Identity and image at architecture firms

Transcription

Identity and image
at architecture firms
1
2
Identity and image at architecture firms
By
José Chan
in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science
in Science Communication
at the Delft University of Technology,
to be defended publicly on Tuesday May 17, 2016 at 3:00 PM.
Supervisor:
Thesis committee:
Drs. C. Wehrmann
Prof. ir. M. J. de Vries
Dr. ir. S. M. Flipse
Dr. ir. L. Volker
J. Kraaijeveld
Science Communication, TU Delft
Architecture and the Built Environment, TU Delft
BNA (Royal Institute of Dutch Architects)
An electronic version of this thesis is available at http://repository.tudelft.nl/.
3
4
Summary
This research examines a method for architecture firms to measure their perceived and desired
identity, how they see themselves and how they would like to be seen, their image, how they are
seen externally, and to compare them. Knowing how the external public, potential clients and their
stakeholders view the firm and what image and reputation the firm has is valuable to architects, in
order to be aware of their position and improve their communication towards their clients and
stakeholders. The first part of the research focuses on examining the corporate identity of the firms.
Following Bernstein’s Spiderweb method, interviews were held to determine the perceived and
desired identity of the firms. The second part of the research focuses on measuring the corporate
image of the architecture firms. Multiple factors have influence on the image in the mind of the
audience, but this research focuses on the secondary communication of the corporate identity, in
particular on the websites of the firms. Comparing the perceived and desired identity of the
architecture firms with the image that prospective clients get from visiting the firms’ websites, the
results revealed a gap between identity and image. To know to what extent the study is useful to
architecture firms, the interviewees were presented with the results and asked for their feedback.
The research was positively received by the architecture firms. The results of the questionnaires
made them aware of the gaps between identity and image and stimulated thoughts and discussions
about how to close this gap. This research motivates the architects to look for advice externally on
their communication and identity. The method is suitable for research with their existing clients and
with more communication channels.
5
6
Table of contents
Summary ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Table of contents ................................................................................................................................ 7
1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 9
1.1 Document structure ................................................................................................................. 10
2 Theoretical framework ................................................................................................................... 11
2.1 Corporate identity .................................................................................................................... 11
2.2 Corporate image ..................................................................................................................... 13
2.3 Corporate communication ....................................................................................................... 14
2.3 Architect’s clients .................................................................................................................... 15
2.4 Measuring identity ................................................................................................................... 16
2.5 Measuring image..................................................................................................................... 16
2.6 Measuring gaps between identity and image........................................................................... 17
3 Research methods......................................................................................................................... 19
3.1 Identity .................................................................................................................................... 19
3.2 Image ...................................................................................................................................... 20
3.3 Gap between identity and image ............................................................................................. 21
3.4 Feedback ................................................................................................................................ 22
4 Results .......................................................................................................................................... 23
4.1 Firm 1...................................................................................................................................... 23
4.2 Firm 2...................................................................................................................................... 27
4.3 Firm 3...................................................................................................................................... 31
4.4 Firm 4...................................................................................................................................... 35
4.5 Firm 5...................................................................................................................................... 38
4.6 Firm 6...................................................................................................................................... 42
4.7 Firm 7...................................................................................................................................... 46
4.8 Section summary .................................................................................................................... 49
5 Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 53
5.1 Identity .................................................................................................................................... 53
5.2 Image ...................................................................................................................................... 53
5.3 Gap between identity and image ............................................................................................. 54
5.4 Method .................................................................................................................................... 54
5.5 Limitations ............................................................................................................................... 55
5.6 Practical implications ............................................................................................................... 56
5.7 Further research...................................................................................................................... 57
6 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 59
7 References .................................................................................................................................... 61
7
Appendices ....................................................................................................................................... 63
Appendix A - Transcription interview – Firm 1 ................................................................................ 63
Appendix B - Thematic coding of interviews................................................................................... 71
Appendix C - Questionnaire ........................................................................................................... 72
Appendix D - Research report – Firm 1.......................................................................................... 75
Appendix E - Feedback ................................................................................................................. 79
8
1 Introduction
Architects have faced many challenges since the financial crisis. Between 2008 and 2011, revenue
and jobs of architecture firms halved, while the amount of architecture firms almost doubled (Centraal
Bureau voor de Statistiek, 2016). The declining turnover forced architects to leave firms and these
architects started their own firms. Half of the work was then spread over almost twice as many firms
leading to intense competition between architects. Since 2014, the benchmark surveys of the Royal
Institute of Dutch Architects (BNA) show a slight increase in the amount of firms that are optimistic
about the increase of the amount of projects and increase of turnover (BNA, 2015), although there
are differences between regions and big and small architecture firms in workload and prospects
(BNA, 2016). While the amount of work is growing currently, it is still far from what a healthy amount
of work should be and far from what it used to be in 2008 before the crisis. There is still no significant
growth of employment at the firms. Besides competition from colleagues, architects also face
competition from other service firms in the building sector like contractors and property developers
who take over the tasks of architects (Teunissen, Van Doorn, & Heintz, 2011). The professional
association for Dutch architects, BNA, strives to strengthen the position of architects by promoting
their added value in the building process. BNA also offers several courses and tools to help architects
develop their business, which is needed in order to be able to keep doing their primary tasks.
In the past, there was little attention for the business side of running an architecture firm despite its
importance. Architects now feel the need to pay more attention to their business strategy and the
development of their entrepreneur skills. With a good business strategy, it is possible to distinguish
the firm from competitors and to attract more clients. On a market where everyone owns the same
general set of creative and technical skills and provides the same services, architects have to stand
out from their competition by strategically positioning themselves on the market and placing emphasis
on their unique selling points such as personality and vision. When hiring an architect, clients not only
choose an architect based on qualification and fee, but also based on trust and personal factors.
They hire architects they believe will deliver good work and with whom they connect. How the client
sees the architect, his image and reputation are therefore important in this decision. To gain
competitive advantage, architects therefore need a good image and reputation. Knowing how the
external public, potential clients and their stakeholders view them and what image and reputation
they have is valuable to architects, so that they can be aware of their position and improve their
communication towards their clients and stakeholders. This research examines how architecture
firms can measure their image and compare it to how they like to be seen. This not only raises
awareness of the importance of how they present themselves externally, but also gives them a
steppingstone to improve their communication.
The aim of this research is to learn how corporate identity and corporate image can be measured at
architecture firms to gain insight in the gap between their identity and image. The objectives of the
study are to investigate a method to measure identity, image and the gap between identity and image
at architecture firms by applying it to Dutch architecture firms.
Research question:
How can architecture firms gain insight into the gap between the image in the minds of their
prospective clients and their corporate identity?
Sub-questions:
1. How do architecture firms describe their corporate identity?
2. How can one measure to what extent the corporate identity is in line with the corporate
image?
This research contributes to the knowledge of corporate identity and corporate image in the practice
of architecture firms. At the moment, literature on the marketing at architecture firms include Haupt
and Kubitza (2002), Koren (2005) and Linton et al. (2005). These elaborate on how architects should
market themselves in general. Smyth and Kioussi (2011) have done case studies on brand
management in architecture firms and Roberti and Heintz (2010) have done a research to map the
9
promotional activities of Dutch architects. The latter conclude that 50% of the surveyed architecture
firms have some knowledge of how they are perceived in the market, but no further research has
been done yet on how the firms are really perceived externally and how this compares to how they
perceive themselves internally.
The results of this research will offer insights for architects who run their own business, most often
small to medium-sized architecture firms, and will be interesting for architects with different years of
experience. This study will lead to knowledge of identity and image that is tailored for the architect,
which is useful for the Royal Institute of Dutch Architects (BNA) to offer to their members for their
professional development, especially on the subjects of communication and marketing.
1.1 Document structure
This thesis consists of several chapters. Chapter 2 describes the theoretical framework which
supports this research. Here, the main topics of this research: corporate identity, image and
communication are defined and explained based on existing literature. Methods to measure identity
and image are collected from literature and literature on architecture firms is also introduced. The
theories in this chapter provide the basis for the research questions and for the methods that are
used in this study. Two assumptions are made on the outcome of the research questions. Chapter 3
describes the method that is used for this study. It describes all the steps taken to measure the
identity and image and to examine the gap between them. In Chapter 4 the results of the different
measurements are presented for each firm separately. The chapter ends with a summary of the
results. The results are discussed in Chapter 5, followed by practical implications for the architecture
firms. This chapter also looks at the limitations of this study and also suggests several directions for
further research. The final chapter presents the conclusions that are drawn from this research.
10
2 Theoretical framework
2.1 Corporate identity
Definition
A review of literature of the past decades on the definition of ‘corporate identity’ reveals that there are
many different definitions of the term. Van Riel and Fombrun (2007) suggest three major approaches
(Fig. 1) to categorize the different explanations of the term.
• The first approach is rooted in graphic design and mainly about visual identification. Originally, the
term corporate identity was used in relation to the logos, company house style and other visual
symbols used by an organization (Van Riel, 1992). Selame and Selame (as quoted in Van Riel &
Fombrun, 2007) define corporate identity as “the firm’s visual statement to the world of who and
what the company is”. Corporate identity was also described as “the logo or brand image of a
company, and all other visual manifestations of the identity of a company” (Carter, 1982 as
quoted in Van Riel & Fombrun, 2007).
• The second approach is rooted in corporate culture. Here, identity is seen as “what organizational
members believe to be its [the organization’s] central, enduring and distinctive character, the
members’ shared beliefs about what is distinctive, central, and enduring about their organization”
(Dutton, Dukerich, & Harquail, 1994). Gray and Balmer (1998) have defined corporate identity as
“the reality and uniqueness of the corporation. It refers to the distinct characteristics of the
organization or, stated very simply, “what the organization is”.
• The third approach is rooted in communication. In this approach, the focus of corporate identity is
on planned communication, the self-presentation of an organization, and behaviour. From this
viewpoint, Birkigt and Stadler (1988) define corporate identity as “the strategically planned and
operationally applied internal and external self-presentation and behaviour of a company.”
Figure 1. Three approaches to corporate identity.
In this study, I will use corporate identity as described in the second approach, rooted in corporate
culture. The graphical presentation and the self-expression of identity, the first and third approach will
be considered as parts of corporate communication in this framework. The corporate identity then
entails the different characteristics of an organization, what the members believe is distinctive, central
and enduring about it. This approach is relevant for the distinction between identity, communication
and image to enable comparison between identity and image, which is the focus of this study. Image
is about the characteristics of an organization that are seen externally.
Types of identity
In literature, the term ‘corporate identity’ is sometimes used interchangeably with ‘organizational
identity’. In literature where the distinction between the two terms is described, ‘corporate identity’ is
what the managers wish the organization is, also referred to as the strategic or desired identity
(Brønn, 2005). This type of identity is defined by top managers and their advisors and includes the
vision, mission and philosophy of the organization (Chun, 2005).
11
‘Organizational identity’ is how employees perceive and understand the organization, “how we see
ourselves” (Albert & Whetten, 1985). This type of identity is seen from the employee’s perspective
and focuses on what they perceive.
In this study, I will also make the distinction between the identity of the organization as perceived and
desired by managers and employees. However, ‘corporate identity’ is already used in this study as
overarching term to refer to characteristics of an organization. For this reason and because ‘corporate
identity’ and ‘organizational identity’ are sometimes used interchangeably, I will not use these terms
to describe the distinction between the two types of identity. Instead, I will adopt the different types of
corporate identity as defined by Balmer in his AC4ID model (Balmer, 2012). In his model, he identifies
seven types of identity:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Actual Identity - What the firm’s identity is indubitably found to be
Communicated Identity - What the corporation claims the corporate brand to be
Conceived or Perceived identity - What the corporate brand is seen to be
Covenanted identity - What the brand promises to be
Cultural Identity - What the corporate brand culture is found to be
Ideal Identity - What the corporate brand needs to be
Desired Identity - What senior managers wish the corporate brand to be
This model makes the same distinction between what was described as ‘organizational identity’ and
‘corporate identity’ above, but using the terms ‘conceived/perceived identity’ and ‘desired identity’. To
avoid confusion, I will use these terms. ‘Conceived/perceived identity’ describes how the employees
and managers currently see the organization and ‘desired identity’ how they wish the organization will
be.
Components of corporate identity
According to Gray and Balmer (1998), the principal components of corporate identity are the
organization’s strategy, philosophy, culture and organizational design. Melewar and Karaosmanoglu
(2006), on the other hand, propose seven dimensions of corporate identity: communication, design,
culture, behaviour, structure, industry identity and strategy. They include all three of the approaches
to defining corporate identity: design, culture and communication. However, as explained above, in
this study corporate identity is seen as the distinctive characteristics of an organization and is
separated from corporate design and the organization’s communication. Therefore, Gray and
Balmer’s four components of corporate identity are more suited for this study: strategy, philosophy,
culture and organizational design.
• Corporate strategy describes the organization’s product or market scope, its objectives and
strategies for competing in their market (Gray & Balmer, 1998; Melewar & Karaosmanoglu, 2006).
Strategy determines what the company produces and how it provides values for its customers.
• Corporate philosophy is specified as the business values and beliefs of the organization’s
senior management. These are often written down in the organization’s mission statement.
• Corporate culture is the shared values and beliefs of the employees. It defines what the
employees hold important and unimportant and explains how activities are undertaken in the
organization.
• Organizational design, or corporate structure, is how the organization is structured in terms of
departments, hierarchy, degree of centralization, size of staff, design of jobs and internal systems
and procedures.
These components are used in the categorization of the characteristics that the architecture firms’
managers and employees use to describe the organization.
Identity at architecture firms
Architecture firms are distinguished from other types of business organizations in that they are
service organizations, professional organizations and creative organizations (Winch & Schneider,
1993). Architecture firms offer services instead of tangible products. Their service and the results of
the service can vary per project and per client. An implication from being a service organization is that
they interact continuously with the client during the period of time that the service is provided.
12
Architecture firms are professional organizations in that architects are professionals in a particular
expertise and there are standards and procedures they have to meet and follow (Von Nordenflycht,
2010; Winch & Schneider, 1993). Architecture firms are also creative organizations in that architects
are creators and artists. Their core business is design; they create solutions to spatial problems with
a vision.
Winch and Schneider (1993) suggest that architecture firms must differentiate themselves from their
competitors by articulating a distinctive competence. This will result in competitive advantage.
As service organizations, architecture firms can differentiate themselves from others through the
scope of services they provide to their clients and in how they interact with their clients. As
professional organizations, they can compete with other architecture firms on the quality of the
specification, realization and conception of their projects. This entails among others the quality of
finishes, fitness for purpose, quality of service delivery in terms of program, budgets, quality of
aesthetic terms, elegance of form and spatial articulation. As creative organizations, they can
differentiate from other firms in their creativity, to solve problems in an innovative and creative way.
Assumption 1:
From this theory, I expect that when describing their corporate identity, architecture firms will describe
the components that differentiate them from their competitors in their strategy, philosophy, culture
and structure. Based on the theory on architecture firms as service, professional, and creative firms, I
expect these characteristics to be the scope of the services they offer, how they interact with clients,
different qualities of their design projects and their creative vision.
2.2 Corporate image
Corporate image is “the mental picture that audiences have of an organization” or “what comes to
mind when one sees or hears the corporate name or sees its logo (Gray & Balmer, 1998). Dowling
(1986) defines image as: “the set of meanings by which an object is known and through which people
describe, remember and relate to it. It is the net result of the interaction of a person’s beliefs, ideas,
feelings and impressions about an object”. Melewar and Karaosmanoglu (2006) point out a link in
literature between corporate image and corporate identity, where “image is the collective perception
that the stakeholders have of corporate identity”. Corporate identity is generally seen on the sender
side and corporate image on the receiver side of the communication process (Christensen &
Askegaard, 2001).
In literature, image and reputation are sometimes used interchangeably. The difference between
corporate image and corporate reputation is that reputation evolves over a period of time from
consistent performance, reinforced and promoted with communication, while corporate image is a
quicker and easier result from communication programmes. Reputation indicates a value judgment
about the organization (Gray & Balmer, 1998). Image is quicker to change as a result of
advertisement than reputation. Reputation needs more time, effort and real experience. Another
distinction found in literature is that image is the perception of only external stakeholders and
reputation includes both internal and external stakeholders (Chun, 2005).
It is generally believed that a favourable image and reputation in the minds of stakeholders are
important for organizations and can lead to competitive advantage. A good corporate image creates
emotional added value for the organization, which yields a lead over competitors (Brinkerhof, 1990).
Image and reputation influence the willingness of stakeholders to provide or withhold support for the
organization (Balmer & Gray, 2000). Poiesz (1989) presents three reasons why image is important for
the customer’s decision process: Images are helpful when information is too extensive and complex
for people to process. A positive image may increase the attention and interest in information of a
product or service. If there is too little motivation or information processing ability, image can induce
small and temporary changes in attitude. Image may serve as substitute for concrete information
(Dowling, 1986).
Different researchers suggest that a distinct image and reputation are formed through the
communication of the company’s identity, which differentiates the organization from its competitors
13
(Balmer & Gray, 2000; Cornelissen & Elving, 2003). Gray and Balmer (1998) present a pragmatic
operational model (Fig. 2) showing the path from corporate identity to competitive advantage.
Figure 2. Operational model for managing corporate reputation and image (Gray & Balmer, 1998)
According to this model, corporate image is created through the communication of the corporate
identity, which may lead to competitive advantage. Gray and Balmer state that feedback is essential
to manage the corporate identity and that it should be continuous. Based on the feedback of
corporate image and reputation, management may decide that corporate communications need to be
changed or even that the corporate identity should be adjusted. Aside from the communication of the
corporate identity, corporate image, corporate reputation and competitive advantage can be
influenced by exogenous factors as well. Examples include control of critical resources, country of
origin and its image and reputation, industry image and reputation and images and reputations of
alliances and partnerships (Balmer & Gray, 2000)
2.3 Corporate communication
Corporate communication can be seen as the bridge between corporate identity and corporate image
and reputation. According to Gray and Balmer (1998) it is “the aggregate of messages from both
official and informal sources, through a variety of media, by which the company conveys its identity to
its multiple audiences or stakeholders”. They suggest that corporate communication should be
viewed in a broad sense and they separate the corporate communication system into three
components: primary, secondary and tertiary communications (Balmer & Gray, 2000).
• Primary communications include products and services, market behaviour, behaviour towards
employees, employee behaviour to other stakeholders and non-market behaviour.
• Secondary communications include formal, corporate communications: advertising, PR, graphic
design, sales promotions etc. and visual identification systems.
• Tertiary communications include word-of-mouth, media interpretation and competitors.
Primary and secondary communications have direct influence on stakeholders and also influence
each other. Tertiary communications go from stakeholder to stakeholder. Together the three
components create corporate image and corporate reputation.
This is in line with Dowling’s model (1986) of the corporate image formation process (Fig. 3). In his
model, Dowling suggests that behaviour of the organization’s employees, the image that is
communicated through media and personal experiences and communications are all of influence on
the formation of corporate image. Formal company policies may be communicated internally and
externally to anyone looking for information on the organization. This combined with the culture of the
organization and the organization’s controlled communication influences both the employee’s image
and the external image. The organization’s controlled communications are regarded as most
important by management in the process of corporate image formation.
14
Figure 3. Corporate Image Formation Process (Dowling, 1986).
As mentioned before, some scholars view communication, design and behaviour as components of
corporate identity. In this study they are viewed separately from corporate identity, but seen as part of
corporate communications. Behaviour is included in the primary communications and design and
communication in the secondary communications.
This study focuses on the image that is created through secondary, controlled communications. Real
experiences and interpersonal communications via employees or others are excluded as much as
possible to observe what image is created only from controlled communications and not from
previous experiences or interactions over time. Secondary communications are expressed actively
and consciously by the firm, while behaviour and word-of-mouth are not always expressed
consciously or directly by the firm. Interpersonal communications and previous experiences will not
be included in this study, because these would influence the stakeholders’ views of the organization
and we would not be able to discern which part of the created image is the result of which interaction.
Inclusion of these factors would require a broader study. This also explains why this study focuses on
corporate image and not on reputation, as reputation is formed over time and through more
interactions. This has implications for the choice of subjects of this study, which will be explained in
the next section.
2.3 Architect’s clients
It is important for organizations to communicate their corporate identity to create the intended image
in the eyes of their stakeholders. For architecture firms, their stakeholders include: “clients,
prospective clients, employees, prospective employees, industry (consultants, contractors, suppliers,
etc.), competitors, media, academia and the general public” (Koren, 2005).
The stakeholder group that this research focuses on is the firms’ prospective clients, because image
is important for clients in their decision to choose an architect. Architecture is a service and the
decision for choosing an architect is based on the client’s expectations of the architect’s performance
(Koren, 2005). A good image in the eyes of the clients may increase the chances for the architect to
be chosen.
This study will only focus on prospective clients and will not include existing clients, because the
study focuses on the image that is created only through secondary, controlled communications and
not from previous experiences or interactions. Existing clients already have direct experience with the
firm, which influences their perception of the firm to great extent.
Architects typically have two types of clients, which both will be represented in this study: public
clients and private clients. Public clients are required to select an architect through the European
Tendering process. Promotion techniques will most likely have less effect on their decision than with
private clients, but nevertheless, for the selection of the first list of architects, name familiarity, image
and reputation do play a role (Roberti & Heintz, 2010). Private clients are more likely to be influenced
by image and reputation in their decision for an architect, as they base their choice on their belief in
an architect’s expertise. They are not only interested in the price, quality and reliability of the
15
architect’s services, but they also base their decision on trust and connection with the architect
(Koren, 2005).
2.4 Measuring identity
To measure identity, multiple measurement methods exist for different types of identity.
Actual identity
Van Riel and Balmer (1997) explain three ways to measure the actual identity using different methods
of data collection. The laddering technique (Van Riel & Fombrun, 2007) includes open interviews with
employees with the objective to identify their dominant values. Balmer’s affinity audit (as cited in Van
Riel & Balmer, 1997) uses semi-structured interviews, observation and organizational documentation
reviews in order to reveal the dominant systems of values and beliefs and evaluate it against the
corporate mission and strategy. Van Riel et al. developed the Rotterdam Organizational Identification
Test (as cited in Van Riel & Balmer, 1997) which focuses on employee identification and uses
questionnaires.
Perceived identity
Van Riel and Fombrun (2007) mention a common way to measure the identity as perceived by
employees. It entails interviewing employees to obtain a list of attributes that are frequently
mentioned and surveying employees to determine which of the attributes are the most typical for the
company.
Desired identity
To measure the desired identity of an organization, three methods can be found: Bernstein’s
Spiderweb method (as cited in Van Riel & Balmer, 1997), the IDU method of Rossiter and Percey and
the Lux star method (as cited in Van Riel & Balmer, 1997). Bernstein’s Spiderweb method and Lux
star method both use qualitative research techniques like semi-structured interviews in group
discussions. The Spiderweb method focuses on the characteristics of an organization as seen and
desired by the managers. The Lux star method uses seven core dimensions to describe the
personality of an organization. These seven traits are used to stimulate discussion about the desired
identity of the organization and can be used to classify other observations about an organization. The
IDU method was originally developed to position product brands, but can be adapted to determine an
organization’s desired identity (Van Riel & Balmer, 1997). It uses surveys to discover what key
stakeholders see as important (I), what is being delivered (D) by an organization and what is seen as
unique (U) compared to other organization.
2.5 Measuring image
Van Riel and Fombrun (2007) explain several methods to measure image: the Kelly repertory grid,
natural grouping, Q-sort, photo-sort, attitude scaling, card-sort and laddering. Image measuring
methods can be open or closed, meaning the respondents may be asked to describe an organization
in their own words or based on predetermined characteristics. The methods can also be different in
the tasks that the respondents are asked to do. The Kelly repertory grid, natural grouping, card-sort
and Q-sort ask the respondents to examine a set of company brands, names or statements and sort
and rank them according to their own criteria or predetermined criteria. The photo-sort method is an
example of a method asking respondents to use metaphors, e.g. photos of human faces that
represent emotions, to describe an organization. Another example is the Corporate Character Scale
(Chun, 2005) which uses personification, asking the respondents to view the organization as a
human being and assess its personality. Another method, the attitude model, asks respondents to
rate organizations on certain attributes and to indicate to what extent they feel the attribute is
important.
16
2.6 Measuring gaps between identity and image
A gap between the image externally and the identity internally is undesirable but not uncommon due
to differences between what is promised by the organization and what is perceived or experienced by
the client. A gap between perceived identity, desired identity and image affects the reputation of the
firm (Chun, 2005). Especially at a service firm, where interactions between employee and client are
important, these gaps are said to be critical (Davies & Miles, 1998). Monitoring gaps can prevent
potential problems in reputation.
A research that looks at gaps between identity and image has been conducted by Davies and Chun
(Davies & Chun, 2002) using the Corporate Character Scale. It has shown that measures of image
correlate with those of identity, implying that image and identity might co-evolve or be linked in
causality (Chun, 2005). This means that the corporate image can be managed by managing the
corporate identity. Markwick and Fill (1997), who have also done a research on the gap between
identity and image, state that such image researches can be used by organizations for strategic
development to guide changes in the organization and in the corporate communication in order to
create competitive advantage.
As we have seen, several methods can be found to measure identity and several to measure image,
but there are only a few that enable comparison between identity and image by measuring both.
Identity researches focus on the views internally, often the differences between the views of the
employees with those of the managers or with the corporate strategy and mission. Most of the image
researches focus on studying reputation or image with one stakeholder group, for example in
reputational rankings, creating benchmarks to compare organizations, but they do not compare the
views of different stakeholders on one organization. Of the previously mentioned methods to measure
identity and image, these are the methods that enable measuring both: Balmer’s affinity audit,
Bernstein’s Spiderweb method, the IDU method by Rossiter and Percy, and the Corporate Character
Scale.
Bernstein’s Spiderweb method
The method that will be adapted and applied in this study is Bernstein’s Spiderweb method. This
method was chosen over other methods for several reasons. The first is that it allows measuring the
perceived identity, as well as the desired identity and also the external image. Furthermore, it enables
comparison between them to find any gaps. Another advantage over other methods is its simplicity
and effectiveness. It is known as a pragmatic and less time-consuming way than other methods. It
can be used for both large and small organizations, which is particularly relevant for architecture firms
where the range of sizes is big. Furthermore, it does not require wide access to the organizations like
some of the other methods. This method is also particularly suitable for architecture firms, because it
can stimulate discussion and encourage reflection about the goals of the firm. It makes the different
ideas in the heads of the different partners of the firm explicit and also brings out any conflict points.
As architecture firms often have multiple partners and the identity of the firm is not regularly
discussed, this is a method that can be useful to architecture firms.
The Spiderweb method (Bernstein, 1986 as cited in Van Riel & Balmer, 1997) starts with a group
discussion with senior management, communication managers and representatives of business units.
In this session, participants are first asked to describe the organization in general terms and later in
more specific characteristics and values. Then, together the group chooses the eight key
characteristics of the organization that they find most important, decisive or relevant for the
organization. Each participant is then given a form on which they list the eight characteristics and
score the current and desired situation with a school figure (one to ten) per characteristic, i.e. the
perceived and desired identity: To what extent does this characteristic define the organization? To
what extent should the organization be defined by this characteristic? The responses are then
presented in a cobweb diagram (Spiderweb). Other stakeholders can do the same thing to map out
the differences between the internal and external views of the organization.
17
Assumption 2
I expect that Bernstein’s Spiderweb method can be adapted and applied to architecture firms to
measure the extent to which the corporate identity is in line with the corporate image. The method will
allow insight into any gaps between identity and image and stimulate discussion about the goals of
the firm.
18
3 Research methods
This research uses case studies of seven architecture firms to study corporate identity and image at
architecture firms following Bernstein’s Spiderweb method. For each firm, three steps have been
followed to answer the research questions:
1. Identity: Determine the corporate identity of the architecture firm
2. Image: Measure the corporate image of the architecture firm
3. Gap: Compare the corporate identity with the corporate image
These steps will be explained in this chapter.
Selection of cases
The architecture firms were selected through a generic purposive sampling approach (Bryman,
2012), based on the size of the firm and whether they are active on the market of private clients. I
aimed to have a diversity of small, medium and large firms, in similar proportions to the distribution of
members of the BNA (2015) to have a representative sample of Dutch architecture firms. The second
criteria, whether the firm works for private clients, was chosen because these firms acquire new
clients through marketing and communication strategies. To them a good image and alignment
between identity is more relevant than to firms that acquire projects through tendering processes
only.
Forty-six architecture firms were invited by e-mail to participate in the research and, in case of nonresponse, followed up by phone calls. The seven architecture firms that participated in this research
are listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Participating architecture firms and interviewees
Architecture firm
Firm 1
Firm 2
Size (fte)
1-5
5-10
Firm 3
Firm 4
10-20
Firm 5
20-40
Firm 6
Firm 7
>40
Position interviewees
Architect, director
Architect, co-director
PR & Communication
Architect, director
Architect, adjunct-director
Architect, director-owner
Architect, director-owner
Architect, partner
Architect, partner
Managing partner
Graduate intern Communication
Architect, director
Office manager, architect
Office manager, PR & communication
Project leader
Building engineer
3.1 Identity
The first part of the research focused on the corporate identity of the firms. Following Bernstein’s
Spiderweb method, interviews were held to determine the perceived and desired identity of the firms.
Between June and August 2015, interviews were conducted at the offices or studios of the seven
participating architecture firms. The interviews were conducted with one or more directors or partners
of the firm and if available were joined by the communication managers and other employees. The
directors or partners are the most relevant to interview for the desired identity, because they
determine what the desired identity of the firm is. For the perceived identity, both the directors and
employees are relevant to interview, because the employees’ views may differ from the desired
identity and the identity as perceived by the partners. Furthermore, the directors or partners are not
19
always the ones who are responsible for the communication channels. The interviews were semistructured to enable comparison between the interviews at different firms. All interviews were held in
Dutch and the duration of the interviews ranged between 55’ and 1h 20’. The interviews were audio
recorded, transcribed and coded using thematic analysis (Bryman, 2012; Ritchie & Lewis, 2003).
Thematic analysis is the process in which themes are discovered in qualitative data, as Bryman
explains. These themes are categories identified by the analyst through the data, related to the
research focus and questions, built on codes in the transcripts and provides a basis for theoretical
understanding of the data. As suggested by Ryan and Bernard (2003), in this research the themes
are found by looking for repetitions, similarities and differences and theory-related material. The
interview questions and the transcriptions can be found in Appendix A. The coding table can be found
in Appendix B.
The interview started with an introduction by the interviewer about the research and the course of the
interview. Following Bernstein’s Spiderweb method, the participants were first asked to describe the
firm in general terms. Then, more specific questions were asked about the characteristics that are
distinctive, central and enduring in the firm. This is according to the widely adopted criteria to
describe perceived identity (Albert & Whetten, 1985): “The collection of attributes that are seen as
typical for the “continuity, centrality and uniqueness” of the organization in the eyes of its members.”
As the participants described the identity of the firm, all keywords and characteristics they mentioned
were written down by the interviewer on loose paper. This resulted in a number of words on the table
describing the firm, varying per interview between eleven and thirty words. After the questions, the
participants were invited to review the words and to add more words if needed.
Next, the participants were asked to choose together the eight most important words for the firm.
After the participants agreed upon the eight most important characteristics for the firm, they were
asked to individually rate the characteristics on a scale from 1 - 10 for the perceived identity and for
the desired identity of the firm. To score the perceived identity, they answered: To what extent do you
think this word suits the firm at the moment? For the desired identity, the question was: To what
extent do you want this word to suit the firm?
The given grades were then averaged for the number of interviewees (if more than one) and the eight
characteristics were set into a radar chart. This resulted in a Spiderweb chart for each firm where the
perceived identity can be compared to the desired identity.
Architecture firms use a variety of channels to communicate externally. The second part of the
interviews concerned these communication channels. However, the interviews showed that websites
are the only channels that all the architecture firms use and for this reason, to enable comparison
between the firms, the main communication this research focuses on is the websites of the firms. A
website is also the channel where the most complete information about the firm is communicated.
Furthermore, websites are integrated in daily life as an important communication mean and it is often
the first contact point of a potential client with the architecture firm and a resource for other
stakeholders as well (Koren, 2005).
3.2 Image
The second part of the research focused on measuring the corporate image of the architecture firms.
Multiple factors have influence on the image in the mind of the audience, but this research focuses on
the secondary communication of the corporate identity, in specific on the websites of the firms.
Sampling
For this part of the research, prospective new clients of architects were sought after. This excluded
existing clients because they already have an image of the architecture firm in their mind. This would
influence the way they observe the website of the firms and how they perceive the firm.
A purposive sampling approach was used to find participants. To find public clients who have no
relation or acquaintance with all of the seven architecture firms and to approach many of them to get
enough results would be a time consuming task and may not even be possible. For this reason,
students of the studies Construction Management and Engineering (MSc Civil Engineering) and
20
Management in the Built Environment (MSc Architecture) of Delft University of Technology were
selected as a representation of public clients. In the future, they will most likely work at organizations
who are public clients of architects. The students were approached by e-mail, social media and
during their lectures. Snowball sampling was also employed to reach more students of the same
studies.
For the private clients, men and women of 21 years or older were asked, who have had an education
and are working or who are currently studying. This sample of people represents a group which might
hire an architect in the future.
There were 81 respondents of whom 21 have completed the questionnaire and 60 partially. Only the
complete responses have been included in this study.
Questionnaires
For practical reasons, this part of the research was done with online self-completion questionnaires.
The participants were able to fill in the questionnaire in their own time and also to save their progress
and finish it later.
The questionnaire was divided into two parts for each of the seven architecture firms. The
participants were asked to look at the website of an architecture firm. Links to the homepage, the
about page and the projects page of the firm were given. To minimize measurement error due to
respondent fatigue and familiarity of the questions and answers in the course of the questionnaire,
the seven architecture firms were put in random order for every respondent. One prior question
tested whether the respondent knew the firm beforehand.
The first part of the questionnaire tested what words the respondents would use to describe the firms.
The respondents were free to choose words from an existing list or to fill in words themselves to
describe the firm. The list of words they could choose from comprised all the words that the
architecture firms had chosen as the eight most important words together. The list of words was
reduced for synonyms and similar words beforehand. It would be superfluous for the respondents to
read all the meanings the words had for the architects had when using these words, so the words
were not explained, but put under a few categories. The categories were: the architecture/designs,
the firm, the services, the clients/projects and the way of working. This way, the respondents still
knew what the words described globally. The categories were based on the themes that followed
from the coding of the interviews with all the firms. The respondents were also asked to elaborate on
their choice of words.
The second part tested to what extent the respondents thought the characteristics that the firms had
chosen suited them in their view. The respondents rated the words that the architecture firms’
directors and employees had chosen to describe the firms. They rated the eight most important
characteristics on the same scale of 1-10. This mirrors what the directors and employees had done in
the first part of the research. The respondents were only asked to explain their two highest and two
lowest grades to reduce the risk of fatigue as this was a long questionnaire as a whole.
3.3 Gap between identity and image
After determining the perceived and desired identity of the architecture firms and the image that
prospective clients get from visiting the firms’ websites, the main question was whether there are
differences between how the firms describe themselves and how the prospective clients see the
firms.
To see to what extent the image is in line with the perceived and desired identity, the characteristics
chosen by the respondents were compared to the characteristics chosen by the architects.
Similarities and differences are pointed out and discussed in the results.
For the second part, the average scores of the respondents were compared to the scores of the
architecture firms in the spiderwebs. The biggest and smallest gaps between perceived or desired
identity and image as well as the lowest and highest image scores are discussed in the results.
21
3.4 Feedback
The results of the interviews and questionnaires were sent to the architecture firms in a report. An
example of a report can be found in Appendix D. To know to what extent the study is useful to
architecture firms, the interviewees were asked a few questions after they received the reports. The
questions were asked via telephone or via e-mail if not available. The questions tested four things: 1)
whether the architects found the study useful, 2) what they concluded from the results, 3) what they
missed in the study and 4) what steps they will take on account of this study. The questions are listed
in Appendix E. The participants that gave feedback were the same as in the interview in the first part
of the method.
22
4 Results
In this section, the results of the interviews and questionnaires are presented per case. The cases
are put in order from small to large firm. Each case has the following content:
•
•
•
•
•
The characteristics that the interviewees chose together to describe the firm with the scores for
the perceived and desired situation.
Perceived: To what extent do you think this word suits the firm at the moment?
Desired: To what extent do you want this word to suit the firm?
A comparison between the given scores for the perceived and for the desired identity.
A comparison of the words that the interviewees at the firm chose with the words that the
respondents of the questionnaire chose.
A comparison of the scores that the firm gave for their perceived and desired identity with the
image scores the respondents gave.
The feedback of the architects about the research after the reports were sent to the firms.
4.1 Firm 1
Identity
Firm 1 is a small firm (< 5 fte) based in Amsterdam. The interviewee was the director and leading
architect of the firm. The first part of the interview resulted in a list of characteristics describing the
firm from their perspective, of which the eight most important characteristics were chosen by the
architect. These are explained below. Table 2 shows the scores that the architect has given the eight
most important characteristics for the perceived and desired situation.
Table 2. Characteristics of firm 1 with the given identity scores and gaps.
Characteristic
Ambitious
Personal approach
Local
Pleasure
Professional
Surprising designs
Private clients
Trying to grow
Perceived
7
8
9
7
5
7
9
5
Desired
9
6
6
9
9
9
5
9
Gap
2
-2
-3
2
4
2
-4
4
What is remarkable at this firm is that not all the scores for the perceived situation are lower than the
scores for the desired situation like most of the other firms have. For ‘personal approach’, ‘local’
and ‘private clients’ the architect gives lower scores for the desired situation, meaning that he
desires to have or be less of these characteristics. The three characteristics are all related to the
small size of the firm, which explains the congruence of the given scores. The personal approach is
something characteristic of the firm. The architect works by himself with sometimes one or two
interns, so the clients all have personal contact with him. The architects states that the danger is that
he ends up e-mailing all his clients for a whole day. “As an architect, maybe 90% of the time you’re
busy talking and emailing, calling, conferencing, going to projects on the bike, looking at something
and 10% is that you’re really sketching.” He also adds that he visits people at home and that he
shows his own house, which he designed himself, to his clients as well. He aspires to sketch more
and communicate less, which explains the lower score for the desired situation for ‘personal
approach’. He comments that a lot of the communication is also whining. “You have to give clients the
feeling that they cannot always ask you everything, because otherwise you will spend too much time
on them. So you have to keep some sort of distance, which not always succeeds.”
The firm is very local, because all the projects are in the East of Amsterdam, which is something the
architect is not pleased with. “That we are local is really typical for us. A characteristic now, but not in
23
the future, of course. I don’t need to go abroad, but as local as this, East of Amsterdam, that is a little
too much.” Therefore he scored the perceived a high score (9), but a lower score (6) for the desired
situation.
The architect has mainly individual, private clients. Everything he makes is unique for those people.
However, the architect wants to make bigger things, which does not fit with private clients.
“Individuals are almost always limited to one house or two houses or a renovation, so if you want
something bigger, you have to find a different type of clients.” He states that when you start as an
architect, it is often with private clients, but that he is trying to grow. Growing is something he wants
very much, explaining the given scores and gap (4) for this characteristic. The architect desires to
grow in the type of projects and clients he has and also in the amount of employees at the firm.
Growing also means having a more professional approach. This is also something the architect
strives for. This can be seen in the scores for perceived situation (5) and desired situation (9) as well.
The architect finds the firm not professional at the moment. He is looking for ways to be more
professional, to have more structured processes. “Yes, so I consider to change course though, for
example, to merge with other firms like me, to find a merger partner and be bigger together and also
to be more professional.”
About his designs, the architects says the firm is ambitious and that he makes surprising designs.
“We never make something normal, we don’t do something because a client wants it. The client has
to find us because of what we do. That is our plan actually, that they come to us particularly for the
specific style, the design approach. Style is a wrong word though, because everything we make is
actually different.” The architect also states that he likes to surprise himself with what he designs,
something that gives him pleasure. “If it is fun to work on a design, the result is fun, too.” He
concludes that the firm is ambitious to make something special. That ‘ambitious’, ‘surprising
designs’ and ‘pleasure’ are related, can be seen in the corresponding scores for the perceived
situation (7) and the desired situation (9).
Image
In the first part of the questionnaires, the respondents chose words that they found most suitable to
the firm based on what they had seen on the website (Table 3). Instead of the eight most chosen,
eleven are listed here, because there were several words that were chosen by the same amount of
respondents.
Table 3. Top characteristics for firm 1 chosen by the respondents with percentages.
Characteristic
Percentage
Sustainability
Local
Surprising designs
38%
33%
29%
Creative
Modern
Personal
Architecturally ambitious
National
Fresh
29%
29%
29%
24%
24%
24%
Open
Service-minded
24%
24%
A few of the words that the respondents chose are the same as or similar to the words that the
architect used. The percentages of respondents that chose the same words are relatively low
compared to other firms. Local and national are similar and both are in the list of the respondents.
The architect has clearly described the firm as local in the interview. Surprising designs, creative
and architecturally ambitious are also words the respondents chose. The architect has used
surprising designs and ambitious as well. He has stated that he wants to make unique and special
designs, which could be related to being creative. The respondents chose to describe the firm as
personal, which can be clearly deducted from the interview as well. The architect has currently
24
personal contact with all of his clients and makes unique designs for all of them, although he desires
to have a less personal approach. In total there are six corresponding words, but it should be kept in
mind that the list was longer than those of other firms due to the several words with the same
percentage.
Gap between identity and image
The image scores of the second part of the questionnaire were put into a spiderweb with the identity
scores given by the architect (Fig. 4).
Ambitious
10
8
Trying to grow
Personal approach
6
4
Perceived
2
Private clients
Local
0
Desired
Image
Surprising designs
Pleasure
Professional
Figure 4. Spiderweb of identity and image scores for firm 1.
Table 4. Characteristics of firm 1 with identity and image scores and gaps.
Characteristic
Ambitious
Personal approach
Local
Pleasure
Professional
Surprising designs
Private clients
Trying to grow
Perceived
Desired
Image
7
8
9
7
5
7
9
5
9
6
6
9
9
9
5
9
6.6
7.3
7.5
7
6.3
6.8
7.1
6.7
Gap
Perceived - Image
0.4
0.7
1.5
0
1.3
0.2
1.9
1.7
Gap
Desired - Image
2.4
1.3
1.5
2
2.7
2.2
2.1
2.3
In the spiderweb we can see that the perceived and desired scores have large differences between
them. Some characteristics have high desired and low perceived scores, other characteristics the
other way round. The image scores however are for the characteristics all around the average of 6.9
with a 6.3 as lowest and a 7.5 as highest image score (Table 4).
The highest image score (7.5) is given to the characteristic ‘local’. This was also one of the
characteristic chosen by the respondents themselves. The respondents can deduct from the website
that the firm works mainly on small local projects. The gaps between the perceived and desired
situation and image score are both 1.5, but one is 1.5 higher, the other 1.5 lower. The respondents
find the firm more local than the architect desires to be and they find them less local than the architect
perceives.
‘Professional’ has the lowest image score (6.3) and also the biggest gap (2.7) with the desired
situation. Many of the comments of the respondents are about the website’s graphic design which the
respondents find messy, unfinished and difficult to navigate, which makes it look unprofessional. The
website also makes the respondent think that the firm does not have very much experience.
The biggest gap (1.9) between the image and the perceived situation is with ‘private clients’. The
gap with the desired situation (2.1) is also relatively big. From the comments of the respondents it
seems they recognize the focus on private clients and private residential houses. This is in line with
25
what the architect has pointed out in the interview, which is why the big gap between image and
perceived situation seems out of place. The image score (7.1) of the respondents is above average
though, so they do recognize it.
The respondents recognize the personal approach, as seen before in the words that they had
chosen in the first part of the questionnaire. The image score is the second highest (7.3) and it has
the smallest gap between the desired situation and the image (1.3). The respondents comment that
the firm gives the impression to be personal because of the small and local projects. However, this is
not positive to the architect as he desires to have a less personal approach.
‘Ambitious’ has a small gap (0.4) between perceived situation and image. It has a relatively low
image score (6.6) and one of the biggest gaps (2.4) with the desired situation. The respondents find
the firm not as ambitious as the architect perceives and far from what the architect desires to be.
A small gap (0.2) can be found between the perceived situation and image of surprising designs of
the firm. The respondents state that they find the projects and designs different than others, out of the
box, quite unique and something different each time.
A characteristic that is aligned between the perceived situation and the image is ‘pleasure’. Some
respondents comment that it is described in the vision of the firm and that it looks like the firm just
wants to have fun in what it does. Others comment that it cannot be deducted easily from the website
that the firm has fun designing, also because of the, in their view, unprofessional website.
Trying to grow has a relatively big gap between both the perceived situation with the image (1.7)
and the desired situation with the image (2.3). The respondents see that the firm is trying to grow,
more than the architect perceives, but it is still far from how far the architect wants his firm to grow.
Feedback
The architect thinks such research is interesting if he takes action in response to the research, which
he has not done yet. He states that the research has lead him to the right track, but that he needs to
invest time and money to take action on it. He planned to hire an intern to work on his PR and
communication, but so far this has not been done yet.
26
4.2 Firm 2
Identity
Firm 2 is a small to medium-sized firm with less than 10 employees based in Rotterdam. The
interviewees were one of the co-founders and co-directors and the communications manager. Table
5 shows the characteristics and the scores that the interviewees have chosen and given.
Characteristic
Distinctive signature
Pleasure in designing
Sustainability
Materialization
International orientation
Dialogue
Innovative answer on new programs
Public building / public space
Perceived
9
7.5
7
8.5
7
9
8.5
8
Desired
9.5
9
8
9.5
8
9.5
9
9
Gap
0.5
1.5
1
1
1
0.5
0.5
1
A few characteristics have evenly high scores (9.5) for the desired identity implying that these are
evenly important to the firm. These are the distinctive signature, materialization and dialogue.
Distinctive signature describes their architecture. Even though the core business is mainly utility
buildings, they try to have a different approach for each project. “We are often asked in particular for
a sort of innovative view on questions. (…) In the end, people say now that they are quite
recognizable buildings, that we have a very distinctive signature.” The small gap (0.5) shows that they
are quite satisfied with their distinctive signature at the moment.
Materialization is one of the three things that they always focus on in a project: “The spaciousness
and organization of the program and the materialization of the buildings, those are the three things
that actually come back in all our projects. (…) What we therefore have formulated as our core value
of how we want to work, that is sculptural, scenography and materialization.”
They find dialogue during the design process essential. This includes being personal and listening
well to clients. This can be seen in the high scores for perceived (9) and desired (9.5).
The biggest gap (1.5) between the perceived and desired situation can be found in the pleasure in
designing. The co-director states that having fun in designing is what is important to them. “Having
fun in designing is at the centre. That is a very nice phrase, but sometimes we say to each other:
‘When are we laughing then?’ Because it is less than expected. Designing is obviously demanding
work.” This explains the gap between the perceived and desired situation.
Even though sculptural buildings are important, the firm also wants them to be functional and
sustainable. They believe they can make the world better with what they do, by making beautiful
spaces that stimulate energy and collaboration. Sustainability is part of that and an important aspect
in their buildings.
The firm is also described as international orientated, even though The Netherlands is still very
important to them. This has effect on their website, on which their texts are solely written in English.
Sustainability and the international orientation have the lowest scores for the perceived situation, but
also the lowest for the desired situation, which shows that these are the least important
characteristics of these eight.
Characteristic of the projects is that they are mainly public buildings and they always try to make a
connection with the public space in their designs. They also say to have innovative answer on new
programs and new questions.
27
Image
Characteristic
Percentage
Surprising designs
Modern
Creative
43%
43%
33%
33%
Eye for detail
International
Enthusiastic
Timeless designs
Innovative
29%
29%
24%
24%
24%
24%
Materialization
24%
Remarkable about the words that the respondents choose to describe the firm is that they choose
‘surprising designs’ and ‘modern’. These are both characteristics about the architecture of the firm
as perceived by the respondents and point out the distinctive signature of the firm’s designs. The
respondents have also chosen distinctive signature to describe the firm. Architecturally
ambitious, creative, timeless designs and materialization are also characteristics about the firm’s
designs and architecture. Materialization is a characteristic the interviewees had chosen as well. That
the firm is international orientated is also recognized by the respondents. The respondents also see
the firm as innovative, which the interviewees had used to describe themselves, too.
10
Public building /
public space
8
6
Pleasure in
designing
4
Innovative answer
on new programs
Perceived
2
0
Sustainability
Desired
Image
Dialogue
Materialization
International
orientation
28
Characteristic
Pleasure in designing
Sustainability
Materialization
International orientation
Dialogue
Innovative answer on new
programs
Public building / public space
7.2
7.4
6.6
7.3
6.9
6.9
Gap
Perceived - Image
1.8
0.1
0.4
1.2
0.1
2.1
Gap
Desired - Image
2.3
1.6
1.4
2.2
1.1
2.6
6.6
7.5
1.9
0.5
2.4
1.5
Perceived
Desired
Image
9
7.5
7
8.5
7
9
9.5
9
8
9.5
8
9.5
8.5
8
9
9
All of the image scores are lower than the identity scores (Fig. 5). Two characteristics have a small
gap of 0.1 between image and perceived situation, which are ‘pleasure in designing’ and
‘international orientation’ (Table 7). ‘Pleasure in designing’ also has one of the highest image
scores (7.4). The respondents say: “It seems to me that they love to make beautiful designs and have
a lot of fun in it.” “From the picture at the office description it seems that they enjoy what they do.”
“They radiate their passion for designing”.
The international orientation was also chosen by the respondents in the first part of the
questionnaire. It has the smallest gaps between both image with the perceived (0.1) and image with
the desired situation (1.1). The respondents recognize this from the pictures and text. They see a few
projects that are done abroad and therefore recognize the international orientation. However, some of
the respondents comment that most of the projects are still done in The Netherlands, which they did
not expect from the description of the firm. This could explain the relatively low image score (6.9).
The lowest image score is a 6.6 for ‘sustainability’ and ‘innovative answer on new programs’.
The gaps at ‘sustainability’ are not very big, but this characteristic has the lowest perceived and
desired identity scores. The respondents comment: “Sustainability is not immediately apparent if you
look to the pictures and the appearance.” “For me, sustainability does not match with these
expressive buildings forms. (Something that is more complicated to make, costs more material and
CO2 emissions, etc…)”
Even though ‘innovative’ was chosen by the respondents in the first part of the questionnaire, they
do not give high scores for this characteristic. The two gaps are also relatively big (1.9 and 2.4). The
respondents say that the firm does not seem innovative, because the designs are repetitive. They
also find that the firm does not come across as very different from other architecture firms. This could
also explain the relatively big gaps for ‘distinctive signature’. One of the respondent says: “I think
the signature is not very clear. Every time I see a different picture it gives me a completely different
image of the company (which does make them versatile).” The image score is relatively high.
Respondents also affirm: “The structure of the building project is distinct form other architects and
has a special style.” “There seems to be a distinct style that emerges in different designs.”
The highest image score is given to the characteristic ‘public building / public space’. The
respondents see from the pictures and projects that the firm works mainly on public buildings and
spaces.
‘Dialogue’ has the biggest gaps for both the perceived (2.1) and desired situations (2.6). None of the
respondents comment on this characteristic, which means it is not the characteristic for which they
gave their lowest score. The big gaps may be due to the high scores that the director and
communication manager gave themselves for this characteristic.
‘Materialization’ has relatively big gaps, but has one of the highest image scores (7.3). This implies
that the respondents recognize this characteristic, but the interviewees had given higher scores. The
respondents find it very evident in the pictures and text that the firm focuses on materialization. “They
give a lot of attention to the material with which they work.” “Expressive sculptural buildings with its
materialization.”
Feedback
The firm concludes from the results that there are discrepancies between the desired result and the
image. They observe that especially the aspects of sustainability, innovation and dialogue should
29
have more attention on the website. They also observe that different people have very different
judgments about the firm: some see it as distinctive, others see it as comparable to other firms. They
plan to discuss the results internally and pay attention in particular to the characteristics that have a
wide gap between image and desired identity. Such research is valuable to them because it is rare
that an external audience reflects on their website. It allows them to take a close look at a few things
critically. They would have liked to know how the respondents have looked at the website, whether
they scanned it quickly or whether they have studied it thoroughly. Another question is whether the
characteristics are relevant to potential clients. They would like to know on what aspects potential
clients select architects and what they look for on a website.
30
4.3 Firm 3
Identity
Firm 3 is a small to medium-sized firm with less than 10 employees based in Rotterdam. The
interviewees were the two directors and leading architects of the firm. Table 8 shows the
characteristics and the scores that the architects have chosen and given.
Characteristic
Quality products
Quality services
Flexible/agile
Team player/collaboration
Research oriented
Initiating
Wide range of services
Broad field of work
Perceived
Desired
7.3
7.5
8
8
5.5
7.5
7
7.5
9
8.5
8
8.5
8
9
8
8
Gap
1.7
1
0
0.5
2.5
1.5
1
0.5
In the interview the architects first state that they are an all-round architecture firm. They offer a wide
range of services, from design to building technology and they have a broad field of work,
meaning that they do many different types of projects. “(…) a large variety of projects. Housing,
tunnels, commercial real estate, so you show that we have knowledge of various areas of the
market.” The scores for the two characteristics are similar. The broad field of work has a higher score
(7.5) than the wide range of services (7) for the perceived situation. The scores for the desired
characteristics are the same (8). This implies that they are quite satisfied with the broad variety of
projects they work on, but want to offer a somewhat wider range of services.
The interviewees also state that they are flexible in the services they can do, it can be the whole or a
limited package, tailored to the wishes of the clients. They are also flexible in all phases of the
projects and also in methods and forms of collaboration. The gap between the perceived and desired
situation for flexible is 0, meaning that they perceive themselves as flexible as they wish to be. They
also add the term agile, in which they see the meaning of being responsive.
In terms of collaborations, they see themselves as a team player, with clients and with colleagues.
For them, collaborating is also a way to stay visible. “Advertising your value or quality is not distinctive
enough. How you stay visible, that is a problem then. We do that through collaborations, we are
reasonably good in that.” This characteristic has the highest score for the perceived situation (8) and
a small gap with the desired situation (8.5).
What the architects find important is quality. “For me, the quality of the work is the first priority. Then
collaboration and then the quality of the services.” They also state that their mission is to function well
and put beautiful things in this world, to always add value. “We give a higher quality or more quality
than is asked of us.” The quality of the services scores slightly higher (7.5) than the quality of
products (7.3) at the perceived situation. The quality of products has a higher desired score (9) than
quality of services (8.5)
The characteristic with the lowest score for the perceived situation (5.5) is ‘research oriented’, which
is used in the initial description of the firm in the interview. “We also try to look actively at product
developments, we do that ourselves as well. We also look for innovations in the market when it
comes to healthcare, education, we contribute to it and we take initiatives in it as well.” The low
perceived score and the big gap (2.5) with the desired situation shows that they are not yet satisfied
with the extent to which they focus on research and this is what they desire to do more. That they
actively look at developments and contribute to innovations also shows that they are initiating. They
are also initiating in the sense that they look for new work in projects themselves. ‘Initiating’ is one of
the most desired characteristics (9) for them and has a relatively big gap with the perceived situation
(7.5).
31
Image
Characteristic
Percentage
Traditional
Local
Socially concerned
Classic
48%
43%
33%
33%
Specialized
Collaboration
Modern
Expertise
29%
24%
24%
24%
24%
One of the words that the respondents have chosen as suitable for this firm is collaboration. This is
a word that the architects have chosen to describe themselves as well.
Another word that the respondents have chosen is ‘modern’. This is not in the list of eight most
important characteristics, but the architects have mentioned it in their interview. “We are modern, in
processes, skills, technology and means of production.” A more often chosen word is ‘traditional’.
This seems contradictory with the word ‘modern’, but both might describe other things: the
architecture or the firm.
Broad field of work
Quality products
10
8
6
4
2
0
Quality services
Perceived
Flexible/agile
Desired
Image
Team
player/collaboration
Initiating
Research oriented
32
Characteristic
Quality products
Quality services
Flexible/agile
Team
player/collaboration
Research oriented
Initiating
Broad field of work
Perceived
Desired
Image
Gap
Perceived - Image
Gap
Desired - Image
7.3
7.5
8
9
8.5
8
7.1
7.2
6.5
0.2
0.3
1.5
1.9
1.3
1.5
8
5.5
7.5
7
7.5
8.5
8
9
8
8
6.8
7
6.5
6.6
6.3
1.2
1.5
1
0.4
1.2
1.7
1
2.5
1.4
1.7
In the spiderweb (Fig.6) we can see that almost all the image scores are lower than the identity
scores, except for the image score for ‘research oriented’. The architects had given themselves a
low score (5.5), but the respondents give it a higher than average score (7). The gap is the biggest
(1.5) between perceived and image. One of the respondents explains: “Research oriented I gave a
seven, because I can recognize it from the text, but you have to actually experience it yourself before
you can say it.”
Characteristics with small gaps between the perceived situation and image are the quality of
products (0.2) and the quality of services (0.3). The image score for the quality of services (7.2) is
higher than the score for the quality of products (7.1). These are the highest image scores. The
respondents say: “From their projects and descriptions, I think that the quality is high.” “Most of the
projects look similar, but all the projects do look good.” “I have the idea that the products (quality) are
less than the offered service package. I would expect more of it.”
Another characteristic with a small gap (0.4) is the wide range of services. However, the image
score is relatively low (6.6). The broad field of work also has a low image score (6.3). Respondents
seem to relate the two characteristics. They comment: “When I look at the projects, they all look a bit
alike in design and purpose. It seems to me that they are specialized in only one thing.” “Many of their
projects are similar, so they do not give the impression that they provide many different services or
work broadly.”
The biggest gap between desired situation and image (2.5) is with the characteristic ‘initiating’. It
also has one of the lowest image score (6.5). From the comments of the respondents it seems that
this characteristic cannot be deducted from just the website. One of the respondents does say: “It
looks like they won’t surprise you (negatively). Therefore, they will provide quality, but not very
innovative.”
A characteristic with a low image score (6.5) and relatively large gaps (1.5) is ‘flexible/agile’. A
positive comment from a respondent: “I feel that the company is very good in their flexibility and in
working together. They look for the best solutions with all the stakeholders and don’t mind
compromising.” Another respondent comments: “I could see that they collaborate a lot, but to me that
does not say how flexible they are.” How flexible the firm is, cannot be deducted from a website alone
evidently, but what the respondents conclude from the website at the moment is that the firm is not as
flexible as the architects perceive and desire the firm to be.
Being a team player or collaborating is also a characteristic that is not being picked up from the
website as much. The respondents comment that it cannot be concluded from the website or that the
firm did not seem to collaborate. Even though the respondents have picked this term in the first part
of the questionnaire as well, the image score is not high (6.8) and the gaps are relatively big (1.2 and
1.7).
What is remarkable for this firm, is that many of the comments of the respondents point out that the
characteristics that the architects have used to describe the firm cannot be deducted or concluded
from a website alone.
Feedback
The architects have discussed the results of the report internally. They state that some of the results
are not very surprising to them, but that others make them think about how they should present
33
themselves in a way that fits with their identity and qualities. That most of the people judge based on
the projects and the images was known to them and as a firm they had been focusing on that
naturally. They realize that they might not be paying enough attention to the characteristics of the firm
that are important to them that cannot be captured in images. Those are process-related
characteristics like flexibility, collaboration and initiating. They also state that there is a danger that
they are not selective enough in the projects they choose to show on the website. Furthermore, they
admit that they are not as active in some segments of the building sector as in others. They comment
that they will critically reflect on their desired field of work and how broad it really is and how broad
they desire it to be.
Following this research, they will discuss the results with an expert, a professional in architecture and
the architecture sector, to reflect the results of this research on his impressions and experiences in
the industry. This will lead to a follow-up action.
The firm values such researches. They have done an image research before with their clients. They
see it as an advantage that clients know them and not only judge based on the website alone, but at
the same time they see it as a disadvantage as well. This research provides enough material for them
to discuss and reflect on, leading to possible follow-up actions.
34
4.4 Firm 4
Identity
Firm 4 is a medium-sized firm (10-20 fte) based near Leeuwarden in Friesland. The interviewees
were the two partners and leading architects of the firm.
Characteristic
Quality
Expertise
Connecting
Network
For the market
Artistic
Narrative
Socially concerned
Perceived
8
7.5
7.5
7.5
8
7.5
7.5
7.5
Desired
9.5
9
8.5
8.5
8
7.5
8
8
Gap
1.5
1.5
1
1
0
0
0.5
0.5
The two characteristics that the architects desire the highest scores for, are ‘quality’ (9.5) and
‘expertise’ (9). At the same time, these are the two characteristics where the scores for perceived
and desired situation differ the most. The difference between the scores are both 1.5. One of the
partners mentions ‘quality’ as one of the core values of the firm. He states that quality is what they
should deliver. The other partner responds that he finds ‘quality’ a general notion, but that expertise
in the field of architecture and in the field of building technology are an important core value. Both
were mentioned as core values and things the firm wants to deliver and be, which explains why they
have high desired scores for these two characteristics.
‘Connecting’ and ‘network’ have received the same perceived (7.5) and the same desired scores
(8.5). That the two characteristics are closely related in the architects’ views also follows from the
interview. When asked about the mission and vision of the firm, one of the partner summarizes it in
one word: connecting. “We want to connect (…) with a tradition, or with the people with or for whom
you’re building, with the history, with the local physical environment. It’s always looking for
connection.” Later he adds that connection also has to do with collaborations and networking.
Because connecting is so important to them, they are more set to work together with other firms. This
is shown in a partnership with three other architectural firms with whom they work on large projects.
The architects describe their designs as a combination of artistic and for the market: “We are a
combination of artistic, we have won both architectural awards and publications and design well for
the market simultaneously.” “Not just architecture for the architecture or architecture for fellow
architects alone, but particularly for people.” They describe it as an attitude. One of them elaborates:
“(…) you should have an added value, not only very elitist or artistic, but it has to be broader than
that. (…) That means, how you behave in processes, that you never profile yourself as THE architect
who is above other parties. We don’t do that. We try to be very subservient.” This explains the lowest
desired score (7.5) for ‘artistic’. Both characteristics have the same score for the perceived and
desired situation, implying that the firm has reached the architects’ desired situation for both
characteristics.
A characteristic that is related to connecting and for the market is being socially concerned. The
partners find context important: the immediate surroundings, but also the context of people’s
interests, which they have also mentioned when describing ‘connecting’. They value the physical and
the societal context. They adopt a socially concerned attitude, which stems from their idea to be of
added value.
The characteristic ‘narrative’ relates to their designs. They describe it as ‘narrative architecture’,
particularly using storytelling. Storytelling is something one partner is doing more than the other. They
find it good to have different personal styles within the firm. At the same time, they find this
challenging: “As a firm you want to put out a single image, but the firm is also a lot of people and it is
a container.”
Trying to summarize the characteristics of their firm, one partner says: “I think this is what the office
wants, to just deliver quality and expertise. This is more how we do it, which is connecting and
network. This is our attitude: artistic, but for the market.”
35
Image
Characteristic
Percentage
Surprising designs
Traditional
Artistic
Down to earth
33%
33%
33%
29%
29%
Private clients
Communicative
Broad field of work
Classic
29%
29%
29%
29%
What stands out is that ‘artistic’ has been chosen by the respondents as one of the most
characteristic words for the firm, which is also a characteristic that the partners of the firm had
chosen. ‘Surprising designs’ may be in line with the ‘artistic’ characteristic as well.
The respondents get the impression from the website that the firm provides a wide range of
services. In the interviews, it was mentioned once that the firm is a full-service firm. However, it was
not mentioned throughout the rest of the interview and not chosen as most important characteristic.
The respondents describe the firm as communicative and down to earth. Down to earth has not
been mentioned explicitly in the interview, but the architects did mention that they want to be nice1
and that because they are located in Friesland, they are very aware that they work in a strong
community where they need to consider other people. Respondents also noticed their social media
links on the website.
Traditional and classic are quite similar words. The architects said about tradition that they want to
connect with, and build on tradition and history. However, they also said that they are innovative and
renewing, not necessary in the architecture, but in the profession concerning building processes,
building technology and circular economy.
Quality
10
Socially concerned
8
Expertise
6
4
Perceived
2
Narrative
0
Connecting
Desired
Image
Artistic
Network
For the market
1
Dutch: nice
36
Characteristic
Quality
Expertise
Connecting
Network
For the market
Artistic
Narrative
Socially concerned
Perceived
Desired
Image
8
7.5
7.5
7.5
8
7.5
7.5
7.5
9.5
9
8.5
8.5
8
7.5
8
8
7.1
6.7
6.4
6.4
6.4
6.6
5.9
6.6
Gap
Perceived and Image
0.9
0.8
1.1
1.1
1.6
0.9
1.6
0.9
Gap
Desired and Image
2.4
2.3
2.1
2.1
1.6
0.9
2.1
1.4
In the interview and the first part of the questionnaires, we have seen that both the architects and the
respondents chose ‘artistic’ as characteristic for the firm. Indeed, we can see that ‘artistic’ has the
smallest gap (0.9) between desired situation and image. This means that how artistic the firm is seen
externally, is close to how artistic the architects see themselves and how artistic they desire to be.
Respondents comment: “They look artistic in what they do. Special designs.” “(…) it has an artistic
appeal.” “They must be artistic, because I can’t find a distinct style in their work.”
The smallest gap (0.8) between the perceived situation and image is with ‘expertise’. However, the
gap between desired expertise and the image is big (2.3). Their expertise as seen externally is close
to how they see their own expertise, but relatively far from what they desire their expertise to be,
because of the desire or ambition of the architects to be more professional.
‘Quality’ has the biggest gap (2.4) between desired situation and image, but it has the overall highest
image score (7.1). The gap between perceived situation and image is relatively small (0.9). This
implies that from the eight characteristics, quality is seen as the most fitting characteristic of the firm
by the respondents. It is close to how the architects view their own quality, but relatively far from what
they desire their quality to be, similar to ‘expertise’. Both were mentioned as core values of the firm
in the interview.
That ‘connecting’ and ‘network’ are closely related characteristics is affirmed again as the
respondents have given the same image scores for both (6.4), as did the architects for the perceived
and desired identity.
‘Socially concerned’ has relatively small gaps between image and perceived (0.9) and desired (1.4)
situations. The respondents comment: “They design with eye for the surroundings, socially
concerned.” “They are projects like apartments and houses, so I have the feeling that they are very
socially involved.”
The lowest image score (5.9) is given to the characteristic ‘narrative’. The gap between perceived
situation and image is the biggest (together with ‘for the market’) (1.6). There is a relatively big gap
between the desired situation and image (2.1). The respondents comment about ‘narrative’: “The
texts on the websites were not speaking to me.” “Did not really emerge from the website. Few
pictures, few text.” “Not really narrative or artistic designs. I find them somewhat timeless. You see
such designs everywhere.”
Feedback
The architects think this research is valuable and that the chosen method provides enough guidance
to manage one’s identity. They find it good to know that the pictures of the projects get the most
attention on the website. In the time of the research, they have renewed their website. The current
website is more visual, which they are glad is in line with the conclusion from the report. They also
think it is a good suggestion to investigate the image on a regular basis, for which they find the
method suitable. They think image is important, because architects are not always chosen based on
objective criteria, but also on likeability or goodwill.
37
4.5 Firm 5
Identity
Firm 5 is a medium-sized (20-40 fte) architecture firm based in Amsterdam. The interview was held
with the partners and leading architects of the firm.
Characteristic
Enterprising
Non-residential/utility
Corporate
Put things into perspective
Classic
Listening
Self-reliant
Perceived
7.5
7
7.5
8.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
8.5
Desired
8
8
9
8
9.5
7.5
7.5
8.5
Gap
0.5
1
1.5
-0.5
2
0
0
0
The highest score for the desired situation is for ‘architecturally ambitious’ (9.5). It is the only
characteristic in the list that describes their architecture, but the high score shows that they find this
very important. It is also the characteristic with the biggest gap (2) between the perceived and desired
situation. The architects say they listen well to commercial clients on one hand, but on the other hand
are ‘architecturally ambitious’. One of the architects elaborates: “There is a category of firms that
do shops and are only serving, where image is less important. That is absolutely not the case with
us.” The characteristic that may seem an ‘odd combination’, as they describe it, with their ambition in
architecture is ‘listening’. They say that they are willing to listen to what the clients want and that it is
also the feedback that they receive from clients. ‘Listening’ has the same scores for perceived and
desired situation (7.5).
The characteristic ‘corporate’ has the second highest score (9) for the desired situation and also the
second biggest gap (1.5) between perceived and desired. ‘Corporate’ describes the type of clients
they have. This implies that they desire more corporate clients. This is in line with the related
characteristic ‘non-residential’ or ‘utility’ which describes the type of buildings they like to work on.
They also gave a higher score for the desired situation (8) then for the perceived situation (7) to this
characteristic. The architects explain that they are a corporate firm which they find unique in The
Netherlands. They used to do a lot of residential buildings, but now they focus on institutional parties
and investors and they work with many hotel chains. “We are also a firm that builds public utilities2,
but that is not so unique, because that is a very general term, but corporate is perhaps the best and I
don’t know if a lot of architecture firms in The Netherlands would describe themselves like that.”
One of the architects describes the firm as ‘enterprising’ in the sense that they are ‘self-reliant’.
They think that they are often sent out to do a job with very little information. “We often get a call: ‘We
need a hotel, period. Good luck with it, done next week.’ So in that sense we are self-reliant.” ‘Selfreliant’ has the same score (8.5) for the perceived and desired situation. ‘Enterprising’ has a gap of
0.5 between perceived and desired situation.
The architects also describe the firm as a classic firm that is quite old and exists for quite a while.
“We nurture the tradition.” They state that they are a firm with a lot of tradition, because they have a
large portfolio. They explain the benefits: “We are not the new kid on the block who still have to try
things out, so people come to us because they know it will be fine.” ‘Classic’ has the same score (7.5)
for perceived and desired situation.
One characteristic that the architects desire less than in the current perceived situation is the
characteristic of ‘putting things into perspective3’ or being down to earth. It has a score of 8.5 for
the perceived situation and an 8 for the desired situation. The architects use it to describe their
attitude, that they are not as serious and do not create an atmosphere as heavy as other architects
do, but are more light-hearted and down to earth. One example they give is that they do not like to
talk about design using jargon. Even though they prefer to be down to earth, the architects do
2
3
Dutch: utiliteitsbouwbureau
Dutch: relativerend
38
acknowledge that the architectural profession is a serious business and it needs to be handled
seriously as well. This might explain why they desire to be a little less of this characteristic.
Image
Characteristic
Percentage
Modern
Professional
Corporate
Materialization
57%
43%
38%
38%
33%
Business-like
Innovative
Large-scaled projects
29%
29%
29%
What stands out is that 57% of the respondents think ‘modern’ suits the firm, while this could be
seen as the opposite of ‘classic’ which the architects used to describe the firm. This can be
explained by the different aspects within corporate identity. The architects meant this word in a
different context. The architects described their firm as a ‘classic’ firm because it has a long history
and exists for quite a while, while the respondents chose ‘modern’ to describe the architecture and
the designs of the firm. One of the respondents comments: “In terms of design, it is all very modern
and that is also how the firm wants to distinguish itself.” What is also striking is that the respondents
chose ‘distinctive signature’ as a characteristic, while this is something that the architects
specifically pointed out during the interview as something they do not have. One of them states that
while there may be similarities, not all of their buildings look alike. In terms of style, they do state that
it is all modernistic. This is something the respondents have concluded from the websites as well.
A characteristic that corresponds with what the architects have chosen in their interview is
‘corporate’. However, the respondents have also chosen ‘professional’ and ‘business-like’, which
may indicate that the respondents think also the term ‘corporate’ describes the firm and not only the
clients, for which the architects used this word.
‘Large-scaled projects’ can be related to the non-residential or utility buildings that the architecture
firm mostly designs as those are often large-scaled.
Self-reliant
Listening
Enterprising
10
8
6
4
2
0
Perceived
Corporate
Desired
Image
Put things into
perspective
Classic
Architecturally
ambitious
39
Characteristic
Enterprising
Corporate
Put things into
perspective
Classic
Listening
Self-reliant
7.2
7
7.1
Gap
Perceived and Image
0.3
0
0.4
Gap
Desired and Image
0.8
1
1.9
8
6.3
2.2
1.7
9.5
7.5
7.5
8.5
7.3
6.1
6.4
7
0.2
1.4
1.1
1.5
2.2
1.4
1.1
1.5
Perceived
Desired
Image
7.5
7
7.5
8
8
9
8.5
7.5
7.5
7.5
8.5
There is no gap between the perceived situation and the image for the ‘non-residential’ or ‘utility’
characteristic. The respondents can deduct from the website that the firm works on utility projects as
well as the architects perceive the situation. The gap between desired situation and image is also
relatively low (1).
The characteristic ‘architecturally ambitious’ has the smallest gap (0.2) between the perceived
situation and image, but the biggest gap (2.2) between desired situation and image. The respondents
can see from the projects that the firm is ambitious at the moment. “Their designs give a quite
ambitious and overwhelming impression.” “They show in their projects that they try to exceed limits.”
However, the architects desire to be even more ambitious in their architecture.
‘Enterprising’ has a relatively small gap (0.3) between the perceived situation and the image and
has the smallest gap (0.8) between the desired situation and image. This means that how
enterprising the architects view themselves is close to how enterprising the respondents see them.
“They give me the impression that they take themselves very seriously and want to grow very much
and show what they can do.” “Projects seem enterprising (…)” The architects connected the terms
‘enterprising’ and ‘self-reliant’ with each other and scored ‘self-reliant’ higher than ‘enterprising’. It is
striking that the respondents do the opposite and score ‘self-reliant’ lower than ‘enterprising’. This
results in a relatively big gap of 1.5 between image and perceived and desired situation for the selfreliance. The respondents comment: “They came across as collaborative, hence not self-reliant.” “I’m
not sure if they are self-reliant and enterprising, because certainly their clients must have hard
requirements in these large-scaled projects.”
The biggest gap (2.2) between perceived situation and image is with ‘put things into perspective’.
The image has a relatively big gap (1.7) with the desired situation as well. Even though the architects
stated that they are light-hearted and down to earth, one of the respondents says: “The firm appears
to me like they take themselves very seriously, perhaps a little too seriously.” “They come across too
business-like.” This also shows in the words that the respondents chose themselves: professional,
corporate and business-like. ‘Corporate’, therefore, has a small gap (0.4) between the perceived
situation and image. What should be kept in mind is that the architects used ‘corporate’ to describe
the type of clients they work for and not to describe the firm itself. Some of the respondents think that
‘corporate’ suits the firm because it comes across as very business-like and serious. Other
respondents do recognize and comment on the corporate clients: “Many governmental institutions as
clients.” “This firm has a very corporate/public sector image.” “The photos of the projects seem to tell
that they mostly work on large corporate projects.”
The lowest image score (6.1) is given to the characteristic ‘classic’. This is in line with the first part of
the questionnaire where respondents thought ‘modern’ suits the firm as these two terms seem to be
the opposite of each other. All of the comments of the respondents about ‘classic’ are about the
architecture and the designs of the firm, not about the firm itself, while the architects used this word to
describe their firm. It is remarkable that some respondents comment that they find the designs
timeless and in that sense classic. However, most of the respondents think that this firm has modern
designs and therefore give a low score for ‘classic’.
‘Listening’ has a relatively low image score (6.4) but an average gap (1.1) for both situations. From
the comments of the respondents it seems that this characteristic cannot be deduced merely by
looking at the website of the firm. One respondents states that the firms comes across as a large,
serious firm and thus less approachable. However, we cannot conclude with certainty from the few
comments on this characteristic that this is the reason for the relatively low image score.
40
Feedback
The architects think the gap between their perceived identity and their image is a reminder to pay
more attention to their communications. They take the results into consideration when updating the
website and it also makes them think about how to communicate their story. They find the research
valuable and think the research would be most valuable if done with their potential clients. A question
they have that is outside the scope of this research is how the external public’s view are formed,
whether this is through built projects or pictures, personal conversations, articles, website or social
media.
41
4.6 Firm 6
Identity
Firm 6 is a medium sized (20-40 fte) firm based in Rotterdam. The interview was held with the
managing partner of the firm and a communications intern.
Characteristic
No-nonsense
Technically progressive
Service: from A to Z
Integrated: Interior and architecture
Circular projects
Urban context
Eye for detail
Perceived
8
7
9
9
6.5
8
8
8
Desired
9
8.5
9.5
9.5
8.5
9
9
8.5
Gap
1
1.5
0.5
0.5
2
1
1
0.5
When describing the firm, the managing partner states that their focus is on the ‘urban context’, on
sustainability and on ‘large-scaled projects’. He points out that this is something that can be seen
from the projects that they have delivered the past few years.
‘Large-scaled projects’ has the highest score for the desired situation (9.5) and has also the smallest
gap (0.5) between perceived and desired situation.
The projects are always in an urban context and large-scaled, but with ‘eye for detail’. “So you have
to imagine that a window frame or an edge of a roof or whatever, is just as important as the whole
context in which the building is located.” That they work on large-scaled projects is not unique, but
how they do it is what makes them distinctive in their opinion. ‘Eye for detail’ also has a small gap
(0.5) between perceived and desired situation.
The managing partner describes a few examples of large projects where sustainability, energy
neutrality and use of materials are fully integrated, which he calls ‘circular projects’. This also points
out that they are innovative or ‘technically progressive’ as they state that they are one of the first
who have made such large buildings cradle to cradle. In their view, the large scale on which they
work with BIM and Revit also shows that they are technically progressive.
Another characteristic of the firm according to the partner concerns the services they provide. He
calls it ‘services from A to Z’. “(…) and that we really provide services from A to Z to our clients, not
just make a nice little sketch and then say ‘figure it out yourself’. (…) It is an important aspect of our
services.” This characteristic also has the highest score for the desired situation (9.5) and the
smallest gap (0.5) between perceived and desired situation. Another characteristic related to the
services of the firm is that they work ‘integrated, on interior and architecture’. Interesting is that
the partner already states that this is not seen externally: “Almost nobody knows that. We do interior
projects on a quite large scale and it is not seen by the outside world, so that is already a first gap.” It
also has the lowest perceived score (6.5) and the biggest gap (2) with the desired situation.
The characteristic ‘no-nonsense’ describes the way the firm works. The managing partner finds it a
clear characteristic of the firm. “So it is not the case that we think of fantasy air castles, but we are
aware that we live in the real world.” No-nonsense is also mentioned as one of the characteristics that
employees should have.
It is remarkable that none of the characteristics are fully aligned between the perceived and desired
situation.
42
Image
Characteristic
Percentage
Modern
Surprising designs
Public building + public space
Professional
43%
43%
43%
33%
Timeless designs
Narrative
Socially concerned
Involved
33%
29%
29%
24%
24%
None of the words that the respondents have chosen at the questionnaires correspond exactly with
the words that were chosen in the interview. However, there are some that describe similar
characteristics. Public building and public space are similar to large-scaled projects and the urban
context.
The respondents think that the firm is involved, which has been stated in the interview as well. “Our
employees are very involved with clients and projects.” In their mission that the partner has read
aloud during the interview, it is also stated: “We are involved from the first sketch to long after the
grand opening.”
About their architecture and designs, the respondents say it is modern, surprising, timeless and
architecturally ambitious. The managing partner says they don’t strive to have a specific style, but
do have it. “It is not the case that we use our style as part of our identity. I sometimes say jokingly:
‘We are a firm with no style.’ We try to design buildings that fit as closely as possible to the needs and
wishes of the client and in that sense we are rather without style.”
The respondents think the firm is professional. In the interview, the partner mentions that the
employees are very solid and very professional.
No-nonsense
10
Eye for detail
8
6
Technically
progressive
4
2
Urban context
0
Circular projects
Large-scaled
projects
Perceived
Desired
Image
Integrated: Interior
and architecture
43
Characteristic
No-nonsense
Technically progressive
Integrated: Interior and
architecture
Circular projects
Urban context
Eye for detail
6.7
7.5
8.1
7.6
Gap Perceived and
Image
1.3
0.5
0.9
1.4
Gap Desired and
Image
2.3
1
1.4
1.9
7.5
7
7.4
7.7
1
1
0.6
0.3
1
2
1.6
0.8
Perceived
Desired
Image
8
7
9
9
9
8.5
9.5
9.5
6.5
8
8
8
8.5
9
9
8.5
The image scores given by the respondents are not always lower than the identity scores. In two
cases the scores for image are higher than the scores for the perceived identity.
The characteristic with the smallest gap for both the perceived (0.3) and desired (0.8) situation is ‘eye
for detail’. The respondents find that there is a lot of attention to detail.
The characteristic with the biggest gap (2.3) between desired situation and image and the second
biggest gap (1.3) between perceived situation and image is ‘no-nonsense’. It also has the lowest
image score (6.7). Based on what they have seen on the website, the respondents think this is the
least fitting characteristic of the firm. It is not clear from the website alone that the firm is nononsense. They think the projects look complicated and the many different styles of their architecture
do not give a no-nonsense impression.
‘Service: from A to Z’ has the biggest gap between perceived situation and image (1.4) and the
second biggest gap between desired situation and image (1.9). However, the average image score is
7.6, which is one of the highest. The comments of the respondents also point out that the
respondents recognize this characteristic. “The firm wants to make the whole picture complete, from
beginning to end of the project.” “They provide many different services.” One respondent comments
that the website does not shows clearly which services they offer and therefore finds service from A
to Z not fitting properly.
The highest image score (8.1) is given to the ‘large-scaled projects’, which shows that the
respondents can clearly deduct this from the websites. This is in line with the characteristic they
chose in the first part of the questionnaire: ‘public building and public space’. In their opinion, it
shows in the pictures and the projects on the website that the firm works on large projects. Public
space can also be related to ‘urban context’ of which the gap between perceived and image is
relatively small (0.6). A respondent comments: “I think the firm thinks a lot about where their projects
will be located and how that is reflected in an urban context.”
It is remarkable that ‘integrated: interior and architecture’ of which the managing partner said it
surely has a gap, has scored a higher score for the image (7.5) than for the perceived situation (6.5).
Even though the managing partner thinks it is not known externally that the firm works on both interior
and architecture, the respondents can deduct it from the website: “I really feel that the company is
particularly focused on the integration of interior design and architecture, and that this happens on
quite a large scale.” Other respondents comment they have read it and seen it on pictures as well.
‘Technically progressive’ has a small gap between image and perceived situation (0.5), but the
perceived situation has one of the lowest scores. The respondents comment: “The buildings look
beautiful, but not super technically advanced.”
‘Circular projects’ has a relatively big gap (2) between desired situation and image and a relatively
low image score (7). It is not very clear how this can be explained. A few respondents state that they
have read about the circular projects in the description of the firm. Other respondents commented
that they do not know exactly what circular projects are.
44
Feedback
The results of the research are in line with the firm’s own observations, which helps with
improvements on the website they have planned. They will use the results to put the planned
improvements into action and will also take the results into account in the event of building a new
website. They think the research would be more valuable to them if the focus was on their own clients
and if it not only focused on their website.
45
4.7 Firm 7
Identity
Firm 7 is a large firm (>40 fte) based in Rotterdam. The interviewees were the director/project
architect, an office manager/architect, an office manager/PR and communication, a project leader
and a building engineer.
Characteristic
Ambitious
Reliable
Business-like
Professional
Complexity
Communicative
Collective
Fresh
Perceived
Desired
Gap
6.8
8
8.2
7.8
7.6
7.7
6
6.2
9.2
9.6
8.4
9.2
8.9
9.4
8.9
9
2.4
1.6
0.2
1.4
1.3
1.7
2.9
2.8
The scores given for the perceived situation are all lower than those for the desired situation, which
means that for all characteristics the interviewees desire more of it than the current perceived
situation. The interviewees have given the characteristic ‘reliable’ the highest score (9.6) for the
desired situation. The interviewees have mentioned it when describing the firm and also as a core
value of the firm. According to the director it has a downside: “I think our reliable occasionally turns
into careful. (…) Look, you can manage risks, but that is different from avoiding risks. For me that is
not meant as something positive.” Later in the interview he does state: “Well, I think that many of our
current clients choose us because of our reliability.” The high score for reliability shows that they do
desire to be very reliable.
The second highest score for the desired situation is given to ‘communicative’ (9.4). They find it
important to communicate and to collaborate and they find that it does not have to get in the way of
their architecture. “We are very focused on communication also, with the clients, but especially with
the end users of the building. (…) So, do communicate with users and don’t think that it stands in the
way of our creativity. You can do both.”
A characteristic related to reliable and communicative is ‘collective’. It has the lowest score for the
perceived situation (6) and the biggest gap (2.9) with the desired situation. The interviewees state
that they see collectivity as an added value and that it describes what they do internally and
externally. They want to have openness to the employees and “it also comes from being ‘from
Rotterdam’, stand for something together”.
A characteristic with a very small gap (0.2) between perceived and desired situation is ‘businesslike’. It implies that they are quite content with how business-like the firm is at the moment in their
view. It has the highest score for the perceived situation (8.2), yet the lowest score for the desired
situation (8.4).
A characteristic mentioned together with business-like is ‘professional’. It has a relatively high score
(9.2) for the desired situation. When one of the interviewees asks what makes them professional,
others answer: “We know what we do, when it comes to BIM, for example, or specific knowledge and
experience.” “If you look at how much knowledge we have here in the firm and it ranges from fresh
young people to just people with years of experience."
A characteristic with a high score for the desired situation (9.2), but a relatively big gap with the
perceived situation (6.8) is ‘ambitious’. With ambitious, the interviewees mean ‘self-transcending’.
They continually try to be critical of themselves and to improve. If a user likes their building, it does
not necessarily mean they are satisfied with it themselves. The director comments: “Yes, it is in that
sense self-transcending, yes, that you push your limits every time and that you set a new personal
record again. There’s a sportive side to it also.” Another word they use to describe this is ‘to excel’,
but they conclude together that ‘ambitious’ is a better sounding word.
The characteristics of the architecture or the designs are not mentioned often in the interview. The
only characteristic in the list of most important characteristics about the projects and designs is
46
‘complexity’. The director states that it is the common thread through everything they do. The
scores for the perceived and desire situations do not necessarily reflect or contradict this.
The second lowest score for the perceived situation (6.2) is given to the characteristic ‘fresh’. The
director states clearly that this is something he desires the firm to be more. This reflects in the low
score for the perceived situation and the second biggest gap of 2.8 with the desired situation.
Image
Characteristic
Percentage
Professional
Public building + public space
Timeless designs
Modern
Socially concerned
Dialogue
57%
38%
29%
29%
24%
24%
Public sector
24%
The characteristics that the respondents of the interview have chosen are in Table 21. It is
remarkable that 57% of the respondents choose ‘professional’ as a suitable characteristic of the
firm, which is one of the words that the interviewees at the firm have chosen as most important as
well. Another similar characteristic to one of those of the list of the interviewees is ‘dialogue’. It is
similar to the characteristic ‘communicative’. The characteristic ‘socially concerned’ that the
respondents have chosen is similar to ‘involvement’ which is mentioned in the interview, but not
chosen as one of the most important characteristics. The respondents have also chosen ‘public
sector’ which is mentioned in the interview at the firm as well. When describing the projects they
work on, one of the characteristics is that they work at the public sector. The respondents find that the
firm has ‘modern’ and ‘timeless designs’. This is in line with what the interviewees have stated as
well in the interview. They state that they do not have a specific design style, but it is based on the
modernistic architectural language and they find timelessness important.
Ambitious
10
Fresh
8
Reliable
6
4
2
Collective
0
Perceived
Business-like
Desired
Image
Communicative
Professional
Complexity
47
Characteristic
Perceived
Desired
Image
Ambitious
Reliable
Business-like
Professional
Complexity
Communicative
Collective
Fresh
6.8
8
8.2
7.8
7.6
7.7
6
6.2
9.2
9.6
8.4
9.2
8.9
9.4
8.9
9
7.1
7.2
7.6
8
7.1
7
6.9
6.5
Gap
Perceived - Image
0.3
0.8
0.6
0.2
0.5
0.7
0.9
0.3
Gap
Desired - Image
2.1
2.4
0.8
1.2
1.8
2.4
2
2.5
What is remarkable is that the gaps between the perceived situation and the image are relatively
small compared to the gaps of other firms. The gaps are all smaller than 1. The smallest gap, 0.2, is
between the perceived situation and image of the characteristic ‘professional’. It also has the
highest image score (8). This is in line with the first part of the questionnaire, where respondents
chose professionals as well to describe the firm. The respondents only have positive comments on
this characteristic: “The firm is very professional and large-scaled to me. A very good impression of
the firm.” “I think the firm’s strength lies in their pragmatism and professionalism, how they interact
with the clients and projects.”
The biggest gap between the perceived situation and the image (0.9), although small compared to
the biggest gap of other firms, is found at the characteristic ‘collective’. It also has one of the lowest
image scores (6.9). However, the image score is higher than the score given for the perceived
situation. The respondents comment: “(…) collective (interactive) is more appropriate for a younger
starting firm.” “From the website I cannot deduct how collective they are.” The respondents do not
see the firm as collective, but the interviewees already had given themselves a low score for the
current perceived situation.
The lowest image score (6.5) is given to the characteristic ‘fresh’. It has a small gap (0.3) with the
perceived situation, but has the biggest gap (2.5) with the desired situation. The interviewees had
given a low score for the perceived situation, showing that they do not find themselves ‘fresh’ at the
moment, but desire to be. The image score and the gaps of the scores of the respondents are in line
with this view. They comment: “Appearance does not look very fresh, I have seen these designs
more often.” “It did not give an impression of fresh to me, because everything was written so
businesslike.” “I think they do not have a fresh appearance. Website overall impression is somewhat
boring.”
‘Business-like’ has the smallest gap (0.8) between desired situation and image. It has one of the
highest image scores (7.6) and it had the lowest desired identity score (8.4). The gap with the
perceived situation is also small (0.6). The respondents view the firm as business-like close to how
they perceive themselves and how they desire to be.
Feedback
The firm concludes from the results that they are close to their desired image, but that there is still
room for improvement. They find the results of this research a good lead to go to a professional PR
image firm to work on their desired image and to learn how to improve their communication and
identity. They find the research valuable for the firm and state they definitely want to do this research
with existing clients or study other communication channels.
48
4.8 Section summary
Identity
Characteristics
Each firm is described differently by the partners, leading architects and employees. Each
characteristic that the interviewees use to describe the firm is, with a few exceptions, different from
characteristics that other firms use. However, the characteristics can roughly be put into categories.
In general, the interviewees describe the firms’ culture, its architecture and designs, the projects they
do, the clients they work for, the services they offer and how they interact or collaborate. These
categories match with the literature on the components of corporate identity by Gray and Balmer
(1998) and from the literature on strategic management of architecture firms by Winch and Schneider
(1993).
Culture
Corporate culture is the shared values and beliefs of the employees. In this case, these are often the
values and beliefs of the directors or managers of the firm.
The firms use the following characteristics to describe the firm’s culture: socially concerned (firm 4),
put things into perspective (firm 5), self-reliant (firm 5), enterprising (firm 5), classic (firm 5), nononsense (firm 6), ambitious (firm 1 and 7), reliable (firm 7), business-like (firm 7), professional (firm 1
and 7), pleasure (firm 1), fresh (firm 7), flexible/agile (firm 3), initiating (firm 3) and pleasure in
designing (firm 2). All of the firms have at least one characteristic describing their culture. Firm 5 has
the most with four characteristics in this category.
Architecture and designs
When describing the architecture and designs, characteristics the interviewees use are artistic (firm
4), narrative (firm 4), surprising designs (firm 1) and eye for detail (firm 6). They also say their
architecture is ambitious (firm 5), innovative answer on new programs (firm 2) and quality (firm 3 and
4). Important focus points of their architecture are mentioned: sustainability (firm 2), materialization
(firm 2), urban context (firm 6), connecting (firm 4) and for the market (firm 4).
What is remarkable is that one firm does not describe their architecture or designs at all, which is firm
7. They have the word ‘ambitious’ in their list, but use it in the sense of improving themselves every
time, not to describe their architecture or designs. With five characteristics, firm 4 has the most words
that have to do with their architecture and designs.
Projects and clients
The projects are described using the following characteristics: non-residential/utility (firm 5), largescaled (firm 6), circular projects (firm 6), technically progressive (firm 6), complexity (firm 7), broad
field of work (firm 3), local (firm 1), international orientated (firm 2) and public building/public space
(firm 2). About the type of clients they say that they are corporate (firm 5) and private clients (firm 1).
Not every firm describes the projects or the type of clients. Firm 4 does name characteristics about
how they work with clients, but not which type of clients they serve or what type of projects they do.
Only Firm 1 and 5 describe the type of clients they work for.
Services
About the services the firms provide the firms say: quality (firm 3), wide ranges of services (firm 3),
research oriented (firm 3), service: from A to Z (firm 6), integrated: interior and architecture (firm 6).
Firm 6 and firm 3 are the only ones who describe which services they offer or other related
characteristics to their services. Both have more than one characteristic in this category.
Interactions and collaborations
Network (firm 4), connecting (firm 4), listening (firm 5), communicative (firm 7), collective (firm 7),
team player/collaboration (firm 3), personal approach (firm 1) and dialogue (firm 2) are all
characteristics the firms use to describe how they work with clients and colleagues or peers. Almost
all the firms have at least one characteristic in their list about these interactions or collaborations.
Firm 6 is the only firm that did not list any characteristics about this.
49
Structure
Firm 1 is the only one who has chosen a desired change in the firm’s structure as most important
characteristic: ‘trying to grow’.
Scores
Table 23. Average identity scores of the seven firms.
Firm
Firm 1
Firm 2
Firm 3
Firm 4
Firm 5
Firm 6
Firm 7
Average score
perceived identity
7.1
8.1
7.3
7.6
7.7
7.9
7.3
Average score
desired identity
7.8
8.9
8.4
8.4
8.3
8.9
9.1
Most of the firms have given all of their characteristics higher scores for the desired situation than
perceived situation. In general, this implies that the eight characteristics that they have chosen are
important to the firm and that they desire to be more or do more of these characteristics.
A few firms have given the same scores for the perceived and the desired situation to some
characteristics. For example, firm 3 has given the characteristic ‘flexible’ an 8 for both the perceived
and desired situation, firm 5 has given ‘classic’ and ‘listening’ both a 7.5 for both situations and firm 4
has given ‘artistic’ a 7.5 for both as well. This means that not only are these characteristics important
to them, but they are also satisfied with the extent to which the characteristics suits the firm at the
moment.
A few firms have given lower scores for the desired situation than for the perceived situation to some
characteristics. These are characteristics they perceive at the moment, but want to be less or do less
of. Examples are doing local projects (firm 1), working for private clients (firm 1) and ‘put things into
perspective’ (firm 5).
Image
In the first part of the questionnaires, where respondents choose characteristics they think are
suitable for the firm, the firms have one to three characteristics in their list that are the same as the
most often chosen characteristics. Some firms have words that are similar, but not the exact same.
Most of the words that the respondents choose are different from the words that the directors and
employees of the firms had chosen.
The answers on the question where the respondents base their view on, show that most of the
respondents choose characteristics mainly based on the projects and pictures they see and the
description of the firm they read. The website design and the general impressions are relevant as
well.
Overall, the firm with the least corresponding words or similar words is firm 5. The respondents chose
‘corporate’ and they have ‘corporate’ and ‘business-like’ on their list which correspond, but this is the
only corresponding word on the list. However, the percentage of respondents that chose the same
words is relatively high (29%-57%) compared to others, which implies that they have a relatively
strong or clear image.
The firm with the most corresponding and similar words is firm 1. The respondents chose three
characteristics most often that are in the list of the firm as well in the exact same words. Two of the
words they have chosen are similar to the words the firm has. However, the number of respondents
that chose the same words is relatively low (24%-38%). The list of words that were chosen the most
was also longer for firm 1, because there were five words at the bottom of the list of eight that were
chosen the same amount of time. This led to a longer list and increased the chance that the
respondents picked the corresponding words. This firm having the most corresponding words could
be the result of the longer list.
50
Overall, the scores that the respondents give for the characteristics that the firms have chosen are
lower than the scores that the firms give themselves. Thus, there is a gap between the image
perceived externally and the identity as perceived and desired internally. The gap between image and
perceived identity is overall smaller than the gap between image and desired identity.
Table 24. Average image scores and gaps with identity scores of the seven firms.
Firms
Firm 1
Firm 2
Firm 3
Firm 4
Firm 5
Firm 6
Firm 7
Average image
score
6.91
7.05
6.75
6.51
6.8
7.44
7.18
Average gap with
perceived identity
0.96
1.01
0.91
1.11
0.89
0.88
0.54
Average gap with
desired identity
2.06
1.89
1.63
1.86
1.45
1.5
1.9
The image scores are often lower than the scores for the perceived identity, which suggests that,
based on the websites, the respondents see the characteristics less than the firms perceive them. In
some cases they are higher than perceived. For example, firm 3 has scored itself a 5.5 for ‘research
oriented’, but the respondents have scored them on average a 7. With firm 7, they have scored
themselves a 6 for the characteristic ‘collective’, but the respondents have scored it a 6.9 on average.
Most of the image scores are also lower than the scores for the desired identity, which suggests that
the respondents perceive less of the characteristics than the firms desire to be. In a few exceptional
cases they are higher than the desired scores. For example with firm 1, where they desire to be less
local, the image score is a 7.5, while the desired score is a 6.
The firm with the smallest gap between image and perceived identity is firm 7 with an average gap of
0.54. The firm with the biggest gap between image and perceived identity is firm 4. Their average gap
is 1.11. The firm with the smallest gap between image and desired identity is firm 5 with a gap of
1.45. The biggest gap between image and desired identity is found at firm 1 with a gap of 2.06.
Feedback
The architects have found the research in some way useful to their firms. They have learned about
the gap between identity and image and they are now aware which characteristics in particular need
more attention. The results are not very surprising to them, but do make them think about how they
can improve their website. Firm 3 and firm 7 have indicated to follow up on the results by going to a
professional to work on their communication and identity. Firm 3 has also discussed the results of the
study internally. Most of the firms see the research as something they would like to do again with their
existing clients and also with more communication channels. This would make the research more
valuable to each firm.
51
52
5 Discussion
5.1 Identity
This research has examined how architecture firms describe their corporate identity.
From the literature on the elements of corporate identity, I expected the firms to describe the
corporate strategy, philosophy, culture and structure. All of the firms describe their corporate strategy
as they describe at least one of the organization’s products: their architecture and designs or the
market scope: the projects and services. Except for one, all of the firms describe their architecture
and designs. Also with one exception, all of the firms describe the type of projects they do. Two of the
firms describe the type of clients they have. Two firms describe the services they provide. All of the
firms describe their corporate philosophy and culture. Six of the firms also describe how they work
with clients and colleagues or peers. The corporate structure, however, has only been described by
one firm.
From the literature on architecture firms as creative professional service firms, I expected the firms to
describe their services, how they interact with clients, the different qualities of their design projects
and their creative vision. Only two of the firms describe the scope of the services they provide.
However, all of them describe their culture which also relate to how their services are. How they
interact with clients is described by six of the firms and the different qualities of their design projects
and their creative vision also.
In short, three of the four components of corporate identity: strategy, philosophy and culture can be
found in the perceived and desired identity of architecture firms in this research. One component, the
corporate structure, has a less prominent role in the corporate identity of architecture firms. When
describing corporate identity, the firms describe characteristics that are distinctive. How the
organization is structured is often the same for many architecture firms, especially for small and
medium-sized firms. This might explain why this theme has not been mentioned often and why this is
not included when describing the identity of the firm. How the directors and employees describe the
identity of their architecture firms in this research is in line with the assumption that architecture firms
are creative professional service firms.
5.2 Image
Each firm’s identity is different and as image is created through the communication of the corporate
identity, each image is different for each firm as well. The image that the prospective clients get of the
firm by visiting the websites of the firms depends not only on what is communicated by the firms
about their identity but also on how and where the clients look on the websites. The prospective
clients mostly look at the projects and pictures on the websites of the firms. The projects on the
websites of the firms consists mostly of pictures as well. The pictures and projects on the websites
show the architecture and designs of the firms, which explains why the prospective clients mostly
have chosen words that describe the architecture and design projects in the first part of the
questionnaires. They have chosen less of the words about culture, service and interactions.
Consequently, firms that used less words about their architecture to describe their identity have less
words that correspond with those chosen by the prospective clients. For example, this could explain
why firm 5 has the least corresponding words, while having relatively small gaps between the identity
and image scores. The percentage of respondents choosing the same words is relatively high, which
implies that they have a relatively strong or clear image. However, because the words that the
respondents have chosen are mostly about architecture and the architects used more words of other
categories to describe their identity, they only have few corresponding words. They used more words
that are not communicated visually, but verbally or through interactions.
For architecture firms it might not be surprising that the clients mostly look at the architecture
projects, as this is their main business and prospective clients base their decision for an architect on
53
the architect’s expertise and credibility, which the portfolio establishes (Koren, 2005). Studies about
how people look at websites and website images (Nielsen, 2010) also found that people pay attention
to visual elements with content that is relevant to the task at hand. For prospective clients, if they are
looking for an architect or comparing architects, the portfolio is important and relevant. One of the
main functions of the architecture firms’ websites is also to show the portfolio. Their portfolios are the
most up to date and complete on the websites.
This raises the question whether prospective clients can also conclude from projects and pictures
how the firm’s service and culture or way of working is. This is important as architecture is a service
and architecture firms also need to promote their services to clients (Koren, 2005). The question of
how to communicate process-related characteristics was also pointed out in the feedback by one of
the firms.
5.3 Gap between identity and image
In this research we found gaps between how architecture firms view themselves, what they desire to
be and how others see them. Ideally, these three are in line, but it is not uncommon that there is a
gap. The gap between perceived identity and image shows the differences in the current views
internally and externally. The gap between desired identity and image shows how far the firms are
from their desired identity compared to the prospective clients’ views. The gap between perceived
identity and image is in all cases smaller than the gap between desired identity and image. Based on
the theory that image is created through the communication of identity (Gray & Balmer, 1998), the
communication of identity needs to be improved in order to close the gaps. How identity elements like
philosophy and culture or services and way of working can be communicated effectively on websites
is another topic for further research. It should also be kept in mind that the communication of
corporate identity is one of multiple factors influencing corporate image. As mentioned in the
Theoretical Framework, other factors outside communication also influence the corporate image.
Thus, besides the other factors, the gaps measured in this study are very specific to the firm because
it is dependent on the characteristics the firm has chosen, whether these characteristics are easily
communicated via the website and how strongly the firm has communicated the characteristics. In a
broader sense, architects can be compared to other businesses which offer creative services and
have a visual design as product, for instance interior designers. Although the characteristics will differ
between architects and interior designers, as much so as one architect is different from another,
interior designers may also encounter the same gaps when communicating the services and way of
working.
5.4 Method
This method has been tested at the firms with a focus on websites to reveal any gaps between
corporate identity and image. From the first interview the interviewees were made aware of their
identity and how they communicate it. During the interview, the thoughts of the interviewees on the
identity of the firm were spoken out, which made it easy to see different views and ideas of different
interviewees. This method can therefore help to make the different views internally explicit and
stimulate discussion. The method can thus be used by management to determine a clear and
focused desired identity at the start of the firm or periodically to examine the current situation.
The research was positively received by the architecture firms. The results of the questionnaires
made them aware of the gaps between identity and image and stimulated thoughts and discussions
about how to close this gap. This research motivates the architects to look for advice externally to
work on their communication and identity. It also forms a basis for further research with their existing
clients and on more communication channels. Internally, it may be used as a monitoring tool to see
whether changes in the communication have had effect, for example.
For the architecture field in the Netherlands, this research is valuable because architects in the
Netherlands do not frequently manage their marketing and communication, which also reflects in the
54
research field of architecture. In the Netherlands, there are almost no literature or researches to be
found on this subject. Architects are little aware of the influence of their communication on their image
and have little knowledge of their image. This method is therefore a practical tool for them to make
them aware, to think about and discuss their identity, to shed light on their image and to evaluate their
communication. BNA could include this tool in their marketing and communication toolkit to provide
support and guidance to Dutch architects.
This research is relevant to the field of Science Communication as it deepens the knowledge on how
identity, image and especially the gap between identity and image can be measured. So far, only few
studies are known to have measured both identity and image and to examine the gap (Davies &
Chun, 2002). Other studies have focused on measuring either identity or image and only focusing on
one stakeholder group, instead of comparing different stakeholders’ views. Furthermore, even though
Bernstein’s Spiderweb method is mentioned as a method that is able to measure both identity and
image, no literature was found where this had been done.
This researches focuses on the method to measure the gap between identity and image, but does not
examine what the best way is to communicate a firm’s identity. This has also been mentioned in the
feedback of the architects. They would like to know how they can shape their communication to bring
across their desired identity to their stakeholders better, thus some of them have indicated that they
will consult a professional about the results of this research. This leaves room for the Science
Communication professional to give advice or do further research.
The architects can use this method as it is, starting with the interviews. It is however recommended to
make the Spiderweb during the same meeting. This immediately allows insight in the gaps between
perceived and desired identity among the employees and management, stimulating more discussion.
At the moment they only discuss the characteristics of the firm and how important they find them.
When the Spiderweb is made visible, they can also discuss the scores and the gaps.
The second part of the method can be conducted on their real clients or the potential clients with
whom they are not working yet. They can adjust the questionnaire to the communication channels
they would like to examine and use the words they have chosen to describe their identity. They could
also change the list of words that is shown to the respondents, but it should be kept in mind that
these have to be broad enough to fill all the categories and should capture the possible answers of
the (potential) clients.
5.5 Limitations
In this study, the words that described the characteristics were very important. However, words can
be interpreted in various ways. The respondents did not know the exact meaning and context of the
words in the list of the questionnaires, which could cause a different understanding of the same
words than the interviewees had intended. To explain the meanings of all the words would be
exhaustive, so the words in the list were grouped in different categories.
People could also have different connotations for certain words. The research does not differentiate if
the words are positive or negative and the results do not reveal if the respondents see these as
positive or negative words for the firms either. That the respondents choose a word often or give a
high score to a word does not tell whether they think this word is good or bad. A high image score
shows a clear or distinctive image, but does not show whether the firm’s image is good or bad.
The numbers in this study might give the impression of hard data, while the results should be
interpreted qualitatively rather than quantitatively. The number of interviewees ranged from one to
five and there were only 21 respondents who completed the questionnaires, which are small sample
sizes. The percentages of respondents choosing the same words only indicate relative differences
between firms and between chosen words. The scores given by the architects and respondents also
merely indicate the relative differences between characteristics and between firms. A high desired
identity score versus a low score shows the importance of a characteristic to the firm. A high image
score shows that the respondents find the characteristic suitable to the firm, but it might have a big
gap with one of the identity scores because of the different ways of scoring. Therefore, the results of
this study should not be evaluated quantitatively but qualitatively.
55
Earlier, it was mentioned that a few identity elements like services and culture may be better
communicated through other channels than websites. A gap between identity and image could have
two reasons: that the word was not clearly communicated on the website or that the word is difficult to
communicate in this way. Services and culture may be better communicated through texts than
image, through other forms of secondary communications than websites or through interactions and
behaviour. Firms with a big gap do not necessarily have poor communication, but they can have
more characteristics about services and culture.
There is always the question whether the respondents that were sampled are representative for the
private and public clients. Students might not have the same view and financial capability as real
clients do. Ideally, this research is done with real clients, but because earlier contact would influence
their perception of the firm, they would base their opinion on more factors than were investigated in
this study. Finding clients with no previous association with all of the firms would be very difficult.
Whether the interviewees are representative of the whole architecture firm can also be debated. The
interviewees were often the directors and leading architects of the firm. The interviews only show how
they view their firm, but this might differ from what the rest of the employees think. The perceived
identity that was found might be different when doing a research over the whole firm including all
employees.
5.6 Practical implications
Figure 11. Operational model for managing corporate reputation and image (Gray & Balmer, 1998)
This method can be used by individual architecture firms to reveal gaps between their identity and
image at a given moment. The results of such a study is the feedback as shown in the model of Gray
and Balmer (1998) (Fig. 11). By knowing their corporate image and to what extent this is in line with
their corporate identity, the firm will know whether action is needed to correct any gaps. This might be
a change in their corporate communication or even in their corporate identity. An added advantage is
that the study also helps the leaders of the firms to be aware of their identity and how this is
communicated and received.
When applying this method, the steps of this study can be followed to measure the perceived identity
of a firm by interviewing employees and to reveal the desired identity with the partners of the firm.
The method can be used to make different views of employees explicit, which is useful in a strategy
meeting.
To get a more complete picture of the corporate image of a firm, it is recommended and also
requested by the architecture firms to do the study based on more communication channels. Doing
the research with existing clients and other stakeholders at an individual firm gives valuable
information to the firm in question. The study can then show where alterations are needed in the
corporate communication and allow discussion about the firm’s identity. Such studies can be
conducted internally or by external consultants on a regular basis, as it is also recommended by Gray
and Balmer to have continuous feedback. If the research is done regularly, it can be investigated
whether management and employees have changed in their thoughts about the identity of the firm
and whether image has improved as desired. The method can also be used before and after a
56
change in either the identity or in the communication, to measure any impact or effectiveness of the
change on the image.
5.7 Further research
This research tested the method to measure the gap between identity and image on a limited number
of seven cases. The method was introduced and applied to architecture firms for the first time in this
research. Like any other method, it has to be repeated many more times to validate the method.
Specific choices have been made in the approach, for example to focus on websites to enable
comparison. The same study can also be done with a focus on social media or other communication
channels and on existing clients and other stakeholders. It is recommended to do the research with
more respondents to reduce measurement variability.
This method allows insight in the gap between identity and image, but does not reveal how the gap
can be closed. More research is needed to identify what the most effective way is to communicate
each element of corporate identity to minimize the gap. For example, how can process-related
characteristics be expressed through text and images on websites? Architecture firms are service
orientated and need to distinguish themselves from competitors. What is the best way to
communicate their identity in order to create a distinctive image? Which communication channel is
most important to architects and their stakeholders to show their identity?
More research is also needed to determine the significance of the corporate identity and image on the
decision of public and private clients to hire an architect. How much influence does corporate identity
have on the corporate image? How do clients look at websites to select an architect? How much do
exogenous factors like reputation of the country of origin, of the industry or of alliances and
partnerships contribute to the corporate image? How heavy does the corporate image of a firm weigh
in the decision for an architect? These are all questions which are interesting for further research.
57
58
6 Conclusion
The aim of this research was to learn how corporate identity and corporate image can be measured
at architecture firms to gain insight in the gap between their identity and image. The objectives of the
study were to investigate a method to measure identity, image and the gap between identity and
image at architecture firms by applying it to Dutch architecture firms. The architecture firms use three
of the four components of corporate identity to describe their perceived and desired identity:
corporate strategy, philosophy and culture. Their corporate structure is less important to describe in
their identity. In architectural terms they describe the services they offer, how they interact with
clients, different qualities of their design projects and their creative vision.
The image that the prospective clients get of the firm by visiting the websites of the firms depends not
only on what is communicated by the firms about their identity but also on how and where the clients
look on the websites. The prospective clients mostly look at the projects and pictures on the websites
of the firms.
Because the firms’ architecture and design is communicated through the projects and pictures, this
part of the corporate identity gets the most attention and the image is to a great extent based on what
is communicated visually.
In this research, Bernstein’s Spiderweb method was proposed to measure the corporate identity and
image to gain insight in the gap between identity and image at architecture firms. The method allows
insight in the gap and is useful for architects to know which aspects of their identity and
communication needs improvement. It raises awareness of the influence of communication on
external stakeholders. The method can be used as a monitoring tool on a regular basis to see
whether the gap has closed. It also stimulates discussion about the identity as perceived by
employees or managers and about the desired direction of the firm and is thus also useful to use
internally for strategic marketing. The results form a basis for further research to improve the
communication of architecture firms to their stakeholders.
59
60
7 References
Albert, S., & Whetten, D. (1985). Organizational identity. In B. M. Staw (Ed.), Research in
Organizational Behavior (pp. 263-295). Greenwich, CT: Jai Press.
Balmer, J. M. T. (2012). Strategic corporate brand alignment. European Journal of Marketing, 46(7/8),
1064-1092.
Balmer, J. M. T., & Gray, E. R. (2000). Corporate identity and corporate communications: creating a
competitive advantage. Industrial and Commercial Training, 32(7), 256-262.
Birkigt, K., & Stadler, M. (1988). Corporate identity-Grundlagen. In K. Birkigt & M. Stadler (Eds.),
Corporate Identity. Landsberg am Lech: Verlag Moderne Industrie.
BNA. (2015). Conjuntuurpeiling BNA, Najaar 2015. Retrieved May 7, 2016 from
http://www.bna.nl/marktkansen/branchecijfers/bna-conjunctuurcijfers/
BNA. (2016). Herstel architectenbranche kent grote regionale verschillen. Retrieved May 7, 2016
from http://www.bna.nl/herstel-architectenbranche-kent-grote-regionale-verschillen/
Brinkerhof, J. D. F. (1990). Corporate image als concurrentiewapen. Holland Harvard Review, 22, 4554.
Brønn, P. S. (2005). When it Comes to Corporate Image It's Identity That Counts. Retrieved May 7,
2016 from http://www.magma.no/when-it-comes-to-corporate-image-its-identity-that-counts
Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods: Oxford University Press.
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek. (2016). CBS StatLine - Bedrijven; bedrijfstak - architectenbureaus
Retrieved May 7, 2016 from
http://statline.cbs.nl/Statweb/publication/?DM=SLNL&PA=81589ned&D1=a&D2=1085&D3=0,
4,8,12,16,20,24,28,32,l&HDR=T,G2&STB=G1&VW=T
Christensen, L. T., & Askegaard, S. (2001). Corporate identity and corporate image revisited - A
semiotic perspective. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 292-315.
Chun, R. (2005). Corporate reputation: Meaning and measurement. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 7(2), 91-109.
Cornelissen, J. P., & Elving, W. J. L. (2003). Managing corporate identity: an integrative framework of
dimensions and determinants. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 8(2),
114-120.
Davies, G., & Chun, R. (2002). Gap between the Internal and External Perceptions of the Corporate
Brand. Corporate Reputation Review, 5(2/3), 144-156.
Davies, G., & Miles, L. (1998). Reputation management: theory versus practice. Corporate
Reputation Review, 2(1), 16-27.
Dowling, G. R. (1986). Managing Your Corporate Images. Industrial Marketing Management, 15(2),
109-115.
Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M., & Harquail, V. V. (1994). Organizational images and member
identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39(2), 34.
Gray, E. R., & Balmer, J. M. T. (1998). Managing Corporate Image and Corporate Reputation. Long
Range Planning, 31(5), 695-702.
Haupt, E., & Kubitza, M. (2002). Marketing and communication for architects: fundamentals,
strategies and practice. Berlin: Birkhäuser.
Koren, D. (2005). Architect's essentials of marketing. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Linton, H., Clary, L., & Rost, S. (2005). Marketing for Architects and Designers. New York: W. W.
Norton & Company.
Markwick, N., & Fill, C. (1997). Towards a framework for managing corporate identity. European
Journal of Marketing, 31(5/6), 396-409.
Melewar, T. C., & Karaosmanoglu, E. (2006). Seven dimensions of corporate identity: A
categorisation from the practitioners' perspectives. European Journal of Marketing, 40(7/8),
846-869.
Nielsen, J. (2010). Photos as Web Content. Retrieved May 7, 2016 from
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/photos-as-web-content/
Poiesz, T. B. C. (1989). The image concept: Its place in consumer psychology. Journal of Economic
Psychology, 10(4), 457-472.
61
Ritchie, J., & Lewis, J. (Eds.). (2003). Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science
Students and Researchers. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Roberti, Y., & Heintz, J. L. (2010). Promoting Architectural firms in the Netherlands. Gestão &
Tecnologia de Projetos, 5(3).
Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, R. H. (2003). Techniques to Identify Themes. Field Methods, 15(1), 85-109.
Smyth, H., & Kioussi, S. (2011). Architecture Firms and the Role of Brand Management. Architectural
Engineering and Design Management, 7(3), 205-217.
Teunissen, L., Van Doorn, A., & Heintz, J. L. (2011). Architect in de praktijk. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij
SUN.
Van Riel, C. B. M. (1992). Identiteit en imago: een inleiding in de corporate communication.
Schoonhoven: Academic Service.
Van Riel, C. B. M., & Balmer, J. M. T. (1997). Corporate identity: the concept, its measurement and
management. European Journal of Marketing, 31(5/6), 340-355.
Van Riel, C. B. M., & Fombrun, C. J. (2007). Essentials of Corporate Communication: Implementing
Practices for Effective Reputation Management: Taylor & Francis.
Von Nordenflycht, A. (2010). What is a Professional Service Firm? Towards a Theory and Taxonomy
of Knowledge Intensive Firms. Academy of Management Review, 35(1), 155-174.
Winch, G., & Schneider, E. (1993). The strategic management of architectural practice. Construction
Management and Economics, 11(6), 467-473.
62
Appendices
Appendix A - Transcription interview – Firm 1
4 augustus 2015
Geïnterviewde: Architect, directeur
José: Ik heb een bachelor in Bouwkunde gedaan, toen ben ik doorgegaan met de master
Bouwkunde, maar heb ik niet afgemaakt. Dat heb ik 1 jaar gedaan en toen dacht ik, architect worden
is het toch niet voor mij, en toen ben ik Wetenschapscommunicatie gaan doen. Dat is ook aan de TU
Delft. Voor mijn afstudeeronderzoek combineer ik deze studie met mijn achtergrond in Bouwkunde.
Mijn onderzoek gaat over de identiteit van je bureau en over het verschil tussen de identiteit die jij wilt
uitstralten en het imago dat je hebt voor de buitenwereld. Daar zit vaak een gat tussen en er zijn heel
veel dingen die het imago kunnen beïnvloeden, maar ik kijk dan puur naar de communicatie, dus
bijvoorbeeld je website of social media gebruik.
Architect: Dus je impliceert dat de architect die je spreekt iets doet aan de publiciteit. Kijk een
website staat uiteraard, iedereen heeft een website. Maar dan nog, dan ben je niet echt aan het
communiceren, vind ik. Maar ga door.
José: Ja, en daarnaast ben ik bezig ook nog bezig voor de BNA. Ik weet niet of je daar lid van bent?
Architect: Nee
José: Maakt niet uit, en voor de BNA ben ik dan bezig met marketingkaarten. Zij hebben zeg maar
dienstenkaarten gemaakt, dat gaat over wat voor soort architecten je allemaal hebt. Nu zijn we bezig
met waardekaarten, wat is de waarde van een architect en hoe kan je nou praten met de
opdrachtgever dat hij snapt wat jou waarde is. En dan als vervolg daarop komen marketingkaarten en
daar werk ik aan. Maar ja, mijn onderzoek gaat dus over de identiteit van het bureau en voor het
eerste deel ga ik langs architectenbureaus en vraag ik daar naar de identiteit van het bureau, wat is
je identiteit, wat zijn de kenmerken van je bureau. En in het tweede deel ga ik dan studenten vragen
om te kijken naar de communicatiemiddelen van die architectenbureaus en aan de hand daarvan,
kijken of daar dezelfde kenmerken uit te halen valt.
Architect: Ja, ik begrijp het. Dus nu ga je vragen wat de identiteit van mijn bureau is.
José: Ja, zou je het bureau in het kort kunnen omschrijven?
Architect: Ja, we zijn een klein bureau, we zijn niet bepaald commercieel. Wij richten ons op
maatwerk, dus onze klanten zijn individueel, een soort behandeling die niemand anders krijgt. Dus
wat wij voor die mensen maken is iets unieks. Dat is één ding wat we veel doen, we werken dus veel
voor particulieren. Het andere is dat we ook grotere dingen willen maken en dan moet je eigenlijk niet
meer bij particulieren zijn. Particulieren beperken zich eigenlijk altijd tot één huis of twee huizen voor
mijn part of een verbouwing, dus als je iets groters wilt, moet je een andere soort klanten vinden. Dus
wij zijn op een bepaalde manier terecht gekomen in een iets andere hoek, namelijk onder andere
sportclubs. Dus wij maken gebouwen van bepaalde afmetingen, compleet ander soort gebouwen
eigenlijk, andere budget ook, niet eens zo'n hoge budget moet ik zeggen. Maar via die
sportgebouwen kom je weer bij openbare gebouwen, kom je ook te maken met ambtenaren,
bijvoorbeeld zo'n stadsdeel waar het gebouw moet komen, dus hebben we contact met de gemeente
over die dingen, want zo'n bouwcontract staan in sportparken.. heel veel vergaderd. Op die manier
zijn we ook terecht gekomen in die cultuur. Van het een komt het ander, we zijn nu bezig met een
gebouw voor stadsdeel Oost Amsterdam, geen sportgebouw, het is een gebouw voor Jeugdland, dat
is een soort speelterrein met allemaal gebouwtjes erop zodat je binnen en buiten kan spelen. Je
begint als architect vaak bij particulieren, want dat is het meest voor de hand liggende opdrachtgever,
we proberen langzamerhand te groeien. Daar zijn we eigenlijk al een tijdje mee bezig. Ik zei niet
commercieel heel duidelijk, want als je commercieel denkt, dan moet je eigenlijk doorrijden. Want dan
moet je het veel groter aanpakken, veel professioneler aanpakken. Dat is dus, als ik naar onze
ontwerpen kijk, die zijn ook allemaal ambitieus eigenlijk. We maken nooit iets normaals zeg maar, we
doen niet iets is omdat een klant het graag wil. De klant moet ons eigenlijk vinden vanwege wat wij
maken, dat is ons plan eigenlijk, dat zij speciaal op ons afkomen om die specifieke stijl, die
63
ontwerpbenadering, stijl is een beetje een verkeerd woord, want eigenlijk alles wat wij maken is
anders. Wel grappig om dat te vertellen, maar heel veel mensen die zeggen, ze lijken allemaal niet
op elkaar, maar er zit wel een lijn in. Ze zijn compleet verschillend qua materiaal, qua vorm, maar er
zit wel een soort lijn in, qua gevoel.
José: En hoe is het bureau begonnen?
Architect: Ik heb eerst bij een groot bureau gewerkt, bij verschillende grote bureaus. Ik ben
begonnen bij Ben van Berkel, UNStudio, wat een heel mooi, groot bureau is, dus daar ben je
natuurlijk heel trots op, dat je daar mocht werken. Vervolgens ben ik gaan werken voor Marlies
Rohmer, ook een hele succesvolle grote architecte, veel in de woningbouw werkt zij. Dus ik heb daar
veel geleerd op dat gebied, woningbouw. Op een gegeven moment kreeg ik een opdracht voor
mezelf voor een huis, en toen was mijn plan eigenlijk al om op een gegeven moment voor mezelf te
beginnen. Dat kon ik toen gaan doen. Toen heb ik er een compagnon bij gevraagd, ook van hetzelfde
bureau van Marlies Rohmer, we zijn iets van 10 jaar lang [naam bureau] geweest, of 8 jaar lang, ik
heb niet geteld. Op een gegeven moment hadden we veel succes, hadden we ook een groot
appartementengebouw hier binnengehaald en dat is eigenlijk waar we op af stevenden en ook
woningbouw, grootschaliger. En toen is die opdracht, terwijl die bijna al helemaal door ons getekend
was, is ie gestopt vanwege de angst van de ontwikkelaar dat hij de huizen niet kon verkopen. Dus
toen mijn compagnon zo teleurgesteld dat hij ermee is opgehouden. Hij is ander werk gaan doen, hij
is gaan werken bij een constructiebureau. Hij is eerst bij een ander architectenbureau gaan werken,
2, maar uiteindelijk is het toch doorgegaan dat grote gebouw. Dat heb ik toen alleen met mijn nieuwe
medewerkers afgemaakt. Maar dat is een beetje het begin, dus begonnen bij andere bureaus en toen
voor mezelf begonnen, compagnon erbij en af en toe en medewerker en af en toe een stagiair, dus
we zijn eigenlijk nooit groot geweest, zeg maar, altijd 2, 3 a 4 mensen soms en een enkele keer 5.
José: Ja, en wat zijn nou een aantal kernwaarden voor het bureau?
Architect: Ik wil mezelf ook graag verrassen met wat we maken, dus dat ik er plezier in heb. Ik heb
een paar van die wijsheden verzameld in de loop van de jaren. Als het leuk is om aan een ontwerp te
werken, dan is het resultaat ook leuk. Sterker nog, als het niet leuk is om aan een ontwerp te werken,
dan wordt het resultaat ook duf en het proces is slopend, eigenlijk alles gaat downhill. Daarom
proberen we altijd iets bijzonders te maken en het komt wel eens voor dat het uiteindelijk een beetje
tegenvalt het resultaat. Is wel eens voorgekomen. Het heeft ook vaak met uitvoering te maken, met
budget vaak te maken, dat je dingen gewoon eigenlijk moet terugdraaien die juist een plan mooi
maken, interessant maken. Maar we zijn dus heel ambitieus om iets bijzonders te maken, want als ik
dit voor geld deed, dan moest ik iets heel anders gaan doen eigenlijk. Misschien dat ik dat in de
toekomst ook maar ga doen.
José: Ja? Zijn er bepaalde herkenbare dingen aan jullie bureau? Of wat maakt jullie uniek?
Architect: Het grappige is dat je op een gegeven moment als je heel lang voor jezelf werkt, je bijna
niet eens meer weet hoe andere bureaus werken, want als je dus 15 jaar niet bij een ander bureau
gewerkt hebt, dan is dat misschien wel helemaal veranderd. Ik hoor af en toe wel van medewerkers
hoe het daar is. Ik hoor ze ook uit natuurlijk. Uniek aan ons kantoor. We zijn niet heel erg strikt
georganiseerd, dus ik probeer, mensen mogen hier met mooie ideeën komen en ik probeer juist het
meeste uit ze te halen. Ik hoef niet per se alles zelf te bedenken, ik heb liever dat iemand anders iets
goeds bedenkt, waar ik.. Uiteindelijk ben ik wel de baas, dus ik stuur bij. Als ik iets niet mooi vind, dan
moet het helaas helemaal over, maar ik hoop juist dat de goede ideeën die ik ook mooi vind, dat we
samen iets moois, iets goeds maken. Maar je vroeg waar we uniek in zijn he?
Ja, de manier van werken. Hierarchisch is het in de zin van dat ik de baas ben, maar ik vind het heel
leuk als andere mensen goede ideeën hebben. Ik weet niet of dat uniek is, misschien dat andere
architecte ook zo werken. Ik hoop het eigenlijk. Maar als je naar de resultaten kijkt van hoe de huizen
eruitzien, het zijn dus heel veel huizen en een paar ander soort gebouwen, dus we maken ze maar
niet echt doorsnee. De doorsnee huizen, die hebben zeg maar het veilige, en daarmee zijn die
architecten heel slim, want die kunnen dat huis dan vrij makkelijk tekenen, want ze hebben dat
eigenlijk wel vaker gedaan precies zo. Ze hebben een bureaula vol en ze weten ook wat het kost
zo'n huis, dus die hoeven niet zo te ploeteren om binnen budget te blijven. Dus wij maken het ons
niet makkelijk zeg maar. Want als je drie van die huizen op een rij ziet, dan is die van ons wel echt
altijd bijzonderder, bijna altijd. Dr zijn nog veel betere architecten dan wij natuurlijk, maar wij proberen
om ook goed te zijn.
64
José: Heeft het bureau een missie/visie?
Architect: Nou, ik geloof dat ik dat niet eens op die manier verwoord heb in onze teksten. Niet zo
een visie, moet het even nalezen, maar we maken ontwerpen die we zelf verrassend vinden. En dr
zijn natuurlijk altijd, dat verschilt per tijdsgericht, uiteraard is het steeds belangrijker om ecologisch te
bouwen, ik kan moeilijk zeggen dat we daar heel erg goed in zijn, maar we proberen natuurlijk ons
wel daarin te verdiepen, maar het is zeg maar niet de hoofdrichting. Maar in elk ontwerp zit wel
ideeën in die richting, dus als je mij naar een visie vraagt, ik wil wel verrassede gebouwen maken,
maar ook die blijven. Ik wil niet alleen maar modieuze dingen maken, maar ook dingen waarvan
mensen over 20 jaar zeggen, fantastisch, dat was een schitterend ontwerp. Ook iets, in het Engels is
het elaborate, dat woord, in het Nederlands is het doorwerkt. Eigenlijk willen we dingen maken die
doorwerkt zijn, dus niet te vlak. Er moet een beetje diepgang in zitten. Platte, simpele gebouwen, in
principe niet. Dus we doen eigenlijk veel te veel moeite voor gebouwen. Ten eerste zijn we niet
commercieel, het is eigenlijk helemaal niet commercieel om je ontwerpen 3 keer om te draaien en
opnieuw te beginnen. Maar uiteindelijk, het resultaat, is dan wat mij betreft het belangrijkste. Dus we
werken heel hard en het resultaat, daar gaat het om. Maar goed, ik vraag me ook af hoe we daarmee
verder komen, want ik droom wel eens van commercieler en professioneler worden, dus meer
geordende processen. Uren tellen doen we ook niet. Bij grote bureaus moet je dat doen, want als je
dat niet doet dan raak je de draad kwijt denk ik, maar dat is bij ons nog nooit gebeurd.
José: Even kijken, we hebben nu vooral dingen, veel over het ontwerp en de soort opdrachtgevers.
Zijn er nog kenmerken die we missen?
Architect: Ik ben heel lokaal, speelt allemaal in Amsterdam-Oost af, heel lokaal. Ja, ik overweeg dus
om het roer om te gooien hoor, om bijvoorbeeld een fusie met andere bureaus zoals ik aan te gaan,
een fusiepartner te zoeken en samen groter te zijn en ook je professioneler op te stellen. Maar zolang
wij op eigen kracht zulke gebouwen rond krijgen, dus ik hoop echt dat dit gebouwd gaat worden, want
heel veel dingen, die komen uiteindelijk niet van de grond, die komen niet verder dan het
schetsontwerp, want daar moet dan uiteindelijk budget voor komen en waar ik dan een beetje boos
op ben, als dit uiteindelijk tot een opdracht komt, dan moeten wij concurreren met 3 andere bureaus
en dan moet je voldoen aan bepaalde eisen die de gemeente stelt aan de omvang van je bureau. Je
moet een bepaalde omzet hebben, je moet een aantal architecten in dienst hebben. Dat wordt dan
moeilijk, dus alleen daar al moet ik voor samenwerken. Dus eigenlijk, daarom zei ik ook ja, toen jij je
aanmeldde, ik dacht, vind ik interessant om over te praten. Wij moeten iets gaan doen, of tenminste,
ik moet iets gaan doen, want anders zit ik hier over 10 jaar nog met 1, 2 medewerkers. Het is leuk,
maar we werken ook veel te hard eigenlijk. Dus ik wil eigenlijk een professionaliseringsstap maken,
als ik daartoe in staat ben. Je moet je voorstellen, als je 15 jaar dit doet, dan gaat je hele manier van
denken, wordt dan anders. Dus, ik denk vaak heel anders dan architecten die grote bureaus hebben.
Zij zijn veel professioneler, veel zakelijker. Ik ben na 15 jaar gewend om het zo te doen. Maar ik heb
altijd gedacht, het belangrijkste aan dit beroep is ontwerpen, is uiteindelijk wat je maakt. Dus alles
eromheen, management, acquisitie, al die, bouwtechniek, is eigenlijk ondergeschikt aan wat wij
maken.
José: Ja klopt, maar om dat te kunnen blijven doen, om te kunnen blijven ontwerpen, heb je al die
andere dingen wel weer nodig.
Architect: Precies, eigenlijk heb je een goeie projectleider nodig met 1 of 2 tekenaars aan wie je de
projecten geeft, dat die het gaan uitwerken, weet je wel. Dan kan je je als architect bezig houden met
acquisitie en schetsontwerpen. Want het kost zoveel tijd om iets uit te werken, dat je eigenlijk al geen
tijd meer hebt om nieuwe dingen te bedenken. Daarom is het belangrijk, vind ik, om te groeien.
José: En ook om nieuwe projecten binnen te halen, zou je zeg maar al tijdens het vorige project al..
Architect: Ja het is moeilijk om alles te doen. Dat vind ik lastig, ik heb hier altijd mensen die weinig
werkervaring hebben, dus moet ik veel uitleggen. Dus als ik elke keer moet uitleggen hoe het precies
in Nederland gebouwd wordt, bouwtechniek, dat is vermoeiend eigenlijk. Dan wordt je ongeduldig en
zeg je, ga je maar inlezen. Maar het moeilijkste wat er is eigenlijk is dus goeie ideeën hebben,
creatief zijn en ook mensen daarvan overtuigen. Dat is iets wat we eigenlijk de hele tijd blijven doen.
José: Nog meer dingen? Nog meer kenmerken? Hoe wil je overkomen bij opdrachtgevers?
Architect: Het liefst, en dat is een beetje gegroeid zo, je moet opdrachtgevers het gevoel geven dat
ze niet alles aan je kunnen vragen, want anders ben je veel te veel tijd aan ze kwijt. Dus je moet een
soort afstand houden, dat lukt ook niet altijd hoor.
65
José: Dus eigenlijk wil je wel persoonlijk zijn?
Architect: Ja, dat is een beetje het gevaar met e-mail enzo, ook voordat je het weet, ben je op een
dag al je klanten aan het e-mailen. Dan krijg je ook veel te veel vragen terug. Dus stel ze vragen je
iets, als je dan snel antwoordt, komt er weer een vraag. Dus ik probeer me een beetje te beheersen.
Dan laat ik m'n email 1 of 2 dagen liggen. Maar ik zie ook wel eens dat opdrachtgevers je niet
helemaal claimen. Ze pakken zoveel ze kunnen pakken, het is vaak voor hun de eerste keer zoiets
doen, een huis bouwen. Maar ze weten ook niet wat normaal is, dus als architect moet je je eigen
grenzen stellen. Daar word ik wel steeds beter in. Op een gegeven moment heb je 4 van die huizen
tegelijk lopen en je kan het fysiek gewoon niet doen. Wat misschien leuk is om te vertellen, is dat je
als architect misschien 90% van de tijd bezig bent met praten en met e-mailen, met bellen,
vergaderen, op de fiets naar projecten gaan, iets bekijken en 10% is echt dat je aan het schetsen
bent, of dat je over architectuur aan het praten bent, over een maquette aan het praten bent. Relatief
gezien gaat heel veel tijd niet in het ontwerpen zitten, maar in alles wat eromheen hoort. Ik heb zo'n
droom eigenlijk dat je het zo regelt, dat je misschien wel de helft van je tijd aan het ontwerpen, aan
het schetsen bent. Als je je tijd goed wilt besteden, moet je eigenlijk meer schetsen en minder
communiceren. Als je 90% van je tijd bezig bent met klanten te praten. Het is ook heel vaak gezeur,
dat is ook zo. Wat ik trouwens ook heb geleerd is jezelf indikken tegen gezeur. Iets wat architecten
meemaken.
José: Zouden we hier de 8 belangrijkste kenmerken uit kunnen halen?
Architect: Even kijken wat nou echt belangrijk is, dat we lokaal zijn, is echt typisch voor ons. Een
kenmerk nu, maar in de toekomst niet natuurlijk. Je wilt natuurlijk beetje, ik hoef niet naar het
buitenland hoor, maar zo lokaal als dit, Amsterdam-Oost, dat is wel heel erg overdreven. Nog een
tegelwijsheid: Liever een jaar tijd 1 of 2 dingen maken die echt goed zijn, dan 10 dingen waarvan 3
goed. Dan doe je allemaal dingen die heel veel energie kosten niet mooi zijn. Je verdient er op zich
ook niet heel veel geld mee, want als je meer projecten hebt, heb je ook meer mensen nodig. Dan
ben je het geld ook weer kwijt aan de mensen. Dus ik probeer me echt te concentreren op de dingen
die mooi en goed zijn. Dus ik benijd die grote bureaus helemaal niet, want als je een groot bureau
bent, te groot, dan ben je ook bezig met 20 medewerkers te voeden. Dus mijn ideale grootte is denk
ik 6 man, of misschien 8. Daar streef ik eigenlijk al 10 jaar naar, dus dit kantoor, daar past ook
makkelijk 8 in.
Oke, dus.
José: De 8 belangrijkste.
Architect: Persoonlijke ontwerpbenadering, persoonlijke benadering, hebben we dat al staan?
José: Ja persoonlijk hebben we wel staan.
Architect: Ja, je zoekt de mensen echt thuis op. Ik laat de mensen ook mijn eigen huis zien, zelf
ontworpen. Dat helpt ook wel vaak.
Lokaal, ja dat zijn wij. Ambitieus zijn wij ook, altijd geweest. Ook leuk om te vertellen is dat we altijd
op zoek naar grote en mooie opdrachten. Als ik in de krant lees dat iemand van plan is om een
zwembad te bouwen, dan benader ik die man en zeg ik: toevallig heb ik heel veel nagedacht aan een
grote zwembad, zullen we een keer afspreken? Dan kom ik met ze aan tafel en voordat je het weet,
heb je weliswaar niet een betaalde opdracht, maar wel een schetsontwerp. Die ga ik dan maken en
dan, je kan eigenlijk bijna geen ontwerp maken zonder opdrachtgever. De opdrachtgever die weet
alles, die weet bijvoorbeeld wat hij nodig heeft in dat zwembad. Voordat je het weet staat je ontwerp
in de lokale krant, gaat de wethouder er over praten. Komt ook wel iets goeds uit af en toe.
Dus, de proactieve benadering, je kan wel aan een prijsvraag meedoen met 100 andere architecten,
maar ik doe het liever zo dat je de enige bent en dan hopen dat het doorgaat. Of je bent heel vaak
met z'n 3-en. Als er een particulier naar mij toe komt met plannen om een huis te bouwen, zeg ik
altijd, ga met andere architecten praten, want ik wil het liefst dat als jullie met mij in zee gaan, dat je
daar goed over nagedacht hebt. Want anders krijg je gedurende het proces, komen ze erachter dat je
de verkeerde bent of andersom. En het loopt wel eens mis, maar wat ik dan erbij zeg, laten we dan
een schetsontwerp maken wel voor geld, en dan moet je mij en die andere architecten dezelfde
opdracht geven en dat verdien je altijd terug. Dan kan je kiezen uit 3 ontwerpen, of 2, in plaats van
dat je af gaat op verhaal eigenlijk alleen maar, want verhaal is vaak maar een verkooppraatje. En als
je een ontwerp ziet, daar kan alles in zitten. Dan ga ik met die mensen praten, 2 keer op z'n minst,
dan gaan we schetsen, maquettes, 3D noem maar op. En dat winnen we eigenlijk bijna altijd. En dan
dat geld dat ik daarvoor krijg, dat reken ik dan in het honorarium, dus dan betalen ze niet meer. Maar
66
als wij het niet krijgen, dan krijg ik wel dat bedrag. Het is een hele goeie truc, het zorgt ervoor dat
heel veel mensen die gehaast, die denken dat ze het zonder ontwerp kunnen doen, dan gaan ze met
andere architecten praten en dan worden ze uiteindelijk met een heel mooi verhaal erin geluisd.
Bijvoorbeeld dat ze heel goedkoop kunnen bouwen. Maar ik heb dus geleerd dat als je mensen
voorspiegelt dat je kan bouwen voor zoveel euro en het is niet realistisch, dan vaak krijg je het dan
terug, want dan is de aanbesteding is een disaster, moet je ales weer terug draaien. We vissen op
die manier naar heel veel opdrachten. Oja en nog iets, heel veel klanten komen op ons af na
aanbeveling, dus voor ons is mond op mond reclame heel belangrijk.
José: Ja, want mijn volgende vraag ging over de communicatie, want, check je wel waar de meeste
klanten komen, of ze op je website kijken?
Architect: Ja, het blijkt dat ze allemaal heel goed de website bekijken. Ze kijken allemaal heel goed
of ze het mooi vinden en vergelijken het met websites van andere architecten zoals wij. Ze lezen
zelfs de visie. Daar staat niet alleen de visie maar ook de manier van werken in. Moet je maar even
lezen.
José: Maar hoe actief update je dan de website?
Architect: Ja heel weinig, want ik heb het zelf zo druk, maar nu omdat het zomervakantie is, ga ik
misschien deze week al nog 5 of 10 projecten erop knallen die we gedaan hebben en er nooit op
gezet hebben. Dus we hebben veel te veel projecten en we zetten er te weinig op. Slaat echt nergens
op. En wat wij ook nooit doen, wij sturen nooit iets op naar tijdschriften. Een enkele keer worden we
benaderd, maar als ik dat zou doen, zou zoveel slimmer zijn, want publicatie, dat levert iets op. We
hebben een paar publicaties gehad en die leverden altijd fantastische dingen op. Eigenlijk dankzij
publicaties kregen wij opdrachten, maar het ergste is dat wij het te druk hadden en te lui voor zijn. Als
je goeie foto's wilt maken, moet je vaak het hele huis ervoor uitruimen, moet je nieuwe meubels erin
zetten. De klanten moeten het je gunnen. Publiciteit is zo belangrijk, maar doen we te weinig aan.
José: Want gebruik je ook social media? Facebook, Twitter?
Architect: Nog niet, gaan we wel doen.
José: Of een persoonlijk account?
Architect: Nee, doen we niks mee.
José: En linkedIn?
Architect: Ja, maar als architect heb je daar volgens mij niks aan, tenzij je allemaal projecten erop
zet natuurlijk.
José: Houden jullie wel contact met de opdrachtgevers die julli hebben gehad?
Architect: Als we bevriend zijn wel, die kom je altijd tegen. Maar een enkele keer hebben we ook
een happening en dan nodigen we die mensen allemaal uit. Maar meestal met particulieren als je
eenmaal een huis gebouwd hebt bouw je er niet nog eentje. Althans niet binnen 5 tot 10 jaar.
José: Ja, maar we zouden je wel kunnen doorsturen als zij weer mensen kennen.
Architect: Ja, doen ze ook he, heel veel mensen komen via mensen die in onze huizen wonen. Die
huizen die bevallen heel erg, gelukkig. Dus mensen blijven er heel vaak wonen, dus dat werkt wel.
José: Dus jullie hebben ook geen nieuwsbrieven ofzo?
Architect: Nog niet, nee. Ik zou eigenlijk een stagair moeten hier die zich heel erg bezig houdt met
selecteren van foto's, typen van nieuwsbrieven, bijhouden van de website.
José: Hebben jullie een portfolio online?
Architect: Ja veel projecten staan online, maar heel veel ook niet.
José: En verder, staan jullie in de pers?
Architect: Heel weinig, behalve de lokale kranten af en toe een beetje, maar op dit moment niets.
José: En een jaarboek?
Architect: Van onszelf niet. We proberen nu alles op de website te krijgen.
67
José: En persberichten als er een gebouw wordt opgeleverd? Brochures?
Architect: Nee, ik schrijf wel een column in een architectuurkrant. Elke maand, ik beoordeel een
gebouw, krijg ik ook reactie op, niet zo heel veel hoor, maar het wordt wel gelezen, dat merk ik, dat
mensen me aanspreken erop op staat. Ze lezen wel m'n naam onder het stuk en ik schrijf met in de
achterhoofd dat mensen, dat kunnen ook wel klanten zijn. Dus ik probeer niet al te ongenuanceerd
over te komen. Ik denk vaak dat het wel leuker is als ik dat doe, maar ik ben heel genuanceerd in de
stukjes en ik vind voor mezelf dat ook wel werken om zo te schrijven.
José: En ga je veel naar events?
Architect: Te weinig, veel te weinig. Beurzen, ja ik heb een keer op een beurs gestaan, maar dat is
zo slecht eigenlijk voor je zelfbeeld als je op een beurs staat, doe ik nooit meer. Zit je daar in een
stand, komen allemaal mensen voorbij shoppen, nee. Doe ik nooit meer. Maar ik ga ook heel weinig
naar lezingen eigenlijk terwijl Arcam hier vlakbij is. Daar worden hele leuke lezingen gehouden, maar
het lullige is, dan zit je daar, dan moet je naar een of andere lezing kijken van een jongere,
succesvolle architect. Dat speelt wel mee.
José: Ja en verder, bezoek je wel eens opdrachtgevers?
Architect: Nooit, ik word gebeld en mensen willen mij inhuren en dan maken we een afspraak.
José: Hoeveel personen er aan de communicatie?
Architect: Nou, geen, 0.
José: en hoeveel tijd ben je ermee bezig?
Architect: Nou, dat is het grootste deel van je werk, maar het is geen acquisitie nog. Het is geen
communicatie. Zeg maar nihil.
José: En door welk kanaal vinden opdrachtgevers jullie het meest?
Architect: Mond op mond, ja ook hier nu op straat, als mensen een nieuw huis nodig hebben, kijken
ze rond waar nieuwe huizen staan, kijken ze op het bordje, zo komen ze ons.
José: Dus voor welk kanaal het belangrijkst? Mond op mond reclame he?
Architect: Ja eigenlijk wel.
José: Oke, kunnen we dit nog afmaken, de 8 belangrijkste karakteristieken?
Architect: Ambitieus, die is een beetje hetzelfde als verrassende ontwerpen. Ja, plezier in wat we
doen. Groeien willen we heel graag. Ik weet niet of dat mag, is dat een kenmerk? Particuliere
opdrachtgeverschap, dat is groot percentage van wat we doen ook al willen we wel meer openbare.
Hier zit al heel veel in. Ambitieus is heel breed eigenlijk. Persoonlijke benadering, loyaal. Dat leidt ook
weer op mond op mond reclame. In de bouw duren dingen ook vaak langer dan verwacht, maar dan
word je als niet loyaal gezien. Je moet eerlijk zijn, toegeven als je fouten maakt.
Wij willen altijd iets bijzonders maken, verrassende ontwerpen. Doen wij altijd. Er zijn bureaus die dat
niet doen, maar wij hebben dat wel heel erg, we willen altijd iets geks maken.
Proberen te groeien, dat willen we al 10 jaar, ik wil heel graag tot 6 personen komen.
José: Ik heb hier iets wat je kan invullen. Hier vul je de karakteristieken in en dan kan je een cijfer
geven van 1 tot 10, voor in hoeverre zijn we dit nu, en in hoeverre wil ik dit zijn. En wat ik daar dan uit
ga maken is dan een spinnenweb. Normaal gesproken doe ik dat met meerdere personen en neem ik
het gemiddelde. En dan ga ik zo'n spinnenweb vergelijken met de spinnenwebben die door de
studenten worden gemaakt in het tweede gedeelte van mijn onderzoek.
Architect: Ik zit even te kijken naar het commercieel. Ik ben niet commercieel, maar ik wel
commercieel worden, moet ik die niet misschien toch een plaats geven ergens?
José: Ja of heeft dat ook met de soort opdrachtgevers te maken? Dat je bij particuliere
opdrachtgevers bij desired een lager cijfer dan actual?
Architect: Ja, maar het suggereert dat particulier altijd niet commercieel is, maar ik wil eigenlijk wel
commercieler, professioneler. Maar dat is niet iets wat we nu zijn, professioneel.
José: Naja, ik kan professioneel opschrijven, dan geef je voor actual een laag cijfer.
Architect: Ja, oke.
68
José: Dan heb ik nog een paar vragen over de communicatie. Dus je hebt wel een visie en een
bureauomschrijving en die staat dan op de website. Staat ie nog verder ergens anders?
Architect: Nee
José: En is het belangrijker voor je om duiderlijker te communiceren wat je doet, je ontwerpen, of
wie je bent als bureau?
Architect: Nou eigenlijk doe je dat met je ontwerpen, dacht ik. Het plaatje zegt wat je maakt en wie je
bent. Vaak lees je de teksten niet op de website, tenzij je op zoek bent naar informatie om het
gebouw te begrijpen, maar ik hoef niet te lezen, wij zijn zo en zo, goed in dit en dit. Dus wie je bent
blijkt uit je ontwerp en enkele steekwoorden erbij.
José: En zijn er nog kenmerkende dingen aan je communicatie of website? qua taalgebruik of toon?
Architect: Nou, ik probeer inderdaad wel niet al te ambtelijk te schrijven, dus ik lees vaak en schrijf
ook vaak stukken. Ik ben ook schrijver, dus op het moment dat ik teksten neerzet, ben ik wel bewust
hoe het klinkt, maar iedere tekstschrijver is dat. Maar ook niet slijmerig, niet te ambtelijk, meer zoals
ik ben, heel persoonlijk. En we proberen ook niet al te veel doorsnee te zijn, we zijn ook gewoon
geen doorsnee bureau.
José: En de naam van jullie bureau, daar hebben we het over gehad. Logo?
Architect: Ja, hebben we. Die staat op al onze tekeningen, heb ik laten ontwerpen door een
ontwerper. Het was eerst [naam bureau], maar goed, dat is dus een beetje veranderd.
José: Ja, en heb je daarbij ook nagedacht hoe dat overkomt?
Architect: Nou, wij vonden het wel leuk om hem zo te laten ontwerpen als een constructie. Hij is
letterlijk geconstrueerd. ....
Ik ben gewend aan het logo, volgens mij is het wel heel herkenbaar.
José: Ja en verder hebben jullie een huisstijl, dat rood, gebruiken jullie dat nog steeds?
Architect: Nou, rood eigenlijk steeds minder. We doen eigenlijk weinig met huisstijl, dus wel op alle
boekjes dit logo en dat rode logo doen we eigenlijk niet meer.
José: We hebben het al gehad over de ontwerpen, maar dr is niet een specifieke stijl van ontwerpen
he? Er zit wel een lijn in, maar..
Architect: Ja, we maken wat we interessant vinden en dat evolueert met de jaren.
José: Heb je dan wel een bepaalde stijl van tekenen? Schetsen?
Architect: Nou de handschets, je hebt natuurlijk een bepaalde soort handschetsen, maar daar doen
we eigenlijk niet zoveel meer mee, die zijn meer om het ontwerp te maken. Soms als die geslaagd is,
dan bewaren we 'm. Soms zet ik 'm ook op de website. Voor de rest de 3D tekeningen in het kantoor
worden door allemaal verschillende mensen gemaakt. Ik maak ze zelf niet, tenminste die stijl die
wisselt ook een beetje met de tekenaar, maar ik zit er natuurlijk wel bij of achter de computer om dat
te sturen, dus ik heb bepaalde manier van presenteren. Ik zorg ervoor dat ze er een beetje zomers
uitzien de plaatjes. We maken de natuur zoals die er is, dat probeer ik altijd in het onwerp te krijgen.
Veel maquettes, wel beetje ouderwets, maar dat vind ik wel leuk. Zelf heb ik veel maquettes
gemaakt, ik geloof echt in maquettes.
José: Ja, dus is er nog een bepaalde link tussen de visuele communicatie, qua stijl of
herkenbaarheid. Dat zomerse dus?
Architect: Ja, die plaatjes komen op de website terecht, dus als je de website opent, zie je heel veel
van die plaatjes. Dat geeft een soort gevoel, de basiskleur is zwart, maar er zit veel natuur in. Die
website is wat ik zelf mooi vind gewoon en dat is wat mensen mogen zien. Niet een bewuste stijl om
mensen te pleasen, maar dit is gewoon wat wij mooi vinden. Ik ben ervan overtuigd dat het werkt zo,
dat als je dus een andere smaak hebt als architect, dan trek je ook andere klanten. Die mensen
komen gewoon niet bij ons. Dus door te laten zien wat je zelf mooi vindt, komen mensen bij jou die
jou ook zoeken.
69
José: Ja en zijn er nog andere kenmerkende of typische dingen aan jullie visuele communicatie?
Qua foto's bijvoorbeeld?
Architect: Nou, we proberen niet van die projectontwikkelaarplaatjes te maken, want een
projectontwikkelaar, die heeft een andere smaak, die laten vaak hun renderings maken bij een
bureau extern. Dat wordt altijd heel erg lelijk, dat is gewoon smakeloos. Als architect heb je paar
producten, een is tekening en de ander is maquette, dus als je dat niet goed doet dan doe je iets fout.
Ik heb nog nooit een presentatie uitbesteed, daar moet je zelf achter zitten.
José: Nou dat waren mijn vragen. Dus voor het tweede gedeelte ga ik de studenten vragen en die
gaan dan kijken naar de website en het logo etc. dus mag ik dan gewoon gebruik maken van de
teksten op de website?
Architect: Ja, tuurlijk.
José: Oke, en verder gebruik je geen andere.. geen boekjes, geen..
Architect: Nee, heel af en toe liet ik wel iets drukken, ik heb er wel eens een paar uitgedeeld, maar..
ik heb op een beurs gestaan en toen had ik deze kaarten.
José: Oja, daar staat de visie op.
Architect: Ja. En de beurs was specifiek gericht op de particuliere opdrachtgevers, dus de teksten
zijn ook geschreven voor de particuliere opdrachtgevers.
Dit is ook leuk, hier wordt gevraagd om je idee op papier te zetten en vaak heb je een echtpaar en zij
en hij, of hij en hij, die hebben vaak onbewust dat ze 1 idee hebben, maar ze hebben vaak andere
ideeën en dat komt er niet altijd uit. Dus als je hun vraagt het apart op te schrijven, komen er vaak
toch andere dingen uit. Dus dan leg je dat naast elkaar, en dan blijkt dat de één andere ideeën heeft
dan de ander en daar kan je juist iets mee doen.
70
Appendix B - Thematic coding of interviews
71
72
Appendix C - Questionnaire
73
74
Appendix D - Research report – Firm 1
75
76
77
78
Appendix E - Feedback
Feedback questions
1. Wat halen jullie uit de resultaten? (Wat concluderen ze? Wat hebben ze geleerd?)
2. Wat kunnen jullie hiermee? (Wat voor actie gaan ze ondernemen? Bespreken ze de resultaten?
Gaan ze iets aanpassen op de website, aan hun identiteit? Of erover nadenken?)
3. Wat voor waarde hecht je eraan? (Wat vinden ze ervan? Vinden ze het nuttig/ van belang voor
hun bureau? Zouden ze het onderzoek nog eens willen doen met hun echte opdrachtgevers?
Onder andere communicatiekanalen?)
4. Wat mis je nog? (Wat hadden ze graag nog willen zien?)
Feedback answers
Firm 3
Een aantal conclusies komen ons bekend voor, zoals de conclusie dat we allereerst worden
beoordeeld op basis van gerealiseerde projecten en vooral het beeldmateriaal ervan. Hier zijn we als
bureau van nature ook erg op gefocust. Het gevaar is daarbij dat we onvoldoende aandacht geven
aan aspecten van ons bureau die we wel belangrijk vinden maar niet in beelden zijn te vatten. Het
gaat dan precies om de procesmatige aspecten zoals flexibiliteit, samenwerken en initiëren. Het
vraagt dus absoluut aandacht hoe we deze (gewenste) kwaliteiten beter zichtbaar kunnen maken op
ons website.
Wat betreft de projecten is het gevaar juist weer dat we niet selectief genoeg durven te zijn als het
gaat om de keuze van projecten en het materiaal dat je hiervoor gebruikt. We herkennen dat het ons
moeite kost om intern streng te zijn bij de selectie van projecten en materiaal.
Waar we minder aan kunnen doen is dat we in bepaalde segmenten van de bouw beter
vertegenwoordigd zijn dan in andere.Je zou daar dus de conclusie aan kunnen verbinden dat we in
een minder breed werkterrein actief zijn dan we werkelijk zijn of wensen te zijn. Daar moeten we ook
nog eens kritisch naar kijken.
Heel grappig zag ik in het enquête resultaat zowel de term klassiek als modern terugkomen. In de
verklaring zag ik dat modern vooral werd bedoeld in de zin van procesmatigheid, maar er is binnen
het kantoor ook altijd wel een discussie gaande over de architectonische bandbreedte van ons vak
en hoe ons bureau zich daarbinnen beweegt. We ontwerpen zowel meer klassiek georiënteerde
projecten als moderne en (in onze ogen) vernieuwende projecten. Versterkt of verzwakt deze
bandbreedte ons imago? Aan de ene kant willen we tonen dat we ons vak in de breedte uitoefenen
en dat we flexibel zijn; aan de andere kant weten we dat klanten vaak behoefte hebben aan
duidelijkheid, zodat ze van te voren kunnen inschatten wat ze van ons mogen verwachten. Grappig
genoeg staat dit weer in contrast met de opmerking die uit je rapport naar voren komt dat onze
projecten allemaal een beetje op elkaar lijken qua ontwerp (en doel).
Dit is een aspect dat ons bezig houdt en waar we niet goed vorm aan weten te geven.
1. Wat haal je uit de resultaten?
We hebben er zeker wat aan. Sommige conclusies zijn voor ons niet verrassend, maar andere
stemmen ons toch weer tot nadenken over hoe we ons als bureau kunnen presenteren, op een wijze
die past bij onze identiteit en kwaliteiten. In het algemeen vinden we ons kennelijk beter dan de
geënquêteerden uit onze website kunnen afleiden.
2. Wat kan je ermee?
We gaan met een deskundige, een professional in de architectuur en architectenbranche, een
dialoog aan om de resultaten van je onderzoek te spiegelen aan zijn indrukken en ervaringen uit de
branche. Daar moet een vervolgactie uit voortkomen.
3. Wat voor waarde hecht je eraan?
Wij hechten in het algemeen grote waarde aan dit soort onderzoeken. Wij hebben in het verleden ook
wel eens (door een student) een imago onderzoek onder een aantal van onze klanten laten
uitvoeren. Het voordeel is dat klanten ons kennen en niet alleen afgaan op de website, maar dit is
tegelijkertijd weer een nadeel.
4. Wat mis je nog?
Wij hebben met dit onderzoek voldoende handvaten.
79

Identity and image at architecture firms

Transcription

Similar documents

Eindexamen Engels havo 2006-II

Exposé

Examenopgaven VBO-MAVO-D

activiteiten van la protectora avilés

Examen VMBO

Examen VMBO-BB - De Digitale School

Examenopgaven VMBO

Examen VMBO

SkinVision - Holland Focus

Bidvoice issue 4_Dutch.indd

Acronis True Image 2014