ABSTRACT

The measurement of design quality is an area of study that several large organisations have started to take an interest in over the past few years. It is likely that this is a reflection of consumerism,1 and an awareness to respond ever more closely to the needs of an organisation’s customers. It is also the result of greater affluence in our society leading to more time to enjoy those aspects of life which improve its quality. The start of the twenty-first century will see the flourishing of a second renaissance conceived in the last decade of the twentieth century when leisure time meant for many people that they could enjoy a longer life, good food, music, and show an interest in the design of their personal space beyond that ever experienced by any previous generation. The plethora of television programmes giving advice on gardening and decorating and redesigning houses illustrates the potential demand for high-quality environments and an awareness of well-being. What is much more difficult to achieve, is to attempt to measure these design qualities, and give them quantitative values. Most families now have access to a car and people seem to be able to make the value for money judgements necessary in choosing a particular model. Likewise, we all make value for money judgements when deciding on everyday purchases for clothes and food. However, the construction industry has for decades been wedded to the concept of lowest price as the best procurement route for new buildings. Slowly, and to some extent reluctantly, this outdated concept is being brought into line with other consumer products but there is a long way to go before wholelife costing is seen as a better way to judge the performance of a building. As architects well know, the problem often starts with exceptionally low fee bids reducing consultancy remuneration for design to meagre and pitiful levels – the result being an almost inevitable dilution of design quality.