This is rather random, but do you prefer to attach yourself to the design you develop at the risk of feeling crushed when the client/juror does not like it? Or do you prefer to produce a design that you're not very attached to in order to remain complacent despite a client/juror's dislike? What is your reasoning for why you do it?
atelier nobody
Oct 24, 19 3:30 pm
I prefer to get a thorough understanding of the client's needs and desires before I start designing, so that I don't have to make that choice.
Dokuser
Oct 24, 19 3:31 pm
But there will inevitably be a case where the client does not like your design despite it meeting their needs.
Wilma Buttfit
Oct 24, 19 3:32 pm
Then you revise it.
Dokuser
Oct 24, 19 3:34 pm
of course
atelier nobody
Oct 24, 19 3:48 pm
I am currently working on a project where we were specifically hired to research multiple options. After we submitted the first draft of our report, the client's PM told us to take out all but the 2-3 blandest, cheapest options before the report goes to their Board. C'est la vie.
Wilma Buttfit
Oct 24, 19 3:31 pm
If you solve the problems and listen to them, the client will like it.
Dokuser
Oct 24, 19 3:37 pm
This does not answer my question, but to be fair it is a bit poorly written/unclear. I am referring to how you go about designing it.
Wood Guy
Oct 24, 19 3:59 pm
tintt, I forget, do you do residential design? I do, and I put a lot of effort into understanding my clients' needs, wants and preferences, solve their problems creatively, present confidently, have the technical skills to support the design and often they still don't like it. Their program often changes after I present SDs.
Wilma Buttfit
Oct 24, 19 4:15 pm
I just started doing residential design recently. I agree they often change their minds once they see what they ask for. I pretty much count on it. I think that's part of the process, that they see their desires in drawings and then they can more clearly identify what they want. I don't take it as they don't like it, but that we need that back and forth.
Wilma Buttfit
Oct 24, 19 4:38 pm
I've been showing them what they ask for and another version of what they tell me their budget is. Once this week and once last week, the client increased their budget because they like it. Now, my problem is that the scope increased and my fee might not because they expect me to keep it the same. Oops.
x-jla
Oct 27, 19 10:11 am
My client who’s a psychologist told me I’m a great listener. I think if we listen and incorporate their wants/needs...or have good reasons for not incorporating them...they are usually happy so long as they feel we are paying attention.
OnlyArchitect
Oct 24, 19 3:50 pm
I understand what you mean. I feel like in most of my schooling I was always taught to remain detached to my design in class practice, however, I can definitely say that it’s pretty impossible to not be attached. It sucks when the client doesn’t like it, but oh well. The previous commenters just don’t want to admit to being crushed by a client’s dislike.
OnlyArchitect
Oct 24, 19 3:54 pm
*professional practice, not class practice
atelier nobody
Oct 24, 19 4:12 pm
"Crushed" is a heavy word, I've never had to call my therapist over a client rejecting a design. Somewhat disappointed, sure.
Wood Guy
Oct 24, 19 4:02 pm
I could never present something that I did not think was a good design, but I don't let my preferences overrule those of my clients. You have to have a thick skin--a lot of good design work ends up in the trash can; that's just part of the job.
atelier nobody
Oct 24, 19 4:10 pm
I try to keep a file of rejected design ideas - maybe next client will have a similar enough program and like the idea the last client hated.
Dokuser
Oct 24, 19 4:15 pm
This is very a good idea.
Wood Guy
Oct 24, 19 5:49 pm
Same here, atelier nobody. I'd like to think that someday I'll turn them into semi-custom house plans for sale.
GridBubbles
Oct 24, 19 6:21 pm
Our professional development instructor / successful practicing architect once said "Architects need to remember that buildings are expensive. You're providing a service to the client and finding solutions to their problems. At the end of the day it is their building so listening to your client is key to a successful practice."
In other words... get over it, leave the ego at home, the building belongs to your client.
OddArchitect
Oct 24, 19 6:35 pm
As others have said you listen to your client and design a building to what they want and need. Part of your career as an architect is to help your client understand what they want and need. Some clients know, some don't. You then steer your client to a design that works for them.
mightyaa
Oct 24, 19 6:57 pm
I get attached, so I allow my Machiavellian traits to dominate. I manipulate others perceptions to my will. When I present, I already paved that road so they will choose the concept I want them to choose. They’ll even credit themselves for thinking of designing it that way… because I planted seeds and watered them early on while torpedoing and morphing their preconceived ideas to my own.
GridBubbles
Oct 24, 19 8:23 pm
So.... basically Inception. What is your totem?
Dokuser
Oct 24, 19 9:16 pm
the superpower every architect wants hahah
mightyaa
Oct 25, 19 12:14 pm
It isn’t a superpower, it is a personality trait. Perception and emotional value; That is how people make choices. I just learned how to introduce new thoughts and insights to start shifting that perception towards aligning with what I want. Stupid current event example, but a ‘closed door secretive meeting’ generally triggers a distrust emotional response if they care about it, so that becomes a narrative so when those hearings are complete, that information gathered feels a bit more sketchy. Manipulation of perception is nothing new to get people to think about things different than they normally would in any other circumstance; so what is normal now feels wrong. You just need to plant those seeds, water, and watch them grow until they believe they know a better way… which just happens to be those other seeds you planted that lead to your concept being how they now define ‘better way’.
OddArchitect
Oct 25, 19 1:44 pm
Care to provide an example?
mightyaa
Oct 25, 19 4:57 pm
Not easily since it is complex. But earlier this week.. My boss is a structural engineer. I’m working on a re-roof (structure rotted) and the fireplaces are shit. Single wythe, 6’ high and corbelled; massive structural issue. The flue block isn’t even tied in; it’s a hazard and shitty construction. I know my boss. So I know the direction he’d be inclined to go (steel, cmu backer, chase down to the fdn) and I know the GC will have a fit, there would be huge CO, and I’d have an angry owner. So… I present the problem in passing with my boss to get his brain churning (start them thinking about it). Additionally, pop a joke about how it is surprising it hasn’t fallen down after 40+ years in this awful condition (seed planted – whatever we do will be better); joke maybe they should consider gas so we could use wood (torpedo - steer away from wood and material changes). Shoot the shit about old school fireplace complexity dropping terms like smoke chamber, ash pit, clay flue, etc. (establish my expertise). I shoot off a follow-up email with photos, and multiple options, one of which (my goal solution) I came up with stitching in masonry to the flue block, and the rest are really just overkill of what he’d want by default. Being sure to ask some complex question about how we’ll chase down to bearing, lintel attachment to non-grouted cmu, etc. (torpedo the complexity of ideas he’s probably mulling over, plant seed about the simplicity of my concept). I also know he’s getting ready to leave town for another project which means he’ll just want to say “ok” versus develop something (manipulation of circumstance to my advantage). I make another rough 3d sketch of this stitching and masonry header tie to lay on my desk knowing he’ll walk by to talk about this project. (manipulation since I know he’s visual) He’ll see it, ask questions, and I’ll walk him through… already addressing things I know he’ll be thinking like lateral, the tie in, etc. (manipulation because now I have him seriously contemplating ONLY this solution). Be sure to tap their ego, “My dumb architect brains wouldn’t know, but would this solve the lateral?” I know I’m right, but let him ‘teach me’ and he’ll emotional invest in the solution I led him too. (emotional manipulation) Then I got the sign-off I needed without having to even explore his stagnant engineering ways. He leaves happy… I get what I want and the project moves along happily...
Dokuser
Oct 25, 19 5:01 pm
so sociopathic tendencies with superpowers??
Dokuser
Oct 25, 19 5:05 pm
I was just kidding, but in all seriousness it sounds like you’re pretty experienced. That sounds like a very good technique that i’ll remember for later in life. I’m currently still in undergrad.
GridBubbles
Oct 25, 19 8:36 pm
Well generally isn't this a trait normal for all group working relationship? I mean if you're going to just steam roll the conversation, you certainly won't win over the other side. The goal here is to solve the problem, not oppose people's emotion and opinion.
Dokuser
Oct 25, 19 9:06 pm
Hahah, that's exactly what I was thinking, but felt like I should be polite.
GridBubbles
Oct 28, 19 2:17 pm
This is Archinect, its one of the few and rare platforms where architects can freely exercise their blunt honest opinions/ honesty without repercussion of losing their clients! Haha
mightyaa
Oct 28, 19 7:05 pm
Yes, some of that trait is in everyone dealing with group relationships. This is different though and at another level. So, like your school, it isn’t about talking to your professor/peers into just liking your concept. This is talking them into changing their perception of the project requirements to fit your concept you like (which you know violates their ideas of what they expect to see). An example; I am pushing through the City, with staff approval, a building constructed entirely in the right-of-way instead of on our parcel. It violates almost every zoning code. Summary, I didn’t like my client’s property, so I threw out the books and designed it across the street on a piece of property we don’t own and made everyone, including government agents, thrilled with the concept. I didn’t just get people with authority to agree, I got them to throw out the normal application of code and find another way to look at and process this legally.
This is rather random, but do you prefer to attach yourself to the design you develop at the risk of feeling crushed when the client/juror does not like it? Or do you prefer to produce a design that you're not very attached to in order to remain complacent despite a client/juror's dislike? What is your reasoning for why you do it?
I prefer to get a thorough understanding of the client's needs and desires before I start designing, so that I don't have to make that choice.
But there will inevitably be a case where the client does not like your design despite it meeting their needs.
Then you revise it.
of course
I am currently working on a project where we were specifically hired to research multiple options. After we submitted the first draft of our report, the client's PM told us to take out all but the 2-3 blandest, cheapest options before the report goes to their Board. C'est la vie.
If you solve the problems and listen to them, the client will like it.
This does not answer my question, but to be fair it is a bit poorly written/unclear. I am referring to how you go about designing it.
tintt, I forget, do you do residential design? I do, and I put a lot of effort into understanding my clients' needs, wants and preferences, solve their problems creatively, present confidently, have the technical skills to support the design and often they still don't like it. Their program often changes after I present SDs.
I just started doing residential design recently. I agree they often change their minds once they see what they ask for. I pretty much count on it. I think that's part of the process, that they see their desires in drawings and then they can more clearly identify what they want. I don't take it as they don't like it, but that we need that back and forth.
I've been showing them what they ask for and another version of what they tell me their budget is. Once this week and once last week, the client increased their budget because they like it. Now, my problem is that the scope increased and my fee might not because they expect me to keep it the same. Oops.
My client who’s a psychologist told me I’m a great listener. I think if we listen and incorporate their wants/needs...or have good reasons for not incorporating them...they are usually happy so long as they feel we are paying attention.
I understand what you mean. I feel like in most of my schooling I was always taught to remain detached to my design in class practice, however, I can definitely say that it’s pretty impossible to not be attached. It sucks when the client doesn’t like it, but oh well. The previous commenters just don’t want to admit to being crushed by a client’s dislike.
*professional practice, not class practice
"Crushed" is a heavy word, I've never had to call my therapist over a client rejecting a design. Somewhat disappointed, sure.
I could never present something that I did not think was a good design, but I don't let my preferences overrule those of my clients. You have to have a thick skin--a lot of good design work ends up in the trash can; that's just part of the job.
I try to keep a file of rejected design ideas - maybe next client will have a similar enough program and like the idea the last client hated.
This is very a good idea.
Same here, atelier nobody. I'd like to think that someday I'll turn them into semi-custom house plans for sale.
Our professional development instructor / successful practicing architect once said "Architects need to remember that buildings are expensive. You're providing a service to the client and finding solutions to their problems. At the end of the day it is their building so listening to your client is key to a successful practice."
In other words... get over it, leave the ego at home, the building belongs to your client.
As others have said you listen to your client and design a building to what they want and need. Part of your career as an architect is to help your client understand what they want and need. Some clients know, some don't. You then steer your client to a design that works for them.
I get attached, so I allow my Machiavellian traits to dominate. I manipulate others perceptions to my will. When I present, I already paved that road so they will choose the concept I want them to choose. They’ll even credit themselves for thinking of designing it that way… because I planted seeds and watered them early on while torpedoing and morphing their preconceived ideas to my own.
So.... basically Inception. What is your totem?
the superpower every architect wants hahah
It isn’t a superpower, it is a personality trait. Perception and emotional value; That is how people make choices. I just learned how to introduce new thoughts and insights to start shifting that perception towards aligning with what I want. Stupid current event example, but a ‘closed door secretive meeting’ generally triggers a distrust emotional response if they care about it, so that becomes a narrative so when those hearings are complete, that information gathered feels a bit more sketchy. Manipulation of perception is nothing new to get people to think about things different than they normally would in any other circumstance; so what is normal now feels wrong. You just need to plant those seeds, water, and watch them grow until they believe they know a better way… which just happens to be those other seeds you planted that lead to your concept being how they now define ‘better way’.
Care to provide an example?
Not easily since it is complex. But earlier this week.. My boss is a structural engineer. I’m working on a re-roof (structure rotted) and the fireplaces are shit. Single wythe, 6’ high and corbelled; massive structural issue. The flue block isn’t even tied in; it’s a hazard and shitty construction. I know my boss. So I know the direction he’d be inclined to go (steel, cmu backer, chase down to the fdn) and I know the GC will have a fit, there would be huge CO, and I’d have an angry owner. So… I present the problem in passing with my boss to get his brain churning (start them thinking about it). Additionally, pop a joke about how it is surprising it hasn’t fallen down after 40+ years in this awful condition (seed planted – whatever we do will be better); joke maybe they should consider gas so we could use wood (torpedo - steer away from wood and material changes). Shoot the shit about old school fireplace complexity dropping terms like smoke chamber, ash pit, clay flue, etc. (establish my expertise). I shoot off a follow-up email with photos, and multiple options, one of which (my goal solution) I came up with stitching in masonry to the flue block, and the rest are really just overkill of what he’d want by default. Being sure to ask some complex question about how we’ll chase down to bearing, lintel attachment to non-grouted cmu, etc. (torpedo the complexity of ideas he’s probably mulling over, plant seed about the simplicity of my concept). I also know he’s getting ready to leave town for another project which means he’ll just want to say “ok” versus develop something (manipulation of circumstance to my advantage). I make another rough 3d sketch of this stitching and masonry header tie to lay on my desk knowing he’ll walk by to talk about this project. (manipulation since I know he’s visual) He’ll see it, ask questions, and I’ll walk him through… already addressing things I know he’ll be thinking like lateral, the tie in, etc. (manipulation because now I have him seriously contemplating ONLY this solution). Be sure to tap their ego, “My dumb architect brains wouldn’t know, but would this solve the lateral?” I know I’m right, but let him ‘teach me’ and he’ll emotional invest in the solution I led him too. (emotional manipulation) Then I got the sign-off I needed without having to even explore his stagnant engineering ways. He leaves happy… I get what I want and the project moves along happily...
so sociopathic tendencies with superpowers??
I was just kidding, but in all seriousness it sounds like you’re pretty experienced. That sounds like a very good technique that i’ll remember for later in life. I’m currently still in undergrad.
Well generally isn't this a trait normal for all group working relationship? I mean if you're going to just steam roll the conversation, you certainly won't win over the other side. The goal here is to solve the problem, not oppose people's emotion and opinion.
Hahah, that's exactly what I was thinking, but felt like I should be polite.
This is Archinect, its one of the few and rare platforms where architects can freely exercise their blunt honest opinions/ honesty without repercussion of losing their clients! Haha
Yes, some of that trait is in everyone dealing with group relationships. This is different though and at another level. So, like your school, it isn’t about talking to your professor/peers into just liking your concept. This is talking them into changing their perception of the project requirements to fit your concept you like (which you know violates their ideas of what they expect to see). An example; I am pushing through the City, with staff approval, a building constructed entirely in the right-of-way instead of on our parcel. It violates almost every zoning code. Summary, I didn’t like my client’s property, so I threw out the books and designed it across the street on a piece of property we don’t own and made everyone, including government agents, thrilled with the concept. I didn’t just get people with authority to agree, I got them to throw out the normal application of code and find another way to look at and process this legally.
That’s crazy, in a good way.