The Case for Architectural-Design Competitions

Autor/in	Lewis, Roger K.
Titel	The Case for Architectural-Design Competitions
Quelle	In: Chronicle of Higher Education, 55 (2009) 34, (1 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0009-5982
Schlagwörter	Architecture; Competition; Design Requirements; Competitive Selection; Evaluation Criteria; Guidelines; Judges; Contracts; Construction Management; Educational Facilities Design + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Architektur; Wettkampf; Design preferences; Gestaltungsmittel; Richtlinien; Judge; Richter; Vertrag
Abstract	A well-publicized design competition is especially beneficial for universities. It allows them to enhance fund raising and stimulate design consciousness among students, the faculty, and even members of the surrounding community. Yet universities rarely conduct competitions, and instead select architects for major projects through a multistep, closed-door procurement process, with little or no participation by faculty members. Selecting an architect is a big gamble, since nothing guarantees that the chosen designer will deliver a beautiful, functional, affordable building. Hiring an architect, whether for a house or a law school, is daunting and momentous. A design competition improves chances of success. It gives a client an opportunity to see a range of conceptual design options and gain greater insight into how different architects think creatively and respond to project aspirations and constraints. Above all, a design competition can produce exceptional architecture that might not otherwise result from conventional procurement methods. Yet design competitions can be problematic and risky. Many American architecture firms avoid them, viewing them as exercises that divert resources from projects already under way for fee-paying clients. Practitioners also complain that invited competitions are too often biased toward celebrities. Choosing jurors unwisely can skew competition outcomes. Having chosen and served on juries, the author advocates several jury-selection guidelines: (1) A majority of the jurors should be accomplished, well-respected design professionals--architects, urban planners, engineers--appropriate for the project; (2) They must have no stake in the project and should not be dogmatically attached to a narrow design philosophy or personal agenda; and (3) Nonprofessional jury members must be well-informed project stakeholders, chosen for their wisdom, judgment, and knowledge of project aspirations and requirements. Design competitions are likely to fail if they are not well conceived, responsibly managed, and well supported financially. Thorough site documentation, a lucid functional program that spells out the project's needs, a realistic budget and schedule, a distinguished jury, and, most important, a dedicated sponsor are all indispensable. Carried out properly, a design competition can be a win-win experience, even for competitors who don't win. (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	Chronicle of Higher Education. 1255 23rd Street NW Suite 700, Washington, DC 20037. Tel: 800-728-2803; e-mail: circulation@chronicle.com; Web site: http://chronicle.com/
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10