Large-scale urban projects that make use of exceptional architecture face a number of challenges: namely the scale and complexity of the projects as well as the elevated expectations faced by architectural and engineering firms. Meeting these challenges requires the development and approval of non-standard design and technical solutions. Based on the analysis of four case studies in the German context, we show how the creation of exceptional architecture requires that built environment professionals actively negotiate with established norms and standards in various ways. The learning processes thus enabled are contradictory. On the one hand, knowledge gained in the process of developing innovative solutions remains exclusive and, often, codification and standardization do not occur. On the other hand, in some instances, standards and norms are adapted to inform and guide other projects. In conclusion, this paper argues, norms and standards constitute a contested terrain and are characterized by a contradictory performativity. This paper thus advances wider debates on innovation in the building industry by highlighting the extreme tensions and ambivalent trade-offs that exist between the development of unique and tailor-made solutions for singular buildings and the investment in the standardization of novel products for the built environment.

No abstract

PurposeThe main goal of this paper is to shift the focus from the symbolic and aesthetic features of iconic projects to the complex process of their actual materialisation. Hereby, the authors conceptualise iconic projects as the “collaborative performance” of a wide range of built environment professionals. The authors seek to unravel the complexity of organisational action, professional practices, knowledge and expertise, and the inter-firm networks required for the creation of iconic architecture.Design/methodology/approachThe analysis is based on an in-depth case study of the Elbe Philharmonic Hall, Hamburg's new icon. This included 26 semi-structured interviews with a broad range of interview partners, which were conducted by an interdisciplinary team.FindingsBesides by spectacular architectural design, iconic buildings are characterised by the meticulous execution of even the smallest details as well as of more hidden building elements unlikely to be seen by the public. Execution is usually contingent on the specific building processes and construction practices and requires the continuous engagement of project architects, as well as trusting collaborations with their partners in the construction industry. Yet the making of iconic projects is challenging and (financially) risky, and the interfaces between project partners cannot be easily translated into contractual agreements, which potentially compromises the collaboration between architects and construction firms.Originality/valueThis paper advances a cross-sectoral view on professional practices by providing in-depth insight into the work of less prominent project architects and their partners in the construction industry. This paper hereby bridges design and construction practices and provides a more holistic understanding of how iconic projects are constructed on the ground.

More than any other profession, architecture has been shaped by the tension between autonomy and heteronomy. Recently, however, this dichotomy is seen as unproductive for understanding architects’ practices in-depth, especially in the context of the growing internationalization that is transforming and restructuring architectural practice. The paper applies the lens of ‘relational autonomy’, grasping architectural practice in relation to the actions of other built environment professionals, and to material artefacts. Dependence is framed not as a threat but as a productive potential. The focus of the paper is on the practices of less prominent architects in celebrity global firms. More specifically, the paper explores the practices enacted during the actual materialization of design-ambitious edifices, on-site and in the workshops of sub-contractors. The main argument is that less visible architects can secure and enhance the (relational) autonomy of global architects during construction, by actively shaping a specific working context, where they can purposefully mobilize dependence. Practices during construction generate new opportunities for creative engagement and enhance architects’ influence over processes beyond their autonomous actions, thereby enabling the making of products with high symbolic value.