Thoughts on Difficult Clients

I haven't met any architect lucky enough yet to avoid Those Clients. You know the ones. The husband and wife that disagree on everything and put the team in the middle. The owner who meddles with the construction on site. The committee that can't make a decision. The client with an outrageously aggressive schedule.

Archdaily posted a cute graphic about some of the typical problem clients an architect (or really any design-based field) may run into. (Originally posted here on Digital Synopsis.)

A Field Guide to the Wonderful World of Clients, part I

Women in the Built World Symposium: The Men's Perspective

The third annual Women in the Built World Symposium was held this past February in Chicago, and was better than ever. Among the panels were lectures on terra cotta restoration, roofing best practices, the renovations in the Old Post Office, and panels on advocacy and women in construction. One of the more encouraging panels was The Men's Perspective, a panel discussion among principals and presidents of an architecture firm, an engineering firm, and two construction firms. "But wait," you ask, "I thought this event was Women in the Built World - why do we need to hear from more men?"

What the ...: An Ongoing Series

That feeling when you draw a perfectly buildable detail that gets rejected in May, and then after much sound and fury pursuing the alternate detail, is revisited as the new idea in the following January.

I just ... it is so frustrating to deal with these changes and on top of the changes the bad attitude and nasty remarks from the client, and then END UP RIGHT WHERE WE STARTED NINE MONTHS AGO.

YOU CAN MAKE A NEW HUMAN BEING IN THAT AMOUNT OF TIME.

What the ...: An Ongoing Series

Importing our consultant's BIM into our model:

8 MILES

Shutting that Sh*t Down: In Action!

The sad truth is, there is no shortage of opportunities to shut bigoted and derogatory language down. Today's example: a phone call with a contractor, which he thought was with just one person but was in fact on speakerphone.

Blake (not his name), who thought he was only talking to my boss instead of the full internal project team, told a story about a past friend-turned-client who asked the same question at every single meeting. The question was fairly innocuous - is there a problem with pouring concrete foundations in winter? Blake was getting increasingly frustrated by this repetition, since he was giving the same answer - yes, as long as it's above 10 degrees; we do this work all the time - every time the question was asked. Finally, he told the client, "Please stop asking this question. I've answered it the same way every time." And then went on to say that the client's "pussy husband" spoke to Blake after the meeting and was upset at how he dressed her down. And further added, "I'm sorry, but I have to put it this way, her husband was wearing women's underwear --"

I interjected at this point with a sharp "Woah woah woah!" and as soon as I had, the contractor exclaimed "I didn't know I was speaking to the whole office!" and my boss switched the phone off of speaker, and made some remark about "Blake's man-talk."

Here's the litmus test, fellas: Are you upset to learn that your female / black / gay / trans / disabled / immigrant / etc. colleagues heard something you thought you were saying to "just one of the guys?" Next time, SHUT UP.

Your silence is tacit approval

I just had a little teaching moment with a younger male colleague about shutting down an inappropriate "joke" that came on a call he had with a general contractor about a female design team member.

His position (and I think many men go this route when they aren't taught to do otherwise) was to remain silent. As he put it, "do not engage." What he didn't realize, and I know he's not alone in this, is that his silence is tacit approval of this kind of "joke."

The burden of objecting to sexist or racist or ableist or other derogatory "jokes" often falls to the people in the oppressed group, while the people who can leverage their social privilege remain quiet. I will object all the live-long day when someone makes "jokes" like this in my presence, but I know it has more power when that objection comes from someone who has more privilege to leverage. I might get written off as "oh, she's just PMSing" or "she's hormonal" or "it must be that time of the month" or some other sexist nonsense if I speak up, but my white straight cis male colleague will be taken more seriously.

Men out there: gender equity in the workplace is not the burden of women and non-binary people alone. You need to speak up.

White people out there: racial equity in the workplace is not the burden of black and brown people alone. You need to speak up.

Straight people out there: sexual identity equity in the workplace is not the burden of LGBTQ+ people alone. You need to speak up.

Able-bodied people out there:  ableist equity in the workplace is not the burden of disabled people alone. You need to speak up.

Time to rock that boat. (And while you're at it, rock the vote!) 

Please won't you be my neighbor.

The mass murder at Tree of Life Synagogue this past Saturday is tragic, and infuriating, and crushingly close to home for me - I'm from Pittsburgh, grew up in Squirrel Hill, was active in the Jewish community. Although my family only belonged to that congregation for a short while, my sister's Bat-Mitzvah was at Tree of Life and we have friends and neighbors who attend services there.

As a Pittsburgher I'd like to point out something that may not be common knowledge.

Fred Rogers' house is just down the street from Tree of Life. This mass shooting, this hate-filled act of anti-semitism that took the lives of 11 people and irrevocably changed the lives of countless more, literally took place in Mr. Rogers' neighborhood.

Election Day is almost upon us. Please, please, please vote. Please.

Stereotyping

I had a meeting last week with a client to review his custom wardrobe designs. We were looking at eyeglasses compartment inserts and comparing the standard sizes with the drawer widths in his particular closet to figure out how many eyeglasses he could store in the configuration the wardrobe designer was proposing.

He pulls out a pair of glasses from his pocket, folds them onto the table, and says "These are what, 9 or 10 inches wide?"

...

They were 5 inches wide, and it was all I could do to stop myself from laughing out loud.

What the...: An Ongoing Series

The kitchen consultant: "We want to make sure our client is ecstatic about the finished product."

~pregnant pause~

The architect: "I have a hard time imagining our client being ecstatic about anything. Maybe we should shoot for pleased, or satisfied."

What the... : An Ongoing Series

A thought that just passed through my mind about half an hour ago:

10am is too early for harmonicas in this office.

What the ...: An Ongoing Series

My colleague sent this image to me out of the blue with the caption: I'M COMING FOR YOU.

Eli and Edythe Broad Art Museum, by Zaha Hadid Architects

and all I could think was

Professional Correspondence: Part 5: "WHEN" and Review

This post continues from Professional Correspondence, Part 4: HOW.
(Lost? Start here, with Part 1: Professional Correspondence)

How many times have you sent or received business correspondence after 10pm? From someone ostensibly on vacation? Over the weekend? I’m working with a consultant now who habitually sends submittal responses after 11pm on a Sunday. This person is based in Chicago, not in Shanghai.

It is important to recognize that the timing of a message has meaning just like the content or the medium of the message. Habitually sending correspondence long after business hours, during vacation, or over the weekend sends the message that your work life has greater priority than the rest of your life, and sets expectations that you are “on call.”

Professional Correspondece: Part 4: "HOW"

This post continues from Professional Correspondence, Part 3: WHAT.

Marshall McLuhan coined the phrase “The medium is the message,” which appeared in his 1964 book “Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man.” McLuhan describes a message as “the change in scale or pace or pattern” introduced by a new invention or innovation. Look at how much communication has sped up and increased in volume with the wide adoption of email. It’s been ten years since the first iPhone made it possible to take and send high quality pictures from the same device. Can anyone here remember the last time they used a fax machine?

Professional Correspondence: Part 3: "WHAT"

This post continues from Professional Correspondence: Part 2: "WHO"

Now let's talk about WHAT: the actual content of the correspondence.

Most face-to-face meetings and telephone calls will have preliminary small-talk: how are you, how’s your family, do you have plans for the weekend, etc. This is the social “grease” to maintain a smooth relationship with people. In contrast, business writing is more brief. Effective correspondence in a business setting gets to the point right away, and makes clear the call to action to get efficient results. This is different from a lot of the typical writing models taught in school, and different from how one would correspond with friends and family. Teaching the difference is critical to promote writing that gets results.

Professional Correspondence: Part 2 "WHO"

This post continues from Professional Correspondence: Part 1.

The three main parties in a traditional project delivery for construction are the Client, the Builder, and the Designer. In this model, the Client holds a formal contract with the Builder, and a separate formal contract with the Designer. In turn, the Builder holds formal contracts with subcontractors, and the Designer holds formal contracts with engineers and consultants. The Designer and Builder do not have a formal contract with one another, but collaborate in order to deliver the project. There are other methods of project delivery, and these three main figures appear in just about all of them in varying relationships.

Professional Correspondence: Part 1 "The Four Questions"

This is adapted from a presentation for BuiltWorlds Future Workplace Forum, which occurred on June 14, 2018. Slight modifications in the text have been made to fit this format.


For all of you in the building industry, you know that Architecture, Engineering, and Construction are about relationships. All projects in construction are projects of collaboration, and the success or failure of projects is largely determined by the success or failure of communication. And in most cases, the failure to communicate is rooted in speaking dissimilar languages and coming from different backgrounds. While architecture studio classes develop the skills for presenting one’s own work, they do not typically take into account how to communicate with the myriad other people involved in construction. Knowing this lack exists in architecture school, it’s no small leap to imagine it is also lacking in engineering and construction pedagogy. So how do you help your colleagues bridge this gap for a clear path to success?

What the... An Ongoing Series

Pro-tip: If you are a (sub)contractor on a project, DON'T TAKE A PISS IN THE STAIRWELL OF THE BUILDING YOU ARE CONSTRUCTING DURING NORMAL WORKING HOURS WHEN THE ARCHITECT IS VISITING THE SITE.

What the... An Ongoing Series

When a contractor says "this is the drop-dead date for upgrades" on a new construction condo building, and your client gives confusing upgrade information a week after that drop-dead date, and then new and different information three months after that drop-dead date, and then yet again new and different information a whopping six months after that drop-dead date, you probably don't drop everything to get the details figured out that third time.

But you might decide to crack open the whiskey under the sink and put a slug in your afternoon coffee...

 

Grenfell Tower: Building to Reap the Whirlwind

image by Chris Barker

With the global economy hurtling toward a greater and more insurmountable chasm between the rich and poor, symptoms of these societal structural inequalities will continue to occur. The deadly and terrible fire in Grenfell Tower is just one more in a chain of tragic disasters that continue to impact the most vulnerable people in disproportionate measure.

Public and affordable housing remains a hotbed of political and social strife, in no small part due to the continual implementation of disastrous policies, lack of oversight and regulation, and straight-out malevolence from the governments and landlords of these properties toward those people these projects are meant to serve. The US has more than a few particularly infamous housing projects, many of which have been vacated or demolished as unsalvageable failures.

By now there has been a great deal of press about the flammable cladding, the single stairwell for a 24 story building (completely legal per British building code and ASTONISHING to this US architect), the misinformation given to residents, the previously-aired fears of a disastrous fire, and the overall heartless deregulation to give financial advantage to landlords and disregard the health, safety, and welfare of tenants.

(And you thought this speech by Rik Mayall on "The New Statesman" was satire.)

Perhaps what is saddest and most infuriating is that this largely-preventable tragedy was not the first of its kind, and won't be the last. Remember the Ghost Ship fire - less than a year ago? This fire, in a building that was not intended to house residents but was home to dozens, killed 36 people in Oakland, California.  And like in Oakland, the survivors in London are without much hope of finding a new place to live within the city. London is suffering from its success - in a booming economy and with increased population growth, affordable housing has been sluggish to keep up, resulting in a severe gap between the median home price and median salary. These are not "market forces" at work - this is the deliberate policy of the government choosing not to invest in this desperately-needed sector. This is in stark relief to the "Billionaire's Row", a street of empty and derelict mansions worth millions of pounds. 

While there has been an outpouring of funds and donations from around the world to help alleviate this situation, this is merely a bandaid on the open wound of unjust housing. What would it mean to the UK (and the US, and the rest of the world) if the government were to adopt a Right to Housing as part of a bill of rights for all people in these nations? Not just nationalists, not just citizens, not just legal aliens, but every person would have the right to access adequate housing. How would this be defined? How would it be supplied? How is it to be believed that some of the wealthiest nations on the face of the earth are unable to afford the basic sheltering of their people?

Perhaps I am being hypocritical. I'm an architect that designs in the luxury residential market - highly specialized and profitable, and for the most part ignores the need for affordable housing by building single family residences on oversized lots in the wealthy suburbs and rural landscapes. Then again, the city of Chicago where I practice has an Affordable Requirements Ordinance which demands that residential developers building in the city provide either affordable units within the project itself, or build affordable housing elsewhere in the city. This does not apply to every project, but it does apply to a substantial number of them, one of mine included. While this does not address a right to housing, it does help to ensure that affordable housing exists in the marketplace and is available for those who need it. It's a small step in the right direction.

What the...: An Ongoing Series

A cheeky comment from a GC:

GINGERLY.