The built environment is a powerful tool for improving people’s lives, sense of well-being, and overall health. As such, good design is an important tool in the fight for equity across populations. Unfortunately, design services are often a luxury, inaccessible to those who might benefit most from them. However, architects and engineers are not able to operate without resources. To explore these topics, ARCHIVE Global and Silman’s Building Equity Initiative teamed up to host a conversation amongst New York City practitioners to evaluate barriers and best practices when addressing pro-bono and low-bono design work. Below is a documentation of the shared challenges, strategies, and opportunities voiced by architects and engineers in attendance, focusing particularly on the structural engineering perspective.
Design firms expressed that common challenges centered around lack of funding/resources, limited time, gaps in collaboration, and misaligned expectations between the firm and client regarding pro-bono and low-bono work. Moreover, key strategies mentioned for overcoming challenges within this sector of work include capitalizing on personal passions and creating clear scopes of work to define client expectations.
Likewise, opportunities voiced in the discussions included the creation of cross-collaborative partnerships, emphasis on the value of relationship building, and looking beyond the traditional design community for allies.
Challenges
The first shared challenge was that limited funding for pro-bono and low-bono work prevented firms from doing this work substantially and sustainably. In particular, this was a challenge faced by smaller firms, as resources can be limited. Thus, often, even given the best intentions, paid project work tended to take precedence over pro-bono and low-bono work and limited the amount of this work firms were able to take on. In addition, from a staffing standpoint, this type of work often depends on the passion of staff members. This lack of resources can quickly lead to burnout as staff gets too busy. And their enthusiasm may dissipate as they are tapped for more paid work to compensate for the financial inability to engage full-time staff with pro-bono and low-bono work alone.
Opportunities voiced in the discussions included the creation of cross-collaborative partnerships, emphasis on the value of relationship building, and looking beyond the traditional design community for allies.
A second common challenge voiced was the misalignment between client expectations on pro-bono and low-bono projects versus designer limitations regarding time and resources. Many firms have faced the challenge of having clients buy into the firms’ time while also understanding their limitations of scope and expertise. As a result, misaligned expectations between firms and clients lead to outcomes that do not fit the goals and constraints of both sides. Thus, there is a need to manage and align expectations from the start of a project.
For structural engineering firms, in particular, connecting with clients and potential projects is a major challenge. Outreach and communication with architects and nonprofits to find pro-bono and low-bono projects can be time-consuming and unpredictable. Often these efforts are fueled by the passion of younger staff members who have less experience with client outreach and thus may be intimidated or not well equipped to make the connections necessary to maintain a steady level of pro-bono and low-bono work, or once a project gets started, to navigate client relationships.
Strategies
One strategy some firms have taken to address these challenges is to create a framework that treats pro-bono and low-bono work similarly to paid projects by tracking time spent and paying employees for that time. This approach can hold firms and clients more accountable, indicating that a firm has a top-down commitment to this work. Alternatively, other firms include pro-bono and low-bono work within their business development sector, tracking hours donated and setting goals to hold the firm accountable to prioritize that work.
To better align client and firm expectations, firms often break down a project into an initial scope of work or feasibility study as a starting point. This ensures that the client and firm are aligned with their goals, needs, and limitations before proceeding with a full-scale project.
Opportunities
One of the main opportunities that came out of the discussion included forming cross-collaborative partnerships with other design firms, community based organizations, and nonprofits, emphasizing the value of in-between connection building. Although very valuable and central to design work, relationship building often operates in a silo compared to the design and construction processes. More cross-collaboration among different disciplines can help reduce the time required to make these connections and reduce the resource depletion and burnout that often results.
Firms are also continuing to navigate how to strike a balance between conducting high-quality work while also having the ability to show off their work. One innovative opportunity discussed was to create a funding model where paid projects’ funding could be funneled into pro-bono and low-bono work to help combat limited resources and the inability to engage full-time staff. Likewise, tapping into the younger generation of architects and designers who are interested in using their skill sets for good could be useful for getting the momentum going. However, this approach does not eliminate the need for support for these initiatives by firm leadership.
Next Steps
As a result of the productive workshop and discussion among design firms, a critical goal is to maintain momentum toward continuing and expanding the conversation beyond workshop participants. For example, creating an email listserv for the future exchange of ideas more fluidly could facilitate seamless collaboration across sectors, clients, and disciplines. Moreover, to better align expectations between firms and clients, there were suggestions to create guidelines to educate each party – for example, the client/nonprofit, on the process of pro-bono and low-bono design work for AEC firms. Overall, there was a strong emphasis among firms in attendance to further explore coalition building to continue supporting each other and share challenges, successes, and strategies for pro-bono and low-bono projects.