Bachman, L R (2008) Architecture and the four encounters with complexity. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 4(1), pp. 15-30. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
In the surge of scientific revelations concerning chaos, cybernetics and systems theory since the Second World War, architecture has been drawn into several encounters with dynamic complexity. Architects have often danced with this complexity, but there has never been a full embrace—the encounters only amounting to skirmishes between two radically different perspectives. Increasingly however, these two histories of design and science are convergent, drawn together by forces of post-industrial knowledge, society, globalization, economic interdependence and ecological sustenance. Through past literature, that convergence can be framed by four modes of architectural complexity—wicked, messy, ordered and natural—but the history of these encounters has seldom been couched in terms of their teleological and dynamic influences, nor have their separate operations been characterized or connected in a way that adds coherence. This paper addresses this missing history by making explicit distinctions between each of the four modes of architectural complexity, tracing their early proponents and characterizing their operations.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | complexity; design; gestalt; history; messy; natural; ordered; post-industrial; systems; wicked |
| Index terms: | coherence, history, society, interdependence, architect, globalization, systems theory, complexity, war, science |
| Subjects: | conflict and crisis studies, profession, human factors and perception, economic factors, communities and social development, theoretical framing, specialized education, organizational analysis, systems engineering, architectural and construction history |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Organizational Design, International Construction, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Stakeholder Management, Legal Issues, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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