Rethinking of business models
Since the disciplines of architecture and engineering became separate and more special-ised within narrow fields, the differences in approach and methods have become more pronounced. The need to invent new ways of collaboration is therefore more evident than ever.
A radical suggestion toward breaking with the traditional framework, and the contractual issues it brings along, would be to establish multidisciplinary building companies, where a designated project team could handle a building project from initial idea to finished construction. In large corporations, careful attention must be given to avoiding estab-lishment of single-discipline sub-companies within a multi-disciplinary corporation. This could be mitigated by having multidisciplinary project teams working specifically on only one type of building, e.g. schools, office, residential, refurbishment, etc. This would ensure co-location of a multidisciplinary team and the every-day physical presence and high level of internal multidisciplinarity, which would benefit the individual designer and the quality of building project (see page 130). Another benefit would be the repetition of work, which means project teams would not have to start from zero on every new project.
The team would be familiar and used to working together, and working with the same type of buildings would allow experience gathering and knowledge obtained from ear-lier projects to be used in new projects. Working with a specific building type on a team basis would require that all teams include all disciplines. The business model described above is in the following called project type based business model. Overall there are two business models; the project type based and the profession based. The profession based business model is often applied in larger companies. The following figure 23 illustrates the two business models, where the project type based has its project teams across pro-fessions, and the profession based has profession, mono-discipline, departments.
Team 1
Team 2 Team 3
Team 4
Team 1 Team 2
Team 3 Team 4
Figure 23 - The project type based business model is shown to the left, and the profession based business model to the right
The profession based business model can cause challenges, if interfaces of disciplines are not well coordinated, as this will create professional silos. Silo structures can be problematic if the interfaces of the professions are not well coordinated, hence mistakes can happen and rework on the design will be necessary. This coordination require careful management. The most common business model within architectural studios and engi-neering consultancies, is the profession based business model. One of the main advan-tages of the profession based model is the strong professional competencies within each discipline. In a larger discipline specific department, a larger variety of competencies and experience within the specific discipline will be available. Younger and less experienced employees can seek advice and guidance among colleagues. When an issue or challenge arise, the probability that someone in the department will have come across a similar problem before, and thus know how to solve it, is naturally higher in a larger discipline department than in a multidisciplinary project team, where there is perhaps only one or two people within the specific discipline.
As with the profession based model, the project type based model has its advantages and disadvantages. By having well-established multidisciplinary teams, a shift from tech-nical knowledge as design validator to design informer is made easier, since the techni-cal disciplines are a natural part of all design- development and decisions. The technitechni-cal disciplines would also be used to working with the more creative and soft-value disci-plines and hence gain a more elaborate understanding of the value and need for these aspects, hence be more open-minded for compromise. This again would put the process over the result. Having a project type- instead of a profession based business model, can however, cause other issues. If one or more teams of employees are designated to a specific building type, this can become very problematic if the company does not get any assignments of this type. Then entire teams of employees will be without work. It is thus not a very robust business model, and strategies for these kinds of situations would have to be developed.
Having the same team of people perform the entire building project will ensure an im-mense amount of consistency throughout the project process, which can be highly ben-eficial for the overall quality of the project and most likely easier to manage, also for the client (see figure 24). However, the type of professionals, who function well in the early phases of a building project, is no necessarily the same type, who function well in the last phases. It is a matter of skillset, but also a matter of personality and temperament. It can thus be difficult to have the same people working on a project from start to finish. It is therefore often seen that team members are changed between design phases to match
their competencies (see figure 25). This can be beneficial for better collaboration, as each team member is used to working with the specific knowledge level. However, information might be lost between phases. Both ways of organising team members in projects are applicable for both the business models.
The tendency of large multidisciplinary corporations is already seen in the building in-dustry, as large contracting companies establish their own internal engineering consul-tancies to handle the design in design – build contracts. Architectural studios also hire engineers in order to have in-house competencies in technical fields.
Process management
Descriptions of a Design Facilitator is found in most literature concerning integrated design processes. The required skillset, tasks and areas of responsibility of the Design Facilitator match some parts of the services of Design Management (2.1) and those of Process Management/Consultancy (8.17), as outlined in the Description of Services (DANSKE-ARK & FRI, 2012). Some tasks of the Design manager require great insight to many aspects of building design and construction, people skills, and the ability to man-age people with different professions, motivations, and personalities. Other tasks require skills within classic project management, e.g. time- and financial management. Besides being numerous, the services required by the Design manager are of very different na-tures. It might be beneficial to split the role of the Design manager in two – a project manager and a design process coordinator, to ensure a high level of quality in the work.
Concept design
Pre-design Schematic
design Design
proposal Detailed
design
Con-struction Concept
design
Pre-design Schematic
design Design
proposal Detailed
design
Con-struction
Figure 24 - Project structure, where team members are consistent through phases
Figure 25 - Project structure, where the team members are changed between phases
A suggestion for the division of services is outlined in figure 26. Some services of 2.1.1 are divided between a role of a project manager and a role of a design process coordi-nator. The rest are not assigned specifically, as they could be handled by either one or in collaboration.
All services of 2.1.4 are divided between project manager and design process coordina-tor. As stated in the sub-conclusion of Part 1 (see page 98), the ‘new’ role of the design process coordinator should not replace the role of the existing project manager. The project manager and design process coordinator should work closely together to and support each other in the overall management of the project. If a sustainability certi-fication, e.g. DGNB, is due, the DGNB auditor should also be part of this close collabo-ration, perhaps in a management team or steering group, as in the partnering project organisation structure, outlined in Part 1 (see page 48). The project manager would be responsible for time- and financial management, tendering, descriptions, contracts, and organisation. The design process coordinator would be responsible for collaboration and coordination within the project organisation. The design process coordinator would be responsible for facilitating workshops and design sprints/workshops/meetings, the over-all design process, ensuring a holistic, sustainable building project. Project meetings would be jointly facilitated by both the project manager and the design process coor-dinator, where agenda items concerning the respective responsibility area of the two would be facilitated accordingly.
A specification of the tasks and responsibilities of project- and design process coordi-nator could possibly prompt a specification of required skills of the two professions. In the building industry, there is a tendency of promoting talented engineers and architects to managers. However, good professionals do not necessarily make good managers and leaders. This is known as the Peter-principle, where a promotion is based on the person’s performance in their current job, instead of their ability to handle the new role. As long as a person performs well in a job, she/he will keep being promoted until she/he rise to the level of incompetence. In general, people who are very good at a highly-specialised trade, for example engineering or architecture, do not necessarily possess the required skills it takes to be a good leader.
Project management Design Process Coordination 2.1.1 Contents
> The project manager determines the form of contract in concert with the individual consul-tants and the client; this work includes defin-ing the responsibilities of the consultants on the basis of agreements concluded with the client.
> The project manager draws up an organisa-tional chart for design and project follow-up.
> The project manager recommends the type of tendering procedure and the allocation of contracts to the client, and coordinates the process of inviting tenders.
> The project manager prepares the tender conditions, tender letter and construction contract.
> The project manager prepares a description of the building project on the basis of propos-als made by the consultants.
> The design manager presents the full tender documents to the client for approval.
> The design process coordinator is responsible for cooperation between the consultants and ensures coordination of project work performed by the individual consultants, with particular focus on interfaces. This is also the case if de-sign work is performed by suppliers or contrac-tors.
> The design process coordinator undertakes the coordination of the building’s architecture, landscaping, structures and installations.
> The design process coordinator also coordi-nates in relation to the building’s sustainabil-ity goals.
> The design process coordinator coordinates follow-up by the consultants, including in rela-tion to joint design and supplier and contractor design.
2.1.2 Programming 2.1.3 Cost management
2.1.4 Authorities
> The project manager handles any advance dialogue, ensures that the consultants submit applications to the authorities and coordi-nates other negotiations with miscellaneous authorities for the purpose of obtaining plan-ning permission and other necessary permits, and finally clarifies the conditions of such per-mission and permits
> The design process coordinator coordinates the collaboration between the consultants with a view to meeting the requirements of the building regulations towards energy needs and indoor climate.
> The design process coordinator coordinates the collaboration between the consultants with respect to the establishment and imple-mentation of a fire strategy, with a view to ob-taining regulatory approval.
2.1.5 Quality assurance 8.17 Process management/consultancy
Figure 26 - Suggestion for division of services of Design Management
In Denmark, engineering and architecture are not only two separate programs, but also two separate trades taught at different schools. This separation is founded by the tra-ditions in the industry, but it also ensures the separation in the industry to continue with the new generations of candidates coming out of the schools. In other countries, engineering and architecture are both taught in the same universities, either in different faculties or side by side. This is for example the case in Sweden, where engineering and architecture students at taught together.
In Denmark, the need for cross disciplinary professionals has been recognised. There-fore, educational programs like Architectural Engineering at DTU and AU, the BSc in Engineering (Architecture and Design) and the MSc in Engineering (Architecture) at AAU have emerged. The program of Construction architect was originally meant to be the same type of cross disciplinary mediator as with the programs in DTU, AU, and AAU. With the exception of the construction architect, these are all engineering degrees with an amount of architecture history and design method in the curriculum. They aim to be a hybrid between engineering and architecture.
It is interesting to note, that these types of hybrid programs are only available at the technical universities and engineering schools and not in the schools of architecture. It can be argued that this is an expression of opinion where the engineers need to adapt to the process of architects and not the other way around. However, engineering is all about problem solving, and the approach and process of typical engineers is what makes them great problem solvers. Even though increased complexity in building calls for radical changes in the overall framework of how building projects are conducted, there is still a great need for highly skilled engineers.
The hybrid professionals are broader in their knowledge of building, but not so deeply specialised. These types of generalists, with knowledge and insight to multiple aspects of building and construction are highly needed in the industry, e.g. to mediate between the different trades and in that way ease collaboration. These hybrids are schooled to a positive attitude towards a high level of collaboration and integration between disci-plines. Collaboration challenges in the building industry are mainly seen between the highly specialised, traditional trades of engineering and architecture. Hence, the issue of attitude should be addressed in the traditional educational programs. These programs could benefit from changes and updates to their curriculum towards an understanding of the work, method, and process of other disciplines.