Igloo is a UK company that is widely respected for its intelligent and creative approach to development. Locating much of its work in regeneration areas, the company regularly experiments with new models and approaches, and is at the vanguard of the implementation of ‘custom-build’ housing in the UK. If you were to ask the average small-to-medium design-led UK architecture practice to name the top three developers they would like to work with, Igloo would almost certainly be among them.
Chris Brown, chief executive of Igloo, therefore seemed a good person to talk to about the ways in which the architectural education system does and doesn’t prepare young professionals not only for today’s development context, but also for the directions in which development and procurement models are heading.
Could you tell us a little more about how architects add value to the process within current development models?
One interesting development is that firms that are designer-maker led, as opposed to simply design-led, or even purely profit-led, are experimenting with different ways of financing projects that are innovative from a development point of view. Assemble, for example, is a very interesting practice. Or indeed, in Igloo’s own custom-build process, the architect works with the builder to create a ‘base design’ – a process that proves to be cost effective and results in a product that is easy to manufacture and construct. The architect is then the interface with the end customer, and customises the base design to meet their needs. It’s a direct relationship.
Should architects perhaps focus on acquiring skills to operate more like developers?
Architecture and development make use of very different parts of the brain, or require different types of brain. Few people are able to do both really well. Architecture is an incredibly complicated skillset to learn. It would be hard to be both architect and developer, with the exception of small projects. What architects tend to lack that developers possess is a greater understanding of– and interest in – the marketplace, of the factors that shape this and the way these interact.
Does this mean that what we teach in schools of architecture, with their design focus, is indeed fit for purpose? Or are there some skills we are failing to impart?
Not all architects seem to have the ability to understand how a building is used. As clients, we assume architects have that knowledge. But they don’t. They don’t seem to have any real evidence base. You do need someone in the development process who can get into the mind of the user and find out what they want. In terms of the architect-developer territory battle, developers can’t do it either. It’s a big concern.
Understanding, but also communicating, how buildings are used covers everything from how a user feels in a room to how the architecture influences their well-being. Architects also tend to be really bad at urban design, but they all think they are really good at it! This leads me to reflect: if they’d been educated effectively, they would know what they do and don’t know.