Architect–BPS consultant collaborations:Harmony or hardship?

Abstract

Multi-disciplinary collaboration is considered necessary for solving complex designs, and belief in its merits is unequivocal in Architecture, Engineering and Construction (AEC) literature. However, this paper argues that collaboration is a challenging endeavour that entails creating a unified platform for professionals to converge. Challenges are compounded when the collaboration is for building performance assessments, as architects' and BPS consultants' worldviews are divergent. This paper presents part of a mixed-methods study investigating collaborative relationships between architects and BPS-consultants. Questionnaires are designed to re-test non-technical barriers in collaboration, described during preceding interviews. Six salient factors, representing barriers impeding fruitful collaborations are extracted, and inter-relationships are explored using inferential statistics. Barriers include perceptions about architects' attitudes toward BPS, using BPS for compliance, trust and communication between architects and consultants. Finally, this research illustrates how recourse to methodologies from outside the traditional BPS realm may open new research avenues in this field. KEYWORDSCollaboration; architects; BPS consultants; questionnaires; inferential statistics. BPS consultants' perceptions about communication with architectsCommunication is "human behaviour that facilitates the sharing of meaning and which takes place in a particular social context" (Llevrouw & Finn, 1990). In a building project scenario, communication is encircled around the open and timely exchange of knowledge, skills and information among project actors. Transparent and timely communication is likely to lead to improvements in co-ordination and decision-making. Simply put, "the better the communication, the better the design process" (Mesa et al., 2016).Consultants' perceptions about their communication with architects, and the impacts of communication on trust dynamics were further explored in this quantitative study. Eight 'communication' variables were featured in questionnaire 2, and are shown in figure 3, included in the factor analysis described in section 3.5.2. A composite variable was generated combining the results of all 'communication' variables (M = 3.184, SD = .533). This mean lies at the third point on the Likert-scale, denoting neutrality. Even though neutrality does not imply negativity, it does not imply effectiveness either, meaning communication between architects and consultants is probably not idea. Subtleties and different dimensions on communication are further explored in the sister paper of this one (Alsaadani and Bleil De Souza, 2016).While the issue of communication was not explored in the architects' questionnaire (questionnaire 1), it is unlikely that architects would feel that their communication with BPS consultants is effective, when BPS consultants have neutral opinions about their communication with architects.

Completing the Circuit: Workforce Development for Advanced Building Construction and Grid-Interactive Efficient Buildings

“…In the profession, energy modeling tasks are typically handled by specialists. Because architects tend to have a limited understanding of energy flows and energy modeling tools, trust in these tools is diminished, limiting their application in the early stage of the design process, when they can have the most impact on reducing carbon emissions (Alsaadani and Bleil De Souza 2018).…”

Performer, consumer or expert? A critical review of building performance simulation training paradigms for building design decision-making

“…Splitting the work does not necessarily mean that the student is collaborating with that professional; as the latter is not participating in the decision-making activity that remains the core objective of conducting the simulation. Collaboration is not a simple division of the design into a series of constituent tasks to be outsourced to different professionals, each of whom works on their part in a comfortable isolation from the other, attempting to piece the design back together into a whole at the end (Alsaadani and Bleil De Souza, 2017). Rather, effective multi-disciplinary collaborations can only occur once a unified foundation; an integrative platform for professionals to work together in harmonious synergy, is created (Alsaadani and Bleil De Souza, 2012;.…”

Architectural Models as a Base for Reliable Early Stage Energy Simulation

“…This process is proposed in Figure 5. Alsaadani and Bleil De Souza (2018) show that 62% of Architects agree that BP is most beneficial to the design process if they conduct it during early design stages, and consultants follow it up. This enables what Braasch (2016) found, which is that Architects want to only model the design once and are innately not interested in ensuring accuracy.…”

“…Therefore, an additional Engineering model is also created. Only 10% of consultants say they communicate results of calculations in a way that Architects can comprehend (Alsaadani and Bleil De Souza, 2018).…”