![]() ![]() |
||||||||||||
10/2005 |
Integrated Practice and
the New Architect: Keeper of Knowledge and Rules One scenario for expanding architecture practice |
|||||||||||
by Jonathan Cohen, FAIA Compared to other large industries, the building industry is highly fragmented, with most projects undertaken by temporary, project-based organizations consisting of many small firms—architect, engineer, contractor. Communication and the exchange of data among these firms are crucial to the success of any project. Unfortunately, the fractured nature of the building industry is reflected in its information systems.
As a result, much exchange of information is still reduced to paper, even when the work is produced on a computer. Whenever these information handoffs occur, the opportunity for delay and error is increased and additional time and effort are needlessly expended in reentering data into new systems. The building process would be much better served if the entire chain of information from design to construction to operations could remain in one seamless digital format.
The shared project model
This kind of team-shared, Internet-accessible, single-model approach is already in wide use in the aerospace and automobile industries where it is known by the term product lifecycle integration.
Industries such as aerospace and auto manufacturing, shipbuilding, and process plant engineering have used enterprise-wide information technology to change fundamentally their ways of doing business. Product lifecycle integration has enabled design, production, and operations to be informed by each other in a kind of feedback loop. Results have included:
At the same time, Internet-based communication technology has enabled decentralization of organizations by making information accessible to geographically distributed work teams and supply chains. Companies such as Nike demonstrate how large enterprises can successfully outsource all production while concentrating on design, marketing, and coordination. The trend toward decentralization and outsourcing suggests that there may be new ways of organizing work that would improve efficiency in the building industry without changing its traditional reliance on small firms. By making external communication cheap and secure, the Internet changes the equation, offering the possibility of connecting the various players in a building project within networked alliances.
Who will take charge of this new, technology-supported design and building process? Clearly, the one who controls the project information will be at the center of the building team. This “project information architect” may combine characteristics now associated with architect, quantity surveyor, process engineer, and construction manager. The duties of this new kind of architect would encompass a comprehensive overview of projects throughout a process that extends from site selection and programming through the entire lifecycle of buildings. The project information architect is the:
The project information architect would be at the center of flexible, net-worked alliances, temporary groupings of physically dispersed, independent companies. Such organizations are founded on trust—a willingness of participants to share goals, risks, and rewards. Highly successful models of networked organizations have existed for many years. Movie production in Hollywood is one example. Until the 1950s, movies were made by a few vertically integrated large studios that controlled every aspect of production, distribution, and display of films. When this system collapsed under antitrust pressure, movie production shifted to project-based teams assembled to make a single film. The studios continued to control financing, marketing, and distribution, but film production became a project-based virtual enterprise. The transformation took place in just a few years. The culture of networked organizations is based on cooperation and trust rather than hierarchical command and control. Individual small businesses are free to innovate, and these innovations are diffused throughout the enterprise. By allowing small companies to concentrate on what they do best, networked organizations foster innovation and responsiveness to customer requirements. In this environment, standards—accepted ways of doing things—become ever more important, enabling specialists who have never worked together to quickly become productive with each other in the same way that makeshift surgical teams of doctors and nurses are able to work effectively in emergencies, using well-defined protocols and procedures. Although flexible alliances seem a perfect fit for the building industry, there are a number of deeply ingrained cultural impediments that will have to be overcome for this form of project delivery to gain acceptance. At present, no one “owns” the whole building process. The traditional insularity of the design professions from the construction process mitigates against an industry-wide focus on the customer and product. Indeed, there are few incentives for designers and builders to innovate, and sometimes there are severe risks in doing so. Risk and reward are not equitably shared among designer, builder, and owner. There is also the widely held belief that the building industry is unique, so little can be learned from other industries. Finally, legal and insurance boundaries have been so tightly drawn that they inhibit experimentation in process delivery models. Opportunities and choices Copyright 2005 The American Institute of Architects.
All rights reserved. Home Page |
|
|||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |