Work for a 30 person firm..portfolio is primarily K-12..is design oriented to the extent that it has a few designers. The partners are traditional in their point of view- the client is always right..I see the business aspect of that perspective .. the gist of my query or musing is that I finally got to participate in the design process, came up with a design option that the client liked in parts, now he wants to combine two options to produce a incongruous mess. Really wondering, if I ever get to a point of being able to present, is how do certain firms (not only the stararchitects) convince clients to implement the concept in its entirety. Or is this more the norm and my angst a result of inexperience :).
proto
Jul 6, 16 4:06 pm
good question
welcome to architecture
likeit
Jul 6, 16 4:07 pm
Also, I see in my history, that I had posted a discussion in a similar vein.. remembered that, but wanted to reignite discussion.. thanks much for participating :)
proto
Jul 6, 16 4:13 pm
your success as an architect will come from your ability to anticipate what is important to your client and deliver architecture that serves that need.
the choose-your-own-option is a result of not successfully capturing the essentials
this is not a complete repudiation of your abilities as a designer necessarily...sometimes it's just hard to coalesce the competing interests of the client and the site/code/zoning/life safety issues that need to be met & then do it "poetically" or "designerly" (quotes are just for words i'm making up to describe architectural aspirations)
as i said, welcome to architecture
monosierra
Jul 6, 16 4:16 pm
You could be tactical and show why it wouldn't 'work' as the client envisions - because it's ugly or violates codes - before busting out your preferred version and explain why it is superior in all regards. Produce solutions instead of just pointing out the negatives.
Convincing renders, rigorous analysis, and expert knowledge of rules and regulations will bolster your case - those are your bread and butter to begin with anyway.
One could also consider why the client wanted to combine the two parts. I always find interpretation of intent a pretty important part of the design process - the intent of the client, program, commission, zoning law etc. It takes some second guessing but if it works, you could well tease out what it is that the client liked and produce a design that hits the right spot while satisfying your own agenda. It could be as simple as a massing idea, or how circulation flows between seemingly incongruous parts, or two particular details meeting up. Working to understand what people want and then trumping what they had in mind could be a very satisfying process.
chigurh
Jul 6, 16 4:24 pm
Very often the opinion of the clients must be disregarded in their own interest.
likeit
Jul 6, 16 5:23 pm
Appreciate the responses.. I do have a few years of experience..cd's and code issues under my belt.. it just seems to me that most architects and firms definitely have enough grasp of 'rules and regulations' to absolutely never produce an option, which does not conform. As said above, it is our bread and butter.. I have to go with chigurh that the client's opinion about "design' must be disregarded, not only in their own interest, but in the professions survivability and the urban/ suburban built environment..This is only in the context of the particular project which is a 2000 sq ft addition, larger more complex projects, I can see being ruled by zoning, codes and all else..I definitely don't have experience, besides production, but would imagine that there are architects who are selling their vision effectively and coalescing (love the word) all interests, intent.. I do agree that design options may not be the way to go, it reflects unformed design intent..I respect 'technical architects' and probably will end up as one, but really, good design ( literally progam and resolution of the program in a built form) needs to be the precursor and guide throughout the life of the project. Even as I am saying, I feel the need to apologize for sounding naïve:)
likeit
Jul 6, 16 5:37 pm
Chigurh, how would/does the actual process of disregarding the client work, wouldn't the client be mad;)I guess, it would be a drawn out process of convincing arguments, which is why most firms would just give in..
chigurh
Jul 6, 16 6:08 pm
I was being facetious, but I do think there is some truth to the comment.
You have to ask yourself why a client would hire you in the first place - they want you to perform a task they are unable to do themselves.
If you operate from principles - knowing what you want to achieve out of your work (most architects don't which is why they cave under client pressure and why 99% of our built environment is shit) you see your voice as important, and you see what you have to offer to the project is important. If you just "give in" as you say without presenting your convincing arguments then you failed as an architect and your work reflects that. It is a delicate balance, requires the right type of client and tone. Sounds like you are working for an architect that has a track record for just giving up and that is just sorry.
mightyaa
Jul 7, 16 1:42 pm
+1 chigurh;
I usually sat down with the client and quietly remind them that they hired me for my expertise, and in my opinion based on my experience and that expertise, what they are asking for is not a sound direction... then state my case making sure they understand that I'll do it but don't think it is a wise direction.
x-jla
Jul 7, 16 2:05 pm
To persuade a client away from a bad idea you need to implant doubt in their minds. Make them doubt their idea while simultaneously finding comfort in yours. You do this by using phrases that suggest that their thinking is out of line with established principles and techniques and overall good design. Never say NO, just create doubt in a very polite and accommodating way. If you push too hard, they will push back...Its human nature...Most of the time they will jump ship if you can make them see practical/aesthetic flaws in their idea and then present your own in a more perfect light. Body language also plays a big part...smiles and smirks can let the client know that you see silly mistakes that they do not understand/realize. Let them think that you are laughing at them on the inside, but always be polite and accommodating on the outside. This makes them feel that you are too nice to tell them straight up why their ideas suck, and makes them doubt themselves without feeling the need to defend their ideas out of pride. I've gotten pretty good at this.
mightyaa
Jul 7, 16 2:12 pm
And if you have time, I do what I'd call "planting seeds". Basically I will offhandedly make a comment or remark of some idea or direction I could see this going. It is often tailored to what I know their likes are. Plant that seed and walk away from it. Usually within a few days, they'll come back with this "wonderful idea they had"... the seed grew as it churned away in the back of their head.
likeit
Jul 7, 16 2:18 pm
Love all responses, exactly what I was hoping I would get, lol at your response jla-x, but sounds like a very effective technique. The gist seems that faith in your abilities as a designer/ architect and your 'design ideology' is really the driver of how you would come across to the client. More specific stories and responses would be great..
Work for a 30 person firm..portfolio is primarily K-12..is design oriented to the extent that it has a few designers. The partners are traditional in their point of view- the client is always right..I see the business aspect of that perspective .. the gist of my query or musing is that I finally got to participate in the design process, came up with a design option that the client liked in parts, now he wants to combine two options to produce a incongruous mess. Really wondering, if I ever get to a point of being able to present, is how do certain firms (not only the stararchitects) convince clients to implement the concept in its entirety. Or is this more the norm and my angst a result of inexperience :).
good question
welcome to architecture
Also, I see in my history, that I had posted a discussion in a similar vein.. remembered that, but wanted to reignite discussion.. thanks much for participating :)
your success as an architect will come from your ability to anticipate what is important to your client and deliver architecture that serves that need.
the choose-your-own-option is a result of not successfully capturing the essentials
this is not a complete repudiation of your abilities as a designer necessarily...sometimes it's just hard to coalesce the competing interests of the client and the site/code/zoning/life safety issues that need to be met & then do it "poetically" or "designerly" (quotes are just for words i'm making up to describe architectural aspirations)
as i said, welcome to architecture
You could be tactical and show why it wouldn't 'work' as the client envisions - because it's ugly or violates codes - before busting out your preferred version and explain why it is superior in all regards. Produce solutions instead of just pointing out the negatives.
Convincing renders, rigorous analysis, and expert knowledge of rules and regulations will bolster your case - those are your bread and butter to begin with anyway.
One could also consider why the client wanted to combine the two parts. I always find interpretation of intent a pretty important part of the design process - the intent of the client, program, commission, zoning law etc. It takes some second guessing but if it works, you could well tease out what it is that the client liked and produce a design that hits the right spot while satisfying your own agenda. It could be as simple as a massing idea, or how circulation flows between seemingly incongruous parts, or two particular details meeting up. Working to understand what people want and then trumping what they had in mind could be a very satisfying process.
Very often the opinion of the clients must be disregarded in their own interest.
Appreciate the responses.. I do have a few years of experience..cd's and code issues under my belt.. it just seems to me that most architects and firms definitely have enough grasp of 'rules and regulations' to absolutely never produce an option, which does not conform. As said above, it is our bread and butter.. I have to go with chigurh that the client's opinion about "design' must be disregarded, not only in their own interest, but in the professions survivability and the urban/ suburban built environment..This is only in the context of the particular project which is a 2000 sq ft addition, larger more complex projects, I can see being ruled by zoning, codes and all else..I definitely don't have experience, besides production, but would imagine that there are architects who are selling their vision effectively and coalescing (love the word) all interests, intent.. I do agree that design options may not be the way to go, it reflects unformed design intent..I respect 'technical architects' and probably will end up as one, but really, good design ( literally progam and resolution of the program in a built form) needs to be the precursor and guide throughout the life of the project. Even as I am saying, I feel the need to apologize for sounding naïve:)
Chigurh, how would/does the actual process of disregarding the client work, wouldn't the client be mad;)I guess, it would be a drawn out process of convincing arguments, which is why most firms would just give in..
I was being facetious, but I do think there is some truth to the comment.
You have to ask yourself why a client would hire you in the first place - they want you to perform a task they are unable to do themselves.
If you operate from principles - knowing what you want to achieve out of your work (most architects don't which is why they cave under client pressure and why 99% of our built environment is shit) you see your voice as important, and you see what you have to offer to the project is important. If you just "give in" as you say without presenting your convincing arguments then you failed as an architect and your work reflects that. It is a delicate balance, requires the right type of client and tone. Sounds like you are working for an architect that has a track record for just giving up and that is just sorry.
+1 chigurh;
I usually sat down with the client and quietly remind them that they hired me for my expertise, and in my opinion based on my experience and that expertise, what they are asking for is not a sound direction... then state my case making sure they understand that I'll do it but don't think it is a wise direction.
To persuade a client away from a bad idea you need to implant doubt in their minds. Make them doubt their idea while simultaneously finding comfort in yours. You do this by using phrases that suggest that their thinking is out of line with established principles and techniques and overall good design. Never say NO, just create doubt in a very polite and accommodating way. If you push too hard, they will push back...Its human nature...Most of the time they will jump ship if you can make them see practical/aesthetic flaws in their idea and then present your own in a more perfect light. Body language also plays a big part...smiles and smirks can let the client know that you see silly mistakes that they do not understand/realize. Let them think that you are laughing at them on the inside, but always be polite and accommodating on the outside. This makes them feel that you are too nice to tell them straight up why their ideas suck, and makes them doubt themselves without feeling the need to defend their ideas out of pride. I've gotten pretty good at this.
And if you have time, I do what I'd call "planting seeds". Basically I will offhandedly make a comment or remark of some idea or direction I could see this going. It is often tailored to what I know their likes are. Plant that seed and walk away from it. Usually within a few days, they'll come back with this "wonderful idea they had"... the seed grew as it churned away in the back of their head.
Love all responses, exactly what I was hoping I would get, lol at your response jla-x, but sounds like a very effective technique. The gist seems that faith in your abilities as a designer/ architect and your 'design ideology' is really the driver of how you would come across to the client. More specific stories and responses would be great..