Skip to main content

Operational Tension

When it comes to how we do our jobs, where do architects find inspiration? It seems to me there are three perspectives:
  1. Sui Generis - Treats architecture as a unique field, looking to other architects
  2. Creative Orientation - Lessons can be found in other creative fields
  3. Business Orientation - Seeks to apply general management principals
The limitations of the sui generis approach are self-evident (that is, I don't want to look for references at this moment). By focusing only on the practices of other architects, our ability to adapt and innovate relies on other architects to experiment and disseminate that information. How consistently do the major trade publications look at these issues? I suspect not often. I also suspect readership of more specialized publications is thin within the architectural community. This approach has the self-serving appeal of defining our work as special and by extension, we are special. Maybe architects aren't more prone to that sort of status seeking than anyone else. Maybe we are.

The creative orientation is often driven by a signature designer's personality and is difficult to apply consistently. The business orientation risks commodification of our services. The most common practice that I've observed is to try and switch from creative to business, from design to production. I've heard a fair amount of talk about design happening at all scales and at all phases of a project. I haven't seen that consistently carried out all that often. The definition of design as a form of creative problem solving helps, but I don't believe we've built operational frameworks to support it.

Farnam Street recently posted some ideas from the original Mad Man and advertising great David Ogilvy that, I believe, balance both the creative and business perspectives. I'll just repost the headline concepts and leave the details to you. Unfortunately, the original publication is out-of-print. Used copies are available online for $50 and up. Ogilvy titled it The Eternal Pursuit of Unhappiness (happiness being equated to complacency?), based on eight principals:
  1. Courage
  2. Idealism
  3. Curiosity
  4. Playfulness
  5. Candour
  6. Intuition
  7. Free-Spiritedness
  8. Persistence
These strike me as much more interesting topics for discussion at an annual review. Having sat in on some 90 day reviews recently, they're certainly more interesting than Communication and Skill Development.


Comments

  1. Upon further reflection, I'm pretty certain architects underestimate how creative and dynamic business can be. Following start-up culture, though not necessarily a good place for practices, I've seen a lot of design thought and creativity.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Value of Pop Economics?

A friend recently posted a meme about rising income inequality to Facebook. One of the comments was a link to a piece from Economics Explained with the provocative title " How The Dutch Economy Shows We Can't Reduce Wealth Inequality With Taxes " I'm starting to see a pattern in these sorts of economics articles: 1. Make a pointed and contrarian claim about the power of economics to address a major issue in contemporary society (taxes won't fix inequality). 2. Compare related economics concepts that have much narrower definitions than the ones that drew in the reader (GINI vs income & wealth inequality vs a few specific aspects of Dutch taxes and culture). 3. Add some artfully selected facts to keep people interested (Heineken family info). 4. Also artfully avoid saying explicitly that the narrow comparison proves or disproves anything specific about the broader societal problem. 5. Make a generally agreeable statement about the world: Inequality doesn't ...

A Golden Failure

It's 2020, and unless things really truly go to literal hell, everyone will recognize what that means for a long time. I've been trying to find a way of tying these many struggles together, COVID-19, racism, violence, climate change. I wish I could remember where this idea came from, because it isn't mine. The Golden Rule, to do unto others as they would have them do unto you, isn't enough. Not by itself. It lets us rest on a sense that we can get by being polite, that we can rely on reacting to circumstances as we encounter them in a positive way. These challenges stem from an entire society's dysfunctions. An LED lightbulb and a meme or two isn't remotely enough. I understand this to be the core belief of the progressive movement: what we want for ourselves, we must work to provide for others, for everyone else. Every decision about our collective welfare has to start there.  Choosing not to is the core of bigotry, of environmental destruction, the genesis of ...