This week’s interview is with Craig Applegath, Founding Principal of DIALOG’s Toronto Studio.

Craig is a passionate designer who believes in the power of built forms to meaningfully improve the wellbeing of communities and environments in which they play a part. Spending his childhood summers in the forests of Northern Ontario, Canada where he learned all about forest ecosystems, it came as no surprise when he later enrolled in biology.

But biology didn’t satisfy his additional passion for designing and making things, so he switched courses to architecture. His early passion for biology, however, remains visible in his work, many of which include sustainable practice, green design, integrated design, and urban resilience among others. The question that defines his work is: How can we shape our built environment so that it is more effectively and constructively integrated with the natural systems within which we live?

DIALOG was able to position itself in the Toronto market as a leader in integrated design and green design. The company grew from a one-person operation in 2003, when Craig founded the Toronto studio, to the one-hundred-and-fifty-person operation they are today.

Keep reading to learn about environmentally integrated design projects and Craig’s vision on how climate change, artificial intelligence and automation will change architecture for good.

Enjoy the interview!

Could you tell us about your background?

I trained as a biologist at the University of Toronto, with an interest in ecology and marine biology, and then as an architect at Dalhousie University, in Halifax. After graduation from my first professional degree in architecture I worked for a year in the studio of O.M. Ungers in Frankfurt, Germany, where I was introduced to the importance of the critical relationship between architecture and its urban context. It was that interest that led me enter the Master of Architecture in Urban Design program at Harvard’s GSD.

The next 5 years was spent qualifying as an architect and beginning my own architecture practice in Toronto in 1992. After leading my own practice for six years I joined Dunlop Architects as a partner in 1998 to focus on institutional projects and lead the development of their green design efforts. In 2003, when Dunlop was purchased by Stantec I didn’t relish the idea of being a corporate architect so I left to found the Toronto Studio of DIALOG, lead the firm’s green design strategy, and be part of DIALOG’s institutional design team.

Since joining DIALOG, the Toronto Studio has grown from myself to an integrated team of 150 architects, planners, interior designers and engineers. My primary role now is to lead the Higher Education design team, coordinate the efforts of our computational design group, and continue to push the envelope of green design. The project that I have most recently completed is the Bill Fisch Forest Stewardship Education Centre – a facility designed to be a LEED Platinum and Seven Petal Living Building Challenge facility – the greenest building in Canada.

You started training as a biologist. Is this were your awareness for the environment came from?

Since as far back as I can remember as a kid I was passionate about making and designing things, and fascinated by the natural world. I was extremely lucky because my uncle was a science teacher, and I spent a lot of my summers as a kid tromping around Northern Ontario forests with him and his daughters learning all about forest ecosystems and the role that various plants and animals played in those ecosystems.

The thing I remember most about those outings was how my uncle refused to simply explain things to us, but instead encouraged us to figure them out for ourselves by developing hypotheses and then proving them or not. He provided us with just enough clues to build a hypothesis so that we ourselves could figure it out.

I think this early experience with the scientific method instilled both a sense of wonder about the natural world, as well as a deep love and respect for the scientific method. I also had an amazing biology teacher in high school who continued to inspire my love of all things biological. Upon graduating from high school I entered the science and biology program at the University of Toronto with the intention of pursuing a career as a biologist and academic.

What changed your mind and made you follow a career in architecture?

Although I had started university with the intention of becoming a biologist, I found that as a study, biology didn’t satisfy my other passion for designing and making things. Also, I came to realize that what was really starting to fascinate me was the intersection our built environment and natural systems, and how we could shape our built environment to be more effectively and constructively integrated with those systems. So the more I explored opportunities to do this, the more I was drawn to architecture.

So now, years later, I still find myself still as interested in biology as I do in architecture and urban design, and I am finding that I am able to more and more integrate all three passions in my work.

When did you found DIALOG’s Toronto Studio and how has the studio evolved since then?

I started DIALOG’s Toronto Studio in the fall of 2003. DIALOG (then Cohos Evamy) was well known in Alberta, but new to Toronto. A classmate from the Harvard GSD, the late Tom Sutherland, and I had had parallel careers for many years and when I left Dunlop Architects we agreed that I should start a Toronto Studio for DIALOG. It was really the absolute best of both worlds. On the one hand, it was a start-up, with all the excitement and fun of a start-up. On the other hand, DIALOG’s Alberta studios provided significant knowledge and resources to backstop the Toronto Studio in our first couple of years.

As it turned out, we were very quickly able to position ourselves in the Toronto market as a leader in integrated design and green design, and to win some key projects that really started our growth, allowing us to grow from a one-person operation in 2003 to the one-hundred-and-fifty-person operation we are today. We now have a truly integrated studio of planners, architects, interior designers, and structural, mechanical and electrical engineers.

This integration is critically important because not only does it allow us to do very green design, it provides for a highly collaborative and creative environment to design in. It is also turning out to be very important to our ability to leverage the use of computational design (also called parametric design). The integration of architecture and engineering disciplines significantly enhances our studio’s ability to integrate all aspects of the building design into the computational design process.

So for example, a parametric exploration of a building façade design can be wholly integrated with the design of the building structural system. In the time that it used to take us to do three options, we can now do two hundred. The use of computational design is also serving as a launching pad for the exploration of cognitive computing and AI in the design and projection process, as well as more effectively tying our design process into the future realities of the construction and building operation processes.

I would argue that cognitive computing is the next space race for our profession. I think it will change just about everything we do.

Could you give as an example of one of your office’s environmentally integrated design project? What was the biggest challenge?

Probably the best example of an environmentally integrated project is the Bill Fisch Forest Stewardship Education Centre. It is 4000 sf education centre designed to be both LEED Platinum and achieve all seven petals of the Living Building Challenge. It was designed as a Net-zero water and Net-zero energy building.

The biggest challenge on this project was to achieve the requirements of the Living Building Challenge Materials Petal, Red List. Many of the materials and product manufacturers and suppliers we researched were unwilling to provide us with the information we needed to make a determination of whether their material or product complied with the Red List requirements. However, it was such a compelling project to work on that these kinds of problems could be taken in stride.

How do you define urban resilience? And how does it define your work?

I became interested in urban resilience some years ago when our studio started to discuss the challenges that our cities would face as climate change started to bite. In essence, planning for urban resilience asks the question: how can we plan and design cities and buildings in ways that will allow them to rebound from the shocks and stresses that will be associated with the climate change impacts that will be increasing in frequency and intensity over the next century?

These explorations were actually the starting point for us to expand our study into the broader question of how we can plan our cities, and the regions they are part of, to be environmentally symbiotic rather than pathologically parasitic. It’s clear that we have a lot of work to do to both reduce our harm and prepare for the impacts of climate change.

You created the Symbiotic Cities Network in 2012. Could you tell us about the network’s mission?

The creation of Symbiotic Cities Network was an opportunity to bring together like-minded professionals – planners, architects, engineers – to explore how we can shift from being pathologically parasitic and environmentally destructive species, to being mutualistically symbiotic and regenerative species. Although this might at first hearing sound hopelessly naïve and optimistic, there are actually a number of important things we can do to move in this direction.

Over the past couple of years we have boiled it down to three overarching and interconnected strategies:

First, we need to radically reduce the harm our species is causing to the biosphere. At the moment we are consuming somewhere in the order 1.7 planets worth of ecosystem services per year (obviously, the world only produces 1 per year so this is obviously not sustainable). This means we are now chewing into our natural capital. We are also pumping millions of tonnes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, and have reached over 400 ppms of CO2 in our atmosphere (350 ppms is considered the highest “sustainable” concentration).

To significantly reduce the harm we are causing we will have to economically internalize the costs of using our natural capital, and move toward a much more circular economy, and radically reduce our CO2 emissions. The good news is that we have the technology to do this. The only question is whether we can deploy it soon enough to be effective.

Second, we will have to learn how to adapt our cities and communities to the mounting impacts of climate change, including rising sea levels, increased frequency and intensity of severe weather events, as well as stress that a changing climate will cause existing ecosystems. This is where resilience comes in.

Third, we will have to invest significant resources to repair and regenerate the damage we have already done to the biosphere. We will be adding between one and two billion people to the planet over the next 25 years, so this will be particularly challenging. This is where regenerative design is important.

What’s your opinion on the architectural education? Are the architects to be prepared to work with complex challenges like the climate change, population growth and climate-induced migrations that our cities are facing nowadays?

It is probably impossible for any faculty of architecture to adequately prepare students for the complexity of challenges that they will face young architects.

Climate change, population growth, in-migrations of climate and political refugees are all big picture challenges. New building technologies, new design technologies, artificial intelligence, and cognitive computing, and the increasing commodification of architecture are additional emerging professional challenges.

I think that many faculties of architecture in North America are struggling to maintain their currency and relevance in this rapidly changing environment. There is no silver-bullet fix, but I think that both the profession and academia will have to find more effective ways to cross pollenate and collaborate in developing effective learning strategies for both educating and training future architects if they are to be successful.

DIALOG is quite a big partnership; it has four studios in Canada and one in the USA. What are the challenges to work in such a large-scale office structure?

Although DIALOG has over 500 people working across 4 studios in Canada, and one new studio in the USA, it doesn’t feel that big – and was designed that way. We are not a hierarchical organization, but rather a networked organization. There are 50 principals and 75 associates, and work is team-based and very collaborative. Because we are an integrated planning, architecture, interior design, structural, mechanical and electrical firm collaboration and design thinking are powerful cultural drivers in the firm.

I suspect that new interns that have worked in very hierarchical, top-down firms must wonder when they arrive at DIALOG just who is running the place. It takes a while for them to figure out that as a networked organization there is actually no one ‘running’ the firm, but rather, there are people entrusted with carrying through both the studio and firm level strategy that has been developed by the principals consensually.

The other important ingredient for success in DIALOG is expertise, leadership, and entrepreneurialism. Principals are only as successful as their ability to provide the kind of expertise and experience necessary to win good projects and clients.

What is your strategy to find new customers?

Two simple words: expertise and service. Our clients hire us because of the expertise we can offer them, and for our commitment to excellent client service. New business comes from either referrals, or from clients seeing us speaking at conferences, expert roundtables, or reading about us in professional journals.

The best advice I have ever seen on how to win new business was written by David Maister in his book, Managing the Professional Service Firm. As he points out, people want to hire experts who care about them, and experts are people who do research, write about it, and speak about it.

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

When I first started my own practice I thought everyone wanted to run their own practice. It turns out not. Most people just want to work in a great practice run by someone else. But for those who are real archipreneurs – and you know who you are – I will tell you that there is nothing so thrilling and fun as starting your own business; and nothing so scary and anxiety producing as starting your own business! They are the flip side of the same coin. But in terms of general advice for people starting their own practice or business here are a few lessons learned:

1. Design Your Life:

Before starting your own business, make sure that starting a business is the right thing for you, and figure out what kind of business you want to be in. One of the best ways to do this is through something you are probably pretty good at already: design thinking.

However, to really see design thinking very effectively applied to designing your career, reading Bill Burnett and Dave Evans’ book Designing Your Life, is one of the first things you should do. (I am actually using it right now to design the next decade of my career.) One of the things that they very effectively show you how to do is ask the right questions so you can solve the right problems.

The last thing you want to do is start a business that is smart as a business idea, but does not succeed in helping you develop the career that will be most fulfilling to you, and that you will be most successful in.

2. Business 101:

Most architecture schools do not provide good training in the business aspects of the profession of architecture. So before you quit your day-job, it’s worth taking a community college or continuing ed course at your local college or university on how to start and run a small business. It will teach you the basics of sales, marketing, book keeping, and managing people.

I would also recommend taking a course in negotiation. Architects, for some reason, are typically terrible negotiators, especially in negotiations for fair compensation for their services!

3. Find a Blue Ocean:

This is a reference to W. Chan Kim and Renee Mauborgne’s book Blue Ocean Strategy that suggests that entrepreneurs look for business opportunities in uncontested waters – blue oceans – rather than competitive, bloody waters – red oceans. This is good advice if you can find your own blue ocean.

One thing is for sure, in North America and Europe, architecture is a mature market with limited opportunity for new traditional practices. If you are a traditional practice, you will be up against dozens, often hundreds of competitors who will have much deeper portfolios than your new business will have.

So you will need to offer something that really differentiates you from your competitors. Maybe you will be the new expert in computational design? Maybe you can team up with an emerging builder to become a niche design-build practice? Maybe you will be a developer-architect? Whatever you do, you need to develop a secret sauce that your competitors will find difficult or impossible to copy.

When I started my own practice just as the Internet was emerging, I positioned myself as a “virtual architect” and pulled together consultants form all over North America to do projects – mostly buddies from grad school. But it sounded cool, and got me speaking gigs at conferences, and conferred a degree of uniqueness on my practice that got me noticed.

4. Build and Support Your Network:

I have not met any successful entrepreneurs who do not have a deep network. Networks are for support; networks are for leads; networks are for advice; networks are for collaboration. Networks are the important bonds that allow you to see and realize potential opportunities.

One of the best guides to developing your network is Harvey Mackay’s book, Dig Your Well Before Your Thirsty. One of the most important lessons in Mackay’s book is that networks are not to be milked, but rather supported. You build a network of people whom you will try to support, and care about, and they will in turn do the same for you.

I can’t say enough about how important building a good network is.

Without a good network success will be virtually impossible.

5. Take Care of Yourself:

You will be pulled in a thousand directions at the studio, and you will also have a private life with its own demands and stresses. So you will need to learn how to take care of yourself and manage your energy and manage your physical and mental health. There are two very important things you should be doing, even when things are crazy busy – in fact especially when things are crazy busy.

First, you should set aside an hour at least three to four times per week for exercise – both cardio and resistance training. Second, learn how to meditate and do so each day. If you are new to meditation try the Headspace App on your iPhone or Android. I have talked with a number of entrepreneurs who say they could not function without exercise and meditation, and most accounts by successful entrepreneurs I have read have said the same.

6. Make a Difference:

I think to be successful you need to lead a meaningful life – that is, a life that provides you with a powerful and meaningful reason d’etre for what you do. As part of designing your life (above) you will be thinking a lot about this. You don’t want to get to being late middle aged and wonder what the hell you have done with your life! Life is short and needs to be lived with passion and intent.

7. Read, Read, Read:

I think that one of the most important ingredients for success is to be constantly at the intersections of culture, technology, and business, and to do so you will need to be constantly reading – reading books, blogs (like Archipreneur), newspapers, and journals of all sorts.

You need to read both broadly and deeply. You need to understand the bigger world around you; but you also need to maintain your expertise in whatever your specialty niche is (and you will want to have at least a couple of specialty niches!).

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 developers and architects?

The world is changing so fast I am not sure what to say here, except that the chances of getting it right are highly unlikely. Having said that, there are a number of trends that smart archipreneurs should keep theirs eyes on.

The first is the transition from green design to resilient design. I’m not sure how fast this will happen, but once Miami, NYC, Boston and Seattle all start flooding on a regular basis because of climate change, resilient design will be much more of an opportunity.

The vertical integration of design, construction, and building operations is another thing that is coming, being driven by the transformation of everything into digital information – BIM is the future. Parametric design and BIM will smooth the way for this to be ever more a reality.

Prefabrication, like the work SHOP does will also be a possible blue ocean for archipreneurs.

All the above lead to the conclusion that

to be successful young architects will have to be capable of swimming in the worlds of design, information technology, business, and fabrication/construction.

The world of digital information is turning us into craftspersons once again – but craftspersons on amphetamines!

About Craig Applegath

Craig Applegath is the founding principal of DIALOG’s Toronto Studio, and a passionate designer who believes in the power of built form to meaningfully improve the wellbeing of communities and the environment they are part of. Since graduating from the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University with a Master of Architecture in Urban Design Craig has focused his energies on leading innovative planning and design projects that address the complex challenges facing our communities, as well as on his advocacy of sustainable building design and urban regeneration and symbiosis.

Craig’s area of practice includes the master planning and design of institutional projects, including cultural and museum, post secondary education, and healthcare facilities. In addition to his professional practice responsibilities, Craig speaks about his research and design explorations at conferences and workshops internationally. This has included recent presentations at conferences in Prague, Munich and Beijing.

Craig was a founding Board Member of Sustainable Buildings Canada, and a Past President of the Ontario Association of Architects. Craig has lectured or taught at Harvard, the University of Toronto, the University of Waterloo, as well as at many professional and sector related conferences around the world. In 2001 Craig was made a Fellow of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada for his contributions to the profession.

The post Going Green: Advice on Integrated Design, Life and Business with Craig Applegath appeared first on Archipreneur.

Computer graphics have come a long way since Ivan Sutherland’s Sketchpad. Sutherland’s vision of entire environments being controlled and generated by computers has become more of a reality in the last decade. Gadgets such as head-mounted displays, data gloves, virtual reality controllers, and motion trackers are all promising to become as commonly used as smartphones. While skeptics question the true groundbreaking potential of VR, the adoption rate of this new technology seems to be on the rise.

Analyst firm Gartner has been keeping a close eye on emerging technologies for over 20 years. Their annual Hype Cycle research method visualizes the dynamics whereby new technologies emerge and develop. The chart predicts the evolution of emerging technologies in the IT and communication industries, separating the hype from industry drivers that actually evaluate their maturity, as well as commercial and business applicability.

The Hype Cycle usually includes five key phases of a technology’s life cycle:

• The first, known as the Innovation Trigger, marks the kickoff of a technology breakthrough followed by hype generated by the mass media. At this time, no significant usable products or commercial viability can be seen.
• The second stage, the Peak of Inflated Expectations, relates to early success stories and publicity. At this point, the curve starts to decline with the beginning of negative press coverage.
• In the third phase, the Trough of Disillusionment, interest in the initial breakthrough wanes as experiments and implementations fail.
• When the second and third generation products are launched and combined with a set of offered services, the technology reaches the Slope of Enlightenment. This is the stage in which new practices start developing pilots before they reach a high-growth adoption phase.
• When/if the technology reaches the Plateau of Productivity, mainstream adoption will take off; this is also the time when investments pay off.

Gartner’s findings built on data collected up until 2015 show that virtual reality has reached the Slope of Enlightenment, together with autonomous field vehicles and enterprise 3D printing. The Hype Cycle chart shows that it’s probably going to take another 5 to 10 years for virtual reality to go mainstream. In the short term, the development of VR is expected to continue and, according to tech experts, will be mostly driven by the gaming industry.

When it comes to architecture, five years ago it was easy to dismiss VR as another passing fad, but now it seems that VR may be here to stay. Though mainstream architecture firms are not known for their readiness to invest in new technologies, VR seems to be gathering momentum. Firms are starting to use VR both internally, as part of their design processes, as well as externally, in communication with clients.

CGarchitect’s Jeff Mottle claims that the future of the technology in architecture and ArchViz lies in its potential to provide scale and presence: “Two things that also neatly sum up what we feel when we experience architecture in the real world. This ability to experience a space we can’t visit, or one that does not yet exist, is the basis of nearly everything professionals in the field of architectural visualization do on a daily basis, so really VR is quite complementary and takes what we do to another level.”

One of the most important questions to ask when it comes to the future of VR is whether its evolution will be driven by pursuits for visual fidelity (image quality) or commercialization. Mottle believes that the technology is likely to develop in both directions, and stresses interactivity as its most important aspect for adding value. In the foreseeable future, the consumer space will play a crucial role in the evolution of the tool, but the high price tag seems the largest obstacle in a more widespread use of VR in architecture offices.

A recent survey conducted by CGarchitect, which focused on the architectural visualization industry, shows a rising adoption of VR in the last year. Around 69% of surveyed professionals are already using VR/AR/MR in their workflow or are planning to use it in the next two years. Though the survey included a relatively small number of respondents, its results provide a useful cross section of the industry and show an enthusiasm with which architects are welcoming VR.

Seattle-based NBBJ is one of the architecture firms that has had the most success in keeping step with technology. NBBJ developed their self-contained venture Visual Vocal to build a VR platform that was integrated into the firm’s design process. By using VR, NBBJ hopes to speed up collaboration and communication between designers and allow them to make decisions based on fast client feedback. The new productivity tool will allow architects to build VR versions of 3D models that can be explored on a smartphone.

Together with mobile and cloud-based solutions, VR is expected to replace conventional communication such as email. The team, led by John San Giovanni and Sean House, raised $500,000 for Visual Vocal, which will not only be developed as a solution for architecture, but for other industries as well. Future plans for the platform includes creating solutions for the aerospace industry, product design, and biotech.

For its new corporate headquarters in California, computer chip maker NVIDIA demonstrated VR’s potential on a completed building powered by NVIDIA products. The VR headsets allowed Gensler designers to navigate structural models and notice design flaws that might otherwise be missed in 2D environments. They also provided a more realistic view of how much light would enter the interior, and bounce off reflective surfaces or be absorbed.

While we’re waiting to see if VR assumes a more significant role in the architectural design process, those focused on creating architecture-related products might consider using VR to boost their marketing efforts. Global brands are already using VR to attract new customers. According to a new survey conducted by Greenlight Insights | Market Insights for Virtual & Augmented Reality, people are more likely to buy a product from a brand that uses VR, as this makes them appear more forward-thinking. The survey shows that 53% of responders are more likely to purchase products from brands that use VR than those that still haven’t adopted the technology.

***

Do you think virtual reality has a future in architecture? How will it affect the way we design buildings and communicate with clients?

The post Will Virtual Reality Redefine the Way Architects Work? appeared first on Archipreneur.

The business world is changing, and so is the world of architecture. The ‘space as a service’ concept and digital technologies are affecting the architect’s profession. Unfortunately, architecture graduates are coming to learn about these changes somewhat late in the game, and part of the problem lies in the plodding, defunct methodologies that are taught in architectural schools.

The LSA, founded by Will Hunter in 2013 (read our interview with him), however, is proposing a different type of educational enterprise. The LSA wants to make an education in architecture more affordable, emphasizing ‘real world practice’ and better preparing talented graduates for tackling the vast changes that the architectural profession is currently undergoing.

The future for architects is one of the school’s most pressing concerns. In a panel discussion at the Design Museum last month, the LSA invited leading thinkers Alastair Parvin and Daniel Susskind to debate the contemporary state of the profession.

Alastair Parvin is a strategic designer at 00 London and a co-founder of WikiHouse Foundation. We have previously written about WikiHouse, where we outlined Alastair’s simple but provocative idea: what if, instead of architects creating buildings for those who can afford to commission them, regular citizens could design and build their own houses? This concept is at the heart of WikiHouse, an open source construction kit that means just about anyone can build a house, anywhere, anytime.

Daniel Susskind is co-author with Richard Susskind of The Future of the Professions, and is a lecturer in Economics at Balliol College, Oxford. Previously, he worked for the British government in the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit, as well as in the Policy Unit in 10 Downing Street and as a Senior Policy Adviser in the Cabinet Office.

Alastair and Daniel – who are at the forefront of critical enquiry into the role of the architect – both presented their visions for how the profession must evolve in a panel discussion with LSA founder Will Hunter and Farshid Moussavi, founder of Farshid Moussavi Architecture and Professor in Practice of Architecture at Harvard University Graduate School of Design.

See for yourself:

***

We presented our own vision for the 5 emerging trends that will shape the future of architecture in a recent article. What do you think the future for architects will look like?

The post Editor’s Pick: Daniel Susskind and Alastair Parvin Debate the Future for Architects appeared first on Archipreneur.

Discourse concerning automation and artificial intelligence has really come into the limelight in the last few decades, and we have seen both optimistic predictions and dystopian visions of the future. Are machines taking our jobs away, or are they helping us move away from menial tasks and pursue more creative endeavors? Do architects have any reason to panic?

Technology-driven development is undeniably changing job markets across the world. Taxi drivers, clerks and bookkeepers, among other professions, are likely to completely disappear in a matter of decades. Apps and robots are replacing repetitive activities: drones can survey crops and deliver packages, and self-driving cars are expected to dominate city streets within our lifetime.

Computers are reaching a level of sophistication that allows them not only to perform mechanical, repetitive tasks but also operate on a higher cognitive level. While optimists see this change as an opportunity for economic growth and innovation, others are voicing their concerns over its social implications, such as economic inequality and unemployment.

According to a research conducted by the World Economic Forum, over 5 million jobs will be lost to automation by 2020, affecting mostly white-collar workers in administrative and office jobs.

Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A. Osborne from Oxford University, authors of The future of Employment, have created a table that ranks professions by probability of computerization, according to which people working in administrative support, factories, retail and service industries are most likely to be replaced by computers.

In the AEC industry, model makers, technicians, drafters and urban planners are at a much greater risk of disappearing compared to architects, interior designers and civil engineers. Frey and Osborne give architects a 1.8% chance of being automated, compared to a 93.5% chance for accountants, a 96.3% chance for restaurant cooks, and 86.4% for real estate agents.

A new McKinsey report suggests a somewhat different impact of automation on job prospects. Instead of thinking of automation in terms of it eliminating entire occupations, the report suggests that many jobs will be redefined rather than eliminated—at least in the short term.

During the 1950s, before architecture and engineering firms shifted from having shared computers to individual machines, companies transitioned from mainframes to ‘minicomputers’. Due to steep prices, these machines had to be operated by specially trained workers. Designers would bring their work to the CAD Department and wait for hours to receive plotted outputs, which would then be turned in for revision before being returned to the designers.

This back-and-forth seems cumbersome by today’s standards but back in the day this new system produced work that had previously taken 10 or 12 people to complete. It also eliminated and introduced job profiles through a process that still continues to evolve.

In the last 15 years, employment for architects has increased by 25%, with significant differences between specific job profiles. Computerization has generated some new occupations within the field of architecture, in particular the mainstream profession.

While employment opportunities have diminished for architectural drafters, other profiles such as BIM specialists, digital making technologists and communication managers are experiencing growth. The chances of the architectural profession disappearing any time soon are slim, but long-term predictions imply that the role will most likely be redefined.

Another important question is: to what extent can machines substitute higher cognitive processes required in designing a building?

California-based company Aditazz uses methods derived from the semiconductor industry to create algorithms that simulate hundreds of viable design options for state-of-the-art healthcare facilities, completely eliminating the need for countless drafts and revisions. They developed an automated tool that offers the possibility of exploring a number of designs and operating options in a fraction of the time it takes traditional methods, allowing for intelligent trade-offs based on real data.

Furthermore, these can be translated into instructions for a robotic system that casts construction components. Aditazz conducts operational simulations that show performance metrics, bottlenecks of efficiency, utilization of key resources, patient wait time, etc.

Amazon and Google are also working on creating automated design solutions. Engineers at Google developed a platform with online planning applications that standardize and automate design and construction processes, promising to save up to 50% in construction costs, and cut project development time by up to 60%. The project, initiated in the Google X laboratories, was later rebranded as Flux.

Are these developments a threat to architects? Not likely. Both Aditazz’s and Flux’s automation tools are solutions based on machine-man combinations. Technology is nowhere near supplanting architects. It can address most of the quantitative aspects of architecture, even some of its qualitative characteristics, but when it comes to dealing with context, taste, aesthetics and negotiation, computers lack the higher levels of adaptability and superior cognitive skills needed.

***

Architects don’t need to worry about losing their jobs or becoming obsolete, at least not in the short term. Even in the long term, it seems that technology actually redistributes labor from areas susceptible to automation into other sectors, eliminating certain types of jobs and boosting others.

Economists at the consultancy Deloitte released a study showing that, in the last 140 years, technology has actually created more jobs than it has destroyed in England and Wales. This cycle of eliminating and creating jobs can be painful, but it will hopefully occur at a slow enough pace that will allow workers to adapt and grow.

The post Algorithm vs. Architect: Will Machines Design the Cities of the Future? appeared first on Archipreneur.

Over the last two decades, the construction industry has been subject to dramatic changes, paving the way for a future in which traditional spatial concepts are longer valid. Now, compost is being used for building materials, crowdfunding and collaborative design have become increasingly popular approaches to architectural projects, there is a focus on the importance of green infrastructure and energy efficiency, and the line between private and public space is becoming increasingly blurred. These new approaches are foreshadowing the ways in which our urban environment will evolve over the next few decades. Here’s a rundown of the new trends that have already started to affect the way we build:

#1 – No More ‘Public vs. Private’ Space

An increasing number of buildings not only address the needs of its users by function but also aim to incorporate public and commercial amenities. Architects are becoming aware of the need for creating inclusive spaces that share the same palpable values as their neighborhoods and the general public.

With the emergence of new technologies, it has become possible to design large developments as micro-cities that offer a range of diverse services (think Google, Facebook and Linkedin headquarters). Private buildings often include recycling and composting facilities and other public domain functions.

Excess energy that has been generated by private residences, offices and other buildings is now often fed into the public power grid. As Adriana Seserin writes in her article “The Publicly Private And The Privately Public”, “The dichotomy of public vs. private is limping in its ability to describe the complexity of today’s society.”

#2 – Design Will Become More Collaborative

Architecture as we know it is likely to disappear and, in the future, the role of architects may be very different to how we recognize it today. Specialists in, for example, environmental science and social anthropology will become active team members in design studios, working on complex projects that require knowledge in different fields.

It is reasonable to expect that the emergence of specialists from various fields will eliminate many of the job profiles currently existing in the construction industry. “Small ‘design-led’ practices will face increasingly stiff competition from multidisciplinary giants and must become more business savvy in order to survive in the future,” claims a 2011 RIBA report.

The rule of starchitects is likely to come to an end, as both private and public clients are starting to expect much more than iconic spaces and structures. Interaction, inclusiveness, easy maintenance and energy efficiency are getting priority over extravagance for extravagance’s sake.

#3 – Internet of Things Becomes Internet of Spaces

The “sharing economy” (or, “collaborative consumption”) has had the greatest impact on the housing and real estate market. Peer-to-peer online platforms like AirBnB, as well as shared workspaces and driverless cars are paving the way towards a future in which infrastructure is the dominant aspect of the built environment.

Regarding residential architecture, the concepts of interconnectivity and smart design will redefine the way living spaces are created. Transformable spaces that adapt to the homeowner’s age, economic status and personal preference are well on their way to becoming mainstream.

#4 – Buildings Will Be Funded by the Many

The concept of  is radically changing the way projects are financed. Since it was first introduced, Kickstarter has funneled more than $66 million into a varied number of projects, from food through movies to technology. Architectural projects, including Lowline and the BD Bacata Tower, have also made use of crowdfunding to advance their plans.

Certain areas of the construction industry – standardized designs and prototype housing, chain stores and retail office buildings, and schools – could see more competitive bidding in getting their plans funded, while more complex structures requiring unique designs such as stadiums, power plants, bridges, museums and medical buildings are less likely to be built through an open-bid approach.

#5 – Going Tall, Small and Temporary

Breaking the pattern of the urban sprawl we’ve seen over the last century, the new trend of building super-tall structures will make cities grow upwards rather than outwards. These tall buildings combine living, playing, shopping and working in one area and are made possible thanks to the advances in material technology, like electronic glass panels. As developments in technology change the size of our gadgets, so too may these developments also affect the size of our living spaces.

This change would be made through modular design, which has increasingly been used in different building typologies. Additionally, many architects are now recognizing that the shorter a building’s lifespan is, the more sustainable it can be. Therefore, ‘prefab’ houses that are easily replaced could be the future of architecture.

***

The recent phenomenon of technology altering the physical world and permeating every aspect of our daily lives is symptomatic of a larger social and cultural shift. The way buildings are financed, designed, built, used and removed continuously changes architectural discourse and introduces an entirely new vocabulary into the construction industry. We are excited to see how it will all pan out in the coming years.

What do you think the future of architecture will look like?

The post 5 Emerging Trends That Will Shape the Future of Architecture appeared first on Archipreneur.