Exploring an architecture of trust was
something we recently had to do for an assignment in our professional practice
class. Reading about this and applying other ethical values that I find the
most important I also seem to come back to some kind of architecture built on
the platform of a non-profit business plan with a goal to serve the
community. Plan New Hampshire[1] is a
great example of an architecture of trust. The organization was a collaborative
effort on the part of the several architects from New Hampshire’s AIA Chapter seeing
the need to preserve the quality of life in their area. Through collaboration
these individuals developed a service that gave back to communities, expanding
on the preferred servant leadership style and further supported by the Four
Building Blocks of an Architecture of Trust.[2] This
kind of service involves giving the community a voice, as well as disposing of the
perceived architectural attitude of an all knowing omniscient designer that
only manifests itself through education or some innate ability. Utilizing their
knowledge these architects are equipped to act as orchestrators of a situation
building trust and often mending the fragile fabric of funding communities.
I was inspired by the efforts of these
individuals offering up their leadership abilities to help where people have
lost their way. This seems to closely resemble to ideal architecture firm that
has been painted in my head through the collaboration of many different
sources. In my mind an architect or group of architects should be a pillar in
their community. As a business plan, in my head, I think a firm should be a not
for profit venture who invests in the projects they build. It has been brought
to my attention that there are firms who waive their architectural fee in
exchange for a half percent return on the project over the course of ten years.
This kind of investment would be motivation to design in such a way as to
insure a return on investment. This would essentially be like stock in the
community, showing your interest and desire to be a part of the community,
rather than acting as a sort of middle man out to fight for a piece of the pie.
Competition in this sort of environment would be encouraged, and only help to
strengthen the community. Functioning as leader’s different firms and
architects would strengthen the community by each being able to utilize their
strengths contributing to a community rather than simply trying to profit off
it. While also allowing and encouraging the community to grow without a
self-centered focus of turning the community into a designers pet project.
Orchestrating their knowledge as
generalist’s architects have the power to bring order to chaos if they would
just step up to the plate and take the initiative. The fear with this kind of
action is that we put ourselves out there for public execution. Maybe this is
what we are meant for. As students studying architecture we are often asked why
did we choose architecture? The answers given will run the full gamut, but the
underlying theme of them all is that we believe we can make a difference. To
make a difference we must often make changes and work to bring people of polar opposites
together on common ground. When have these sort of action ever been perceived
as favorable? The title of architect is one that often come with great respect
and mysticism, with a knack for leadership and ability to absorb criticism.
Modeling our principals of business practices and ultimately life after the
Four Building Blocks of Trust architects will be able to make the changes they
wanted to see in a more prolific manor.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment