Raisbeck, P (2017) Tribes, warlords and transformers: An institutional logics model of the architectural profession. In: Chan, P W and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 33rd Annual ARCOM Conference, 4-6 September 2017, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
Architecture has often been described as profession divided by a foundational logic of aesthetics against one of production: Creatives versus Suits. The business plan is one way that architects have saught to reconcile the demands of design creativity and the need to be profitable. In the theory of practice, the business plan integrates and balances issues of strategy, available resources and operational contingencies. Thus, business plans provide a useful point of analysis into the institutional logics of the Australian architectural profession. These plans and the way they are formulated provide a window on the socially constructed material practices, assumptions and values and beliefs that shape the cognition and behavior of architectural firms. Through qualitative interviews and a quantitative survey the different business planning practices in different sized Australian architectural firms is outlined. In overview, the extent to which firms utilise and employ business plans and associated planning methods is described. How these planning methods are inscribed into the educational curricula of architects is discussed. The details of business plans and planning processes are then evaluated. The institutional logics evident in business plans indicate the way in which architects structure their firms and how they collectively resolve conflicts between design thinking and the prosaics of efficiency.A model of instutional logics is proposed for the architectural profession that accounts for a range of reasoning schemas. This model incorporates the foundational logics of the aesthetic and business divide. But in addition it explores and suggests that several co-existing and layered institutional logics are at play in the profession. These logics are governed by concepts of gender, patronage, privilege, pedigree, gender, and an asceticism associated with the logics of craft. A logics of market survival is evident as a result of economic cycles of growth and decline. The model establishes how the foundational logic of the creative-business divide hampers the architectural professions ability to change given the rise of new technologies and procurement systems.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architecture; architectural firms; business plans; institutional logics. |
| Index terms: | planning process, interview, institutional logic, efficiency, reasoning, creativity, architectural firm, new technology, planning method, aesthetic, strategy, survey, profession, privilege, window, cognition, procurement system, architect, economic cycle, survival |
| Subjects: | business, profession, data collection methods, institututions, urban planning, contractual arrangements, environmental science, business management, innovation and technology management, performance management, factor and component analysis, architectural elements, theoretical framing, management, sociology, cognitive psychology, project controls, innovation and creative processes |
| Topics: | Ethics, Quality Management, Design Practice, Time Control, Engineering Principles, Research Practice, Business Strategy, Governance, Sustainability, Procurement, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
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