letter to the AJ editor

Dear Christine,

I have been thinking about your challenge - "what should we do next?" . It wasn't easy!  However, a couple of things that I am involved in has led me to think how good it would be if the AJ shone a torch on the discrepancy between the skills architects are taught when studying and the skills they need when they start work.  I wonder if it might be a factor in the fall off of women in architecture.

Nearly all the women at the RIBA's Female Power evening talked about architecture as collaboration, inviting consideration, adapting and relating.  Alison Brooks felt that the old model of modernism as singular, authoritarian and static had passed.  I have been researching the application of "BIM" to projects and considering how we can incorporate the approach, software and skills into our practice in order to remain competitive.  I find it fascinating and there are many things I could say about it but in this context the thing that really stood out to me was its embodiment of collaboration.  The second thing was organising a networking/marketing workshop for Cambridge Women in Construction.  This focused on the idea of an 'elevator pitch' - deciding what's special or memorable about you, your skills, what you offer and why it's good.  We were taught ways to remember people's names, ways to enter a conversation and ways to leave it. To many of us it highlighted the need to be direct, succinct, unapologetic and positive.

In my experience, architecture schools spend the majority of time teaching how to design and then how to present and defend the design.  Do they still do this? I completed a part time part 2 in 2008 and we were still doing it then.  In practice, the buildings we build come out of a process of presentation, negotiation, collaboration and compromise.  Women should, by reputation, be good at this.  However, even for an experienced woman architect, a room full of suited male consultants / contractors/ clients can be intimidating and just summoning the energy to go round the room shaking hands at the end of a challenging meeting can be difficult. 

Could/should the structure of teaching architecture be changed to reflect a collaborative approach, not just to design, but to work as a whole?  Would/could it help the men and particularly women joining the profession?  Would 'architecture' or 'design' suffer?  It would be fascinating to hear the arguments.

Meanwhile, we will continue to run CWiC training events that cover some of the skills mentioned and find as many ways as we can to support the women already working in construction.


Best regards,

Jo