Judging the AIA's Handbook of Architectural Design Competitions: Choosing a New Winner

Tonyali 1

Harvard University_Graduate School of Design Design Competitions, Spring’14

Judging the AIA’s Handbook of Architectural Design Competitions

- Choosing a New Winner

Tonyali 2


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

Foreword

1 Introducing the International Federation for Architectural Design Competitions (IFADC)

2 Competition Types

3 Elements of Architectural Design Competitions

4 Key Stakeholders

5 Work Sited

Tonyali 3


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am grateful for all who contributed to the process and encouraged this work, particularly to Professor Jerold Kayden for his support and guiding and to Professor Peter G. Rowe for sharing his exclusive memoir and to all guest speakers in ‘Design Competitions’ class for later contributions including, Douglas Woodward, Robert Campbell, Donald Stastny, Moshe Sofdie, Chris Reed.

Tonyali 4


FOREWORD

WHAT IS THE CURRENT SITUATION?

With the booming population and developing economies, built environment has reshaped from rural/agrarian to urban. 3 million acres of land are lost each year in the US through urbanization and more than China’s urban population doubled to 712 million, equal to %52 of the whole population, during the same period.

As a consequence of these situations and many more similar cases around the world, urbanization process has escalated to upper lines in governments’ agendas that enunciated the vitality of architectural projects because design competitions become a strategy to attract global press attention, support tourism economy, and encourage investment. On the other end of the spectrum, developers have seen the rising number of design competitions and a high demand for participation. In order to increase exposure for themselves they have also become a part of this trending business. In short, regardless of who the sponsors are, the need for design competitions has grown substantially.

Simultaneously in the last decade, the advancement in architect’s tool palette has enabled architects to produce much more than ever in significantly much less time. Browsing the architects’ recent works regardless of their company scale would render the hefty portion of their portfolio transpired after 2000’s. However, the advantage of fast production has lost its potency soon after the lawless design competitions brought along fast consumption. The hope in technological improvements that the profession welcomed with optimism at first, replaced with despair by the exploitation of increased capabilities of architects.

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?

The rise of architectural design competitions entailed inevitable consequences as well. One of the premiums of spread of architectural competitions, seemingly, has been that the architecture of the city upgraded to a level where it allows entrees all over the world, appreciates every architects’ idea and embolden their involvement. Yet, at the same time it builds a platform where the high level of competitiveness begets the most of the entries get depreciated and is being dismissive to all except for the winner.

This all sounds as the innate and innocent nature of the concept of competing. However, the fact that the fairness to all parties and all components of competitions is not stringently sought and enforced, the architectural design competitions - with the promise of choosing the best and increasing the quality of work - causes first, the number of losers be tenfold or even hundredfold of the winner(s) second, biased jurors to be tolerated and ignored or jury decisions to be manipulated third, unsatisfied sponsors due to the result of the competition fourth, the public voice to get muted or overlooked completely.

WHAT IS THIS WORK ABOUT?

Given the insights collected in Professor Jerold Kayden’s class in Harvard University Graduate School of Design named ‘Design Competitions’, this work aims to manifest a certain perspective to be realized in the making of design competition by referencing the AIA’s Handbook of Architectural

Tonyali 5


Design Competitions for being relatively the most comprehensive publication today although it has been inadequate addressing the fairness of competitions and setting a firm ground on which design competitions can be just to all stakeholders and other indirect beneficiaries.

Therefore, before design competition method is abandoned or less preferred due to high level of exploitation and having been false utilized, the unique opportunity that design competitions have offered to both individuals and public must be preserved.

Believing deeply the promises of design competition method, this work becomes very important to write especially for the reasons that there is no single institutional binding which can make the process just, and even the most reliable resources about architectural design competitions have been unresponsive to fairness problem and far from being suggestive, yet mostly focuses on the documentation of the practices for archives.

For above reasons, this work has been developed for those who have involved or likely to involve in architectural design competitions to portray how architectural design competition should be conducted, had the fairness is the priority of the business as it should.

According to this scenario, in the first chapter this work will introduce International Federation for Architectural Design Competitions (IFADC), the necessity for a federation, and the mission and responsibilities of IFADC.

In the second chapter, competition types will be readdressed in correspondence with the goal of this work, to make competitions fair. There will be a brief mention about why there is a necessity of condensing all existing types into one type that is second to none and even offers more variety within it.

In the third chapter, elements of design competition will be explained in detail unfolding the basics of design competition proposed in the work.

The last chapter is going to mention the key stakeholders of the architectural design competitions, their official responsibilities and obligations to each party.

Tonyali 6


INTRODUCING THE INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION FOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN COMPETITIONS

One of the major problems of current application of design competitions is that there are no laws and regulations enforced by an official institution that can protect the individuals’ rights. The AIA’s handbook also avoids addressing this deficiency in the whole system by providing only advisory and informational guidelines.

In default of the executive institution of the architectural design competitions laws and regulations, the design competitions have failed to be just:

To the clients when,

The expectations are not met The competition costs more than it is estimated initially The clients’ view is not taken into considerations or not represented properly

To the professional advisors when,

They act under the client’s influence They are underpaid The client cannot finance the competition expenditures

To the jurors when,

The juror team contains member(s) who is unable to evaluate the design The jurors force to act under client’s influence The jurors are not given adequate time for judgment They are underpaid

To the entrants when,

There are too much entrees The jury members are biased Their suitability for the competition is overlooked Their service is not fully compensated Their works are not published or publicized

To the public when,

Their needs and views are not taken Their tax or fund is overspent or turned to dust

In order to achieve a fair competition, we should understand that design competition is a huge business that grows exponentially every day and the laws and regulations must be set to increase the quality of the results and the efficiency of the production globally, to prevent unfair conduct, and to protect the rights of each party.

Apart from a team consists of four indispensable stakeholders: the client, the professional adviser, the jury, and the competitors, IFADC, which will be introduced in this chapter, is a proposed

Tonyali 7


international organization that makes and develops laws and regulations of architectural design competitions and plays a regulatory role in all architectural design competitions over the world to add the fifth stakeholder into the set as public and sixth as itself: a legal institution.

The necessity of an international federation is evidenced by the dire need for realization of first, the amount of architectural design competitions is inconceivable with numbers second, they take place almost everywhere and concern all human beings due to the fact that architecture does not belong to persons nor the nations but to humanity third, competitions are becoming the most preferred method of architecture profession, which combined with construction industry ranks in the top five industry of the world and needs to be seen as a very important business.

IFADC (THE INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION FOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN COMPETITIONS

The International Federation for Architectural Design Competitions is a non-governmental organization whose prime goal is to make and develop laws for architectural design competitions. The international Federation for Architectural Design Competitions makes the regulations for all architectural design competitions that are very foundation of the profession and the society that guarantees equality for each parties and indirect beneficiaries. IFADC, through its legitimacy, its experience, its methods and its credibility, has a unique role to play in contributing to realization of fairness.

- FOR THE ARCHITECTURE.FOR THE WORLD.

The world of architects is a place rich in natural beauty as well as a podium on which they enjoy their works. The built-environment, where architects are heavily active, is a sensitive ground not for only who designs it but also for the greater public. Unfortunately, the architectural design competitions are underused for the world’s good, albeit the miraculous opportunities that it offers to direct and indirect beneficiaries. IFADC now has even greater responsibility to reach out the design world, using architecture design competitions as a symbol of hope and better world.

Only with the unwavering dedication of every IFADC member can architecture in all its forms contribute achieving IFADC’s goals at a high level by protecting standards, encouraging competition and promoting solidarity in the architects’ world.

- A CHANCE AND A CHALLANGE

‘For the Architecture. For the World’ reflects the core element of IFADC’s mission and represent both a chance and a challenge: a chance for us to making a difference to people’s lives, and a challenge to balance this social element with our competence of overseeing the rules and helping organize fair architectural design competitions.

- THE FUNCTION OF ‘IFADC’

Attracted to countless architects around the world, architecture is the heart and soul of IFADC and as the guardian of this most cherished method of architectural production, we have a great responsibility. The responsibility does not end with safeguarding the Laws of the architectural design competitions it extends to:

Develops new rules and regulations

Tonyali 8


Creating an Architectural League Inspecting design competitions Protecting the rights of each party Responsible to restrict change or advise the entry fee Licensing professional advisors and sponsors Keeping a profile record of sponsors, professional advisors, and jurors Publishing and advertising the architectural works Archiving and documenting the competitions Determining the cost of services Determining the schedule for competitions Supervising the sponsors, and the professional advisors

Tonyali 9


COMPETITION TYPES

Popular competition types today are numerous but still allow too little flexibility such that in all cases, the crux of competition is focused on the winner, in other words being dismissive to the rest. Therefore, the interest of this work comes from the belief that current competition models are apathetic at times. The lingering emphasis on typical models only conduce more victims as the correspondence between the demanded outcome and applicants’ profiles is not sought at first.

The key point in this work is to transform and synthesize existing models into a single model that consists of a cohesive set of rules so that the logic that builds its foundation allow variations within one model to be extremely responsive for changing circumstances.

The system to be presented here is neither heroic nor the sole solution to the contaminated ethics of design competitions. It is a spark to be carried further, advanced and branched out in the future with revisions and adjustments. It will be constituted and developed merely by the users of the system.

The new competition method eliminates all former competition types but keeping their useful rules condenses them in a unique format. Although there is no variation available in the format of the new method, competitions do vary according to different parameters.

COMPETITION GOALS AND OUTCOMES

There are four different types of competitions each seeking different goals and outcomes determined by the AIA’s Handbook, which are project, idea, product and prototype competitions.

COMPETITION ENTRANTS

All competitions are open competitions in the new format. New competition type permits anyone in the design field to enter the competition providing that they qualify for the first stage, which is a modified version of competition formerly known as RFQ competition. The only difference is that other architects can send their qualification documents to the competition as well.

COMPETITION FORMAT

The format introduced in this work is a 4 staged competition that concentrates on different ideas and allow unconsidered entrants to get a chance to participate in the first two stages. In the last two stages, it focuses on reducing down the entrants substantially so that with a reasonable budget provided for few architects, the competition can achieve the production of highest quality designs.

COMPETITION REQUIREMENTS

According to IFADC’s rules any design competition must require:

A licensed sponsor with promising business record A licensed professional advisor A thorough program proposed by professional advisor Complete graphic and other illustrative materials required by the competition Precise rules and a schedule

Tonyali 10


A qualified jury Appropriate prizes and/or stipends Arrangements for publicizing the designs that qualified to the 3rd stage.

Tonyali 11


ELEMENTS OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN COMPETITIONS

It is important to consider if the design competition method is the most reasonable regarding the projects’ needs and aspirations. Sponsors may still consider the traditional procurement methods in cases which they find more lucrative, efficient, or feasible.

However, the design competition method presents a lot of advantages:

In general

Creates more successful projects for users and public Acts as an educational tool for sponsor, architects, and society Attracts attention of the press and the general public Broadens public discourse about design, as well as about the specific project

For sponsor

Enhances the credibility Increases exposure Allows reliable business with the architect Allows positive participation to the project Allows interaction with more than one architect Generates new ideas Creates projects both for sponsors’ and greater public benefits Better pays back the investment

For architect

Increases exposure Acquires expertise in a new building type Increases experience Uncovers new talents

Although the advantages of design competition method vary, each party should be very careful before running a competition or being a competitor. It is a very structured process, delicately calibrated to discover the best design whilst being just in every step of the processes.

The sponsor, the professional advisor, the jury members, and the architects must consider that the competition is illicit if the agreement does not comply with all the rules stated in IFADC Professional Conducts of Architectural Design Competitions. Some of the inappropriate conditions that may exist in the architectural design competitions are as follows:

The sponsor has not assured to compensate the cost of architectural service or does not hold a sponsor license issued by IFACD

The sponsor has not appointed a licensed professional advisor The professional advisor has not established a qualified jury The contract does not provide an adequate schedule for evaluation or project

Tonyali 12


DESIGN COMPETITION (IN)VARIABLES

As defined in the AIA’s Handbook of Design Competitions there are 8 variables in design competition to be further mentioned in this section. These variables are the points where many design professionals conceive as the flexibility of competition nature whereas this oversimplified form of ‘either this or that’ understanding is what threatens the future of design competitions.

We all agree on the systems that allow certain variations are better able to adapt changing circumstances but this can only be made possible with a robust core system that allows right amount of flexibility. In current situation, the ambivalent nature of the rules only favors certain stakeholders mostly the sponsors. Therefore, this chapter will explain how the new system introduced changes the definition of preconceived variables in architectural design competitions.

- SIZE OF THE PROJECT

The size of the project affects the type of entrants.

As small projects promotes less profit, they can require less qualification and less experienced architects or students stand a better chances in this type of competitions. Sponsors on the other hand, may not prefer to run a competition for small projects as they may not worth the time and the money required. But non-profit entities may find it easier to run such competitions as they have limited budget and they can compensate the entrants’ expenditures. These competitions will provide great opportunities for the less experienced architects allowing them to compete with similarly experienced competitors.

Complex programs of larger projects demand more qualifications therefore only the teams who display an adequate performance can qualify. The prerequisites of a competition are sensitive process and licensed professional advisors should be able to adjust these requirements. This way sponsors will know the qualified architects are likely to meet the expectations.

Also, the sponsor can obtain statistical data of the companies’ works from IFADC, and invite his/her own candidate that he/she thinks suitable to compete in the competition. The rules and conditions concerning competitors invited by the sponsors will be explained later.

- QUALIFICATION

Qualification criteria can change according to the level of exposure that the sponsor and the professional adviser want for the project. By changing the prerequisites, the professional advisor can delimit the number of competitors to qualify at the first and second stage of the competition where the entrants do not invest too much yet. Depending on professional adviser’s understanding and insight of the specific project the prerequisites can be extremely high.

However even with the least prequalification required to compete for the first and second stage, the number of teams must be reduced down to 10 or under at the end of the 2nd stage and 3 or under at the end of the 3rd stage.

This new qualification limit allows every architect and architecture students to participate in any competition if they can meet the prerequisites. However, cutting the upper limit down to 10 in the 3rd stage of the competition will save competitors’ time greatly and give opportunities to pursue

Tonyali 13


another competitions before getting used up around one competition and disappointed in the end. With this forced early elimination, the design competitions world-wide will have tailor-made entrants because many architects would be saved from being busy with one unfit competition too long.

Besides, this will mean the every competition brief is accessible. Creating this transparent business, and opening the briefs up to public especially the less experienced architects or students will have a chance to individually follow the briefs and the winners and discover their own strategy by interpreting the parameters that lead to the success. Every time passing, they will be better equipped to the 1st and 2nd stages and get used to the requirements. This is one of the harmless way in which architectural design competitions can play an educational role.

- SELECTIVITY

All competitions must be open to everyone in the profession who can meet the prerequisites for the 1st stage as IFADC indicated. Some entrants can be invited to the competition if they are believed that they are suitable for the design task however, they also have to qualify after documents for prequalification are sent.

The idea is to make all competitions both open and limited to the invited architects. By that, if at the first stage jurors decide to see entries in the next stage other than invited ones, they can carry over those designers to the next round letting them develop their idea. This will give everyone an equal chance to try and let go without getting too much invested but on the other hand, it will leave the door open for surprises and alert invited entrants who see the competition taken for granted.

- COMPENSATION

We live in the age of production and every drop of idea may be beautiful once it is planted but if they die in the air they are meaningless. With the new one type competition more ideas are valued, evaluated and then freed if they are not promising enough. For the global circulation of ideas and teams for different competitions, the quicker this process is the better it is.

In present approach, the sponsors think that they will get to pick a better project only if more team is shortlisted. However, from another perspective because all sponsors carry the same attitude the architects are competing for more projects at a time with less chance to win. Besides, this situation decreases the quality of the work inevitably and it does not bring efficiency as it causes so many unrealized works that are so much developed.

The new system proposes not too much investment to the projects up to the 3rd stage, decreasing the stipend costs for the sponsor. Also limiting the number of entrants 3 or less in the final stage, sponsors can afford to pay more for lesser teams. Because the architects will know that their work is compensated and stand a better chance to win, new system will increase the quality of work and make design competitions positively more competitive.

Except for the first and second stages of the competition, the sponsor must pay the cost of architectural services to the entrants determined for each project by IFADC. Entrants will not be compensated more than the average cost of work calculated according to IFADC rules and regulations, however it is on their own had they see a necessity to spend more to their project.

Tonyali 14


This process will cut unnecessary expanses that sponsors usually make to numerous entrants as in the former competition types, and maintain the design competition method preferable for sponsors as they have to allocate almost same amount of budget for running a design competition.

- JURY COMPOSITION

Jury composition is one of the crucial parts of achieving a fair design competition. The representation of different ideas plays an important role of the selection of the best projects. That is why IFADC applies semi-flexible jury composition that can vary for each competition. According to the architectural design competition laws jury composition may vary according to the professional advisor’s and the sponsor’s preferences but must meet the number of 7 without any exception.

The most diverse jury can include 4 jurors selected by professional adviser, 1 juror assigned by IFADC, and 2 jurors selected by the client.

If the sponsor wants to be represented, the maximum number of seats allotted to the sponsors’ representatives is limited to 2. All representatives of the sponsor must be experts from the design profession and realized by IFADC. In any jury composition, 1 jury member out of 7 must be assigned by IFADC. The rest of the jury members must be selected by the professional advisor. The total number of jury members cannot be greater or less than 7 as indicated in IFADC rules.

All of the jury members must have equal voice at every stage of the competition and the all sessions must be presided by a jury manager who must have no voice in the decision making process. Also, the professional advisor cannot be a part of the jury in the same competition.

All jury members must be experts from the design competitions.

- STAGES IN COMPETITION

The competitions are made in 4 stages.

The first stage is an open stage which requires entrants to submit their background and relevant experience without asking them for any design work. This may include different intensities of designer’s bio, statement of design intent, projects or relevant documents of why they think they fit for this project. The professional advisor should determine the expectancy and intensity of each document that will ease the selection process for the first stage. If the sponsor has reached out to other architects that he wants to see in the project, those teams are also required to submit their application for the first stage.

The jury can only eliminate at most two third of the architects who are either invited by professional advisor or the sponsor. This is a semi-protective rule for the professional advisor and sponsor’s candidates but it also gives chances to other entrants who are not invited. This increases the competitiveness as the invited teams can be at risk if they are found lacking of ambition or being insufficient for the project by the jurors. One other promise of this system is that jurors can act more freely from the professional advisor and the sponsor. That will greatly reduce the chances of competitions without a winner happening.

Tonyali 15


At this stage neither the sponsor nor the client are expected to answer project related questions and must not be in contact with any entrees. This rule is to speed up the first stage and limit the budget allocated for the first step.

This stage cannot take more than 3 days after the competition is announced and the jurors must not be present altogether. The evaluation of the first stage can be made remotely by asking each juror to select maximum 3 to be qualified for the second stage. If the number of entrants is less than 21, a judgment session must be held and all jurors must be present. In this case, the jury decides together on the projects to be qualified to next stage.

At the end of the first stage the jury must select at least 3 projects to qualify to the 2nd round. If they believe 3 or lesser projects should be qualified to the next round, they still must allow 3 teams to continue to the next round.

The competition cannot end without a winner at first stage. If the competition will end without a winner, it can be done at any stage after the 1st stage.

The second stage demands the initial ideas and concept drawings from the entrants to be able to see if their initial work is promising to keep up with their background and ambition that qualified them to the second stage. This stage also cannot take more than 2 weeks. Within 2 weeks the teams are expected to deliver their submittals and the jury must get together to decide on the entrants to qualify to next stage. At this stage jury cannot select more than 10 entrants to go further to the third stage.

The third stage demands ten projects to come up with individual concept proposals. During this time, the entrees can ask questions to the professional advisor and the meetings with clients must be arranged on a regular basis.

Technical and non-technical consultants must be assigned at this phase of the competition to give technical insights to each team and approve their projects. Technical teams can be hired directly by the professional advisor. At the end of the 3rd stage, only the projects that have approval from technical consultants can be reviewed by the jury. After the jury review maximum 3 teams can qualify for the 4th stage.

At least one of the invited teams must qualify to the third stage if the competition is not ended at the end of the 2nd stage. If none of the teams can obtain approval from technical consultancy team at the end of the 3rd stage, the competition automatically ends without a winner and no judgment session is held.

The maximum time that 3rd stage can take is limited to 6 months.

The sponsor and professional advisor are responsible to publicize the jury report at the end of the 3rd stage and public voting for the projects must be made before the teams move forward to the final stage. This public voting is not a determining factor to the final jury decision but it is a commentary level feedback to the designers. These statistics of public opinions will be recorded in IFADC to rank the companies’ works to different criteria. However, the more direct influence of public view to the project occurs at the very beginning. The public opinion is integrated to the project at the beginning as the professional advisor must include in the programme of the project.

Tonyali 16


At the 4th stage, technical advisors again need to be active and their approval is mandatory for projects to be presented to jurors. Client meetings are another important part of this stage as it is in the 3rd stage.

The time for final stage can change according to the project size and complexity. The jury may or may not select winner at the end of 4th stage.

- ADVISER

In all competitions sponsors must engage a licensed professional advisor, backed by an advisory and approval board. Architects must be aware of the legal consequences of entering a competition that does not comply with this rule.

- PRODUCT EXPECTED

It should be clearly stated in the competition brief by the professional designer that all submission elements and level of detail must be defined in particular. The IFADC have the right to judge invalidate the competition had there is any objection to these terms.

Tonyali 17


KEY STAKEHOLDERS

COMPETITION SPONSOR

The sponsor plays the most crucial role to determine the success or failure of the competition process.

If a sponsor wants to hold a design competition, he/she must have a sponsor license that is issued by IFADC. This license will prove his clear bank records and related activities and give him the rights to hold a design competition. The professional advisor must make sure the sponsor holds a license before signing off an agreement.

When a sponsor holds an architectural design competition, it obligates itself to running the competition in accordance with laws and regulations enforced by IFADC.

This means that prize money, fees, and honoraria must all be awarded based on the rules of IFADC. The sponsor also responsible for hiring a licensed professional advisor to start off the competition processes and must also pay for the technical advisory board and jurors’ costs.

The sponsor cannot invite more than 5 architects and cannot assign more than 2 jury members.

PROFESSIONAL ADVISOR

Professional Advisor’s must be recognized and certified by the IFADC. As a consultant to the sponsor, the adviser is the individual who is most directly responsible for planning, organizing, and running a design competition. The advisor’s responsibilities fall into six key areas:

Survey and data collecting: Searches out for public view, demand and comments about the project by different methods and reports and involve those facts into the program

Program: Develops rules and working documents explaining what the content and conduct of the competition will entail, including announcements, rules, instructions, program information, and reports

Organization and structure: Plans, organizes, and manages a competition to attract a wide array of outstanding solutions for the sponsor’s problems

Review: Selects a highly qualified jury and establish a collaborative chemistry within it General oversight: Prepares the competition terms so that competitors, jurors and client receive

fair treatment Inviting the competitors: May invite architects to participate in the competition

These major duties require that the professional adviser serve as an impartial liaison among sponsor, jury, and competitors. To ensure fairness, the adviser must be an independent architect, urban designer or planner – ideally combination of all - who is capable of objectively approaching a competition.

- CHARACTERISTICS OF A PROFESSIONAL ADVISOR

Since all professional advisors must hold the license to be appointed to work as a professional adviser, the sponsor may wish to work different types of professional advisors that range from the least to the most stringent. Depending on their individual stand point, professional advisors can

Tonyali 18


encourage or discourage extreme, innovative, experimental, ground-breaking projects as long as they comply with the conditions enforced by IFADC.

- SELECTING A PROFESSIONAL ADVISOR

The sponsor should choose professional advisor by browsing their portfolios or success rates or their preferred coworkers. Sponsor may also conduct interviews with each candidate to assess the degree of personal, aesthetic, and organizational compatibility before making a selection.

The sponsor can also obtain information and statistical data from IFADC about the professional advisors and evaluate their works with numbers as well.

- COMPENSATION

The sponsor must offer an agreement to compensate no less than the cost of professional advisor’s service stated in the IFADC’s regulations under table of estimated cost of professional advisor’s service according to project size and complexity.

- PLANNING THE PROCESS

During the course of a design competition, the professional adviser should be involved in the following tasks:

Determining the feasibility of holding a competition Examining the sponsor’s preliminary program, site, and budget to assure they are sound Collecting data from public view, conducting surveys and synthesize all into the final program Planning the overall procedures Scheduling the order of events Determining the budget for competition and assure that the sponsor is a licensed sponsor Writing the procedural rules Preparing and testing the project program Writing the submission requirements Selecting and composing the part of the jury Hiring technical and non-technical consultants or team of consultants in the name of a client Planning logistics and handling Writing a competition announcement

- SUFFICIENT FUNDING AND AUTHORITY TO HOLD A COMPETITION

The adviser must make sure that he/she is working with a licensed sponsor and be convinced personally to the fiscal responsibilities of the sponsor. Failing to do so may cause disempowering of a professional adviser and lose its license.

COMPETITION JURY

In architectural competition, the function of the jury is to examine all design submissions with respect to the program requirements, review and evaluate the competitors’ designs, prepare reports reflecting their individual views and judgment criteria, and recommend which project to be qualified.

Tonyali 19


A qualified jury adds expert judgment to the competition selection process. It also guides the sponsor with a level of architectural advice that is not available in commissioned work. If the sponsor feels strongly that an architectural problem requires a design exploration by many professionals, then the selection of the best should be made by experts in the design field.

- COMMITMENT TO THE COMPETITION PROCESS

All jury members must meet the requirements of the competition rules and dates set by professional adviser and must be available for every scheduled meeting, jury, and consultancy that is mentioned in the contract and the IFADC rules.

- OBLIGATION TO THE JURY

It is a jury’s obligation to abide by the program in judging all submitted work. It is essential that before agreeing to serve, prospective jurors devote an appropriate amount of time to a careful examination of the draft version of a competition program, paying special attention to the objectives of the program, composition of the jury, dates established for judging, and the tasks assigned to the jury.

When a competition program imposes independent criteria, such as a geographical context, social conflicts or political atmosphere of the project location, a specific type of building, jurors must consider even more carefully the invitation to serve and satisfy themselves that the sponsor is able to obtain reliable information concerning the special conditions.

On the other hand, juries must compose of only design professionals. Other aspects of the project whether technical or not are discussed on the sub-stages of the competition as in the body of a technical advisory and approval team. This enables the jury to discuss the technically approved designs on a very high sophisticated level to single out the best out of the final options.

By accepting the position, jurors agree to abide by the rules of competition. In effect, they are bound to the following:

Have no contact with any of the competitors Devote themselves fully to the task of evaluating entries on the days established for judging Abide by the requirements of the competition program in evaluating competitors’ entries Make every effort to arrive at a consensus regarding the selection of a winner Submit a report explaining their decisions

- COMPENSATION

Jurors must be compensated for their time. At a minimum, their travel, lodging, meals, and expanses must be paid by the sponsor. However the sponsor may limit the budget for jurors’ expanses which may require professional advisor to compose another jury or negotiate with the sponsor. Nevertheless, the minimum budget for jurors’ expanses is determined by the IFADC’s standard cost of jury service according to the project size, complexity, and project’s location. Sponsors must pay this minimum amount to run a legal competition.

Tonyali 20


- JURY SELECTION

To select the jury, the sponsor may leave the selection of the jury to the professional advisor or may want to be represented. If he/she wants to be represented, he/she can determine up to 2 jury member under the condition that they are from a design profession and recognized by IFADC.

The sponsor may also ask for IFADC’s supervision to reach out to architects who are in line with the sponsor’s view.

- COMPOSITION OF A JURY

The sponsor has the right to determine up to 2 of the jury members providing that they are designers or have design backgrounds.

In all conditions, one of the jury members must be always assigned by the IFADC. Whereas the rest of the jury members or in the case of no sponsor involvement, all jury members except for the one assigned by IFADC must be selected by the professional advisor.

Non design consultants cannot serve in the jury. Competitions with specialized purposes such as the use of certain building materials or the exploration of particular themes such as energy conservation may seem to require non-designers in the jury. However, jury is a highly sophisticated ground where the design should be discussed.

The environment in which a politician, a neighbor resident, some designers can discuss to single out the best design, is not productive, yet it is impossible to justify any of the comments that non-designers can make. Their views are surely important but a mixture of people from different backgrounds trying come to a decision on design is a counter-productive environment. Besides, in the judicial process of determining the winner, if one of the finalist projects is found structurally unstable or not properly equipped or has poor acoustics and this is realized by one of the non-designer jurors, this may only be an example of the false competition. If the competition had structured better, we would expect that that design would not have made to the finals or it would have changed accordingly.

The new system proposes all non-designers such as local community leaders, board members, politicians or if the sponsor is public agency, neighbor residents, building industry representatives to be assigned in the body of non-technical advisory board that is active in the 3rd and 4th stages of the competition. They are also given the right to approve or disapprove a project from their point of view and report it to the jurors.

If a project is not approved by technical consultants, it is automatically disqualified. However, a project that is approved by technical consultants can only be disqualified without jury’s will only it is disapproved by all non-technical advisors.

With this new system, the jury can make its decision only seeking the best design that will create a substantial change in our built environment.

Tonyali 21


- THE JURY MANAGER

The jury manager is an individual or a group of people that assure every juror’s voice is equally heard and understood. The jury manager cannot form a view on the projects.

- THE EVALUATION PROCESS

A jury’s selection of award winners is made by progressive elimination of entries. At all stages, during the deliberations, elimination decisions must be made by voice vote. The exchange of views that takes place during a jury’s deliberations is important as it is the only way of consensus.

In the first stage, jurors must look at all entrees document about 5-10 minutes. The time allotted for this phase cannot exceed 2 days and it is determined by the professional advisor.

Every competition must ask for submission of the names of the entrants within 3 days. If the situation is such that there is a high demand more than 100 applicants are considering enter, they may ask for entry fee to decrease the entry demand to be transacted within 24 hours.

If the numbers are still greater than 100, they must accept all entrees to the first stage.

However the professional advisor cannot ask an entry fee more than $50 at the first announcement as required by IFADC. If the professional advisor increases the entry fee to reduce the numb6er of entrants after seeing the demand is more than 100 entrants, this is categorized as a high demand competition and the professional advisor must regulate the rules with IFADC supervision.

At the end of the 2nd stage, the number of competitors must be reduced to maximum 10 by the jurors.

Jury must meet at the end of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th stage.

The 4th stage finalizes the competition by selecting a winner and ranking the rest or report that no projects found worth to be awarded.

Tonyali 22


WORKS SITED Campbell, Robert. Design Competitions Harvard University GSD - Design Competition Class

Members. 2014.

Federation Internationale de Football Association. n.d. 2 5 2014 <http://www.fifa.com/>.

Foster + Partners. n.d. 7 4 2014 <http://www.fosterandpartners.com/>.

Frampton, Kenneth. "Megaform as Urban Landscape," 1999 Raoul Wallenberg Lecture: Megaform as Urban Landscape, (New York, NY: University of Michigan A. Alfred Tabman College of Architecture + Urban Planning and Kenneth Frampton, 1999). International Federation For Human Rights. n.d. 2 5 2014 <http://www.fidh.org/en/>.

International Union of Architects. n.d. 3 5 2014 <http://www.uia-architectes.org/en#.U3HAtfldXAw>.

Maps of World. n.d. 15 4 2014 <http://www.mapsofworld.com/thematic-maps/world-urban-population.htm>.

OMA. n.d. 6 4 2014 <http://www.oma.eu/>.

Reed, Chris. Design Competitions Harvard University GSD - Design Competition Class Members. 2014.

Rowe, Peter G. Design Competitions Orcun Tonyali and Thien Nguyen. 2014.

Sofdie, Moshe. Design Competitions Harvard University GSD - Design Competition Class Members. 2014.

Stastny, Donald. Design Competition Harvard University GSD - Design Competition Class Members. 2014.

The Handbook of Architectural Design Competitions. n.d. 15 3 2014 <http://network.aia.org/resources/viewdocument/?DocumentKey=401c1518-c434-4850-8194-826f0d55a126>.

Woodward, Douglas. Design Comeptitions Harvard University GSD - Design Competition Class Members. 2014.

Urbanisation in China, China's Chicago, July 26, 2007, Chongqing, The Economist - A giant city in the south-west is a microcosm of China's struggle to move millions from rural to urban areas.

Zaha Hadid Architects. n.d. 5 4 2014 <http://www.zaha-hadid.com/>.

http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9557763

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chongqing

Judging the AIA's Handbook of Architectural Design Competitions: Choosing a New Winner

Documents