Our exploration might be by way of a serendipitous conversation while passing one another in the stairway, with a chance of forgetting whether one was ascending or descending.  Or, it might be aligning our thoughts and processes ahead of walking into a formal meeting for further interrogation with a wider audience, or a chat in the kitchen while brewing our tea.  Or it might be undertaken by a group of us huddled around a screen (or two) – an impromptu conversation staged by dragging across any available unoccupied chairs of our neighbouring colleagues. At other times we might stand around pinned drawings, or fire up a large format digital screen to broaden the projection  – the scattering of unique index finger marks that are left on the screen become remnants of a vigorous debate. These conversations are wide-ranging and inclusive – from articulating ideas, to forecasting and speculating on cost and quality outcomes. The contributions are varied and always insightful as we each bring to bear both our own experience and knowledge beyond architecture. An architectural draftsperson is also a cartoonist, and an architect a photographer. A graduate is also a researcher and editor, and another is recognised for their talents in digital animation. We have accomplished musicians and those with qualifications in the arts, socials sciences and landscape architecture.

While we thrive on competitions as a way to explore new ideas without certainty that they will be realised, we still celebrate the built outcome as amongst our greatest achievements.  We work in an open floor plate with project teams configured around a single bench and within earshot of each other. We are always conscious that our efforts are toward preparing drawings, models and directions for others who will construct the work.

We consistently refer back to the images, diagrams and planning outcomes of completed projects as reference points for evaluating a design idea. We might find ourselves employing various visualisation techniques in the fast-and-furious testing of an idea that may or may no longer hold, in parallel with the slow and steady review of construction detailing. We navigate a line between the conceptual basis of the project and the realities of the construction process.

And all the time we work within a context that continues to change – we continually engage with different procurement models, new technologies, the very real threat of climate change, the exponential growth of our cities, and the seemingly ever increasing constraints of cost and time, regulatory controls. If necessary we will discard one idea in view of replacing it with another – there are plenty more good ideas where that one came from. This approach allows us to remain resilient as the boundaries of architecture shift.

Meaghan Dwyer and Bill Krotiris

Originally published in This Building Likes Me