|
"It's not as far-fetched as it may sound," asserted Abe Elfadel, as he introduced the topic for the latest event in the Innovation Days speaker series – comparing building architecture and design with system architecture and design.
As moderator of the panel, Abe welcomed his colleagues Aichin Chung and Philip Emma, as well as three professionals from Gensler -- Lance Boge, Maddy Burke and David Epstein.
The intent of the Innovation speaker series is to bring creative and technical people together to explore the many outlets for (and origins of) innovation, and this panel did not disappoint. Indeed, during the course of the hour-long event, the audience discovered that while there are obvious differences in scale (highlighted by Aichin, who pointed out that while her work is done on the micron-scale, the common unit of measurement for building architecture is square footage, which would encompass 92 to 93 billion microns squared), many more similarities lurk beneath the surface.
Definitions
Defining terms was a very important part of this discussion for all of our panelists.
For building architecture, Lance drew on Hegel's philosophy, saying that "architecture begins once the function has been fulfilled."In his view, architecture is what goes beyond the simple function – it is the extra or cultural piece that is brought to the building.
For systems, Phil noted that "the role of architecture is to create a fully specified, unambiguous contract between the hardware and the software, so an architectural statement is the instruction set. It's what the storage looks like, it's the process of doing input/output, and it's all of that at a very detailed, complete level. The purpose is to give a conceptual model to the programmers – it's not a statement about what's real, it's a statement that if you conceive of a machine as working in this way, things that you write will work this way."
An audience member eloquently commented on the extension of meaning that the word "architecture" has undergone. "First, it seems that architecture is an art or practice of building. It's creating the form. A common part seems to be building blocks that an architect must use, and in different fields, the blocks are different. Mostly you are bound by what's available. Sometimes you can request new building blocks to fit your purposes, but usually not. And you have a certain output."
Inspiration
When talking about the work that they do, most of the panelists talked of being inspired to follow their particular career.
Maddy explained that she was inspired to be an architect by her father's career in engineering and his love for buildings, while Lance confessed that it was "an excuse to be abstract and still play with my hands." Taking that thought one step further, David added that building architecture is creating an environment that you can experience – "that shelter, that gut feeling, that's of great desire, great excitement."
On the systems side, Aichin was most eloquent in stating her reasons for pursuing the work she does. "I went into circuit design because of the potential impact on society as a whole, and then also the curiosity on my part to want to design, to want to know how things work. Not so much building things, but just understanding how they work."
Creativity
Once being inspired into a vocation, how does one keep that sense of inspiration and creativity amid the many corporate and client obligations? The panelists shared some of their secrets for maintaining their innovative edge.
"To do creative work, first you have to get the left brain part down pat," offered Phil. "Then you stimulate the right brain. And for me, that's the arts – music, painting, literature. That frees a lot of creativity. And, to be quite honest, I think some of my very best inventions were when I've talked to someone in a different discipline and completely misunderstood what they told me."
Finding the next best thing for buildings keeps David engaged. "We're trying to figure out how to make buildings that use less and less power. And environmentally, to make the experience better. And that's where we're pushing in the building industry -- figuring out air quality, light, all those issues that we think will make daily lives better. The buildings that can stand on their own, try not to use as much fossil fuel as they have in the past, and really that's where our innovation is going to happen."
Changes also keep Phil moving forward with his work. "We're at a very exciting time because I think scaling is ending. As an industry, we've made the statement that frequency isn't going to go further. To innovate past that point requires some real breakthrough thinking. We're ripe for revolution."
Maddy finds that constraints can also breed innovation. "Limitations actually force creativity, particularly in New York where every day there's a new zoning or code issue."
"And there's always that budget thing," she added, to the amusement of the crowd.
"But it takes more than just creativity," Lance admitted. "It's a lot of roles. I think that out of all those tensions – my personal desire to make something, the client's desire to have something but not want to pay enough for it, knowing that I want a craftsmanship quality that no longer exists - all those things go into forming a relationship. If you win the client over, they understand and they begin to be part of the solution, they see it as something more."
And glancing around at the interior of the Eero Saarinen-designed building that houses IBM Research's headquarters, he added, "I mean, the reason you work in this building is because somebody saw architecture as something more than just a thing to keep the rain out."
Process
The process behind designing and refining a plan or blueprint is something that all of the professionals undertake.
"Trying to get to that elegant solution, trying to simplify everything down," said David. "I like to get to the really clean, efficient solving of problems. That seems to come from everywhere, like 'a little piece here, there, oh, if you switch this, you do that'. Making it simpler, better every time. We go from a messy beginning of needs and concerns to getting it more defined, defined, defined. And, at the end, you get to something that works… I'm always trying to think about a solution that's very clear, understandable, does exactly what it needs to do, and doesn't do more than that."
Aichin said that the refining process for circuit design was similar. "We do testing, we do simulations. Our first design is not always going to be the end product. There are a lot of cycles that we go through where we find what isn't behaving as we thought it would and change it."
Presentation
Style and the finished product were other topics that the panelists touched upon in their discussion.
"There's a salesman's quality about it. You need to be able to be a designer, to be creative, but you also need to be able to sell it. You can't – at least in my experience – just put it on the table and walk away and have people cheering for it. You usually have to convince them and you have to keep on convincing them", said Lance.
"The computer is a major part of the presentation aspect and the sell to the client," said Maddy. "And it can actually get us into trouble because you get somebody that has a beautiful presentation drawing that the client loves, but in fact, everyone's been paying so much attention to the beauty that no one has paid much attention to the reality. It can be deceptive. You have to understand what you really know about what's underneath the lines."
Conclusion
The exchange was riveting, but there wasn't nearly enough time to cover all the potential topics. In the end, the panelists and the audience walked away with a more nuanced understanding of the unique role that architecture and design have in both the technological and aesthetic domains.
|
|
IBM Research
Philip Emma
Aichin Chung
Abe Elfadel
Gensler
Lance Boge
Maddy Burke
David Epstein
|
