Nuances of an Efficient Practice vs. Employee Satisfaction
What is Efficiency?
Efficiency = Output/Input
Efficiency refers to achieving maximum productivity with minimum effort. In the context of design, this means achieving maximum creative output with minimum time and effort. Efficiency can be achieved in both the process of designing and the resulting product, such as furniture or space planning. Different offices have different approaches to efficiency, with some focusing on one aspect at the expense of the other.
The Efficient Process and Ways to achieve it:
A very interesting method devised by Matharoo associates pushes employees to work after hours. Whenever a new project arrives in the studio, the team gathers to discuss the brief around 4 pm, and the task is to come up with bold and radical conceptual ideas by the next morning. All employees right from the principal architect to the interns work on the same design brief after office hours, at their homes, and at their desired times and workplace. The next day, an idea is chosen after looking at all the proposals, regardless of who has brought up the idea. This allows each employee, regardless of position in the studio, to participate in the design process, if he wishes to, as the process is not mandatory for all.
Along with this, he has a timekeeping system in place wherein the employees keep track of the time taken to finish changes in a drawing. This amount of time becomes the benchmark or record to be broken next time if a similar type of work is in hand. Reducing the amount of time versus the number of changes in a drawing simply shows how the employee is progressing in terms of speed and accuracy. These systems allow Matharoo associates to work very efficiently, and produce good work simultaneously.
On the other hand, looking at the ideas of efficiency for Groundwork architecture, the focus is more on the number of projects vs time. Very clear systems of hierarchy and the work done at each level is set.
The most prominent system of all is a clear division of stages of design i.e. Conceptual Design, Schematic Design, and Construction Drawings. The conceptual design comes from the principal architect and the project architect. Which is then given to a senior architect to make a schematic drawing set. This schematic stage is approved by the clients and the production of working drawings starts.
In this process, the roles of the senior architects, junior architects and interns are fixed. This makes them experts at what they do, but at the same time makes them uninterested by making them do the same things again and again. For the design development and making of the construction drawings, the employees are given the drawings of previous projects done by the office as a reference for the design language, which makes the design process faster.
Groundwork focuses more on the details, and resolution of each and every part of the building, and making drawings for each and every corner and the tiniest detail possible. Sometimes this leads to employees drawing some things that are already built on-site, and the idea is to complete the drawing set. This is one aspect where groundwork’s focus on efficiency is diluted and more importance is given to the completion of the set of drawings.
Here, one can see that the idea of an efficient process can be interpreted in two drastically different ways. On one hand, Matharoo does not clearly say that the process needs to be efficient but the smaller aspects introduced in the office culture make the office efficient in designing. While groundwork architecture has very strong systems in place which lead to the streamlining of the design process and making it efficient.
Employee Satisfaction:
The idea of employee satisfaction comes from the agendas of better employee retention and better quality output by the employees in a short amount of time, which translates to an efficient process of design. Understanding the desires of employees and incorporating them in a way which does not hinder the smooth functioning of the office is a critical system to develop in an office.
There are many ways in which employee satisfaction is catered to in different offices, AndBlack studio takes their employees on yearly tours, while groundwork architecture has recently started events like GA Talks, and they also take employees to their completed projects as site visits.
Matharoo associates have smaller events in place throughout the year that help employees come out of their daily routines and enjoy for a bit every once in a while. They have pool days when every employee has to compulsorily enter the pool or he has to leave the office. They have movie screenings, outings, and many other activities. A food menu is designed every year and the lunch and snacks are decided. New interns have to cook a meal for the entire studio at least once, and if the employee is staying back after hours, the dinner is on the studio, whatever he wishes to eat! These types of activities are designed to encourage employee satisfaction and achieve work-life balance.
Here, one can see that while encouraging events and activities, Matharoo also pushes his employees to be more efficient, by keeping checks as mentioned above, but along with that, he also encourages activities like these. A healthy combination of both leads to more productivity as well as a good work-life balance for the employees. On the other hand, groundwork architectures systems for efficiency work better than Matharoo associates in many ways, but the monotonous work lack of involvement in larger design ideas for most of the employees might lead to less employee satisfaction sometimes. And looking at every other office the idea of efficient systems is given priority, above employee satisfaction to some extent, whereas one should thrive towards employee satisfaction in ways which lead to better productivity in employees.
Architectural Practice: The System-Output Relationship
In Architecture, the final output of a project is a manifestation of the design thinking as well as the system and ideology of the practice. The system-output relationship is an essential aspect of any architectural firm, as it defines the processes and procedures that drive the delivery of successful projects. Having visited several firms, I noticed that each firm focussed on different aspects of the practice and derived its systems from it. A well-developed design system ensures that projects are delivered with a consistent design approach, while a well-developed documentation system ensures that all project information is properly recorded and maintained. A well-developed communication system ensures that the design is efficiently communicated to the client, the design team as well as the contractor. Based on observations of the architectural firms in Ahmedabad, some common trends were identified:
Having a Design Language
One such observation was that single proprietorship firms like HCP, Jagrut & Partners, Groundwork, and Matharoo Associates have a specific language or style, irrespective of the scale of the practice. On the contrary, younger firms like Vaishnavi Shukl and ButterConcepts didn't have a specific language or style, and it was felt that it may evolve over time. The firms that retained the sense of a common language had a fixed design process and system of assigning design work to familiar people that ensured that larger ideas of the firm are maintaining throughout the process. Younger firms, lacking an established design language or style, may still be exploring different approaches to design. This exploration may lead to a less specific language or style, as the firm is still in the process of developing its identity. However, as the firm gains more experience and defines its approach to design, a more specific language or style may emerge.
It was also observed that having a common design style was necessary for gaining recognition, as it made it easier for people to associate a particular project with a particular firm. This is another factor, conscious or subconscious, that made different projects belong to a particular firm. The language need not be just the aesthetics, it could also be, for example, projects addressing a larger concern of sustainability, as in the case of Kakani Associates, or projects made to enrich the lives of people and work with the government, as in the case of Compartment S4.
Overall, the system of having/ not having a design language or style is influenced by a variety of factors, including the size of the firm, the diversity of its employees, and its level of experience. Understanding these factors can help firms develop and refine their design language, leading to a stronger and more recognizable identity.
Distribution of Roles & Responsibilities
If you are a large team, one pertinent question that could be asked is who designs and should everyone design. In such cases, a proper system of design is necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the practice. Smooth, it need not be the fastest or most efficient, it just means that there is a proper distribution of roles and responsibilities. Principle sketching and giving it for execution, as in the case of Apurva Amin where he makes the initial sketches of all, as well as everyone sketching and developing the design, were both found to be efficient. This suggests that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to the design process or distribution of roles and responsibilities. Instead, different approaches can be equally effective, depending on the firm's culture, structure, and goals.
Principle sketching, where the principal architect creates a preliminary design that is then handed off to other team members for execution, can be effective in firms where the principal architect has a strong vision for the project and is able to communicate it clearly to the rest of the team. This approach allows the principal architect to maintain control over the overall design direction, while still leveraging the skills and expertise of other team members.
On the other hand, sketching and developing the design by the team can be effective in firms where collaboration and collective input are valued, as was seen in Compartment S4. This approach allows team members to bring their unique perspectives and ideas to the project, resulting in a more diverse and innovative design. Interestingly, Compartment S4 already had a common intention among the team members which helped in maintaining the larger ideas of the practice in check.
One interesting case was that of Matharoo Associates, where initially everyone was allowed to sketch and pitch in ideas, and then one selected idea would be developed by the team and the design process established. This was a mid-way where the diversity of ideas was also retained, and the efficiency of design development was also maintained.
Overall, the key to efficiently distributing design work in the design process is finding an approach that works best for the firm's specific context and goals. This may involve experimenting with different approaches and continually refining the design process over time. In firms where decision-making is more distributed, team members may feel more engaged and invested in the design process, resulting in a more collaborative and dynamic office environment.
Clarity: a crucial factor
The clarity of ideology and larger goals of an architectural firm helped firms to make quicker decisions and hence made the firm more efficient. One such case experienced was in Kakani Associates, where the decision of having or not having a window in a government school was taken from their ideology rather than the spatial implication of the window. This helped in resolving the difference of opinion quickly as you have something to reflect upon.
The clarity of the design process could also help in the overall functioning of the firm and understanding of one’s role in the project. It creates a common ground to understand different projects within a firm and helps in maintaining a timely schedule. One good example of such a system was Groundwork Architecture, where the process was divided into 4 phases and the level or type of output from each stage was pre-determined. A predetermined design process may be effective in some firms, particularly those that have a high volume of similar projects. Such a process can help to streamline the design process, ensuring consistency and reducing the likelihood of errors.
The idea of having clarity of what needs to be done or how is it to be done within a firm is very important as it forms the backbone of the overall functioning of the firm. The absence of systems results in inefficiencies, and having a clear sense of direction can be instrumental in driving productivity and achieving success. When team members have a shared understanding of the firm's values, goals, and vision, they are better equipped to make decisions that align with these objectives, resulting in a more focused and efficient design process.
No system?
One interesting thing that was observed was that irrespective of the ideology or the design approach or the design process, each firm had a specific system, either of how they work or what they work towards. This could be a conscious effort or subconscious in some cases. But no firm that we visited had a sense of system, be it decision-making firms or sense-making firms, be it single proprietor or partnership, be it small scale or large scale. Hence, having systems is important. Understanding one’s ideology, and the nature of the practice one wants to achieve would help in coming up with the most appropriate system that one wants to establish within the practice.
It is evident that firms that have clear systems in place tend to produce better results, as they are able to streamline their processes, manage their resources effectively, and deliver projects on time. The absence of systems, on the other hand, can result in inefficiencies, delays, and a lack of clarity in project execution. Therefore, it is imperative for firms to develop and implement well-defined systems that align with their goals and objectives to ensure that they produce high-quality output. These could include having a clear ideology, a recognizable design style, and efficient systems and processes. My key learnings from these observations are the importance of having a strong sense of purpose and direction, a clear idea about the ideology, and efficient systems and processes in place to ensure timely and successful project delivery.