Forum discussion

chiming in on SDL thread re: Stagnation / Plateauing in firm (AIA 2030 program and otherwise)

Hello friends,

Recently, as part of the AIA 2030 working group discussion – a topic came to light that was a conversation among (I believe) the SDL subset of our community, on a topic that is my personal obsession and daily focus – so I wanted to pipe up and share thoughts. BUT I want to respect the safe space, so if those of you in SDL want to keep this conversation amongst yourselves only (and find any of what I share useful) – please feel free to cut and paste it into your own listserv!!

For those of us not in the SDL list – this is the essence of the post:

“Does anyone share the same feeling of stagnation? We are supposed to hit 80% pEUI reduction now and working towards 90% mark, but I don’t see it happening for majority of our projects, even the “right” ones that we implemented integrative design process & iterative energy modeling. I am wondering whether anyone would be willing to share their secrete sauce that pushes projects over the hump.”

I feel compelled to chime in because this has become the exact heart of the focus of SPI’s work in the past 5 years….instead of writing paragraphs (partially because there are a few different reasons for this!) I’ll ask a few questions…

(these questions should apply to firms of all sizes and scopes even if my wording isn’t precise and even though there are obviously differences in implementation!)

- Has the firm-wide commitment been translated from executive level pronouncements down to every single person having clarity as to how their role/daily activities contribute to achieving the goal?

- How do you know if all project teams in the firm are ‘doing it’ (setting goals effectively, tracking, etc)? And if so, is there support for teams that are struggling?

- Does your firm have (effective) feedback loops to learn from your ongoing work so that you can continuously improve (and not repeat the same things that hold you back) ?

Related to this – if you are an AIA 2030 Signatory firm – do you leverage the DDX data (of your firm and more broadly) as a feedback loop to staff (at least once per year, but ideally more)?

- Is your sustainability leadership or governance (whatever you call it) somehow embedded throughout your firm (whether you have an SD, CSO or multiple of them for huge firms – in addition to that – a network of others by region/office/team – who champion and keep eyeballs on making sure it happens)?

- Are sustainability actions and deliverables embedded in or tied to your QA/QC process as appropriate?

- Does your firm have internally-driven ‘best practices’ or standards for sustainability (meaning the firm is not purely ‘reactive’, waiting for clients to ask for it)? Either based on COTE FDE or other?

- Has your firm taken the time to reflect and assess to make sure that your project delivery methodology aligns with your sustainability goals (and/or external commitments like 2030 Commitment)?

- Lastly, (a loaded question that might need a lot more explanation, but here goes anyway) has your firm incorporated critical change management strategies in the creation/roll out and implementation of this commitment (meaning was the “plan” done by a small subset of staff and then presented/rolled out or was there deeper/broader engagement of staff to set/create and figure out implementation)?

There are more questions I could ask – but if the answer to any of these is “I have no idea”, or “somewhat” or – of course – “no” then you’ll begin to see why plateaus might be happening in your firm….

The new AIA 2030 SAP (sustainability action plan guidance doc) was recently released and we (the working group) included new content on change management and other things – so take a look there, even if your firm is NOT in the program (and if you’re interested in getting your firm to become a signatory but haven’t been able to make it happen – contact me and I’ll help you figure out how to do that!)

If any of you want to have a chat offline – just ping me – I’m happy to listen, share and do a little brainstorming with you.

0

You rely on LEEDuser. Can we rely on you?

LEEDuser is supported by our premium members, not by advertisers.

Go premium for $15.95  »

Sun, 06/27/2021 - 01:03

Damn. This is the stuff. Thanks Barbra. As ever, you are in the bulls eye of key questions. Hearts all around Jim Newman On Sat, Jun 26, 2021, 2:11 PM Barbra Batshalom wrote:

Thu, 07/01/2021 - 16:09

Been thinking about this a lot. Provacative questions deserve provacative responses. :-) I think what you wrote gets at the root of a lot of things and the more I ruminate on it, I see all your questions essentially being extensions of "how much can one firm move the needle?" I look at my firm: we're huge advocated of integrated forms of delivery (which we have research to show produces higher performing buildings). We build our own new offices to net-zero/net-positive energy via designs that lower PUI and through on-site energy generation (and do it at or near market rates... certainly paying back over the life of the office). We have sustainability best practices and we see some adoption of them ticking up. We're pretty vocal about all of these. We're just one force and factor in the mix, though. The pressures individual customers and partners face are pretty far from our control and I sense that, much as all of us try to move the needle in our ways, we are still (out of pure necessity) going to play the game by the rules set for us project by project and building by building. I've come around to thinking that until the places we build start mandating district level solutions and demand that we stop thinking about sustainability on a per-building basis, our efforts are going to be seen as novel or things to try, but we'll stay at this plateau. We have the methods, it can be done at the right costs, but most firms represented here? We're the ones executing from a playbook that others have already decided on for a variety of reasons. We keep finding new point solutions (electrification, say) rather than system solutions (electrification, but supported by clean on-site energy generation so we're not passing carbon around and then sharing that energy generation with the whole neighborhood). The people with the levers of regulation or the people who can set and commit to a grand vision for what gets designed and built are who we need to take action, I think.

Thu, 07/01/2021 - 16:41

Jay – your ruminating about how much can one firm do brought to mind that the one firm can do a lot. Supporting someone to be on a code council, or involved in ASHRAE, COTE, preservation boards, or other organizations can be huge levers. But more specifically our state is considering requiring heat pump space heating and water heating for most new buildings, which is a huge leap forward (3x over gas or elec resistance). We compiled a list of all of the heat pump based buildings, and almost half of them are from one engineering firm! Most of them are from this firm plus one more. And there are a small number of architecture firms represented (many on this list!). So if this code proposal passes, a very small number of firms will have proven through their hard work over years that heat pumps are feasible, and this will have driven the entire state past any stagnation... -Kjell F

Add new comment

To post a comment, you need to register for a LEEDuser Basic membership (free) or login to your existing profile.