There's a perceived 'malaise' where society needs to reappraise its relationship with work and effort relative to desired per capita income, moving beyond merely changing environmental conditions to actively fostering growth.. 5.
Unlike a traditional brief, which works to corral a project before it even begins, effectively shutting down possibilities, a problem statement opens them up.The problem statement pinpoints the gap between the existing state and the desired state (of a company, a site, a process) and defines the core values that will drive the project.
This, of course, runs counter to how many architects and engineers work today.Normally in design and construction, a client hires an architect with a predefined brief in hand.The very descriptor –brief– points to a system that diminishes the basis of a project, marginalising it to a minor, condensed idea rather than an expansive and radial statement of purpose.
Design to Value, on the other hand, asks that clients rather approach every project with a question, or set of problems, to be solved – not a directive.The architect’s role is to define the core problem and then to find innovative solutions.. To purchase this book, visit.In this episode of our Built Environment Matters podcast, Jaimie Johnston MBE catches up with Brett Rogers, CEO of construction supply chain company, Katalyst DI.. Click the 'play button' above to listen in, or read our 5 Key Takeaways from this episode below.... 1.
When we integrate supply chain data into the design and construction process, we unlock the possibility of Tesla-like margins.. ‘Normal’ design is usually a linear process, with bespoke supply chains engaged at a late stage.
However, as large serial clients adopt more standardised designs to improve efficiency on construction projects, the benefit of getting closer to supply chain partners is becoming clear..Furthermore, new external chillers, AHUs (air-handling units), stacks and fans, louvres, waste stores, external access, and other material changes to the office building may still result in the need for Planning Permission.
This can add many unexpected weeks or even months to a project and introduces an element of risk.In the fast-moving life science industry this is particularly frustrating and removes much of the benefit of converting an office in the first place.
The faster a lab can be designed, the faster these issues can be assessed and potentially mitigated.. Planning and other permitting matters will of course differ significantly outside the UK and a different approach will also be necessary.. 7.Existing offices may lack sufficient common areas or can pose problems for lab material and personnel flows throughout the wider building.. Office elevators sometimes aren’t big enough to transport larger lab equipment (e.g.
(Editor: Heavyweight Streaming Gear)