Thursday24 August 2017

Right now, no one’s a winner

  • Email
  • Comments (6)
  • Save

Adopting a new approach to competitions could save time and money – and offer better opportunities for young practices

Last week I had the privilege of serving on the jury tasked with drawing up the shortlist to rebuild Windermere’s steamboat museum. Announcing the competition back in June, the chief executive of the charity that runs the museum made a point of noting that he was open to the idea that the commission might go to a younger practice. Including names like 6a, Carmody Groarke, Adam Khan and Witherford Watson Mann, the shortlist maintains that outcome as a real possibility.

With 114 expressions of interest we certainly had no shortage of talent to choose from. That extraordinary response spoke both of the desirability of the commission and of the lean times that entrants are facing. The number of man-hours that had gone into developing all these documents was frankly scary.

Many entrants will have applied for multiple competitions this year, each time devoting days to the preparation of submissions and answering pre-qualification questions that are ever so slightly different from the last lot.

There is surely a need for the RIBA to put structures in place that limit this horrendous wastage. It might look, for example, to Flanders, where all public commissions are the subject of competition. Every six months the Flemish state architect (the Vlaams Bouwmeester) announces a new raft of competitions and invites expressions of interest. Architects then submit a single portfolio to the Bouwmeester’s office, identifying those competitions for which they wish to be considered.

The UK staged only five open competitions in 2011, compared with 200 in Germany and 1,600 in France

Before the downturn, the RIBA was managing as many as 25 competitions each year through its Leeds office. The economies that could be engineered by adopting a more integrated assessment method are enormous.

While design competitions based on initial expressions of interest have much to recommend them, it is a bleak picture if they constitute the only procurement route on offer. If you are an architect in your twenties or thirties and struggling to grow a nascent practice you might well take issue with my claims for the youthfulness of the Windermere shortlist. The chosen firms’ directors are all on the wrong side of 40 and have a track record of public commissions behind them. Unknown quantities they are not.

The possibility of running an open competition was explored but rejected on the grounds that such a route tends to prove successful only for briefs of a fundamentally generic nature. The steamboat museum represents a highly complex and particular problem, the resolution of which is going to demand extensive dialogue between the competing architects and the client.

However, the need for more open competitions in this country remains. When David Chipperfield accepted the Royal Gold Medal earlier this year he bemoaned the fact that the UK staged only five open competitions in 2011, compared with 200 in Germany and 1,600 in France. Again Flanders offers one of the more interesting models. There, a limited number of small public commissions are reserved for recent graduates.

The newly launched e-petition demanding reform of public sector procurement systems represents a vital first step towards the transformation of this country’s timid competition culture. But we will only have succeeded in enacting real change when architects of all ages have access to the opportunities they deserve.


Readers' comments (6)

  • Good luck to those on the shortlist but the structure of this 'competition' simply seems designed to bolster an elite within an elite.

    Presumably all of the 114 expressions of interest were identifiable by name to the jury. So 'unknowns' had no-hope.

    I wonder aloud whether the Director of this museum thinks himself a Kingmaker? I hope the jury as a whole have the strength to consider merit to be above patronage for such a wonderful site.

    There should be more open anonymous competitions; especially those - like this one - involving tax payers money.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Philip Terry

    We would have loved to take a crack at this competition. What a mouth watering scheme! Put off by the PQQ & shortlist, need to focus on bidding for work with a more realistic chance of success.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • you two are way bitter.
    some good architects have been shortlisted for a good competition. (a rarity in this country.)

    and all you can do is bad mouth them. shamefull
    would you have preferred a massive multinational winning this scheme.

    the practices that have been shortlisted, are small scale and probably struggle for work (like most people right now). but they're on the shortlist because they are talented architects. thats all.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Carl: I would ask that you read my comment again CAREFULLY. I did not bad mouth the shortlist I merely questioned how they got there.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Monty Leigh Pemberton

    Good point well made.... I like the cut of your jib Mr Woodman

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • how to make the list as a new practice

    option A
    "hey, that's the architect that worked under that really good architect.... he's in!"

    i am the bitter untalented one... but seriously, open anonymous competitions would remove all the bitter individuals and those that are actually good will shine will through. although picking the right architect for the job might prove harder for a client wanting a specialist in a required sector.

    its an interesting debate, and worth looking at the europeans' methods as they seem to be doing something right.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

sign in register
  • Email
  • Comments (6)
  • Save
Sign in

Email Newsletters

Sign out to login as another user

Desktop Site | Mobile Site