design vs specification

The metrics for judging the quality of property and its architecture are predominantly technical specifications.

In commercial workplace, BCO standards are the genesis of most designs. The space on offer becomes all about the size of the reception, the height of the ceiling, the width of the lift lobby and the fan-coil units. Design becomes a tick-box exercise because developers and architects find solace in the certainty of the spreadsheet.

But do prospective tenants actually make decisions based on these rational criteria only? Do they carry with them a tape measure to assess the quality of the space they’re looking to rent? Does a reception that’s a few square metres short have its fate sealed of never being let? Or can architecture carry currency by fulfilling the needs of prospective tenants, by addressing their desires and aspirations, and by resonating with them?

When buying a smartphone, people make a decision based on the design and the appeal of the brand. They may post-rationalise their decisions by talking about the camera resolution or the battery life, but this is a moot point when they’re choosing between 2 or 3 phones of the same tier. The technical performance is taken for granted. Same in fashion. When choosing between 2 brands of the same calibre, do people actually care about the number of stitches?

In all other consumer goods, technical specification underpins the product, but what sells it is the design and the lifestyle it augurs. If technical specification dictated the design, all smartphones would look the same. All laptops would look the same. All clothes would look the same. So how can brands then stand out to claim a share of the market?

Most architecture already looks the same because these industry standards were devised as guidance to anchor architectural design, not to be a surrogate for it.

The overreliance on rational metrics is not only stifling for innovation, but it can also be pernicious, because it condemns to the wrecking ball so many existing buildings that could have been retrofitted had they not fallen short of these standards.

So not only is there a market need to reassess the metrics, but there is also a sustainability imperative.