Inspire a Shared Vision: Architect as Leader
I was on Twitter earlier in the week and noticed that AIA National is looking for architect bloggers to write about “architect as leader”, to help expand on the AIA 2013 National Convention theme of Building Leaders. So… what does Architect as Leader mean?
The First Rule of Architecture School is Don’t Break this Rule
I write about some wild stuff. I talk about monetizing BIM through micro-transactions via Augmented Reality. I tell you that printing your drawings is a waste of time. I call people dinosaurs. I daydream about self-driving cars and wonder what kind of Architect I am. One could argue that over my three years of blogging I went from focused (just writing about ArchiCAD) to slightly less niche-oriented (writing about ArchiCAD and some broader BIM topics) to off the rails. Or maybe just heading off the rails. I still find an excuse (crutch?) to mention BIM in most of my posts.
But look again at those various posts. What’s the bigger theme? What’s the underlying form that I’m seeking? It’s to imagine the future; to untangle what might be; to explore what could be; to not be constrained by rules. We were always told this in architecture school, weren’t we? Follow the Rules! Oh but don’t follow the rules. Well our professors couldn’t TELL us to break the rules because then we’d be following the rule of breaking rules… Instead we had to be told to accomplish Thing A and then do Thing Q on our own. If we were good students and did Thing A, our jurors would complain “oh that’s great and all. You did a fine job interpreting the brief, but why did you do Thing A instead of Thing X?” It was only once we realized that the initial question was merely a starting point that we started to succeed. The deeper lesson of all those years of schooling wasn’t about interpreting the question, but challenging the question and returning something bigger than was asked for.
Now I will Crush Your Soul
Practicing architects have real clients with actual needs. Ignoring client desires, constructability issues, costs, codes, etc. is a very poor way to run a business. As such school and practice have competing and antithetical pressures and requirements. We need to bring that fire and otherworldliness into the professional realm. We need to merge the two.
Inspire a Shared Vision
Anyone can design a building. Anyone can talk about construction. The typical architect probably knows less about putting together a building than the average contractor. The IT guys know more about technology than us. The sustainability consultants know more about energy usage than we do. We aren’t the mythical master builder anymore. Everywhere we turn, there’s someone who knows more about the specifics of our trade. We are surrounded by specialists and experts. Everywhere we look there are rules that if we try to follow, we lose. Because just like in school, following the rules is the way to second place. Or maybe third. But architects are trained to think differently. We are taught (often via fiery trials) to find a vision for our work. And to be leaders, this is what we must do. We must look beyond the mundane and inspire a shared vision. Whether our passion is for sustainability, materials, technology, art, communities, we must look to the future and declare “You don’t exist yet. Therefor there are no rules and requirements. Thus this is what it will look like, why it will be that way, and how it will be.” And maybe we’ll be wrong. Maybe we’ll fail. Maybe we’ll be told no. But through persistence; through always chasing and sharing the unbuilt; through exploring the yet to be imagined; through looking at the grander patterns, we get a little closer to moving the rest of the AECOU industry to a more beautiful and prosperous future. Anyone can build. Architects need to dream and inspire.
Abdication is not an Option
I should stop there, but I’ll give one quick example. Look at all the discussions on BIM. Who’s controlling the conversation? It’s contractors, consultants, engineers, and software companies. It’s rarely architects, and almost never design architects. And what’s happening with BIM? It’s being touted as a boon for construction and operation. It’s being hailed as the collaboration and coordination panacea. Where are the the voices proclaiming it as the greatest design tool? As the solution to other problems with the built environment? As the answer to all the questions that don’t even exist yet. Architects: inspire the shared vision.
To keep track of everything I’m writing, follow Shoegnome on Facebook and Twitter. And while you’re at it, the RSS feed is a great way to never miss anything either. Also to read other architects’ thoughts on the topic of Architect as Leader, you can find a list of other posts here.
Bonus point: the title and theme of this post is one of the Five Practices of Exemplary Leadership presented in Kouzes & Posner’s The Leadership Challenge. If you’re interested in leadership, read this book. I read it as part of the AIA Minnesota Leadership Forum and my wife read it as part of her MBA program at the Carlson School of Management – University of Minnesota. It’s incredible.
Liz O'Sullivan
Super, super post. A lot of architects don’t seem to realize what you have pointed out about the BIM discussion: “Who’s controlling the conversation? It’s contractors, consultants, engineers, and software companies.”
Time to wake up! Architects do need to be the leaders, but things must change – a lot of architects right now aren’t suited to BE the leaders in the construction industry. Humans often can’t change until our souls have been crushed.
Jared Banks
Thanks! Fortunately the last few years did wonders for us all in that last requirement for change…
Larry Fredlund
“fiery trials” and “Fairy Tales”….half a horse.
Pingback: What Emerging Architects are about to inherit
Justus
Quote: “The deeper lesson of all those years of schooling wasn’t about interpreting the question, but challenging the question and returning something bigger than was asked for.
…
Ignoring client desires, constructability issues, costs, codes, etc. is a very poor way to run a business. As such school and practice have competing and antithetical pressures and requirements.”
A minor quibble or maybe elaboration. I’d say the above sentences are not really antithetical. The latter sentence is not merely a poor way to run a business but a lazy approach to design. My design philosophy has always been that the role of the architect is to navigate those limitations and still give the client what they -actually- want and need. So how does the apparent contradiction resolve itself? The first quoted sentence is a vitally important aspect of fulfilling client desires because in my experience, a client rarely knows what they want…and that includes me and my wife as we work on our own house remodel!
A building that meets regulatory requirements and follows the rules of science is just the baseline standard of care for our profession. Making our client happy is good business. But our true value as architects is to curate the world if limitless possibilities and present the select few viable options that make sense within the context of the project. Sometimes we end up just making just what the client wanted from the beginning, but I don’t think we have really done our profession justice if we didn’t challenge and question them along the way.