Managing architectural competitions: Empirical evidence from practices in the UK and Italy

Manzoni, B; Morris, P and Smyth, H (2010) Managing architectural competitions: Empirical evidence from practices in the UK and Italy. In: Egbu, C (ed.) Proceedings of 26th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-8 September 2010, Leeds, UK.

Abstract

Since project based organizations are a typical configuration in the architecture industry, two streams of research are relevant for architecture practices. (1) Team management, as architecture design and production originate from collaborative networks among multiple actors, but results from empirical studies have been inconsistent regarding which variables are predictive of team performance and project success. (2) Project management, as management in organizing practices has grown in recent years, even if existing research has difficulty with linking performance attributes to specific factors such as organizational form, company culture or strategy. Based on these premises, the paper focuses on architecture competitions which are a currently debated topic and one of the most important rituals to acquire work. The aim is to explore how competitions are part of the practice’s business strategy and how teams work on competitions' proposals. We analyse and compare two case studies of middle-sized architectural practices (around 30-40 employees), one in Italy and one in the UK, competing for work through competitions. Preliminary findings suggest that architectural competitions can serve both exploration and exploitation strategies and are based on a collaborative design process.

Item Type: Conference Paper (Paper)
Uncontrolled Keywords: architectural competitions; architecture practices; team management; business strategy
Index terms: architectural competition, proposal, case study, project success, business strategy, strategy, exploitation, project-based organization, team management, stream, architectural practice, exploration, empirical study, evidence, Italy, configuration, competition, collaborative design, project management, team performance
Subjects: project management theory and practice, water management, Geography, research methods, tendering, management, systems engineering, market analysis, design methods, practitioner, business, organization, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, project planning, environmental resource management
Topics: Design Practice, Organizational Design, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Sustainability, Procurement, Roles and Professions
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here