The Design Decade

We seem to have a habit of thinking in 10-year cycles. The 1970s are remembered for the oil crisis and stagflation, the ’80s brought us Reagan tax cuts and the fall of the Iron Curtain, and the ’90s saw the invention of the Internet (which we called the “information highway” back in the day) with the resulting dot-com boom (and bust). But what of the first decade of the 21st century? There does not seem to be a convenient nickname for it. The zeros? The aughts? The Os?

Endings are also beginnings. As the inaugural decade of the 21st century is closed out, the curtain rises on the next. A lot of people are relieved to see this one recede into the rear view mirror, as it was difficult on many fronts.  We started off with a crisis that failed to materialize: Y2K, which predicted the world-wide crash of computer systems. This was followed in short order by a real but unexpected disaster on Sept. 11, 2001, that marked the beginning of an era in which world-wide terrorism became an undeniable fact of life. Two wars and unprecedented prosperity followed. Then the Great Recession, which, in addition to wiping out homes, jobs, and 401(k)s, shook our collective sense of self confidence to the bone. And let’s not forget the tsunami in Sri Lanka, reminding us all of nature’s incredible destructive power.

Yet despite it all, we are still substantially better off than we were 10 years ago.

Looking back, it seems that the first decade of the 21st century will be remembered most for establishing global connectivity. We now understand that a coal-burning power plant in Shanghai not only pollutes China but also Canada, and it’s painfully clear that a bunch of unpaid mortgages in Detroit and Phoenix can tank a pension fund in Ireland. Cell phones have become ubiquitous and can be loaded with hundreds of “apps,” including cameras, games, texting, twittering, and GPS (allowing us no excuse to get lost anymore).  With Google we can find out just about anything we want at any time. And as Tiger Woods knows all too well, real privacy has ceased to exist. All this has happened in an astonishingly short time.

So while life is more complicated, challenging, and dangerous, we can be comforted by the fact that we are all in it together, for good or for ill, which in turn creates a huge incentive for mutual cooperation.

Global connectivity also alters our sense of scale, as things that once seemed far away and relatively unimportant, like a hurricane in Louisiana, now really hit home. Everyone everywhere has become our neighbor, and that may be the biggest revelation of all.

Global connectivity has tremendous implications for the A/E/C industry. The buildings we produce consume huge amounts of natural resources to construct and maintain, and they are responsible for nearly half of all carbon emissions — far more than any other source, including transportation. Wise use of our natural resources is essential if future generations are to survive and thrive.

It’s clear that design is not just about creating objects but also processes. More than ever, society can benefit by adopting the designer’s problem-solving mindset when grappling with issues, be they in health care, education, the economy, or even politics.

This first decade was difficult in many ways, but it also opened new doors.  For designers everywhere, it’s a profound leadership opportunity.

Global Design: The Architect’s Dilemma

While the recession still rages in the A/E/C industry, there is a bright spot, which is the amount of international work currently being undertaken by U.S.-based design firms. Over the past 10 years, the fee volume of overseas projects has grown by a compound rate of 30 percent per year.  More than $1.5 billion in design fees are now earned on foreign projects, and for some firms this can be as high as 30 percent to 40 percent of their total revenue. International contracts greatly extend the influence of U.S.-based architects, providing unique opportunities for collaboration and outsourcing, but there is a hidden cost that poses a significant long-term challenge to the health of the profession.

When working overseas, most architects typically provide only the SD and DD services, with local firms handling the CD and CA phases.  Since SD and DD generally represent only 35 percent of the A/E typical fee, this means that the vast majority of the fee volume (65 percent) is reserved for foreign firms, which can often provide those same services at a much lower cost. It follows that an office which is heavily dependent on international work will experience a significant shift in the need for talent — more designers and fewer technical staff. Over time, architects who concentrate primarily on overseas work could well see their technical capability severely eroded. To compound the problem, those doing foreign work often rely on outsourcing to produce models, renderings, and even some of the design documentation.

Over time, the implications hold significant long-term dangers for the profession. The CD/CA process has traditionally been fertile ground for training new staff. Where else will newly-minted graduates learn the nuts and bolts that are necessary to complete their training? How will they get this experience if CD/CA is not done in their offices? Furthermore, if architects concentrate only on the up-front design at the expense of CD/CA, they risk morphing into graphic designers (concerned primarily with aesthetics) and will gradually forfeit their claim to providing responsible control over the documentation process as well as protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the public. This is the very foundation of licensure.

This trend bears close watching. A cautionary tale is provided by Clayton Christensen in his book The Innovator’s Dilemma, in which he recounts the fundamental changes in the steel industry that were brought about by the advent of “mini-mills” several decades ago.  In the beginning, overseas producers took on the high-volume, low-margin business, while the high-end, technically sophisticated steel was still rolled in the United States. However, in the course of only a few years, the overseas mills became much more innovative, efficient, and productive, eventually supplanting all of the major U.S.-based producers. Now most of our structural steel is imported rather than exported, with a corresponding decline in our asset and knowledge base.

Could this be the future of the design profession? Only time will tell. In the meantime, firms that are tempted to take on too much international work should carefully balance their portfolios with domestic projects that offer opportunities to provide a full range of professional services, especially CD and CA. International work can be exotic and even intoxicating, but it cannot be the whole meal. Like a healthy body, a healthy firm requires a balanced diet.