Essays To Read

Catching The Third Wave
The Design Process – Architectural Thinking

Kyle V. Davy AIA
Originally published in Architecture: Celebrating the Past, Designing the Future,

Edited by Nancy B. Solomon, AIA. American Institute of Architects, Washington DC, 2008
In his breakthrough book, The Innovator’s Dilemma, MIT professor Clayton Christensen
observes that technologies move through a performance life cycle that can be represented by an
S-curve. Early in a technology’s development, performance gains are slow, but as the it is better
understood and diffused, the rate of improvement accelerates. As the technology matures,
progress once again slows, eventually reaching a natural limit where little additional
performance improvement is possible. (See Figure 8.1) When technologies reach that point of
maturity, they are ripe for overthrow by new, disruptive technologies.
After a fifty year run, the architectural design process, when viewed as a technology, has reached
maturity. Signs of disruptive change are increasingly evident across the field of architectural
practice. Architects are using new digital tools to imagine new building possibilities, and to
collaborate with project stakeholders in new ways. For the first time since R. Buckminster Fuller
was practicing, large numbers of architects are actively involved in the design and development
of new materials. Architectural firms are staging participatory design experiences where project
stakeholders co-create the design. And architects are engaging in acts of creative leadership on

August 31, 2006
Page 1
behalf of clients and communities as those groups struggle with increasingly complex social and
environmental challenges.
The architectural design process is poised at the brink of a new wave of evolution in the way
architects design and think. This wave is being driven by four disruptive trendsi:
• new digital design tools and technologies
• new materials and methods
• the experience economy
• creative leadership and the challenge of adaptive work
As it accelerates, the wave will transform where and how design takes place, who is involved,
redefine the architect’s role in the process, and shape a new theory of architectural design. This
new design process promises to quickly outperform the current model of practice, creating
significant new forms of value for clients, communities, and society.
Four Major Disruptive Trends
New Digital Design Tools And Technologies: Exponential growth in computational

performance, digital memory and storage, digital communication, and the Internet explosion
continue to disrupt and change society. These information technologies are also yielding a
growing array of next-generation digital design tools and technologies. Digital modeling,
simulating, and experimenting tools offer architects new opportunities to engage in what
technologist Michael Schrage calls “serious play” as part of the design process.ii Serious play
occurs when individuals, teams, and organizations use digital technologies to spark creative
thinking, foster new creative conversations and interactions, and energize team performance.
Schrage has noted that, “the most important raw material of innovation has always been the
interplay between individuals and the expression of their ideas.” Change the media and you
change the way people think, interact, and design.

August 31, 2006
Page 2
In the past, architects relied on sketches and the occasional hand crafted model as the primary
media for expressing and communicating design ideas. Now, equipped with a wide array of
digital design and modeling technologies, from 3-D design to building information modeling
(BIM), to energy-use simulators, to quantity take-off and cost databases, architects are
transitioning to new mixed-media design environments. The combination of traditional sketch
techniques with these new digital modeling tools offers a potent new creative engine for
architects and project teams.
The work of architect Frank Gehry is a powerful illustration of this combination. To turn his
design vision into reality for projects ranging from the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao to the
Disney Concert Hall in Los Angeles, Gehry married sophisticated digital modeling software and
rapid prototyping tools to his idiosyncratic drawing style. The synergy of these techniques allows
an iterative design and modeling process that supports both his personal creative search as well
as his ongoing creative dialogue with members of his design team. Using digital models, he has
extended the boundaries of who is involved in the design process to include a wide range project
stakeholders including builders, subcontractors, and fabricators.iii
Engineers supporting the architectural design process are also applying new digital modeling
tools. The global engineering firm ARUP has deployed a variety of software packages to help its
staff develop solutions for the increasingly complex designs being generated by architects it
works with. ARUP staff took software originally developed by the automobile industry for crash
test simulations and reprogrammed it to help engineer solutions for complex seismic and
vibration problems that could not otherwise be addressed by traditional structural engineering
processes. For a project in seismically active Japan, ARUP engineers used this software to
simulate their way to a base isolation structural scheme that ultimately made the architect’s glass
curtain-wall design possible.
More broadly, architects are on the verge of replacing the 2-D CAD software with new 3-D
building information modeling software (BIM). For the most part, 2-D CAD never made a
serious contribution to the architectural design process, because it was primarily used to convert

August 31, 2006
Page 3
from hand drafting construction documents to producing them using the computer. Using BIM
software, architects can design and document at the same time, opening up new possibilities for
reconfiguring the overall design process, which since the 1950s has been constrained by the five
phases specified in the AIA’s master agreement between architects and owners. This process
assumes that the bulk of design is completed during the first two phases, schematic design and
design development, leaving the work of detailing and specifying the design to the construction
document phase. Formally, no design was supposed to take place during the last two phases of
bidding and construction. BIM technologies can be used to move from phases toward a
continuous process, combining design and construction documentation efforts. Architects will
spend less time on details and specifications that can be handled by other parties (suppliers and
fabricators), and more time on creating value through design.
Digital tools also are being used to create new integrated processes that provide end-to-end
support for owners during the life of a project, from site acquisition, through programming,
design, construction, and occupancy. The Beck Group, a Dallas-based architecture, construction,
and real estate consulting company has developed proprietary software that allows it to offer
exactly this type of integrated project delivery process. At the front end of a project’s life, Beck’s
process combines 3-D modeling with quantity take-off and cost estimating software to facilitate
in-depth site feasibility analysis. After a site is selected and design begins, the software supports
direct collaboration between architects, construction managers, and subcontractors. This type of
team collaboration early in the design process has radically changed the type and timing of
information that needs to be generated by the firm’s architects, allowing them to design more and
draw significantly less.
New Materials and Methods: The construction industry is witnessing an explosion of new,
technologically-enhanced building materials, equipment, and manufacturing processes that are
transforming both the “what” and “how” of building. New composite materials offer significant
advances in structural strength while radically reducing weight. Embedded processors are buried
in materials and equipment to better monitor and control the performance of building structures
and environments. New green building materials and energy conserving equipment help clients

August 31, 2006
Page 4
achieve sustainability goals. And new computer-aided design and manufacturing techniques
allow the mass-customization and pre-fabrication of building products.
Rather than wait for manufacturers or others to develop these new products, architects are
extending their design domain to include research, design, and development of building materials
and methods. They are embracing this new design role, acting both independently and in
collaboration with other industry stakeholders--for specific projects, and also as part of
independent product development efforts. Architects are reclaiming territory previously
abandoned to manufacturers and contractors.
William McDonough is at the leading edge of architects pushing a “green” design agenda
through active engagement in the development of new materials and methods, that move beyond
resource efficiency to eco-effectiveness. Along with Michael Braungart (a environmental
chemist), McDonough co-founded the MBDC Group to design and develop eco-intelligent
building products. In collaboration with manufacturers such as DesignTex, Rohner Textil AG,
and Ciba-Geigy Ltd., MBDC has helped create a series of new fabrics, carpets, and building
products that reduce the environmental burden created by their production, use, and disposal.
They have developed carpets and fabrics that use only a fraction of the chemicals normally
required in a manufacturing process. Moreover, when these products wear out they can be
removed and composted, becoming mulch to nourish the soil rather than languishing in landfills
for centuries waiting for their chemical composites to break down.iv
Boston-based Kennedy & Violich Architecture (KVA) established a separate research business
called MATx (short for materials) to develop products such as a “luminous curtain,” and a desk
that eliminates messy cabling and wiring by embedding ultra-thin polymer films that carry
electricity and data into a plywood surface. The Office for Metropolitan Architecture has
developed a series of products that help create unique shopping experience for customers at retail
clients like Prada.

August 31, 2006
Page 5
RDG Planning & Design, a Midwestern architecture and design firm, is capitalizing on this new
attention to materials by folding artists and artisans directly into their organization. By merging
the Dahlquist Art Studio into their operations, they now offer a range of artworks and public art
through the firm. Taking the process a step further, the firm is setting up new collaborations
between its architects and artisans to “push the limits of design by integrating new materials and
techniques into every level of project development…from concept to fabrication and
installation.” RDG’s efforts recall a time when architects and artisans were natural collaborators,
for example in the hallmark terra cotta tiles and bronze screens designed by Louis Sullivan for
Chicago skyscrapers of the 1890s.
Architects are also engaged in the design and development of new ways of constructing
architecture. In the past twenty years, manufacturers such as Dell Computers have learned to
deliver a mass-customized product to their customers, combining the cost, delivery, and quality
advantages of factory assembly with attributes tailored to specific customer preferences.
Manufacturers serving the construction industry are collaborating with architects to move in the
same direction, developing building components, systems, and entire structures around mass
customization concepts. Architects such as Kieran Timberlake in Philadelphia are working with
manufacturers to develop prefabricated assemblies that can be used in a variety of project types.
By taking advantage of factory-fabricated components, Kiernan and Timberlake designs offer
clients cost, schedule, and quality gains not possible when these elements are stick-built on site.v
On the West Coast, architect Michelle Kaufman is working with Britco, a manufacturer of
“factory-built buildings” in British Columbia, Canada, to fabricate and erect a set of new home
designs using the manufacturer’s prefabrication capabilities. This work has included her
“Glidehouse” and “Breezehouse” modular housing lines that have now generated over 125
orders for homes. Within the constraints of these building systems, customers can tailor modules
to their particular site, and customize materials, roof styles, floor plans, and finishes that turn this
assembly line product into premium housing, featuring a distinctive modern aesthetic and
sustainable design features.

August 31, 2006
Page 6
The Experience Economy: In The Experience Economy, Joseph Pine and James Gilmore argue
that our economy is shifting toward a new class of economic offerings – memorable
“experiences.” According to Pine and Gilmore, experiences stand atop a hierarchy of economic
value, which moves upward from commodities to goods, from goods to services, and from
services to experiences. The willingness of consumers to pay top dollar for coffee concoctions
served at Starbucks is an illustration of the power of experiences to change the economic value
of products and services. Many service companies, including retail, restaurant, hotel, resort,
hospitality operations are using buildings and interiors designed by architects to create similar
high-value experiences.vi
Architects are also realizing that the design process itself offers an opportunity to create
memorable experiences. The industrial design firm IDEO has pioneered the application of this
concept, staging a variety of experiences for clients as part of its product design and development
process. These experiences range from office tours that bring clients backstage to witness
IDEO’s unique approach to design, to inclusion in the firm’s internal Monday morning show-
and-tell sessions, to active participation in brainstorming sessions. Some clients even move staff
into IDEO offices for extended periods of time to work in tandem with IDEO designers and to
experience the IDEO culture. Electronics giants Matsushita and Samsung sent teams to live and
work in IDEO's offices to absorb a new creative mindset that could be used to enhance their own
corporate product development processes and organizational cultures.vii
Participatory programming processes and design charettes for clients and project stakeholders
are being reconceived to not only generate a work product (program or design), but to leave
participants changed in some way--more knowledgeable about themselves or some issue central
to the project. William McDonough offers a wide range of learning experiences that help clients
not only implement eco-effective projects, but also extend this green philosophy to other aspects
of their businesses and operations. These include facilitated visioning sessions that help industry
leaders think outside-the-box about eco-effective design opportunities, collaborative design
processes to design new products and materials, educational workshops, and collaborative design
processes. McDonough set up a “peace room” (versus war room) in the basement of Ford’s

August 31, 2006
Page 7
Rouge River manufacturing plant to support the reinvention of that enormous old factory site. It
provided a place where representatives from all parts of the company could to interact with the
design team, help Ford set goals and strategies for the project, and change the mindsets of people
throughout the company about sustainability and the need for eco-effective design and
manufacturing practices.viii
Creative Leadership and the Challenge of Adaptive Work: Susan Harris, my co-author for
Value Redesigned: New Models for Professional Practice, has noted that rising social and
technological complexity is driving a need for new leadership capacities that can help clients,
communities, and society cope with the escalating adaptive challenges. Architects are responding
to this by moving beyond the limitations and mental models of traditional “design” work, toward
a new stance that recognizes the need for creative leadership, mobilizing clients and stakeholders
to tackle the tough problems they face, and guiding them through the difficult changes that are
necessary to successfully adapt to changing conditions.
In the mid-1990s Ronald Heifetz, who teaches leadership at the JFK School of Government at
Harvard, offered key insights into this shift in leadership stance. He redefined the work of
professionals, directly linking their efforts, and the value they create, to the type of leadership
challenges his or her clients face. Heifetz makes a distinction between two different types of
situations clients face. The first type of situation, “technical work,” involves problems that are
easily diagnosed and fixed by professionals with little involvement by the client. The second
type of situation, “adaptive work,” arises when circumstances are significantly more complex,
precluding both easy diagnosis and straightforward problem solving. Adaptive work requires the
professional to assume a leadership role, guiding the client to confront, understand, and respond
to an adaptive challenge, in the best way possible.ix
In the last 20 years or so, a significant portion of what used to be considered technical work for
architects has migrated into the adaptive work category, driven by growing complexity and
interdependence in the client’s social and technological environments. An airport terminal
expansion provides a good example. Project definition, planning, and design efforts demand

August 31, 2006
Page 8
significant involvement and consultation with countless project stakeholders ranging from the
airport authority to airlines, unions, vendors, the flying public, the FAA and homeland security
representatives, and the broader community (to name a few). Beyond creative design, the
situation demands creative leadership: leadership to inspire, mobilize, and guide this social
constellation through a long, involved project delivery process.
Ratcliff Architects, based in the San Francisco Bay Area, has responded to this need for creative
leadership by developing and learning to lead new collaborative design processes. In these
collaborative processes, the architect’s creative role shifts from doing the design, to facilitating
the design process. For a four-building science center for a major university, Ratcliff, along with
associate architects Moore Ruble Yudell, led a collaborative design effort consisting of five
major workshops to address site investigation, massing and site use, departmental organization,
spatial layouts, and image. Each workshop process lasted from two to three days, was preceded
by significant preparation, and involved a core team plus groups of users ranging from thirty to
almost one hundred people.
Although the client had originally established relatively conventional goals for the project, the
collaborative design process yielded a new, more compelling vision for the science facility,
calling for the creation of a research center that would attract and retain world-class scientists
and investigators. Facilitation included:
• designing the overall process as well as individual workshops
• identifying and engaging project stakeholders
• guiding teams through design workshop activities, including site assessment, using
simple modeling materials to imagine and express preferences in building massing,
departmental layout, and the functioning of key spaces, as well as exploration of images
appropriate to the facility and site
• surfacing differences and resolving conflicts
• helping the group reach closure around key design ideas and decisions
• synthesizing and crystallizing design concepts and ideas in finished designs and drawings

August 31, 2006
Page 9
The result of this creative leadership was a set of buildings that fulfilled the group’s vision,
enabling cutting edge, interdisciplinary scientific research in laboratories that are adaptable and
flexible (in ways that allow scientists to stretch their research dollars as far as possible), safe,
productive, and enjoyable work in.
Beyond a need for this type of collaborative leadership, a client may face an even more daunting
situation where there really isn’t a solution. In these situations diagnosis may not be possible; at
best the client can hope to learn more about the problem and better understand its different
facets. The client may also learn that they can’t fix the problem either. Rather, their only viable
option may be to adapt and change in deeply held values, beliefs, and behaviors. In these cases,
the role of the professional becomes one of transformative leadership helping the client engage
in, and move through, this difficult change process.
The City of San Jose and San Jose State University faced such an adaptive challenge when they
decided to build the first joint-use library in the United States, combining a new public library
for the city with a new academic library for the University. Both clients needed to build new
library structures at the same time and in roughly the same location. They realized that by
combining their resources into one project, sharing funding, and eliminating the duplication
inherent in constructing two buildings the resultant library could be bigger and better equipped
than either party could afford separately. However, mixing public and academic library cultures
was like mixing oil and water. To develop the “seamless-service library” the mayor and
university president had in mind would require a new culture, values, and operating practices. To
facilitate the planning and design of this joint operation the client turned to Anderson Brule
Architects (ABA).
ABA designed and facilitated a process that included dozens of meetings involving hundreds of
staff members from both organizations over a twelve-week period. At the end of the process,
ABA had helped the library staff not only define a new “seamless” operations plan, but also
transform themselves into a single high performance team, unified around a shared vision,
culture and values. Although ABA would go on to be part of the architectural team that designed

August 31, 2006
Page 10
the library structure, their greatest achievement flowed from the transformative leadership they
provided that helped their client design and create a new organization. Commenting on ABA’s
performance, one library leader commented, “ABA’s process made the potential of a combined
facility believable for staff members from both sides…It’s facilitation allowed staff to think
outside the box and enabled participants to reflect more on real possibilities…and to understand
staff concerns on each side…The process improved communication and created stronger
relationships that have only begun to serve us well.” The process generated buy-in from staff at
both libraries, and supported a rapid evolution of the new organization that paid significant
operational dividends once the new building was occupied.
In some cases, the architect’s creative leadership may not lead to either a design or a building.
Rather, the architect may help the client identify other opportunities for change and
organizational development that solve the presenting problem without the need to build. The Las
Vegas firm of Lucchesi Galati worked with a public utility services division, which had come to
them with a commission for a new warehouse facility. Before proceeding into the traditional
architectural design process they had been commissioned for, Lucchesi Galati convinced their
client to open up their time and organizational boundaries in order to facilitate a 20-year analysis
of not only the division, but also the city’s entire public works department. This effort showed
that operational improvements, staffing changes, and other efficiencies would allow the agency
to satisfy its needs without building anything. The firm lost a design commission, but gained
credibility and the city’s trust through this act of leadership, ultimately becoming the agency’s
exclusive design consultant.
Convergence and Change

Architectural practice in the United States has moved through two previous waves of evolution
(See Figure 8.2.) The first wave gathered through the middle of the 19th Century and crested in
Chicago during the 1890s, where Burnham and Root, Adler and Sullivan, and other architects
transformed the city skyline as they invented and refined the skyscraper. From his studio in Oak
Park, a young Frank Lloyd Wright was laying the groundwork for his Prairie Style of

August 31, 2006
Page 11
architecture. And, in 1893, Chicago’s “White City” of the Columbian Exposition dazzled throngs
of Americans with new concepts of urban order, amenity, and aesthetics.
A second wave began to swell just prior to the start of World War Two, with the arrival of
European refugees such as Walter Gropius and Mies van der Rohe on America’s shores. They
brought with them a new approach toward design that, in post-war years, was married to a new
model of practice pioneered by practitioners such as Skidmore, Owings (SOM), and Merrill and
Caudill, Rowlett, and Scott (CRS). This shared model of practice, including a common approach
to the architectural design process, held sway for the next fifty years. Styles might vary, from
functional, to Brutalist, to Post-Modern, but that underlying model of practice and design process
remained relatively fixed.
Now, at the start of a new century, the architectural design process has reached another tipping
point. Driven by the convergence of these disruptive trends, a third wave is poised to radically
transform the way architects design and think.
Setting: Traditionally architects have designed behind closed doors, in relative isolation from
clients and other project stakeholders. During the first wave, the American Beaux-Arts, the
setting for design was the master’s atelier. Architects were artists who worked in the creative
isolation of their studios. Clients were patrons and beneficiaries of this public art and waited until
the design composition was complete and ready for display. With the rise of the Modern
Movement during the second evolutionary wave, the setting for design shifted into the corporate
studio or office, but the activity of design still took place out of sight. Although occasionally
involved in programming activities, clients continued to be recipients of finished designs, not
active participants in the design process.
As the third wave swells, design is moving to new collaboration spaces--both literal and virtual--
where architects, clients, and other project stakeholders can co-create designs. These
collaborative environments support a wide range of creative activities for the team, including
low-tech brainstorming and idea generation spaces, “caves and dens” for individual reflection

August 31, 2006
Page 12
and synthesis, and high-tech workstations that can be used to display and manipulate digital
models and simulations.
Participants: In the atelier, the architect-master was attended by a small number of acolytes.
Design was an elite endeavor, confined to those that had been prepared either through extensive
schooling at institutions like the L’Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris or through long apprenticeships
to American masters. The ateliers of Richard Morris Hunt and H. H. Richardson were widely
emulated by architects across the country. In the second wave, participation remained exclusive,
design principals continued to lead a small team of gifted subordinates in the development of the
design, from programming through concepts and schematic designs. As work progressed into
design development and construction documents, larger numbers of production-oriented
architects could be engaged in detailed design of building components and systems.
The third wave is opening up the design process to active participation by growing numbers of
project stakeholders, from clients to contractors to community representatives. Architects are
beginning to act as creative leaders, facilitating movement of team members through
collaborative design processes.
Roles: In the 19th Century, the role of the architect in design was structured around the “artist-
master” of Beaux-Arts instruction. By the 1950s, that role had evolved, becoming the
autonomous “design principal,” responsible for understanding the client’s program,
conceptualizing and elaborating the design scheme, and maintaining the integrity of the design
ideas through subsequent construction document and building phases.
In the third wave, architects are evolving from being the “designer” to being the “creative leader”
of a design team. As creative leaders, architects will facilitate growing numbers of team
members through a collaborative design process; the design will be co-created by the team, not
generated and controlled by a lone creative genius. He or she will “design the design process”
and facilitate the team’s work as it moves from defining goals and setting the vision through
concept generation and refinement of the design. The creative leader will also continue share

August 31, 2006
Page 13
personal insights and synthesize, express, frame, and develop key design concepts. However, he
or she will do so as an active team member, not the sole design authority.
Process: Adhering to Beaux-Arts principles of composition and method, the architectural design
process in the 19th Century was formal, artistic, academic, and hierarchical. The process moved
from development of the basic “parti” or concept, to sketches, to formally rendered plans,
sections, and elevations. Construction documents were minimal; much of the design intent was
communicated by the presence of master architect on-site during construction. By the height of
the Modern Movement, the design process had evolved into set of highly prescribed phases,
memorialized in master contracts used by professionals. The process was linear, segmented, and
expert. Formal phases were structured to take full advantage of an increasingly specialized
workforce, with design segmented from drafting (whether by hand or by computer),
construction, and administrative work. Design was to be substantially complete by the end of
design development phase, and it was formally assumed that almost no design happened during
construction.
The third wave is transforming architectural design into an iterative, participatory, and emergent
process. Increasing numbers of project stakeholders are joining architects in increasingly
collaborative design experiences. The process uses a mix of media, ranging from traditional
sketches and rough physical models, to advanced 3-D and 4-D digital models to engage
participants in serious play and to make critical design decisions. Phases of work are being
replaced by continuous processes, enabled by BIM and other digital software, that allow
architects to program, design, and complete building instructions and specifications
simultaneously. Design work will stretch from project initiation through construction, revolving
around new building information models.
A New Design Theory Inspired By Living Systems

Driven by powerful disruptive forces, the third wave is shaping a new theory of design for
architectural practice. Early indications suggest that this emergent design theory will be inspired
and informed by a deep understanding of nature, life, and living systems.

August 31, 2006
Page 14
During the Beaux-Arts wave, design theory was built upon a foundation of immutable artistic
principles drawn from classical art and the great architectural monuments of classical Greece,
Rome, and Baroque Europe. In the second wave, Modern Movement design theory was inspired
by industrialization and built around a new machine aesthetic. Design emphasized planning,
technical problem solving, and honest expression of materials. This new theory preempted, but
did not entirely replace the first wave’s commitment to composition and artistic expression; the
old design theory still existed in practice, residing in the shadow of a new dominant theory. With
the advent of Post-Modernism, the stylistic imperative of the Beaux-Arts theory resurfaced,
giving architects renewed license to practice the art of design.
“Living systems theory,” and parallel developments in chaos and complexity theory, evolved as
a reaction to the closed, Newtonian paradigm that has dominated much of scientific thinking.x
Living systems theory is having profound impacts on knowledge disciplines ranging from the
sciences (biology, ecology, and brain sciences) to sociology, business management, leadership,
the arts…and now, architecture and the architectural design process. We are beginning to
understand that:
• Buildings are nested within larger living systems and design needs to serve those larger
societal and environmental systems at the same time it satisfies the immediate needs of a
particular client.
• Designers can draw inspiration from, and work in harmony with, nature, natural systems,
and nature’s economics.
• Living systems stay alive by partnering with and learning from their environments.
Design needs to fully engage and learn from the organization and environmental
ecosystems surrounding their clients and communities.
• Living systems are most creative when on the edge of chaos, the sweet spot between
order and disorder. Design can leverage the power of self-organization and emergence by
moving to this edge and involving the client and other project stakeholders in new
collaborative creative processes.

August 31, 2006
Page 15
This new design theory will, once again, not entirely replace the old. Architectural design will
continue to be informed by artistic and functional imperatives from the past. However, living
systems theory will move to the forefront and directly link architectural design to stewardship of
the larger societal and environmental ecosystems within which buildings exist. Empowered by
this new design theory, architects can play a pivotal role how we deal with increasingly serious
adaptive challenges, exercising creative leadership on behalf of clients, communities, and
society.
I would appreciate your feedback about this essay. Please send your thoughts or comments to:
Kyle V. Davy Consulting

www.kylevdavy.com
kyle@kylevdavy.com

August 31, 2006
Page 16
Figure 8.1
Technology S-Curve
Performance Trajectory
of Technology
Time
Figure 8.2
The Third Wave Of Evolution In The Architectural Design Process
The Third Wave

Living Systems
Second Wave
Modern to Post-Modern
First Wave
Beaux-Arts to Prairie School
Time
1850 1900 1950 2000

August 31, 2006
Page 17
i
For a more extensive discussion of these disruptive trends and other ideas presented in this
chapter readers may reference: Kyle V. Davy, AIA and Susan L. Harris, PhD, Value Redesigned:
New Models for Professional Practice, (Atlanta: Greenway Communications – Ostberg, 2005).
ii
Michael Schrage, Serious Play: How the World’s Best Companies Simulate to Innovate
(Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2000).
iii
Mildred Friedman, ed., Gehry Talks: Architecture + Process (New York: Universe, 2002).
iv
William McDonough and Michael Braungart, Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make
Things (New York: North Point Press, 2002).
v
Stephen Kiernan and James Timberlake, refabricating ARCHITECTURE (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 2004).
vi
B. Joseph Pine II and James H. Gilmore, The Experience Economy (Boston: Harvard Business
School Press, 1999).
vii
Robert I. Sutton and Thomas A. Kelley, “Creativity Doesn’t Require Isolation: Why Product
Designers Bring Visitors Backstage,” California Management Review (fall 1997).
viii
McDonough and Braungart, Cradle to Cradle.
ix
Ronald A. Heifetz, Leadership Without Easy Answers (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
Belknap Press, 1994).
x
For learning more about “living systems theory” and how it is impacting leadership and
management theories: Margaret J.Wheatley, Leadership and the New Science: Discovering
Order in a Chaotic World (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 1999); also Roger Lewin, Life at the
Edge of Chaos (New York: MacMillan, 1992); also Steven Johnson, Emergence: The Connected
Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and Software (New York: Scribner, 2001); also Richard T. Pascale,
Mark Milleman, and Linda Gioja, Surfing The Edge Of Chaos (New York: Crown Business,
2000); also Janine M. Benyus, Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired By Nature (New York: Quill
William Morrow, 1997).

August 31, 2006
Page 18
Confidence
Kyle V. Davy AIA
March 11, 2009
“The only limit to our realization of tomorrow will be our doubts of today.”
April 12, 1945, Franklin Roosevelt’s final statement to the American people prior to his death.
Prepared for the 1945 Jefferson Day Celebration (Undelivered)
The financial downdrafts of the last six months have battered design professionals and their firms
along with the rest of the economy. Markets have disappeared. Clients have gone out of business
or significantly cut back operations. Projects have been put on hold or terminated. And financial
credit has been cut or restricted. Worse, these problems have been layered on top of an already
challenging industry environment where fundamental project delivery and business models have
been called into question.
Uncertainty is increasing. How much farther could we slide? Are we close to the bottom? When
will the economy start to recover? How robust will that recovery be? What will our world look
like when we emerge from this downturn? And, in the meantime, what should firms do?
The temptation is to hunker down, husband our resources, and wait to see what happens. We
could make the case that design professionals, like everyone else, are victims of the downturn,
blame circumstances for our situation, and wait for someone else to solve the problem for us.
Unfortunately, that posture almost certainly makes matters worse. In fact, Rosabeth Moss
Kanter, in her recent book Confidence: How Winning Streaks And Losing Streaks Begin And
End, suggests that such actions are often hallmarks of teams or organizations taking the first turn
into often-irreversible death spirals.i
Confidence
March 11, 2009
Page 1
But there is another path. According to Kanter, winning teams act with confidence in the face of
adversity. They take responsibility and own all their results, learn from setbacks, share
information, and maintain the disciplined practices that were at the heart of previous successes.
They strengthen relationships and emphasize collaboration. And, winning teams promote
initiative-taking by reassuring people that what they do can make a real difference, and that they
have what it takes to stay the course under pressure.
As my colleague David Aitken notes, “Beliefs drive behavior.” With confidence, defined as a
sense of optimism, self-assurance, courage and calm determination, winning teams can -- and do
-- rise above difficult circumstances and behave in ways that perpetuate their success.
At this time of crisis, as we struggle to regain our footing, it is vital for design professionals to
act with confidence, not only for the benefit of their firms, but also for the benefit of society.
Design professionals are uniquely suited to play a key leadership role in the recovery, mobilizing
people to face and tackle a set of significant adaptive challenges.
This is our time.
The recent Federal stimulus plan funds significant new efforts to develop renewable energy
sources and to rebuild infrastructure. However, the funding in each of these areas is only a partial
step toward solving the deeper mega-problems within which they are nested.
• The $94 billion stimulus budget for green energy is only a fraction of the funding
necessary to make renewable energy sources a significant factor in our energy portfolio.
We also know that renewable energy is only one aspect of a much larger sustainability
challenge and that the highest leverage opportunities will be found within the context of
the whole system, not by sub-optimizing around the parts.
Confidence
March 11, 2009
Page 2
• The roughly $100 billion of spending on infrastructure is, again, only a down payment on
an infrastructure deficit that is rapidly approaching $2 trillion. Beyond that, this budget
will barely move the gage measuring progress toward building a 21st century
infrastructureii essential to support the U.S. economy in an increasingly competitive
world.
Solving these mega-problems demands initiative, innovative thinking, and leadership beyond the
federal stimulus. These are the entrepreneurial qualities that the legendary engineers, architects,
and landscape architects exhibited when presented with the blank canvas of a young America
waiting to rise at the dawn of the 19th Century. The canals and waterworks, the railroads and
bridges, the parks and skyscrapers – wonders unheard of previously -- rose in the wake of their
energy and vision. We stand again at such a moment in history.
If we believe in ourselves and the value that we offer as stewards of our professional domains we
will move forward, in the face of these challenges. Design professionals can provide more bang
for each buck spent by transforming project delivery processes. They can expand funds available
by bringing new private financing to the table. Professionals can pioneer the next generations of
green building and infrastructure designs. Engineers and architects can co-develop, with
manufacturers, new materials and pre-fabrication methods that both lower project costs and
reduce carbon footprints. And, designers can create new solutions that make quantum leaps
forward in the quality and performance of energy technologies, buildings, and infrastructure. In
fact, professionals are already active in many of these areas.
The green economy promises to be the “mother of all markets” according to Thomas Friedman
in his recent book, Flat, Hot, And Crowded. Add to that the scope and scale of work involved
with creating a 21st Century infrastructure for a sustainable future, and opportunities for
entrepreneurial initiative become practically unlimited.
Confidence
March 11, 2009
Page 3
It is time to choose. Will design professionals give in to what has become a dependent mindset,
wait for government to award us our share of the stimulus package, and leave it to someone else
to lead us out of our difficulties? Or, will we seize the mantle of leadership and act with vision,
confidence, and an entrepreneurial spirit? If we choose to lead, we can create substantial value
for society and cement a more robust future for our firms and professions. Moreover, this
leadership will also model, for the larger public, the beliefs and behaviors central to reversing the
current downward economic spiral.
I would appreciate your feedback about this essay. Please send your thoughts or
comments to: kyle@kylevdavy.com
i
Rosabeth Moss Kanter’s book, Confidence: How Winning Streaks And Losing Streaks Begin
And End documents her findings from a study of winning and losing sports teams and business
organizations. It is a richly illustrated resource leaders can use to guide their actions either
maintaining winning streak or reversing a slide into losing.
ii
Here I would define infrastructure broadly to not only include transportation and utilities, but
also schools, institutional facilities, other forms of urban and green infrastructure.
Confidence
March 11, 2009
Page 4
Animal Spirits In High Performance Cultures
Kyle V. Davy AIA

June 16, 2011
“Let us unite in banishing fear. We (the federal government) have provided the
machinery to restore our financial system; it is up to you to support and make it
work. It is your problem no less than it is mine. Together we cannot fail.”
With these words, spoken on March 12, 1933, President Franklin D. Roosevelt closed the first of
a remarkable set of radio messages to an American public struggling through the depths of the
Great Depression. His “fireside chats,” were crafted to inform and teach, and to give people
perspective on the country’s situation. But, more than that, they were designed to restore
confidence and instill a renewed determination to persevere in the face of tough times.
Roosevelt’s intention was to influence the spirit of the American public, what John Maynard
Keynes would later refer to as the country’s “animal spirits.” Keynes used the term animal spirits
to describe the emotions, affects, and beliefs that drive an economy and civic life. This concept
of animal spirits, derived from human psychology and adopted by behavioral economists,
recognizes that even in a free market, people’s actions are shaped not only by the laws of supply
and demand, but by feelings -- positive impulses such as confidence and fairness, as well as less
desirable motivations such as fear and greed.1

1
George A. Akerlof and Robert J. Shiller, Animal Spirits: How Human Psychology Drives the Economy,
and Why It Matters for Global Capitalism, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 2009.
Animal Spirits – Page 1

More recently, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan described feelings of
“irrational exuberance” prior to the bursting of late 90’s dot.com bubble, “infectious greed”
during the latter stages of the housing bubble, and “shocked disbelief” in the aftermath of the
2008 financial meltdown.
To be clear, the concept of “animal spirits,” and its use in this essay, is not to be confused with
an alternative meaning associated with shamanistic cultures (including Indians of the American
West) in which spirits from the animal world are embraced as sources of wisdom, guidance, and
inspiration.
Animal spirits, as described by Keynes, are present not only in the general economy, but also in
the cultures of individual organizations. Feelings of resignation, fear, and despair can send firms
into tailspins. Optimism, hope, and confidence can propel firms to success in the face of tough
times. These types of animal spirits can be of particular significance for leaders of professional
design firms, which have weathered four long years of turbulence and uncertainty.
Leaders need to reflect on their cultures -- and themselves -- on a regular basis, in order to gauge
which animal spirits are ascendant or receding. Then, they can target their efforts to encourage or
reshape beliefs, feelings, and emotions and guide their firms to greater success.
How does this happen? Let’s examine the influence of two of the kinder animal spirits,
confidence and generosity.
Confidence
Confidence embodies a positive outlook about the future and one’s ability to succeed. It resides
at the top of Keynes list of animal spirits that drive economic business cycle. Confidence is

fundamental to people’s ability to rebound from crisis, respond to adversity, and adjust to
changing circumstances.
Teams on extended winning streaks, according to Rosabeth Moss Kanter,2 act with confidence,
taking responsibility for and owning all of their results, learning from setbacks, sharing
information, and maintaining practices that were at the heart of previous successes. Leaders of
winning teams promote initiative-taking by reassuring people that what they do makes a real
difference, and that they have both the resilience and creativity to succeed in the face of
adversity.
Confidence can also be thought of as the “sweet spot” between two different animal spirits,
despair and arrogance.3 Despairing people lose hope, give up, and wait for someone or
something to rescue them. Arrogance, on the other hand, breeds hubris and blinds organizations
to internal and external imperatives for change until it is too late.
Kanter suggests three leadership practices for keeping high performance teams in that sweet spot.
First, leaders help their people face the hard facts of their situation, and take responsibility for
their problems. This includes offering unvarnished feedback and straight talk about issues that
need to addressed.
Second, leaders must enhance relationships and foster collaboration, emphasizing teamwork, and
building trust, commitment, and accountability. They can’t allow people to hunker down and
isolate themselves. Instead, they must demolish the internal organizational silos that separate
people, and build bridges to stakeholders outside their organizations.

2 Rosabeth Moss Kanter, Confidence, How Winning Streaks & Losing Streaks Begin & End, Three Rivers
Press, New York, 2004.

3 Rosabeth Moss Kanter, Confidence.

Third, leaders can spark initiative and innovation by reframing situations to point out
opportunities, where before people only saw barriers. They encourage the sharing of intelligence
and knowledge throughout the organization. Leaders empower people to generate new ideas and
engage in experiments, encourage small wins, and build on those successes. At the same time,
leaders search out and remove barriers to action. Finally, they communicate an unwavering
optimism about the organization’s ability to succeed.
Roosevelt’s first fireside chat illustrates each of these practices in action. He offers the American
public a dose of straight talk, telling the story of the bank crisis and how it unfolded. He stresses
that solving the problem will require unity of action (collaboration) across the country. He
outlines policy responses that his administration is taking to help ease the pain and stimulate
progress (initiative & innovation). And, finally he expresses his unshakeable belief that “together
we cannot fail.”
Generosity & Noble Purpose
The animal spirit generosity, which is often expressed in an organization’s noble purpose, or
contribution to society, can be a powerful source of creative energy. Over the last twenty years,
business scholars have noted that the pursuit of a higher purpose can be key to stimulating
progress and maintaining forward momentum. It can also provide a rallying flag for orienting
and uniting a staff buffeted by turbulence and change.
This spirit of giving and offering service to humanity can also be found in the burgeoning
corporate social responsibility movement, which is rewriting the rules of corporate governance
and management. Increasingly, people want companies to combine traditional business pursuits
with initiatives that serve a set of stakeholders that is broader than just customers and
shareholders. This trend is particularly evident in the younger generation of workers who want to
know that their efforts make a difference in their communities and the world.

As Daniel Pink illustrates in his book DRiVE, a noble purpose, particularly one that goes beyond
the profit motive, can be a primary motivator. Google, for example, taps into that motivational
potential by allowing people to spend time pursuing aspects of their work that they personally
find most meaningful.4
A powerful illustration of an inspirational purpose, within the context of a professional

organization, is the Mayo Clinic. The growth of this remarkable organization from the clinic
founded in 1883 by the two Mayo brothers in Rochester, Minnesota into one of the world’s
leading medical institutions (patient provider, medial innovator, and global brand) was powered
by the pursuit of a singular purpose … “to help the sickest patients.”
Inspired by this shared purpose, the Clinic, throughout its history has placed a priority on the
social benefits produced by its approach to medicine, not the potential for financial revenues.
Even before the Clinic was converted to non-profit status, the Mayo brothers poured the majority
of their earnings back into the Clinic to help better fulfill its mission, opting to provide
themselves and other physician partners with what they described as “decent financial security”
as opposed to wealth or lavish lifestyles. This approach continues to attract physicians and staff
who are primarily driven by intrinsic motivations -- doing work they love and believe to be
important.
Assessing Your Firm’s Animal Spirits
If you are curious about the animal spirits present in your firm’s culture, take a look at the
following ten word pairs. Each pair contains two contrasting “animal spirits.” Rate, along the
scale, each pair of animal spirits as to which most closely describes your firm’s culture.

4
Daniel H. Pink, DRiVE: The Surprising Truth About what Motivates Us, Riverhead Books, New York,
2009.


CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 DESPAIR

CONFIDENCE 1 2 3 4 5 ARROGANCE

HOPE 1 2 3 4 5 FEAR

OPTIMISM 1 2 3 4 5 RESIGNATION

ACCOUNTABLE 1 2 3 4 5 IN DENIAL

GENEROUS 1 2 3 4 5 SELF SERVING

CONNECTED 1 2 3 4 5 ISOLATED

CAPABLE 1 2 3 4 5 HELPLESS

ENGAGED 1 2 3 4 5 COMPLACENT

INSPIRED 1 2 3 4 5 DEADENED

Other members of your firm may also find this instructive. Spend time with them sharing your
perceptions and identifying potential leverage points for change. And, finally, turn your attention
to your own beliefs and feelings. How do you rate yourself? Which of the animal spirits present
the greatest challenge to you, personally, and how might you address those challenges?
Inspiring Animal Spirits
In the 1930’s, Roosevelt had an intuitive grasp of the country’s “animal spirits” and understood
his role as a leader to inspire a positive, constructive outlook in society during a time of extreme
adversity. Now, in this post-recessionary environment, professional design firms face their own
serious challenges. The effects of the recession linger across the economy, markets haven’t
recovered, clients are increasingly assertive, and new aggressive competitors loom. Leaders of
professional design firms must become masters of their company’s animal spirits, inspiring
positive beliefs and behaviors to build high performance cultures.

Game Change
for Built Environment Professionals
Part I: Growth Through Innovation & Entrepreneurship
Kyle V. Davy AIA

April 2, 2013
The last thirty years have been tough for engineers, architects, and other design professionals.
Markets have shrunk and core services have become commodities. Firms find themselves
trapped in limited, reactive, risk-averse roles, playing a game they can’t win -- increasingly
marginalized, put upon by clients, and threatened by new types of competitors.
But, engineers and architects can change the game. Given the right moves, design professionals
can once again become drivers of economic growth -- turning challenges that confront clients
and communities into opportunities for technical innovation, entrepreneurial initiative, and
ultimately, the transformation of their professional practices.
Innovation Drives Growth

Technical innovation and knowledge sharing are, according to economist Paul Romer, the
fundamental drivers of economic growth and development. In the hands of entrepreneurs, new
ideas give birth to new products and services, which in turn generate more new businesses. He
describes how a cascade of technical insights and knowledge flowing from innovator to
innovator and entrepreneur to entrepreneur creates a dynamic of ever increasing returns, a
phenomenon that explains the lion’s share of economic growth. 1
The explosive growth of California’s Silicon Valley is a living example of Romer’s virtuous
cycle—a crucible of technical invention and knowledge sharing within an extended, open
community of private sector computer engineers and programmers, scientists and researchers,
and business entrepreneurs. Across an arc of fifty years, people and ideas flowed from
semiconductor companies (Fairchild Semiconductors) to personal computer makers (Apple) and
a growing venture capital community. Venture financiers, in turn, funded generations of
technology startups including Internet pioneers (Netscape), whose work created fertile ground
for the emergence of search companies (Yahoo, Google), which led to social network innovators
(Facebook, Twitter), and so on in this highly networked, creative hotspot.

1 Knowledge and the Wealth of Nations: A Story of Economic Discovery, David Warsh, W.W. Norton &
Company, New York, 2006. Original source: Endogenous Technological Change, Paul M. Romer,
Journal of Political Economics, University of Chicago Press, October 1998, pp. S71-102.

Game Change – Part I of III
Growth Through Innovation and Entrepreneurship
April 2, 2013
Page 2
Fundamental to this virtuous growth dynamic is Romer’s observation that although there are first
costs incurred in developing a new idea, future use and reuse of that same idea is virtually free
and often spreads rapidly. The original sequencing of the human genome, for example, took
over a decade and cost billions of dollars. Today, new genomes are mapped in hours at a cost of
just thousands of dollars. The how-to of genome mapping is now “in the air” of the
biotechnology industry, available at little additional cost to help create and grow new enterprises.
Those businesses, in turn, generate their own innovations and knowledge, which then feeds the
creative thinking of the next generation of researchers and entrepreneurs -- accelerating the
growth of the bioscience economy.
Romer’s insights offer a game-changing path for built environment professionals. By combining
their capacity for generating new ideas with a renewed willingness to take initiative as
professional entrepreneurs they can drive economic growth and development. And by following
this path, firms can become lynchpins in an emerging entrepreneurial economy.
Past as Prologue
This is a role they have played before. Engineers and architects were highly esteemed engines of
economic growth in the Nineteenth Century. They not only helped invent many of the
technologies that drove much of the industrial revolution in North America, but also led in the
creation of many of the great enterprises of that era.
The building of the Erie Canal was one of the earliest projects that demonstrated the powerful
impact of design professionals on growth and development. Completed in 1825, it drove the
nation’s economy for the next fifty years. The technical ingenuity and drive of engineers like
Benjamin Wright and James Geddes -- men who literally learned their profession on this job --
made the construction of the canal possible. Their engineering achievements ranged from
inventing new means of grubbing the standing timber that covered much of the 350 mile-long
canal route, to creating new concrete materials to seal the waterway’s surface, to designing the
mechanical works and structures for over 80 locks and 18 aqueducts located along its course.

April 2, 2013
Page 3
The economic impact of the canal was profound; farmers across the American interior found new
markets for their crops, new cities and industries sprang up along the canal’s length, and New
York City grew rapidly into the nation’s dominant urban center. 2 Beyond these direct impacts on
economic growth, the Erie Canal also set off its own virtuous cycle of technological innovation -
- an explosion of invention and a sharp rise in patenting in areas adjacent to the canal as
inventors and entrepreneurs tapped into the rich stream of information and opportunities that
accompanied the rising tide of trade, commerce, and people flowing along the canal’s route.3
The completion of the canal signaled the dawn of a gilded age of technological innovation and
entrepreneurship by the country’s engineers and architects. Beginning in the late-1830s, James
B. Francis, Chief Engineer of the Locks & Canal Company pioneered numerous innovations in
canal, weir, flume, and turbine technologies as well as hydraulic operations that were pivotal in
making the mill town of Lowell, Massachusetts the first major industrial center in the United
States. Moreover, Francis’ inventions and experiments as well as the calculations, rules, and
insights he shared in his seminal publication, Lowell Hydraulic Experiments, shaped the new
discipline of hydraulic engineering and influenced the design and operation of waterworks
around the world well into the Twentieth Century.
During the middle decades of the century, engineers such as J. Edgar Thomson designed, built,
and operated America’s emerging network of railroads. In 1847, Thomson took over as engineer
of the newly established Pennsylvania Railroad, which was to connect Philadelphia west to
Pittsburgh. In response to his impressive performance designing and constructing the rail line
across that mountainous terrain the board named him president of the railroad. By the end of the
Civil War, he had made the Pennsylvania Railroad into the largest transportation company in the
country, with more that 6000 miles of track. As late as 1975, Fortune magazine named Thomson

2
Peter L. Bernstein, Wedding of the Waters: The Erie Canal and the Making of a Great Nation, W. W.
Norton & Company, New York, 2005.
3
Kenneth Sokoloff, Inventive Activity in Early Industrial America, : Evidence from Patent Records,
1790-1846, Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1988 (Working Paper #2707).

April 2, 2013
Page 4
as one of the first 19 people selected for its newly established Business Hall of Fame, along with
such other notables as Henry Ford and J. Pierpont Morgan.4
The completion of New York City’s Central Park in 1873 cemented the reputation for
innovation, entrepreneurship, and artistry of landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted.
Olmstead not only designed, but also, supervised the construction of this first-of-its-kind
naturalistic landscape located in the middle of a major city. With its use of idyllic, densely
planted areas, its segregation of circulation systems for pedestrians, horseback riders, and
vehicles, and numerous advances in the construction of the park and planting or transplanting of
over four million trees and almost 1500 species of vegetation, the design set the gold standard for
parks designed in North America for the next century.5
Following Chicago’s Great Fire of 1871, the construction of tall buildings, made possible by the
technical ingenuity of architects and engineers such as Daniel Burnham, John Root, and Louis
Sullivan, transformed that city’s Downtown Loop into America’s mercantile center. Their
innovative solutions for concrete mat foundations, metal framing systems, electric illumination
and ventilation systems established prototypes that would be used in the design of steel framed
skyscrapers for decades to come. And their artistic treatment of the building envelopes for these
structures elevated “Chicago School” architects to a preeminent position in architectural design
and professional practice.
Marginalized and Commoditized in the Twentieth Century

By the end of the Nineteenth Century, engineers and architects had established themselves as
driving forces in the nation’s economic growth and development. Unfortunately, in the next
hundred years they largely ceded this position of leadership.

4
The Innovators: The Engineering Pioneers Who Made America Modern, David P. Billington, John
Wiley & Sons, New York, 1996, pp. 114.
5 A Clearing in the Distance: Frederick Law Olmsted and America in the 19th Century, Witold
Rybzynski, Scribner, New York, 2003.

April 2, 2013
Page 5
During the first decades of the Twentieth Century, the vast majority of engineers opted for
employment by industrial corporations, exchanging aspirations for technical invention and
personal entrepreneurship for the security of “domesticated” company service as operational
managers and efficiency experts.6
At about the same time, in an act of professional hubris, leading architects (represented by the
American Institute of Architects) traded their progressive stance as technological and design
innovators away in pursuit of an ultimately unsuccessful gambit “to elevate the social status of
the architects in the public’s mind” as artists and keeper’s of the nation’s cultural identity.7
Divorcing the art of architectural design from the technicalities of building and construction,
architects lost a primary avenue for innovation and creativity and surrendered much of their role
in fostering economic growth.
As the century progressed, both consulting engineers and architects in private practice gave up
on entrepreneurship and adopted less risky stances, content to provide mostly plain-vanilla
services to others. Instead of initiating projects -- they waited for clients to call. Few challenged
themselves to invent new technologies or knowledge -- most stayed within their comfort zones of
proven technical formulas and well-worn ways of working. Making matters worse, architects and
consulting engineers institutionalized these tendencies in the 1970s and 1980s by widely
adopting an economic business model focused on selling technical services by the hour that still
dominates practice today.
By the end of the century, design professionals found themselves relegated to the sidelines of
power and influence and increasingly regarded by clients as providers of commodity-like
services to be purchased on the basis of lowest cost. Playing victim to these developments is

6
The “Revolt of the Engineers” Reconsidered, by Peter Meiksins in The Engineer In America, Edited by
Terry S. Reynolds, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1991.
7
Leadership By Design: Creating An Architecture Of Trust, Richard N. Swett, Ostberg-Greenway
Communications, Atlanta, 2005.

April 2, 2013
Page 6
hardly a recipe for success: these conditions could spell the death of not only firms, but also the
professions themselves.
Romer’s Virtuous Cascade in Action

Fortunately, built environment professionals are beginning to confront this adaptive challenge
and take steps that thrust themselves back onto Romer’s virtuous cycle of technical innovation,
entrepreneurship, and growth.
The recent evolution of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), a rigorous set
of green building standards created under the auspices of the U.S. Green Building Council
(USGBC) offers a prime example of this new dynamic. From its beginnings in the mid-1990s,
architects and engineers were pivotal players in the creation and implementation of the LEED
standards and rating system. Widely adopted across the building design industry in the last
fifteen years, LEED has had a significant impact on the design and construction of tens of
thousands of projects, saving energy and materials, reducing greenhouse gases, eliminating
toxins, improving human health, and enhancing the experience and productivity of building users
and occupants.
LEED, in turn, has been midwife to the birth, or rebirth, of numerous businesses in the design
and construction industry. Over 1000 businesses and non-profits are now engaged in the
recycling and reuse of building materials alone. According to a study by Booz Allen Hamilton,
LEED projects will have generated an additional $12.5 Billion in GDP and created over 230,000
jobs in the U.S. economy by 20138. LEED’s success has also been a spur to the broader green
movement within the design and construction industry and in society as a whole, shifting
mindsets and fostering innovations that not only use less energy and do less harm, but also heal
and regenerate larger living systems, prompting leaders in government and industry to add
sustainability as a key criteria in decision-making processes.

8
Green Jobs Study, Booz Allen Hamilton, prepared for U.S. Green Building Council, Washington, DC,
2012.

April 2, 2013
Page 7
Seeing and Seizing Opportunities
Beyond the spin-off effects of technical innovations, small numbers of design professionals are
also reawakening to the potential of professional entrepreneurship, seeing and seizing on
opportunities for innovation and change that lie within and/or adjacent to their professional
domains. Some, like their Nineteenth Century ancestors, they are choosing to not only design,
but also finance, build, operate and/or own facility and infrastructure projects. Others are
developing alliances with manufacturers to design new building products and systems (from eco-
friendly fabrics to building envelope systems); creating new forms of intellectual property by
creating software for, and mining, “big data” from client systems; engaging in performance
contracting for energy projects; and establishing companies to design and build their own lines of
pre-fabricated housing.
Young architects and engineers are also starting new types of practices, often as non-profits or
for-benefit companies, focused on goals of social entrepreneurship--serving needs of neglected
or disadvantaged populations, often overseas, helping in disaster recovery efforts, or pursuing
strategies to prevent or lessen the damage from global climate change.
For these professionals, it’s a game changing strategy. They are bearing the risks and reaping the
rewards that come from bold new value propositions that move beyond selling technical services
by the hour.
Game Change: Mind Shift Required

A mind shift, from a fear of consequences to being open to possibilities, is fundamental to this
game changing strategy. Fear of consequences (lawsuits, commoditization, lost clients, economic
losses, loss of self esteem, etc.) drives professionals and firms into protective crouches designed
to ward off the worst effects of turbulent economic conditions and changing industry dynamics.
Although this stance may be helpful in the short term, it dramatically undermines long-term
viability. As leadership consultant David Aitken points out, a living organism cannot protect

April 2, 2013
Page 8
itself and grow at the same time. Protection inhibits the flow of knowledge, people, resources,
and opportunities a living company needs in order to thrive.
Openness changes the game. Dramatic challenges come with new possibilities – “mysteries” to
be explored, partners to connect and collaborate with, forums for bringing creative people
together, and opportunities to craft bold new value propositions. Changing the game through
technical innovation, knowledge sharing, and entrepreneurship renews the life-sustaining
connection between professional designers and their environment. It re-establishes the symbiotic
relationship between engineers, architects, and other creative design professionals and economic
growth. And, it can propel firms toward more prosperous futures.
Coming Next: Part II: Becoming A Professional Entrepreneur
A Note On This Series

Game Change for Built Environment Professionals: Growth Through Innovation &
Entrepreneurship, is the first of a three-part series exploring how engineers, architects,
scientists, and designers can change the game of professional practice through technical
innovation, knowledge sharing, and entrepreneurship. The second essay examines specific
strategies for technical innovation and becoming a professional entrepreneur -- including case
studies of firms are already engaging in these types of entrepreneurial initiatives. The third essay
raises the bar for built environment professionals regarding their mission to spur the growth and
development of society, going beyond just economic growth to propose a broader definition of
responsible growth, bringing more people up to decent standards of living while making our
living systems healthier and more resilient.
I would appreciate thoughts and feedback about this essay. Please send your comments to:
kyle@kylevdavy.com

April 2, 2013
Page 9
Game Change
For Built Environment Professionals
Part II: Becoming a Professional Entrepreneur
Kyle V. Davy AIA

May 6, 2013
Entrepreneurs are “people who have the talent to spot business opportunities
and the courage to risk their resources in developing those opportunities.”
Muhammad Yunus
In 2010, leaders at the civil engineering firm PSOMAS noticed an emerging opportunity in
Southern California. A confluence of state mandates requiring the use of renewables in the
generation of electricity, tax incentives offered by the state, and falling prices for photovoltaic
technologies were spurring solar energy development.
But public institutions in the region (school districts and community colleges, etc.) had been
largely left out. Even though they had plenty of sun and property for development (roofs and
parking lots), the tax incentives that made solar development feasible were not available to them,
and PSOMAS realized that this disconnect presented an entrepreneurial opportunity.
The firm sought out a finance partner and formed a new joint venture, PSOMASFMG, to secure
contracts to design, build, operate, and finance solar power systems for public institutions,
particularly for past clients of the firm with whom there was a high-trust relationship.
Photovoltaic arrays placed on roofs and parking lots provide electrical power at lower and
predictable rates with no capital costs to these public institutions. In turn, PSOMASFMG
benefits from the state tax credits available to private developers of solar projects. This value
proposition has, in the last two years, helped make PSOMASFMG one of the fastest growing
solar developers in Southern California -- completing systems on over 50 sites -- which, besides
benefiting the firm financially makes a genuine contribution to the broader societal imperative
for more sustainable energy solutions.
The opportunity for Larson Design Group (LDG) surfaced during the early days of the Marcellus
Shale natural gas boom in Pennsylvania. Leaders at the engineering, architecture, and surveying
firm, located in the heart of the Marcellus Shale region, realized that the treatment of waste water
produced by fracking operations was going to be a key problem that would have to be addressed
to enable drilling activity in the region. But, LDG didn’t just wait for drillers to hire them to
design treatment facilities -- they got out in front.
LDG developed an innovative water treatment solution involving the design of a small,
centralized water treatment unit that could service a local “neighborhood” of drillers to address
the fracking wastewater problem. Leaders realized that, if they kept the water treatment unit
small, the firm could manage the risks associated with taking full responsibility for financing,
building, and operating the unit as well as designing it. They established LDG’s TerrAqua
Resource Management (TARM) division to take on this challenge and proceeded with the design
and construction of a prototype unit.
LDG’s first completed water treatment installation quickly passed its profitability breakeven
point. Based on that experience, the firm moved on to plan and design additional units, capable
of being moved to accommodate drilling patterns and water networks as they spread through
leaseholds in a given area. TARM was so successful that the firm attracted a major Canadian-
based oil and gas services company as a partner in the development of additional water treatment
facilities in the Marcellus, as well as, in the future, other shale gas regions across the country.

Game Change – Part II of III
Becoming a Professional Entrepreneur
May 6, 2013
Page 2
The entrepreneurial “aha moment” for a small group of consulting engineers in Houston, Texas
came in 2006, as they confronted the progressive failure of critical infrastructure systems in
America’s fourth largest city. The deteriorating storm water, street and drainage systems of this
subtropical Gulf Coast city, exposed residents to ongoing floods -- disrupting traffic and
commerce, damaging property, causing injuries and sometimes resulting in loss of life.
Roughly two-thirds of the city’s storm sewer and street drainage systems were beyond their
useful life and the problem was getting worse. Funding of $500 million per year was required to
fix the problem. Unfortunately, Houston was spending only a fraction of that amount --
approximately $100 million per year -- on those critical infrastructure systems.
Rather than continuing to play the victim to chronically inadequate state and federal
infrastructure funding levels, the consulting engineers decided to turn the challenge around and
frame it as a leadership opportunity -- they would help the local community understand, own,
and solve its problem.
To accomplish this, the engineers decided to mount a major political initiative, something none
of them had ever done before. They formed a non-profit organization, ReNew Houston 501C-4,
to educate the public about the storm water, street and drainage problem. They also set up a
separate “Specific Purpose Political Committee” (also called ReNew Houston) to lead the
campaign to pass a city charter amendment mandating locally generated fees and dedicated
funding to fix it.
Of the roughly $1,750,000 spent on the campaign effort, almost 70% was provided by the
engineering community in Houston -- not counting the considerable sweat equity invested by
engineers in learning the ropes of running a major political campaign, collecting signatures
during petition drives, forming coalitions with groups representing other civic interests, attending

May 6, 2013
Page 3
and speaking at community meetings, giving press conferences, and the countless other activities
that the group engaged in to help pass the amendment.
Houston voters approved the charter amendment in the fall of 2010, providing financing to meet
the full $500 million a year ($10 billion over 20 years) need. As a result of ReNew Houston’s
vision, initiative, and adaptive leadership, Houston is on its way to creating a twenty-first-
century storm water, street and drainage system. This “good work” by the city’s engineering
community will continue to pay significant social dividends to local residents and businesses for
decades.
Three Types of Entrepreneurs

Entrepreneurs play a key role in economic growth and development through their willingness to
put new ideas and technical inventions to use, according to economist Joseph Schumpeter. This
role has traditionally been ascribed to private entrepreneurs -- classically, figures such as
Andrew Carnegie, John D. Rockefeller, and J. P. Morgan -- who reshape the world through
commercial enterprise. For private entrepreneurs, primacy is placed on generating a substantial
return to investors.
In the last two decades, social entrepreneurs, such as Nobel Peace Prize winner Muhammad
Yunus -- who pioneered the concept of microcredit financing (small loans to poor people, mainly
women, to help them start businesses and lift their families out of poverty), have entered the
global stage. Mission-oriented, social entrepreneurs (often with funding provided by
philanthropic and government institutions) target initiatives on behalf of underserved, neglected,
or disadvantaged populations. They endeavor to create social benefits (public good) for
particular groups and/or for society at large. Social entrepreneurship is a vital, new force shaping
societal progress by addressing critical unmet needs.

May 6, 2013
Page 4
PSOMAS, Larson Design Group, and the ReNew Houston engineers represent an emerging third
entrepreneurial type, the professional entrepreneur. Professional entrepreneurs operate in the gap
between private entrepreneurs and social entrepreneurs -- combining purpose with profit to serve
unmet needs within, or adjacent to, their professional domains.
Professional entrepreneurs are transformative agents seeking to create new public goods while
generating fair returns for their initiative and risk-taking. PSOMASFMG’s entrepreneurial
efforts are advancing the use of solar energy -- helping to meet a social need to increase the use
of renewables for electric power generation in order to reduce the state’s carbon footprint. At the
same time, these projects provide an attractive financial return on their engineering and
entrepreneurial efforts.
Professional entrepreneurs are forward thinking and innovative. Almost before any drillers had
moved into the Marcellus Shale region, Larson Design Group anticipated the potential
wastewater problem associated with shale gas drilling and fracking operations, and put together

May 6, 2013
Page 5
an innovative solution, underpinned by a sound business case, that could be deployed quickly to
address that issue at a local level.
Professional entrepreneurs are impatient with the status quo. The ReNew Houston engineers
were unwilling to sit on the sidelines and watch critical infrastructure systems in their
community continue to deteriorate. They seized the entrepreneurial initiative to help solve
Houston’s storm water problem.
Finally, professional entrepreneurs must be willing to bear and manage the risks associated with
their ventures as a necessary condition for achieving the rewards -- whether for private gain or
public good -- that they seek.
Professional Entrepreneurship: Start With Innovation

In his book Design Thinking, Roger Martin describes how innovators and entrepreneurs move
along a predictable path – what he calls the “knowledge funnel.” Innovators start at the top of the
funnel, exploring “mysteries -- things in our environment that excite our curiosity but elude our
understanding.” Moving downward, Martin describes how explorations often lead to new
insights or “heuristics -- rules of thumb that guide us toward a solution (or invention).” In the
hands of entrepreneurs, these roughly formed inventions can be fashioned into viable
commercial products and services. These products and services are, in turn, further refined and
elaborated at the base of the funnel -- creating algorithms or “explicit, step-by-step
procedure(s)”1 that can be exploited for operational efficiency and maximum profit.
The type of curiosity and initiative exhibited by entrepreneurs and innovators at the top of
Martin’s knowledge funnel were hallmarks of nineteenth century engineers and architects.
Benjamin Wright and William Geddes, primary engineers for the Erie Canal, explored the
mystery of transportation in a wild country. James B. Francis, Chief Engineer for the Lowell

1 The Design of Business: Why Design Thinking Is The Next Competitive Advantage, Roger Martin,
Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass., 2009.

May 6, 2013
Page 6
Locks & Canal Company outside Boston, plumbed the depths of waterpower and industrial
production, and the Chicago School architects, such as Daniel Burnham and John Root, delved
into the architectural puzzle of tall buildings. For each of these innovators, the “mystery”
provided a container for inquiry, reflection, inspiration, and ultimately invention.
Unfortunately, during the last half of the twentieth century, most engineers and architects shifted
their focus toward the bottom of the knowledge funnel, becoming masters of the algorithms of
professional practice. For most contemporary design firms, devoting time and resources to
“exploring mysteries” just doesn’t fit with the service mentality that currently dominates
professional practice.
Design professionals can begin to reassert their legacy of innovation and entrepreneurship by
moving back toward the top of the knowledge funnel -- becoming curious about and exploring
the driving forces, trends, and challenges (or mysteries) that are shaping the world and reshaping
professional domains.
The top of the funnel teems with possibilities. “Mysteries” might be found within emerging
markets (shale oil and gas development, the smart grid for powering electric vehicles, the
industrial renaissance in North America), the evolution and convergence of technologies (IT,
nanotechnology, biotechnology, neuroscience), in environmental issues (global climate change,
water depletion, the food cycle), or in other adaptive challenges confronting society (education,
poverty traps, criminal justice, healthcare and wellness, urbanization).
Invest in Research & Development

Explorations may take the form of formal research and development efforts. Some design
professionals already engage in this type of activity and give R&D a legitimate (funded) role in
their firms.

May 6, 2013
Page 7
For example, the innovative global engineering firm, ARUP, emphasizes research as a
fundamental element of technical excellence, exploring both large-scale drivers of societal
change and focused technological developments in such areas as 3D design, simulations,
buildings physics, and fluid dynamics. Gensler has long used a major commitment to workplace-
focused research, particularly pre- and post-occupancy workplace management, to differentiate
themselves from competitors in the commercial office design market.
The architectural firm Kiernan & Timberlake has a dedicated team of researchers (many with
PhDs) and devotes 3% of gross revenues to ongoing research.2 Their exploration of the
“mystery” of prefabricated, mass-customized manufacturing methods for building envelopes,3
established the firm as one of the most innovative architectural design firms in the country,
prized by clients and other industry stakeholders (particularly manufacturers) for their ability to
lead collaborative R&D efforts and consistently produce innovative new building systems and
design approaches.
Guerilla R&D
As an alternative to large scale research and development efforts, consider empowering staff to
launch “guerilla R&D” efforts -- small scale, low-cost experiments and tests using
unconventional means designed to surface new insights into technical problems and client issues.
For example, the increasing ubiquity and decreasing cost of embedded sensors and control
technologies provides a new way for design firms (particularly engineers) to stage and learn from
their own real-time experiments.
Guerilla R&D efforts, with ‘barely enough’ budgets, can challenge teams to get creative. Recall
the plentiful stories of high-tech start-ups that created their technology breakthroughs on
shoestring budgets – using the inspired energy of deeply committed, curious (and mostly young)
people. Generation Y staff (roughly below the age of thirty) who are technologically adept,

2
Kiernan & Timberlake Website.
3
Refabricating ARCHITECTURE, Stephan Kiernan and James Timberlake, McGraw-Hill, New York,
2004.

May 6, 2013
Page 8
thrive on the challenge of new learning and aren’t prisoners of algorithmic mental models, can be
critical additions to these teams.
The burgeoning “makers” movement is filled with examples of individuals and organizations
engaged in this type of guerilla R&D. Within the design and construction industry, some small
architectural firms are already collaborating with start-up digital-fabrication laboratories to
launch relatively inexpensive explorations into material fabrication, form-making, and
prototyping methodologies.4
Connect and Collaborate

Technical innovation and entrepreneurship seldom flow from individual actors. It’s a team sport
where success often hinges on effective collaboration between multiple parties. You don’t have
to do it all on their own, but you do have to find, connect, and collaborate with the right partners.
To take advantage of their solar energy development opportunity, PSOMAS connected to a

compatible financial partner. ReNew Houston’s engineer-leaders had to develop and manage a
wide range of political alliances with community and other interest groups in order to pass their
charter amendment.
Firms don’t have to be constrained by traditional industry roles and boundaries. Consider
research laboratories, universities, and non-profits as potential alliance partners. Join larger
industry coalitions that are addressing major problems within your professional domains. For
example, participation in the U.S. Green Building Council’s largely “open source” development
of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards provided a major stimulus
for innovation and knowledge creation for countless design professionals during the last twenty
years.

4
In the Hothouse: The Next Industrial Revolution May Be Happening In Our Own Backyards, Blaine
Brownnell, Architect: The AIA Magazine, July 2012, pp. 88.

May 6, 2013
Page 9
Find a university that has added a “design thinking” program to their academic curriculum --
such as Stanford University’s d.school (the Hasso Platner Institute of Design). Volunteer to
participate in, and support, the design program’s efforts. The creativity and social
entrepreneurship demonstrated by young students from diverse academic backgrounds, designing
products and services to solve problems of the world’s poor, is truly exceptional. Their efforts
and spirit are infectious and likely to stimulate your own creative thinking. They may also deeply
inspire your staff as they think about possibilities for your firm’s future.
Finally, don’t be limited in your search for potential collaborators by geography. Look for
potential partners in creative hot spots--geographic areas, often urban districts, where creative,
entrepreneurial people naturally gather, rub shoulders, and share knowledge about emerging
trends and the latest new technologies. You might even consider moving staff to those locations.
Small Bets
As ideas and innovations crystalize, entrepreneurs move forward along two fundamentally
different paths, according to Saras Sarasvathy, a professor at Darden Graduate School of
Business.5 Along the first path, entrepreneurs attempt to fully develop a singular big idea,
prepare a detailed business plan, and organize and implement a step-by-step roll out strategy.
This is the “big bet” approach Boeing has used to launch successive generations of its jet aircraft.
But, with big bets come big risks.
Along the second path, entrepreneurs make “small bets,” developing ideas and innovations “just
enough” to launch an experiment -- an initial prototype or offering -- that allows the entrepreneur
to test the waters to learn what works, and what doesn’t. Based on that learning, they continue to
iterate the process, building up to a breakthrough. Or, they stop the initiative and move on before
sunk costs become too high.

5
As discussed by Peter Sims in his book, Little Bets: How Breakthrough Ideas Emerge from Small
Discoveries, Free Press, New York, 2011.

May 6, 2013
Page 10
Larson Design Group’s prototype water treatment is a great example of a small bet. The firm
carefully considered what it was willing to lose on the venture before proceeding with its first
unit. LDG purposely limited the size and cost of the prototype unit. They needed to test their
value proposition to find out whether they could sell the water treatment service to a
neighborhood of drillers and generate a profit. And, they needed to determine if that treatment
operation could be run successfully within the context of a professional service firm. The first
prototype answered those questions affirmatively and the firm is now scaling up and expanding
their TARM initiative.
Small bets are particularly important for entrepreneurs with limited capital. In his analysis of
“how entrepreneurs succeed”, Malcolm Gladwell notes that entrepreneurs aren’t necessarily
more courageous or risk seeking than others. Rather, they are just “better at figuring out how to
make a sure thing than the rest of us.”6 Small bets offer professional entrepreneurs an effective
way of figuring out “sure things” and dealing with the major risks that come with new ventures,
particularly the financial ones. Simply put: keep your bets small until you know you’ve got a
winner.
Professionals as Bridge and Catalyst

Beyond contributing to Paul Romer’s virtuous growth cycle7 of technical innovation, knowledge
sharing, and economic growth and development, professional entrepreneurship represents a
transformational opportunity for society.
In his book Commonwealth, Jeffrey D. Sachs argues that the public sector, the private sector, and
the not-for-profit sector (NGOs or Non-Governmental Organizations) must come together in
unprecedented ways to solve the daunting global challenges society will face in the next fifty
years (ranging from environmental sustainability to population dynamics to poverty traps). But,
he leaves out a significant fourth actor – the professional entrepreneur.

6 The Sure Thing, Malcolm Gladwell, New Yorker, January 18, 2000, pp. 24-29.
7 See the first essay in this series for a full explanation, Game Change for Built Environment
Professionals - Part I: Growth Through Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

May 6, 2013
Page 11
Professional engineers and architects have traditionally served as both bridge and catalyst to
harness emerging scientific and technical knowledge (often generated by public sector university
and research institutions) to solve societal problems.
Private
Companies
Professional Entrepreneurs
Public NGOs
Institutions (Civil Society)
Movement toward professional entrepreneurship places engineers and architects back into the
role of catalytic leadership, facilitating collaboration with organizations from the other sectors to
move toward sustainable solutions through enterprise and applied innovation. Design
professionals, leveraging their technical expertise, creativity, and leadership capacities within the
context of new entrepreneurial initiatives and enterprises are uniquely situated to help society
successfully confront these challenges. If they are willing to take on this role and the challenges
that come with it, they can help create a more prosperous future for society and for their own
professional practices.

May 6, 2013
Page 12
Coming Next: Part III: Champions of Responsible Growth
A Note On This Series

Game Change for Built Environment Professionals: Becoming a Professional Entrepreneur, is
the second of a three-part series. The first essay explores how engineers, architects, scientists,
and designers can change the game of professional practice through technical innovation,
knowledge sharing, and entrepreneurship. The second essay examines specific strategies for
technical innovation and becoming a professional entrepreneur -- including case studies of firms
are already engaging in these types of entrepreneurial initiatives. The third essay raises the bar
for built environment professionals regarding their mission to spur the growth and development
of society, going beyond just economic growth to propose a broader definition of responsible
growth, bringing more people up to decent standards of living while making our living systems
healthier and more resilient.
I would appreciate thoughts and feedback about this essay. Please send your comments to:
kyle@kylevdavy.com

May 6, 2013
Page 13

Essays To Read

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Essays To Read

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Catching The Third Wave

The Design Process – Architectural Thinking

Originally published in Architecture: Celebrating the Past, Designing the Future,

Catching The Third Wave

Four Major Disruptive Trends

New Digital Design Tools And Technologies: Exponential growth in computational

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

Convergence and Change

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

A New Design Theory Inspired By Living Systems

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

Kyle V. Davy Consulting

Catching The Third Wave

The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

Catching The Third Wave

This is our time.

Kyle V. Davy AIA

Animal Spirits – Page 1

Animal Spirits – Page 2

Press, New York, 2004.

Animal Spirits – Page 3

Generosity & Noble Purpose

Animal Spirits – Page 4

A powerful illustration of an inspirational purpose, within the context of a professional

Assessing Your Firm’s Animal Spirits

Animal Spirits – Page 5

Inspiring Animal Spirits

Animal Spirits – Page 6

Kyle V. Davy AIA

Innovation Drives Growth

Marginalized and Commoditized in the Twentieth Century

Rybzynski, Scribner, New York, 2003.

Romer’s Virtuous Cascade in Action

Game Change: Mind Shift Required

Coming Next: Part II: Becoming A Professional Entrepreneur

A Note On This Series

Kyle V. Davy AIA

Three Types of Entrepreneurs

Professional Entrepreneurship: Start With Innovation

Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass., 2009.

Invest in Research & Development

Connect and Collaborate

To take advantage of their solar energy development opportunity, PSOMAS connected to a

Professionals as Bridge and Catalyst

Professionals - Part I: Growth Through Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

A Note On This Series

You might also like