I am about one fifth of the way through "The Science of Shopping" by Paco Underhill. Likening it to a Tom Clancy read, versus Bickford's "poetry," is a decent analogy. It moves quickly, doesn't require a lot of digging, and keeps my interest.
At this stage, I am most impressed with one of his simple observations; "There are certain physical and anatomical abilities, tendencies, limitations and needs common to all people, and the retail environment must be tailored to these characteristics." If you could change just one word in that quote, and have it be an architectural mantra, I would suggest that you change "retail" to "Built." Much like Herb's latest post concerning the ill designed toilet, how often do designer's lose sight of who they are designing for? The human animal...... And if we learn nothing else from Underhill's writing, we should at least take away that, the better a designer understands those which he/she designs for, the better his/her designs should be....
So, this is the problem...What is the solution?? Pay attention!! Study, research, read, listen.... Test, and re-test our pre-conceptions to verify the accuracy of our beliefs.... If the CEO of a multi-billion dollar retail chain can not know the actual conversion rate within his store, we all are most likely missing pieces of the puzzle here and there which could help us better understand the human condition..... and in turn make us better at what we do...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hi PJ,
After reading Susan Bickford essay and Paco’s Underhill ‘s book, I look both writers sharing information of, what could be good design. To relate to your comments “obvious isn’t always apparent,” do you think Architecture school needs instructor like Bickford and Underhill to teach design studio? To challenge the architecture students to think outside the “architecture box?” or maybe not, because “obvious isn’t always apparent.”
Felix
To understand the "client/scope" one must fully be able to communicate to the client what you understand, from what you have been told/seen. I mean you and I can have a conversation using words to describe the "architecture" of a space and the way people will interact with it and understand every word of it. Yet when expressing these ideas to your client, the vocabulary needs to be different. Every trade, industry, business etc has their own language. When a new client hires us to build out a space or even a new building and the scope of work/business we are designing for is foreign to us, we must research, study, observe, and listen to everything. When we speak about the job we must do so in a language that the client will understand
i.e. I sometimes say “at what height do you want the sill plate of the glazing at?” when I should really say, “Where do you want the bottom of the window at?”
I agree with Peter when he says, “the better a designer understands those which he/she designs for, the better his/her designs should be....” but we should also be able to communicate that we do understand in a way that the client can understand us.
Good point... this goes back to Herb's comment that we must be "bilingual".....its not just about what we say, but how we say it...
Post a Comment