Download Otter for your meeting notes

562: Business Development Lessons From Signature Firms with Andy Bigwood: Otter Voice Meeting Notes

562: Business Development Lessons From Signature Firms with Andy Bigwood

Enoch Sears1h 10min

Speaker 1

00:00

It can come across as arrogance. But I think it's so important that you have a clear position say, I have something of value to offer you. Hello

Rion Willard

00:06

and welcome to the Business of Architecture. I'm your host Ryan Willard and today I have the distinct pleasure of introducing Andy big word, a partner at rich and partners. He has a profound focus on leading and facilitating client and design team collaborations. Andy is dedicated to uncovering designing and delivering quality projects that make a positive difference to the spaces where we live, work and learn. Previously, Andy worked at Foster's and partners where he was an associate partner, and he was also the head of contracts and business development at Heatherwick studio for about four years. He originally trained in mechanical engineering, and then Andy received an MBA from Bristol University. And he migrated into working with architecture practices, where he developed a specialism around contract negotiations, client acquisition, and the mechanisms needed to elevate a practice into profit and growth. With a wealth of experience in business development and design leadership, and the in part, invaluable tips and insights to help architects and design professionals win more work and grow their businesses to reach their potential. This episode is filled with golden gems, so make sure that you listen to it more than once. We talk about the secrets behind how signature brand firms like Norman Foster, foster and partners and how they can negotiate contracts. And when work. We look at the risks that all architecture practices face with new clients, and the temptation of doing free work and competitions and the risks that are involved. And we also look at what the large practices do to get paid on time and the challenges that they face. So lots of really interesting, deep insights into the world of larger architecture practice firms here, sit back, relax and enjoy Andy big word. It's time to announce this month 200 club if you missed our episode on the 200 Club, listen to Business of Architecture episode 485 To learn more about this new initiative for benchmarking small firm performance, so big congratulations to Drew and Justin Tyndall, Kimberly Doakes Daniela spanner and new and harassing Mark Elster, Charles scram or any Adams Chris Brandon, Brad Hubbell, Marina Robina. Yogesh mystery, Andrei nemecheck Denise Burkett and Yes, Ben de Chris Rawlings, Jorge cat tram Lena bola, Judy and Larry April, Kelly Morgan, David and Kristen ware, and George A girIs. Great job to everyone who's made it into the 200 Club. This month, keep up the fantastic work. This podcast is produced by Business of Architecture, a leading business consultancy for architects and design professionals. This episode is sponsored by Smart practice business of architectures flagship program to help you structure your firm for freedom, fulfillment, and financial profit. If you want access for our free training on how to do this, please visit smart practice method.com. Or if you want to speak directly to one of our advisors about how we might be able to help you please follow the link in the information. Hello, listeners. We hope you're enjoying our show. We love bringing you these insightful conversations, but we couldn't do it without the support of our amazing sponsors. If you're a business owner, or know someone who would be an excellent fit for our audience, we'd love to hear from you. Partnering with us means your brand will reach over 40,000 engaged listeners each month interested in becoming a sponsor, please send us an email at support at business of architecture.com Hello, Andy, Welcome to the Business of Architecture. How are you? Very good. Hello, Ron. Excellent, good, good to be speaking with you. Now you've had a very interesting career you were previously a associate partner at Foster's and partner. And more recently, you're one of the partners at region partners and have developed a very interesting career specialism practice strategy development, design management, and actually very active in in client acquisition and helping and making sure that the business is actually winning and work so perhaps we can we can talk a little bit about managing partners and your your current role there and and how you got to to be in a position that you're in.

Speaker 1

04:37

Sure, no, it's great to talk talk to you more and so I I've been at rich and partners for about almost a year and a half now. Just over that, I think so. I joined after spending some time at Foster's when I was over two years. Previous to that I did actually spend about five years at Heatherwick studio as well heading up their head of business development and And the commercial team. And previous to that was about eight years at Foster's. So over 20 years in this area of architecture with some quite signature practices clearly, the interesting thing that Rich was, it was a rich itself is now just in the AJ 100 This year has got to position 38. Last year was at 62. So it's been getting up the up rankings. And that's been fascinating just to see how that progress has happened in the last year, Rich's got over 1100 people. It's a multidisciplinary practice. So project managers, engineers, architects, and that in itself was an interesting rather than a solely architecture focused practice. And I came across to rich, I'm based in London, someone I worked with at Foster's came across the cross, and it was an opportunity to build a London team. And there's a wider team of architects across the practice, which is 130 now, so it's a big practice of architects as well as the multidisciplinary. And the the real challenge. And the interesting bit for me was growing a London team focusing on design, focusing on really high quality work, and gaining all the nuggets and information from previous practices like Foster's and Heatherwick and, and also having it as arguably a non signature practice and what the different challenges are there are differences compared to a highly branded, you know, something like Foster's, which is very well known over the last 50 years and has built that that profile. So yeah,

Rion Willard

06:43

so very interesting. In your background, obviously, you're not a architect in the traditional sense that you've worked intimately in architecture practices for the majority of your career. You've got a degree in mechanical engineering. That's correct. And yes, in real estate and finance as well, or economics. That's

Speaker 1

07:05

right. Yeah. That was not a degree. It was a short course at LSE. Right. Yeah. Yeah. Just trying to get awareness about gotcha,

Rion Willard

07:15

gotcha. Okay. So so the position that you've been doing in Foster's partners, Heather works, he, can you talk a little bit about what you were helping these practices do? How would you describe what your role was?

Speaker 1

07:30

So very much, largely at Foster's, it was a project management role. So and focusing on business development, commercial and contract negotiation, and also setting the projects up. So a lot of focus at the front end, winning the work, Fallout, negotiating, and also building the right team for the specific opportunity, and making sure that the project was set up as best it could be to deliver and protect the architecture teams, but also engineering teams, because it was often a multidisciplinary offer. Now, whether that was leading by Foster's with a sub consultant, other big engineering firm like W SP, for example. So it's making sure the Yeah, the different facets of the business side in terms of fees, contracts, terms and programs. And the delivery was set up in the best possible way. So so the architect team was protected. And also, once the contract was signed, leading into design management, so leading and working with the client teams on and the architect teams to make sure there was enough. Well, the whole project set up properly, and that was the right degree of client decision making. If there was issues, sorting out additional fees, sorting out changes, the briefs, things like that, which I think was interesting. It does span and scale, you know, from the smallest practice, to the largest practice, it's the same formula of tools and systems to protect to protect the firm. There's obviously different people involve different stakeholders, different locations, I think that was a fascinating thing that fosters can have when you were dealing with all sorts of cultures, globally. So it could be Japan could be over in Tokyo one one day, and then the next day, it's Google in Mountain View. So there's a whole grep for the clients, but I think distilling it down, there's the same tools to get through to get a safe contract sorted out with the right fee levels, and also making sure you've got the right protections in place. What Yeah, yeah. So

Rion Willard

09:41

as I say, what sorts of things are you doing to ensure the safety of a contract? What kinds of mistakes would be kind of very serious for these practices to to make and and also how do you make sure that the fees are correct, we kind of assume with the with the, with practices Like Heatherwick sort of fosters that, you know, like you're saying their signature name practices, one would expect the clients are kind of approaching them. And that they're able to charge a kind of premium on their fees comparatively to other practices. I don't know whether that's the truth, but that's what the outside perspective is often.

Speaker 1

10:20

I think it depends on the situation and the market. And, and it does vary, I think it's fair to say there's, you definitely have a stronger hand if you've got a strong brand, and the client wants to work with you. But there's, you know, most of these large scale signature sort of big cultural projects are won through competitions. And often there's, you have to put a lot of skin in the game start off with which I think is one of the things I'm fascinated by how that set up. And architects do get a raw deal, often at the start, when we have to do a lot of free work, they have to put, which is easier for people with deep pockets like these more successful firms, which is harder for smaller firms, clearly, who don't have that, and don't have that. So I think and the more and more you see, these firms do have, if you're in a competition situation, the terms of procurement set out from the start, and they're quite difficult, you just have to maybe have a bigger war chest in a sense to put some money in to invest in these competitions, that then behind the scenes, you can talk to people and try and build different streams of reputation in the area in which the geography to help. But also, I think I think Foster's has done it very well over the years in terms of building a sort of reputation in terms of a can deliver, they will deliver, and they will take on sort of ambitious projects and give the company there's a whole back catalogue of obviously, case studies to show they have candy, that so it puts you in a very strong position. I think in terms of, you know, the detail in terms of terms and conditions, I think, fundamentally, you're trying to secure payment and make sure you you do get the best payment terms possible. Now, whether that's an upfront advance payment. Now, as I say, in a competition situation, you can't always do that you have to just try and win the competition. But in other direct appointments, or when you're in a more competitive situation in terms of you're not doing a design competition, but submitting a proposal or request for proposal, you can then often dictate your terms and come to a middle ground. And I think it's just about being reasonable. And talking to the client about explaining really carefully. Your your team, your resources, you'll have to expand how you work. And obviously, why should you work for free. And I think that's the crazy thing in the industry, which seems to be often in those early stages. It's just given, it's completely reasonable for an architect to work for free, which is, you know, if you went to a lawyer, or went to an accountant, to any other professional service provider, they'll be like, what you're talking about, you know, and you know, I think architects, generally we can, we can help in terms of putting forward the case to say, well, that's not reasonable. And I was trying to get to that position of. And I think it comes back to also building a really strong relationship with the client, and the clients team, and mapping out who the key decision makers are who the, you know, not roadblocks, but who people you have to get in front of and what their processes. So even before putting a proposal on it sort of backing up and just thinking, Okay, what's the process of client sign off? Because often you do find you get through maybe one proposal situation, and then you get to the next round. And then the fees get negotiated and negotiated and negotiated. So I think those upfront conversations, just having a really honest conversation and open conversation about what processes can help a lot and not assume anything. And obviously, be. And I think I was trying to list out some of the traits of where I think people are successful versus not successful. I think having this self confidence and belief in it can come across as arrogance, but I think it's so important that you have a clear position, say I have something of value to offer, you know, whichever size scale type of firm you are. And this is and really have make it clear why that is. And there's different techniques, I think you can apply to different sectors, for example, but I think I see that in the larger teams even from an early stage. I think the former boss was very confident and a very clear communicator to explain this is the value add I offer. And this is it clearly showed it afterwards quite quickly and listen to me. And thinking back to some of the examples in the early days when they didn't have the brand they still showed and almost over delivered the on what they could offer from it and it also surprised the client. I think there's If you can get in a situation where you're face to face to clients, having those one on one conversation, it might be you've built that relationship before we even, were going through a formal, you know, commercial proposal or tender process to come across as, and you've built a relationship before. And I see that day in day out. Now, very successful architects do that. They're pre positioning, they're building relationships with these key clients, they're targeting and building that. And it may involve a little bit free work. But it leads on to saying, Okay, I've tried, I've shown you, I can deliver for you. I've shown you I can solve your problems. And then it's not a conversation about well, why should I choose you over that? That firm? I know you're delivering for me, I know. And then, when you overlay that over time, with good experience with delivered projects, and a back catalogue of great, you know, building that portfolio is obviously super important.

Rion Willard

15:58

How do you qualify a client? I recall conversations when I was at RSA, HP, you know, the suspicion sometimes of a certain client, where they've just approached a big name, practice. And, you know, it could be quite exciting and intoxicating on at first, you know, some big projects and some exotic location. But then there was always sometimes hold on a minute, is this a project that's actually going to take off? They're asking us to, you know, are we going to do free work for this person? How do we know that they're legit? How do we how do you qualify a client to make sure that they're who and what they say they are, because even at the larger commercial scales, it's still, you know, it's sometimes we kind of come across this in smaller, smaller projects. But even at larger commercial scales, there's still there's still things which aren't appear, what they are, and also, also competitions as well.

Speaker 1

17:01

Definitely, no, I think that's, that's the challenges, I think you've almost got to, you can ask some very careful questions at the start, I think always building the open questions and having a script to pre determine questions to try and analyze what the what the project type is, you know, always what it is, who the authority is trying to ask the questions about that process, trying to ask them to understand about their funding structures, and not say it's a problem, but just having an open conversation, I think you can be if they're professional, and you're professional, you can get that captured. If you can't, if you're having problems, trying to understand that there's some alarm bells should be ringing. But equally, there's no harm in saying no to opportunities. And I think, you know, that's probably as the biggest strength of some of these, it's, it's a tricky balance when you've got large teams and Bissell that this is where you get into a challenge of bigger and bigger companies, you've got mouths to feed and almost the sort of go no go decision sometimes reduces down because you, you just need to get work in. So I think the lens is different. But my, my experience of when it goes, well, you should really focus on. It's all it's about the client, but it's also about you do you really want to work on these projects, and think carefully about why I like to talk about, you know, maybe the head of a company, their decision to do it, but then also department in charge? Are they invested? Would they love to do this project or not? And have two keys to turn, rather than just one? Founder saying, Yeah, we're doing all these projects, throwing it over the fence, and then it just carries on in terms of and then you get disgruntled Gruntal team, because you're constantly doing work, you're not necessarily so really invested in and you want to do and that and that happens. I think we've scaled as well. And I think on the smaller practices, you've got more opportunity probably to develop that personal go, no go question about is this support folio? I want to be building does this project fit in it properly? Now, that's a slightly different thing. But I think we do have more control than we think about taking on the projects we want to. And arguably you can have more success, once you determine your own portfolio, which again, can scale from an individual architects up to big architectural teams, but and largely focused on sector that I think you're completely right, in terms of some of the bigger, higher profile conversations are more difficult in terms of checking if that client has the money at the right time to pay you. And fundamentally it does, you need to do some tests like that maybe you can limit your risk by saying Would you stop you know, the I see more and more. There's a lot of firms who will do an individual stage two sort of a pre I suppose before you even get into concept design a short piece of work. Working out is the brief right and that can be quite an agile way of start. Seeing a project where you're lower lowering your risk, because you can often secure that quite quickly, the client can sign off quickly, you can really test if they're serious or not, you can see up to you want to keep working with them. And I think that is something we can put in a position carefully with clients and, and negotiate quickly, maybe don't get that much reason. But that's fine, because you're really trying to build the relationship with them. Let them build a relationship with you and have that equal relationship. And then during that time, you can secure a work because often sometimes these bigger projects are quite complex to work out. So durations, you know, the actual stakeholder sign off process, the planning process, you know, what sort of sustainability targets you're going to focus on. And there's a lot of education in those early stages, I think, educating the client. So But ultimately, the test is really the acid test is, you know, clearly, did they pay you? Do they pay you on time? And that's fundamental. And I think, you know, not assuming they're going to pay you and then positioning it, not being afraid to say, well, I want to get paid up front, pay the monthly allowance. And then obviously, maybe it needs to be a success fee, if there's certain things which are restricted on their the clients funding, release that releases, but I see I do see it at the top highest level, you get challenges with payments, not the lowest level, but the the any scale can be difficult. So the more you look at this is like just having really clear and open communication and say, well, not being afraid to say this is why we need this payment plan. And often you do get into resourcing requirements and turbulence clients understand that I think there's, there's clarity, but you're trying to de risk, it's a lot of the time for the client, who doesn't always know, you know, that he's coming often to you as the expert in all the team of experts delivering this quite technical, risky service. And I think I think that's a fascinating thing, when you're putting yourself in the client's sort of chair and thinking about, well, what's he up against? How can you make him look good. And that individual, and then the client look good. And it and often, if there is a problem with their funding, they might, you know, often can happen with developers. So you have an honest and open conversation about that and just say what you need to pass, but, you know, let's work out a proper payment plan and then say, limiting your risks on, you know, testing if they're serious or not. Yeah, but I think as soon as you go down the line, and it clearly happens with developers a lot. When we're not gonna pay you to get planning or, you know, we'll pay you on a success fee structure, which is all risk on the architecture team, which is clearly quite, quite challenging. But it may be worth it for the right opportunity. And I think that's where, well, that's, that's where

Rion Willard

22:53

that's where it becomes interesting, because obviously, you know, getting paid on a success fee for you know, we have a lot of clients, a Business of Architecture, where, you know, it doesn't work if the developer is suddenly imposing this timeframe on you, and you hadn't agreed upfront. But if there's an negotiation upfront, where architect says, Okay, I'll take the risk of getting paid after planning approvals. But in order for me to take that risk, then there's got to be a healthy bonus or uplift in my fees as a result, okay, great. Well, then now the architect can choose to share in the risk and get rewarded for it, as opposed to just, you know, being forced to take on risk. You know, you make an agreement for a certain amount of fees. And then what's your what's your reward for taking on risk as well? Did you get paid what you said we you agreed on, but it's just six months late. And that doesn't work?

Speaker 1

23:52

Yeah, no, completely. And I think, again, having an open conversation and being curious about how that client, or their whoever's running the funding model, in the development situation, how that's going to work. And yeah, trying to get an equal balance of risk and return. I think that's, it's one of the games, isn't it? This I think trying to, for me, I look at it, let's try it as a bit of a puzzle. Let's work out how you can get the best deal for you. And then and then there's a way forward, potentially, but you do have to say no, sometimes and say this isn't gonna work out and move on quick, quickly. And that's probably in that later design. In the go. No Go situation saying no. is more important than saying yes, actually. And knowing when you do say no, when the red lines are, what,

Rion Willard

24:39

what kinds of questions would you be asking, let's say a developer client, about their funding model, and what sorts of answers will be given what sorts of things what questions would you be asking and what kinds of things would you be looking out for? That could be potential red red flags that might mean payment might be hindered or have, you know, you might be taking on a bit more risk than you anticipated?

Speaker 1

25:04

Yeah, I think it's it's an interesting question. I think often, the big milestones are developers, when you get to planning clearly, that's when the risks massively. And quite often, there's at that point, these early stage developers will get their money out or most of their money out at that point. And they open out to wider investment pools. So understanding if that's their exit strategy, or if a and then there's obviously, probably, they'll stay involved until the point of construction delivery, and then that might be when they get all their money out. So it's maybe for them a, you know, a timeline of maybe four years, but a lot of the risk is reduced at the point when you get planning. So But clearly, that could take a while for a big development, if you're working for, say, three, four or five months to get up to planning maybe. And then there's a window until planning successes, you know, when it's determined, that could take another period of maybe six months. So it's, that could be a year of working at quite challenging rates, that again, if you so yeah, we shouldn't go in lightly, we should really just think about those risks, and then be realistic about it. Is it right for us? Do we have? Can we support that process, if you don't get planning, you know, and what happens then, and think about the worst case scenario. But then if there's an upside, so often, it's let's cover the, maybe the costs of team still trying to get secure that and try and be realistic. And this is where I think having external planning consultants can be really useful. Out in that location, what so it's an independent sort of verification of the program. It's not the clients best case, we're going to get planning in six months, or it's not, you're saying, well, I need all this time to do the design, it's sort of independent, and then you be realistic, but the upside to the developer is clearly a lot more often than the architect. And once they get that value, it could sell it after planning. And then I think those are the questions which are quite important. Like, is there they may not tell you so but you could look from their previous research behind the scenes, what do they typically do to their developments? Do they hold it? And some will, but often, I think in those early stages at once you get planning once again, a bit later on, they will bring in pension fund, and investors on bigger scale investors who will be there for the longer term, and that'll be their investment timeline. And I think it's not a problem if that current developer wants to get out. I suppose it's just making sure. Once you understand that, and you've mapped it through, make sure then you you can it works for you financially. And it's an even as I say, the worst case scenario, if, if it goes, Do they get planning? Are you okay with that situation, and you might have, you'd be able to offset it against other opportunities you're working on.

Rion Willard

27:58

And again, I guess, I guess in in some cases, there might be, you know, a change of client even or like the developer was selling it post planning to another developer who's gonna take on the actual construction of the build, then does the architect then wants to kind of negotiate some kind of clause in a contract to make sure that they get retained on for the project GFC, that kind of situation coming up?

Speaker 1

28:27

Again, it sort of depends. This is where I think people with very strong brand, signature firms are in more strength, because then you can say they want a x design building. And it it always you can't stay involved. I think if you can try, and you can obviously keep tabs on wording in there. But it's normally it can happen. And I think if that is one of the challenges to go in with open eyes, I think they can still terminate a contract quite and due to someone else having another pressure which is coming recently as the rise of designer build contracts and clients going to contract as earlier. You know, and at that point, in the UK, you have obviously sort of stage. Normally after stage three, potentially could go to a design or build contract one. And the design build contractor doesn't want the architect involved and goes to their own preferred architect to deliver the service. So then you could get cut out then if you're not careful. And I think it is. It's an interesting one. I mean, I think as ever, you've got to prove your value all the way through. And if you do offering great value you offer solving problems, even in those late stages for contractors, I think you can you can win and you can you can, you can keep going but it's it's certainly a risk and I think it happens internationally as well as in the UK, you know, fail by the name especially. Well, maybe it's more common in the Far East. How you protect yourself They just charge upfront fees and really charge more in those early stages. And then if you do get cut out, it's not such a big risk, you know, you've, you've made more money to count to counter that. So you could keep the team going. That is certainly a challenge is I think we've got to acknowledge it, it's difficult, you know, building stuff, and getting paid, is difficult anyway. And then if it's a really exceptional project, it's arguably more difficult. And therefore testament to people who can keep going, keep going with these, you know, if it's your own design practice, or your work within a bigger practice, it is difficult. And I think this is where I'm fascinated with the sort of, you've just got to have that length, relentless resilience, and be able to keep going. And from a mental health point of view, it's, it's hard. And I think building a team around you who can really support you is fundamental, really been careful about, you know, the balance of I sort of look at it, you know, financially you might be making, are you making enough money for your practice? That's difficult? Then there's also have you got the right work life balance that's challenging for architecture, especially, and, you know, working all hours, you might be making loads of money from projects in the Middle East. But have you got a home life balance that you see you get? So seeing your family is a challenge and attention? And then the third area? are you actually doing projects, which are meaningful to you? And at the end of your life, when you look back and think, Oh, I'm so proud of that portfolio? So I think there's, it's interesting to get sucked along with just making money for the practice. And then after 10 years, maybe you think, well, was that worth it? You know, all that pain and whatever divorces or, you know, not seeing my kids as they're growing up, that's, I think, for me, it's, you want to have that well rounded situation. It's a bit of a wider concept, but more and more It's becoming, because I've got a young daughter who's now 10. And you think, well, it's so those moments you could miss working all hours, is not really what life's about, clearly wants to. You want to have a full and an interesting work. But it should be balanced with your home life, then, like save as meaningful portfolio conversation, it's not easy, but actually, I think if you deeply think about what projects I want to make a difference to what not just chasing after the money having it doesn't necessarily it works for some people. And I think in especially in this wider societal challenge, where we've got climate change blessing, where we've got current societal challenges of climate change, you know, of extreme differences between rich and poor. And, you know, some of the big structural societal challenges we've got, how we address those plus, you know, benefits, the underlying of just developing projects and doing great design work. But in the rounds of this whole thing, we should be using less materials or being more careful with what we're designing is are really focuses your mind on what is the right portfolio portfolio projects moving forward. And I think having having time to actually think about that, and really then trying to watch your, your personal health without not burning out, because and then building a team to share the responsibilities is so important. And then you might survive for three years. But actually, you need to have that great team around you for longevity and to keep smashing, you know, delivering and doing all the great stuff, which you can I think, after a while, that out comes if you're not careful, just happens and say sad plays if maybe if you can set up the practice and start to really, you know, look after yourself, and you know, we're all going to we're not going to win every job we go for. So then it's like, how do we process mentally, you know, not feel too bad about not winning the thinking about all the benefits there? And obviously, do we put every effort we could have done on that situation in time to secure that project? If we'd entered we learned something along the way did we improve along the way, you know, those sorts of situations and looking at the effort was under percent. We didn't we didn't win. But there's factors why we didn't win. So we can take on board for the next and almost like training hard and going again, and not being mentally getting tied up with oh, we failed again. We didn't win. We didn't win. Clearly. There was because I think what's interesting is if you keep positive in a relationship with that situation, those clients you've built up quite often, they will come back to you for the next one or the next opportunity they have and you've already it's not the end for you've learned so much about their problems through that process. You can then pivot and apply it to another situation. So the typology it's nine pound. I think so. I mean, it's just that's not sure. I think I lost the question there. But the the general sort of idea of trying to look after yourself as an end look after your team, I think is another area which architecture, especially in last 20 years, I don't think it's necessarily been given enough focus and actually, the whole situation where, you know, architects have been paid, you know, a salary and then but the expectation or the demands require overtime working, it's just, you know, and it becomes a culture then. And always the bravado to keep going the latest, yeah, I think you can get a better balance in life, which is some thoughts I've got recently,

Rion Willard

35:34

no ABS absolutely and, you know, the kind of negotiating of the fees in the contract and being very selective with, with who it is that you're you're working for, and, you know, making sure that you're able to tick, the, the, the all the the work life balance parts of it, as well as being able to, you know, ensure that you're getting decent fees from the work as well. So you can sustain yourself in a healthy manner. And not be kind of killing yourself doing something for low fees, or killing yourself doing something for high fees where there's no substance to the project, or you're doing things which are diminishing your own your own values, because none of that is all of that, like he said, he's gonna end up just causing mental health problems, stress, overwhelm, and, and burnout. I wanted to talk a little bit about kind of competitions and the risk of competitions. I've seen on the inside, I've been part of like many, many competition entries in my career, but I was working again, when I was working at RSA HP. They had like a constant competition team that was on rotation, I assume fosters and Heatherwick have the same kind of structure where they've they've got they've got deep pockets, they have the ability to be able to enter lots and lots of competitions, and they only need to win one or two of them a year for it to kind of pay for all of the work that they're doing in other competitions. What sorts of for you what what kinds of risks do competitions pose? And how do you make sure that the competition that you're at you're engaging in is going to be a it's legit, be that it's, you know, is there some sort of strategy that you've got in place? If you don't win? IE, you know, that it's going to give you some exposure? Or there's there's some marketing collateral that's produced? And, and, yeah, and I think, kind of see, how do you mitigate? Certainly, as you know, sort of smaller practices? How do you kind of mitigate the amount that you input into it, because it's very easy to kind of get into a culture of just throw everything at a competition? You know, we saw the I think the Guggenheim in Helsinki project was pretty disturbing in terms of the amount of resource that it produced from, you know, 1000 or so practices, many of these small practices. And then we have, as if con winning it and, you know, doing extraordinary work, taking it through to that second stage only for the projects that just to suddenly disappear. And there's an enormous amount of investment there from, from a young for young practice. And for the project just didn't have any, you know, it was it was very precarious in the first place. There's enormous amount of risk for architects. When they're entering in into competitions, how do you how do you see kind of what sorts of alarm bells? Would there be for you in terms of which competitions to enter in which ones to stay away from? That

Speaker 1

38:42

makes sense? I if you can avoid them on total think it'd be great. And if you can have threat conversations clearly about even have build your and it's clear, there are benefits. And I debate this with various people about this quite a lot. And it's you also they say, weighing up, is it for portfolio building, even if you don't win? What does it give you? Does it get you onto a new stage in front of a new group of clients? Is it the only way to break into that sector or that client base? And it could well be a launch to a new platform of projects. So I think having a solid financial pipeline is important as well. And even I think, I think I still wouldn't go for every single competition. It was very selective, it's very carefully thought through. And often it was like, Do we have a genuine chance of winning this is something have we had, you know, often the clients will come to various firms and talk to them about, you know, and invite them. So is it an invited competition and weigh up the numbers you see, like those examples, or there was one I saw in Cambridge for the civic center the other day Well, earlier last year, which we turned down, which had something like 120 people going to the site visit. And it's like, okay, there's 120 people there must be in the element of just risk, you know, probability is you're not going to get selected because it's not worth it. There's one for the British Museum out at the moment, which again, and as an interiors, at VNA, which are all amazing projects, but you do have to sort of think, well, there's loads of great design firms out there. Honestly, do we have a way and why are we different? And I think being what was quite nice, actually, if you can get a room together of critical feet, people who haven't got a vested interest in that specific project, where maybe it's their hometown, or it's their they were dying, Southern rally to do that project, having some strategic different lenses, like reputation, Lee, some of them have a comms team, for example, financed for some of them the one of our fights today, finances like, can we afford to do this competition, he could maybe budget in the start of the year for the number of cars, there will be some property, and then way up with the other design partners? Is this the right opportunity for us versus their one, you know, there may be a bit of a forced trade in terms of who's right and the situation and be just objective and business rather than the contracts can look at it from the lens of what are the risks? Are we going to gain from it from a commercial point of view? Is it really worth the investment at the start? Some of them aren't, as you say, and they can stop, like any project can stop clearly. But competitions, especially public, big ones, it all made for me, sometimes I'm quite cynical about it always seems like it's, it's a big fashion show, in a sense to show off a good competition. And it's actually, arguably the competition organizers who are winning Best out of this because there they get promoted.

Rion Willard

41:53

So it's a marketing, you know, seems

Speaker 1

41:57

like it and I think procurement itself could be done differently. So I think probably stepping back from the candidate was change how that happens. And it's avoiding doing them in the first place by building, for example, why'd you and asking those tough questions? What are you trying to get out of it? Is there a place where there's not everyone? The herd is not flocking to that area? Or herding to that area? Is it is there areas, say if you're working in higher education, or if it's some other maybe big cultural projects, there is. Everyone wants to do big museums say, maybe there's other projects, which you get more satisfaction out of, and they're less busy thinking, and maybe go to build a reputation in those sectors think the light heavyweight, even Foster's in the early days, they didn't chase after those types of projects. They were Foster, especially with quite industrial, they were stuff which other people weren't doing. Yeah. And actually, they forged this whole new lens of architecture. And I think, I think that's what's quite interesting is when we break down out of all of the built environment, how much are actually, you know, designed by architects, there's quite a lot of art. And you can probably make a lot more headway in doing small changes to large, you know, large sheds keep popping up all over the UK, and you're like, some of them are soulless industrial states, you know, surely that would be a lot more, you know, enjoyable to try and make a small difference to that space, compared to a luxury Art Museum, where you think well, okay, it's, it's nice, but is that really where I want to be working? Similarly with? Yeah, so the different sectors, I think, Where where are the gaps is probably a big place to look and not getting to where everyone else is going. And actually, you can have much more exciting conversations with people in those situations, because there aren't these organized competitions.

Rion Willard

43:56

So that's really that's a really interesting point that you bring up. Yeah. Obviously fosters were, you know, and same with RSA, HP and Grimshaw. You know, in Hopkins, they were they were doing these sort of unusual industrial buildings than other architects weren't interested in, literally, and that's what they were using. They're kind of using it as an area to experiment. And we're building out a reputation as a very interesting thought.

Speaker 1

44:25

So some of the Yeah, touching on how you make those spaces more human friendly, people centric, doesn't have to be the whole sites either. I mean, as was interesting, you could have large production spaces, but maybe there's some more people focus areas. But this also comes back to why What are you doing it for as well while you're bidding for those competitions? And actually, I find personally, it's much more enjoyable actually building relationships and networking and growing relationships, in other events, wherever it depends. What you're focusing in on, but there's, there's so many problems which people need help with. Like say at this stage higher education is going through lots of challenges. There's some big university campuses which are doing amazing work, that they've got challenges with occupancy student numbers going down space, they've got too many buildings need to consolidate, need to think about new ways of learning and teaching with the homeworking has sort of sector specific focus, and as loads, loads of opportunities, and there's a really healthy community of people where they they're wanting to make positive change in terms of sustainability, lowering energy usage, you know, making big changes, I think you can carve, be more proactive and go out and meet people and actually have that in mind equally obviously. Let's say transportation or ports, areas where ports are really challenging at the moment, they're not they're very typically industrial. They don't have to be some of the best projects can be you know, we're in Sydney Opera House walking down, you know, to the marina, there's some lovely spaces. Everyone likes waterfront places, so but I think often. Yeah, and something not engineer mindset. They're just some of these places are built for throughputs built for development. And there's loads of opportunities there for architects to get in. And again, like say, even now, Foster's does team up with engineering, on bridges on you know, airports, obviously, which is maybe a bit contentious, but the or large industrial complexes are still needed more than ever. Yes, the flow trek trade is going berserk. Absolutely.

Rion Willard

46:34

Absolutely. And let's talk a little bit about kind of the actual art of selling and negotiating and making sure that the fees are kind of set. Well, and also you mentioned a little bit earlier just about this idea of confidence. And, you know, obviously we look at someone like Norman Foster and and Thomas Heatherwick and, you know, that quite ignorant ematic figures in themselves. And I've heard the rumor of Norman Foster in the past, where, obviously, we know, his kind of the drawing style at Foster's, you know, is very kind of iconic. And, you know, in the industry gurus sort of way of developing that I've heard that had this wonderful story of, of it was a plane ride or something going off to a client pitch. And Norman Foster sat, and he rehearsed the drawing that he was going to draw live inside of the client pitch. And it was, you know, to kind of orchestrate a conversation was, you know, kind of like, Ah, I've got an idea. And then he stands there. And then does this live drawing, I don't know how much how much truth is in that by like the the showmanship of it. And the the sort of romance about it, how much, you know, kind of what's involved in the selling and negotiating process with with a client was obviously it's actually you're dealing with teams of people, it's not necessarily one person and another person how to what kind of mechanics are involved in these kinds of agreements that that get made? And what sorts of negotiations what does it look like.

Speaker 1

48:11

And I think that's fascinating that, that way of looking at things. And actually, if you don't plan before the pitch, or the, when you're coming to see the client, you don't always perform very well. And you come across as a bit fumbling, casual and unorganized, which doesn't help anyone, especially a top CEO, who's very busy, and you've got 15 minutes to make an impression that so I think planning is clearly really, really important. I mean, I and I think this works for anyone in terms of we get a bit obsessed with architects don't like selling architects don't like marketing. architects don't like business development, and it's disgusting words and no, but I think there is a there's a difference. You can position your team to their strengths as well. And I think one thing of not obsessing about those terms, but focusing on partnerships and building partnerships, I think it's really important and the fundamentally we're trying to build relationships with people in terms of selling in terms of building trust with spirit the same person on the opposite side who you may or may not have known for a while how quickly you can get to that trust situation so they buy with you I think it's fascinating. Thomas would often say any seven touches before you really will go will buy buy something from me, which I mean, you hear time and time again in various other business books. I think I wrote down the key pick ended up with peace for some reason that partnership was one then there was like problems and challenge and I think problems is interesting if you listen or read Donald Miller's we've written some amazing books, including story brands, but he he positioned things of understand what the client's problems are, what their pain points why Would they be in a position it like that, I think some people don't care. If you're 75 years of practice, some people don't care, it's about how are you going to solve my problem now, and it can be the individual here for their team. And often serving, if you position yourself to be I can solve that problem. It's not even architecture in some ways. It's like, I am that trusted person who can build a team to solve that problem, whatever it is, specifically, and we've identified it first. And then we break it down into its component parts really clearly. And then you start building out obviously the brief of the project and the purpose, which is the third pick, strangely, and then then this idea of practicing, of doing it, refining it, doing it better, constantly learning constantly growing, and then you get your portfolio, which again, was a little peek. I couldn't do, it sounds really cheesy, but then you get a portfolio, which does matter. But I think that that reinforces the wheel, because then you get you go to the next meeting, and you say, Well, I've just been in this meeting, solving these problems to this person, he looks like you have exactly the same problems. Have you got any others that you know, and we know how to solve these problems, because here's the examples. You're not even talking about money yet, but you're talking about problem solving. And I feel that is the strongest position because and, and something else I thought was quite nice, where you position the client as the hero in this whole piece. And you you're the guide, again, solving their problem, you can be that wise, not having a bigger beard, but a Gandalf type character or a, a guide, not Dumbledore. But in terms of Harry's the hero for clients, the hero, he doesn't quite know what he's doing. He's got a big risk on his shoulders to try and sort out this problem, or development, whatever that officious positioning it like that they're in quite a nervous, stressful situation, they may lose their job, if they don't deliver on time, the client may lose lots of money if they don't deliver it. So recognizing that and then positioning yourself, you're not the hero, you're the guide, you can solve by giving them advice, you can solve their challenges, because you've got this, all this wisdom, which you can help them with. And actually, that's really positive. So they often you turn, in a sales situation, you can turn lots of people off, if you come across as I'm this, I've done this, I'm amazing, blah, blah, blah, you know, and actually, I go off, you know, I want to do work with you often the more mature experience sophisticated clients will, will know a lot of that, I think, and they almost can design the building that they want something different as well. So this isn't a P but I think admitting you don't know everything as well, and you're willing to learn and go on this journey with them. And it will be a pleasant journey. I think that's something clean that something heavyweight do very well is actually really nurture a client really communicate very clearly not in technical speak. But communicate really simple, not simply that clearly to co vary and then display the designs very simply fosters as well, to be honest, there's a there's definitely a sort of confidence in both camps. There's an ability to we can deliver this, whatever it is believing us we believe in ourselves. And as a can do attitude was something I was always really impressed with Foster's very much. There was this drive to get stuff done. And there was this ability to get stuff done. And the client was like, maybe sometimes a bit disorganized. They had this challenge, how do we get this over the line, they know actually often in the Middle East as well. Some of the more recent experiences where fosters will actually be the ones driving the projects forward, and making sure the client was supported properly, especially if it was a startup client who had lots of new people in place, or people who disappeared and new ones came in. They were the ones arguably who held a lot of the knowledge. So I think that's, that's fascinating. And then it's a natural conversation to get into once you've crossed the line from you've built a relationship, you built the trust step event into a like, where it makes complete sense to work with you because you're so helpful. Of course, I'm going to pay you of course, I want to work with you. They make my life easy for the clients. So I think if you can position yourself like that, it said not necessarily clearly there's then they have to have to go to three clients or three, three different people to get procurement, right. But I think if you're you can justify your value then you can justify. Well, as I said at the start, you can maybe try and secure a small, small commission to really test it if you need more time to really build them. full respect to be if there's any questions you have or they have about you, but over deliver in that first stage. And then it's just a no brainer to move to the next stage because by then you've probably defined the brief really clearly And I think what's important is really showing that value of making sure the brief, the budget and the design vision are aligned by the end of stage two or concept design and holding the client to account. So you've got to sign that off, and be quite firm with them in a nice way. But just saying, for the project to be successful, we have even on the biggest scale, we had this, the design didn't go the brief didn't match the budget, which was a real challenge. Coke was a big stakeholder groups because of and how you rectify that, I think is a big discussion as well, then the design vision will be what it will be. But that's a product in some ways of what they want in the building, what they want, how much money they have. And you need to square that square that get the triangle to work together and be aligned. And then you can obviously move more into the production stages and delivery and get all the other team members involved. Building the the engineering complexity building, making sure it's costed and driven. But I think so that would be my approach, I think. And then, yeah, just assessing if they're on the same journey, because some clients aren't, and I think they want to something good enough. And is that enough, is that and then there's always constraints with budgets, sometimes very strict. So be realistic about that. Getting that cost consulting involved quickly, early sense checking if their budgets realistic, because often it can not be the client did the budget three years ago, things have changed, we've gone up with the market changes, or it was just done badly. And that can cause huge stress and the projects and the project fails not for your property, the architects, what hard work? It's because it isn't hasn't been set up properly. And I think all those questions again, you could be a guide in that sense and saying, Well, this budget is not realistic. And I think two roles which work well as where you have this either a project manager or design manager role. And then the design architect working side by side no see that can work quite nicely where the design leader partner can can drive the design forward, keep it positive relationship, the partner is a sort of a design manager or project manager can push. Push forward on the more commercial side, the project management stuff, the other the wider team issues like Why aren't the engineers appointed? Why isn't the cost consultant on board? Why haven't you signed off these decisions, we've got all this information we need sorted out, we're waiting for and that's holding us up and, and how you, you can keep that sort of more process, project management steps going. And then the architect can stay positive, have a really positive discussion with the client, it's still the same team. But you, you can split out the meetings, and often you have a client side you can have someone sign up the design vision, someone sign up for budget, and then someone delivering it. And then so you can mark different teams. So yeah,

Rion Willard

58:02

so interesting. So that, you know, you're dealing with multi headed, multi headed client teams here. And actually, you know, your own team internally is kind of split up and to different parts dealing with different parts of the of the client at that scale. That's with with your work now, region partners, and you mentioned at the beginning of the of the podcast, you know, some of the, you know, you're taking a different approach here because it's, you know, you don't have the same signature brand as a Foster's or Heatherwick. On the other hand, it's sort of like a lead. It's not starchitect what sorts of approaches have you found that are different that you're using rich, and and partners and, and you know, that kind of innovative if you like,

Speaker 1

58:54

I think it's a it'd been a fascinating experience. Because you can always rewind to when you think when fossils first started, when they didn't have a brand, they didn't have a name and you think well, and track back to those projects. But over delivering and doing almost you come back to basics you strip out the brand, you strip out that you just focus on what makes a good project for that specific situation and do the best work you can. And I think that is where often is there's a bit of a gap because you can you can draw, you can surprise the clients as well by over delivering, showing them something they weren't expecting. Use some of the tools and techniques you've gathered over the from the bigger practices and what they might be doing the lessons of what, what has been a successful project. And I think it comes down to also just being realistic that the budgets may be lower, the fees may be lower, but actually you can still deliver great projects. And and that piece I said about you know, breaking the project up that seems to be quite common into small steps. and almost starting, and often, especially in the team in London, we're building a portfolio of work. And it's, it's how that works. And Richard in certain sectors is, is has a really well developed name, such as in motorsports, and various other areas. So there's certain projects science and technology as well, as well as higher education. So you can dip into those experiences. And I think it's a different offer, in many cases, because you're, you're not just focusing on design, you are focusing on delivery as well. And being an it's not the right for every client, but you can show awareness to this multi headed multidisciplinary approach and an offer, in a way, a slightly different offer to people, because it's not just focused on design, but it's a well, you'll get really well designed project, but it will be well project managed, it will also consider sustainability, we'll consider all the specialisms because they could be taught to bring into this project, there's again, I think it's de risking for projects for clients. So but then at the end of the day, if you can show some really nice projects as well. That's great. And I think that's what's coming through now. And time and time again, we've having clients saying those projects, and those designs are really, really great. And they look at, they deliver the brief, and they they're hitting the budget. So it's almost a win win. It's not really well, it's an interesting challenge, you've got to you've got to work within the constraints of the project. And arguably, those are better design challenges, sometimes. unlimited budget. And I think, the focus, I wouldn't say it's easy, it's definitely been difficult, because you haven't got a constant stream of projects coming down. And I think that's something that I have been working with Foster's are, there's a lot more work coming down the pipeline. But it's, it's also satisfactory, satisfying, like you're trying to generate the work, you're trying to build the relationships, and you're actually having more some of these more authentic conversations, because Oh, more rewarding conversations, because you've created that opportunity. And, and then when you are delivering it's a more personal situation. But I think still the, the tools and approaches are exactly the same, really, in terms of really defining your value. And like we touched on just now how you go through that process, which is something which is fascinating. And I think constantly trying to communicate clearly, as I say, to raise the profile, because all companies change, which is changing massively, and it's going in a really positive direction. And it's not the same company, it was last year will be here before we had before. And it's it's almost, we're constantly refining our collateral. We're looking at different approaches, learning and what's working, what's successful, what isn't successful. We lost out against Hawkins brown recently, which was actually a really good experience, because we're up talking to them in the same conversation. And that's fascinating. And that we took that as a major win thinking well, actually, we've, we've we've developed so honed art skills and talent, skills for that specific opportunity. Now, what's next? Let's keep going. And there's a real momentum building. And I think that's, to me, that's what gets exciting when you realize, even if you lose, you're winning, because you're gaining, you're growing, and you're constantly refining it. I think what's been exciting for me as well as it's building this really exciting young team, especially in a London office with I think it's 16 people at the moment, which is quite good. Some people have come across from Foster's actually. So there's a there's a common understanding of design approach. There's but then as, as younger architects and people associates who are coming up systems, and there's focusing on that, what can we do as a startup practice in a larger practice is quite exciting, the different challenges you face. And I've really enjoyed just helping the younger architects progress through as well and learn and grow and, and the sort of sharing knowledge from, like we talked about today. And then thinking well, what's what's right for us isn't right for Foster's, but there's lots of things of horses, which wasn't necessary. If we had full control. Would we have done it like that? Maybe not. So there's a there's an autonomy in a sense to the work we're doing now, which I think is really liberating and exciting in that sense, especially if you feel more, you've got more investment in the process, if that makes sense. And you're not a small cog in a big wheel. You're you can help. Yeah, the mystique of machine work in different ways. But as I said at the start, I think it's not easy. I think climate at the moment is difficult. The competition is very high. You've got to keep that always have built this resilience to keep going and not get too emotionally attached if you fail because failing, you're obviously learning in a first attempt and learning and all that. And I think it's Yeah, building that resilience that what we were focusing on last year was building the portfolio. That's really helped us now move to the next year. And, and I think there's now a really positive momentum going. And then that will be looking out, as I said, at the start the mental health of the team and making sure we're not burning too hot, and they are taking breaks, when pressures coming on, they're getting support. I think that side of team, the team dynamic is really important that you can because you can't do everything clearly. And how you split up roles between you and do business development, but also delivery, and there's a partner I work with. So Mason came across from Foster's, he largely leads the design process, and the quality and then I'm more on business rather than the commercial. So it's quite a balanced team. And as I said, that's a Project Management site management piece. So there's a balance and and under us, we've got a big sort of good support team, a free senior associates who are very good, very capable design, but also really fascinated in putting more work and then and then there's another sort of layer. So it's quite well structured, even though it's quite small team who've got quite enough resilience now already. And then it's it's interesting debates having at the moment, and I remember I popped into the white read architects think Dickie, have you I know you've interviewed? Yeah, we were talking about the valley of death or something where if you grow past 20, maybe before, if you're targeting trying to get to 50, it can get difficult because you have all the support functions, and your turnover can suffer as you're professionalizing. So there's an interesting debate about is great, right? For everyone. Will you then also have to have the mouths to feed situation because you've got to obviously, secure more work. So there's a balance? Or do you focus on this thing, focused on your team size and do the best quality projects possible, and you can still earn good money, but because you're being more selective on what you're choosing, but actually, as you get to, you know, as you get go to the next stage, it gets more, you get more systems in place. You've got professionalize more, and not say we haven't got that image because it's got different. It's a larger sort of entity as well. But it's how you interface in with that, in that I know, it seems there is a challenging sort of space when you get larger. And we debated that Heatherwick as well, should we get more than two inch people. Foster's has grown to sort of 1600 people last and it's like, the challenges they're even more extreme in some ways. But it splits up split up into smaller teams, these still have that we have to keep coping with. Where's the work coming from. And I think how you how you balance off, especially if you've started working, working on projects, how you, you know, those projects can all stop. So you've got to balance keeping the pipeline going, thinking, keeping opportunities ticking over, and relationships, just in case your current pipeline stops. So that's a another tension and balance. So it is a fascinating moving.

Rion Willard

01:08:17

Amazing, amazing. I think that's probably the a good place for us to conclude the conversation. Now I can see we've, you know, just lost it. I lost track of time that I was enjoying just listening. Absolutely, absolutely brilliant Andy really. So I really appreciate your, your, your time today. And sharing and sharing those insights and your expertise. There's still loads more that I want to ask. So maybe we'll have we'll have another one of these at a later date. But thank you so much for your for your time today. It was really really insightful.

Unknown Speaker

01:08:55

Jordan is great. And that's a

Rion Willard

01:08:57

wrap. And one more thing. If you haven't already, please do head on over to iTunes or Spotify. And leave us a review. We'd love to read your name out here on the show. And we'd love to get your feedback. And we'd love to hear what it is that you'd like to see more of and what you love about the show already. This episode is sponsored by Smart practice, business of architectures flagship program to help you structure your firm for freedom, fulfillment, and financial profit. If you want access for our free training on how to do this, please visit smart practice method.com Or if you want to speak directly to one of our advisors about how we might be able to help you. Please follow the link in the information. Hello, listeners. We hope you're enjoying our show. We love bringing you these insightful conversations, but we couldn't do it without the support of our amazing sponsors. If you're a business owner, or know someone who would be an excellent fit for our audience, we'd love to hear from you. Partnering with us means your brand will reach over 40,000 engaged listeners each month interested in becoming a sponsor, please send us an email at support at business of architecture.com. The views expressed on this show by my guests do not represent those of the host and I make no representation, promise guarantee, pledge warranty, contract, bond or commitment, except to help you be unstoppable.

00:0000:00