Generally, we’ve done quite well. In fact, today, if you look at our Board of Directors, almost everybody on the Board came into the firm through acquisition. Some people would say, well, that’s weird. But we don’t really look at acquisitions as that different from hiring people. It’s just a more efficient way to hire people. It would be different if we went and merged with Gensler or SOM or something like that, then yeah. Then you would see two completely different firms that you could trace – kind of like the Capulets and the Montagues3 – back to their particular cultural DNA.
That would obviously be much more complex, and we’ve never done anything at that scale. It was almost always people joining Perkins&Will and believing in what we believe in and already having the same values. It was quite easy for those firms and people to become citizens of Perkins&Will.
Also, importantly, whenever we acquired firms, we would always say, “Look, we’re not static. One reason we are who we are is because you’ve joined us and you’re going to change us.” You know, when Peter Busby joined us, we said, “Just because we’re not as green as you are, you shouldn’t stop being green. We want you to make us greener.” Which is what happened.
KS: That’s a great message. You want the firms you’re acquiring to influence and help shape the future of Perkins&Will.
PH: Yeah. It’s a humble approach because no one has all the answers. The whole point of an acquisition is sort of one plus one equals three. Both firms should get better, bigger, happier, all those things. And if you do that, then the business side of an acquisition makes tons of sense.
KS: As CEO, you have a series of client relationships, you still are engaged in some way with projects but not running them. How do you keep in touch with the work at Perkins&Will, to ensure the outcomes, the impacts, the quality are aligned with the mission and vision of the firm? How are you orchestrating that and how do you get visibility broadly across the firm?
PH: Through a number of ways. I mean, I’m just interested. Whenever I travel to other studios, I make a point of actually meeting with teams and sitting in design reviews and those kinds of things. I mean, I’m an architect and that’s my passion, at the end of the day. And I care about that more than any other aspect of the business, the people and the projects and the clients.
We also have a Design Board, and our Design Board does an annual design review of the entire portfolio. And I participate in that. That’s like a full weeklong process where we review lots of projects, and I present back to the firm what we see from the Design Board perspective. So that’s kind of an intensive way to stay in touch annually.
I’m also on our Research Board, which is the group that governs our investments in research. So I stay involved on the innovation front. I’m also on our Technology Board, which has been a long-term interest of mine. That is about what are we doing digitally in terms of innovation. These are some of the things I’m interested in the firm that I stay close to, or as close as I can.
One of the problems with my role – and this is probably true with a lot of management – is it’s easy to slip into a habit where all you do is fix problems. When there is a problem, you have to pay attention to it. But every time I attempt to fix a problem, I’ll turn around and say, well, what good is going on? How do I celebrate the good and get close enough to know what’s happening?
That means I am familiar enough with the aspirational qualities of the work or the beauty in the architecture or the happiest clients. One of the things we do is survey all of our clients every year in a micro survey called Plus. It’s basically a customer satisfaction survey, asking our clients if they’re happy.
If there are clients that were unhappy for some reason, I personally talk to them. I’ve done that for about five or six years and I’m still doing that. But one of the things I told myself last year is I’m going to start calling the absolute happiest clients. What are we doing right? And both sides are really quite interesting. You know, we’re sort of introverts in our industry. We’re worried that clients are going to be unhappy with our work in some ways. We’re kind of shy about that.
Architecture and interior design and planning are the most joyful acts. It’s like a form of creation and we should be very confident with our clients and bold and form relationships that lead to trust and good things happening. We shouldn’t be shy to ask them how they feel about our work. If there’s one little point of pain in a relationship, it can turn into a snowball. And all you had to do was ask early on.
KS: In terms of the firm’s projects, can you identify two or three that you think are particularly meaningful, that hit all the right notes in terms of the firm’s purpose or went far beyond what the client thought possible?
PH: Yeah. One recent project was the Gardner Neurosciences Institute for University of Cincinnati Health. One thing I really love about that project is it relied on some of the research that was coming out of our Human Experience (Hx) Lab, which was basically taking human factor design neuroscience and incorporating that into the actual design process. And it resulted in a building for neuroscience research that was just a better building.
There was plenty of healthcare expertise and lab and clinical expertise that went into it that was more normative, but then there was this extra layer of human experience design, which had to do with thinking about light and acoustics, which actually then impacted the design of the building envelope, which has this kind of diaphanous veil on it, because it was a light control thing. People with brain trauma have different reactions to light.
To me, that’s just a really compelling project that relates to this next order of design innovation through thought leadership and just resulted in a really successful client experience. And everyone just loves that project. I mean, if we can love the spaces that we occupy, so many good things can happen. If architecture is just the sum of the parts, that’s depressing because bricks and mortar are just going to cost more and more every year. It’s just going to be more and more expensive bricks or more and more expensive mortar. But if it’s about the performance and the inspiration of the occupants of the building, that’s almost something that you can’t put a price on.
Canada’s Earth Tower, that’s not built yet, will be the tallest timber building in the world. It will be a forty story, residential, timber building. And the reason for that and why it’s called Earth Tower is carbon capture, and just thinking differently about material selection. Again, it’s not built yet; it’s caught up in some zoning issues in Vancouver not because of its material, but because of where it is the city. But I believe it will get built in time.
Gardner Neurosciences Institute
| Client: | University of Cincinnati Health |
| Architects: | Perkins&Will |
| Location: | Cincinnati, Ohio, USA |
| Size: | 194,000 square feet | 18,000 square meters |
| Completion Date: | 2019 |
Photo Credit: © Mark Herboth, courtesy of Perkins&Will
The Gardner Neuroscience Institute is a treatment, research, and teaching center for complex neurological conditions and integrates 15 specialty centers, including those for treating epilepsy, brain tumors, mood disorders, strokes, and Alzheimer’s disease. The six-level facility provides a singular place for comprehensive multidisciplinary neurological care, workspaces for researchers and students, exam rooms, consultation offices, specialty-care rooms, infusion-treatment rooms, and two levels of flat floor parking for patients with mobility issues.
The