作者：麗貝卡·倫納德

DW Legacy Design?工程

DW Legacy Design?是Design Workshop開發(fā)的一種循證設計方法，旨在為項目團隊提供決策制定的透明化依據(jù)。它可以使團隊保持統(tǒng)一，并相互協(xié)作。盡管全公司的同仁們一致同意只有在實際世界的項目應用中才能真實檢驗這種設計的指標，但是很多項目團隊都有一種共同感受，那就是除了形式創(chuàng)造外還必須做研究。要創(chuàng)建一個可衡量的流程，必須熟悉研究方法、分析并記錄 廣闊而深入的主題——這是在當今如此快節(jié)奏的從業(yè)者世界里難以實現(xiàn)的。這也許是許多從業(yè)設計師很少冒險開展研究的原因，而只有專業(yè)學者才會進行這樣的研究。

DW Legacy Design?擁有一條嵌入式的反饋式循環(huán)——創(chuàng)造、評估、創(chuàng)造、評估，——它縮短了研究的學習曲線，并保證有時間來評估隨著方法學的演變而日益增多的復雜內容。從項目初始一直到竣工后的監(jiān)控，都在實行這種嚴謹?shù)姆椒?。在過去數(shù)年來，Design Workshop的設計師已找到將這種方法整合到項目工作的機遇和挑戰(zhàn)。

尋找可進行DW Legacy Design?的工程

應用DW Legacy Design?的過程的第一步是贏得這項工作?？蛻舯仨氃敢饨邮芷漤椖吭谒拇蠓懂牐ōh(huán)境、社區(qū)、經濟和藝術）內是綜合性的并且可衡量的。由于鮮有實踐者會嘗試達到這種嚴謹?shù)难芯克?，因此，客戶可能對這種方法的價值并不了解。設定綜合目標、開發(fā)基線和尋找基準點所需的努力程度可能會遇到阻力——這些活動經費很可能已經占項目預算的三分之一了。如有必要，設計師必須“推銷”這種循證設計。有一點是至關重要的，那就是設計師必須通過展示先前工作并與之分享初始水平及持續(xù)的分析其是如何使以后的項目節(jié)約成本并獲益的經驗，從而設定合適的期望。

自始至終都運用DW Legacy Design?方法

項目有擔保之后，設計團隊必須制定一項工作計劃，該項計劃包括對每個設計過程階段的嚴謹衡量，并在完成后符合循證設計標準。團隊必須快速熟悉關鍵問題、創(chuàng)新機會、批判性問題疑問、客戶愿景以及客戶關鍵成功因素（CSF）?？蛻粼妇笆强蛻纛A期的項目成果的清晰表達。這僅可通過聆聽客戶的表述才可形成?？蛻舻腃SF是必須實現(xiàn)的特征或結果，只有如此才能讓客戶認為這個項目是成功的，而且，在整個項目過程中，必須對客戶的CSF進行評估。隨著項目的進展，可能也有必要對這份清單進行修改?？蛻舻腃SF在工作范圍內也許并沒有被描述，所以幫助客戶界定是十分重要的 。

Design Workshop團隊在這個過程開始時，會與客戶、團隊成員及在場的關鍵利益相關者召開戰(zhàn)略性項目啟動（SKO）會議。與整個團隊和合作者的廣泛對話會使備選方案更周全，也大致議定了確定問題的方法。透明化的決策制定使各方均能夠了解擬定的過程，因而對項目有統(tǒng)一期望。這個過程充分體現(xiàn)在以下范例中。

在奧斯汀公園與娛樂活動管理局的領導下，通過與利益相關者的會話，Design Workshop顧問團隊針對德克薩斯州奧斯汀共和廣場項目找出并確認了客戶的CSF。在這個過程的構建階段盡可能以可衡量的方式來表達每個關鍵的成功因素。例如，方案聲明，“該項目應保存和保護現(xiàn)有的‘拍賣橡樹’，因為 奧斯汀市的原始地皮就是在‘拍賣橡樹’下出售的。”這一關于樹木保護的表述當然是一個重要的普遍性問題，特別關注的是“拍賣橡樹”的保存，與一般的林木保存截然相反，可以說，這也是一個批判性問題。在這個階段，不可能讓每個CSF都可衡量，因為目前的狀況還是未知數(shù)，且尚未開展研究去了解什么才是合理的目標。相應的還有數(shù)種表述，如：“該項目應為多世代的使用者提供機會”，“該項目應創(chuàng)建一個‘標志性’公園，體現(xiàn)出鄰里的同一性。”雖然不可衡量，但這些觀點也被記錄在案，構成項目團隊的研究議程的基礎。（參看圖1）

一旦團隊的基礎工作確立，就必須應對關鍵項目的挑戰(zhàn)，并制定相應的方法?！绊椖坷Ь场笔且豁棓⑹滦圆呗裕枋龅氖琼椖康木經r。這項策略在把DW Legacy Design?運用到項目中的同時，總結了必須應對的主要挑戰(zhàn)。在討論項目語境的初始階段，首先遇到的困境就是：“什么會妨礙項目取得成功？”這個問題生動地體現(xiàn)了項目的復雜性以及對綜合解決方案的需求。這樣一來，困境聲明就完全不同于工作范圍，也不同于客戶的愿景和目標。通過團隊的設計與規(guī)劃調查進行檢驗和確定項目成果，而“項目主題”則是關于項目成果的聲明。它是對核心問題或困境聲明中存在的疑問的擬定解決方案。共同清晰地表明項目的偉大計劃，可以使團隊為了共同目標或經歷團結起來。

在項目早期，團隊會制定項目的困境和主題聲明。由于附近的公共開放空間有限，共和國廣場項目的困境在于，與其它同等規(guī)模的城市公園相比，它的使用強度更大，而且，由于對隨后的運營和維護缺乏合理的規(guī)劃，該公園有可能被過度使用。此外，公園的再設計包括很多利益相關者，它們是聯(lián)邦政府、州政府和市政府、在活動期間經常出入該公園的社區(qū)成員、在市中心工作的人以及住在該公園附近的居民，由于再設計對他們有著多重意義，因此，獲得對再設計的廣泛支持變得更具挑戰(zhàn)性。

項目的主題是要承認地域的歷史以及會影響該過程的其它計劃；加強文化、物質、歷史、藝術、情感、生態(tài)和經濟方面的聯(lián)系；把該公園與其它著名的城市目的地公園相比較；最后，確保實施及持續(xù)運營和維護的成本可由設計產生的附加收益所負擔（如：附加銷售額或財產稅）。（參看圖2）

敘事原則是關于項目固有的主觀陳述，也是項目相關人士都了解和信服的陳述。對于DW Legacy Design?的四大范疇（環(huán)境、社區(qū)、經濟和藝術），每個范疇敘事原則的清晰度對嚴謹、全面、以探索為導向的設計過程是至關重要的。這一做法為項目團隊奠定了共同的基礎，并針對主題檢驗作出各種設想。敘事原則可使團隊在與客戶的討論以及在公開會議上更具說服力，以獲得較好的效果。

從一開始就針對四大范疇——環(huán)境、社區(qū)、經濟和藝術——進行綜合思考，使結果能融合進最全面的可能性與績效指標 。項目目標對循證設計過程是必不可少的，因此，必須盡早制定，以便為分析提供信息、為備選方案創(chuàng)作提供指導、為持續(xù)監(jiān)控提供基礎。對于目標的要求 必須是明確、可衡量、可執(zhí)行、實事求是、有時限，但是，這一點很難在首次團隊集體討論會上實現(xiàn)。在調查項目機遇，同時制定方案或者召開SKO會議的時候，Design Workshop團隊會組織進行一場關于目標和指標發(fā)展的簡便 對話。專門設計的“指標選擇明細表”用于指導以探索為導向的討論，并鼓勵實現(xiàn)DW Legacy Design?四大范疇的目標。初次集體討論后，小組會選擇并優(yōu)先考慮相關的研究與衡量主題、制定初始目標并強化對冗余區(qū)域的探索。這一做法有助于從一開始就形成工作范圍、確定額外團隊成員并確保綜合性、優(yōu)先化方法的制定。在設計過程的前期設定的目標的責任性是交付具有真正價值的可持續(xù)性解決方案的必要條件。對于共和廣場項目，目標是通過采用鍵盤輪詢設備的公開會議與在線投票的方式，與利益相關者公開討論后制定的。共設定了25個項目目標，這個數(shù)字被認為可以體現(xiàn)項目的復雜程度；不過，不時地追蹤如此多目標是難以處理的，項目團隊也發(fā)現(xiàn)，要以同等的嚴謹性達成所有目標是很難的。共和廣場項目的目標例子包括“增加鳥類、松鼠和蝴蝶的棲息地”和“減少熱島效應”。顯然團隊早期認為每個目標都有可行的措施。對團隊而言，要了解如何衡量其它目標就更難了，比如：“把場地獨特性真實納入設計和規(guī)劃中”。團隊選擇把它們視為目標，但也承認，定性衡量多于定量衡量。（參看圖3）

設定目標后，Design Workshop團隊在現(xiàn)場或區(qū)域內對每個目標的現(xiàn)狀進行研究 ，以便建立測量進度的基線。為了提供這些數(shù)字實際意義的參考點，要把基線與行業(yè)標準、最佳實踐和同等設施相比較。沒有這條基線，隨后的衡量就沒有參考意義。公司的門戶網(wǎng)站是一個設有共享知識和信息的內部站點，其它項目所收集的以往項目經驗以及完整記錄的案例研究為當前項目提供了各項基準。對于共和廣場項目，熱島效應是通過測定不透水表面的數(shù)量而衡量的（目前，該公園有25%的不透水表面）。棲息地是通過樹冠覆蓋面和下層花卉植被的百分比進行衡量的（目前，該區(qū)域有40%是被樹冠覆蓋的）。每個目標都可找到數(shù)據(jù)來源，否則就會以場地調查、利益相關者投票或已知事實的推論的形式進行基本研究（如：衡量光線是通過在柵格上的光照取樣，并測繪出數(shù)值而得到的）。（參看圖4）

接下來的工作階段——制定和檢驗備選方案、安排項目進行長期監(jiān)控——往往是最具挑戰(zhàn)性的。研究是開發(fā)設計和建立備選方法證據(jù)的基本要素；不過，對于研究費用次于開拓思路和制定備選方案所需費用的項目來說，這也是一個要點。為了確保決策人充分了解信息，必須利用設計過程早期在測量基線過程中所用的相同方法對每個設計備選方案進行分析。這個步驟面臨的挑戰(zhàn)在于，制定備選方案通常占用了大部分分配時間，幾乎沒有或很少留時間在達成目標時對成功進行衡量。此外，若設計方案尚未完成，某些指標是很難預測的。例如，在開幕日、在種植兩年后或者在植物完全成熟時，設計師如何預測備選方案的樹冠覆蓋面？再次以共和廣場項目的非滲透表面指標為例，現(xiàn)狀查明的不透水表面的現(xiàn)有數(shù)量為25%，而可同等公園的不透水表面比例為50%～60%。若這三種備選方案測得的樹冠覆蓋面為40～50%（現(xiàn)存條件與可比擬基準之間的范圍），團隊則認為這些備選方案是可以實現(xiàn)的。（參看圖5）

盡管強烈希望對項目施工后的績效進行評估，但是，接受長期監(jiān)控的項目的范例極少。施工圖和施工監(jiān)理完成后，設計師的契約通常就結束了，客戶也已轉移到其它事務上，未來的利益相關者（如：居民、使用者）并不清楚如何利用基線與未來測量結果進行比較。即使客戶有遠見去實行項目監(jiān)控計劃，團隊人事變動、缺乏系統(tǒng)知識以及數(shù)據(jù)可用性的改變也使其難以繼續(xù)將指標與基線、基準進行比較，因而難以長期了解項目是否獲得成功。共和廣場項目有望在2013年年底動工，預計在2014年年底竣工。同樣地，該項目一直以來也沒有監(jiān)控。不過，有一些目標需要持續(xù)監(jiān)控，才能確保其已達成。例如，有幾個目標僅可通過對建成后公園的使用者調查才能進行衡量，如：“提高對該公園的歷史意義的認識”和“通過公園設計彰顯本土特征”。根據(jù)社區(qū)會議上的鍵盤投票及在線投票結果確定了這些目標的基線條件，那就是有50%的現(xiàn)有公園使用者對該公園的歷史有清晰了解，并且有12%認為該公園捕捉到了“奧斯汀的精髓”。設計團隊現(xiàn)在就提前思考這些問題，從而對這些目標的變化進行長期監(jiān)控 。（參看圖6）

讓一個接一個的項目都建立在成功的基礎之上

由于在大多數(shù)設計實踐中DW Legacy Design?方法并不常見，還需要一段曲折的經驗，因此，將這個過程確立的初始成本很高。為了在市場競爭中立于不敗之地，設計實踐必須更加高效。從一個項目到另一個項目，團隊成員必須繼續(xù)運用其在先前工作中獲得的經驗。對于某些項目類型，有些指標一直都非常有用。例如，幾乎對所有的街道景觀和公園項目來說樹冠覆蓋面都是至關重要的，它的作用包括：減少徑流、減少熱島效應和提高人類的舒適度。對幾乎所有政策計劃而言，重要的是提供優(yōu)質的、人們買得起的住房。項目團隊能夠從一個接一個的項目獲得寶貴的專業(yè)知識，因此不必花太多的時間和精力進行研究和評價結果。

分享經驗教訓和系統(tǒng)知識的正規(guī)機會具有雙重益處，其一是讓那些不愿嘗試嚴謹指標追求的團隊成員有機會向更富經驗的成員聆聽和學習，其二它提供了一種認知方式給較早接受的成員，他們是一批早于別人勇敢嘗試高質量研究的人。此外，如果已經看到其他項目帶來的積極成果，團隊更有可能采用方法學或開展研究，因此，要熟悉以往取得的成功也十分關鍵。

項目團隊最初面臨的一些挑戰(zhàn)是，他們企圖追蹤過多的指標，而根據(jù)經驗，如何區(qū)分指標的優(yōu)先次序才是成功的關鍵。與內部人員分享范例非常重要，這樣團隊才不會從零開始——Design Workshop一直在內部推廣這種做法。Design Workshop已開發(fā)出一種“可持續(xù)性矩陣”，這份文件至關重要，可以追蹤各種目標及策略、任務、基線、基準和研究原始資料，尤其是在多學科團隊工作時。該工具在公司的門戶網(wǎng)站也有直接鏈接 ，因此，團隊能夠即刻查到潛在指標的相關信息。若每個潛在指標主題都有充分的且易于得到的研究和基準，則可以減少花在研究和“發(fā)明”相關數(shù)據(jù)庫的時間，從而使團隊成員能夠把分配的研究時間花在尋找更佳的信息或者更具相關性的新比較基準上面。項目計劃書模板使團隊能夠從某些既定的DW Legacy Design?內容開始制定項目文件。由于整個公司的團隊都是采用相同的模板，因此可以把一個項目的相關研究結果快速轉移到下一個項目中。在項目進行中，訪問Design Workshop的門戶網(wǎng)站已成一個較為常見的步驟——在設計和施工過程中，員工既 取出也存入知識。

最后，宣傳各項指標，這是至關重要的！Design Workshop已開發(fā)出各種方法慶祝成功，并通過DW Legacy Design?獎勵計劃，對員工提交主題會議論文進行鼓勵，以及出版關于公司實踐和項目的文章和書籍，來將這些信息傳播到公司內。如果與哲學信仰相一致，積極的強化能夠有助于產生有策略、有遠見的行動。

應對挑戰(zhàn)

Design Workshop將DW Legacy Design?方法運用于各個項目中，經歷過眾多的挑戰(zhàn)，力求克服數(shù)十年來對在景觀建筑與規(guī)劃領域中的研究自滿情緒。這些挑戰(zhàn)可分成幾大類，包括：缺乏積極性，缺乏基于研究設計的過程機制，對未知事物存在恐懼心理。缺乏積極性通常是因為缺乏對指標益處的認識。設計師必須要有一個強有力的理由，說明基于指標的設計方法諸如：DW Legacy Design?如何讓設計精益求精，同時也能為客戶省錢。偶爾會出現(xiàn)這樣的情況：團隊在整個設計過程中缺乏自律性，而沒有在過程中追蹤各項指標。阿圖·葛文德在《清單革命》（2009年）里捕捉到了這一現(xiàn)象，他指出，“不過，我們需要的不僅僅是在一起工作的人要相互友好，還需要自律。自律是困難的——比信任和技能還難，甚至可能比無私更難。我們天生就是有缺陷的，是變化無常的生物。我們甚至無法克制自己在兩餐之間不吃零食。我們生來就不是自律的。我們生來就追求新穎和刺激，而不是仔細關注細節(jié)。自律是我們必須處理的工作。”作為項目的領導者，主管和項目經理都必須提倡這種嚴謹性和可衡量性。從簽訂合同到項目的最終實施，如果團隊領導人并沒有表明其對可衡量價值的信任，那么，這種可衡量性就是無謂的了。

第二類挑戰(zhàn)與研究機制有關。如前所述，對新接觸諸如DW Legacy Design?過程的團隊往往會考慮太多的指標，因為實際上還有一種學習曲線，可以針對給定的項目類型對指標進行編輯并區(qū)分指標的優(yōu)先次序。事實上，在項目啟動時建立一致意見時所付出的努力是對日后追蹤指標的順暢過程的投資。區(qū)分優(yōu)先次序時，除了考慮數(shù)據(jù)的規(guī)模和發(fā)布頻率，還要考慮數(shù)據(jù)的可用性。

圖1 (fig. 1)CREDIT: Design WorkshopThere were 1,508 dwelling units within a 1/4 mile of Republic Square in 2010 - up from 372 dwelling units in 2000. 在2010年，共和廣場的1 / 4英里內有1508個住宅單位— 而在2000年，只有372住宅單位。

圖2 (fig. 2)CREDIT: Design WorkshopDue to the park’s role in the neighborhood as both a neighborhood park and a citywide destination, it was at risk of being “l(fā)oved to death.”鑒于街區(qū)內公園扮演著鄰里公園和市級公園的雙重角色，使它處于“愛到死“的危險邊緣。

沒有一個項目經理可以單獨實施這一設計過程。如果團隊成員對統(tǒng)計學和統(tǒng)計分析有基本的認識，且了解看待項目及衡量項目績效的不同方法，那么，團隊的效率就會有所提升。這種學術含意在于，可以表明把基礎統(tǒng)計學納入景觀建筑課程所帶來的價值。

包括分包顧問和利益相關者的團隊應努力做到節(jié)約時間和資源，并抓住創(chuàng)新機會。公司和項目領導層的支援有助于團隊了解這些節(jié)約和機會。辦公室的其他人必須支持團隊的愿景，并幫助填補知識空缺和應對挑戰(zhàn)。經常為項目團隊提供機會進行工作匯報，并從外部資源獲取新的見解，可以確保團隊更嚴謹?shù)剡\用這種方法。強化DW Legacy Design?的其它方式還包括：擁有可使團隊通過研究調查和指標應用來加快設計周期的工具，例如ArcView和BIM；投資于既適合于外行讀者又具有學術嚴謹性的寫作方式培訓；提供關于如何用圖表表達指標的實例和培訓。

團隊開發(fā)的指標往往是設計行業(yè)或學術界的其他人尚未研究過的，這使基準的建立具有挑戰(zhàn)性。這說明實踐者有機會與各機構合作來支持研究。有些人可能會問，私營公司是否應該或能夠以正規(guī)的學術方式來開展研究？這包括以下問題：需要從學術界獲得什么才能開展實踐？怎樣的學術研究對實踐有意義？實踐者開展的研究能否也符合學術研究的標準？課程開發(fā)的意思是什么（有無必要開發(fā)創(chuàng)造力和批判性思維能力）？研究方法和統(tǒng)計學是否應該成為景觀建筑課程的一部分？這對那些旨在把學生教育培訓成從業(yè)者的計劃來說有什么意義？實踐者是否應該參與學術出版物的同行評議文章，將其來作為一種反饋形式 ？

這種學術界/實踐者合作類型的成功范例是：Casey Trees and Davey Tree專業(yè)公司構思和開發(fā)的、美國林務局支持的“國家樹木價值計算器”。Design Workshop持續(xù)提供具有學術質量的研究（例：同行評議），比如即將在愛丁堡大學建筑系學報主辦的《愛丁堡建筑學研究》雜志發(fā)表的一篇文章，文章的主題是Design Workshop的路易斯安那州新奧爾良拉斐特綠道規(guī)劃。盡管面臨著相關的挑戰(zhàn)，關于如何付出努力還是有很多要說的。

最后一類挑戰(zhàn)打著“害怕”的旗號。諺語“知識就是力量”可用于激發(fā)對賦權和威脅的感受，這主要取決于掌握知識的人。無論出于什么原因，一些決策人和利益相關者都可能對數(shù)據(jù)表示懷疑，或者可能會主動嘗試用他們不熟悉的知識去阻撓設計過程取得的進展。合理的研究可用于追究掌權人的責任，這可能會有點可怕。不過，決策過程越透明，決策過程及其結果就可獲得更多的支持。重要的是，設計師應非常明確地指出收集數(shù)據(jù)的目的，而這往往是需要注意措辭的。有時候，要在目標上達成一致意見是不可能的——例如，“使溫室氣體比基線情況減少XX%”。指標——“使溫室氣體比基線情況有所減少”——可能更順耳一些。要在項目工作中運用DW Legacy Design?會面臨許多挑戰(zhàn)，但通過發(fā)展知識體系和支持更嚴謹?shù)难芯繕藴?，每個挑戰(zhàn)都是可克服的。

圖3 (fig. 3)CREDIT: Design WorkshopA community meeting and on-line poll were used to validate goals and determine priorities for the project. 社區(qū)會議和在線調查被用來驗證目標和確定項目的優(yōu)先權。

證明我們的價值

隨著行業(yè)日益把循證設計作為準則，實踐者在基于研究的設計過程（如：DW Legacy Design?）中扮演的角色正在演化是實踐者可能在設計過程的“創(chuàng)造”階段處于最佳狀態(tài)；不過，他們會發(fā)現(xiàn)自己對創(chuàng)造結果進行“評估”的階段會越來越認真負責?？恐庇X或純粹靠坊間證據(jù)判斷某個構思的價值漸漸地不被大家認可了。設計師必須尋找那些同樣努力尋求嚴謹性和自律性的客戶、學者和專業(yè)同行（同伴）來促進設計行業(yè)更好的發(fā)展并提升項目的可持續(xù)性。Design Workshop已找到把這個理論運用于項目工作所面臨的機遇和挑戰(zhàn)——這種努力的參照基準極少。但是，這種努力的回報不僅僅是獲得各個第三方組織的肯定（如：美國景觀建筑協(xié)會、美國規(guī)劃協(xié)會、美國新城市主義協(xié)會和城市用地學會），而且還因知道我們的努力目的是推動景觀建筑與規(guī)劃行業(yè)的永久發(fā)展，所以也令人頗具成就感。用醫(yī)藥諾貝爾獎得主亞歷克西斯·卡雷爾的話說，“對于那些愿意克服惰性的人而言，生活如泉涌般綻放?！?/p>

圖4 (fig. 4)CREDIT: Design WorkshopMeasures for each goal were determined; then, baselines were compared to other desirable urban parks. 確定每個目標的措施；然后，將基線與其他理想的城市公園進行比較。

圖5 (fig. 5)CREDIT: Design WorkshopEach alternative was assessed according to how well it measured up to stated project goals.每個選擇方案根據(jù)符合規(guī)定項目目標的優(yōu)劣進行評估。

麗貝卡·倫納德是Design Workshop的總裁，在社區(qū)規(guī)劃、城市設計、重建、旅游規(guī)劃、區(qū)域規(guī)劃和場地設計方面擁有豐富的經驗。麗貝卡畢業(yè)于印第安納州曼西波爾州立大學建筑與規(guī)劃學院，并獲得城市與區(qū)域規(guī)劃碩士學位。她在公私營規(guī)劃行業(yè)的經驗使其在設計行業(yè)中往往有獨特的見解。麗貝卡認為，一個出色的設計需要將各個方面的背景都考慮在內——包括環(huán)境、社區(qū)、藝術與經濟。

DW Legacy Design?Work

DW Legacy Design?is a method of evidence-based design developed by Design Workshop in order to provide project teams with a transparent foundation for decision-making. Legacy Design keeps teams unified and aligned. During the early days of Legacy Design, associates throughout the f rm agreed that the true test of this design method’s merit lay in its application to real world projects, yet a feeling permeated many project teams that the necessary research was something completed outside the process of form-giving. The act of creating a process that is measurable requires skill in research methods, analysis, and documentation of both broad and deep subject matter - a practice that is often diff cult to deliver in the fastpaced practitioner’s world. This is perhaps why many practicing designers rarely venture into research, and those that do are often involved with academics.

DW Legacy Design?has a built-in feedback loop - create, evaluate, create, evaluate- that shortens the learning curve for research and provides time to evaluate increasingly more sophisticated material as the methodology evolves. This rigorous approach is ingrained in a project from its inception through post-completion monitoring. Over the last several years, Design W orkshop’s designers have found opportunities and challenges to integrating it into project work.

Finding Work that Allows for DW Legacy Design?

The f rst step in the process of applying DW Legacy Design?is winning the work.The client must be open to the project being comprehensive and measurable in four broad categories - environment, community, economics and art. Because few practitioners attempt this level of research rigor, clients may not understand the value of the approach. There may be resistance on the level of effort required to set comprehensive goals, develop baselines, and f nd benchmarks - activities that may potentially represent a third of the project’s budget. When necessary, the designer must be capable of “selling” evidence-based design. It is essential that the designer set proper expectations by showing examples of previous efforts and sharing stories of how this level of early and continued analysis can lead to cost savings and benef t later in projects.

Employing the DW Legacy Design?Approach from Start to Finish

Once a project is secured, the design team must develop a work plan that includes rigorous measurement at each phase of the design process and meets the standard of evidence-based design at its conclusion. The team must quickly become acquainted with key issues, opportunities to innovate, critical questions, Client Vision and Client Critical Success Factors (CSFs).iA Client Vision captures the client’s articulation of what the outcome of the project will be. This vision can be developed only by listening to the client. The client’s CSF are the features or results that must be accomplished in order for the client to consider the project a success, and these should be evaluated through the course of the project. It may become necessary to revise the list as the project evolves. Client CSFs may or may not be described in the scope of work so it is important to help the client def ne them.

The Design Workshop team begins this process with a Strategic Kick-Of f (SKO)meeting with the client with team members and key stakeholders present. Inclusive conversations with the entire team and collaborators result in more thorough alternatives and broadly agreed upon approaches to identi f ed issues. Transparent decision-making allows all parties to understand thought processes, resulting in a unif ed project vision. This process is illustrated in the following example.

The Design Workshop consultant team identified and confirmed the following Client CSFs for the Republic Square project in Austin, Texas, with leadership from the Austin Parks and Recreation Department and through conversations with stakeholders.(see f g. 1)To the extent possible at this formative stage of the process, each critical success factor was expressed in a manner that would suggest measurability. For example, the plan states, “The project shall preserve and protect the existing ‘Auction Oaks’ under which the original plats of the city of Austin were sold.” This statement about tree preservation, certainly an important general issue,concerns the preservation of the ‘Auction Oaks’ in specific, as opposed to being a statement about tree preservation in general, arguably a critical issue as well. It was not possible to make each CSFs measurable at this stage because the current conditions were unknown and the research had not been conducted to know what a reasonable target was. Accordingly, there were several statements such as “The project shall provide opportunities for multi-generational users” and “The project shall create a ‘signature’ park, ref ecting the identity of the neighborhood.” Although immeasurable, these sentiments were logged and formed the basis of the project team’s research agenda.

Once the groundwork with the team is laid, the key project challenge and approach must be developed. The Project Dilemma is a narrative device that describes a project’s predicament. It sums up the major challenges that must be addressed while applying DW Legacy Design?to a project. Beginning with a discussion of the project’s context, a dilemma answers the question: “What is standing in the way of a project’s potential for success?” It renders vivid the complexities of the project and the need for a comprehensive solution. In this way, a dilemma statement is entirely different from the scope of work or the client’s vision and goals. The Project Thesis is an assertion about the project outcome that will be tested and resolved through the team’s design and planning investigations. It is a proposed solution to the central problem or question stated in the dilemma statement. Collectively articulating the big idea of the project aligns the team to a common goal or story.

Early in the project, the team develops the project’s Dilemma and Thesis statements. With limited public open space nearby, Republic Square’s Dilemma is that it is subject to more intense use than other comparably sized urban parks, and without adequate planning for subsequent operations and maintenance, the park faces the possibility of being overused. Furthermore, the challenge of achieving broad support for the park’s re-design is complicated by its significance at many levels to stakeholders, including federal, state and city governments, members of the community who frequent the park during events, people who work downtown,and residents living near the park.

The Thesis for the project is to acknowledge the history of the site and other plans that will inf uence this process; to enhance connections - cultural, physical, historical,artistic, emotional, ecological, and economic; to compare the park to other outstanding urban destination parks; and f nally to ensure that the costs of implementation and ongoing operations and maintenance can be borne by the added revenue created by the design (e.g. additional sales or property taxes). (see f g. 2)

Narrative Principles are inherently subjective statements about a project, but ones that are commonly understood and believed by a project’s constituents.The articulation of narrative principles in each of the four DW Legacy Design?categories (environment, community, economics and art)is central to a rigorous,comprehensive, discovery-oriented design process. The exercise lays a common foundation for the project team with assumptions against which the Thesis can be tested. Narrative Principles help the team argue persuasively for a good outcome with clients and in public meetings.

Comprehensive thinking from the beginning in four categories - Environment,Community, Economics and Art - yields outcomes that integrate the fullest range of possibilities and metrics for performance. Essential to the evidence-based design process, project goals must be developed early in order to inform the analysis, guide the creation of alternatives, and provide the foundation for on-going monitoring. The desire is that goals be SMART (Specif c, Measurable, Actionable, Realistic and Time-Specif c)ii, but this is rarely achieved at the f rst team brainstorming sessions. A Design Workshop team will lead a facilitated dialogue about goals and metrics at the point of investigating a project opportunity, when developing the proposal, or when convening the SKO. Specially designed Metrics Selection Sheets are used to guide a discoveryoriented discussion and encourage goals in all four DW Legacy Design?categories.Once the initial brainstorm occurs, the group will select and prioritize pertinent research and measurement topics, develop initial goals, and consolidate redundant areas of exploration. The benef ts of this effort can help develop a full scope of work,identify additional team members, and ensure a comprehensive and prioritized approach from the beginning. Accountability to goals set early in the design process is required to deliver real value and truly sustainable solutions.

For Republic Square, the goals were developed in an open forum with the stakeholders, through both a public meeting where keypad polling devices were used and an on-line poll. There were 25 project goals, a number considered to be necessary given the project’s complexity; however, tracking this many goals at times seemed unwieldy, and the project team found it dif f cult to approach all goals with equal rigor. Examples of goals from Republic Square include “increase habitat for birds, squirrels and butter f ies” and “reduce heat island ef fect.” It was apparent to the team early that there were feasible measures for each of these goals. Other goals were more dif ficult for the team to understand how to measure, such as“incorporate truly site speci f c cues into design and planning.” The team chose to keep them as goals but to acknowledge that the measure would be more qualitative than quantitative. (see f g. 3)

After setting goals, the Design W orkshop team researches existing conditions of each goal on the site or within the community in order to create a baseline from which progress will be measured. To provide a point of reference for what these numbers actually mean, baselines are compared to industry standards, best practices, and comparable facilities. Without this baseline, there is no point of reference for the meaning of subsequent measurements. Previous project experience and welldocumented case studies housed on the f rm’s portal, an internal website for sharing knowledge and information, provide benchmarks. For Republic Square, heat island effect was measured by the amount of impervious cover (25 percent of the park is impervious surface today). Habitat was measured by percent of tree canopy and flowering understory (40 percent of the site has tree canopy today). A source for data was found for each goal or primary research was conducted in the form of site surveys, stakeholder polls or inferences from known facts (e.g. light was measured by sampling the light on a grid and then mapping the values). (see f g. 4)

The next phases of work - developing and testing alternatives and setting up the project for long-term monitoring - are often the most challenging. Research is the essential ingredient of developing designs and building evidence for alternate approaches; however, this is also a point in the project where the expense of the research becomes secondary to that of developing ideas and producing alternatives.To ensure decision-makers are adequately informed, each design alternative must be analyzed with the same methodology used earlier in the process to measure baselines. The challenges with this step are that the creation of alternatives typically takes most of the time allotted, leaving little time, if any , for measuring success at reaching goals. Also, some metrics are dif ficult to predict for un-built design proposals. For example, how does a designer forecast tree canopy for the alternatives - on opening day, two years from planting, or at full maturity? Using the impervious surface metric again for Republic Square, it was determined that the existing amount of impervious cover was 25 percent and the comparable parks were between 50 and 60 percent impervious cover. When the three alternatives were measured between 40 and 50 percent (a range between existing conditions and the comparable benchmarks), the team believed that the alternatives were within the realm of possibilities. (see f g. 5)

Despite strong desires to evaluate a project’s post-construction performance, there are few examples of setting up a project for long-term monitoring. The designers’contracts are typically complete after construction documentation and observation, the clients have moved onto other matters, and the future stakeholders (e.g. residents,users)are not aware of the baselines with which to compare future measurements.Even if the client has the foresight to set up a monitoring program, team turnover ,loss of institutional knowledge, and changing availability of data makes it dif ficult to continue to compare metrics to baseline and benchmark conditions for a longterm understanding of a project’s success. Republic Square is expected to begin construction in late 2015 with completion scheduled for late 2016. As such, there has been no monitoring. However, a few goals will require on-going monitoring to ensure that they have been reached. For example, several goals such as “increase awareness of the Park’s historical significance“ and “allow local character to shine through in the design of the Park” can only be measured by surveying the park users post-construction. The baseline conditions for these goals, determined from keypad polling at community meetings and an on-line poll, is that 50 percent of current park users have a clear understanding of park history and 12 percent think the park captures the “essence of Austin.” By having the forethought to ask these questions now, the team is set up to monitor changes in these goals over time. (see f g. 6)

Building on Success from One Project to the Next

Because the DW Legacy Design?approach is atypical for most design practices and requires a steep learning curve, the initial cost of navigating this process can be high. To stay competitive in the marketplace, a design practice must become more efficient over time. From project to project, the team members must continue to apply the knowledge gained from their previous work. Based on project type, some metrics are consistently useful. For instance, tree canopy is important to almost all streetscape and park projects and achieves a variety of goals, including reduction in runoff and heat island ef fect, and improving human comfort. Accessibility to quality affordable housing is important to nearly all policy plans. A project team can gain valuable expertise from one project to another reducing the time and ef fort necessary to conduct research and evaluate outcomes.

圖6 (fig. 6)CREDIT: Design WorkshopOnly a post-occupancy survey will be able to validate the plan’s progress towards several of the goals - e.g.user satisfaction and appreciation for historical signif cance of the park. 只有使用后的調查才能夠驗證該計劃對幾個目標的進展情況 — 例如用戶對公園歷史意義的滿意和贊賞。

Formalized opportunities to share lessons learned and institutional knowledge will have the dual bene f ts of allowing team members who have been reluctant to attempt a more rigorous pursuit of metrics the opportunity to hear and learn from more experienced team members whilst also providing a form of recognition and acknowledgement for the early adopters, those brave enough to attempt quality researches earlier than others. In addition, teams will be more likely to use a methodology or conduct research if they have seen positive outcomes on other projects, so familiarity with past successes becomes critical.

Some initial challenges for project teams were that they attempted to track too many metrics, and experience has taught that how to prioritize metrics is critical to success. It is important to share examples within the off ce so that no team is starting from scratch - a practice Design W orkshop continues to promote internally.Design Workshop has developed a Sustainability Matrix, a crucial document to track all goals and strategies, assignments, baselines, benchmarks and research sources, especially when working in a multidisciplinary team. This tool links directly to the f rm’s portal so the team can have instant access to the relevant information about a potential metric. Having adequate research and benchmarks on each potential metric topic easily accessible reduces time spent researching and ‘inventing’relevant data bases, thereby allowing team members to spend allocated research time f nding better information or more relevant new benchmarks for comparison.A project book template allows teams to begin a document with certain DW Legacy Design? content already in place. With teams across the firm using the same template, relevant research can be quickly transferred from one project to the next. The Design Workshop portal has become a more regular step in project development - with staf f making both withdrawals and deposits of knowledge throughout the course of the design and implementation effort.

Finally, it is essential to proselytize about metrics! Design W orkshop has developed methods to celebrate successes and spread the word firm wide through its DW Legacy Design?Awards program, through encouragement of staff to submit session papers on the topic, and through publishing articles and books about f rm practices and projects. Positive reinforcement, if aligned with philosophical beliefs, can lead to action that is strategic and forward-thinking.

Solving Challenges

In an attempt to overcome decades of research complacency in the fields of landscape architecture and planning, Design W orkshop has experienced numerous challenges applying the DW Legacy Design?approach to projects. These challenges fall into several categories including lack of motivation, the mechanics of a research-based design process, and a fear of the unknown. The lack of motivation typically stems from a lack of awareness of the bene f ts of metrics. A strong case must be made by the designer illustrating how a metric-based design approach,such as DW Legacy Design?, has produced design excellence while simultaneously saving money for clients. Occasionally, there is a situation where the team is not disciplined enough to track metrics throughout the process. Atul Gawande captures this phenomenon in The Checklist Manifesto (2009)when he says, “What is needed, however, isn't just that people working together be nice to each other. It is discipline. Discipline is hard-harder than trustworthiness and skill and perhaps even than self essness. We are by nature f awed and inconstant creatures. We can't even keep from snacking between meals. W e are not built for discipline. W e are built for novelty and excitement, not for careful attention to detail. Discipline is something we have to work at.”iiiAs project leaders, the principal and project manager must advocate for this level of rigor and measurability. From developing the contract to the f nal implementation of the project, measurability will be futile if these team leaders do not demonstrate their belief in its value.

The second group of challenges relates to the mechanics of research. As discussed earlier, teams new to a process such as DW Legacy Design?will often consider too many metrics because there is even a learning curve for editing and prioritizing metrics for any given project type. In fact, any efforts used building consensus at the initiation of the project will be investments in a streamlined process of tracking metrics later on. The prioritization effort should consider the availability as well as the scale of the data and how frequently it is released.

No project manager can implement this design process alone. Team effectiveness increases if there are team members who have a basic knowledge of statistics,statistical analysis, and understand the dif ferent ways of looking at projects and measuring their performance. This has academic implications in that it suggests the value of including basic statistics in the landscape architecture curriculum.

Teams, including subconsultants and relevant stakeholders, will respond to time and resource savings and opportunities to innovate. Reinforcement by both f rm and project leadership will help a team understand these savings and opportunities. The rest of the of f ce must support the team’s vision and help f ll in gaps in knowledge and address challenges. Offering frequent opportunities for a project team to present its work and gain new insights from outside sources will ensure a more rigorous application of this process. Other ways of reinforcing DW Legacy Design?include having tools available that allow a team to rapidly cycle through research inquiries and metrics undertakings such as ArcView and BIMiv, investing in training on how to write in a way that is both appropriate for a lay audience but also academically rigorous,and supplying examples and training on how to graphically illustrate metrics.

Often, a team will develop a metric that simply has not yet been researched by others in our industry or the academy, making establishing benchmarks challenging.This presents an opportunity for practitioners to work with institutions to support research. Some ask whether private firms should be, or are even capable of,conducting research in an academically valid way, with questions such as the following: What does practice need from academia? What academic research is important to practice? Can practitioners conduct research that also meets the standards of academic research? What does this mean in terms of curriculum development (the need to develop both creative and critical thinking skills)? Should research methods and statistics be part of the landscape architecture curriculum?What does this mean to those programs that are focused on educating students and preparing them to be practitioners? Should practitioners participate in peer-reviewed articles in academic publications as a form of feedback?

A successful example of this type of academy/practitioner collaboration is the National Tree Benefit Calculator, conceived and developed by Casey Trees and Davey Tree Expert Company with support from the United States Forest Service.Design Workshop continues to provide academic quality research (i.e. peer reviewed)such as a 2013 article in the Edinburgh Architectural Research, a journal of the Department of Architecture at Edinburgh University, on Design W orkshop’s Laf tte Greenway and Corridor Plan in New Orleans, Louisiana. There is much to be said about putting in the effort despite the associated challenges.

The f nal group of challenges falls under the banner of “fear.” The phrase “knowledge is power” can be used to conjure up feelings of both empowerment and threat depending on who has the knowledge. Some policy-makers and stakeholders may,for whatever reason, distrust data or actively try to thwart progress derived from a process with which they are not acquainted. Sound research can be used to hold those in power accountable, which can be scary. However, the more transparent the decision-making process, the more support there is for the process and its outcomes. It is important that the designer make very clear the purpose for collecting the data, and often this is a matter of choosing the right words. At times, consensus on targets is impossible - “reduce greenhouse gas from baseline conditions by XX percent,” for example. Indicators - “reduce greenhouse gas from baseline conditions” - may be more palatable. There are many challenges to implementing DW Legacy Design?in project work, but each can be overcome by growing a body of knowledge and supporting more rigorous research standards.

Proving Our Worth

The role of the practitioner in a research-based design process such as DW Legacy Design?is evolving as the industry increasingly accepts evidence-based design as the norm. Practitioners may be best at the “create” stages in a design process;however, they are finding themselves more and more responsible for the steps that require that they “evaluate” the results of their creations. Judging the worth of an idea on intuition or on purely anecdotal evidence is growing less acceptable.Designers must f nd clients, academics, and professional peers (teammates)that strive for the same rigor and discipline to help advance the design industry toward better, more sustainable projects. Design W orkshop has found opportunities and challenges to applying the theory to project work - an effort that has few benchmarks. But the ef fort has been rewarded with not only third-party validation from organizations such as the American Society of Landscape Architects, American Planning Association, Congress for the New Urbanism, and the Urban Land Institute, but also immense satisfaction for knowing our ef forts are advancing the professions of landscape architecture and planning forever. In the words of Alexis Carrel, the Nobel Laureate in Medicine, "Life leaps like a geyser for those willing to drill through the rock of inertia."v

Notes:

i PSMJ Resources, Inc., Project Managers Bootcamp Manual, 2003.

ii G. T. Doran. “There is a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives.” Management Review,Volume 70, Issue 11(AMA FORUM), (1981), 35-36.

iii Atul Gawande, The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right. New York, New York: Picador, 2009, 183.iv Computer software used as spatial databases by professionals in the industry.

v Alexis Carrel. BrainyQuote.com, Xplore, Inc., 2013. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alexiscarr158387.html [accessed May 30, 2013]. Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/citation/quotes/quotes/a/alexiscarr158387.html#bRqZmV38JTjoEpUv.99.