Built Environment Matters

Diversity and the Future of Architecture with Satwinder Samra

• Bryden Wood • Season 1 • Episode 17

Share episode
Satwinder Samra, architect, educator, TV presenter... talks to Bryden Wood Architecture Board Director Paul O'Neill about opening doors and increasing diversity in Architecture, the importance of listening, and how his students make him optimistic for the sector


Send us a text

To learn more about Bryden Wood's Design to Value philosophy, visit www.brydenwood.com. You can also follow Bryden Wood on LinkedIn and X.

Paul O'Neill:

Welcome to this edition of Built Environment Matters. The Bryden Wood podcast. I'm Paul O'Neill Architectural Board Director at Bryden Wood. And this month we're joined by Satwinder Samra. Satwinder was born in Huddersfield in 1969 to migrant Punjabi parents. His early education was at Deighton High School. And Huddersfield New College after gaining a first class honors and Distinction at Master's level at Sheffield University, he worked for Urban Splash in Liverpool, Proctor and Matthews in London before co-founding his own practice Sauce Architecture. He now collaborates with William Matthews Associates supporting international design projects. At the same time he has become an accomplished architectural educator. Having taught as a visiting design tutor, guest reviewer and external examiner at schools across the world. This includes the Royal College of Art, Hong Kong Design Institute, and Yale School of Architecture. He is currently Director of Collaborative Practice at Sheffield University School of Architecture. His insights, expertise and ability to communicate with passion and insight mean he is in demand as a commentator, a host, an on-screen designer and broadcaster, highlights include the BAFTA award-winning CBBC series The Dengineers interviews with Monocle Radio, The Times of India and the BBC. Ultimately, all his work promotes, making architecture accessible to everyone. Sat winder, welcome.

Satwinder Samra:

Hi, Paul. Lovely to be here. And thank you so much for asking me to take part in the Bryden Wood podcast

Paul O'Neill:

fantastic. Great to speak to you. I believe you're sat in the arts tower at the Sheffield, university, which I spent many years. And I think we crossed over as I was starting my degree you were considering a different role there following your master's to go into teaching. And more recently, of course we bumped into each other at the AJ Awards where our project Circle Birmingham picked up a Highly Commended award and you were picking up an award on behalf of one of your collaborators, I believe. And you were carrying around the red disc, the winner's disc for them on their behalf, which is great to see. So it, it kind of brings me onto the first question. You know, I've had quite a traditional career as an architect. And I was just wondering if you could explain to me and everyone else in various different areas in your last 20 or so years as an architect how you followed such a varied career path

Satwinder Samra:

Yeah, of course, Paul. So I suppose bumping into you at the AJ Awards was wonderful in itself and picking up a prize on behalf of William Matthews Associates. But to get to that point, as you suggest has been a bit of a wide and varied journey. I did study here at the Sheffield school of architecture, which was a brilliant school because it gave me the confidence to realise that I perhaps did have some talents. And I'd found something that I was really interested in and fascinated by. So I left here and I went to work for a fairly unknown developer at the time called Urban Splash. And as we know, they've gone on to do great and wonderful things in terms of regenerating many cities and towns centers around the country. And that for me, was a wonderful experience because we were sort of, you know, we were quite young and everybody was kind of just getting on with things that there was no worries. And the thing for me that was absolutely fascinating was that we were given the chance to actually design was so different to my year out experience, which was quite practical. And I was very much looked after but the sense that you could have an idea and you could make it happen. And that experience for me was pretty seminal really in terms of my overall journey, because it gave me the confidence to realise that when you draw something, it can have an impact, but also that you have to work with others and work productively so that you realise that it's not a singular act. The profession, you know, often speaks about the hero architect. And that was the antithesis of that. So I spent nearly four years in Liverpool and Manchester and then I was drawn to the wonderful opportunity to come and work in London. And every architect wants to work in London, it's the kind of stepping stone. And so I went to work with Proctor Matthews which was very different private practice working on social housing and the Stonebridge estate, which was so different to doing loft apartments in, Manchester,and Liverpool. And after that, I went to America for a bit, travelled around, came back. Wasn't really sure if I still wanted to be an architect, as we all do, we all go through this moment in our careers of thinking, is this what I want to do? And then I managed to get a little bit of teaching work here at the school of architecture. And at the same time set up a little practice with a friend of mine and the two kind of developed together. And then Jeremy Taylor, who was head of school said, are you interested in running the third year? So I ran the third year and ended up doing that for 10 years. And then I run the part two program for a couple of years. And then more recently this is pretty untraditional, isn't it? Cause now I'm about to jump into the world of television, where, I got approached by the BBC. And they said there were making a program called The Dengineers where they design dens for kids so it's a bit like Grand Designs for a younger demographic. They came and visited us actually in the arts tower. They filmed me and a very good friend of mine, Tony Broomhead, who I asked to come and work with me and collaborate. I don't like working on my own, I like to work with other people, have a sounding board have someone to share some of the responsibility someone to drink a cup of coffee with and chew things over and they came and saw us and they said, can you just have a chat with each other? So we sat there chatting, drawing, talking about ideas. How would you make a garden better? Or why is it important to have the sunlight in a certain place in a, den. And why is architecture important or not? Depending on where you sit and the next day they phoned us up and said we'd really love you to work on the show. And that was about five years ago now. And we're on our sixth series. Now we normally get about three episodes. So that was something that was totally unexpected, not something I trained for. And then at the same time had been developing some conversations with an old friend of mine who you might remember William Matthews who used to work for Renzo Piano. And, and it was on behalf of William that I actually picked up that big red gong at the AJ Awards and carried around all evening. They're quite heavy. Aren't they? And. So I've been doing some work with William working as a consultant helping on international design competition. So I feel very fortunate at the moment. And we might touch upon that later on, what do we mean by being lucky or do you make your own luck, but I've got this lovely breadth of different activities, which keep me interested and hopefully interesting

Paul O'Neill:

Fantastic. So collaboration is key toBryden Wood we have a floor in our London office where we invite clients and delivery partners to collaborate and live in our office, which is fairly unusual for architects and engineers. But collaborations obviously really important for you. You're the Director of Collaborative Practice at Sheffield. Can you tell us a little bit more about that please?

Satwinder Samra:

Yeah, of course. About six years ago, we realised in the school of architecture that the introduction of the higher fee potentially could be problematic for architecture students. As we know, architectural training is quite long, it's quite arduous, it's quite expensive. And we were concerned that certain students who might not have the means or the ability to do the full seven years might seriously consider leaving after doing their part one. So we thought, is there a model that we can develop that allows students to earn as they learn, but also to better capitalise on the relationships that can exist between the university and practice. So we designed this new program called Collaborative Practice and I was sort of tasked with a number of colleagues to sort of design this new course. And essentially students work four days a week and the fifth days for academic learning and support. And the thing that's unique about this program is the work that the students do in practice becomes live academic content. So there's a genuine. Relationship between the student's experience in practice and what we found when we set it up, people were a little bit doubting and there's like, well, is it a part-time course? Is it like a kind of old school apprenticeship? And you know, we had to be a bit pushy really to convince people that this was a good idea. And we're now sort of six years in, we've got over 50 leading UK practices on board. And I think the thing that. Is really beneficial for the students is that they have an opportunity to carry on working, but also learning, which just seems like quite a sensible idea. Yeah, no, that's fantastic. And Bryden Wood.

Paul O'Neill:

We'd definitely like to be one of your partner practices for this. So we should talk more about that

Satwinder Samra:

wonderful

Paul O'Neill:

offline.

Satwinder Samra:

So we've got 51.

Paul O'Neill:

Fantastic.

Satwinder Samra:

It's a great list. It's a great list of practices. So, you know, anybody who's studying architecture I think could pick any practice on there and have a great education from in practice and obviously with the university.

Paul O'Neill:

Your work is often around the importance of diversity and inclusion in Architecture. Would you like to just talk about that and how you address that? But before we do, could we look at why, as in, how does the lack of diversity and inclusion among architects manifest itself in the Built Environment? Yeah, that's, that's a great question. So I'm sort of speaking here quite close from the heart and personal experience. I'm an Asian architect. I'm from a working class background. My father was a bus driver and my mum used to sew clothes in a factory. So if I came now, to potentially consider studying architecture

Satwinder Samra:

I probably might not do it because it's long, arduous and expensive, but also you know, I think there are barriers that exist and sometimes these barriers are hidden. Now, if we consider the makeup of the profession at the moment it's definitely getting more diverse and there's more diverse faces and people. And I think for me, and I've realized this in the last few years that I'm in a slight position of privilege, but also I can help students who might feel a bit different or they might be the first person in their family to go to university like I was they might feel like they don't fit in. And so I think if we have, if we have more people like me or people who are different. Actually visible then I think it gives a a sort of open door, or it gives someone the opportunity to realize that maybe they could do this as well. And because the courses are, you know, expensive, I think that's another barrier for people who might be from a background where there isn't much money floating around or there's perhaps a sort of worry about that. You know, we talk about student loans and the repayment is, on one level affordable. But for some people, the idea of debt is actually very obstructive and it puts people off. So I feel on one level, that's something I'm super fascinated by and feel very proud that I can stand up in front of people and say, look, this is what I do. This is why it's interesting. And this is a wonderful career to be involved with. But also if we have those different voices, Actually at the table when we're designing new parts of towns or looking at housing projects, they will bring a different life perspective and a different set of experiences, which I think makes the practice of architecture more rounded and, and less kind of myopic. And I think that often can be, problematic.

Paul O'Neill:

Yeah, I think it's great that you're addressing that. I think we were fortunate to go to university when we didn't actually have to pay those tuition fees. And I think if I was in the position now maybe the fear of debt comes from parents rather than young, you know, 18 year olds, 19 year olds, but it's definitely something that must hang over you when you start, particularly with a course like architecture is as it's well known. It's a six, seven year course like studying to be a doctor. And that does definitely rack up a large potential debt at the end of it. So it's great to hear more about that approach that you're taking and using the initiative to to address this. Can you discuss examples of how more Inclusive approach has led to better outcomes, whether this is personal or you've seen it from your students.

Satwinder Samra:

Okay. So. On a personal level for me, I think that the more you listen in any situation, which in its sense is, is about inclusivity. The better aware you become. And I think for the architectural profession, the training historically was very much around you present your work or you promote it, or worst case scenario you defend it and you have an argument which suggests that you don't really listen, you've already made your mind up and however possible you're going to get this through. And I think schools of architecture have a certain responsibility to bear in the way that they may have taught and the way that some schools still do teach. And I think if, we encourage students to listen to. And to be better colleagues. Then I think that puts them in a better position, not just in terms of the workplace, but in terms of their own lives. So that's one area that I'm super fascinated by , you know, architects often don't talk about listening. But I think it's such an important skill. And then in terms of students, what I've found is that what we're trying to do through, a lot of our teaching, and this is very much pursued in club to practice is to empower them with the ability not just to listen. To better communicate. So how do you get an idea across succinctly using either drawings or the spoken word and how do you use language in a productive and inclusive way rather than in a kind of semantic obstructive way? So I often talk about you know, the architects the words that they use are problematic because they actually create a barrier. So when architects talk about liminal space or shutter gaps, it's like, well, what are they about. You know, it's a, it's on one level, it's a irrelevant. Yeah. And that's where I find the work in television is super helpful because if you're trying to communicate to a broader public, then you have to use words and images that are open and help people to better understand. And I've found that that's really helped not just in my work, but in the way that I work with my students. So we talk a lot about timekeeping, tone of voice, smiling. Why don't architects ever smile? Go through any architects, websites and look at the faces and the poses. They're all, it's like, they've got something wrong with their shoulders and they seem to stare through the camera rather than at it, and they're very rarely smile. I've got loads of screenshots of architects, websites with them, not smiling. And I've used that in a lecture and I just put it up and I say, why isn't anybody smiling?

Paul O'Neill:

What happened? Why did everybody get so serious? I'll have to check out my profile picture and make sure I'm smiling. I'm sure I am. I'm sure I am.

Satwinder Samra:

So, with regard to I'm just going to come back to Sheffield, actually, Sheffield university. You must've seen many changes with regard to the, to the tutors as well, and their approach to encourage and, and kind of collaborate and encourage the student. From definitely when I started and when I finished, there was a big change. And you mentioned the likes of Jeremy Till's starting and Sarah starting as well. And that really changed. That was a, that was a real change to Sheffield. But before then it may be, it was a little bit dated and it was an evolution really made a difference to me. So it must have evolved even further of the last, since I left, 20 odd years ago, 22 years ago, there must have been further developments as well. Could you. Just touch on that a little bit. Sure, sure. And I think you've touched upon something there that, which is around previous architectural cultures, even though it was pretty good here, there was still a culture of the crit being this adversarial place where you would defend your work. And I think we were better here than a lot of other schools, but I think a lot of that's come around changing some of the words and the language. So we call it a review. We don't call it a crit. I always say that when students present their work, they don't present their share. When we Look at students' work, I will often encourage other students to be the reviewer. An othe r one will be the timekeeper. Another one will be the note taker. So we all take turns. So I'm more like a facilitator as opposed to the tutor who has infinite knowledge and wisdom on everything to do with architecture, because I don't have that. Just got a bit more experience. And I think in doing that it encourages the students to practice having a voice and practice having an opinion. And I think if they can do that within the learning environment, then when they come into practice or they're, you know, in client groups or they're with stakeholders or they're meeting a community, those skills empower them to not just become better listeners, but to become better advocates for the profession. So I think there is definitely, there's definitely a culture definitely within this school of architecture, which is around that. And I know that there are cultures that exist in other schools where people still talk about crits and arguments and students defending their work. It's kind of so outdated and highly problematic because what it leads to is students becoming highly defensive of their work and then they get into practice and they take those traits with them. And then it's no wonder that clients say, well, these architects, they don't really listen. They already had an idea of what they wanted and you know why were they so serious and not smiling as well? And then they wanted me to pay them 12 percent.

Paul O'Neill:

Yeah, absolutely. Um, Another thing that's changed is the way we produce information. And I think that was a transitional period as well when I, when I started. So it was very much in the first couple of years of still tracing paper and scratching out mistakes. And then we were introduced to CAD and we had various modules related to the use of CAD but obviously, you know, 20 years it's really changed. I was just wondering from, your point of view, how digital has changed the way that we design or how we teach architecture. So when I was there, it was kind of on the side and it wasn't encouraged. You never really encouraged to produce and use these techniques, these digital techniques to represent your work. It was still to do with how you could use your artistic abilities in terms of producing drawings, beautiful line drawings, sketches, artwork and model making, of course. And how's that changed now? And the use of the old techniques, as well as the new techniques or the mix

Satwinder Samra:

I think you mentioning the idea of mix is absolutely fundamental so that what's valuable for students and very important is that they have a repertoire of skills and abilities to not just research or better understand what already exists. But then how do you develop an idea whether it's something to do with something in three dimensions or you might be trying to work out how light might fall into a space, or it's more to do with proportion or the way that someone might move through a building. Now, as we know, you can do that with a sketch or you might do it with a physical model, but also we have a repertoire of digital tools available to us now. So we try to encourage students to use the breadth of, Tools that are available, but I also think that there's a flip side to this, and it'd be interesting to hear your thoughts on this, which is something I call the digital arms race, the visualization arms race for everybody has to have the most beautiful visualizations which they either do in-house. or they get from people specialists when they're doing a pitch now on one level, that's amazing because you can have a super realistic image of what this project might look like. The downside of it is I think that sometimes we're over designing a project at the earliest stages when perhaps we don't need to do. And I have this conversation with students where we talk about what's the most appropriate manner or tools to use any particular, time in the design process. And I think a mixture is good. And I still think that physical models that are made by hand are very empowering and especially empowering for a student because it gets you to see the third dimension without having to sort of travel into hyperspace because ultimately a screen is still flat. Like, I'm looking at you now and we're having this conversation, but I'm having a two dimensional representation through a screen of a three-dimensional experience. Now we could say, you know, you look at gaming and you look at the world of unreal engine and epic games. That is for me is absolutely, you know, an area. that is still slightly untouched and we need to go into that further, but I think that working side-by-side with physical models or robotics or a sketch, if we have the repetoire. Available to us and we use the repertoire. I think that makes us better designers. And also, I think for clients, it's fascinating because clients like to kind of come into this magical world of design and we hold their hand, don't we And there's nothing more special than that moment when you put something on the table and the client goes, wow, I wasn't expecting that. Or often they'll say, well, I couldn't have done that. And you want to say, well, yeah, that's fine. That's okay. Because we're trained, we're here to do. And, and you can pay us and help us to do that.

Paul O'Neill:

Yeah, I think the mix is critical. There's nothing like a physical model, but then again, you know, the, the, the engines that we use, the design tools that we use, we can very quickly produce the beautiful 3d CGIs. Now the downside, which I'm just it's not a downside. But if you produce what looks like a finished resolved, design too early on you have to make the client aware that it's just the first iteration, the first idea. And sometimes they feel that they might not be able to touch or move it around because it looks so finished. So polished. And I think that is it's something I'm discussing with the university of Greenwich. We're looking at a couple of buildings on their sites for them, a library building, which is fantastic project. And I just, you know, the part two students who produced the information, did it in a super quick time, you know, within a week or two weeks of producing these kinds of masterpiece CGIs, which are mind blowing really. But we had to tell the clients said just, you know, this is the first approach. The first, the first idea. And really, this design needs to be developed with collaboration, with you, with feedback. And you know, and then they relax a little bit because once somebody puts what looks like a finished design on the table? They say, well, you know, it's that it is that the commission ended. I said, no, it's just that we can produce these iterations very quickly. And we can tell you in great detail. So that's the positive. We can look at things in great detail very quickly, but you just got to make them aware that it's still the early iterations and we can produce the next evolve design to a same level of detail if not more using the technology.

Satwinder Samra:

And I think there's something around. Speed and time sometimes doing things quickly is good because then it means people might not be in the office till nine o'clock every night. So I think that's a good thing. And I also think that sometimes projects are overworked. So the ability to have endless options shouldn't always mean that you should always make all the options. And this is something else, you know, we talk about here in the school of architecture, which is around working hours, culture and mental health. And how design is on one level, quite intangible. And there are a number of unknowns that you're constantly dealing with and we try and encourage the students to realize that dealing with the unknowns is a normal part of the process. It's not because you not good at what you're doing so that this is what I call the positive gray or the area in the middle of the design process. We're not quite sure where it's going to land, but if you stay with it always will land. And I think you need to take time away from the keyboard or the drawing board or the model making table and go and live everyday life and then come back. because how can you design for everyday life if you're not living it? So, you know, these architects you know, this culture of working late into the night because you know, they're so passionate and they do a such a great job. And it's like a badge of honor. It's kind of problematic. Fair enough. You know, when you're reaching a deadline, if you've got to have a push that's fair enough, but you shouldn't be the norm that culture of the, you know, the long hours working culture. And I think some of that comes from schools of architecture, especially when they say we're open 24 hours a day, because all that's saying is you should be here 24 hours. It's not saying you can pick and choose when you may or may not come to the school. So here at Sheffield, we close the studio eight o'clock in the evening, and because we're sending a very strong signal an out about working hours culture. Yeah, were guilty of that. I think when we were there, you know, I lived in a house of architects and you know, who stayed up the latest, who stayed up all night, you know? And it wasn't. Yeah, it was a badge of honor. And I'm glad it's changing. And so talking about things that are changing. So we talked about how we create information. What about the changing role of the architect in the coming years? How do you see that's changing? So we touched about it in terms of education, in terms of how we represent our buildings. What about the role. So I often think about this because if you look at, you know, if you were to pick up on our RIBA journal from 1965, there would be an article on the changing role of the architect. This is an ongoing conversation, and I don't think it's anything specific to the current profession. But what I would say is that the profession needs to be mindful that it doesn't become irrelevant. And the way it will maintain relevance is by ensuring that we can best communicate what it is we do and why, what we do is our value. And, and for me, that happens through being quite clear about what we do, why it's valuable and then how we can create change. And that happens through students being well-equipped. To sort of respond to situations. And I also think that the traditional role of the architect is one predicated by contractual law and by legislation and the professional bodies, which on one level we don't have much of a say in, and we have to work with that. But I think around that there are students and practices setting up now who might call themselves special consultants, or they might call themselves creative directors, or they might call themselves you know space changers or something. They might not call themselves architects, but the role that they're fulfilling is similar, but it's slightly different. I think the skills are very, very valuable in lots of different arenas. But I think the biggest challenges the profession faces essentially is is there enough work? Who is doing the work and what is an appropriate fee to charge to have a sustainable practice. And I often speak with my students about what is an appropriate fee to charge on a project. And how do you ensure that you can put bread on the table, but ideally that would be a flavorsome bread rather than the cheapest bread that you can buy from the supermarket. So, you know, we have to maintain relevant. And I think the other thing that I think is fascinating is the role of the contractor potentially could be diminished. Although contractors might not be happy to hear that because we have the technology that allows us to design something on a machine. And then for that file to goes directly either to a robot or a community group who might saw the bits of wood up themselves and put the project together themselves. So I think sometimes the legislation and the procurement scenarios don't necessarily get in the way but they kind of, it's a bit of a straight jacket.

Paul O'Neill:

Yeah, I think linking a big thing for Bryden Wood is, is getting the intelligence out of the supply chain and using that intelligence to deliver better value to the end product really. And we're always reaching and seeking that intelligence and that experience from the sub-contractors the specialists, the experts, the fabricators. And yes, we do reach down there and we're able to we have a robotics lead and we fabricate a lot of our D f MA projects by using those techniques really and sending or exporting the files straight to the fabricators robotics or a process line. Which is something that I think will be a great change in architecture and construction in the coming years With regard to Sheffield, is it's still in demand, I guess you are oversubscribed with students?

Satwinder Samra:

Yeah. As you know, you know, the school has a reputation which is a very good one. And we're very much interested in the social purpose of architecture, but also you know, designing buildings and projects of merit. And students that come through the system and leave are often in demand. And I think one of the reasons is because they're seem to be canny and flexible and they can think around things. They're good listeners, good communicators. And they're not, they're not peacocks, you know, they're a bit more willing to integrate and to sort of think around things, which I think they're are the kind of people that, you know practices want in the workplace and clients like working with.

Paul O'Neill:

Excellent. And we've obviously touched on your Dengineers work. But how do you see that we can attract a wider range an even wider range of people into the profession, which obviously starts with the route through the degree, or should that change? Do you need a degree to practice architecture? Should we be looking at that change and have more of a apprenticeship type role from the very early stages?

Satwinder Samra:

I think the more options that are available for students, the better, because choice is absolutely fundamental because someone might not have the money or they might want to live at home. They might not move somewhere else. They might still want to work. There might be a students might be more mature. They might already have a family, education, you know, needs to continue opening up. Which I think is something that's absolutely You know, fundamental really to change the nature, not just of, of the profession, but allows students who have got different life experience into into, into practice and, you know, into sort of developing themselves as well.

Paul O'Neill:

Yeah. And finally, I guess, a question is, how optimistic are you of the architecture and construction sector, maybe focusing on architecture, of course as a role in society

Satwinder Samra:

I'm absolutely optimistic, you know, you have to be optimistic to be a designer because you're dealing with uncertainty and unknowns. So sometimes you know, you might have moments of pessimism, but I think if you speak to some of the students and you'll know this from some of the younger members of staff that you might have on the whole, they're eager and willing and they want to learn, and there is a kind of change the world kind of mentality. Which is around climate change and injustice and sort of political activism. And I think those aspects are as important as where do you put the front door and is there a shadow gap or not? And you know, what, what materials are you going to use for a project? And I think working with those two things simultaneously with students who are sort of passionate and engage with the support of practices like yourselves you know, I'm absolutely optimistic.

Paul O'Neill:

Fantastic. It's been fantastic chatting to you, Satwin der thank you very much.

Satwinder Samra:

Thanks so much. Absolute pleasure

Paul O'Neill:

Thank you for listening to this edition of Built Environment Matters. Please join us again. Next time.

People on this episode

Head Shot

Jaimie Johnston MBE

Host