Navigating the design process can be a thorny undertaking. We go back and forth with colleagues on ideas, seeking to find the best solution for the design problem at hand. It is a standard phenomenon, to challenge our colleagues and push one another to achieve something great. And with passionate creativity also comes deep seated convictions. Particularly for those more junior and intermediate members of the team, defending an idea is great, but sometimes it's not. Identifying the balance between letting go of an idea and advocating for something one believes is crucial to the success of a project is nuanced and tricky to navigate.
One approach to disagreements is focusing on what is right instead of who is right. The design team's primary objective is providing the best solution for the client and all parties should be working with that final result in mind. Campaigning a personal agenda is not in the best interests of the group.
Let's go a bit further. Maybe your idea comes with the goals of the group in mind (this is usually the case), but it is not well received by the rest of the design team. You lobby for your perspective, trying to articulate the pros of the design move you've proposed, but still no one buys in. What's your response? If you're a team player, there's really only one response, and it's not moping.
Even if we assume that you are right on an undeniable empirical level, it's still the right call to let go of the proposal and return to collaborating with your colleagues, except if your name is on the door, of course. That's when who is right comes into play. Sometimes it's better to just be "wrong," especially when the person who has the final say is not feeling the direction you want to go in.
Most creatives want autonomy, but it would be unwise to let that desire come in between you and your team. It's a fine balance. Hopefully, you weren't hired to be a sycophantic order taker — you're on a team to realize a common goal. Part of achieving that might entail challenging the assumptions of your colleagues. If your employer is writing your paycheck, it's likely they value your opinions in some way. But in the end, most staff in an architecture firm are working to realize the vision of someone else, or of a collective group.
If I have an idea that I feel strongly about and do everything I can to explain it and advocate for it, expressing my deep belief of the impact it will have, but the person that I work under (or the group) does not buy in, I have to shift my focus. This is the reality of non-autonomy. This doesn't have to be a grim reality, but merely an obvious quality of the team dynamic. Collaboration is good, and so is absolute creative freedom — both are just different sides of a similar coin.
Hi Sean,
I hope that your article will resonant with new graduates. For many people, that first year in the work force is a like jumping into cold water. Intern architects aren't helped by school cultures that still teach students to generate ideas singularly (despite periodic attempts to introduce group work into studio design projects). I too was disoriented by the abrupt transition from university to the 'real world', being spun around by client suggestions that often seemed prosaic and contradictory. Helping me through this struggle was an article about Gunter Behnisch's creative process. Aside from his spectacular design sense and commitment to sustainable solutions, he was also known for working in an integrated manner, inviting his clients and their stakeholders into the very beginning of the design process. Reading about his process, I initially thought that all this input would create a veritable Tower of Babel. Then he said this: It is my work to accept all suggestions and then apply my discernment and experience to mold all that I have received into a comprehensive and inspiring whole, much like a conductor. This taught me we don't have to work in an either/ or battlefield; we can also choose the much more fulfilling both/ and route.
All 1 Comments
Hi Sean,
I hope that your article will resonant with new graduates. For many people, that first year in the work force is a like jumping into cold water. Intern architects aren't helped by school cultures that still teach students to generate ideas singularly (despite periodic attempts to introduce group work into studio design projects). I too was disoriented by the abrupt transition from university to the 'real world', being spun around by client suggestions that often seemed prosaic and contradictory. Helping me through this struggle was an article about Gunter Behnisch's creative process. Aside from his spectacular design sense and commitment to sustainable solutions, he was also known for working in an integrated manner, inviting his clients and their stakeholders into the very beginning of the design process. Reading about his process, I initially thought that all this input would create a veritable Tower of Babel. Then he said this: It is my work to accept all suggestions and then apply my discernment and experience to mold all that I have received into a comprehensive and inspiring whole, much like a conductor. This taught me we don't have to work in an either/ or battlefield; we can also choose the much more fulfilling both/ and route.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.