ARCC 2009 - Leadership in Architectural Research, between academia and the profession, San Antonio, TX, 15-18 April

2009

Rethinking models of architectural research:

we don’t do objects

Jim Stevens1,2, Philip Plowright 1,2, and Anirban Adhya1,2

1
SYNCH Research Group (synchRG)
2
Lawrence Technological University, Southfield, Michigan

ABSTRACT: Historically, an argument can be made that architectural research was produced internal
to firms and manufacturers as proprietary objects or sets of data. The concept of disciplines and
professions reinforced the separation of open-sourced knowledge and the application of that
knowledge in a commercial context. However, design has rapidly changed from an object-solution
profession and is now faced with finding solutions to complex problems within complex systems. The
past practice model of client, architect, and final product seems an ill-fit in this new context. The
question is how to integrate a critical research process into a professional capacity in which that
architectural research needs an inherent and immediate value to be performed or pursued.
The SYNCH Research Group [synchRG] was formed in response to this question. Although research
consortiums, design initiatives and research centres exist within many schools of architecture, most
operate as a department or extensions of a school of architecture. SynchRG operates in neither
private practice nor as a division of the university. Organized as a diverse and fluid association of
faculty, students, professionals, and consultants, the synchRG group is focused on a design
methodology and philosophical structure rather than a client, site, building, typology, or object. The
focus on idiosyncratic or aesthetic solutions to singular problems is set aside in order to provide a
collaborative intellectual space for professional based explorations. The paper will examine synchRG’s
response to current architectural research challenges and illustrate its unique structure as a possible
model to be replicated. A dialogue will be initiated on a model for practice aligned with both academia
and industry.

Conference theme: New methodologies in architectural research

Keywords: systems, open source, applied research,

INTRODUCTION 1. DOMINANT ISSUES

The use of the term “research” in architecture is ill- 1.1 Architectural research
defined at best and empty semantics at worst, and, at Architectural research has traditionally been produced
the very least, its application to design and/or practice in two distinct domains. First, there is proprietary
is misleading terminology. The discussion surrounding research, internal to firms and manufacturers. These
research in architecture is not novel to the last few are either legally protected technology, products, or
years. The Journal of Architectural Education (JAE) sets of data and knowledge particular to a market
devoted an entire issue in May of 1979 to the question segment that the firms operate in. As this knowledge is
of research in architecture, surveying educators and important to the maintenance of market share, there is
practitioners. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, various a vested interest to maintain control over this data
articles were published, often with the same language through secrecy and intellectual property rights.
referencing research in architecture as “emerging” Second, there is academic research, pursued within the
(Joroff 1984) or how it was changing the profession confines of architecture schools as ideas discussed in
(Shibley 1986; Trombley et al 1984). Many papers conferences and published in journals. While worthy
concern the relationship between academic knowledge and important, there is a gap that occurs between
and the improvement of practice. The word “research” traditional pursue of academic knowledge and
is presently in vogue both in academia and practice, professional application, with one of the major hurdles
but one could argue that this terminology has simply being dissemination and access to that knowledge.
replaced what has been known as critical practice There are very few sites of professional, free, and open
without a change to content, methodology or intention. dissemination. InformeDesign, at the University of
Minnesota, attempts to address this issue for interior

25 - ARCC Journal / Volume 6 Issue 2 - 25

 ARCC 2009 - Leadership in Architectural Research, between academia and the profession, San Antonio, TX, 15-18 April 2009

design, architecture, landscape architecture, and urban traditional boundaries of aesthetics and distribution of
planning by making abstract knowledge available to form in space, is affected but all of the design fields.
those professions based on the categories of space, Design has rapidly changed from an object-solution
issues, and occupants. However, InformeDesign profession, that of the isolated single focus, and is now
acknowledges part of their mission is to maintain or faced with finding solutions to complex problems within
reinforce the jurisdictions or boundaries of these complex systems. These problems and the associated
professions through the application of abstract, or approaches to solutions are very difficult to
academic knowledge (InformeDesign 2008). comprehend in traditional methodological models such
The concept of disciplines and professions reinforces as historic architect as the master mason or
the separation of knowledge internal to a firm or contemporary architect as the sole designer. The past
company engaged in commercial development and the practice model of client, architect, and final product no
dissemination of that knowledge for other application longer has the same relevance in this new context.
both within and without the conceptual confines of a The role of the architects moves beyond the aesthetic
profession. It creates a silo mentality. As noted by jewelry box to instead assemble multidisciplinary teams
Meredith Davis, director of North Carolina State to pursue less tangible solutions. The question is how
University's PhD program in design, to integrate a critical applied research process of
professional capacity that uses academic flexibility and
A 2005 Metropolis survey of 1,051 designers, is not end-goal focused, yet can also produce solutions
design faculty, and students in all design both of abstract and concrete natures. The issue is not
disciplines found that as much as 90 percent whether research can be defined, nor whether applied
of design research findings are inaccessible to
research is being performed but how to approach an
students and faculty, even in their own
institutions. There are no design-sensitive old model of practice and academia which is not
research databases or search engines (enter structured to support a systems-based approach. The
“branding” in the typical library search and you entire process, including the dissemination of research,
get books on cattle) and most of the research needs to be disconnected from the tenure or
generated by private practice is proprietary. proprietary processes, following Creative Commons or
(Heller 2007). Open Source models of design (and architecture)
beyond the notion of single architect and object.
There also seems to be a lack of agreement on what
exactly research in architecture encompasses. Valid 1.2 How objects blind us
positions can be taken for a range from designing a We (the authors) argue that architecture needs to
garage for your neighbor to sociological studies of color relinquish its fetish on the artifact or the object, and
perception to the thermal resistance of wall then examine what the effect is on a series of
components, among many others. In the design studio associations. As the focus shifts from the discreet
and practice, precedent studies of existing projects are object to a complex assemblage of relationships as the
within the tradition of “design research.” Sustainability site of inquiry, there are several ramifications. (1) The
is probably one of the most common terms used dominant mode of analysis from Rene Descartes in the
connected to research today, but now we have two th th
17 century to Jacques Derrida in the late 20 century
words without clear definitions. And then when “design” is predicated on the idea of a closed relationship of
is introduced, the issue is confused even more. This binary opposition between two “things”. The Western
openness is seen as a positive element in the creative world has been defined as opposing pairs of meaning:
process, definitions and firm boundaries are resisted in mind-body, black-white, life-death, sky-earth, sun-
order to allow ideas of progress and development to moon, nature-technology, man-animal. Even the most
thrive. aggressive post-structuralist philosophy didn't eliminate
Some arguments place the idea of research as this structure, it simply pointed out the inherent power
overvalued (Kieran 2007). In academia, the idea of differential between the members of the pairs,
research is resisted in relation to the tenure process. positioning one as a degenerate of the other. These
As academics have fought to maintain flexibility over pairs have been instrumental in developing meaning in
their creative output, scholarly research, as a traditional Western culture and flavor of how our culture perceives
path to tenure for most academics in hard sciences, is reality. (2) As the modern period came into full
blended with “creative activities” in the design fields. development, the primacy of meaning was located
We are not supporting the tightening of these within the object itself, or, extending this idea to a body
definitions, as there is health in diversity and of knowledge, within the boundaries of this discipline's
exploration. We are addressing an aspect of research, discourse. The object and their associated discipline
applied research, and in particular a model in which to became focused on interiority. These boundaries and
pursue that research that reacts to changes in the territories of a discipline have been guarded and
organization of knowledge. protected as proprietary knowledge. (3)An extension of
A critical shift is occurring, one that should be the focus on the object is a bias it has lent to
considered in context of applied research in Architecture. Thus architecture frames itself not as an
architecture. This shift is the reframing of design association of complex elements in space, which
thought in architecture from the discreet object solution includes the social, material, and experiential, but
to the systems approach. Not only architecture, with its instead as the erection of an object or building.

26 - ARCC Journal / Volume 6 Issue 2 - 26

 ARCC 2009 - Leadership in Architectural Research, between academia and the profession, San Antonio, TX, 15-18 April 2009

When the idea of applied research is introduced into and connected to particular viewers, the bicycle
the design process, the idea of system, rather than becomes a work of art. In each case, depending on the
object, could be said to be the site of possibilities. In assemblage formed, the function of the bicycle is
the complex layering of engineering, codes, by-laws, different (Colebrook 2006). This is difficult to conceive
budgets, users, public interest, material applications, in architectural terms, as function has been traditionally
life safety, human comfort, social values, and related with typology, program, or economics in fixed
aesthetics (to name a few) that are involved in a categories. Instead, the question can be rephrased:
contemporary architectural design project, simplifying a what does it [the system] do? or what is its [the
project down to program or typology seems less system's] effect?
relevant and less successful. Furthermore, when these Ultimately, the alignment brought into design by a
related but diverse layers are engaged as part of the systems approach is a way to address contemporary
design investigation as a system, solutions occur which complex problems that are unapproachable through the
would not normally present themselves primarily due to idea of the discreet object. Applied system thought in
the diverse field of inquiry and small yet significant architecture is about methodological complexity, not
effects. visual complexity. It is a network structure rather than
System theory recognizes the field as the major site of aesthetically driven object. This does not remove the
operation yet it is only by contrasting the field with the aesthetic nor the object from architecture, it simply
object does architecture traditionally manifest. The displaces its importance. The object, along with parallel
object supports defined boundaries, as in those issues of aesthetics, cost, function, surface, production,
traditionally defended by professions. The field assembly, material, perception, experience,
suppresses those boundaries. As Neal Leach associations, is reintroduced as a form of influence per
recognizes, for a thing to lose its boundaries is for that the field dynamic.
thing to become invisible (Leach,1999). Or to say it in If we extend the idea of system into an operational
another way, and to quote The Incredibles: “if everyone structure for SYNCH Research Group (synchRG) (as a
is special, then no one is special” (Bird 2004). As the case study), then alignment and associations which
boundaries of the field are removed, the recognition of allow for the pursuit of applied research emerge, with
the object as having membership in that particular applied research at the core of the operations. There is
discipline is brought into question. The question, when a shift in both authority and hierarchy—stop thinking
shifting from the object to the system, is how do we like a principle, stop trying to own or control something,
open the field of influence to other disciplines without start acting like a designer.
losing the integrity of the design language of the
profession in which we are operating? Of course, 2. OPPORTUNITIES AND APPLICATIONS
another question could be, is it important to maintain
that particular language? The development of system 2.1 Applied research centers based in universities
theory not only eliminates the binary pairing as defined The academic architectural culture has been
positions, it makes traditional boundaries irrelevant to developing positions towards applied research. Across
the process. The focus of design and research in the globe, schools of architecture are learning to
architecture is changed. Instead of struggling with become more innovative in their partnerships,
arbitrary and culturally fleeting issues of meaning, a collaborations, and research. Applied research and
systems approach asks how something functions development of research centers are important
regardless to its traditional category. phenomena currently seen in universities. There are
There is a further critical shift that occurs when currently 95 centers of applied research housed in the
introducing the system instead of the object as the 57 architecture member-schools of the Architectural
focus of an architectural exploration. The strength of Research Centers Consortium (ARCC 2008). This
the system is its lack of interest in the firm, fixed and growing body of architecture research centers can be
stable boundaries of an object. The strength of the categorized into four categorical research models: (1)
design solution is then found in relevance, rather than faculty led centers focusing on certain concentrations
the object-focused terms of signification, meaning, within the department (e.g., MIT SENSEable City), (2)
truth, or identity. Instead of asking what something college outreach programs and community design
means, the question of the signifier in Western centers (e.g., Lawrence Technological University,
metaphysics, the priority of a system approach is, how Detroit Studio), (3) studio based initiatives (e.g.,
does it function? Function, in this case, should not be University of Kansas Studio 804), and (4) independent
conceived in simplistic operational terms nor is it a fixed non-profit practice-based centers (e.g., University of
category. Function in the system changes, shifts and Detroit Mercy, Design Center).
flexes depending on the association of objects (bodies
and machines) in the act of becoming. For example, a 2.2 Cross disciplinary models
bicycle is a machine without a function until it forms an Many allied disciplines like urban design, urban
assemblage with a cyclist and a road or path. Only at planning, environmental design, and landscape
that point does the bicycle become a vehicle. If the architecture have invested in developing frameworks
machine “bicycle” forms an association with the and models for applied research in a university context
“window” in adjacency with the “bicycle store,” it not based on the bias of the object. These discourses
becomes an object of commerce. Placed in a gallery have engaged in multi-disciplinary and interdisciplinary

27 - ARCC Journal / Volume 6 Issue 2 - 27

 ARCC 2009 - Leadership in Architectural Research, between academia and the profession, San Antonio, TX, 15-18 April 2009

research models, which can be studied as a possible the forum provides an opportunity for discussion,
asset for importing into architectural design. Compared debate, and dialog regarding real estate design,
to traditional architecture research, these disciplines development, and planning.
have demonstrated more openness, stronger The review of these three cross-disciplinary research
partnerships, and collaborative relationships among centers provides some critical insights into the
various groups. A few of the more prominent examples organization structure and modus operandi related to
in urban design, environmental design and planning will applied research. These could be useful for rethinking
be discussed below as case studies. the model of applied research in architecture. There is
The Urban Design Project (UDP) is a center devoted to a broad focus and range to the centers. There is
service, teaching, and research in the pursuit of critical generally an interdisciplinary attitude that necessitates
practice of urban design at the University of Buffalo collaborative partnerships. Multiple relationships are
School of Architecture and Planning (UDP 2007). The developed with the community, business, politics,
center serves the communities of the Buffalo-Niagara profession, and the academia. The centers are led by a
city-region by bringing faculty, professionals, and Director and advised by an advisory board. There is
students together with local governments, community involvement of students, often in paid positions, and
based organizations, and citizens in general, to engage participation of faculty and professionals as PI and
the work of making better places and stronger consultants. Information is disseminated to the
communities. The work of the Urban Design Project academia, profession and the community
has encompassed independent projects, faculty
consultations, student studio projects, and supervised 2.3 New opportunities
thesis investigations dealing with sites of diverse scale Although the applied research centers and cross
and engaging local, regional, national, and international disciplinary models are making valuable contributions
institutional partners. University alignment is limited to there are still new opportunities that can be explored to
space, heat, software environment, and some address larger issues within the profession. All of the
computers in return of the overhead costs paid to the research centers are organizationally aligned to
university. respond to an industrialized set of problems; one that
The goal of the Center for Environmental Design responds to the needs of an individual or group of
Research (CEDR) at the University of California individuals (client). Design problems are solved and
Berkeley is to inculcate research in environmental then reintroduced in the following project. As Klaus
planning and design. Such research, according to Krippendorff (2006: xv) describes in The Semantic
CEDR manifesto, is aimed at “increasing the factual Turn, functional, aesthetic, and market considerations
content of planning and design decisions and at that justified products of design in the past have been
promoting systematic approaches to design decision replaced or overshadowed by more social, political
making” (CEDR 2008). The center reinforces the broad cultural and ecological concerns. All of the referenced
scope of environmental planning and design through research centers are organized in a traditional practice
interdisciplinary organization of discourses, resources, model, responding to market considerations of the
and personnel. The research opportunities range from industrial era. The centers do create relationships with
local environments of people within buildings to region- interdisciplinary teams and conduct outreach to the
wide ecosystems, from small detail of building community; taking on projects that the market
construction to large scale urban planning, from the otherwise would ignore but there is no larger
history of the built environment to the design process organizational alignment to insure that the solutions
itself. Center’s research and technology transfer can be replicated. They do disseminate findings
projects in the planning and design of urban spaces through the academic community and receive post-
involve many CEDR faculty from multiple departments. project peer review but there is limited co-creation with
CEDR also manages and edits Places, a prominent other research centers, they are not focused or
journal in the U.S. principally focused on urban design, provided with a road map that insures continuity
which acts as a publication outlet for students and between themselves and their counterparts. In reaction
faculty in the university as well as institutions and to the need to move away from designing for the
organizations nationally and internationally. market and progressing toward solving the immense
The UM/ULI Real Estate Forum, a joint venture of the problems that face the profession; synchRG turned
University of Michigan (UM) and Urban Land outside the design profession to reorganize itself
Institute(ULI), is a non-profit volunteer organization affectively.
dedicated to enhancing real estate education at the
professional and academic level. The forum acts as an 2.4 Open source model
umbrella organization for other professional As opposed to community or social based professions
organizations interested in promoting scholarship and referenced above, our (constructed) architectural
professionalism in the real estate community. The history has led us to believe that the challenges we
forum is an integral component of the College of face can be solved with a stroke of genius by a solitary
Architecture and Urban Planning Graduate Certificate designer. Our own lack of progress as a profession
in Real Estate at the University of Michigan. Through and our fixation on fashion and aesthetics have shown
series of lectures, conferences, academic and that the challenges we now face require a new
professional participation in events, and competitions, organizational alignment for our research endeavors.

28 - ARCC Journal / Volume 6 Issue 2 - 28

 ARCC 2009 - Leadership in Architectural Research, between academia and the profession, San Antonio, TX, 15-18 April 2009

One possible resource which could act as a model for dictate how transparent and accessible the source
organization and cross-disciplinary involvement is open code is to others. Unlike copyright laws that restrict
source software development. Open source software is distribution and replication of materials, copyleft allows
predicated under the assumption that when a program for distribution and replication as long as the originator
is developed, the source code will be openly distributed of the source code is given credit (GNU 2007). It also
and redistributed. Open exchange of ideas and requires that the newly created software be licensed
knowledge and an open development process is under the same copyleft license. Regulation of copyleft
required. For the open source organizational alignment software license is typically done with a General Public
to work, participants must commit to a common set of License (GPL). In the simplest terms it is not “all rights
rules. reserved” but “some rights reserved.” Each source
code developer can customize the GPL but to be
• All software is created with the foundation called considered open source the fundamental ideals of the
source code. This code is made available for free community must be maintained (It is important to note
distribution. that some open source community members believe
• When using the source code developers are then that any act of claiming rights is counter to the
expected to make the new software available to the community values).
originator and future developers. This is a critical In terms of funding, the source code is not developed
step to maintain the circular process of for free. It can be assumed that the creator incurred
development. expenses to arrive at a product that is in demand by
• If programmers modify the source code then the other development partners. Traditionally proprietary
new software will be renamed or given a version software developers operate on a “go to market”
number. A small modification or a “patch” is often funding model, one that creates in-house research,
an exception. development, testing and release to the market, or the
• New software that embeds the source code can not source code will be licensed from the creator for
place further licensing restrictions that would royalties or another monetary arrangement. The sales
prohibit future development. of the software are the final judge of the products
• Distribution of the source code can not be restricted success. This model presents the software as being
to exclude specific professions, person or groups. an object or artifact, much in the way that a traditional
• Software innovations are not proprietary but architectural approach positions the building. Open
mutually beneficial. source developers have developed alternative
approaches not based on the object. One such
The open source software community identified early approach is to package services to clients as a
that not one individual could solve all of the problems subscription rather than sell boxes of software. This
facing the profession and that it was inefficient for works well because the software is always being
programmers to replicate efforts. This understanding developed and improved by the community as opposed
has streamlined the development process and has to proprietary improvements delivered through version
allowed the community of programmers to respond to a releases. Open source argues this is a better model
rapidly changing market. Unlike the proprietary because the customers decide when the software
development market, the open source organizational needs improvement and the community works to solve
alignment depends on an organizational entity that the issue. This fluid response to fast-moving problems
serves to provide direction or a “road map” of goals serves as a lesson to the architecture profession.
along with a “community” of developers that continually Architectural research is not software development (or
improve the software. This organizational alignment is beekeeping) but there are many benefits to adopting
best described by James Dixon (2007) as the synchronized research relationships. One such option
“beekeeper” analogy. The beekeeper (organizational is a direct relationship to “source code.” Architecture’s
entity) provides an environment that is attractive for source code equivalent is a creatable knowledge base,
bees (other software developers), an environment that a collection of research that will benefit the profession
will allow bees to do what they do best—make honey. through open distribution. Open knowledge will prevent
The beekeeper then sells the honey that funds the replication of tasks and allow for the continuation of
further development of the bee farm. The beekeeper unresolved projects by a diverse group of participants.
and the bees have a symbiotic relationship, one Within this system lies a potential framework for a new
providing the environment and the other providing the model for architectural research. This new model will
work (development). Developers rely on the source respond to the challenges faced by our profession
code to get their own projects working and the while also recognizing the intuitive process of a new
organizational entity (Professional Open Source generation of researchers.
Software Company POSS) relies on the need for the Extracting lessons from the open source community in
source code by potential clients. As with any new relation to the architectural profession, there are
organizational alignment a new structure for funding several possible points to be noted. Principally, while
and intellectual property was required. open source allows for a fluid and diverse team,
Many open source companies protect intellectual lowering barriers for both access and participation, it is
property with copyleft licensing. This is to say, that the still a curated process that is project focused. Oversight
originator of the source code reserves the right to is based on production and knowledge, not titles and

29 - ARCC Journal / Volume 6 Issue 2 - 29

 ARCC 2009 - Leadership in Architectural Research, between academia and the profession, San Antonio, TX, 15-18 April 2009

positions, however. For an architectural community, this The group works with the idea of alignment rather than
idea could be extended past the small scale, individual possession. An organizing thread is an approach which
projects to a larger community organizational structure. dismantles each proposed project into elements and
This structure would connect diverse entities in a then examines various individual solutions based on
curated environment based on tracking projects, the question “what does it do?” in conjunction of its
knowledge-bases, community issues, technological reassembly back into the larger context.
improvement. The curating entity is the system, not the
objects in the system, and provides interface and
access to freely distributed knowledge and research.
There are other points that can be extracted from the
open source process to apply directly to the
architectural community. All participants are
encouraged to provide a free exchange of ideas and
knowledge. The community must commit to recruiting
cross disciplinary members and to identify projects that
will incorporate the allied disciplines to remain
engaged. Participants commit to opening the research
up to the community through an accessible and curated
database. Results should be published early and often,
they can then be continually updated as new
information and research is developed. Think of it as
version 0.8, release 1.0 and update 1.23. Research
participants commit to returning findings to the
knowledge base. Peer review will occur in-process to
allow for a more fluid research. Finally, check your
architectural ego at the door. The community will need
to commit to the idea that furthering the profession and
the research findings is paramount, not the pristine
artifact which is the flavor of the month for the glossy
magazines. Figure 2: Two of many possible organizational
alignments
2.5 synchRG/Institute for Advanced Processes
Based on the idea of systems rather than objects, SynchRG has attempted to set up an organizational
alternative models of research, organization and alignment with open source community principles.
ownership, the SYNCH Research Group (synchRG) Although operating on a local institutional level, the
was formed. The group is a non-rigid organization of alignment provides for an effective open research
faculty, students, professionals, and industry. environment. Project alignment defines participants
with the following titles:

• Principle investigator: Normally conceives or brings

project to the research group and is responsible for
the project’s completion and findings.
• Investigator: Participates in the project in a
supporting role and assists the principle investigator
when needed.
• Guest Principle Investigator (GPI): Has all of the
duties of a principle investigator but normally is
involved only in one specific project.
• Investigator in continuum (IC): Proceeds where a
predecessor left off. Predicated on the idea that
past investigations will be open and transparent to
future research participants.

Various issues occur with a fluid entity like synchRG,

specifically around the discussion of resources and
funding. While pursuing funding sources for several
concurrent projects, it became apparent that the virtual
nature of the research group would work against grant
applications. While being able to be fluid and assemble
teams based on particular strengths, there was a lack
Figure 1: A comparison of referenced research
of a defined organization or available resources. We
centers’ alignment (above) with synchRG’s alignment needed alignment with another body that would provide

30 - ARCC Journal / Volume 6 Issue 2 - 30

 ARCC 2009 - Leadership in Architectural Research, between academia and the profession, San Antonio, TX, 15-18 April 2009

some of the density expected in traditional grants. To architecture and design at the moment. In academics,
solve some of these issues, synchRG proposed a however, this focus causes a paradigm shift in how
partnership with Lawrence Technological University. work is done. Any group serious about applied
Between the research group and the university a third research in architecture has only a few vectors of
body would be developed, an Institute. This Institute, inquiry on which to focus. These are material studies,
vaguely named the Institute for Advanced Processes physical application research and studies, digital
would be owned by neither the members of the fabrication and computational processes, environment
research group nor the university. Instead, it would be research (psychology/lighting/human comfort), and
an independent non-profit which was aligned with both social research (urban/community). Many of these
synchRG and Lawrence Tech. Members of synchRG sit areas are resource heavy.
on the Board of Trustees along with Officers of the Within the late twentieth century debate of modernist
University to oversee this an independent non-profit, morphological understanding (objects) of architecture
but the resources of the Institute are available to and the postmodern notions of complexity (systems),
anybody who wishes to make a proposal for their use. there exists a contemporary paradox regarding the
There is both financial and legal separation from the relative emphasis of form and function in defining,
research group and the university. directing, and practicing architecture. The paradox is
thus manifest in the polarization of contemporary
theory, practice, and pedagogy of architecture: some
commit to social change, but ignore questions of form,
material, and spatial order; another is devoted to
technology, computation, and morphology, but
disregards social and cultural concerns (Hatuka 2007).
Present in the design disciplines, the condition of
separation and isolation is standard mode of operation
in all of general sciences and research fields, Bruno
Latour refers to this division between “epistemology,
the social sciences and the science of texts” (Latour
Figure 3: I/flow’s organizational alignment 1993: 5) as a modern condition, isolating politics,
natural phenomena, social effects and studies of power
Alternative funding and financial models are being from each other on an intellectual level. Within the
explored within the Institute to develop a core model of design disciplines, Bernard Tschumi (1998) has
applied research. The fundamental question is how to asserted, this division has created a contradiction, as
integrate an applied research process into a architects and designers have been unable to reconcile
professional capacity so that research needs an their need to address everyday life with a wish to
inherent immediate value to be performed or pursued. engage abstract concepts.
SynchRG’s unique organizational alignment allows for To address Tschumi’s concern for the gap between the
academic freedom, professional efficiency, spatial (abstract imagined space) and the social (lived
organizational structure, and transparent findings with experience) and Latour's desire to reconnect the
duration. The organizational alignment falls short in various elements of our intellectual life, synchRG’s
ability to reach beyond the university. SynchRG proposed model provides a different framework for
envisions that it will be only one of many groups (bees) better understanding and functioning of architectural
that openly share knowledge in a larger community. It research. The critical question is why is it a problem
is this limitation that necessitates the need for a that we don’t have a good understanding of
profession wide organizational alignment of research, architectural research? Who cares and why should it
one that facilities a transparent and open community. matter?
First of all, this research model demonstrates a specific,
but critical role of applied research in face of
contemporary complex global social, economic, and
environmental challenges that architecture as a
discipline faces. Stephen Kieran (2007) outlines the
development of an ethical architecture that unifies the
art of design with the science of performance. He also
underlines a research ethic as a necessary prerequisite
to develop such an architecture, as does B.D.Wortham
(2007) for reinvigorating the idea of research that has
become naturalized and ubiquitous cutting across most
Figure 4: possible “open source” alignment for disciplines. In his “The Way We Think about the Way
architecture. We Think: Architecture is a Paradigm for Reconsidering
Research,” Wortham argues that the discipline should
seek to become a leader in changing and broadening
CONCLUSION
how research is understood and performed in
academe. Twentieth century discussions and debates
Applied research is a popular discussion within

31 - ARCC Journal / Volume 6 Issue 2 - 31

 ARCC 2009 - Leadership in Architectural Research, between academia and the profession, San Antonio, TX, 15-18 April 2009

around architectural research are well documented in Corporation.<http://www.pentaho.org/>

1979 and 1990 issues of Journal of Architectural
Education (JAE), works of Joroff and Morse (1984), GNU Operating System. 2007. Overview of the GNU
and that of Julia Robinson (1990). The synchRG System/GNU General Public License, Version 3.
model, within the context of the twenty-first century, <http://www.gnu.org/>
highlights the role of open source model and its
experience and appropriation within architecture. This Hatuka, T. & D’Hooghe, A., 2007. After
model reinforces the condition where research is Postmodernism: Readdressing the Role of Utopia in
“glue”—an interstitial adhesive place that binds theory Urban Design and Planning. Places, 19(2), pp. 20-27.
and practice, that connects the profession and the
academia. In the current context, discussed earlier, it Heller, S. 2007. Is There A Doctor of Design in the
is unlikely that much of the architectural research will House? An Interview with Meredith Davis.
be conducted solely in the proprietary realm of the <http://www.aiga.org/content.cfm/is-there-a-doctor-of-
profession or within academic confinement. Most of design-in-the-house>
that will happen in “intermediate institutions” like
synchRG and will then be enacted in practice and Inform Design. 17 Dec 2008. Mission . <http://www.
studied in the academic circles. The synchRG model informedesign.umn.edu/Page.aspx?cId=179#>
highlights this function of research as a stage of
assemblage and enactment. The research model Joroff, M. L. and Morse. S. J. 1984. A Proposed
illustrates the powerful role of open construction, use, Framework for the Emerging Field of Architectural
and reconstruction of knowledge systems irrespective Research. in ed. James C. Snyder (Ed.). Architectural
of ownership and typology. This understanding of Research. Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York.
research center as an interstitial place can be catalytic
in promoting shared dialogic space, where things can Kieran, S. 2007. Research in design: planning doing
function in relation to others, in simple sight or monitoring learning. Journal of Architectural Education.
knowledge. v.61, n.1. pp. 27-31.
Second, the discussion of research in the present
capitalist society needs to be in reference to the Krippendorff, K. 2006. The Semantic Turn, Taylor &
production and consumption of knowledge. The market Francis Group.
seems to be doing a satisfactory job in providing
objects and products. But with the continual shift into Leach, N. 1999. The Anaesthetics of Architecture. MIT
interconnected complex systems, it often ignores the Press, Cambridge.
everyday problems and disregards the importance of
functions and processes within these complex systems. The Regents of the University of Michigan. 2008.
There is a two-fold gap between the research, UM/ULI Real Estate Forum. <http://www.umuliforum.
production, and consumption of knowledge. One, com/>
research in architecture is engaged predominantly in
the proprietary realm or the academic confines. Robinson, J. Architectural Research: Incorporating
Another, the knowledge produced for consumption and Myth and Science. Journal of Architectural Education
use by people is not designed or poorly designed. v.44.n.1. pp. 20-32.
Within the constraints of economic interest and political
control, human experience, use, and relations are Shibley, R. G. 1986. Practice and research .
sometimes neglected. Emphasizing systems, Progressive Architecture. v.67, n.12. pp. 49-50.
performance, and relationships within research, while
still involving aesthetics, materials, structure and Trombley, S., Pearman, H., Lawson R.M., and Powell.
occupation, as demonstrated by the synchRG research M. 1984. August. Research: research is increasingly
model, is critical to restoring the roles of design and influencing the way in which architecture is practiced.
designers in architectural research. RIBA journal. v.91, n.8. pp. 34-38.

REFERENCES Tschumi, B., 1998. The Architectural Paradox.

Oppositions, ed. M. Hayes, Princeton Architectural
Architecture Research Centers Consortium. Inc. 2008. Press: New York, pp. 224-227.
ARCC members. <http://www.arccweb.org/memlst.
htm> Wortham, B.D., 2007. The Way We Think about the
Way We Think: Architecture is a Paradigm for
Colebrook, Claire. 2006. Deleuze. London: Continuum: Reconsidering Research. Journal of Architectural
London. Education. v.61, n.1. pp. 44-53.

Center for Environmental Design Research. 2008. The Urban Design Project. 2007. A center for the study
<http://www.cedr.berkeley.edu/default.htm> and practice of urban design. <http://www.urbandesign
project.org/>
Dixon, J. 2007. The Bee Keeper. Pentaho

32 - ARCC Journal / Volume 6 Issue 2 - 32