37. Getting There

I haven’t forgotten about the other four signposts that I discussed with the locals and Fig. 37.1 shows their individual calibration. These will not be discussed in any detail, but I do want to share just three views which came up while discussing the process of delivering a workplace (Signpost 11).

Leo who sees the workplace from the no-nonsense pragmatism of the real estate world explained:

[Investors] produce these assets [office buildings] for the purpose of financial gain. Most of the times, it’s the antithesis of innovation and they do what is tried and tested to reduce risk and increase profit.

As an Architect this sentiment is never easy to hear, but I have heard it before from others in property development where the value of the building resides in its return on investment and little else.

Frank expanded on that idea from the architect’s perspective:

Mass architecture is about big buildings and big finance. We’ve got ourselves locked into a mindset in which only large corporations can build on our behalf… in which ‘form follows finance’.

I missed most of what Frank said afterwards, I was still processing ‘form follows finance’ – a clever, albeit disheartening, update of ‘form follows function’ axiom by Louis Sullivan [134].

Thankfully, I was recording the conversation because what Frank said next was quite relevant too:

The purpose of an architectural firm is to make architecture. So, no architectural firm will challenge whether or not you need that new workplace. And some will say that they do, but they don’t, really, because there would be a loss of fee.

Indeed, it’s so rare for architects to propose a non building-based solution that when they do, it becomes a TED talk. In Architecture for the people by the people [135], Architect Alastair Parvin argues that architecture is about solving problems, not about making buildings which he sees as just about the most expensive solution to almost any given problem. What about losing those fees? From that same talk:

Now, it looks like you’re doing yourself out of a job, but you’re not. You’re actually making yourself more useful. Architects are actually really, really good at this kind of resourceful, strategic thinking. And the problem is that, like a lot of design professions, we got fixated on the idea of providing a particular kind of consumer product, and I don’t think that needs to be the case anymore. [135]

This view of architecture does not take away the product the discipline is best known for – undoubtably, there are instances in which a building, or more broadly a ‘space solution’, is the best answer to a problem. Instead, it expands the range of answers available to architects and designers. In his talk, you can learn how Parvin solved an architectural problem with a bell and a watch.

Last, but not least Henry who is in charge of delivering workplace solutions for a large organisation posed a rhetorical question, “why do large enterprises exists?” His stark answer:

[Organisations] exist to drive shareholder value. The CFO’s role is to count beans and the more beans they count, the better.

That is indeed a severe and abbreviated representation of large enterprises; however, one can read the works behind the ‘Theory of the Firm’ [136] and learn a lot about specialisation, organisational structures, employees’ and employer’s relationships, even about the intangibility of firms themselves and walk away with an overarching impression not too far from Henry’s.

These views from just three of our locals are a good description of the context that comes into play well before designers have the opportunity to consider what happens in the workplace – or apply signposts.

Promisingly, a consistent message emerged from talking with Leo, Frank, Henry and the other locals: they wanted change. The vast majority (over 80%) of our locals would rather head closer to the signposts than the established view.

In Part I of this book, I shared my motivation for walking from Melbourne to Sydney and in Part II, I took you through my preparations leading to my first step. In Parts III and IV I brought you along my analogue and virtual pilgrimages where we saw many Signposts rise. Having already completed the journey and sharing what I learned, I was just that little bit ahead of you, but in Part V you caught up with me. We met at the end of the trail and from there on, we travelled shoulder to shoulder laying paths.

In the next, and last Part, we go separate ways. However, I am hopeful we will meet again at the destination of the Signposts.