In recent years, we observed skepticism among investors, particularly within the public sector, regarding the use of architectural and urban design competitions as a method for project development. Despite the Czech Republic witnessing a significant increase in the number of such competitions, several developers have faced challenges that have led to disillusionment, causing some to reconsider or abandon this approach altogether.
The decision to initiate an architectural competition is not to be taken lightly. Organizing a competition entails significant costs, and both the preparation and execution phases require a considerable investment of time. Nonetheless, despite these challenges, it is generally recommended to seek designs for buildings or public spaces through architectural or urban design competitions. Below are seven reasons why this approach is highly beneficial.
In conventional procurement processes, where factors like cost or team experience dominate, the client only sees one specific proposal after signing a contract. In contrast, architectural competitions allow developers to assess detailed proposals during the selection process, offering a clearer vision of potential outcomes.
Competitions follow clear rules established by the Czech Chamber of Architects. Every step from announcing the competition to selecting the winning proposal and revealing results, can be monitored. Competitions include public exhibitions and published catalogs of entries, with jury meeting records available for review. This transparency reduces speculation about bias or corruption. Additionally, competitions attract media attention, enhancing public trust and the reputation of the competition client, whether they are a government body, state institution, or private investor.
The Competition Jury, made up of both developer representatives and independent, high-profile experts (who make up the majority), is responsible for evaluating the best proposals. These jury members assist the developer in establishing the brief and competition rules at the beginning of the process. Additionally, by adopting a holistic assessment method, the jury evaluate proposals able to solve complex problems of each aspect of the project.
Well-prepared competitions allow for a balanced assessment of all project requirements, from architectural design and cost to energy efficiency, water management, and phased implementation strategies.
One reason developer may hesitate to engage in architectural competitions is the concern that the process might result in an overly expensive design that disregards the financial constraints of the investor. However, the competition conditions may include a clearly defined investment limit as a binding evaluation criterion, with proposals exceeding the set limit subject to disqualification.
Conventional procurement often shifts the responsibility for defining expectations onto the project designer. In competitions, investors must clearly articulate their goals, user needs, and financial constraints beforehand. This structured approach helps convey expectations to participants while preserving creative freedom of design teams involved.
Competitions enable community involvement in architectural and urban planning processes. Residents and stakeholders can contribute during the preparation phase by assessing the current situation and expressing their needs. Public exhibitions and media coverage of the competition ensure transparency and foster dialogue. Competitions stimulate interest in contemporary architecture and urbanism, encouraging broader cultural engagement.
The announcement of the results is then accompanied by an exhibition of the competition proposals. This gives the public the opportunity to see the proposals and their authors or to read the comments of the jury.
Different competition formats offer distinct advantages depending on a project's requirements. For instance, when the goal of a design competition is to award design work more efficiently and swiftly than other procurement methods, the format must always remain anonymous to ensure impartiality.
In contrast, some situations are better suited for non-anonymous competition formats. These allow invited participants to engage directly with the jury or key stakeholders, presenting and refining their proposals at various stages of development. One example of this approach is the competition workshop, which we used to select a developer for the regulatory plan of Mill Island in Pardubice International Urban Design Competition Florenc21 in Prague.
Ultimately, it is the client’s responsibility to select the most suitable competition format for their project. Within the guidelines of the Czech Chamber of Architects, clients may also explore combining multiple formats to best address their specific needs.
When a competition client decides to launch a competition, it is advisable to engage an experienced competition organizer. This expert can help clarify the client’s expectations at the outset, select the appropriate type of competition, and establish clear, non-negotiable boundaries for future solutions, thus defining the degree of creative freedom available to architects, landscape designers, or visual artists.
An architectural competition alone cannot address all the issues tied to the successful design and realization of buildings or public spaces. Simply announcing a competition does not guarantee that the final solution will satisfy future users, the artistic community, or the local residents. Placing the resolution of all uncertainties into the hands of the competitors and the jury is not a feasible expectation.
For urban planning competitions in particular, it is essential to define the assignment in collaboration with the key stakeholders of the territory and to keep them informed throughout the process and about the outcomes of the competition.
Ultimately, it is crucial for the representatives of the investor, whether a municipality or a private entity, to understand that the jury holds the authority to select the best design. They must be prepared to accept the jury's decision and actively support the implementation of the chosen solution.
