2011年2月24日 星期四

Architectural-based Think Tank + Branding (2)

Architectural-based Think Tank + Branding (2):

Set free the design sector
解放設計團隊


In the traditional architecture firm, the design sector is only a part of the whole group, and they are usaually responsible for the construction ducuments as well, which spends most of their time and energy. And because the lifetime of a single project usaully takes months to years, it's almost impossible and relatively unimportant to keep this "design brain" fresh and active, not to mention trying to do "interdisciplinary design". Such words you architectural designer always hear from others: "Don't waste too much time on this, we still have lots more to do" or "Boring? Finish these documents ASAP and you can have fun with the next one (even we don't have a damn clue where the next one is gonna be...)"
傳統建築事務所裡,設計只是一小部分,在小型事務所裡設計部門的人更需要三頭六臂很強的能力,這裡頭的設計師要有點設計sense(有點就好了),會畫施工圖,最好真的有些經驗真的懂施工(不然PM很辛苦)。每個建築案子的期程,動不動用年來算,這當中設計師需要跟著(PM拉著下面一個畫圖小弟)從頭到尾,從SD到CD,搞不好還要被抓到山上去監工(?),哪裡還跟你談創意談設計的熱誠呢?跨領域啊?你是神經病嘛?"設計"沒這麼重要了,而你總會聽到別人跟你說:"別在這裡想太多,我們還有很多事要做" 或是"忍一忍吧,趕快把施工圖畫完就可以做別的設計啦"就算下個"有趣的"設計在哪裡連個影子都看不到...







As everyone know, architect is not the one producing all the design. It's the project manager and the design team under him doing those tasks. After the team came up with a great idea during schematic design(SD), they begin to work on design development(DD), and, if in a small firm, very likely to be led directly to construction ducuments(CD). Here comes the problem, usaully in small firms, you don't often get good desginers who can at the same time be efficient document producers. As a result, the innovation dies down, atmosphere turns gloomy, and the firm has no more space for new project. Why not take the design sector out of a single firm? Leave other tasts to someone else better.

當然建築師並不是真正做設計的人(會啦,但一部分而已),而是PM帶著設計師做出來的。這些人想出了很棒的idea,然後進到DD,熱情開始慢慢下降,到了CD急速冷卻(熱愛設計的人又熱愛施工圖大概是21世紀最夯的新人類吧),然後一個小事務所因為人力集中到生產施工文件而無法注入新活力...。為何不把設計跟施工文件甚至監工分工開來呢?讓適合不同工作的人放在不同位置(事務所需要到一定規模才有辦法在內部做到這種清楚的畫分,中小事務所需要的是實習生超人)


Here's the change, conceptually, the design team got out of single firm (burden) and become able to work with many other firms freely. What this design team actually become is a window between clients and architects. They now offer architectural designs to more clients, all the way from planning to DD, and hand in the pakages to architect firms for CD and further tasts. But this is not good enough. This design team need to offer holistic front-end strategy, which includes "branding" for the whole product line. Moreover, they need to have marketing skills, and interdisciplinary design abilities of all co-pruducts comes along with the architecture product.
這個設計團隊不在受限於單一公司之後,可以與非常多小事務所合作,並做為銜接業主與建築師之間的窗口。從SD設計一直到DD,然後再將整個設計pakage移交給建築師進行CD和之後施工相關工作。這個團隊具備品牌行銷能力,具備跨領域設計能力,還有該建築產品有關的其他產品設計能力。


But who's gonna be the client? what kind of project?
What the hell is architectural branding? Branding for whom?
And an architect wight ask with scorn: "Wait a minute, why do you think I would work with you??"
但是誰是業主?做什麼樣的建築類型?
建築+品牌有沒有搞頭?幫誰做品牌?
建築師也會問阿:奇怪捏~憑什麼我要跟你合作?


to be continued...

待續.


沒有留言:

張貼留言