Design Project Management PDF

As of 2012, most of our clients have not required a BIM model as an as-built deliverable even though they have required Revit or BIM be used during design and documentation phases. To date, they have only wanted the floor plans in AutoCAD format. H + L Architecture recurring theme in this article i...

As of 2012, most of our clients have not required a BIM model as an as-built deliverable even though they have required Revit or BIM be used during design and documentation phases. To date, they have only wanted the floor plans in AutoCAD format. H + L Architecture recurring theme in this article is communication. Reiterate the importance of sharing information with the client and remind them of the agreements that are in place so that the issues are resolved and coordinated up front. C ON C LU S I O N There are many variables influencing successful project management using BIM. Many firm processes and management practices are affected and need to be evaluated and restructured to leverage the benefits and manage the potential pitfalls of BIM integration. Managing BIM’s various uses and blurred lines of authority and accountability demands detailed control and understanding of the process. BIM is a complex design tool that requires an in-depth understanding of the software to effectively manage the work. This said, there are many fundamental and traditional project management best practices that will remain tried and true, as BIM is not a substitute for good project management. If anything, project management skills will become even more important, especially in the areas of team building, project coordination, conflict resolution, and communications. PA R T 3 : P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y Fo r M or e In for m a t i on Pennsylvania State University BIM Project Execution Planning Guide: http://bim.psu .edu/Project/default.aspx. AIA Digital Practice Documents C106TM–2007, E201TM–2007, and E202TM–2008: www.aia.org/contractdocs/AIAS076721. 10.5 Design Phases Paul D. Mankins, FAIA, LEED AP BD+C Architectural design is the defining and differentiating skill set of architectural practice. It involves translating the needs and aspirations of the client into built form through the creation of drawings and specifications that define the work. DESIGN Design, by its nature, is multivalent. It involves the integration of diverse, often conflicting, project requirements and circumstances into a gestalt—a whole greater than the sum of its parts. At its best, the result is a solution that appears simple, almost inevitable—a functional, cost-effective, and beautiful resolution of the client’s problem appropriate to its place and time. While the best solutions appear simple, however, the design process is unique and complex. Design is simultaneously intuitive—drawing on personal experience and subjective artistic judgment—as well as rational, drawing on analysis and the objective integration of functional and technical requirements. Despite this complexity, however, design is practiced by thousands of skilled architects as well as other professionals around the world. There is a common misconception that design begins as an act of epiphany—a momentary stroke of genius in which the essential aspects of the solution come to the designer fully formed. While this may occasionally occur, far more often design begins Paul D. Mankins is an award-winning architect and a founding partner of Substance, an architecture and design practice based in Des Moines, Iowa. He is a frequent speaker and architectural design instructor committed to advancing design issues both within the profession and to the general public. 654 Design Project Management with something much less dramatic—a carefully constructed definition of the situation at hand contained in the building program. From this building program a designer, or team of designers, develops a framework for decision-making and begins the iterative process of generating and evaluating alternatives—methodically refining the project and zeroing in on the final solution. There may be moments of epiphany along the way that provide the occasional “leaps” forward in a process. Design, however, is characterized by gradual, carefully considered “steps.” Most architectural problems have multiple workable solutions. As a result, design is fundamentally about making choices from among alternatives. Having a clearly defined and logical framework for making these decisions is essential. This framework is typically the outgrowth of research and the recognition of synergies and opportunities presented by the design problem. Along the way, there are a number of influences that are important to consider. D E SI GN I N F LUEN C ES Whether simple or complex, each architectural assignment is unique, with particular circumstances and requirements that affect the design process. The following are some of the most important issues that shape and influence a project’s outcome. PA R T 3 : P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y Client Each project has a client and/or user group with specific needs and aspirations. This client usually brings expectations and, occasionally, preconceptions about their project and the desired outcome. Ultimately the practice of architecture is a service profession, and the client is the principal party being served. As a result, the client is usually the most important influence on the design process. They are the reason the process takes place and one of the primary judges of success or failure. Keeping the client’s desires foremost during the design process is fundamental. Cost With few exceptions, projects have cost parameters that must be met for the project to be feasible. Often these costs are not fully understood at the beginning of a project and are refined through the process. Economic and market forces make construction costs fluid. To address these fluctuations, frequently construction costs are analyzed relative to a benchmark for similar buildings or facilities. The project’s relative position on this cost spectrum influences the approach that is most appropriate. Through design, cost is carefully balanced to create value. Hence, a project’s cost has a significant impact on the design process. Schedule The time frame in which a project is to be both designed and constructed can greatly impact the design process. A compressed time frame may suggest alternative delivery options requiring construction to begin prior to the completion of design. In addition, a tight schedule often affects the type of alternatives explored. Conversely, the schedule may be extended or the completion date may be unknown (as with a public referendum or speculative project), suggesting a design process that is partially completed, is inactive for a time, and then recommences. Regardless, the schedule is one of the most influential project parameters. Program Every project has unique requirements. These requirements go beyond an inventory of spaces to include functional adjacencies, technical requirements, performance goals, and aspirations. In short, the program defines the architectural problem. Solving this problem is the fundamental, almost definitive, purpose for design. As a result, the 10.5 Design Phases 655 building program is the primary reference point and the foremost consideration during design and informs every step in the process. Site The project’s site, including orientation, climate, prevailing weather patterns, typography, watershed, and geotechnical issues, is an important factor that greatly informs the design process. Different sites present unique challenges to be addressed and opportunities to be leveraged. How an architectural proposal occupies, reinforces, and shapes a site is often critical to its success. Like program, the project’s site is extremely influential. Context The context, both built and landscape, as well as historic and cultural, are important factors that influence the design process. Often architects establish a stance regarding context by answering questions like: How should this project contribute to its surroundings? Should it reinforce existing patterns? Should it serve as a foil or act in contrast? As a result, the context can suggest solutions, or an array of solutions, that should be explored. Moreover, the context can reinforce the appropriateness of one solution over another. For all these reasons, context can greatly affect the design process. PA R T 3 : P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y Community Increasingly, communities have collective goals and values that can influence the design process. These values are codified, both officially and unofficially, as a type of ordinance or covenant that can affect the alternatives that are investigated and how they are evaluated. How a design proposal responds to these concerns is important and often can mean the difference between a project being realized or shelved. All of these community concerns are influential. Sustainability How a building uses natural resources—during the construction process, over the course of its existence, and even during its deconstruction—is an increasingly important driver. While the client’s interest in sustainability may vary, the environmental impact of an architectural proposal is an important consideration. Through systems selection, material selection, even site selection, sustainability informs the alternatives that are developed during the design process and can often affect the way they are evaluated. Building Technology Determining the appropriate building materials and systems is a fundamental outcome of the design process. As a result, both an interest in new technology as well as a respect for traditional methods is a significant influence. For most of architectural history, the materials and systems that constitute a building are responsible for much of its outward expression and form as well as shaping the interior spaces. As a result, building technology is an important factor that significantly influences the process. Regulations Most projects fall within a regulatory and legal jurisdiction with rules and ordinances that must be met in order for a project to be realized. Building codes, zoning codes, energy codes, even tax law can affect the design process. Understanding these requirements is essential. An architect, and the design team, must be mindful of all these influences during design. Over the course of the design process, to varying degrees, each of these issues plays a role in defining the project and shaping the solution. Only by successfully responding to each of these influences can an effective design solution be developed. 656 Design Project Management T HE D E SI GN PROC ESS Design is often discussed in mysterious terms as if it is an arcane activity cloaked in secrecy and reserved for the initiated. Design, however, isn’t alchemy. Rather, it is the visual and analytical process used to reconcile the apparently competing and often contradictory interests and create a clear, comprehensive solution. These influences are disparate, but they have areas of overlap and synergy. Through design, these opportunities can be identified and reinforced and the synergies can be exploited. Design is a unique analytical process that involves two fundamental procedures: understanding a project’s multiple parameters and synthesizing these parameters into a holistic strategy. While complex, the design process is not impenetrable. It is a rigorous, methodical process of inquiry and invention. Understanding ▶ Quality Management in Schematic Design (12.2) explores quality management in programming and schematic design. PA R T 3 : P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y Whether a project is large or small, simple or complex, the first and most important part of the design process is having a clear understanding of the range of issues at hand. Without this, the process will be unfocused and, as a result, will lack the necessary rigor essential to a successful outcome. After all, how can anyone successfully solve a problem without knowing what the problem is? For most projects gaining this understanding is the result of both research and analysis. Each project has specific, often unique, requirements that must be understood. Some of the most common are the following. Program Typically, the foremost area of analysis for any project is the building program. The building program can be a formal document resulting from an independent programming effort or a less structured list of requirements that evolves toward greater clarity through the process. Regardless of form, however, analyzing the building program and drawing out the critical information is an important first step. This analysis can take many forms. As a part of this program analysis, architects often research general information regarding the building type or category of project. This general research includes a review of precedent to discover how similar problems have been solved in the past. Reinventing the wheel is often counterproductive, and this research into precedent can help determine the range of possibilities available and what effective attributes of similar projects may be applicable to the current assignment. In addition, benchmarking is used to evaluate how these projects have performed relative to one another. This is a useful analytical tool in determining what levels of performance are common for a building type, as well as extrapolating the appropriate level of performance for the project at hand. Both precedent studies and benchmarking efforts are general but can shed significant light on the project and are often important first steps. More specific programmatic analysis is also important. The building program, first and foremost, identifies the type and number of spaces within a building as well as the requirements for each space. Compiled, this information describes the size of the project to be designed. In addition, the building program describes the functional adjacencies. These relationships must be thoroughly analyzed and understood. Comprehending the spatial categories implied by the program, as well as the interrelationships between these categories, is a common touchstone for developing alternative organizational strategies. Ultimately, to be effective, both the general building type and the specific building requirements must be fully understood before the design process can advance. Researching the building program is a key step in the process of understanding. Site The project’s site is another key element that must be analyzed to fully grasp the design problem. For building projects, this analysis includes understanding the site’s topography— the slope and drainage patterns present on the site. The topography can present opportunities 10.5 Design Phases 657 and challenges to be resolved during design. In addition, how the site both influences and is influenced by the larger watershed around the site is often a topic for analysis. As important as the site’s topography is the site’s orientation—particularly its orientation relative to the sun, wind, and prevailing weather patterns. Recognizing these natural forces and how they impact the site can greatly affect the range of options to be explored and can suggest possible configurations. Geotechnical issues are another important site-related issue that can greatly affect the design alternatives investigated. The bearing capacity and stability of the soils can encourage the use of certain structural systems and discourage others, as well as impact building placement on the site. Understanding these geotechnical concerns is critical. Finally, access and connectivity to and from the site are important factors to understand. Most building projects are occupied and used by people. As a result, how vehicles and pedestrians move by, to, and through the site are important factors to comprehend. When combined, all of these site issues significantly affect a building’s potential placement and configuration. Grasping the full complement of site issues is critical. Context PA R T 3 : P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y Another element that must be understood, distinct from the project’s site, is the larger context. This can include being aware of the built environment and landscape adjacent to the site. What is the character of surrounding buildings? What materials and construction methods are prevalent? What types of paving, lighting, trees, etc., are present in the area immediately surrounding the project site? Creating an inventory of these characteristics can be helpful. They all make up a physical context that may be responded to—either by extension or by contrast—during the design process. This physical context resides within a larger cultural context that is important to appreciate as well. What is the history of the place? What are the collective values and aspirations of the community? What previously occupied the site? This cultural context can be as influential as the physical context in informing the design process and the solutions ultimately proposed. Combined, this full context—both physical and cultural—must be understood and, ideally, a philosophy established for the design response. Buildings contribute to their context. How they contribute is important. As a result, understanding the context is imperative. Regulations Most architectural projects fall within a regulatory jurisdiction that provides a legal framework. Developing a complete understanding of this framework, including applicable zoning regulations and building codes, is essential. Many of these regulations are compulsory and must be complied within the built work. In addition, many communities have covenants that restrict certain types of construction or material use and encourage others. Environmental regulations can also affect projects in many jurisdictions. All of these regulatory documents can significantly affect the range of options that are viable. Careful analysis is a requisite. Generally these regulations describe “what” must be done, but not “how.” As a result, understanding the full impact of these regulations can reveal areas for innovation, as well as setting limits. Building Technology How buildings are made is an essential area of expertise for architects. Architecture is made up of materials and systems that come together to create form and shape interior environments. However, building technology is continuously evolving and advancing. Developing a comprehensive knowledge of construction means and methods is a principal facet of practice that informs many of the decisions made during the design process. Some architectural assignments are located in regions with a strong, prevailing building tradition and superior trades. This local tradition can inform systems selections and material choices. In addition, the practices of the local construction industry can be impactful, suggesting which building systems are most applicable. Finally, every 658 Design Project Management project can be seen as an opportunity for technological innovation. Innovation, however, requires a thorough grasp of the current state of the industry and where meaningful improvements can be made. Sustainability Increasingly, the project’s long-term environmental impact must be recognized and addressed. Analyzing a project’s likely energy, water, and material use is critical. Searching for ways to reasonably reduce a project’s “carbon footprint” is a worthy area for investigation. Most buildings have long lives measured in years, decades, and even centuries. As a result, their environmental effects—positive and negative—endure. It is important to note that analysis, research, and, as a result, understanding, are continuously evolving throughout the design process as new, additional information becomes available or is revealed. It is important to establish a baseline of understanding to allow the process to advance. This baseline is the result of compiling analysis in all these areas: program, site, context, regulations, building technology, and sustainability. Once these areas are understood, the process of synthesizing this information can begin. Synthesis PA R T 3 : P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y The process of synthesis—drawing together the analysis and ultimately identifying the most applicable resulting strategy for exploration and refinement—is what many, particularly the lay public, consider design to be. However, synthesis cannot take place without a foundation of careful analysis and understanding. Synthesis is a constituent process of design that is increasingly a collaborative endeavor. It often involves a team of professionals rather than a single architect. To effectively marshal a team, information and design values must be commonly interpreted and shared. This is important to keep in mind as we consider these following steps. Establishing Goals For any project to successfully move forward, a common set of objectives should be established. These objectives can include performance and financial goals in addition to aesthetic intent. For the process to be successful it is essential that, once established, these objectives are understood by the entire design team, including the client. Ideally, most of these goals are measurable and an appropriate metric is determined for evaluating outcome. Subjective goals, such as beauty, are often included as well. The full complement of these goals begins to establish a framework for future evaluation. Consultation Often the expertise of specialized consultants is used to augment the analysis conducted during the understanding process. This expertise frequently includes insight provided by structural, mechanical, and electrical engineers, but can also include the consultation of experts practicing in highly specialized areas applicable to specific building types. This consultation is usually an ongoing part of the design process. These professionals are actively participating as part of the larger design team assisting in the identification and development of design alternatives. Prioritizing Analysis The process of understanding results in a significant amount of raw data—data in turn augmented by information and insights provided by specialized consultants. Without prioritization, this data can be overwhelming and often contradictory. It is critical for the design team to prioritize the project data in a way that is consistent with the established goals and objectives. Ideally, this prioritization provides focus and greater clarity. Like the goals, the priorities need to be mutually understood by all members of the design team. The success of most projects depends on this type of careful, internally consistent prioritization to allow for clear decision making. 10.5 Design Phases 659 Creating a Generative Logic In addition to commonly understood goals, it is important to establish a generative logic for developing alternative solutions. This logic is often the place where intuition and subjectivity influence the process. The generative logic is the “vision” or the “concept” that guides and directs the design process. In short, it is a core set of architectural values that result from the established goals and the prioritized analysis. These values are used to judge subsequent alternatives and determine which is superior and worthy of further refinement. Often the creation of this logic is led by an individual drawing upon the broad expertise of the team. It is critical, however, that this logic is understood by the whole design team and occasionally revisited and confirmed. The generative logic is the linchpin for the entire process moving forward. It is what allows for productive iteration, evaluation, and, ultimately, selection of a preferred alternative. Iteration PA R T 3 : P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y Most questions have more than one possible correct answer. As a result, simply answering the question isn’t adequate. Rather, finding the best answer—the most appropriate answer—is the hallmark of good design. In most instances, the full range of possible solutions can only be understood by evaluating alternatives. Once the project goals have been set and a generative logic has been established, the hard work of generating alternatives begins. Designers have many ideas, but identifying the best idea is critical. Through iteration—the act of solving and resolving the problem—designers explore, develop, and document their concepts. Evaluation Design, however, involves more than simple iteration. Design is about making choices. The goals and the generative logic provide the standard or framework for making the relative comparison—for choosing. Ultimately, the iterated alternatives must be judged relative to the established goals and the generative logic for the process to be productive. It is through this process of iteration and evaluation that the process advances. Is the alternative presented consistent with the generative logic? Does the alternative presented assist the project in meeting the established goals? These are the fundamental questions that are repeatedly considered. The design process comprises multiple waves of iteration and evaluation. Alternatives are generated. These alternatives are evaluated, and the most effective—those most consistent with the established logic and goals—advance. In turn, this evaluation leads to new, more refined alternatives being generated, evaluated, and advancing. Through this cyclical process, the solution is increasingly refined and improved. Selection At the end of each wave of iteration and evaluation is a period of selection in which the best alternative (or multiple alternatives) is chosen to advance to the next wave. Selection is made relative to the initial project goals and the generative logic—that is, the framework created by the design team for making these decisions. Careful, consistent selection leads to greater and greater detail and resolution. There is a common misconception that “good design” is simply choosing the “prettiest” solution. In fact, “good design” is selecting the solution that is most consistent with the goals and logic created for the project. For architects, as visual professionals, selecting the prettiest option is often easier than selecting the most consistent. Consistency takes discipline and rigor but results in greater unity of expression and purpose. At its best, this process yields a result that appears simple, almost inevitable— as if it couldn’t have been any other way. The design is frequently described as a linear process—methodically moving from one step to the next. Reality is seldom this tidy. The process of iteration and evaluation often reveals new ways of considering the problem—ways that affect decisions made during previous stages in the process. As a result, design can move forward for a time, 660 Design Project Management then circle back to an earlier stage and begin to move forward again. In addition, the generative logic and, to a lesser extent, the goals can evolve through this process as well. That is why it is important to view these facets as significant but not unchangeable, and why revisiting them periodically is worthwhile. As the design solution evolves and is refined, so, often, are the generative logic and goals. These important values need to be continuously challenged and validated. T HE CO N T RAC TU AL F RAMEWO RK • • • • • • • ▶ See Agreements with Owners (17.1) for more information on the AIA Contract Documents’ B101TM–2007 contracts. PA R T 3 : P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y This design process takes place within a carefully defined, legal, contractual framework. This framework, at a minimum, defines the general parameters of the design assignment, the parties involved, and each party’s responsibility to the project and to one another. Ideally, this agreement is detailed and identifies the anticipated size of the project and construction cost. In addition, schedule information should be included to define a time frame for providing services as well as a description of the services themselves. The most commonly used contractual agreement between the client (owner) and the design team leader (architect) is the AIA Document B101TM–2007 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect. AIA Document B101TM–2007 is a time-tested agreement that has evolved over more than a century of editing, revision, and use. This contract is supported by significant case law and, as a result, is the standard of the building industry. Fully executed, this contract clearly identifies the project parameters, including the following: The client (owner) The designer (architect) A general description of the project The size of the project The anticipated construction cost The preliminary schedule for completing the work The anticipated compensation In addition, AIA Document B101TM–2007 defines two groups of design services— standard services and additional services—and defines which of these services are included. Moreover, it legally describes a design process that moves through a series of five established project phases in an orderly fashion, resulting in greater and greater clarity and resolution of the design solution. These phases are: • • • • • Schematic design Design development Construction documents Bidding and negotiation Construction contract administration AIA Document B101TM–2007 assumes that as each phase is completed, both parties formally acknowledge the accomplishment before moving to the next phase. In addition, it assumes a completely linear process—one phase logically following the previous phase with no reassessment or course correction necessary. Often some modification is required as a project moves through the process and more information becomes available or is discovered. The contract should include mechanisms for acknowledging and incorporating these modifications. Nevertheless, having a clearly defined framework is important and provides each party with a mutual understanding of the project and their responsibilities. Equally important, the agreement provides a legal definition of the design process and a way of gauging progress and establishing compensation. The Schematic Design Phase The first project phase identified in AIA Document B101TM–2007 is schematic design. Much of the early understanding and synthesis takes place during this phase, including 10.5 Design Phases 661 defining the project goals and establishing the generative logic that will be used through the subsequent phases. As the initial phase in the process, schematic design is general and broad in its scope. Through the exploration of alternatives, this phase begins to define the fundamental components of the project and their interrelationships. In addition, multiple organizational strategies are often explored, and the general scope and scale are defined. Initial aesthetic approaches are investigated and discussed. Preliminary systems concepts (particularly structural, mechanical, electrical, and enclosure systems) are analyzed. Increasingly, a stance regarding sustainability is established during this phase as well. By the close of schematic design, the size, scale, and scope of the project have been generally determined. The organization and interrelationships of the project’s major components are established, as well as the project’s site orientation. Common deliverables provided by the architect at the close of this phase include: PA R T 3 : P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y • • • • • • • ▶ Small Firms, Small Projects, and Building Information Modeling (11.3) and Technology in Practice Overview (11.1) further discuss the use of BIM in practice. Site plan Floor plan Elevations Key sections Written narrative or list of major material components, systems, and assemblies Tabulation of building area relative to the building program Preliminary construction cost estimate The advent of building information modeling (BIM) has changed the type and detail included in these deliverables. BIM includes more detail earlier in the process than what was traditionally delivered. As a result, the decisions made during schematic design have increased in importance because they now provide the basis for the creation of a digital model. The full impact of this shifting paradigm is evolving, but it reinforces the need for clear, disciplined evaluation and selection of alternatives during this phase due to the increased cost and impact of future revisions. Moreover, it bolsters the requirement for each party to acknowledge the end of this phase, as well as formally accept the deliverables. The Design Development Phase The second phase identified in AIA Document B101TM–2007 is design development. As its name implies, during this phase the design is further refined and resolved. Design thinking becomes less global and more particular. During this phase the general organizational strategies and concepts developed during schematic design become specific architectural configurations involving plans and sections. As a result, it is important to revisit the project goals, priorities, and generative logic established in schematic design to see that design decisions made and details developed during this phase remain in alignment. By the close of design development the project becomes defined to the point that significant revision is unlikely. The size, scale, and scope of the project are refined. All of the building systems are determined and begin to be integrated. In addition, the sustainable buildings strategies have been identified. The key building details are developed as well, and the major building materials are selected along with their corresponding specifications and performance requirements. Finally, the construction cost estimate is refined and broken out in increasing detail. Deliverables at the end of this phase are similar to those provided at the end of schematic design; however, much greater detail is included. As a result, the scale of the drawings is usually adjusted to reveal this increased level of resolution. The project specification, primarily a narrative at the end of schematic design, is now typically an outline specification identifying specific products and major assemblies. This document is organized in a manner similar to the final specification. Finally, all of the documentation reveals the integration of building systems and coordination with allied consultants. Increasingly clients are opting for alternative delivery methods to design and build projects. “Fast-track” and “packaged bidding” have become more and more common. 662 Design Project Management These delivery methods typically have only a minor impact on the schematic design phase; however, they have an increasing impact during the design development phase. Often the type and level of details are modified to allow for more complete cost estimating prior to construction documentation. This may require some systems to be highly resolved and others to remain more conceptual. In addition, because the systems are not all fully developed, disputes can arise regarding the estimated cost of systems not fully understood or the discovery of unanticipated systems conflicts. It is important to be aware of these possibilities and, if possible, include contingencies in the construction cost estimate to provide for possible eventualities. As discussed during the schematic design section, BIM has affected the level of resolution developed during design development as well. The BIM model allows allied consultants to construct their systems within a shared information model. As a result, the level of integration implied is often higher than for a traditionally designed project. This integration results in an increased understanding of the impact of various systems on the project and reveals potential points of conflict. Moreover, as a result of this higher level of resolution, BIM has begun to blur the distinction between design development and the subsequent construction documents phase. Finally, this change has had an impact on client expectations, as “virtual” building becomes more the norm. As with schematic design, it remains important to formally acknowledge the end of this phase before moving into the construction documents phase. PA R T 3 : P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y Design During the Construction Documents Phase While the design development phase results in a high level of resolution, design does not end at the conclusion of that phase. Rather, the priorities established during schematic design and refined during design development are fully detailed and specified during the construction documents phase. At the close of this phase, the documentation is sufficiently clear and complete for the construction contractor to establish the price for construction and build the project. The documentation includes drawings, reference documents, technical specifications, and contractual and administrative requirements for the project. Most of these documents are informed by the generative logic established at the onset of the project. Their refinement and completion involves consistent design decisions, not merely technical competence. The materials and assemblies specified should support the design priorities and assist the project in meeting the established performance objectives. It is essential that the architects involved in this phase, if different from those involved in the previous phases, understand the goals, priorities, and logic that have guided the project’s design and development. This knowledge will assist in consistent decision making in preparing the final construction documents. Design and Construction Contract Administration Despite significant planning efforts, construction is a fluid process. Most projects are one-of-a-kind buildings that have no opportunity for “beta testing”—they are prototypes. As a result, it is common for changes to the work to be required by unforeseen circumstances and changing owner requirements. Design continues to play an important role during this construction process. The design team should remain mindful of the project goals as changes are being considered. Often these changes require generating and evaluating alternatives, and the project priorities and generative logic remain in effect. Ideally, changes to the work don’t need to be compromises but are, rather, extensions of the architectural values established at the project’s onset. This is possible if the role of design during construction is recognized and exploited. Additional Ser vices In addition to the standard services and phases outlined in AIA Document B101TM–2007, this agreement also references a number of additional services that the owner may 10.5 Design Phases 663 engage an architect to perform. These include programming, space planning, landscape design, signage, furniture selection, etc. Design plays an important role in most of these services as well. Most can extend the project priorities and contribute to meeting the established project goals. C ON C LU S I O N PA R T 3 : P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y Design is an architect’s core competency—it is an architect’s raison d’être. The process is one of the truly distinguishing activities that defines the profession and separates it from other disciplines. As discussed, it is simultaneously a visual and analytical process— informed by both research and intuition. As such, it transcends science and art to be a unique amalgam distinct from engineering or the visual arts. Design begins with understanding the problem and moves through a quasi-linear sequence of iteration, evaluation, and selection to define, refine, and, ultimately, resolve the client’s needs and aspirations. It is a complex, often collaborative process guided by a set of mutually established goals, priorities, and a generative logic that results in a gestalt—something larger than the simple sum of its parts. Design is at work during all phases of an architectural project and informs all of the decisions made throughout construction. Ideally the results of this rigorous, disciplined process are a clear, consistent, and direct statement of enduring architectural values that surpass the client’s pragmatic, functional needs to address their emotional aspirations. It is more than perfunctory. At its best, the design process yields solutions that are deceptively simple, poetic, and ennobling—architecture capable of withstanding the test of time. Fo r M or e In for m a t i on Architecture: Form, Space, and Order (Wiley, 2007) by Francis D. K. Ching. The Nature & Aesthetics of Design (A&C Black, 2000) by David Pye. Analysing Architecture (Routledge, 2009) by Simon Unwin. Designing Architecture: The Elements of Process (Routledge, 2012) by Andrew Pressman. BACKGROUNDER P ROG R AM M ING P aul D. M a n kins , FAIA, L EED ® A P BD +C Architectural programming is a pre-design activity in which the parameters of the project are defined—both quantitatively and qualitatively. This definition forms the critical foundation for the beginning of the design process. Paul D. Mankins is an award-winning architect and a founding partner of Substance Architecture, a design practice based in Des Moines, Iowa. He is a frequent speaker and architectural design instructor committed to advancing design issues both within the profession and to the general public. P RO GRA M M I N G Architectural programming is often described as “problem seeking.” It is the essential preliminary step that informs the 664 Design Project Management subsequent design process. For design to be successful, the design problem must be clearly defined. Only by understanding what the problem is can an effective solution be developed. As a result, thoroughly defining the project—fully seeking the problem—is imperative. Architectural programming involves broad inquiry into the circumstances surrounding a particular architectural problem, as well as highly specific analysis of the particular building requirements. It is important to keep in mind that, while programming involves design thinking, it is not design per se. Programming is intended to define the problem rather than propose a solution. Programming can be divided into a six-step process: Research the Project Type “What have others done?” This is often a useful question to ask at the beginning of the programming process. Few projects are truly groundbreaking. The vast majority of design assignments are, in one way or another, similar to an existing set