Interdisciplinary collaboration in the Virtual Design Studio

Drastic changes in technology and economics currently impact common working structures. Moreover, a fundamental move of western societies from industrial and service oriented societies to information oriented societies can be observed. Like others, the AEC industry is also exposed to the challenge of these fundamental changes, not only regarding an ever growing stock of information on building components and materials, but also because of new methods of collaboration to be applied by all participants. As a result, integrating domain specific knowledge into the design process and conversely, conveying design intentions to domain experts, is meaningful in a constantly growing scale. Utilising advanced technology, a twofold approach in research and education, undertaken at the Institut für Industrielle Bauproduktion (ifib), University of Karlsruhe, is the basis of efforts to create and develop integrating methods of collaboration into the design and planning process. In addition, the integration of AEC practitioners (investors, users, designers, engineers) in the education process provides both drastic changes in the fields of design and construction education of students and a promising approach for life long learning. The focus of this paper is to present the current state of work and to report on experiences gathered during several Virtual Design Studios (VDS) in which multi-disciplinary participants from various Universities and backgrounds were involved. Platforms for the activities are World Wide Web based applications as well as animations, VR, CAD and video conferencing. Design Collaboration The process of design and planing can be described as a process of information flow and manipulation, where goals, parameters and raw data are interchangeable in their role and effect. This process with its various participants and conditions behooves a cognizant, coordinated and flexible planning strategy in order to meet the dynamically changing design goals [Schön 1983]. The inherent complexity of such iterative processes is more so compounded in the design and production of singular products such as ships and buildings. These conditions call for a front-loaded and coordinated planning strategy: the integrated planning approach [Rittel 1970, Rittel 1973, Rowe 1992, LM 95 1994, Wagner 1999]. In this respect, the English term planning comprises any activity related to the completion of a planning project, including design. Over the past few years, the Institut für Industrielle Bauproduktion has intensified its work on integrated planning environments in both, research and education. In the context of several research projects computer based planning environments and systems have been developed in order to facilitate the information and communication flows necessary to utilize an integrated planning approach. The lessons learned from such research projects [INTESOL 1997, Forgber 1998, Müller 1998] have been used and simulated in the VDS and their results again serve as a testbed for research work as well as for the refinement of the pedagogical methods in use. The VDS concept stems from the need to educate students and enable them with skills that will be applicable in real world situations through their lifetimes. In many professions, perhaps moreso in architecture, the need is not so much for specific abilities as for flexible capabilities. The nature of architectural design and the qualities of an integrated planning approach call for strategic thought and dynamic models. The VDS is an attempt to introduce the concepts and train the students through simulated “real world” conditions. The VDS utilizes existing technologies to create a Virtual Projektspaces to provide communication channels necessary in the integrated planning model. Specific tools such as email, newsgroups, html documents and structured, shared databases are used to emphasize various aspects of a common planning environment. These tools are combined within a design exercise framework which requires the students to confront design problems using non-traditional methods [Turkle 1995, Forgber 1997]. Further, the design problems themselves are chosen for their unconventionality, either in their form or in their format. The students are required to use only internet based presentation methods to ensure a universality in accessibility. Through the confrontation with unusual situations or design problems [Rittel 1993], the students are trained on how to manage information flows and how to use it in order to achieve collaborative design solutions. The coordination and management of participants, information and processes that is required by current practice conditions is incredibly difficult to teach. Indeed, it could be said that such skills can only be trained. It is the intention of the VDS to carry out part of this training. The use of internet based tools has the added complexity of exploring and evolving a meaningful methodology with new possibilities for display and communication. This can, in certain circumstances, serve to occlude the goals of the VDS rather than clarify them. Although the results of the studios are graphically enticing, it is the way with which the students are taught (and teach themselves) with these tools that we wish to focus upon. To emphasize this aspect of the VDS, the students are trained to carry out their design work with the following goals in mind: • To gather and assimilate information concurrent to the team consolidation and prior to the actual design activity. • To use a lifecycle oriented approach while developing the design goals and objectives • To increase the communication among team members and “outside” knowledge resources during the design activity In the traditional architectural design studio, the students are given a well defined design assignment and are instructed to begin work as soon as possible, usually alone. The students attempt to solve the problem applying a mostly stomach based, intuitive design strategies. The work is carried out in either the student’s own home or in communal work spaces at the school with planned consultation and review sessions setting a timetable for work planning. Consultation and criticism is given in sessions where the students first present the work and the Critics react with the allotted time and with their comments. The final evaluation is based upon the internal consistency of the student’s logic and the elan with which a solution is provided (or with which it is presented). The VDS is an attempt to reduce the linearity of the studio environment, the student/tutor relationship, and the way with which the students work with their resources. The framework for the design exercise is parameterized through the assumption of internet based tools to create a workspace through which information will be aggregated and shared [ 1996]. The workspace redefines the characteristics of the design studio environment by allowing a flexible definition of: • the limits of the design assignment, • the proximity of the students’ work environment to their colleagues, • the number and makeup of consultants, • the time based constraints for consultation, • the immediacy of response involved in receiving criticism, • the qualities with which the work is evaluated, • and the means by which the work is presented. The scope of the VDS is widened through the flexibility inherent in using this approach. There exists the real possibility, however, that by becoming more flexible, the assignment is, for the student, eventually intractable. By redefining the nature or qualities of the design studio environment, the students are often more involved in meta-problems of the assignment than in the core design problem itself. This behooves a large degree of diligence upon the studio tutors to ensure that the students balance their concentration between the process and the product of the Studio. Although the need for this balance is made clear to the students, the realization of its implications varies with each individual and usually requires an attendant individually crafted response from the tutors. This is, perhaps, inherent in the teaching of design. The scope of the VDS also requires that the expectations of the students be well defined and that the assignment includes not only the production of a design solution, but the investigation and use of the workspace itself. In this respect, an important aspect of the VDS is the establishment of a timetable. The timetable is not, however, one which defines dates for design goals. Rather, the timetable defines dates for setting design goals. This entails, for the students, a not inconsequential amount of research as well as fostering a discussion about how to define the goals necessary to achieve an acceptable, if not overwhelming, design solution. The timetable also includes activities designed to ensure that the students engage themselves with the communication technologies and the wide band of information, information sources and people available through the use of the workspace. Further, the somewhat rich timetable also requires the students to develop strategies for time management owing to the number and variety of assigned tasks. A typical VDS last for 4 to 6 months and involves between 15 and 25 students, one or two full time assistant professors, guest consultants (both locally and remotely) and a guest critic (usually a full professor) for the design reviews. During the VDS, the students are required to involve other persons as either consultants (field specific) or as Netnannies. The role of the Netnannies is to demonstrate the rich variety of options easily available (either with or without the internet) as well as to ensure that the students receive an independent criticism of their work. The Netnanny also provides a control that the information presented with the internet based methods is in itself complete and understandable. The students work