The Primary Generator and the Design Process

Department o f Architecture, University o f Sheffield, The Arts Tower, Sheffield SlO 2TN, UK

In the course of a research project designed to test various hypotheses about the design of public housing, it has been found necessary to study the design process of some architects who had been interviewed earlier. A plea is made for the use of subjective rather than scientific methods in the analysis of this type of material, and by extension for greater emphasis on subjective methods in design. Many descriptions of the design process have been based on an analysis-synthesis model which does not correspond to the design process as seen in practice. A new paradigm has been offered by HiUier, Musgrove and O'Sullivan, one of conjecture.analysis. This is supported by evidence from the present research findings, and an elaboration is suggested to give a model of the design process consisting of generator-conjecture-analysis. The new element is the primary generator, a broad initial objective or small set of objectives, seE-imposed by the architect, a value judgement rather than the product of rationality. Case material is presented to support the idea of the primary generator and the generator-conjecture-analysis model




Often in research a topic which was expected to be of minor importance when the research was conceived acquires a greater significance in the course of the project. The project which gave rise to the 'findings' reported here was not originally envisaged as 'design methods research'. It was intended to evaluate the design of some recent local authority housing schemes, with two main areas of interest. Firstly, it was intended to test current assumptions on the undesirability of high rise and high density, with the hypothesis that a well thought-out scheme at high rise and/ or density could be as satisfactory as a scheme at lower rise or density. (This hypothesis, it is worth stating, has not been supported by the results since high densities do seem to cause problems, although there is not a simple or automatic relationship between higher densities or high buildings and decreased satisfaction.) This is a slightly amended version of the author's paper in New Directions in Environmental Design Research (EDRA 9 Proceedings) edited by Walter E. Rogers and William H. Ittelson (1978). The author wishes to thank Dr Bryan Lawson for his advice and the R. I. B.A. for financial support.

Secondly, it was intended to see whether during the design of housing the architect has in mind an image or expectations regarding the future user, and if so whether this corresponds with the reactions of the actual user, his or her concerns and requirements regarding the home environment. The implicit hypothesis, that an environment seen as unsatisfactory by the user might result from an inaccurate perception of the user by the architect, has been difficult to test because of the very generalized nature of the architects' images of their users. The research procedure first required the selection of estates to study. These were chosen to minimize variation in factors extraneous to the research design, and at the same time to exemplify contrasts in their architectural design, especially in rise and density. It is not necessary to recount here the process of selection in detail; the outcome was that six estates were chosen (Table 1), all in London. A t least one of the architects of each scheme was interviewed at length and the interview taped. They were asked first to talk about their views on the design of housing in general and how these views had changed over time, then about the job history of the chosen scheme. In particular they described the evolution of the design, the existence or otherwise of an image of the future user, and the sourcels) of any image of this kind. They were asked whether the design was the work of a single designer or a team, and if by a team, how they worked together, There were questions on disagreements with clients or superiors, and on any changes the designer(s) would have made if faced with the same design problem again. The question wording and order were not standardized and the intention was for a conversational rather than an interrogational atmosphere. It was found that the designers were generally very willing to talk about their schemes and appeared to enjoy doing so, as if talking about a favourite child. These interviews were carried out in 1975; the schemes had been designed a few years earlier. The other part of the fieldwork consisted 0-f interviews with a sample of the residents on each estate. The details of these interviews and their analysis need not concern us here. It is necessary, however, to consider the problems of methodology that arise in the analysis of the architect interviews. These bring the researcher face to face with the endemic problem of the 'social sciences': how far can sociology use scientific methods to understand and interpret human behaviour? Is it permissible to use shared understandings to interpret subjects' comments? Or should the researcher try to stand outside their situation and avoid making assumptions about subjective meanings? In practice the latter course is impossible; the researcher has to use his or her subjective judgement and to realize that an analysis that was confined to 'scientific' methods would miss the most interesting points. The architects were interviewd by a researcher who teaches in a school of architecture; they assume she understands current issues in housing design: the swing against high rise, the constraints of the cost yardstick, schemes that have been influential, etc. They make passing references, assuming the interviewer shares their frame of discourse sufficiently to understand them. Scientific detachment is not a helpful stance here, except in so far as the reseacher must, in understanding the respondent's assumptions, also stand outside them and understand his reasons for making them. Thus 'social' methods offer a gain over 'scientific' methods of analysis. To quote Aron: 3 'Human behaviour presents an intrinsic intelligibility which depends on the fact that men are endowed with consciousness, with thought.' This willing embrace of subjective methods distinguishes this research from much of the large volume of past and ongoing design methods research.


0142-694x/79/010036-09/$02.00 © 1979 IPC Business Press


a process referred to by Hillier e t a L t ° as 'metadesign'. then to consider the interactions between these factors and to set performance limits on those factors that could be so treated. 12 Others attempted to 'design' a design process from first principles. 2 and recall their own processes would seem p r i m a facie to get closer to the truth about such processes. 1. This simple dichotomization had many variants. a threat to a good solution (see for example Whitehead and Eldars 18). but such simplification is an aid to clarity at this stage. 19 In this research it has been found necessary to treat the architects' accounts as i f they were accurate summaries.Table 1 Client (London Borough) Southwark Southwark No. It is significant that Alexander has now rejected this approach and that Hanson admitted that the method was cumbersome and that he did not intend to use it again. Only then was he to start synthesizing requirements to generate a form. Des. 1. A failing of the unified approach was that it paid little attention to the actual process of design as it occurred in 'real' situations. Individuals might differ in Vol. Some researchers will also dislike the fact that studying design methods in use reintroduces a differentiation in the act of designing between those in different fields. 7. although it was often expressed in diagrammatic form rather than in prose. into quantifiable form. if it has occurred. 4 among others. starting with clusters of related factors. through research. Rev. and post-rationalization by architects describing the process after the event. No. Wehrli 17 identified a range of problem-types. which would not be limited by preconceptions and would thus produce a better solution. It was to be hoped that the synthesis of various factors would almost automatically generate a form. bearing in mind that over-simplification and so on may have occurred. J. may give rise to a simplified model of the design process. where the number of potential solutions is infinite and multiple solutions are sought. Some of the architects interviewed in the present research found it difficult to describe a non-verbal process in words. and can always be elaborated if and when more sophisticated research techniques yield the necessary evidence. The fact that practising designers. involving elaboration of the main stages and often involving feedback loops. The view of the design process that informed most of the research of the sixties was based on an analysissynthesis model. although the non-quantifiable factors were progressively being transmuted. Different methods are appropriate at different levels of complexity. some quantifiable and others 'subjective'. J Bethnal Green Greater London Council Islington Islington 1/11/72 Archit. to the doubly open-ended problem. Insights were gained from the study of approaches to solving simple problems in laboratory conditions where scientific research methods could be applied. Sept. Des. Asking designers. As research and thinking on design methods proceeded there was more recognition of the complexities of the process. architecture. Lawson t2 and Broadbent. July 1979 37 . of dwellings 296 41 58 991 when complete 850 Density (persons per acre) 90 96 136 200 Estate Dawson's Heights Linden Grove Ked~eston W a l k Marquess Road Location Dulwich Camberwell Architects Borough Architect Neylan & Ungless Douglas Stephen & Partners Darbourne & Darke Borough Architect Alison & Peter Srnithson Interview with Kate Macintosh Michael Neylan Douglas Stephen John Darbourne & Jeremy Lever Richard MacCormac Alison Smithson Height up to 12 storeys up to 3 storeys 2 and 4 storeys mainly up to 5 storeys all 3 storeys Ref. did not use such a method was not seen as a drawback. planning. eg engineering or industrial design. but see Alexander 1 and Hanson 9 (in Broadbent and WardS). Oct. Such over-simplification. Some rather unfruitful attempts were made to observe designers at w o r k but it seems to the present author that the research material necessary to understand the design process is not a set of sketches but a knowledge of the mental process the deisgner goes through Observation of sketched and written o u t p u t is a curious way of obtaining such material. 72 THEORIES ON DESIGN METHOD In the early 1960s. have outlined the development of the field. albeit in a less verifiable form. This method. The following description is fairly typical of the methods being taught at the more analytically-minded schools of architecture in the sixties. The designer was to start by exhaustively listing the relevant factors. 71 Robin Hood Gardens Poplar Greater London Council 214 142 7 and 10 storeys Archit. with a single solution. subjectivity was felt to be full of risks. see for example Archer. although of course as research evidence becomes available on these fields this could lead to an improved new meta-theory. 25/4/73 Archit. Examples where the use of such a method has been described are few. Other problems include faulty recall. 16 In many cases these models were derived from the design processes of designers in other fields. 3/11/71 Archit. with minimal need for the designer to exercise subjective judgements. One hoped-for consequence of this would be the possibility of transferring much of the process to the computer. a fruitful new approach to design methodology was generated by the realization that 'design' as a process was common to various fields: the several specialisms within engineering. It was recognized that there were many factors to be considered in any design problem. and so on. Archi~ J. Existing solutions were seen as 'bromide images' (Chermayeff and Alexander6) that hindered the development of better solutions. has problems of its own. Pollards Hill Mitcham Merton 116 April 71 Archit. from the puzzle. industrial design. by and large. but merely as a sign of their backwardness. Sept 74 Archi~ Rev. of course.

'. there was growing d o u b t as to whether the analys~ssynthes~s model and ~ts elaborations could still prowde a satisfactory f r a m e w o r k into which the new thinking could f i t W~th hindsight. in that the researcher avoided making assumptions about whether the subjects could be expected to have a c o m m o n design process. w~th the very large number of potential solutions reduced by external constraints and by the designer's own cogmt~ve structures. a way/n to the problem. the 'conjecture' ~n the terms of Hdl~ereta/ T h e t e ~ m ' p r ~ m a r y g e n e r a t o ~ ' does not refer to that ~mage but to the ~deas that generated ~t m the case of Coventry cathedral. w~th a conjectuhe or conceptuahzat~on of a possible solution Furthe~ under standing of the problem ~s gamed by testing th~s conlertured solution Clearly m some cases where architects have. which had concentrated on what was t h o u g h t to be c o m m o n to all design However. a des~gner-~mposed constraint. supported the conjecture T h e ~ d e a o f a p n m a r y generator was found to be a useful way of conceptuahz=ng a particular stage m the design process. at this stage ~n a housing scheme typically just a target density and m~x of dwelhng sizes. say. but performances on these parameters are n o t specified m advance Once the ~n~t~al concept has been generated ~t ~s tested against these various requirements and modified ff necessary.labo~atl{)n ~1 bhu~e~ '~ *~ . used by the problem solver m order to structure the problem m terms m which he can solve ~t There ~s also a very practical reason why conlectures of approximate solutions should come early on Th~s ~sthat a v a s t v a n e t y of des~9ndeos~ons cannot be taken . that stage that precedes 38 DESIGN STUDIES . of a few simple objectwes to leach an initial concept was characteristic of these architects' approaches m design Th~ greatest variety reduction o~ nakrow~ng down of the Range ot solutions occurs early on ~n the process. science students more often adopted a problem focus. the performance levels wtth respect to parttcutar requirements are decided ~nteractwely. as wdl shortly be descnbed. in the hght of the effect on the emerging concept and on other parameters Naturally th~s process ~s often spiral or ~teratwe m character. the problem-focused and the solution-focused In solving an experimental. design ~s seen as a process of 'variety reduction'.their approach to design. although the types of error were different for the t w o groups The same author d~scr~mmated between the various constraints influencing a design They were cross-classified as being e~ther internal or external to the design of the budding ~tself. and b e m g ~ m p h c ~ t o r e x p l i c ~ t T h e s e d ~ s t m c t l o n s w d l be apphed to the case material later ~n the paper a conlectule Therefore dn. th~s =s why the process of des=gn ~s resistent to the inductive-empiricist rattonahtv so common tn the field A complete account of thedes~gner'soperat~ons during design w o u l d stdt not tell us where the solution came from Hence.before the solut=on tn principle ~s k n o w n conjecture and problem specification thus proceed s~de-by-s~de rather than m sequence' The present author's analys~s of her interviews w~th architects supports th~s proposed model w~th ewdence P r e h m n a r y analys~s of these mterwews was m~t~ally towards the inductive end of the mductwe-deduct~ve spectrum. not necessardy e x p l i c i t Among the archLtects interviewed various objectives served as primary generators to express the site. which revolved learmng as much as possible about the structure of the problem before attempting a soluhon The use of a solution-focus was more characteristic of students of architecture They learnt about the problem by t r y l n g a s o l u t t o n a n d s e e m g w h e r e ~ t w e n t w r o n g Both groups performed the task equally well. which was then tested a g a m s t t h e c a s e m a t e n a l Th~smatenal.s not rejected unless there ~s a fairly glaring m~smatch between tt and the detaded reqturements Probably the mare difference between the practising architect and the student is that the former has the experience of solution types required for a realist~cconlecture A frequent problem ~n a s c h o o l o f architecture ~s the student w h o has a hm~ted stock of gen eratmg ~deas which he attempts to apply to evmy problem w~thout considering whether they are appropriate The concept of the primary generator wdl become clearer w~th examples of ~ts operation in the design of the schemes m t h e s a m p l e We should f i r s t c l a r l f y ~ts relationship w~th the first conceptuahzed ~mage. and about the nature of any such process Yet the conjecture-analys~s model ~s ~tself apphcable at a meta-level to the process of 'analysing' (the language is deficient here) t h e m t e r w e w s the concept of t h e p n m a r y generator can be seen as a cen]ecture. to one of generator-conlec ture-analvs~s The ~ntervlews w i t h architects showed that the us~. chent or third party. or the analys~s does not dictate th/spartl cular concept rather than othm s The concept or objectwe that generates a solutLor~ Js here called the "pr/marygenerator" It can in fact be a group of related concepts rather than a single idea These objectwes form a starting p o i n t for the architect. to provide for a particular relatlonshLp between dwelhng and surroundings. as each of these has ~mportant ~mphcat~ons for the other The conjecture . the ~dea that the altar must A NEW MODEL These refinements certainly represented a conceptual advance on previous thinking. to rational analys~s or empirical investigation design =s essentially a matter of prestructurmg problems either by a knowledge of solution types or by a knowledge of the latenmes o f the tnstrumental set m relat=on to solut=on types. for example ~n housing design there =s frequent switching between considerat~ons of dwelhng type plans and considerations of s~te layout. for there to be a ' r a t i o n a h t y gap' either the visual concept springs to mind before the rational justifications tor such a form.particularly those which revolve other contributors -. he does not start by hstlng all the constraints Any particular primary generator may be capable of justification on ratbonal grounds. this can be seen m Kuhman terms as indicating an increasing need for a new paradigm ~~ Hflher etal [0 supply such a paradigm After clearly showing the inadequacy both of the ~mage of the design process and the percmved role of research ~n much of the thinking of the s~xties. Utzon on the Sydney Opera House and Lasdun on the National Theatre) a wsual ~mage came very early ~n the process I n o t h e t cases ~t appears that a certain a m o u n t of prehmmary analys~s takes place before the visual concept arises It seems normal. described their own process of design (well known examples include Spence on Coventry Cathedral. and the like These will be looked at m greater detad later on The broad requirements of the chent. to mamtmn somal patterns. proposed. but at the p o t n t when it enters the design process ~t ~s usually more of an artLcle of faith on the part of the architect. they propose the replacement of the analys~ssynthes~s model w~th one of con/ecture-analys/s To quote excerpts f r o m thmr paper which are relevant to the present paper only by prestructurmg any problem. can we make ~t tractable. e~ther exphc~tly or ~mphc=tly. however. des~gn-I~ke problem. Lawson ~2 ~dentff~ed t w o contrasting styles of operation. being ~mposed by deslgne~. are used along w~th the des~gner-~mposed primary generator ~n arr]wng at an ~mt~al conjecture or concept The designer has been aware all along that there are several detaded requirements to be met by the design.

and the des=gn ~sof two tall blocks with deck access. Site was again the starting point for Mtchael Neyland. the dwelhng types and how they mterlocked. 1 Dawson's Hezghts expresszng ]ts hilltop site (Reproduced f r o m Architects" Journal. obv=ously the s~te ~s a very unusual one. was buddable economically. was not a des0gner-tmposed constraint but was obviously a major determinant of the solut=on A w~sh to respect the scale of the nmghbourhood prompted the use of a steppingdown profile. No 1. a partner m the small firm that designed Linden Grove for the London Borough of Southwark This ~s a small scheme of about 40 houses plus sheltered housmg FJg. apart f r o m Note that the site is spontaneously described as 'the mare starting off pomt' The second factor. m London. and I always have been one of the romant=c school that t h i n k y o u should t r y to express the umque q u a h t y of the stte. and who had worked in Scandmawa where flats are common. alhed to themes of a phoemx arising from the ashes and so on The primary generator will be a component of the designer's 'cogmt~ve structures' referred to earher By becoming aware of Ideas that are acting as generators. and that s~te u n d o u b t e d l y has. 'as each "Lewathan" looks across the tall of =ts brother' Once the concept of stepping-down tall blocks had been estabhshed there was a great deal to be worked out m detatl whether to use a spht-level plan. roughly speaking. and we were adwsed by the London Umverstty soil experts that even if y o u put a single storey garage d o w n y o u ' d have to pile' EVIDENCE FROM THE CASE STUDIES The job architect for Dawson's Hetghts was Kate Macmtosh. ~f ~t has a umque q u a h t y . the designer may be able to evaluate them and wtden the0r range tf necessary the fact that y o u get magnthcent views in both directions was the fact that the hdl ts unstable. the sod strength. by a destgner brought up m a Scottish city rather than in England. with a romant0cally steppmg-down profile. so that was the mare starting o f f p o m t A n d of course the other pecuhar fact. etc Th~s process clearly fits the 'generator-conjecture-analysts' model Another factor should be mentioned. perhaps as a negative generating factor the lack of a presumption against flats. then at the London Borough of Southwark Her scheme was =n fact the winner of a small mtra-offtce competttgon for the site The sKte is a htlltop =n a suburban area. and o n l y the t o p th=rd. The highest points of the two buddmgs are a focus. July 1979 39 . and the objective of makmg best use of sun and v0ews suggested the staggering of the h~ghest points m each block.the way y o u arrived at the design. this sort of thing' 'Well. 25 Apr]l 1973 with permzsslon © ArchltecturaJ Press L t d ) Vol 1. and there are set-backs on plan so that the effect ~s that the ends of the two blocks curve mwards to g~ve a sense of enclosure The designer had two major preoccupataons at the start of the process to express thts umque s=te and to allow for difficult sod cond=t~ons To quote from the transcript I KM 'Would y o u hke to talk about the job h t s t o r y .

certamly not to let ~t entirely d~sappear. who has written about the scheme and ~ts debt to the Land Use theories of March and Martm (see Martin and Marcht41.te w a s a 'generattng thing' ( R e p r o d u c e d f r o m A r c h i t e c t u r a l Review. lookmg outwards That was one o f thegeneratmg thmgs' way down the mtddle To one side are 4-person matsonette~ with small gardens. usmg pedestrian streets "1 d o n ' t throe of house plans at all at the begmnmg ~ tl. p~oneered ~n their earher Ldlmgton Street scheme. Bethnal Green. that a type plan should be considered outside ~ts s~te.~ Earher ~n the mtervtew. to be solved m an mtegrated way The subjective ~s to be treasured The analys~s-synthes~s model ~s clearly wrong here. replymg to a question on whether they used type plans developed ~n previous schemes. the s~te had httle character o f ~ t s o w n however for Neylan ~tplaysan ~mportant and almost mystical part 'There Is so httle t o q o on. ~ncludmg a feaslb~hty study of rehabilitation of the exlstmg butldmgs as an alternat~vetonewbu~ldmg But t h e a ~ m o f a l l o w m g traditional wsual and social patterns to be retamed ~s clearly a self-tmposed constramt that arises from a value judgement It therefore takes tts place as an archetypal primary generator The next scheme to be considered is Pollards Hill. m modern a~ch~tecture.n ~ enttrely of the s~te and of the restriction% and there are not ~mlv spattal restrictions but also socLal restHchons on the stte Nov~ (th~s s~te) was very dpfflcult. ~s MacCormac ]3 and in the report on RIBAconference~nArch~t J . to g~ve a traditional townscape of streets and squares rather than the then current 'towers ~n a park'aesthet~c Th~salmwasextended~n Marquess Road to include the soctal oblectwe of prowdmg 'an atmosphere of house-dwelhng for everyone'. and ~t was on that partlculm level that I dec~ded to t r y and do a sort of funny section.~f not to recreate ~t. reached by bridges across the central walkway Douglas Stephen was mtervLewed. g w m g a h ~ g h d e g r e e o f p n v a c y The scheme is very mtr~cate and carefully worked out. he sa~d 'We d o n ' t thmk.t battle I had w~th the chents was actually to prove to them that you c o u l d do a Iowr~se htgh density scheme N o w my argumen~ was that the area was very deprwed of pubhc open space hut possibly even more so of pr/vate open space The[e was nowhere' where anybody could be alone. as an absolutely central thmg. The use of relattvely low rise solutions at very high dens~ttes. I mean the whole p o n t of good housmg ~s the relationship between the umt and what's around ~t' So the stte was a generator.. and th{ f~r. and to the other are 2-person flats with 6-person malsonettes above them The roofs of the 4-person units serve as roof gardens for the larger households. so when the conftguratton of the central street came about I d~d have thts somewhat m mind" F~g 2 L i n d e n G r o v e s. by Douglas Stephen and Partners The scheme ~s of 58 umts. had ongmally been for v~sual rather than social reasons. the s~te does become f r i g h t f u l l y ~mportant. 4. an appalhng s~te can d~ctate the whole kmd of (solution) where there are no wews outwards you tend to w o r k round the outside and look rewards. or do any of the thmgs that le~ depr~ved areas would be able to do. ~n an mgemous plan. but for the other three tt was not very ~mportant m that they used solutions which had been at least partly worked out for other contexts The other scheme where s~te d~d play a part was Kedleston Walk.and 6-person households. mcludmg opportumtles resulting from bemg on or close to the ground Another was the dtscovely of a local tradmonal form of working class housmg. and ~s very well hked by the tenants Unlike Dawson's Heights. ~t's one o f the only subjectwe non-measurable thmgs We t r y to get the buddmg to respond and breathe w~th ~ts surroundmgs To take an extreme. for 2-. again relatmg their forms to tradmonal patterns The designers d~d subject then scheme to r~gorous testtng against vartous constraints. but the fit w~th the generator-conjecture-analys~s model ~sgood Thes~te~sdescnbedasa'generat~ngth~ng'w~thout prompttng or previous use of thts term by the mterwewer Possibly the s~te would be found to be the stogie most common generator ~n housmg. with the addltton of a new two-storey type which was to be used beside the h~gher blocks. November ] 971 w~th permission ' A r c h i t e c t u r a l Pre~s L t d ) Th~s desire to mamtam traditional patterns appears agam as a strong element ~n Darbourne and Darke's Marquess Road scheme. and wce versa I r'neaR. 4 J u l y 1973 MacCormac was ~n fact one of a team of designers then w~th 40 DESIGN STUDIES . one of the reasons for Lmden Grove was that there were some good trees round the edge of thes~te So we tended to put ~t ~n the m~ddle. he was not the job architect but was revolved w t t h t h e e v o l u t l o n o f t h e d e s l g n HeLspoht~callyact~veand ~t could be said that a generatmg factor ~n the scheme was h~s awareness of the choice available to the councd tenant ~ n c o m p a n s o n t o t h e o w n e r o c c u p ~ e r Amajorobject~ve was to prowde opportumt~es for people to I~ve the way they want to. tf the destgn process was stud~edforalarge number of schemes For one more scheme ~n the sample the site played a role ~n generatmg the solution. m a rather drab backwater of the borough The design uses a pedestrian way down the centre of the long.for old people. and how the pedestrian street formed a communal ~ecreat~onspace) '1 so enjoyed th~sthat I consciously tned. 'hke a mews street' as the designers put et. Merton T h e l n t e r w e w w a s w ~ t h Richard MacCormac. w~tt~ d~agrams. March andSteadman. ~t was expected of m~ that I would put u p m t h e r t w o s l a b blocl-sor t w o t o w e r blocks. another objecttve from the outset was t o b u d d ~ n Iownse But for th~sdes~gner~twas clearly d~fflcult to separate out d~fferent factors ~n the destgn the process and the product are seen ~naholtst~cway The various requirements are facets of a stogie problem. to spread the hulldmg as much as I could over the whole c~f the s. narrowstte The 2 and 3 storey houses have the~r front doors on the pedestrian way and gardens on the other s~de. w~th a small prwate garden for family dwelhngs 'm a traditional relat~onsh~p to a communal space' A height of four to five storeys over most of the site was to keep the traditional London scale and to allow the church to retain its role as a wsual focus The dwelling type plans were taken over v~rtually unchanged from stage III of L~lhngton Street. and create what you can m the middle. agam usmg a pedestrtan Followmg thLs conjecture the designer had to analyse h~s proposal. to convince first himself and then the chents tt]at ~t d~d m fact satisfy the problem '1 sper~t a lot of ttme wandermg about t~n Bethrlal Gveent ainu almost Ln the tmmedtate w c m t t y of that particular s~te there was a particular Bethnal Green type of dwelhng ~t was one of the bases for th~s s~te ' (He then described these dwelhngs.

and had rejected a solution using malsonettes. all converged to make us feel that ~t was necessary to. developed at 116 persons t o the acre w i t h an almost continuous three-storey terrace o f housing t h a t =s folded r o u n d the outside of the site hke a Greek key pattern. September 1 9 7 4 wttb connect that pr=vate open space to a pubhc open space. wzth permzsslon © Architectural Press L t d ) F. July 1979 41 . the stacked buildings. and our ~ncreasmngawareness of the difficulties of budding buildings that put fam~hes w~th chddren off the ground. the d~fflcult~es of the consortium. have a radtcal rethink So we then brought into focus a ser=esof criteria which had been qu=te ~mphc=t in our criteria for the h~gh buildings. but were all clearly based on what you can do wath a house on the ground They were. -.g. before t h e y articulated and clarified the criteria which t h e y had been using unconsciously Jn rejecting the mmsonette solution When made explicit. A comphcatmg factor was t h a t t h e y were a t t e m p t i n g to design a housing system for use by a small c o n s o r t i u m of local authorltJes f o r densities up to 150 ppa This revolved n o t o n l y pohtlcal problems b u t difficulties w i t h cost w h e n budding t o densities lower than 150 'The high price. 4 Marquess Road retaining famzhar visual and social patterns (Reproduced from Archttectural Review. a b o u t 41 acres. to provide private open space. No 1. $ Kedleston Walk low-rise gives tenants better opportumtzes (Reproduced from Architects'Journal. of a kind that's assoc=ated w~th a hm=ted group of people who can feel some Vol 1. © Sam Lambert ) the L o n d o n Borough o f M e r t o n The site Is a large one. used on the outside f o r parking and on the inside as grassed play areas. I November 1972. giving access to the large central green space Th~s was a particularly clear case o f the design team learning a b o u t the p r o b l e m by t r y i n g to produce a solution The design team had been e x p l o r i n g the p r o b l e m for some time. btgger than a balcony . or 'a sort of intestinal g e o m e t r y ' ~n MacCormac's words A series of 'P' shaped courtyards are f o r m e d t o b o t h sides o f the block.obviously you can't do that econom=cally unless you do at on the ground. these criteria could be used to produce a solution acceptable t o the design team.Fig.

f o r m a l l y speakm9. in th~s case. once the criteria were made explicit they could act as primary generators the terrace concept was estabhshed and the analysis f o l l o w i n g this conjecture could concentrate on ach~evmg house plans. MacCormac said a brief comes about through essentially. m general to demonstrate their developing ~deas which they are usually forced to wr~te about rather than build. explores what is possible by making a conjecture at a solution The final case to be considered ~s the Smlthsons' scheme at Robin Hood Gardens T h l s ~ s t h e f t r s t r e a h z a t l o n of t h e S m ~ t h s o n s ' t h m k ~ n g o n housing the des~gn concept dates back to thmr Golden Lane c o m p e t i t i o n entry ~n 1952 As reahzed at Poplar. when asked about the source of the brief. and wdl pohce tt. to use materials m a way that respects their nature. and I can't qu~te see h o w you can do ~t in stack buddmgs "[hen we thought that access.Fig 5 Pollards Hill 'you can't start w~th a brief and then design © Architectural Press Ltd ) ' (Reproduced from Architectural Review. stte layout and detaded design which best met thmr criteria Later. after making a thorough study of the Smithson. namely the fact that the interview w~th Alison Smithson produced very httle reformation about the genesis of the scheme The interviewer was referred to thmr books The Robin Hood Gardens scheme ~s discussed prmcLpally in Ordinariness and L i g h t (1970) but thmr other bool~ and the plentiful wrttmgs a b o u t the Sm~thsons by others can add dues to their way of thinking and working These can lead the reader into stimulating new ways of thinking about architecture but shed httle dtrect hght on the Sm~thsons' design method A d~scuss~on of their concept of architecture mlght be fascmatmg but ls not relevant here It w o u l d be easy enough. and to the outside are sunken access ways to the basement parking. ~t consists of t w o concrete slab blocks of 7 and 10 storeys. the destre to make their own d e f l m t w e statement on the problem of mass housing. generally. you have to start designing and briefing s~muftaneously. w~th wkde access decks ('streets Ir~ the air') at every third f l o o r Between them Is a grassed m o u n d for children's play. and thus to provtde continued opportunities for exchanges of ideas w i t h the small international circle of desMgners and crlttcs w h o share their deflmt~on of architecture and are absorbed by s~mllar issues The p o i n t ~s that there ~s netther evtdence to support nor to deny thetr use of any particular process of design In the tradttlons of scientific method. because these two activities are completely interrelated' Th~s ~s a particularly s~gmflcant statement coming as ~t does f r o m a designer trained during the sixties at t w o of the schools which emphaslsed 'design methods' He was presumably taught to be aware of and ~n control of h~s own design process In sp~te of such a training he finds the 'analys~s-synthes~s' methods unworkable and instead. was much better to a house than to flats. and acoustic walls to the mare roads on rather side of the site The researcher is faced with a d i f f i c u l t y in attempting to test the fit of the 'generator-conjectureanalysis' model to the Smlthsons' design process. to suggest plausible generating objectives such as. a single contrary mstance~ssuff~cl~nttofalsifyahypothes~s Th~s is not the case here I n t h e f ~ r s t place the Smithsons do not 42 DESIGN STUDIES . ApHI 1971 w~th permzsszor~ sort of respons~bd~ty f o r the space. ~t's more convenient and there aren't indefensible (to use Oscar Newman's term) sorts of space' "Once we'd fhpped f r o m a stack dwelhng to houses on the ground we assumed a terrace would be the best way of doing ~t and the whole exercise. was to find a way of making a terrace continuous so that you can use space m the most efficient way In other words. as this paper has been suggesting. an ongoing relat~onsh~p between what ~s possible ~n architecture and what you want to do And everythmg you do modifies y o u r ~deaof what ~s possible you can't start w~th a brief and (then) design.

P AgamstMethod. Charles M. On the analysis of intu~t~ve deslgn~ processes. Lund Humphnes. or to provide a recipe for 'good' design This was typically the retention during the early phase of design methods research. Of course this model should be subjected to further testing. and the source of the designers' concepts The author feels that the most interesting direction for design research to take n o w is to find further ways o f ' l o o k i n g reside the designer's head'. Lund Humphnes.K Design from linked requirements in a housing problem. Umverstty of Chicago Press. It ~s hoped. 1963 Archer. 1973 Broadbent. 1962 Lawson. the trend m many branches of knowledge ~s away f r o m the concept of a single reigning theory Feyerabend 8 has recently pleaded for a less authoritarian w e w of knowledge anarchism ~snot only possible. 1964 Broadbent. and future research wdl. since these requirements could only become operat=onal m the c o n t e x t of a partmular solut=on There do n o t appear to be any cases in the sample where the requ=rements and thmr interrelationships were analysed =n detad =n advance of any conjectured solution Thus the analysis-synthesis model w o u l d seem to be refuted as a method which can readdy be used m practace The generator-conjecture-analysis model has a closer f i t w i t h the evidence presented here. 1969 Aron. called here p r i m a r y generators. John Wiley. A. J Christopher and Thornley. Truth and thmr more concrete predecessors. New Left Books. ~t ~snecessary both for the internal progress of science and for the development of our culture as a whole And. W J (ed) Envtronmental Design Research and Practice. 1975 Hanson. Pergamon Press. P Knowledge and design. C Commumty and Privacy. T The Structure o f Sclenttftc Revolutions. ' t h a t was one of the generating things'. and O'Sullivan.Fig 6 Robin Hood Gardens as detailed evzdence on design process constitute a 'contrary instance' but merely one where the facts are not known Secondly. they f i x on a particular objective or small group of objectwes. then gwe r~se to a proposed solutmn or conjecture. Rather they have to find a way of reducing the var=ety of potenttal solut=ons to the as yet imperfectlyunderstood problem. and 'we had three major s~mphst=c a=ms at the outset. L B The structure of the design process. S and Alexander. before we started thinking about the design =n detad' It =s clear =n most cases that the des=gn concept was arrived at before the requ=rements had been worked o u t =n detad. R. of exploring subjectivity The demal of the value of the subjective and the hope that the budding w o u l d 'design itself' n o w seem to be products of a sclentmstlc rather than a scientific way of thinking The image of the user imphed by this attitude was a mechamstm one. the requirements and their mutual =mphcat=ons were to be thoroughly studied before any a t t e m p t was made to reach a destgn solut=on It has been suggLsted m this paper that des. in Mitchell. Duty. Doctoral Thesis. G and Ward. D G (ed) Conference on Design Methods. to a small class of solut=ons that is cogmt~vely manageable To do th~s. the hypothes~s on offer Is not that all architects design according to a generatorconjecture-analysis model. Doubleday. German Sociology. but that many appear to do so (w~thout necessardy being aware of what method they use) and that it ~s a method which is more natural to use than the analys~s-synthes~s method which has been w~dely taught and advocated CONCLUSIONS The object of th=s paper has been to augment our understanding of the process of design as practised by architects It is n o t the author's intention to prescribe a single 'correct' procedure. or an elaborated version of th~s In particular. an a n t h r o p o m e t n c m a n m k m w~th certain enwronmental needs but no emotional responses The users' reactions. Lund Humphnes. be able to elaborate the model. 1963 Eastman. G T (ed) Emerging Methods m Enwronmental Design and Planning. Morahty.R Problem solwng m arch=tectural design. C The Determination of Components for an Indian Village. 1969 HiIher. whmh were once used to mttm~date man and restrict h~s free and happy development ~t w~thers away REFERENCES 1 Alexander. often I~terally violent. A (eds) Destgn Methods in Arch/tecture. in Broadbent. just as research on design methods should reflect the d~vers~ty ~n approaches to design It ts not necessary to prescribe one correct procedure to cover all cases. Cambridge. a sequence of boxes bearing parttcular labels. Umvers~ty of Aston m B=rmmgham. Chtchester. and hopefully to a more responswe architecture Such an architecture wdl reflect the diversity and anarchy of human hfe. W. B. Reason. 1972 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Vol 1. (eds) Design Methods m Architecture. which makes it poss=ble to clarify the detaded requ=rements as the conjecture =s tested to seen h o w far they can be met The evidence of the mterv=ews w=th architects has supported the suppos=tton that th=s =s the way that many architects do ~n fact des=gn They use phrases such as 'the s=te was the mare starting-off point'. July 1979 43 . 1972 Kuhn. No 1.gners d o n o t start w~th a full and exphc=t hst of factors to be considered. 3. rather than the way particular designers filled the boxes wroth concepts. in Jones. w i t h performance hm=ts predetermined where possible. perhaps t o differentiate between the methods of different designers. in Moore. Mass. A (eds) Design Methods m Architecture. m Broadbent. Mu~Jrove.the Gods. 196g Chermayeff. wh=ch has been briefly described above The method advocated m the sixties was one of analys=s f o l l o w e d by synthesis. G and Ward. M I T Press. to buddmgs designed w i t h th~s image of man have shown that such architects and architecture are hated by the pubhc A revaluation of subjectivity m design can lead to a revaluation of the subjective responses of the user. Umversity of Cahforma. at last joins all those other abstract monsters such as Obhgat~on. and necessardy so. G and Ward. to cntlc=se methods which d=ffer f r o m the model that has been proposed. for reasons that rest on thmr subjective judgement rather than being reached by a process of Iog=c These major a~ms. 1970 Feyerabend. usually strongly valued and selfqmposed. G Design m Architecture. The Free Press of Glencoe. and to explore further the mental constructs that give rise to the primary generators One of the shortcomings of the early phase of design methods research was that mt concentrated on design m o r p h o l o g y .

B and Eldars. Studt~ Vista. (ed) Environmental design research and practice. 1970 Wehrh. B. Charles. 1373 Yeomans. J P The Geometry of Enwronment. J Christopher and Thornley. M I T Press. R (eds). 1971 Mayer. D Momtormg Design Processes. Mass. W. Archlt J . 1963 Mitchell. T W. 1970 Smithson. 617 Martin.nglestoreybu~Idmgs. R Open-ended problemsolwng in design. Powell. RIBA. L and Steadman. 1966 44 DESIGN STUDIES .13 14 15 16 MacCormac. J Lo and March. 1972 March. P Without Rhetoric an Architectural Aesthetic 1955-72. A and Smlthson. Lat=mer New D~mens~on~ 1973 17 18 19 Supplementary References Banham. Pro¢ Design Methods Group First Int Conf . 1965 Smlthson. R The evolution of the design. The New Brutahsm ethrc or aesthetrc2 Architectural Press. A and Smlthson. to be pubhshed Jencks. Doctoral Thesis. Mass. Reyner. J and Talbot. A and Smlthson. Cambridge Umversity Press. Apprmsal =n the budding destgn process. 1964. University of Utah. M Z An approach to theoptlmal layout of s. 139. 1967 Smithson. 1970 Smlthson. Cambrtdge.J. Pengu~ 1973 Jones. Pergamon Pres% Oxford. M I T Press. Evans. . A (ed) Team 10pr=mer Archlt Des. G T (ed) Emergmg methods ~n envbronmental desLgn and planning. Wdey. Proceedings of the EDRA 3 / A R 8 Conf Umversltv of Cahforma. Modern Movements m Architecture. in Moore. London. 1972 Moore.n Changing Desrgn. London. London. Archer De~ 1971 (October). D G (eds) Conferenc. L (eds) Urban Space and Structures. G T (ed) Emerging Methods m Enwronmental Design and Planning. Cambridge. Faber. P Urban Structuring. on Desrgn Methods. 1968 Whitehead. P Ordinariness and Light. London.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful