Design Process Model – Client Contact, Interaction, and Management

In describing my high-level design model, I overlapped every phase of design development with the client.  Throughout this blog, I have made the case for constant client input, feedback, and dialog.  The process of client interact starts at the first meeting.  In this particular post, I am focusing on the interaction that goes on after that first meeting.

Initially, your objective for having more interaction with the client is likely to be getting a better handle on the client.  What are their interests?  What are their preferences?  Do they favor a particular style?  What are their real motives for this project?  Do they really understand what they are asking for?  Are their priorities accurate and realistic?  These types of questions help you narrow down the client’s requirements and prioritize them.  They also help you make appropriate design decisions later.

You don’t want to be a pest and drive the client crazy with a lot of questions every day.  Some of the things that I think work well during the Data Gathering phase include field trips, brainstorming sessions, and follow-up site visits.

Field trips to look at other properties, hardscape materials, and softscape materials are an excellent way to discover the client’s preferences and help them come to terms with the choices that are available.  A field trip also gives you a chance to ask questions and learn more about the client.  In addition, if you have any particular ideas, you can show these to the client to get their reaction.

Brainstorming sessions work really well with knowledgeable clients.  They are readily able to discuss ideas and have an understanding of plants, materials, etc.  Brainstorming with less knowledgeable clients requires you to find ways to stimulate the discussion.  This can include your portfolio, pictures, samples, etc.  Brainstorming works best if you can do it in the space you are working in.  You just have to be able to take notes and deal with any materials you have with you for the session.  Again, this is a good way to find out more about the client as well as develop the client’s personal involvement in the project.

Going back to the client site for a follow-up visit or two isn’t a bad idea either.  You may have the opportunity to talk to the client in a different context and in a more relaxed manner.  Even if you don’t need any particular information from the site, dropping by for a second look gives you time with the client and an opportunity to learn more about them.

When you are in the Analysis / Synthesis phase you may need additional client input.  For example, after you start looking at space allocation, adjacency, priorities, etc. you may need to review your conclusions with the client.  For these types of meetings where you need input and have questions, I find it best to be well prepared.  Make sure the issues or questions are clear.  You should be able to explain the issue or question to the client so that they really understand it.  Second, I always try to come prepared with a solution to offer.  Obviously if it is a major issue, you want to help the client work through it.  For more general issues or questions, you should have a recommendation but try to get the client to make the decision.  Be sure to have any supporting materials including pictures, drawings, diagrams, etc. to support your presentation.  These not only help the client understand the topic they also demonstrate the work you have done for them so far.

At the end of Analysis / Synthesis, you should meet with the client to review the design program and obtain their concurrence.  Your presentation of the design program represents the culmination of everything you have learned and concluded about the client and site to this point.  The client’s acceptance or agreement to the design program represents their approval of your interpretation of their needs and requirements.  You should also be well prepared for this presentation.  You should have all support evidence available that you used in creating the design program.  It can be extremely useful to be able to refer back to previous meetings, discussions, field trips, and other interactions with the client while making your presentation.

Questions and issues are less likely to come up during the Creative Development phase but they can on occasion.  The same process and recommendations suggested above apply here also; be clear and be prepared.  The major client interaction in Creative Development is the presentation of the preliminary design.  Most of my comments above about presenting the design program apply here also.  Your design should be easy to justify based on the design program and other supporting materials you have gathered or prepared.  Referring to things the client has said during previous sessions makes this presentation that much easier.

There are numerous advantages to spending more time with the client.  Granted it does take up more of your time.  I believe the result is a design that is better targeted to the client’s needs because you have spent the time to fully and completely understand what those needs are.  You also have a client that has seen you work for them and with them throughout the project.  You aren’t just presenting a design; you are presenting the result of a collaborative effort.

Design Process Model – The Creative Development Key Validation Point

The third key validation point is at the end of Creative Development.  Like the first two key validation points at the end of Data Gathering and Analysis / Synthesis, this is a threshold point to help you decide if you conceived a preliminary design that addresses all client needs, site issues and opportunities, and the elements in your design program.  The overlap with the Analysis / Synthesis phase is again built in to allow you the opportunity to conduct further analysis if you feel it is warranted.

Key Validation Points

The result or output of Creative Development is a preliminary design to be presented to the client.  This would include any supporting, collateral materials such as digitally enhanced photos, drawings, display boards, samples, etc.

Chances are that by this point you may have already started developing some of these materials.  It can be useful during the last part of Analysis / Synthesis to explore design concepts.  Any of these preliminary materials should be reused or revised if appropriate.  Otherwise, you can begin developing your preliminary design based on the results of the form compositions, functional diagrams, supporting analysis materials, and design program you have created.

Whatever you choose to develop and use in your preliminary design presentation should be reviewed thoroughly to validate that it supports your findings and conclusions developed to this point.  Some evidence of a need or opportunity that you discovered should support each element, feature, benefit, and aspect of the preliminary design.  Going through this exercise is extremely useful in preparing for the client presentation.  You will be fully prepared to explain and justify your design decisions.

A completely validated preliminary design sets the stage for the final phase of design development, which is the creation of your Client Deliverables.  Everything you have done to this point suggests that you have a design concept that should meet all client needs and expectations.  There should not be any issues that would preclude the client from accepting your design.  All of you preliminary design materials can be finalized for presentation to the client.  The preliminary design materials should be reused as much as possible in creating your final deliverables to the client.

Validating you data, analysis, conclusions, and designs minimizes the amount of rework you may need to do.  It is unlikely that the client will completely reject a preliminary design that is thoroughly validated against their needs and the specific requirements of their site.  Also, the high-level model provides for constant client contact and feedback.  Prior to the presentation of the preliminary design, there should have been client contact and feedback from the initial meeting and the review of the design program.  This would be the absolute minimum of client contact.  Interim contact and review sessions should be conducted whenever more information is needed of if it appropriate to obtain client buy-in and concurrence on specific issues.

My last three posts have dealt with the key validation points.  In the next post, I will be reviewing the client contact activities and how they fit into the key validation points and the four phases.

Design Process Model – The Analysis / Synthesis Key Validation Point

The second key validation point is at the end of Analysis Synthesis.  Like the first key validation point at the end of Data Gathering, this is a threshold point to help you decide if you have completely and thoroughly analyzed the data you have gathered and used it to focus your design development.  The overlap with the Creative Development phase is again built in to allow you the opportunity to explore some design options and if necessary return for further analysis.

Key Validation Points

In the Analysis / Synthesis phase you are going to be massaging the data you gathered to start making design decisions.  Which tools and techniques you apply will vary from project to project.  Your objective is to take the raw data you have gathered and apply various analytical techniques to synthesize that data to start making design decisions.  Those decisions will relate to form, space allocation, space relationships, and other layout issues.  Client needs will be prioritized.  Cost tradeoffs may need to be made.  Analysis will produce information that helps you refine design decisions.  Each method, tool, or technique you use may generate information that suggests the need for revising the decisions you have already made.  This is the synthesis process; weaving and blending analytical results with the data you have gathered to develop the best overall design decisions.

I will be going into more detail about specific methods for this phase in upcoming posts.  The validation issues and questions at the end of this phase are related to making sure that you have addressed the all the data you gathered and used it to make justifiable design decisions.  The analytical methods you use should provide ample evidence that your decisions to allocate space in a particular manner or relate one or more spaces in a specific way are justified.  They should justify any prioritization or tradeoffs you made.  You should be able to point to specific issues that were raised in Data Gathering and see how they were resolved in Analysis / Synthesis.  Likewise, you should be able to trace your analysis of opportunities and see how they were evaluated and addressed.  You may also find that Analysis / Synthesis raised questions that required you to go back to Data Gathering.  That is a natural part of validation.

As I stated earlier, I will address specific methods, tools, and techniques.  However, two particular tools deserve mention.  First, during Analysis / Synthesis you should document you site analysis.  Formally, summarizing all of your results is useful for a couple of reasons.  First, it gives you a chance to review everything and make sure nothing was overlooked.  Second, formally summarizing it into a presentable document can add value to your services if you present the results to the client when the project is complete.  Not only do they have a record of the state of the site as you found it, they also can receive your recommendations for things that can be done in the future.  Lastly, the documented site analysis can serve as a validation tool by checking the results of your design against it to make sure you have addressed all of the issues and opportunities.

The second tool is the client profile.  I have mentioned in other posts that having a high-level graphic profile of your client in front of you can be valuable while working on the project.  It helps you keep the client in the forefront of your mind while developing the design.  A major part of that profile should be the client’s usage scenarios; the activities they plan for their space.  Including these also keeps these in the forefront of your design.

The result of Analysis / Synthesis should be your design program.  The design program should specify exactly what you intend to do for the client.  This is more than a list of bullet points or an outline.  It should include a description of what the outcome will be and how it will be achieved.  What will be changed, created, removed, remodeled, etc. to create the design.  It should paint a picture of the future state but in the process describe how that change will occur.  Your final validation should be to trace through your design program to make sure that the client’s needs are addressed and that all of the site issues and opportunities are addressed.

The last key validation point is Creative Development.  I will address that in my next post.

Design Process Model – The Data Gathering Key Validation Point

The high-level model presented in my last post shows three major validation points.  These come at the end of Data Gathering, Analysis / Synthesis, and Creative Development.  In this post, we are going to deal with the first major validation point, Data Gathering.

Key Validation Points

At the end of Data Gathering, you should have all client needs and a complete site analysis.  The overlap with Analysis / Synthesis is included to provide you the opportunity to go back and ask more questions or gather more data as needed.  In the process of gathering data, you may undertake some analysis that leads you to reconsider the need for more client input or site data.  You should use this key validation point as a test to determine to your complete satisfaction that you have done all necessary data gathering.

Client needs are the most difficult to gather and validate.  As I have mentioned in previous posts, you may have clients who are not aware of all of their own needs.  You may also have clients who are less than forthcoming about their motivations for the project and their expectations.  Given these types of obstacles, it is necessary to approach client needs gathering in a variety of ways.  Asking questions isn’t really enough.  You need to observe the client and their environment to confirm what the client is saying is consistent with their lifestyle.  Asking the same question in different ways at different times may help you confirm that the client is consistent in what they are asking for.  Asking the client to pick samples of things they like such as hardscape samples or softscape materials can also help confirm that the client is clear and consistent.  At the core of any client needs gathering process is the ability to get the client to tell you what they really need, rather than their preconceived solution, what they think you want them to say, or what they think you might be able to deliver.

The site analysis portion of data gathering is more straightforward.  However, it should go beyond simple measurements and note taking.  Digital pictures or drawings are usually helpful.  Viewing the client’s site from different perspectives or at different times of the day can be useful.  Evaluating the neighboring properties and the neighborhood or community can help provide context.  There are also the very specific tasks such as soil samples, surveys, etc.  One of the key points in site analysis is observation.  The context of how the property is currently maintained and landscaped is important.  What the client may have done in the past can provide clues to their tastes and preferences.  Observing the details of how the site is viewed from the outside in and the inside out may provide you with ideas that you can capitalize on later.

In a subsequent post, I am going to go into detail about the specific methods, tools, and techniques you can use to gather the client and site data.  But for now the validation questions you should be asking yourself are:

• “Have I captured all of the client’s needs?”
• “Do I know what the client does not want?”
• “Have I cross-checked and confirmed the client’s answers to my questions?”
• “Do I understand their tastes and preferences?”
• “Can I describe the client’s lifestyle?”
• “Do I have all the site data I need?”
• “Do I have an understanding of how the site relates to the surrounding properties?”

If you feel confident that you can answer these types of questions, you should be done with Data Gathering.

This is a key validation point for a reason.  Missing or incomplete requirements are a huge risk.  This includes requirements that were never identified, requirements that are not fully understood, requirements that are changing, requirements that are not prioritized, and requirements that are  wish list items.  You have to have ALL requirements, and fully understand them.  You also have to know where they stand in the client’s priorities.

The site itself is not so much a set of requirements as a set of constraints and opportunities.  Incomplete site analysis may mean designs that are not feasible due to constraints or missed opportunities to capitalize on existing assets.

The natural tendency is “the smaller the job, the less data gathering you do”.  Regardless of the size of the job, there are two big holes to fill in.  The client, who are they, what do they need, and the site, what do you have to work with.  Realistically you do have to scale back what you do when the scope of work is extremely small.  However, given that, you should be open to learning as much as possible about the client.  That information may come in handy in the current project and in the future.  Also, evaluating the entire site may lead to future projects.

Upcoming posts will go into detail about the methods, tools, and techniques used within each phase.  I will also be discussing the remaining two key validation points that come at the end of Analysis / Synthesis and the end of Creative Development.

Landscape Design Validation Model – High-level Overview

In developing my model for a landscape design process that addresses validation, I wanted to include three key components:

1. A high level of client interaction
2. Reusability of project work
3. Iterative processes that cycle back as needed

The model starts with the two basic things we have to work with; the Client and the Client Site.  Each is represented by the overlapping blocks in the diagram below.

Two Project Context Components -- Client and Client Site

There are two key points.  First, the Client and Client Site blocks overlap because they are interrelated.  The client lives on the site and uses the site.  Second, the blocks span the entire project horizon because we always want to refer to the client and the site and potentially interact with them at any point in the project.  That is part of iterative development.

On top of the context in which we are working are four spheres that represent major design activities, processes, tools, etc.

Four Spheres of Process Activities

The Data Gathering sphere encompasses all of our initial client contact, interviewing, questioning, etc. as well as our assessment of the site.  There are other components within this sphere but for now just consider it the initial gathering of client and site data.  Analysis / Synthesis is work we work with all of the data we have gathered to understand what needs to be done, what can be done, and develop a set of requirements.  This sphere encompasses many of the tools and techniques I have described that help us validate our design decisions.  In Creative Development, we are using the data we have gathered, analyzed, and synthesized to begin actual design work.  The final sphere of activities is the development and finalization of Client Deliverables.  These are all of documents, drawings, and other finished products you will present to the client.

You will note that the four spheres overlap with the Client and Client Site blocks.  This represents the high degree of client interaction.  It also represents the potential need at any point to go back to the client and/or site for more information or clarification.

Each of the four spheres overlaps the one before and the one after.  These overlaps represent iteration and reusability.  We can begin work on the next sphere even though we are not done with the first.  However, we cannot complete the second sphere until the first is completed.  We may work in two spheres at the same time or have activities that span more than one sphere.  This is the iterative component; cycling back and forth until all issues are resolved or we have all of the answers we need.  Any work we do within one sphere has potential to be reused in a later sphere.  It may need to be reformatted or repurposed but the potential to leverage what we have already done still exists and should be exploited.

To summarize, we have four spheres that represent processes, methods, tools, steps, activities, and things we do to complete a landscape design project.  In subsequent posts, I am going to go into detail about what is included within each sphere and how the three key issues I mentioned at the beginning of this post come into play.  The specifics will detail how client interaction, reusability, and iteration are key to making this process work and support validation.

Many individual tools, methods, processes, etc. that are included within these spheres can help in design validation.  Each sphere represents a key validation point.  I have noted repeatedly that no sphere of activities can be complete if the previous sphere is not complete.  Each sphere is its own key validation point.  There is an exit or completion criteria for each sphere that has to be met to make sure our design meets the client’s requirements.  More about this in future posts.

Key Validation Points

Landscape Design Process Models — Does the process work?

Landscape design process models tend to be linear descriptions of what we do.  For this discussion, I am not including anything beyond final design.  No construction or maintenance phases are included.  The typical linear model has major activities divided into several “steps”.  For example:

• Research and preparation
• Design

Or a model with more phases:

• Initiation
• Analysis
• Synthesis
• Design

Regardless of the terminology or name of the phase, you move from one phase of design to the next in a clear sequential order.  Each phase is completed and the next begins.  A few authors have addressed this issue.  Some do refer to iterative approaches or the use of cycling through analysis and synthesis to resolve or reduce the design issues.  Occasionally, there may be a reference to iterating back to an earlier phase, but the assumption is usually to move sequentially, phase to phase.

I have been a proponent of iterative design and development methods for thirty years.  Using iterative design methods provides numerous advantages.  These include early client feedback and acceptance, catching problems sooner rather than letter, and the ability to incrementally develop solutions.

The term iterative can mean different things.  First, it can mean cycling between phases such as between analysis and synthesis, refining the data to develop a design program or design concept.  It can mean developing a project in phases, each small piece being an iteration of the development of the project as a whole.  I tend to use the term, with reference to landscape design, as an approach that focuses on frequent client input and feedback and secondly, not being afraid to take a step back and go through steps a second time to make sure they are complete and correct.  In other words, iterate the process until you validate that it is complete and correct.

My opinion is that the linear models provide direction.  They provide structure and give you an approach.  However, the way to move between or through phases should be dependent upon the project and the designer’s preferences.  Within a phase model, customize the sequence and timing of process steps to suit the needs of the project.

The design process as a whole is not as important as the process steps and methods you utilized during the process.  For example, virtually every design process starts with an initiation phase.  It may be labeled Initiation, Discovery, Orientation, or something similar.  For our purposes, this is where we get to know the client, view the site, uncover client needs, gather information, and all of the background activities that are necessary to find out exactly what the client wants and what we have to work with.

It would be nice to place all those activities into one nice neat phase, complete them, and move on.  However, two very real things happen.  First, you may have to go back to discovery activities later in the project.  You may need to review the site again, question the client further, or undertake some other basic research.  New facts have a way of cropping up throughout a project.  We have to deal with those facts.  The second thing that happens is that as designers we start analyzing immediately.  Everything the client says and every observation is analyzed at least at some subconscious level.  We automatically throw ourselves into an Analysis phase even though we are just starting a Discovery phase.

I think technology has given us a set of tools that allow us to circumvent the design process even further.  It is very easy to gather some information and then sit at a computer a mock up design rapidly.  The quality of those designs is so impressive that clients may be ready to sign off on what they see.  However, no real thought or analysis has been accomplished that determines if those designs are right for the client or what the client really needs.

In subsequent posts, I am going to be developing a landscape design process model that addresses activities and steps that support validation.  That model will look similar to other models you may have seen.  What I think you will find different is that it builds confidence at each phase that the final design is right for the client.

The Case for Gathering More Information

In my January 3^rd post, “Gathering Data:  Challenges, Irony, and Value”, I discussed issues surrounding the volume of information you collect when using a more analytical approach to the design process.  In this post, I am going to go into more detail about the issue of how much information you need to gather or should gather.

At one point in my career, I worked in an insurance claims office.  One of the things every claims examiner learns is that additional information can help you settle the claim for less, but getting that information costs time and money.  Sometimes it is better to settle the claim with a few open questions.  An example of this is settling a claim for bodily injuries.  You can settle the claim for some amount or send the injured party for more medical tests in hopes of finding out the injuries aren’t as serious or extensive as originally determined.  The question is will you save enough in the reduced settlement to cover the cost of the tests.

We have to ask ourselves similar questions.  Will more information gathering improve your results enough to justify the time and cost to you of gathering that information?  Will knowing more about the client, site, neighborhood, etc. improve the quality of what you produce, make the client happier, increase your profits over the long term, etc.?  I think the answer to these questions lies in two areas.  First, what does additional information provide you in terms of content or input into your design that adds value?  Second, what can you do with that additional information in the long term to increase client satisfaction and your business?

I don’t think the value of any particular piece of data or information is necessarily important.  There may be important facts such as a client preferences or information about their lifestyle.  I think the real value lies in the connections between the pieces of data.  Given that any piece of information can be connected to another, there is an exponential increase in the number of connections each time you gather a new piece of information.  Given that, I think the increase in value justifies gathering more data rather than less.

Those unexpected connections can be the stimulus to a truly inspiring design.  They may also uncover some part of the client’s needs that were not expressed directly.  One example of this was a patio project I was working on.  The client’s had reviewed the preliminary design and were extremely happy.  All of the design elements they wanted were included.  We had dealt with shade issues by including some large ornamental trees to the west side of the design.  However, very late in the wrap up of the design review meeting the client mentioned how much they loved pergolas.  A pergola was a perfect addition to the space.  It added tremendously to the final design.  The client’s preference just wasn’t discovered early enough.  Adding the pergola was not a major issue.  We were able to modify the design to include it.  However, that missing piece of the client’s preferences could have been an expensive change or add-on.

The second part of the value of additional information is how you can use it to increase your business.  I have a couple of thoughts on this topic.  First, if you spend a lot of time really understanding the client, you are making an investment in the future.  If you do work for the client in the future you don’t need to go through the full research and analysis process with them again.  You obviously have to acquaint yourself with any changes in their situation or note if things have changed.  Hopefully, you will have stayed in touch with the client at some level since you did the first job with them.  Repeat business with a client leverages the value of the information you have already gathered.

Second, noting everything about the client’s site gives you an opportunity to suggest additional work in conjunction with the current project or in the future.  While reviewing a backyard for a makeover you may note the side yard is in need of work also.  You could suggest adding on a walkway and additional bedding to dress up this access to the new backyard.  Another example would be taking some additional pictures of the client’s site and when the project is over give them a digitally enhanced photo suggesting some other improvements they might want to make next year.

I think there is a strong case to be made for gathering more information rather than less.  Investing time to gather more information will give you more to work with in the current project and secondly, information you can use to either expand the scope of the project or create new business opportunities in the future.