In Sarah Wigglesworth’s 2022 RIAS keynote On Value and Values, she noted
“The current structures that have led us here will not get us out and we need to invent different ones. There is nobody to do this but ourselves…”
I must respectfully disagree.
We don’t need to invent new structures and ways of doing things. They already exist, they’re just not being used by architects.
And there’s certainly others to do this. And at the risk of sidelining the profession.
Fair to say that any life form unable to evolve and become more “fit”, might become subject to extinction.
Like many professions architects have a tendency to stay inside their bubble. Practicing architects teach at universities and everyone learns a lot on the job. It’s system that works wonderfully, except it reinstates bad habits and fails to introduce new thinking. It’s a form of inbreeding. It’s not long before the pedigree image of a Howard Roark perched high over a glassy city is replaced by one of a near toothless creative blankly plucking their banjo. (Too far? Too fair?)
Many architects might consider themselves pedigreed, and perhaps with good reason. But to be frank, pedigree does not guarantee a healthy well adjusted beast. Pedigrees can be inbred and suffer with congenital complications.
It’s more seductive to consider how the profession might better engage with and intentionally seek out new strategies, structures and skills. Making them an integral part of the work of the profession. Architects are quick to acknowledge their broad expertise and the successes graduates have found in other fields. They’re less quick to acknowledge what they might learn from other fields if they were to metaphorically crossbreed with other professions and areas of expertise.
It’s useful to consider building a more robust profession as a process of selective breeding. A process introducing new strategies, structures and skills. The benefit of (metaphorical) selective breeding (to bastardising the crossbreeding Wikipedia entry) is it:
- Enhances and creates more vigorous future architects.
- Allows the introduction into the profession of desired new traits, skills and ways of thinking.
- Can reduce undesirable traits, skills and ways of thinking.
- Creates a profession that combines the best traits of two or more professions.
- Establishes initial steps towards a new profession.
Now I’m not suggesting literally breeding.
That would be creepy.
And wrong.
But I am suggesting intentionally escaping the architectural bubble. And not just escaping but actively seeking out the new strategies, structures and skills to benefit practice as well as identifying traits that are creating friction and ways to overcome them. It’s not good enough to read a book, attend a seminar, do a workshop. It takes an active, vigorous and engaged practice, not a passive one.
The area that concerns me most is the culture, and the reinforcing of poor cultural traits. Such traits include poor behaviours concerning feedback, listening and communication, trust, empathy and leadership. These are all areas contributing to psychological safety and wellbeing. And whilst there has been improvement around hours and flexibility, many wellbeing issues remain.
I don’t want to push the selective breeding metaphor too far. I do want to consider who architects might learn from and engage with more, to introducing better traits, concepts and human skills. I’d start with workplace psychologists, but also poker players, social workers, entrepreneurs, business people, sociologists, politicians, behavioural economists, FBI negotiators, and many others have traits of value to the profession. When we take the time to pay attention to what we might learn from others there’s so much to benefit the profession
It takes humility to acknowledge you might be doing wrong, that you might have more to learn and to get curious to explore new possibilities. It’s hard to acknowledge you might be subject to legacy thinking and the best way to reintroduce new vigour is to venture outside the metaphorical gene pool.
To end, a return to Sarah Wigglesworth’s quote and a deception by omission (of the rest of the quote). I stand by my statement regarding the first couple of sentences, but in context I equivocate:
“The current structures that have led us here will not get us out and we need to invent different ones. There is nobody to do this but ourselves. We must become lobbyists, agents of change, infiltrating local government, sitting on councils, going into parliament, starting movements, becoming activists. While nobody said it would be easy, we have no time to waste. We must find more meaningful Values, skill up, be awkward and demanding, demonstrate the way and hold our political, financial and manufacturing masters to account.”
I’m 100% in agreement with the sentiment. I’m doubtful, however, that the profession is capable of achieving all this without seeking out help and choosing a little selective breeding.
It’s the fit that will survive.
“Slow though the process of selection may be, if feeble man can do much by his powers of artificial selection, I can see no limit to the amount of change, to the beauty and infinite complexity of the co-adaptations between all organic beings, one with another and with their physical conditions of life, which may be effected in the long course of time by nature’s power of selection.”
Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species
Picture by Pixabay [edited]
