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.