Since 2009 (the period of Professor Laura Lee’s residency), the Institute here in South Australia has been pressing for policy makers and others to better utilize the skills that we have as a profession, and utilize them earlier in the decision making process.

It’s been a long process, with plenty of setbacks along the way. And to be honest, until recently the outsider’s view of the profession has remained static – that we are the people to bring in once things are settled and there is a clear outline of what’s required, and we are commissioned to get on with designing a building for our clients.

For that matter, far too many architects subscribe to that view as well.

But in the last couple of months, I’m sensing real change. Our lobbying is gaining traction.

It started with a lunch with the Treasurer back in May where he was interested in how we can influence the supply chain here in South Australia, and how we should be involved early in the development of projects. See May’s e-News here

Ian Nightingale, the Industry Participation Advocate, has since taken carriage of this topic, holding a series of workshops with Institute members to better understand how our decisions influence the supply chain. The conclusion from these workshops has been clear – the earlier we can get involved in a project, the better the outcome will be for the state economy.

At the same time, the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) has been talking to the Institute to understand how the project procurement process can run more smoothly. Their issue has been that the briefs they receive from their respective agencies are not always fully formed, often missing the strategic opportunities, and they continue to have cost, time and quality issues on projects.

And they have acknowledged, and in fact asked, that we think about how we might help them guide the agencies for better considered briefs – in other words get us involved earlier in the process.

Lastly, after nearly two years of hard work, we have secured seed funding from the Department of State Development and the Department of Premier and Cabinet to establish the Adelaide Design Alliance. That funding was secured as a result of demonstrating the value that we brought as designers in developing export strategies in several sectors including Aged Care and Water Sensitive Urban Design (for more on the ADA see this e-News here)

Again, it’s a case of getting us involved early, bringing our design skills to the table to guide up front decisions and carve out new opportunities for our economy.

Its great news – the doors are opening. But are we ready for the potential opportunities it brings?

Can each of us walk into a room full of business analysts, economists, bureaucrats and experts and convince them to think about their issues differently?

Can we move past the idea that the solution is always going to be a building? Can we move beyond trying to reclaim the past and look to the future?

Will we say to a potential client that their brief is misguided and they need to totally rethink the issue?

And do we all have the skills to guide them through a rethinking process and really deliver value for them?

These are all fundamental questions. If your answer is ‘yes’, that’s excellent. If you’re not sure, read on.

At his closing address at April’s Institute National Conference ‘How Soon is Now’, University of Minnesota academic and architect Thomas Fisher delivered an address that mapped out a world where design and designers can be pivotal in unlocking some of the complex issues that we face as a community.

He has subsequently released a book “Designing our Way to a Better World”. In it, he describes numerous scenarios where architects can expand the value we bring to our societies. Many of them involve moving beyond the way that we traditionally have thought about design – that is the creation of physical things of great style and beauty.

Hand in hand with creation of physical space should be the creation of new ways of delivering services and operations – the ‘software’ systems to the ‘hardware’ of architecture. The idea is that a building is only part of the solution – it’s not the whole solution. And sometimes the building may not be the solution at all. Instead, we might just need to change the ‘software’.

In his introduction Thomas Fisher makes the following remark:

“Most designers have paid relatively little attention to the design of what we cannot see and have continued to pursue work in, give awards to, and largely focus on the world of physical design, despite the increasingly competitive nature of traditional design practice.”

I spoke to him over a drink after the conference and outlined some of the things the Institute has been doing here in South Australia to change this. He was intrigued to hear about them, and encouraged us to continue along a path that not many were yet on. In this path lies the potential for new business models, and new arenas in which we can deploy our skills.

So when the time comes – and it is coming – when we are invited into the formative discussions on a particular issue, we should think about stepping outside the business-as-usual ways we view our services. The goal here is as it has been throughout my term as President – to increase our relevance as a profession, and to grow the areas in which we can practice.