally redefined. This must have d"ep implications for the way in which the design team is constructed and functions. As I see it the need remains, is actually reinforced, for a philosophy of integrateddesign,but now this is, or should be, one in which the traditional distinctions between the professions are dissolved to allow richer and more creative interaction. Thi s has profound implications for education. At the end of the twentieth century we no longer acceptthe strict dogmas of the Modern Movement. kactice and theory are characterisedby a more inclusive view. The intellectualnecessity,feltby the'pioneers', to escapefromthe historicist confusionsof the nineteenthcentury has served its purpose and now the value of historical knowledge is 'discipline' of architecture, as an academic almost universally acknowledged" The enterpriseis founded upon its history. But for history to be of more than just generalised value - a kind of colour supplement- it must be brought to bear upon all dimensions of 'Typology and DesignMethod', Colquhounwrote, "In spite of the development design. In of the scientificmethod,we must still attribute... socialor iconic values to the productsof technology and recognizethat they ptay an essentialrole in the generationand development of the physical tools of our environment ... This fact is concealedfrom us becausethe intentions of the design process are "hidden" in the overt details of the performance specifications." What I tried to show is that it is possible to structure the data of the past in a way which makesthem relevantto the problems of presentday practice. 6 InterdisciplinaryDesign: Achievements & Challenges CHANGING CONSTRUCTIONCI.ILTURE Richard Saxon,BuildingDesignPartnership CHANGINGCONSTRUCTION CULTURE Paper presented at the Conference: "lnterdisciplinaryDesign: Achievementsand Challenges" E m m a n u e lC o l l e g e ,C a m b r i d g e ,1 2 S e p t e m b e r1 g g 7 Richard Saxon* The UK constructionindustryis in bad shape, but is getting better. We suffer the highest output prices in Europewith some of the lowestinput costs; our clientsare dissatisfiedand litigious,makingless use of the industrythan in other advancednations; professionals and contractors are not makingenoughmoney,evenat thesehigh prices. The only goodthingsto b e s a i da r e : that UK designersand constructors are able to producesome of the bestarchitecture in theworld, that thereis underwaya deep-seated changecampaignwhichaimsto revolutionise the industry. The British way of designing and constructingbuildingsis unique and looks odd by internationalstandards.As craftsmanshipin traditionalmaterialswas replacedby knowledge of new materialsso we in the UK progressively de-skilledthe main and specialistcontractors and vestedknowledgeand responsibility in universitytrainedprofessionals.We developeda cost controlsystembased on standarddescriptionsof work, robbingcontractorsof initiativein how thingsare made. As constructiontechnologyprogressedhowever,this division between the supposedly knowledgeable and responsibleand those who actuallydevelopand installsystemsbecame illogicaland ludicrous.The socialand culturalgulf betweenprofessionals and tradesbecame a barrierto collaboration and the introvertedconcernsof the 400,000businessesin the UK industrymade us losetouchwith our customersthroughdecadesof publicsectordominance. As the private sector took the lead in the 1980's client dissatisfactionspawned the new diversityof procurementpaths,the collapseof professionalfee scales,the rise of the project manager, the constructionlawyer and the triumph of imported building products. The depressionof 1990- 1993 put the lid on it, crushingthe life out of the construction firms and professionals and creatinga realisationthat the whole squabblingmess had to be reformed, root and branch. The Governmentlaunchedthe LathamReviewwith the inspiredrealisation that unlessclientstook centrestage,the industrycouldnot change. The LathamReviewwas RGS/CHANGINGCONSTRUCTION CTILTURE 27t08t97 publishedin July 1994 and gave directionto a mass of initiatives.Momentumfor change is continuingto buildand whilstit may be too soonto say thatwe are intoa new era, I believewe will soon be ableto say that. The new era is takingshapeand changingthe culture,rolesand potentialof everyoneinvolvedin that new foundphenomenon, the SupplyChain. The TavistockInstituteis workingon a study for the Governmentof barriersto change in the industrywhich should be publishedshortly. The interim report has been very useful in identifyingthe multi-foldforces for change and giving them some structure. Tavistock identifiesfive interlockingfieldsconvergingto createthe comprehensivechange: Businessand Procurement concepts. The trendto collaborative working. Designand Construction Methoddevelopment. lnformation Technologyas a driverand enabler. Human Resourcesissues. Businessand Procurementchangesare generatedby clientsmorethan by the industryitself. Clients,especiallythe regularones,have becomeproactiveand have begunto comparehow they run their own businesseswith how they buy construction.The idea that constructionis utterly differentto manufacturingor to other science industriesbecause of its one-off,site based naturehas been largelydiscredited.The lasttwo decadesof thinkingabout business methodsis now arrivingin construction with a rush. Amongstthe many aspectsof this, the Private Finance Initiativestands out. Governmentnow seeks to relateto its propertyas a charge-paying tenantwithoutresponsibilities for upkeepor utilities,concentrating on its core business.The PFI providerhas to delivera 30 year supplyof managed,serviced,maintained space. Not even the mostcaringpropertydeveloperhas ever donethat in the UK, thoughit is comrnonin the US" Adoptingit is changingprioritiesutterly. Consortiaare forming of facility managers (a newish but future core profession),designers,financiersand contractorsto competefor these projects. Lifetimecostingreplacesthe obsessionwith initialcapitalcosts. designerscan even be equitypartnersto put Qualitybecomesproperlyvalued. Professional their interestin the performanceof the productup front. They can sit aroundthe consortium table and put qualitywhere it counts. I foreseethat conventional institutional developmenton a 2S-year repairing lease will find PFI style propertya serious competitorfor the private b u s i n e s st e n a n t . Collaborativeworking is a style adaptedfrom manufacturingand serviceindustry. Insteadof the single-project, tender-basedselectionof suppliersto work underan adversorialcontract, there is a shift to managed"supplychains"with a high degree of trust. Just as Rover now RGSiCHANGINGCONSTRUCTIONCULTURE 27108197 buys its windscreenwiper from two sourcesrather than the open market,and gets fully alongsidethe suppliersto ensure the success of the whole, so partnershipsof clients, consultants,contractorsand suppliersare appearing. For some companies,like Birse,the conversionfrom carnivorousto herbivorousstyle has been Damascene.Therapistsare brought in to break the old, confrontational habits of a lifetimeand teach the win-win philosophy. What everyoneis seeking is Japanese-style long termism,coupled with the continuousimprovementonly committedpartnerscan achieve. lt is not cosy cartelismbut is restructuring the industryand sharp, tough love. ln the processthe alliance-making again. Suddenly,we are all altruists,concernedfor our customers redefiningprofessionalism first,both internaland eXernaltypes. modeland at the near Methodsare also lookingat the manufacturing Designand Construction parallel of offshore oil construction. In the latter, costs have come down over 30o/oby workingand concurrentengineering.In the former,Boeingcan now builda firstcollaborative off plane with no faults, thanks to well managed teamwork and use of 3D modelling. terms is the reversalof the twentiethcenturytrend to Concurrentengineeringin construction the tradeand maincontractor.Bringingthem in at stagesC & D, in distancingand de-skilling RIBA terms, enablesgreaterspeed and economyeven in a one-offproject. In a series of projectsit allows progressiveprocessimprovementto cut costs deeplyand improvequalityat of specification, knowledgeengineeringand other l.T. based the same time. Standardisation process.The futureof and integrating the designand construction methodsare all re-ordering design and build,as a procurementpath, is seen to lie with a separationof projectdesign work, which should not innovate technically,from continuous,off-line research and stuff. development.This is revolutionary InformationTechnologyis the great enablerof most of the other changes. Five key target conceptsare emerging: i the importanceof global,highspeedcommunication singleprojectdatabases,sharedby all participants.. electronicdocuments,emergingfrom structuredworkflow3 knowledgebasedsystemsas expertadvisorsand automateddesigners'. object modelling,where both catalogueitemsand one-offdesignsare modelledwith all and dimensions: their characteristics The emergingl.T. basedindustrylinks client,team and site closely,enablesdesignsign-offs and site assemblywithoutsurprises.lt naturallysupports based on real clientunderstanding collaborativeworking, concurrentdesign and predictable performance. RGS/CHANGINGCONSTRUCTIONCULTURE 27/08/97 The designersittingat a drawing-boardsizedscreen,with web-styleaccessto everythingand everyoneinvolved,is not far away. Even now, work styles are changingfrom the supportof paper-basedapproachestowardssomethingnew. Which bringsus to the Human Factors: Tavistockthinksthat these are crucial,limitingthe workabilityof some concepts,encouragingothers. People'sskills and attitudesare being by all these innovations.Customerfocus comes hard to architects; challengedcontinuously collaborativeworking seems unnaturalto contractors;project team leadershipis new to o*\f clients;design involvementis a challengeto specialistcontractors.Few people under 30 are at homewith l.T. Mostdo not likethe hoursor stressthat the industryhas demanded. throughtrainingis colossaland yet The workloadof re-skillingand attitudereconstruction trainingis the weakestaspectof the industryand its clients. lt can'tjust be done throughthe i tnh;a s t o b e d o n e w i t h t h e c u r r e n t p r a c t i t i o n e r s o r t h e b yw e ill educationofthenextgeneratio retiredearly,perhapsvery early. To returnto the Latham movement,the processis now in its third stage. After the Review itselfcame the creationof the ConstructionIndustryBoard and its dozenworkinggroups. The productsuppliersand the contractors, specialists, CIB is a true forum for clients,consultants, governmentas industrysponsor.The six are representedby''umbrellas", organisations which and trade bodiesin the industry.The CIB Working togetherspanthe hundredsof professional how projec$ be Groups laboureduntil early this year to produceagreed Oui{qngerorn E!'rould should setupandrunandonhowtheindustry "n"rn" O)ffiq#_ The thirdstaseis ted by threeclB Panels,dealingu;n ,:{r,;r""# "*t&";"} tomorrow. The Good PracticePanel,which I chair,isjhere-toimflbmentthe new guidanceon projectstrategy.The Produclivity Panel h9s thfiob of introducing the methodologychanges Panellgntsnl is w.orking on the methodsof the whichwill cut real costs. Tbe Research t centurywhichwill be futurepractbei twenty-first Fvn) , ^, Dffl CI*l^ ,."{,J\ Governmentis backingup the push with a host of researchprojects,suggestedby DTI and DETR. These are focusedby the ProductivityPanel and CRISP and are providingthe toolkit on how constructioncan adopt the learningprocesswhich manufacturingadopted after the a resolutelyun-intellectual Japaneseimpact. lt will be instructiveto see how construction, industry. sector,copeswith becominga learning-based So what are the resultantchangesto the professionallandscape? I see a business-driven with the academicart-formof architecturetaking its place end to the cultureof introspection, RGS/CHANGINGCONSTRUCTIONCLILTURE 27t08/97 D as a part,but not the core of the discipline.Customerfocuswill determinewhat professionals offerand what is seento add value. Therewill be greatchangesin what an engineer,architector quantitysurveyordoes with their working hours. Processesare being reassessedand the old, uncoordinatedprofessional plans of work are meltingaway. New maps are emerging,with clientand specialistson the map. A concept of the interdisciplinary team is thus widening. Alliancesbetween groups of professionals are likelyto extendto all other membersof the supplychain,and to becomea strategicweapon in competition.Many professionals will be workingas or for clientsand contractorsratherthan as consultants. The cyber-professional is emergingas a formidablecreature. He or she can work acrossthe world or across the countryelectronically and can have access to the experienceof their whole firm and indeed of the industry. We have to get used however to the client e a v e s d r o p p i nogn o u r s c r e e na n d a d d i n gc o m m e n t s . The new professionalis forcedto take personaldevelopmentvery seriously. \Mthout the i n t e r p e r s o n aslk i l l s ,b u s i n e s ss k i l l sa n d t e c h n o l o g ys k i l l s r e q u i r e d w , e are unemployable. These skillsdate fast and so blocksof time and incomehaveto be set asidefor training,both gain has to be ploughedback. The by employerand employee. A lot of the productivity originalyearsat universityand the originaldefinitionof one'sdisciplinewill fade in significance quitequicklyas the continuousdevelopment ethostakeshold. The lnterdisciplinary Design Course no doubt originallywas conceived in a relatively traditionalway. lts future lies on the broad deck acrosswhich lies the whole supply chain. Our challengeis to learnto pulltogether(Latin:CON-TRACTOR)" RichardSaxonis Chairmanof BuildingDesignPartnership, Chairmanof the Good PracticePanelof the Construction IndustryBoardand Past Presidentof the BritishCouncilfor Offices. RGS/CHANGINGCONSTRUCNONCULTURE 27t08/97 InterdisciplinaryDesign: Achievements &. Challenges CHANGING PROFESSIONALROLES: MULTIDISCIPLINARY WORK . A PROFESSIONAL VOCATION Michael Dickson, Buro Happold InterdisciplinaryDesign: Achievementsand Challenges The Design Professions in Transition Ghanging Professional Roles Multidisciplinary Work - A Professional Vocation Background Note by Michael Dickson, Partner, Buro Happold Gonsulting Engineers The traditionalview of advancesin Architecture,Engineeringand the Built Environmentis encapsulatedin the quotationoriginallyfrom 'ln Search of Man' Andre Missenard(1957)and quoted in 'Climate and the Energyof Nations' by S F Markham. "Evolutionof civilisationis closely linked to the potentialities of heating which are dependent, not only upon the techniques of the apparatus and on fuel resources". Historically,developmenthas been characterisedby advancementin specific areas in a cyclical way - in "structure" from masonryto frame buildings,from timber to steel to reinforced concrete into composite construction. In planningthe environment,windows lead to the chimney,to Victorian ventilationsystems,to gas lighting,to low energy lighting; coal fires to central heating and air-conditioningand displacementventilationand chilled ceilings. Reallyit has been a history of sequential improvementitem by item. On a worldwide basis we now need to add the concept of sustainabledevelopment. As defined by the BruntlandWorld Commissionin 1987 on Environmentand Developmentthis is: "Development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs". Truly sustainablearchitecture(small a) requires the resolutionsimultaneouslyof many complex issues. All interestedpartiesin the entire design, construction,operationand decommissioningprocess of the built environmenthave to be concerned with the global environmentalconsequencesof their actions, and to have concern for their actions throughoutthe projecVbuildinglife (and beyond). lt has to be a much more interactive process where many disciplines interact with the specific rigorous knowledge contained(not exclusively)within an individualdiscipline. For the disciplineof structuraV civil/buildingengineering,the approachto sustainableconstructioncould be defined as: "The creation and management of a healthy built environment based on resource efficient and ecological paramefers". Specificallythese issues are:o Appropriatelocationof development a Choice of built form o Choice of structural material o Minimisingthe effects of constructionand deconstruction And these issueshaveto be understoodin termsof theireffectson the environment: Amountof fossilfuel to purchase,process,transportand erect a building(Embodied Energy) water) resources(finitematerials,damageto environment, Use of nonrenewable Pollution(COzglobalwarming)(SOzNOx acid rain)(CFC,CL2 etc ozonedepletion) Once again architecture is moving towards easing the burden on the planet without loss of pleasure,value or comfort. This is being done by the process of improvingeconomic performanceas defined by Lower Life Cycle Gosting and stimulated by considerationsof less EnvironmentalConsequenceas indicated by Life Cycle Assessment. Often quantificationon cost parametersalone will lead to a radically different outcome in respect of sustainabilitythan would occur if a qualitativeassessmenton Environmentalgrounds from cradle to grave were also made. The QueensBuildingis an example of this divergence. The Master and Fellows of Emmanuelrequired a building of exceptional quality and longevity for the Queens Buildingin its heritagesetting next to ChristopherWren's C17 Chapel of Ketton stone. The conventional answer could have been a reinforced concrete frame clad in thin stone panels with a steel trussed roof fully airconditionedand using ceiling forms to adjust the acoustic performance. Simplisticallythis involvesquarryingthe limestone,grindingit down, firing it to create cement which is then added to aggregate and reinforcing bars to create a structural frame etc. What the Queens building did was to create insulationand mass by using the CAD possibilitiesnow offered in design for a constructionin individualsolid stones. Also it utilisesthis thermal mass to reduce peak airconditioningloads, plant and duct sizes as well as improve acoustic isolation. From a first cost point of view this might not have been the minimum option because of intensity of labour required by the unusual process but because of longevity,the possibilityfor reuse and lower energy running cost the building definitely offers a sustainable design. The procurementalso requiredan unusuallyinteractiveprocess between disciplines: Satisfying a heritage environment Client Msion and implementation of a timeless design Architects Creation of a Performance Space Acoustician Organisation of the Procurement Process Contract Managers Perfection of the craft of masonry Stone Masons Advancement of the Technology of Stone Framing Structural Engineers Opportunities of Creating the lnternal Environment EnvironmentalEngineers Costings Specification of Work Packages etc Cost Consultants Construction of the Works Builders,fitters etc Fitting out and furnishing Computers, Cabinet Makers, Plasterers Operation of the Building Fellows, Staff, Students etc and many other disciplines. This process is actuallyembodiedformally in that of ConcurrentEngineeringwithin the lndustrial ConstructionProcess of Partnering. To gain 'Bruntland'points, clients,designersand users need to go back to fundamentalsof performanceand examine the standards that have been set by the various Codes of Practice to which works are constructed and these need to be formulated on the basis of performance requirementsrather than being purely prescriptive. Additionallythe following criteria among others are relevant: e Qccupiers are really integratorsof a range of stimulations(aesthetic,thermal, acoustic, light etc) and are more tolerantthan that anticipatedby rigidlydefined,legallyset criteria of performance. r $tudying of solutions from the past together with the use of computing power and modern technologyto evolve a new languageof the built environment. e Qosting needs to be in terms of a total process of activity, adaptability,maintenanceand o deconstruction. pesigns shaped to reflect the availablematerials,what types of physical and environmentalforces they will be subject to and the socioeconomicculture of the "local" constructionindustry. o fi conscious evaluationof embodied energy within construction(and the non renewable materialsrequired)in order to create a built environmentwhich during its life time is effectiveand reduces global requirementfor non renewableenergy. o ffiinimisationof Waste by Use, Recovery,Reuse, Recyclingof Materials. In summary 'Green' architectureis not just a style for altruistic developersto adopt. lt is a movement gathering pace drawn by compellingeconomic and global reasons. The issues are very complex and differentfor each building usage so that the languageof sustainable Architecture,Engineeringand Constructionfor the Built Environmentneeds augmenting immediately,otherwiseour activitiesas a specieswill be likelyto overloadthe planet. BackgroundReference: RIBA Profile,April 1997 "The Future Sustainable Architecture"by Michael Dickson MD/BT 5 September1997 InterdisciplinaryDesign: Achievements& Challenges THREEDIFFERENTWAYSOFWORKINGANDTHE BUILDINGSTHAT WEREPRODUCEDBYTHEM SamPrice,Price& Myers ConsultingEngineers Three different ways of working and the buildings that were produced by thern. SamPrice MA FICE Hon FRIBA Partnerin Price & Myers ConsultingEngineers Before I talk about Models of InterdisciplinaryCollaborationI want to maketwo generalpoints: The first is that designis a meansto an end and the purposeof our efforts is to producegood buildings. We are designingthingsto be made. This shouldperhapsgo without saying,but I think that in the sometimesintrospectiveheart searchingsthat go on about design the buildersare quite often forgotten. To producea good building,however"good" is defined,whetherit meansbeautifulor functionalor economicalor appropriateor honest,or preferablya happycombinationof all of thesevirtues,one hasto havean aim, an idea,which must be pursuedsingle-mindedly, evenwith passion,, and that passionhasto be understood and sharedb,vevervoneinvolved and ultimatelyby the builders,who after all, are the ones who createthe building. "Passion"-ay be an overstatement, and perhapsI am exaggerating in order to makethe point, but I think it is often easyto seewhich of the buildingsaroundus are the result of what I have calledpassionand which are the result of pragmatism. I saidthat for the buildingto be good the passionhasto be sharedby the builders,by the craftsmen*S_gp.actually making it - laying the bricks, pouring the concrete,putting in c,nnlr,sc)V' the services- and I think it must be acceptedthat in recentyearsit hasbecomegraduallymore and more difficult for the designersto communicatedirectly with the craftsmen." Builders" arebecominga thing of the pastand most buildingwork nowadaysis organisedby "Contractors",who do little or noneof the work themselvesand let it all out as a seriesof subcontracts.The contractorsare trained in managementand talk about "procurement"and describethe buildingas the "product". None of this hasmuch to do with passion.I doubt if passionis on the curriculumof manymanagement courses! So the designersare separatedby contract administrationand managementfrom the peoplewho will build the buildingand it is becomingprogressivelyharderto get the message across, and this meansthat the messagehasto be clearerand more complete. What I mean by this is that the designersmust havea strongerand clearerview of how the buildingwill be built. They can no longer dependon discussingthingswith the builderand if necessary modifyingthe designas the work proceeds. Now all this doeshavesomerelevanceto the issueof interdisciplinary collaboration. The designmust be convincingand completewhicheverway you look at it - particularlyfrom the builder'spoint of view The differentdesignersin the team bring differentstrengthsand weaknesses to their work and it is at leastpossiblethat the engineersare the oneswho are most inclinedto be interestedin the actualprocessof building. Engineeringis, after all, all about making things- it is the practicalsideof science.Architectstend to be ratherfurther off the ground-whichis of coursea very good thing - somebodyhasto be! It is the engineers who may have somethingto contributeto the realisationof the gleamin the architect'seye becausethat is wherethe gleamcertainlyhasto start!. So this is one of the greatvaluesof true interdisciplinarycollaboration- that by working togetherwe havea much better chanceof achievingthe completeness of designwhich is necessary if the passionis to get through to the men who actuallymakethe building. My secondpoint concernsthe natureof the interdisciplinary designteam Nf OiOfor a time think that this complicatedconglomerationof consultantswas a very poor substitutefor a singleall-knowingdesignerwho understoodall the criteriafor building. I thought that if we were all much better and more broadly educatedwe could each carryout the designwithout the needfor help and advicefrom others. Educationwas clearlythe key. Therewas in fact a conferencetwo yearsago on DesignEducationfor Engineersat which the chairman,Lord St. John of Fawsley,expressedthis sameview when he saidin his introduction,"Specialisation is the enemy. We shouldbe seekingto rid ourselvesof it. What we want is the Renaissance engineer.. .." I think that this may very well be the answerto the designof bridges,but I am now certainthat I do not believethat it is the answerfor the designof buildings. If we are to dealwith the increasinglydemandingenvironmentaland energy-usequestionsand if we are to exploit fully the potentialof the manymaterialsthat are now availableto us we must have who first and foremostare expertsin their own field. No amountof enthusiasmfor specialists the generalissueswill makeup for lack of abilityin the specialism.Of coursenothingwill be achievedby a bunchof expertswho haveno commongroundand no commonlanguage, which is why the whole idea of interdisciplinary collaborationis vital to the success.The other vital ingredientis enthusiasmbecausewithout it we cannotachievedanythingworthwhile, as I saidat the beginning Now to the subjectof this session- Models of InterdisciplinaryCollaboration.In thinking about what I wantedto sayI decidedthat "Models" in this title could eitherdescribe the methodof working - the set-upin the designoffice or offices- or it could describethe buildingproduced,as a "Model" of Interdisciplinaryworking. So I havedecidedto describe and show you three examples:-threedifferentmethodsof working andthreebuildingswhich were producedby thesemethodsand are all in their ways "models"of interdisciplinarydesign. I will try to outlinebriefly the successes andfailures,as I seethem,in the buiidingsand in the in order to keepto my allottedtime, to leavesomeof this to teams,but it may be necessary, the discussionthat will follow JamesBurland'stalk. My first examplecomesfrom the late 1960s,when I was working in Ove Arup and Partners Arups had worked for someyearswith architectsSir Basil Spence,Bonningtonand Collins. Jack Bonnington was keento try interdisciplinaryworking, and had set up his own in-houseinterior designand servicesteams. He persuadedReynoldsand Young to put a team of quantity surveyorsin his office and I led a team of structuralengineersfrom Arups. The organisationof the office spacewas interesting.The architects,interior designers,servicesand structuralengineerssat in one office spacedividedinto baysby nearlyfull-height partitions, with eachdisciplineoccupyinga bay. The partitionsdid not separatethe spacesacoustically, so that we could talk to eachother acrossthe partitions,but there was a definiteimplication of separatedepartments.The quantity surveyorswere, perhaps,characteristically,more conservativeand put themselvesin a separateoffice with a front door and a knocker! The main building that we were working on was the SunderlandCivic Centre,and the methodof working seemedto me to be very successful.The architects,interior designersand the structural engineers,particularly,got to know and understandeachother very well, had lunch together frequently,went to Heals and arguedabout furniture designand light fittings andgenerallysparkedideasoffeach other. During the developmentof the design,which I will describein a moment,everythingwent very well, and the job was generallyvery successful.It was only when the pressurecameon from outside- the contractorpressingfor information, for example,that the two firms tended,inevitably,to separateandtake up defensivepositions. The main part of the buildingwas conceivedas afigure-of-eight,forming two irregular hexagonalcourtyardsbasedon a geometryof 60 degrees.The strip of officessurroundingthe courtyardswould be eitherabout 12 metreswide wheretherewould be a centralcorridor with officeseithersideor about i 8 metreswide wherestoragerooms or stairsor lavatories occurredin the middlebetweentwo corridors.This was the ideaand the questionwas how to structureit and deal with the interestingand unusualgeometry. I proposedthat the whole building shouldbe basedon a regulartriangulargrid of 6.0 metre side equilateraltriangles,covering the whole site. The architectspreliminaryplan for the whole building was so-to-speakpicked up and shakenand with very little difficulty we then had a building plan basedon the new underlyinggeometrywhich set the rules for the developmentof the whole design The materialfor the frame was clearly reinforcedconcrete; therewere load-bearingmullionsat the edgewhich were precast,becausethey were only 125mmthick; all the rest of the concretewas castin-situ; the floor slabswere 2Z5mmthick flat slabs. In due courseas the detaildesignprogressedwe found that it was easiestand mosr economicalto reinforce all the slabswith 3-way reinforcement,so in everyway the geometry of the designwas followed I can't really pretendthat this very effectiveand satisfactorycoincidenceof planning and structurecould only havebeenachievedby the methodof interdisciplinary collaboration that we adopted. Probablythat fundamentalbreakthroughwould have occurredwith the structuralengineersworking in their own office. However the subsequent detaildesignof all the elements- walls, stairs,claddingpanels,services- was certainlymadeeasierby the proximity of the architectsand engineers. At the end of the job I felt that it hadbeena most rewardingexperience, but that what had happenedon Sunderland- i e. that the architectsproduceda schemeand the engineers found a systemfor achievingit - was probablyas far asthe collaborationwould go. One might wonder what more could be expected,after all the architectsdid adopt completelythe engineer'sproposaland this is at leastas good as most collaborationsget! However my appetitehad beenwhetted and I wantedto seeif collaborationcould existat a more fundamentallevel of design. So I askedto moveto Arup Associates,which was, and is, a truly multi-disciplinarypracticewith all the necessary expertsin one firm. Arup Associateswas at that time organisedinto sevengroups,eachcontainingabout fifteen to twenty people A typical set up would be four or five architects,two structural engineers,two mechanicalengineers,one electricalengineer,one plumbing engineer,three quantity surveyors,maybeone building surveyor,an administratorand a secretary. The groupssat in open plan officesand usuallynot in professionalgroups. Note that therewere no draughtsmen,which was unusualfor an engineer's office at that time. This was becauseit was felt that the group shouldbe as small as possibleto keep internal communicationscrisp and to help the whole group to focus on a common aim. There were frequent discussions within the groups about every aspectof the design. Everyone'sopinion on any subjectwas valid - if the plumbersaidthat he didn't like the way the architectwas designingthe windows then the architecthad to be preparedto discussit and explainwhy he wanted them like that. If you went into anothergroup and talked to the mechanicalengineerhe would be quite likely to start to explainthe structuralprinciplesof the building he was working on. In many ways this systemwas fantastic. Firstly, of course,for the client, who only had one firm to dealwith and was never faced with buck-passingbetweendifferent offices. Secondlyfor overallcommitmentto thingslike prograrnmeand budget. Thirdly becauseit allowedpeopleto do what they wanted - for examplethe contractadministrationwas all carried out by the quantity surveyors,so that the architectswere free to concentrateon design. During the nine or so yearsthat I worked in Arup Associateswe designedand built a numberof interestingbuildings. I think that nearly all of them demonstratea fundamental interestin construction,and do celebratethe materialsthey are made of, and did try to give the craftsmenthe scopeto show what they could do. In otherwords I think that you can seethe ideaand the passioncomingthrough. Perhapsthe most interestingis the Lloyds Building at Chathamwhich is a good exampleof the influenceof group working at every level of the design Lloyds wantedan office of about 20,000sq metresand a big undergroundcomputer room on the old Gun Wharf at Chatham. The site is on the banksof the Medway and is on three levels,separatedby quite high retainingwalls, the lowest level being the quay besidethe river The principalarchitectof the group proposeda very simplecube of building standing on the middle level, rather like the way that Aalto's Enzo Gutzeit building overlooks the harbourat Helsinki.and fullv air-conditioned.Now this was in the mid 1970sat the time of the oil crisis,and we were all becomingvery consciousofthe amountof energyusedby buildings. Therewas a generaldiscussionin the group aboutfundamentals.The site was large and the air was cleanand there were no obviousreasonswhy a narrow" naturallyventilatedbuildingcould not be got on the site. The group generallyfelt that the architect shouldreconsiderhis startingpoint. I think this view was expressedmost forcibly by the who alwaystendedto be the stroppiest.The architectnot surprisingly structuralen-qineers took umbrage!( This is certainlyan exampleof one of the problemsof group working - it can be very painful.) He invitedthe structuralengineersto do their own schemeif that was how they felt! So one of the engineersproduceda sketchfor a building,narrow enoughto be naturallyventilated,with two open courtyards. It was a pretty scrufri effort and certainly lackedany architecturalquality,but it did makethe point that the ideawas feasible.The architect,to do him justice,did pick up the sketchandturnedit into a presentable proposition, leave- which showsjust how painfulgroup working can be! althoughhe did subsequently just how far Arup Associatesmanagedto get in developing This little episodedemonstrates the democracyof the group. The designof the buildingdeveloped- following very closelyPhilip Dowson'sprinciple of "ConstructionalHonesty". We wanteda squaregrid with vaultedceilingsto give a slow rhythm and a senseof placein big open-planoffices;no falseceilings;very flexibleservices distribution;(somemechanicalventilationwas inevitable);and a precastreinforcedconcrete framefor qualityand speedof erection. As precastconcretehasa long lead-intime we made the bottom storeyof the building,which containedplantrooms,out of in-situ concreteso that it could go up while the precastunits were beingmade. As the sitewas largewe precasted complete7.2m square pyramidson site,while the rest of the frame,includingthe beautifully finishedcolumns,was castin a factory. I think that the story of the designand constructionof this building really does demonstratewhat can be achievedby interdisciplinarycollaboration;and the commitmentof the group and the belief in what we were doing was impressive.So why, after nine yearsor so in Arup Associatesdid I want to leaveand set up my own practiceas a structuralengineer? There area numberof answersand there isn't time now to discussthem all - perhaps this could be a part of the discussionafter James. I will just say now that I felt that I wanted to get away for a bit from big organisations,I wanted a changeof scale,and a greatervariety in the sort of work. I also wanted to try to seewhat it was like to really earnmy own living. So in 1978Robert Myers and I returnedto the world of pure structuralengineering and set up Price & Myers. We certainlyachievedthe aimsthat I havejust listed. The scale changed,the variety increasedenormouslyand we definitelyfound out about earningour own living - there is somethingvery satisfyingabout sticking your own stampson! But what about interdisciplinarycollaboration?Well we found, of course,that this variedenorrnously,like the work, from job to job and designteamto designteam. In the normalconventionalset-upof separatedesignersfrom different firms coming togetherto designa building the framework for communicationis almost always set by the architect. The architectis invariablythe first one of the designersto be appointed,or at anyrate approached,by the client,and the architect usuallydecideshow soonto involvethe others.Somearchitectslike to get a designsortedand agreedwith the client beforetalking to anyoneelse;someare happyto bring everyone together before anythingis decided. We, of course,very much prefer the latter arrangement. The relationshipsbetweenthe designersdo take time to build up. On the first job together everyoneis a bit wary of the others,and it is only through developingunderstanding and finding out how far one can go that a really rewardingrelationshipcan be developed. This appliesas much, of course,to the multi-disciplinarygroup in Arup Associatesas to the more usual world of separatedpractices. In fact smallpracticesrealisethat they are vulnerablein a big, competitiveworld and do feel the needto makegood closefriendshipswith others,so that in someways the incentivefor collaborationis quite as strongas in the expected,takenfor granted,set up of the multi-disciplinarygroup. Anyway, in Price & Myers we now have manycontinuingcollaborativerelationshipswith friendsin all the other disciplines- including the builders! The buildingthat I havechosenas an exampleof collaborationbetweenmy firm and othersis the Cricket Schoolat Lords. The architectwas David Morlev" who we had not worked with before,the Servicesengineerswere Max FordhamandPartners,who we knew well and had worked with frequently,and the quantitysurveyorswere Davis Langdonand Everestwho we also knew well The crucialquestionfor this buildingwas the lighting The MCC wanteda high and steadydegreeof illuminationand this stronglyimpliedartificiallightingwithin a buildingwith a solid roof, so that the lighting levelwould be totally independentof the externalweather conditions.Rrght from the startDavid wantedto usenaturallightingif at all possibleas artificiallighting would be very extravagantin energy. Max saidhe was convincedthat with the correct orientationof rooflightsand suitablereflectivescreeningthe very high and steady degreeof illuminationwould be achievedby naturaldaylightfor a largepart of the year. The designof the roof - its shape,its covering,the rooflightsandthe structure- thereforebecame a matterof crucialimportanceand the essenceof the interdisciplinary collaboration,which exploreda numberof differentideasin somedetailbeforesettlingon the schemethat was built. The designthat emergedhasa clarity and a beautythat comeout of fulfilling the purely functional requirementsof the lighting. Of particularstructuralinterestis the support of this big roof by spanningthe length,endto end,ratherthan the more obviouswidth, so that the roof trussesrun with the rooflightsand form the geometryof the profile of the roof covering. This rhyhm is also relatedto the width of "nets"which are suspended offthe bottom booms of the trusses To summarise,I havetried to show how three different organisationsof peopletackled the issuesof interdisciplinarycollaborationand how threebuildingswere producedby their efforts. I am sure that, in the end, there is no one perfectway of going about this. We are all individualsand we all haveour own ways of working and communicatingwith others. What is necessary,regardlessof the organisation,is the desireto communicateand the passionto build somethingthat is good. The analyical part of the designprocessmay comefrom the head,but the collaborationandthe passioncomesfrom the heart. SamPrice August 1997 10 InterdisciplinaryDesign: Achievements& Challenges MODELS OF INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLABORATION JamesBurland,Arup Associates JAMES BURLAND M O D E L SO F I N T E R - D I S C I P L I N ACROYL L A B O R A T I O N : - 1 2 S E P T E M B E1R9 9 7 "Arup Associates" T h e o r e t i c a lM o d e l Our resourcesconsistof approximately 40oh architects, lu,lP ,rr( /n/k 10o/ostructuralengineers,20o/oMEP*,2o/oprojectce ordination,2o/oquantitysurveyors, 2o/ofinancial management, 2olocombinednew business research and graphicdesign,1oo/onon- technical(secretaries and drawingofficeclerks). We havea theoreticalmodel for the practicewhich is basedon an empiricalapproachto design,treatingeach new projectas a uniqueexperimentwith a new brief,site or client. Designand resources are adjustedthrougha programmeof reviews.The officeis organisedthrough four internalmeetings. A weeklynew businessreviewand resources discussion and a monthlypolicymeeting. This polariseslong term and shortterm decision-making related to about 30 currentjobs and new opportunities, all at differentstagesof development.The whole practice meetsonce a week to sharenews,poliry decisionsand to overview projects. * Mechanical, Electrical and PublicHealthEngineering September1, 1997 77/rrrv/1h "rffu/ A R U P A S S OC IA TES Modelsof Inter-Disciplinary Collaboration The long term aim is to maintaina livelyenergetic,multiprofessional resourcefrom which teamscan be formed aroundspecifictasksin urbandesign,buildings,interiors and product design. Teamsvary in emphasisto match the degreeof structural,architecturaland MEPcontent. But thesethree disciplines must be the minimumincludedfor us to acceptan appointment.We stillmaintainQuantity Surveying,althoughthis is often rejectedby clients preferringindependentcost advice. Thiscore team absorbsother specialist consultants whetherinsideor outsideArupsor in the client'semployment.Thereare three other essentialpartsof the model: long term financialdirection,projectco-ordinationand new business research.All three are linkedwith everystageof a project to varyingdegrees. fr'-r //,&0btuft&\M ,rffi September1, 1997 / ,' ,r/ 441 /hrfoL /fhl'lrtlft 4M"^r,t4 A R U P A S S OC IA TES Modelsof lnter-Disciplinary Collaboration Finances are monitoredon all projectsrelativeto each otherand individually. Thefinancialdirectorhasa rolein determiningvalidityof acceptingor chasinga commission againstavailable resources and the long term financial stabilityof the practice.The projectco-ordinatorreviews rTv>4.aftunw t{nh'in progressagainstforecastedprojectplans. We haveour own versionof the RIBAplan of work designedto suit our Urtt / a4/ inter-disciplinary methods.The business research team providesimportantfeedbackfrom clients.Theyfind out JurnJfo"r/-J / A{drl fuFfu why we havewon or lost competitions,competitive interviewsor bids and ascertainas best they can how the n/"n4d4^A 'atl'*il outsideworld perceivesus. Partof their researchinvolves /'0t4L gatheringand summarising designbriefs.Thisprovides an objectivestartingpoint for all professions ratherthan V'// /4/tu{r{L (rry? projectingan architecturally biasedview of the client's In practicethis theoretical'model' is adaptedto the bhll tubq uniquenatureof eachproject. DurhamNew College, &".h/a,-*"rtrn StockleyParkEastand GlasgowArenaare examplesthat illustratea rangeof applications. 4s/w.h*z qLl,aru dft;,-' September1, 1997 E ;tu).\ha"fl' requirements onto other disciplines in the designteam. Application ,6fri-nJ b-r C/4E?raZul' InterdisciplinaryDesign: Achievements&. Challenges THAT ROOE ETC SophieLe Bourva,OveArup and Partners IDBE "ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES" 12 SEPTEMBER1997 SYNOPSISOF CONFERENCEPAPER *THAT ROOF ETC' by Sophie Le Bourva, OveArup and Partners My participation at the IDBE conferenceresults from a decisiontaken about I I years ago,when I wasjust finishing my first degreeat the Ecole Polyechnique. This is when I decidedto orientatemy field of studies from mainly mathematicsand sciencesto building and civil engineering,but as this felt like too much of a specializationtherl I also decidedto shrdyarchitectureat the szrmetime. My meeting with Peter Rice to whom I am hugely indebte4 m;vwork in Arup, who was one of the early champions of interdisciplinary desigrr,and participatingto the IDBE mastercourse were all direct consequencesof this original split personality. Those subsequentyears and experienceshave been spenttr5nngmore or less consciouslyto use and mergeboth trainings and keep developing a understandingof the "big picture", being always uneasyabout too much specialisation. This presentationwill thereforestart by consideringa few projects in which I was involved at early stages, urcludingLille fain statior-rexclusivelyin relation with the topic of interdisciplinary designto try to identify whatwe meanby interdrsciplinarydesignanddiscusssomeof my fundamentalinterrogationsabout it. These questionsresult largely from the thinking encouragedand fuelled during the IDBE course, and hopefully aim to generatesomefurther thinking during the discussion. Campanile, Poris Theprqect of this 20 mhigh sculpture,at the top of a 30 m high office developmentwas largely carriedout independentlyof the rest of the buildrng designedby Kenzo Tange.The designteam for the sculpturewas quite small, including the ambitious and enthusiasticclient representative,the sculptor Thierry Vide, Amp as structural engrneers,a french practice for the motorisation of the sculpture and the contractor for the suspendedparts. The relative lack of experienceof the sculptor, who had neverbuilt anythingmuch above a few metreshigh, had never been part of a building design team and for whom this project was a major adventure,w6 not without catsing difficulties, and addeda team working challengeto an already technically challenging exercise. But it did not really request from us to reconsidermethods of working, beyond accommodating the delays causedby the visual checking by the scupltor which had to be carried out exclusively by physical models and proto$ping in situ, as drawings did not speakto him. Luckily, we all agreedon the overall objective ("to help him to build his dreamedsculpture).One of the key to this design was the integrationof the structurewith the metal meshskirn producing the desiredvisual effects, to the point of visual disappearanceof the structureif possible. Can we call it interdisciplinary design,evenwhen the original ideawas designedindividually by the sculptor? Lava Lamp, NCE Competition Quitesimilar in scopethan the previous project, the NCE Competition for a 100 feet tower to be locatedin Birminghamwas the opportunity to carry out a design exercise (we unfortunately did not win) with again a fairly traditional team, AEM the architectpractice,Arup for stnrcture,cladding and services,Hanscomb quanntysurveyorand MJ Gleesonas contractorwith specialisthelp from the Glazing contractorT&W Ide Ltd. The design,a 100 feet lava lamp, was luckily testedfurther by a selectionfor the secondround of the competition. This secondphaserequired feasibility to be confirmed both for the glazngto be able to take the hugehydrodynamicpressureand for the fluids to be able to form the blobs rising up the tower. In some ways, it is difficult to find a better example of successfuland enjoyableteamwork and of interdisciplinary collaboration in the spirit of Ove Arup's ideas. On the other end, there was little overlap or integrationof disciplines,specially at the early conceptualstage.So again can we call it interdisciplinarydesign? TGV Station Roof, Lille ("That Roof') The TGV station project can be examinedat two levels, as a project in his own rights or as a part in the overallmasterplan of Euralille.Both levelsare rich of lessonson teamwork and interdisciplinary desigrr"but I would think that the masterplan level is more interestingas it was dealingwith a rather unusual scaleand that the organisationhas beenthought through specifically for this project and to deal with this scale.This is probably all the more relevantthat the trend is for building projectsto get bigger and that firndamental changesneedto occur to deal with suchprojects. At the scale of the overall station, the project team organisation was largely following the traditional organisationfor building prqects in France(seein annexethe descriptionof the typical french organisation). At close examination, this organisationdemonstratessignificant differenceswith the [JK, but at a detailed levelwhich I am not interestedin here.Thedesignteamconsistedmainly of the in-housearchitectsof SNCF, a french Bureaud'Etudes for secondarystructuresand services,Arup for the roof and facadesstructures and cladding and the civil engineersof the SNCF for the concretestructuresand substructures. At the scaleof the roof, Arup hadbeengiven the role of "Maiffe d'Oeuwe", that is the prime agentrole. We therefore put together an interdisciplinaryteam including engineersof different specialities,architectsand a quantitysurveyor.This team,in accordancewith the generalobjectivesagreedin languagewith the SNCF architect, elaboratedthe design that was subsequentlybuilt. This is certainly a case of interdisciplinary design, if not evenof crossdisciplinary design,ie a discipline carrying the work of severalothers. The Euralilleproject deservesmore than a paragraphin this presentationand should really be studied as an experimentcarriedout at full scale.The matching of teams'organisationand contractualentanglementwith the master plan design is an admirableconstnrctionof this project. The designand the procurementof the design were inseparable.This is for me to the credit of the starting team that they reaLtzeAthatthe scaleof this prqect requred a jurnp of scalern the methodsand actedon this from the very early days,even if some of the organisational structureswere inspired from previous caseslike La Defense(SocieteD'Economie Mixte SEIO The organisationof the competitiontestify of this: it was basedon an interview of the architects rather than a designand aimedat choosingan approachabout cities rather than a project, which was deemed impossible to study in a few months. This demonstratesa strategicunderstandingrather than dealing with architectureas a commodity. This allowed to match the masterplan arrangementwith the arrangementof organisational and financial mechanics.But we were far from the Latham's objectives, here, smooth collaboration was not the aim, neither were straight and honest dealings, it was only about getting it to happen.The conceptboth from the masterplan and attachedorganisationwas nicknamedthe dynamicfrom hell by the director of Euralille SEM or inspired cynicismby the architect(chaostheory applied to urban planning and teamwork). The idea was that the different elementsconstituting the masterplan would be purposefully intricate, so that it would be difficult for one to operatewithout the others, but that they would be independentprojects. This was matchedby the financial arrangementof the SEM wherethe investnent came from all the actors on the site in a mix of public and private money, but with a set of independent architect/clientcoupleschosenby Er:ralille for eachpart.This made it virtually impossible for the key players to pull out of the arangement.The collaboration betweenRem Koolhaas and Euralille was also undoubtedly interdisciplinarydesignin action. So what is interdisciplinary design,if it is not only interdisciplinary collaboration?Can we avoid it? If the problem of the numberof specialistsis ever increasing(only visit the Pompidou Centre Exhibition "the Art of the Engineer"'s s@tionon the present/future), it is not new. Renaissance,which is sometimesreferred to as the lost paradisewhere one professionalhad all the knowledge,is rather the origrn of the first split between craftsmen corporations and designers.In France, it is probably Phillibert de I'Orme who first expressedthe notion of "precogitation", ie a purely intellectual anticipation of the future constmction. It is now virtually impossible to be totally multidisciplinary in oneself,and it might not be desirable.Having differencesis inevitable and possibly enriching and it seemsthat interdisciplinary design might therefore be unavoidable. Or should we make a distinction and call it interdisciplinary as opposedto multidisciplinary only, when the collaboration is successful,or when the disciplinesmerge,or when the collaboration starts beforethe project designstartsor when it hasgooddesignasits central objective. This quote from Ove Arup at the Wesftrinster Chamberof Commercein 1965 seemsto sayjust that: "Successful teamwork requiresthat eachmemberof the team understandswhat the others are doing and respectsthem, and that they are united in a common purpose: to produce good architecture." The Euralille project illustrates anotherquestion:it is a casewherethe design and processwere intimately linked and invented for eachother. Can we say that in more standardcasesthe processand the design are equally intimately linked? Probably not. Our advocating of interdisciplinary design is based on the assumption that the processof design has a significant impact on its outcome/result. The hope is that it would result in better, less costly, more efficient environments.Is there evidenceof this? Interdisciplinary design or smooth collaboration is probably neither necessary,nor sufficient for good design, even if it unavoidableanddesirable.Frictionswithin limits is beneficial as it allows to exposemisunderstandings,deal with them and progressfurther. For me, in interdisciplinar"v design,the design,the outcomeis what mattersmost. Interdisciplinarydesignis not an end in itself, we must neverforget the outcomeof all our work, which is to provide a good environment to our lives. So we needto agreeon what good environmentis, what good architectureis. The complexity of expressingwhat good architectureor environment is seemsto have defeatedmost theoricists of architecture andtoday it doesn'tseemimportantin the architecturalconcerns. But I believe we should be able to express it, if we want to be able to arguefor it and aim for it. So beyond interdisciplinary collaboration,we need @rnmonandclearly expressedaims,which must take into accountthe complexity of the environment. These objectives are the most direct way to influencethe design,beforethe organisationalstmcture. While prepanngtlus ta[q I wastold by an engineerthat the subjectivity of architecturalobjectiveswas what madecollaborationso difficult. There is little doubt that architectureor rather constructittgatt environment is a very complexissue,and appraisinga designis not as easyas in the caseof a boat of the America's Cup wherethe good designis appraisedon onecriteria: speed.Using onecriteria to drive a building design is quite inst'fficient to arrive at a balancedresult. Thereforemeaswing the successof the result by only one criteria can't be sufficient. It can't only be cost or enerry efficiency and one should speakof qualities for building, maybenot just qualiff. If thereis oneissuewhich is undeniablyaffectedby the processand specialisation,it is the integration of the different parts, though less actorsdoesn't alwaysguarantybetter integration (BAA car park). I think that this rrught be oneof the possible keys to good design: integration of technolory and architectural concepts is indispensableto achievethe best results. We often use the expressionthat buildings should amountto more than the sum of their parts, I would suggestthat they rather should be lessthan the sum of their parts or that. in the sameway as, in interdisciplinary discussion,not all the players have to talk to influence the design,not all the disciplines haveto show a specific part of the building as theirs. Buildings arenot only the kit of partsdesignedby different specialistsassembledby the architect,that seemto happen in increasingnumbers in the recent built environment.lntegration is often assumedto be the task of the architect, but it should be everybody's aim. So amongst the concerns I would like to see shared by interdisciplinary teams, I would include these:a concern for the whole rather than eachpart is essential, researchof the holistic solution ( caring aboutthe tangible and the intangible). We must avoid the hamburger strategy'.a work built up in layersthat interact as little as possible. ANNEXE FACTS ABOT]T THE FRENCH CONTRACTUAL SYSTEM AND PROJECT ORGANISATION Becauseof the importance of central governmentregulations and of the public sector in France, the French building industy is significantly different from its UK counterpart and it would be too ambitious to compareboth in all aspectshere" It is important in Franceto distinguish betweenthe public and private sectorswith respectto building procurement.The public sectorclient operateswithin a complicatedframework of codeslike the "Code desMarches Publics"(Codefor Public Contracts,I993),laws and decreeswhich provide detailed prescriptions regarding building procurement, including design procurement. The only exceptions are the "parapublic" companies,like the SNCF (FrenchRailways) which operatewith their own similar set of regulations.The importanceof the public sector in the Frenchconstnrctionindustry is more significant than in the UK andjustifies a close examinationof this new text which regulatesthe relations between public clients and private designteams.The percentageof the public sertor is around 30% of the total cost of projects for the architectsand aboutzso of the turnover of the building confiactors, ulmountingto a total of about 116 MF (1993 figures).The private sectoris by comparisonrelatively free of regulations. The main constraint applied to the private sectoris an obligation to employ an architect for the "permis de constnrire" (building permit) since 1977, but there is a lot more freedomspecially in relation to the choiceof contractors( no obligation of competitivetenderingfor example).But, although practice and proceduresare more varied in the private sector,there are substantialsimilarities, sincethe private sector tendsto adopt a lot of the proceduresand terminolory of the public regulations. Typical organisation of teams(doesn'texcludeothers) In the public sector,the appointmentof the designteam has to be carried out rmder one contract and in the caseof building projects, for the whole length of the project. Before tender,the designteam (Maitrise d'Oeuwe) consistsof the architectgenerallyas "mandataire" (prime agent) and the various "bureaux d'6tudes"(consulting englneers).The "bureau de contr6le"( checkingauthority), the "economiste"(quantitysurveyor),the "pilote" and representativesof the client completethe project team. The "pilote" is responsiblefor the prograrn,he chasesprogress,primarily of the contractors,and generallyis responsiblefor making sure that the site nurs smoothly. During the initial designprocess,the client has to appoint a checkingauthority whoserole is to checkthe design of the building for safety, and for proper applicationof the French regulations('Normes"). The design producedby the Maitre d'Oeuwe is checkedafter APD. The contractor'sdesignis checkedduring the "Confr6le GeneraldesTravaux" phase(CGT, site supervision). At the end of tenderphase,the client generallyappointsthe confractorsfor eachseparatepackage("lot") of work (procurementin "lots separes"). The coordinationof the different contractorsis carried out by the "Maitrise d'Oeuvre". ln France,in most cases,the contractoris responsiblefor the final desigrr,it is he who carries out the executionstudies(calculation,constmction drawings, fabrication drawings). In effect he has to review thoroughly the designwhich was producedby the designteam during APD and completedetaileddesign and constructiondrawings,togetherwith a set of constnrctioncalculations,that are submitted to the checking authority and the "Maitrise d'Oeuwe". It is the DCE which the "Maitrise d'Oeuwe" prepareswhich containsthe specificationsand the description of the above studies.During the CGT period, the "Maitrise d'Oeuvre"'s role is to check that the studies aremade accordingto the original designintentions and specifications. The "Maitrise d'Oeuvre" also checksthe executionof the work in the workshop and on site until completionand hasto give instructions to the contractors. Comparison of thework stagesbeforeI afterthe Loi MOP with thenearestBritish equivalent Loi MOP 1985I 1993 Decretde I'Ing6niene 1973 British "equivalent" phases Esquisse Etude de definition Conceptdesign APS Avant Projet Sommaire APS Avant Projet Sommaire Schemedesign APD Avant Projet Definitif APD Avant Projet D6taille Design development Projet DCE Dossier de Consultation Enfreprises Tender documents Assistancepour la passationdes contratsde travaux AMT AssistanceMarche Travaux Tender Etudesd'execution/ Visa CGT Contr6leGeneraldes Travaux Final design documents Direction descontratsde travaux CGT Contr6le Generaldes Travaux ConstnrctionPhase Assistancepour les operations de receptionet de parfait achdvement RDT Reception Snagginglist and handover InterdisciplinaryDesign: Achievements &. Challenges ''THE LAD'SDONEWELL'' . DESIGNTEAMSANT) HOWTHEYWORK GraemeJennings,Pro ARTS G R A E M EJ E N NI N G S IDBE'ACHIEVEMENTS ANDCHALLENGES' 12 SEPTEMBER 1997 PAPER SYNOPSIS OF CONFERENCE "The Lads DoneWell" DesiqnTeamsand How Thev Work Likefootball,buildingdesignrelieson teamwork.Unlikefootballlittle is documentedon the performance of builtenvironmentdesiqn teams and less still on the techniquesand effectivenessof interdisciplinarity. Fortunatelythe shelves of the Cambridge Universitylibrarygroan with the writingsof behaviouraland management scientistson teamworkin otherdesignsectors. In this post-Taylort worldthe viewsof Handy,Dumasand Mintzberg et al can beof useto the designersof the builtenvironment. So I wouldlike to presentsomethoughtsaboutinterdisciplinary designbasedon the thesisstudiesI carriedout duringthe IDBE coursehere,my previouswork in Milanat DEGWltalia and the presentsomewhathybridworkwe carryout at PToARTS. lnterdisciplinary working results in a better product! Despitethe lackof evidenceto suppoftthisstatementthe factis that interdisciplinary workingis hereto stay.CharlesHandycontends thatteamsproducelessideasbutthe onesthat are producedprove moreviable.The increasing complexity of projectsdemandsa team approach.The real questionis how to best use interdisciplinary working.To answerthis we firstneedto understandmoreaboutthe mechanics of interdisciplinary designteamsandhowto exploitthem. Whatis an interdisciplinary design team ? Mostof us haveexperienced that shiftin perception from beingjust participant one of severalto being a in a focusedteam. At the I shouldliketo homein on some teamcharacteristics conference in a 'givens', littfemoredetaillike, teamsize, motivation,the briefing, 'group-think', leadershipandmanagement,for widerdiscussion. lnterdisciplinarity is a wav of working.lt meanscollaboration between intelligent equals( notclones)usuallyintheformof a team,withdefined workingin a trustfulatmosphere.lt is unlikelyto mean a objectives, groupof individualsthrowntogetherwith an ill definedbriefwho happento sharethe sameclient.lt can take severalforms,not only teamsof differingsizes,make-upand rangeof workbut occasionally, individuals. In ltaly, wherethe designpracticesare smalland relyon I workedalongside collaboration, designersMicheledelucchiandMario Belliniwhocouldbe describedas workingin an interdisciplinary wayon their own, movingfluidly betweendifferentdisciplines-graphics, productsandcitydesign-in a typicalworkingsession. 1 Taylorwas the fatherof work and organisationalstudy At the otherefireme the 600 strongdesign'company'formedfor the organised t28 billionChannelTunnelRailLinkhasbeendeliberately teamsto accomodatechangeaccording intoa matrixof crossfunctional to whichpartof the procurement led projecthaspriority,seediagram. At the conferencetheseexamplesand the Olivettiprojectdescribed aboutteam belowwillbe usedto tracesomeof the findingsresearched working. We professionals sharea common language the professionsfrom the sciences' said Herbert Design distinguishes 'design' is alsouseddifferently Simon.The word by ditferentdisciplines. ln 1991| wasaskedto 'manage'the designof DEGWltalia'slargeR & D projectfor OlivettiG4Ssitedin Southemltaly,see slide.Two design teamswereinvolved,one in Londonwherethe designoriginatedand one in Milanto wherethe sketchdesignwas transferred.At first I thoughtthe co-ordination weredueto the two languages used difficulties but I realisedthat even everydaytermsin the sarnelanguagecan be interpreteddifferently.In teamworkit is vitalto clearlycommunicate aspirations and allow for all informedopinionif whathas beencalled resourceis to be avoided. the rreglected Change Designprofessionals arecommissioned everydayto formulatebuildings whichrespondto changewithintheirclients'organisations. SinceI returnedto the UK in 1992therehavebeenseveralstimuliito change within our own industry; the Latham report altered the procurementdebate, the Lottery, ERDF, SRB and PFI funding are affectingthe balanceof patronage,the impactof Agenda21 on design objectives,the learningof some home truths via the RIBA'sStrategic Studies,technology'srelentlessgrowth making us all finally take it seiously and the shiftof balancetowardsthe 'demand'side reflectedin paft by the Construction and HousingBill. But aredesignprofessionals facingthe changes necessaryto keeppacewiththeirclientsand the consumersandcan I D workinghelpwiththischange? Practice Other countrieshave differentroutesto the completionof a built project.Sincemyexperience environment of practicein ltalyI havetried projectbasedway. This has been only to work in a collaborative, partly successful becauseof the differentculturaland legislative obligations operatinghere. page 2 Whenwe formedPToARTSin 1994 the opportunitywas taken to stretchthe projectteamto encompassmoreof the strategyandenabling consultancyworkwhichdeterminesthe courseof projectsand hence the qualityof our builtenvironbment. We not only mix businessand designskillswithina smallofficewe reshape our expertisebase withotherprofessionals throughcollaboration to meetthe needsof the in Presently task hand. we concentrateon the culturalsectorbut we hopeto remainadaptableand commissioned as muchfor our way of workingas for our knowledge. To facilitate thiswe areexploringthe idea 'chambers', ( barristers' model) in whichindependent of forminga differingdisciplinescan co-operatewiththe administrative structure necessary. Recentlysomeof the majorpublicfunders,such as the Lottery,with the hindsightof sometroubledprojects,are demandingmoreattention Thisusuallyrequiresawide rangeof be paidto initialfeasibilitytesting. expertiseand the co-ordinationof the contributors whether consultantsor the client'sstaff is criticalto the optionsappraisal.The of desiqnand proiectskillsare immenselyuseful but contributions designitselfit is not likelyto presentthe majorproblemat this stage. The roleof the designprofessional is thereforeakinto the 'professional adviser'describedby Latham. We are not oftencommissioned beyondthe 'frontend'stages.For our interdisciplinary teamswe needprojectskillsin strateglc consultancy design/optionsassessment/ urbandesign,analysisof requirements, briefing,site / buildingappraisals,partnershipfunding,value engineering/life cycle costing,co-ordination and management, - see examples.These are sustainablestrategiesand programming mixedas appropriate withthe expertiseof economicandorganisational marketresearchers, consultants, aftsagenciesandothers. It is still early days and we are learningfrom this interdisciplinary process.Whatdoes seemclearhoweveris that the traditionaldesign teamcapabilityis oftennotenoughto 'enable'a projectto be realisedor guarantee thesuccessof the outcome. G r a e m e J e n n i n g s , P T o AR T S London 0181 888 6645 Y ork 01904 656 507 t I adfr 9+--" page 3