We Need a Plan
“Right now, we’re screwed. A year from now, we’ll really be extremely screwed, and in two years, it will be end of days...” That colorful sense of urgency is how the meeting started. It was recently announced that over the next five years there may soon be up to 75 new research groups coming to the university. All part of a plan to accelerate groundbreaking global research. Attract and retain the most talented and productive groups possible. Teams with research needs that won’t really be known until they arrive or are on their way. Creating research environments can be slow work. Not to mention existing research growth and the need to navigate productivity, space allocation, legacy agreements, departmental culture, academic expectations, research continuity, zero available space and fifty-plus year-old building systems... And, of course, tight budgets. Tick-tock. We need a plan.
The obvious solution, the one most thought was the logical path forward, was to build a new building. Of course! 150,000 square feet ought to do it. Nope, not an option. Too much money, not enough time. What to do? Solving this problem will require cleverness, a different mindset, and immersion into the way in which innovation can be brought to the work of creating and integrating research environments. Find the potential that exists within what is already there. A deep dive defining a path forward to an actionable plan. Not a report to sit on a shelf, not a series of conceptual planning ideas, not “ideal scenarios”, but actual implementable project development. Understanding and putting all the pieces together through clear intent. Time to crawl in.
The parameters set were surprisingly broad, maybe a sign of openness to new solutions or recognition that a project of this scale and complexity needed some elbow room to find a way. But there are really only two: 1. Focus on four primary departments: Earth Sciences, Physics, Engineering (four departments) and Chemistry (and we didn’t even follow this one, we need to understand the entire research profile - Biology came later), and 2. Look for potential to drive and facilitate interdisciplinary collaboration across research areas. Everything else brought to the project were questions. Questions about capacity, organization, adjacency, capabilities, core facilities, quantity, money, schedule, sequencing, priority, impact, continuity, operations, safety, efficiency, policy - and sharing. Sometimes we need new ways to understand and evaluate our environments.
Through the development of catalyst projects at different scales, some of those questions will be answered. Building a set of operating principles will encourage the team to answer others themselves. Creating in context a regenerating series of projects where the next one builds upon the one before. One that designs with, and for, change. Change that begins with common understanding and clear insight. When powered by immersive insight, clever design strategies transcend, connect, and inspire action.
We’re at the optimistic and energized beginning. Questions are broad and problems undefined. Project beginnings by nature have energy, lots of energy, sometimes too much energy. Driving a team forward too fast. Starting slow to go fast makes sure we’re not down the road too far to come back. Too little time is being spent on the development of the project approach, too much faith in a prescribed process. Working with the design team gathering data and helping to understand the unique character of this environment. We’re facing a level of complexity that is clearly tempting for the team to drive right through in search of a path to clarity. We need a plan…