One of the main reasons why architects lack business skills is the fact that most architecture schools overlook the business side of architecture. Young graduates compete for jobs that often sharpen their design skills, but do little to prepare them for running their own practices. Once they strike out on their own, architects are often forced to learn through costly mistakes and built their business skills while struggling to make ends meet.

The antiquated educational model, still dominant in our schools, also fails to explore different avenues for practicing architecture, and its myopic view of the profession puts architecture students at a disadvantage compared to schools in other professions which are more attuned to modern developments in today’s market economy.

The School of Architecture and Planning (SA+P), one of five schools at MIT, is breaking this pattern with their newly launched entrepreneurship accelerator, DesignX, which will allow students to “make the critical leap from project to startup.” Through a set of classes, mentorship, seed funding, research, and links to the global network of SA+P alumni entrepreneurs, students will get a chance to become entrepreneurs while at school, and develop projects for real-world impact. Running under the adage “learn, launch, and leap,” DesignX will include a four-month, for-credit accelerator workshop through which participants will get a chance to pitch to outside investors and industry partners.

“Many new ideas emerge from classes and studios but are lost after the students graduate,” says Dennis Frenchman, the Class of 1922 Professor of Urban Design and Planning and faculty director of DesignX. “We established DesignX to create a path for students of architecture, planning, media, real estate, and art to take their innovative ideas and turn them into reality.”

Students will choose elective courses in entrepreneurship and innovation and apply to the DesignX program at the end of the fall semester. They can work with mentors who will assist with exploring design concepts, creating a business plan, acquiring and interpreting user feedback, connecting with strategic partners, analyzing target markets and developing prototypes, beta products and services. They will pitch their ideas to committees made up of professionals, entrepreneurs and faculty members who will select students to receive $15,000 in seed funding.

This initial sum will allow young archipreneurs  to develop their projects, business plans and prototypes during the DesignX workshop. The program will conclude with a series of pitches to outside investors and industry leaders with products that target the AEC industry and redefine how users interact with architecture both the physical and digital realms.

“DESx will integrate the initial stages of building a startup into participants’ education, so that students make rapid progress while they are at MIT and are positioned to succeed as they take their first steps toward entrepreneurship,” said Gilad Rosenzweig, the program’s executive director.

According to a recent study of MIT alumni, over 1,200 companies have already emerged from SA+P. The team behind DesignX examines these firms and applies their experiences, failures and successes to the program, giving it an additional element of practicality and rooting the work of its budding entrepreneurs in real-world facts. Before finishing school, selected students will be able to make smart business decisions and learn how to differentiate their enterprises in a competitive market through mentorship, innovation and networking.

MIT has already chosen the first eight startups that will participate in the DesignX accellerator program this spring. At a pitch contest hosted at the institute’s Media Lab in December, 15 startup teams proposed their innovative real estate ideas to the panel of judges who then selected eight teams to get to participate in the coursework and receive $15,000 each in equity-free seed funding:

• Startup named Nesterly aims to connect people with unused real estate assets and extra space with long-term renters at affordable rates in exchange for help around the house.
• Kumej is a transformable floor-seater that enables whose without a conventional workspace to create it on the go, wherever they are.
• Virtual Collaboration Research (VCR) will allow architects and designers to work collaboratively in VR with their AI supported, speech-driven spatial markup tool named Mediate.
• Urban Diagnostics analyses the health of cities by mining city sewers using DNA sequencing and metabolomics.
• Hosta app turns pictures and videos of living spaces into a 3D-model powered home management platform for simplifying the home renovation process.
• Learning Beautiful creates tactile, Montessori-inspired learning materials to teach computer science to young children.
• Bitsence improves cities by tracking human movement and behavior in physical space.
• The eighth startup is Equity, which is modeling a resident-driven development marketplace that matches occupants, designers, builders, and financiers of real-estate developments. It will link housing design with finance and match occupants with development suppliers.

***

If you want to learn more about DesignX: We spoke with the program’s executive director, Gilad Rosenzweig, about his thoughts on the gap between architectural education and practice – and his solution. Read it here on Archipreneur Insights.

The post How Startup Accelerator DesignX Turns Architecture Students into Entrepreneurs appeared first on Archipreneur.

This week’s interview is with Michael Kohn, CEO of Stickyworld.

Michael had been working as an architect in London when he realized that there was a need for a better and easier collaboration between stakeholders in the process of building. He created Stickyworld, a web- and mobile-based tool that enables projects to be shared, commented on and posted with virtual sticky notes attached directly to the images. The tool makes it easier for everyone to understand the discussion at hand, as well as to capture and evidence new insights from participants during the design and construction process.

Stickyworld has since evolved into a universal participation platform, serving individuals and organizations within and outside the AEC industry who seek to involve others in general online engagement discussions or structured participation processes.

Read on to learn how Michael combined his passion for architecture and computing, and how he built a business from these interests.

Enjoy the interview!

Could you tell us a little about your background?

I studied architecture at The Bartlett School of Architecture. But I had always been a little bit entrepreneurial. I built a house for my mum in my gap year, and after I had graduated I entered a lot of competitions for houses of the future.

As an architect, I was always looking for something slightly outside the norm, and I noticed my architectural concepts were verging more on product ideas than straight architecture. I thought of the architect’s role as an enabler to others to make space, rather than saying exactly how everything has to be. As a registered architect, I worked for Cullinan Studio on large building projects like universities and also masterplans.

I later returned to university to study computing: computational design, parametric, programming, and scripting. After I had finished my studies, I set up a computational design consultancy, selling specialist services to bigger practices whilst teaching professional studies at the University of London.

So, this period for me was a weird mix of part-time teaching the traditional practice of architecture to final year students, whilst myself, I was a total novice as entrepreneur, learning the ropes in tech entrepreneurship, mainly through winning funded research and innovation projects. I think I must be a continuous learner and that helps.

What made you decide to found Stickyworld?

In 2005 I cofounded a practice called Slider Studio together with Renee Puusepp. The practice is still running, although now only by Renee Puusepp. We studied computing together, and worked on 3D gaming technology as one of our technology ideas. We did a big project for the Birmingham City Council, delivered as a consultation gaming engine for a housing regeneration project.

The kids loved it because they could jump on a bus and look around and play swapping the architect’s designs around, rather than look at complicated architectural drawings. What we found, however, was that the adults didn’t really engage with the technology. Then somebody asked, “Why can’t I put a sticky note inside your virtual world like I can in the real world?” So that was where the inspiration and name for ‘Stickyworld’ came from.

We were also looking at how you can involve wider groups of people in feedback, discussions, and informing decisions.

There was an understanding that there was a big untapped market for technologies that involved those wider groups.

That didn’t necessarily mean citizens. For instance, when I was working in a practice it was really hard to get a client and the client’s clients and all those other stakeholders into one room so that you can get your drawings signed off and the team gets paid. We realized that there was a missing piece in the software market for technology that would focus exclusively on those wider groups.

How do you finance your startup? Any tips for our community on how you managed it?

It was a fairly normal method: At Slider Studio we took on some ‘normal’ architectural projects that kept us alive. In addition, I was teaching three days a week.

Then we started applying for research and technology grants and competitions. We won a couple of those, got some investments, and then Stickyworld was founded as a business. Since then, it’s been a mix of commercial sales and larger project work to develop the technology for clients and some more technology competition wins. It’s a real mix. You have to scrap in the startup world.

You developed a web- and mobile-based tool that allows more voices to be heard during the design and construction process. Could you give us some examples of how the tool is used and how it helps architectural practices?

Stickyworld gives a little bit more transparency to the types of issues that architects are grappling with. Because design is not a black and white thing, is it? It’s a negotiation.

And if you can get more conversations happening, it’s good for the whole process and for the design team because they get validation on what they are doing.

We’ve got an example where local authorities wanted to redesign the streets to improve conditions for cyclists and drivers. The architects used Stickyworld to present maps and photos of the existing area and engage citizens in conversation around what is good or bad, and what could be changed.

Next they followed up with a more formal consultation on their designs, and referencing how the design accommodates the original feedback. Our technology helps designers keep stakeholders informed and involved across all stages of the projects.

Some architects use Stickyworld for internal design reviews. If you are meeting a client face to face or on Skype but you want to share the drawings and have a discussion about those drawings after the meeting, then you can create what is called ‘rooms’ in Stickyworld. In these private rooms you invite your client – and they invite their family, their friends, whomever is involved – to review the drawings and then provide feedback for the design team.

Large contractors use Stickyworld for bid management. It’s a great solution for, say, bringing in 30 different experts into a room to offer feedback on strategies for sustainability and transport on large infrastructure projects. It also enables people to become more involved and share ideas across the platform to all stakeholders. So it’s a pretty wide-ranging tool for a deeper form of collaboration in design and construction.

So, you have quite breadth customers from different industries?

We do. At the moment, we’re trying to stick to the built environment as much as possible in terms of our marketing investment. Stickyworld is a collaboration platform for working with people who are not on your core team so we need to get the message out more.

There needs to be a shift in mindset away from the old ways of project management where everything was kept close to your chest and on a need-to-know basis. The understanding of risk is changing. If you don’t carry out your projects in a more inclusive and transparent way, all you’re doing is carrying that risk. Our customers are not defined by their sector but rather by their recognition of this risk, and the need to solve the problem of collaborating with their wider stakeholders.

The building industry is known for being slow to adapt to new technologies. What is your experience with this?

In the UK, the building industry operates on very low profit margins. It’s broadly measured by ‘start and stop’ capital projects and unlike those industries, like say manufacturing, which invest in continuous process improvement. Not surprising it has relatively low levels of investment in process research and development.

So bringing in new technology and software is hard. But when all the money is spent on delivering a capital project and little is invested in knowledge sharing across the business to drive growth and profit, you get this condition.

But the industry is changing. I went into a big contractor the other day and it was a room of 20 people, where 14 of them were architects. Architects are getting involved in organization wide innovation and sustainability, and they are employed directly by the contractor. I think that’s an interesting career move option for architects working in private practice, working for an international construction firm to get a different view of the industry.

A lot of architects don’t think like that, though. It goes against the ‘romance’ of architecture. But that is the reality. That pattern has been established. So, I think that many architectural practices have been slow to recognize and adopt the business and cultural change that is happening around them, and I know from experience that the education and the professional institutions sets things up too narrowly to maximize these choices for young architects.

They will probably continue to be slow to change for another five years, maybe even a decade, because of their established business model of delivering architectural services.

Speaking of the romance of architecture, what do you find the most fulfilling about archipreneurship, and what do you find the most challenging?

As an architect, I wanted to invent, to change things, and I had an instinct for R&D and investment in new ideas. But I found that, as a practicing architect there wasn’t the scope to do that in a small practice. Maybe in bigger practices there is a bit more scope, but it’s still very difficult to do.

What is fulfilling as an entrepreneur is that, once you’re doing your own thing, at the beginning you are your own boss and you are in charge. But soon after comes a realization that this is not quite true – you’re not actually in charge – your customers are in charge. And that’s the right way. You have to work for your customers every single day to help them get value else they won’t come back. So it’s incredibly hard work, but when customers say they like your product and recommend you to others – that is incredibly fulfilling.

Of course as an architect, if you work for a client, you like the client, have a good rapport with them, and they like your project that can be very fulfilling, too. The switch to entrepreneurship, or more specifically from being a consultant who offered design services, to being an entrepreneur running a product business, is that you have to change your mindset from one of working for one client or a handful of clients and maybe doing really novel and interesting projects, and to working for a larger number of customers, possibly hundreds and thousands and delivering a stable product or service so it works perfectly for them all.

That is a big change in thinking. It’s personally taken me a long time to get my head around and adjust my decision-making.

How has your architectural training helped you in the actual running of your businesses? What specific/transferable skills have proved the most useful?

There were some things I’ve had to unlearn. As I mentioned, I had to unlearn my perception of my role as a consultant to being a product person, and from working with clients to working with customers.

Architects do have great insight across many different aspects of projects, so that has been useful. As an architect, you can work on planning, policy, all the way to handing over a building and getting a sense of how that building functions. It has been useful to have insight of the full life cycle, but I think some of the things that I would naturally do as an architect, and sometimes still do, are maybe wrong.

I’ll give you an example. In the early days, I employed a lot of other architects who, like me, liked using technology. But what you actually need in the startup world is not lots of people who are the same, but lots of committed people with complementary skills.

I had to unlearn certain ways of working, bit by bit. To do that, I had to ask myself some hard questions: Who is my customer? What skills do I need to serve that customer? Who should be in my team? The reality is that you have to keep learning.

But on the plus side for architects, I think the creative/technical balance and the natural desire for knowledge, inherent to a lot of architects, has helped me and surely helped other archipreneurs to learn a different way of working.

Just because you started out as an architect doesn’t mean that you have to finish as an architect.

Do you have any advice for archipreneurs who want to start and build their own business?

If you are currently in a job, before you jump ship, go and read all the books you can and go to the tech community’s startup events. Not all companies are going to be tech companies, but they’ll all have tech as an element of their work. Whoever calls themselves archipreneurs will have tech in their lives. Go and mix with ideas and people outside of architecture. You’ll learn about yourself in the process. You’ll also learn whether you are ready to jump onto the startup rollercoaster.

Once you have some ideas bouncing around, find some cheap ways to test them out. Identify with and understand your customer as early as you can. Build a team whose skills you need to serve that customer. You are probably going to have to do all of it yourself until you find co-founders. There is no shortcut to this.

In which areas (outside of traditional practice) can you see major business opportunities for up and coming architects?

There are lots of opportunities in the industry. If you’re listening to and watching new developments and you’re savvy about the opportunities available, then you will be able to find out about the new things happening in the industry, often with big contractors. I see some architects changing how they’re delivering their service, and how much of a service they need to give in order to add value. I see a lot of architects becoming product designers.

All the star architects have a product and a brand. Those things may not be immediately possible or desirable for the majority of the smaller architects but I would recommend thinking of it like a pattern: if you understand what your skill is and where there is a gap in the market, then you can define what it is that you do.

I was talking to a friend of mine who works for a very big practice. He says, “We are becoming a little bit like a big design consultancy, more like an ad agency than a traditional architect. And we’ve got an international growth model,” and it’s happening because they’re listening closely to what their clients want and who their clients are. And that is key: if you want to be entrepreneurial then you have to look at the market. But you also need a sense for serving a customer or client base.

The traditional model of architecture, as I learned when I was at university, is that the architect is right, the architects sets the vision, and the architect tells everyone what the vision is. I think this is a dead idea, we have to move on. Some people will lament it but I think it’s a really good, healthy thing.

Why be constrained by the traditional norms of practice and what people told you architects should be? You have to redefine it in order to stay current and get the clients and customers you want.

About Michael Kohn

Michael Kohn is founder and CEO of Stickyworld Ltd, a visual customer collaboration platform that makes it easy for organizations to involve wide groups of people in making better products, services, buildings, places and cities together. Founded in 2010, Stickyworld has attracted a growing number of customers from local government, energy and utilities, construction, architecture and design sectors. A former architect, Michael’s career spans 20 years including award-winning concept design work, administration of multi-million pound construction projects, university research and lecturing, and collaborative technology.

Whilst Michael is no longer a practicing architect he likes to think that his work is contributing positively to a more user-centered design of the real world and his company has big growth plans for 2017.

The post Architect Turns Tech-Entrepreneur: How Michael Kohn Launched His Virtual Collaboration Tool Stickyworld appeared first on Archipreneur.

This week’s interview is with London based developer Gus Zogolovitch, founder of several companies in property development and beyond.

Gus started on his entrepreneurial career path after discovering a gap in the market – project management for refurbishment projects – and building a business offering those services. He ran this venture for a couple of years before joining his architect father, Roger Zogolovitch, to set up Solidspace, which aims to deliver design-led boutique, new-build projects on forgotten inner-city gap sites. (Read the interview with Roger Zogolovitch here)

Gus then started his own venture, Inhabit Homes, London’s first custom-build enabler, which helps people to build their own homes and also sells some of the most desirable new-builds in London. During my interview with Gus, I learned that he had founded two additional companies and that they all interact in the process of building homes.

Continue reading to learn from a self-trained independent developer and to discover his take on the role of architecture today.

Enjoy the interview!

Could you tell us a little about your background? How did you start your career?

I was born and brought up in London, but I had travelled a lot both before and after I went to university. I also lived abroad during my studies.

I started my career in the City of London in investment banking, more by accident than by design. Basically, I had been living with a friend of mine who had to get up really early every day. He got really upset that I could sleep in every day so he got me a job in the City, so that I’d have to wake up early too!

I joined CS First Boston as an intern, working for a guy who later went to work at Goldman Sachs and took me with him. So in answer to your question how did I start my career, it was basically luck. At university, I studied mathematics and philosophy, so I had a good general knowledge but no specific knowledge.

And how did you get into property development?

I left Goldman Sachs and traveled around the world for two years. I did various things, even worked in Australia for a bit. When I came back to London I decided to try and get my house refurbished. I had a very bad experience trying to get builders. Since I didn’t have a job I decided to do it myself and take on the role of ‘project manager’.

It was a disaster! I employed some builders who then walked out on the job halfway through and so I then had to find some other builders who would finish what had been started.

But I realized that that was quite an interesting opportunity. I thought that maybe I could help other people who needed management for the refurbishment of their homes. The idea sounded much more appealing than a nine-to-five.

Seeing that gap in the market I set up my first company. My idea was, rather than paying a fixed price for a refurbishment job, why not pay the price of what it’s going to cost for each day of work and then pay a fee for my services in managing builders and making sure they’re doing what they should be doing. If it takes fewer days than scheduled, the client will save money. If it takes as much time as is scheduled, the client will not save money but can be assured the builders have turned up and completed the work.

I tried running that business for a couple of years. In the meantime, my father had been working on a residential development. I came in at the end to help him with some bits and pieces. And then he wanted me to help him with his website and stuff like that. So I did, and from then on I started doing more for his business. My refurbishment business started to decrease in size and so I ended up working full time for my father.

After a couple of years, we decided to become partners. We looked around, found some sites, bought them and developed them. One of these sites ended up being my house!

Did your experience from your work at Goldman Sachs help you to work with property development?

I suppose it gives you a head for numbers. That was very helpful because I think there are a lot of people in property development who can’t quite get their head around the numbers. They’ve probably been lucky because the markets did go up but they don’t always go up. For that reason, understanding the numbers and the finance is quite handy.

What is your role at Solidspace?

Today I’m just a director. I don’t have any active management in Solidspace. I am just there for board meetings.

That explains why you have time to work for your current company, Inhabit Homes. What is your business model for Inhabit Homes?

It has a few business streams. But the core of the business model is to build high quality, design led homes that are more affordable than some of the homes we built when I was working for Solidspace.

We built some lovely homes at Solidspace, but the reality is they are a premium product. That is almost inevitable as my experience is that good design costs more money. Whatever architects tell you, it is hard to avoid that. So what we do is build watertight structural shells that the owner can then fit out themself.

There are a couple of benefits to this:

First, it is cheaper for customers to fit out than it is for us because we have to include all the management costs, interest costs and the developer profit.

Second, they can choose what they want and how they want it. Rather than having us choose the colours and tiles for their kitchen they want, they can do it themselves. They can spend as much or as little time as they want.

Third, the owner has flexibility in the layout. If you sell someone a 1,000-square foot, they can decide for themselves whether they want three small bedrooms or two large bedrooms.

From our perspective, the benefit is that we get out of the project quicker and can move on to the next project. It also means we don’t have to deal with all the snags in a project that take up a lot of management time when doing a fit out.

At Inhabit Homes, do you employ architects or is architecture a commodity into which you buy?

We don’t employ architects within our company; we outsource the architecture. We do that at Solidspace as well. We like to bring in architects to do the job well and keep everything fresh and the design good. I also think it gives architects an opportunity to do interesting work. I’m a big believer in partnerships. I think of my partnership with an architect as similar to that of a movie director and movie producer. I am the producer and the architect is the director.

How do you carry out market research, and how do you find locations for your projects?

Land is very difficult to get in London so you can’t be that fussy. It’s generally gut instinct but it’s also massively influenced by the price of the land, our financial resources and where our customer base is. We have quite a lot of information on our customers and where they want to be, and we get a good sense of the kind of customer that likes our product. So obviously we try to build in those places.

At the moment, we tend to look in London but we’re also thinking about places outside London for the near future. For now, we’re busy trying to get our first projects off the ground in London.

Do Solidspace and Inhabit Homes ever interact?

Solidspace and Inhabit do quite a lot of work together. For example, Solidspace is building a very nice development not far away from Inhabit Homes’ office near London Bridge. Inhabit Homes is doing the marketing and sales for Solidspace. We are acting as their sales agency on that project because I think we have a very personal relationship with customers. When it comes to nicely designed products, people say, “I don’t want just a basic estate agent to sell it like they would sell any other products. They’ve got to be someone who knows what they’re talking about, someone who understands design and architecture.”

We’re collaborating with Solidspace but also with other clients. Right now, we are working on a project that was just launched in Holland Park, London, by Peter Salter. We are doing marketing and sales for that too.

Our core activity has been in acting as custom build developers, although I’m very interested to see whether or not we can bring Baugruppen (co-housing projects) to London.

Co-housing doesn’t yet exist in London?

No. The financing isn’t really there. Well, they do exist in some slightly strange forms but there are certainly very few of them and they certainly do not have any commercial perspective.

I found yet another company with your name on it: Crowdestates. When did you establish it and what was your goal for this business?

I’m involved with a couple of companies outside traditional property development. Crowdestates is a peer-to-peer lender, a little like crowdfunding for development finance. Small developers need access to finance and what they can borrow at the bank is quite expensive, up to 9% interest a year. The idea behind Crowdestates is to lend money collectively to small property developers at a lower interest rate than the bank.

And is Crowdestates also interacting with Inhabit Homes?

We’re still going through the regulatory authorisation process with Crowdestates. But yes, that is the intention. One of my grander visions is to create a company that does everything from beginning to end.

Another company of mine is called Patch Partners, which sources land opportunities. We train and support people to find development sites, to find old buildings that can be refurbished, or to discover a piece of ground on which to build houses. They go out and find these things themselves and we connect them with developers or investors to get the project up and going.

The vision is to work vertically, Sourcing opportunities through Patch Partners, financing them through Crowdestates, building and selling by Inhabit Homes.

I see! When I was doing my research and found all these companies you own, it made me wonder if you have more days in the week than the average person…

The companies are all connected. A lot of people say, “Don’t work for more than one company.” But I think, why not?

The market is different from how it was when you first started. How would you advise a fresh architecture graduate today on getting his first project off the ground? Any tips on how to manage it?

I think we’re living in amazing times. If you look at the costs of housing and land, they’re ridiculously high. But on the flipside, the costs of connecting and transparency are very low. For that reason, I think there’s never been a better time to create things like Baugruppen (co-housing projects) where communities can come together to buy developments.

I think that we’re going to see more and more of that because why should big companies be the ones buying the land?

Why not get ten of your friends and buy a bit of land together? Through the power of digital technology, you have the power to bring strangers together.

You don’t have to rely on your own networks. It has become much easier to network and to do radical things.

In a way, the barrier to entry into the market is higher because you need more money to buy land. But arguably the ability to find experts is much easier and comes at a lower cost. In the past, what were you going to do? How would you have found an air quality assessor? Now all you need to do is google them, right? In the past, it was a really painful process.

It is all about connectivity and ensuring that you think big when connecting with others.

You have worked a lot with architects. What do you think would help their profession?

I never trained as an architect. But what I see is that there are quite a lot of architects who are very impractical in terms of actually knowing how buildings are put together. Architecture is not just about the design process but also really understanding how a building is structured, for example, knowing what heavy rain or wind would do to it. That’s why I love it when I see architects who have built their own homes and have actually gone through the building process at least once.

Do you have any advice for archipreneurs who are interested in starting their own business?

Don’t be afraid. The key is to realise that there are always going to be risks and there will always be reasons to say no. But you have got to step into the unknown and try it or nothing will change.

Also, believe in yourself and be nimble. Read a lot, speak to a lot of people, and develop your network. There’s absolutely no reason why you shouldn’t succeed. This goes back to my earlier point. We live in a world where 24-year-olds can be billionaires. With the digital world, you don’t need to have been around for 60 years before you launch your first invention. You can just get on and do it. No one is stopping you.

How do you see the future of the architectural profession? In which areas (outside of traditional practice) can you see major opportunities for up and coming architects and developers?

I think architects should think of themselves as collaborators rather than as passively waiting for commissions.

They need to think about their role in the process. They’ve got to go out and find opportunities, and get developers to partner with them and say, “Okay, how can we do this together?”

It’s a bit like my director and producer analogy. When a movie is at the beginning of development, producers, directors and writers will sometimes pitch to the studio together. It’s about building a team around an idea, and that doesn’t always have to come from one side. It can come from the architect who has recognized their role in the process.

I think architects will always be needed because they add a great deal of value, especially in terms of the products. But I think that these days, even if you’re in a practice,

you should be thinking about how you can be entrepreneurial and how you can do things differently.

About Gus Zogolovitch

Gus started his career at Goldman Sachs in London where he was an equity analyst before he set up his first property specialising in residential projects. He ran this venture for a couple of years alone before he joined his architect father, Roger, and set up Solidspace with the aim to deliver design-led boutique new-build projects on forgotten inner city gap sites. He pioneered the Solidspace split-level model by building his own house in north west London where he still lives today.

Gus has most recently started his own venture, Inhabit Homes, which acts as London’s first custom-build enabler, helping people build their own Grand Designs while also selling some of the most desirable new-builds in London. 

The post Investment Banking, Gap Site Development and Building New Homes – an Interview with Gus Zogolovitch appeared first on Archipreneur.

This week’s interview is with Roger Zogolovitch, Founder of Solidspace. I met Roger at the World Architecture Festival (WAF) in Berlin where he was a judge for the completed buildings category for housing.

Roger is a practicing architect and independent developer with 40 years of experience in the field. He has built an impressive portfolio of urban housing projects on gap sites in London.

Roger implements ‘spatial DNA’ into his projects by arranging spaces for eating, living and working on a connected series of split levels. By doing so, Roger can use his architectural skills to build unique projects on otherwise difficult sites in London and also to create beautiful living environments for people.

Anyone keen to develop their own housing projects should read this; Roger gives a ton of valuable advice for getting started.

Enjoy the interview!

You have 40 years of experience in architecture and development. Could you tell us a little about how you started your career?

That’s a good question. From the beginning of my career in architecture, I never worked for another firm. I only ever worked for myself; even when I was at the Architectural Association School of Architecture (AA) as a student. At the AA we ran a little practice and did some quite innovative things in terms of shop fitting. So I’ve always been entrepreneurial.

When I finished at the AA I managed to get quite a big project going. We established the practice, which we called CZWG, Campbell Zogolovitch Wilkinson and Gough. The practice is still in operation in London and has just celebrated 40years. I was involved with that practice for its first 10 years, after which I decided to move my career from architecture – pure architecture – into architecture & development. My passion for development became a reality.

How did you develop your first project and how did you finance it?

It was always difficult. I hadn’t inherited any money. I didn’t have any when I started. But I was able to involve myself in projects. When I was starting out, I spent a lot of time trying to find sites. So my entry point was really through the land.

I was lucky enough to find a piece of land in London. It was a big, old school. I was able to get an option on it, which enabled me to secure it and get planning consent. Then I was able to sell that to another developer. And that made me a profit; at the time, I felt that I was hugely rich! I wasn’t, at least not in today’s terms, but the money was sufficient and enabled me to reinvest it and gradually use this capital to build a development business.

So you managed to secure a buyer’s option and did not have to do the financing for it?

Actually I had to sell it on before I could use the funds to finance the original project.

And did you have to get permission beforehand?

Yes, of course. The planning consent I obtained added value to the scheme. This included changing the designation of a redundant road and incorporating it into the development.

That’s really the skill of the architect; drawing out value…

We should recognize that an architect’s skill set has value. I think that one of the dangers of being an architect is that we tend to look at our projects only in terms of cost, we charge our fees based on that, we consider projects by reference to their budget cost. Developers on the contrary look at the value they create. If architects continue to only look at the costs, they will never be able to make that change to the value side for themselves.

For me, it’s absolutely essential that architects rework this mind-set because architecture does bring value. I thought it back when I started my career and I’m just as committed to that notion 40 years on.

Do you think that there’s a business knowledge gap in architecture education?

There is a huge knowledge gap. I think some architects do try to take an MBA, but property development is not quite the same because what makes them successful is understanding and managing development risks. Architects need to learn risk profiling of their projects.

As architects, we like to think that successful projects come because we have a great idea. But a project’s success is actually down to risk management by a practicing and experienced developer. Of course, they have to have a great idea as well. But successful projects from the developers standpoint are the consequence of successful risk management.

As architects, we like to think that successful projects come because we have a great idea. But a project’s success is actually down to risk management by a practicing and experienced developer.

What happens in development is that you manage risk in terms of acquiring sites, getting planning or regulatory consent, outlining an effective construction and procurement chain, and developing a strategy for marketing and sales. For a developer, it is a production process. You take on board the total cost of the project and become invested in its every aspect. You’re not just involved with the nice bits.

You’re involved with the difficulties, and problems with neighbors, land titles, drains, fire departments, contractors and delays in construction as well as in encouraging sales to take place at the time you want, getting the right price for your sales, satisfying your customers, and thinking about your customers when you’re conceiving a project to make sure it fits with their wishes.

I think that a supplementary course on these business and development topics could be very beneficial for architects because the skill that an architect brings to a project is currently a creative one. Having said that, the average architect already has the ability to view a site, come up with an idea or a vision for it, and be able to manifest it. They already have a partial understanding of the business of development. The need is therefore to add skills that they don’t already have. These skills as I have said are in the field of risk management.

What made you decide to start your firm Solidspace? Was there a particular moment that sealed the decision for you?

We’ve been in development for years but Solidspace was an idea that we had connected to the constraints of building apartments in the city. When we were looking to buy sites in the city, we tended to find small gap sites, largely leftover spaces. When you look at gap sites rather than the ‘usable’ more prominent sites on the waterfront, you may find that the views from the former are towards railways, or down alleys, or overlooked by other residual bits of the city. Some consider them the ugly ducklings of a city, but to me they’re very exciting because of their limitations. These difficult constraints make for fascinating and challenging projects.

The idea for Solidspace was to find an internal arrangement of an apartment space that entertained some sense of grandeur. Something where no matter how small the footprint was, when you came through the door you would say, “Wow, this is really beautiful.”

And that’s why I came up with this idea of working in split levels. You never have the space to do a full double level in these types of sites; a split level means you take away half the volume. It seemed to me that a split level would achieve a sensation of space and volume. That is what we’ve discovered in all the projects we’ve done. Everyone who walks into our spaces says, “This is fantastic. This is beautiful. This is spacious.” And they find it hard to believe how much floor space there actually is. For me, that is a way to turbocharge development.

How does your company lean on a skill set that is specific to architects rather than developers? You’re certainly adding value in terms of design; that’s not what an ordinary developer can accomplish.

That’s quite a complex question because most architects and contractors work on flat or horizontal planes, whereas this Solidspace approach involves working in section putting volume inside the buildings that we’re developing. To be truthful, it has taken us a long time from the first project we undertook to persuading a conservative market of the project’s added value. But after 13 years I can happily say that we have achieved success and we are now managing to sell our products at a premium.

One chapter in your book Shouldn’t we all be developers?, is titled “Land to development is what the canvas is to the artist.” How do you conduct market research, and how do you find locations for your projects?

To me, a project doesn’t really start until we have secured a piece of land. I can obviously still do theoretical designs but the reality is that I need the site to see. For instance, I want to know that it faces north, that it has a wall of 12 meters on one side and a wall of 5 meters on the other, that the sun comes in from one corner, that there’s a window I can’t obscure, and so on. It’s out of this matrix of constraints that I build the site, which I describe as a canvas.

And do you still make the preliminary sketches yourself?

Yes, always.

Do you also assign an architect to the project?

We always work with another architect. We believe that architecture has a good collaborative tradition. But it’s difficult because in a process of collaboration you have to accept that your authorship is not going to be there. Authorship is invariably retained by the architect who executes the project.

So I think that’s quite difficult to swallow, although I think collaboration and authorship are other topics of discussion. But, yes, we make the initial concept and do the basic designs. Then we bring in an architect who works with our a very figurative brief.

What major problems and opportunities do you think cities face in the 21^st century?

For me, the central problem is that the cities we face building upon in the 21^st century have all been established. These are cities that have important histories, some of which are thousands of years old. In that sense, everything has already been developed. So architects need to look at redeveloping former structures.

Take for example the many redundant industrial buildings due to changes in industry and economic growth. Those present opportunities for expansion in the city. To my mind, the most challenging and exciting aspects of future development will be going back over a city and discovering it all over again.

Many commentators have said that London is an open weave city; a cloth that has lots of gaps but the gaps are difficult to bridge. When you fly over London, you see all these houses with gardens and open spaces.

One solution for housing in London is to continue densifying its grain. If you read about the history of housing in London – and the same might also be said for housing in other cities – you will see that housing was made in a very simple way by people who weren’t great architects but rather good builders and contractors. The traditional terraced house followed a very prescriptive model that suited the average family. It was layered horizontally so the lower layers or the top layers were the servants’ quarters.

I think we need the same utility in the way we make our designs today. My feeling is that our designs are far too rigorously regulated and should be more generic with a simpler approval process for the buildings we create. In London, we have a rather desperate problem regarding affordable housing. I’m not convinced that taxing developers who are housing manufacturers to provide our social housing will have any kind of benefit. It’s just a political position with a mind-set to punish developers rather than the recognition that good cities need good supply of different tenure housing.

How would you advise fresh architecture graduates to get their first project off the ground?

I’m afraid it’s all down to hard work. My career has been about development, and it has been very rewarding, both emotionally and financially. But it’s still very hard work. I work very long days. That doesn’t matter to me because I love the work so much. But don’t think this is something that will happen quickly. It won’t make you get rich quick.

You cannot be an architect without having a client, and you can’t be a developer without having a site.

You need to start off very simply: with a site. You cannot be an architect without having a client, and you can’t be a developer without having a site. Those are my two golden rules. I think the reality is that once you have a site, or control of one, then you can start to pull your development together. And then it becomes quite straightforward. You might not be able to afford it, or finance it, but those issues pale in comparison to not having a site at all.

In terms of development and starting a business, what kind of person would you advise to use entrepreneurship?

You should always use entrepreneurship in architectural practice. I remember it was once quite fashionable to talk about business plans, and improving productivity and workflows. I think you just have to tell yourself every moment of every day: what value am I adding to this project?

Architecture and development are based around projects. It doesn’t matter whether you’re designing or building them. A project has a beginning, middle and end. I think that if architects – whether or not they are also developers – can demonstrate to clients that they understand the value they’re adding, and that they want a fee based on that value, then the developer will believe that the architect is on their side. To me, that is the future of entrepreneurial activity in architecture.

How do you see the future of the architectural profession? In which areas (outside of traditional practice) can you see major opportunities for up and coming architects?

I think the architecture profession is in danger of being completely eroded. Architects don’t really understand how to talk about value. Take the WAF – World Architecture Festival where we met. Architects have no measure for value. I didn’t see a single poster that showed the intrinsic or extrinsic value of a project. I didn’t see the cost of a project being created. And so if you say that construction costs are increasing and projects are getting bigger, that means that projects will bring in more money.

The developer will aim to make between 10% and 15% of the project’s margin. If you take that margin off the gross development value and look at the cost, you can see that the developer is responsible for an enormous array of costs: land, interest, finance, professional fees and construction.

Why don’t we understand the value that we’re creating?

The architect only represents a minute percentage of that. But the architect believes that they have a much greater influence on the direction of the project. The people who do the finance don’t have an influence on the direction of the project. Neither do the people who contract that project. It’s the architect who does.

So the question I would ask is: why don’t we understand the value that we’re creating? We must begin to understand where we’re adding value and recognize that what we can bring in entrepreneurship to demonstrate how we can do that. That has the added benefit of making us more competitive against other architects.

That’s great advice. Thank you very much for the interview!

About Roger Zogolovitch

Roger is the founder and creative director of Solidspace. He is a qualified architect with 40 years experience of design and development. He is known in the industry as a progressive thinker – always striving to create projects that delight, engage and push the boundaries of how architecture can enhance our cities.

Roger was the director of the Infrastructure and Development course at the London School of Economics, and lectures regularly on regeneration policy throughout the UK. He has served as president to the Architectural Association.

He has considerable experience in the process of design management of major regeneration projects, including the Greenwich Millennium Village Competition and the Hastings & Bexhill masterplan. Roger is often asked to give his expertise as a juror, he contributes regularly to the architectural press and teaches and lectures widely.

He is author of Shouldn’t we all be developers?, a book that has sparked a debate about the role that small and independent developers should play in building the new homes that are so desperately required.

He is the Honorary Surveyor to the Royal Academy of Arts and assisting them in making their masterplan for their enlarged campus in London for their 250^th year celebrations in 2018.

The post The Solidspace DNA: Roger Zogolovitch Shares His Insights on Being an Architect Developer appeared first on Archipreneur.

Greg’s career as an entrepreneur has gone in various directions. He is the co-owner of a camera equipment rental business in Portland, he created the brand and online shop antler&co selling bookshelves, hangers, and mobiles all made of (you guessed it) deer antlers, and his ironic product Campfire Cologne, a box of sticks that smell like “your best summer ever” is sold at various retailers worldwide, including Urban Outfitters.

When Greg came across The Jennings Hotel in Joseph, Oregon, it was love at first sight. He bought the century-old building in 2014 and launched a Kickstarter campaign to redevelop the building – then a mess of run-down apartments and offices – back to its former beauty as an eight-room hotel and artist residency.

Greg brought together seven artists and designers to each transform one of the hotel’s rooms. As an experienced builder and having built his own cabin, Greg did most of the remodeling work himself and transformed the eighth room.

Keep reading to learn from this self-proclaimed “dreamer-entrepreneur” and see images of the redeveloped Jennings Hotel.

Enjoy the interview!

Could you tell us a little about your background?

There’s no single thread, I just chase what excites me and see if I can make it work. I started my first business – a photo equipment rental shop – in 2006, then built a brand called antler&co, created campfire cologne, co-founded a holiday market (the Portland bazaar) and now work full time on the Jennings. Somewhere in there I built the cabin, too.

You raised money on Kickstarter to transform an over 100-year-old hotel in Joseph, Oregon, to its former beauty. Can you tell us a little about your process to get the crowdfunding campaign going?

It was a lot of work and it was very collaborative. I worked with my friend Leah Brown on the video and talked a ton to other folks I know who’d run kickstarter campaigns. No one had ever tried what I was doing, so it was a bit of a risk, but the results were wonderful and the feedback I got was all very positive. It took about 6-8 months of preparation and shooting.

Did you raise this money for the whole remodeling project, and was it enough?

The campaign was for general remodeling costs, but I knew from the get go it wouldn’t be anywhere close to what I’d need in total. I wanted to be realistic about my goal, which was $80,000 ­– I raised $107,070 – and exceeding it by 33% felt spectacular.

What was the biggest challenge in the redevelopment process?

The challenges continue, but in my case it has been labor. I’ve been doing most of the work myself out of necessity, but this winter I’ll be hiring a couple folks to help me get shit done and hopefully be more or less fully operational by late spring 2017.

The Jennings hotel is now open for business. How is it working out; are you happy with the result?

It’s working great. I’ve got an amazing innkeeper, and it’s been incredible meeting and connecting with the folks who’ve come to stay.

What is your next project? Are you planning another real estate project?

The $64,000 question. I’m working on starting a folk school in Joseph and I’m always looking at other potential hospitality projects, both in Oregon and elsewhere.

Do you have any advice for Archipreneurs who want to start and build their own business?

Dream big, be realistic, do good work, be nice, make cool shit, know your limits and sharpen your pencil.

About Greg Hennes

Greg Hennes is a wild haired, serial dreamer-entrepreneur. When he’s not swinging a hammer at The Jennings Hotel, you can find him running around in the mountains or trying to ride a moose at his cabin in Northern Minnesota.

The post How to Redevelop a 100-Year-Old Hotel through Crowdfunding – with Greg Hennes appeared first on Archipreneur.