Posts Tagged ‘Creativity’

Edition 48 – The ‘Like’ economy

Sunday, April 3rd, 2011

Business21C Weekly is available through the iTunes Podcast directory. To subscribe directly via iTunes, go to the Advanced menu in iTunes and select Subscribe to Podcast. Then paste in the following URL: http://www.business21c.com.au/podcasts/feed

Business21C Weekly is broadcast on Sydney’s 2SER 107.3 fm radio station at 9:00 am each Monday morning.

As Facebook, Twitter and YouTube become increasingly ubiquitous in all facets of our personal and professional lives, there is little doubt that social media is changing the pace of business. This week, Business21C weekly examines the ‘Like’ economy.

With 140 million messages of 140 characters or less travelling through cyberspace everyday via Twitter, how do businesses incorporate social media in their marketing mix, and how are consumers responding? From spawning revolutions to giving customer feedback, social media have made their mark, and won’t be going anywhere. For business, this has meant creating SM strategy objectives and responding to, and being ready for, a changing future.

We talk to Rod McGuinness, social media producer at ABC Radio, Gay Flashman, director at digtital communications firm Formative, and Sandra de Castron from NAB about the ramifications of social media on business.

Edition 40 – Skateistan

Sunday, February 6th, 2011

Business21C Weekly is available through the iTunes Podcast directory. To subscribe directly via iTunes, go to the Advanced menu in iTunes and select Subscribe to Podcast. Then paste in the following URL: http://www.business21c.com.au/podcasts/feed

Business21C Weekly is broadcast on Sydney’s 2SER 107.3 fm radio station at 9:00 am each Monday morning.

This week, Business21C Weekly talks to Oliver Percovich, founder and director of Skateistan, Afghanistan’s first skating school and a not-for-profit organisation working in Kabul. The idea behind Skateistan is to not only provide skateboarding lessons, but to also provide education to children, both girls and boys. For one hour of skating completed, one hour of school class must also be done.

Jochen Schweitzer used this group as a case study for a postgraduate marketing class at UTS. Two students had the brief to provide recommendations to be implemented to this not-for-profit skateboarding school in Afghanistan. Suzie Hollott and Julian Ryan approached issues to identifying and solving problems with this interesting case study, and discuss their experiences with Kirsten Lees.

Edition 36: Business21C Summer stories with Helen Everingham

Monday, January 10th, 2011

Business21C Weekly is now available through the iTunes Podcast directory. To subscribe directly via iTunes, go to the Advanced menu in iTunes and select Subscribe to Podcast. Then paste in the following URL: http://www.business21c.com.au/podcasts/feed

Business21C Weekly is broadcast on Sydney’s 2SER 107.3 fm radio station at 9:00 am each Monday morning.

Today is the start of the Business21C Weekly “Summer stories”. We talk with Helen Everingham, coordinator of ‘The Centre Within’ and ‘Self-Esteem’ courses, which are designed to give you the tools and techniques to achieve what you want out of life. Why are such courses so useful to some people?  How effective have they been in helping people develop coping strategies, and how have the techniques in the courses helped Helen overcome personal personal challenges?

Helen first took Bert Weir’s ‘The Centre Within’ course in 1983 and has been teaching the course alongside him since 2003. She has experienced personal tragedy and loss and shares her experiences in dealing with trauma. She discusses why teaching others the techniques in these courses are so valuable for dealing with hardship and loss.

Helen’s vibrant personality comes through as she joins us in the studio to speak about her experiences teaching in communities all around Australia, especially in rural areas where there is high incidence of depression and suicide.

I like the problem

Thursday, November 11th, 2010

Sydney’s architectural community was given a privileged insight into life at Gehry Partners’ LA office when senior design partner, Craig Webb, spoke at the UTS School of Design, Architecture and Building recently.

It’s not often that someone is moved to tears by a building, especially a world-renowned architect at the end of a glittering career.

But the sight of Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao had Philip Johnson openly sobbing at its opening in 1997. He declared it ‘the greatest building of our time’ and its designer ‘the greatest architect we have today.’

In August this year Vanity Fair magazine asked 52 experts, including 11 Pritzker Prize winners and eight deans of major architecture schools to name the most important buildings, monuments or bridges completed since 1980. Twenty eight voted for the Guggenheim in Bilbao, almost three times the number of votes for Renzo Piano’s second-placed building.

Besides its intangible power to effect an emotional response, Gehry’s flamboyant style has attracted acclaim thanks to the dramatic juxtaposition of fluid curves and sharp edges, the stark contrast yet harmoniousness with the surroundings, and the use of exotic materials.

However, his work has also been criticised for overwhelming its locations – for being vulgar, crude and ostentatious. Some perceive Gehry’s distinctive style as a virtual brand of architecture, labeling it ‘logotecture.’

But, perhaps the harshest criticism of Gehry’s work has come from the man himself. Despite such incredibly high praise from his peers, Gehry has admitted that he is self-conscious about his idiosyncratic structures.

Asked in a 2005 interview how he feels at the completion of a project he replied, ‘it feels precarious to me. Since it doesn’t really look like something else I’ve seen, I worry that it’s some kind of bizarre thing… I want to hide. I want to crawl under the blankets.’

So what is it like to work for a man acknowledged as a creative genius by peers and public alike, who is so incredibly hard on himself – a copybook perfectionist.

Sydney’s architectural community was given a privileged insight into life at Gehry Partners’ LA office when senior design partner, Craig Webb, spoke at the UTS School of Design, Architecture and Building recently.

The designer of 21 buildings with Gehry, Webb was in Sydney to inspect the site of the new UTS Faculty of Business building in Ultimo Street, ahead of the public launch of his firm’s design next month.

Webb describes the design process as ‘a mixture of great terror and absolute pleasure.’

The first stage of design is generally a very loose sketch done by Frank, which is then made into a physical model. The firm places greater emphasis on physical modelling than most, sometimes constructing up to 50 models for a single building. Webb says that over 30 models of the UTS Business School have been constructed.

The dimensions of the models are then fed into a computer to enable the design of 2D and 3D models. Webb says the extremely high degree of precision afforded by computer models has transformed their work. Prior to computer-aided design, the ubiquitous fluid curves in Gehry’s designs – ‘Frank is interested in how fabrics fold’ – were a nightmare for building contractors to accurately reproduce.

Computer models became so integral to the Gehry Partners’ design process that they embarked on a joint venture with French aeronautical company, Dassault Systemes, to develop advanced architectural software.

Still, computer models are rarely used to communicate ideas to clients and are considered just a tool. ‘Frank hates computer models,’ says Webb.

Not intentionally, Webb didn’t really relate any of the ‘nitty gritty’ of design to his Sydney audience. ‘One of the things about our office is that the discussions aren’t very cerebral,’ he says. ‘It’s like… we like that, or we don’t like that. Frank always says that if he knew where he was going he wouldn’t go there!’

As you would expect of one of the world’s leading architectural practices, Gehry Partners does not have to market. They have the luxury of selecting the clients that are the best fit for the firm.

‘There has to be chemistry between us and the client or we don’t go there,’ says Webb. ‘They have to get in and fight with us.’

This view was also very simply conveyed by Gehry in the 2005 Sidney Pollack documentary, The Sketches of Frank Gehry. ‘I accept the jobs based on whether I like the people,’ he said.

This statement might seem naturally applicable to all architect/client relationships, but for a firm that regularly courts controversy, it carries far greater significance. Winning the client’s absolute trust is essential.

Professor Roy Green, Dean of the Faculty of Business at UTS, has been liaising with Gehry Partners since day one of the business school project. ‘We had to buy into [Gehry’s] whole approach to architecture,’ he says. ‘‘We weren’t at all concerned about how about flamboyant the architecture was. We were very reassured by his emphasis on functionality of interior spaces. The exterior only emerges as a result of what’s going on inside the building.’

So what does the UTS building actually look like? Until the public launch of the design next month, no one outside of the actual design group actually knows. Gehry Partner’s policy is to keep designs under wraps to avoid media controversy and misunderstanding.

Professor Green did however reveal that the design was inspired by the concept of a treehouse, with a central trunk as the base of activity and tendrils extending from that, each with a specific form and function.

‘…the metaphor may be apt,’ said Gehry in a recent letter to the faculty. ‘A growing, learning organism with many branches of thought – some robust and some ephemeral and delicate…’

Creative Innovation 2010, the wrap

Friday, October 1st, 2010

What kind of man walks onto a stage in a foreign city – where he has few acquaintances and fewer friends – and declares the newly opened public building in which he is standing an architectural mish mash? What kind of a speaker at a creativity conference declares the ‘chucking around of paint around should be confined to nursery schools and universities but the bit in the middle is about learning what needs to be learned’.

The event was Creative Innovation 2010, hosted by leading members of Melbourne’s art and business community, headed by leading Soprano and social entrepreneur, Tania de Jong.

The speaker was Austin Williams, Director of the Future Cities Project, in the UK and author of The enemies of progress, (Societas, Exeter, 2008). For the first hour of deep conversation during which he shared a stage with Edward de Bono and Rufus Black, Rhodes Scholar and Master of Melbourne University’s Ormond College, the audience would have been forgiven for thinking Williams had walked on to the wrong stage at the wrong event.

‘Excuse me, sir, the conflict resolution course meets next door.’

I would venture to argue that Williams was in exactly the right place at exactly the right time, and indeed cleverly placed by the conference organisers.

Why? Well let’s start with the words ‘creativity’ and ‘innovation’. Put the two together, add the name of just about any industry, and you’ve got the title of at least ten conferences in Australia alone, this year – back of the envelope calculation, granted.

We’ve had creative innovation in design, in accounting, in management consulting, in education, in health, we’ve had regional innovation events, skills creativity events, innovation for the young, the old and the young at heart. Business21C can put its hand up for hosting its own creative and innovative event this year, innovatively disguised ‘funky thinking’.

In fact, there’s been so much talk about creativity and innovation since the GFC undermined our belief in the financial system, that quite possibly the least creative thing you can do right now is host an event with either of those words in the title.

But de Jong and her colleagues recklessly put the two words together and staged an creative innovation extravaganza at Melbourne’s newly built Recital Hall, last month. And they pulled it off with style.

CI2010 worked. More than that, in places it was fabulous. One session even got a standing ovation – and that doesn’t happen often when there’s a management consultant on the platform. I have been trying to fathom why. It was not the impressive list of speakers. After all, in 2010 event organisers have to compete with the likes of TED.com who provide brilliant speakers 24 hours a day to a broadband connection near you. It wasn’t the musical interludes that punctuated the proceedings gracefully, either. It was, I believe, how the speakers were put together on stage: the brilliant and the brilliantly bolshie, the creative and the critical. And kept there. Panel sessions were up to two and a half hours long. No whack-up-your-powerpoints,-say-your-piece-and-sneak-off. Speakers spoke, and the audience drilled. Uncompromisingly, sometimes less than coherently, but relentlessly, for three whole days.

During that time, more than 30 speakers covered topics as diverse as pig farming, mental health, responsible design, irresponsible design, education, play, meditation, neuroscience and brand building for cities. And, in some miraculously found moments between all that content, we were entertained and soothed by a variety of artistic pursuits rarely associated with business discussion, from cartooning to piano, singing and painting.

But why are innovation and creativity taking up so much airtime in business discourse?

Either we are determined to become socially and environmentally responsible all of a sudden, or developed economies are waking up to the thought that they have to come up with new ideas to remain globally competitive. (After all, Australia, you can’t keep digging stuff out the ground and flogging it on, forever.)

The two schools of thought on this go something like…

  1. Western economic nations have painted humanity into a tight corner with their focus on growth, consumption, more growth, more consumption. We are running out of just about everything we need to survive as a species: space, water, fuel, food, clean air. This is a big thorny problem, one that some say can only be tackled by new kinds of thinking.
  2. It’s a matter of economic competitiveness. Take a look at statistics on patent registration around the world. Now compare them to those on national economic growth. There is a correlation. China, India and Korea have shown five, three and two and a half fold growth in the number of patents registered per capita of population in recent years. In developed nations, patent registration is slowing. In the UK and in Japan there’s negative growth. It seems, perhaps, new ideas are drivers of economic growth.

Whatever the reason, creativity and innovation are without doubt the new business black. But does the constant picking over of what creates creativity and sparks innovative thinking work? Or is it mid-life crisis navel gazing of mature economies in search of meaning?

To Austin Williams our potential to innovate is massively restricted by risk averse, precautionary parameters about what innovation should look like: sustainable, responsible, socially acceptable, for starters. Creativity, he says is stifled from birth.

But that’s just what he says. Thirty other speakers gave their insights and thoughts on creative thinking and innovative thinking practice over the three days of Creative Innovation 2010. Some agreed with Williams, some didn’t. But it was the diversity of thought and the opportunity to challenge that set CI2010 apart. Without critical thought and the confidence to challenge, can there be true creativity or meaningful innovation?

Short summaries of some of speakers key points are below. Videos will be online shortly and we’ll link to them as soon as they are. Have a browse, and see what you think.

Professor Jonathan West, Australian Innovation Research Centre, The innovation myth

The myth of innovation is that it arises from creativity. Innovation results from a lot of hard work over a long time, testing, creating and commericialising. Innovation is about changing the system into which the innovation plays. The 3 most important innovations of 20th century are: fixing energy into nitrogen, the atomic bomb, and containerisation (the container system for transport). In common they have the creation of a large scale and complex system to support them. For containerisation, it was a matter of reengineering a whole international infrastructure: ships, ports, dockers, trains, trucks and so on, but once achieved, global trade exploded.

We live in a complex world, with complex systems. Innovation is inefficient because it is about system change and we design our systems to be impossible to change.

Andrew MacLeod, CEO, Committee for Melbourne, Melbourne Innovative City

Presented the concept that the branding for the city of Melbourne should be the new paradigm in internatonal aid – to foster private and public sector development for investment, and for Melbourne to become to private sector investment and administration of international aid, what Geneva is to public sector investment and administration of aid.

Edward de Bono, Rethinking the future

Climate change is not the biggest problem facing humanity – the poor quality of our thinking is. And the fact that we don’t understand just how poor it is. Creative thinking has been trained out of us, because it hasn’t been valued. Now we need a Palace of Thinking where new ideas can be looked at and explored. Only by improving our thinking can we improve the ways we deal with some of the big issues facing us.

Michael Smith, CEO, ANZ Bank, Innovation and the rise of Asia – new opportunities, new risks

The rise of Asia offers new opportunity and new risks for business. ANZ Bank is one of fastest growing banks in Asia. Any large business that does not have a strategy that engages in Asia is exposing itself to risk. Successful strategies to compete in the Asian market must be innovative.

What do you need to innovate:

  • Shared mindset
  • Shared logic
  • Shared discipline (how to collaborate and create new knowledge accross organisations, not just recreating existing knowledge.

Claire Penniceard, Pork farmer, Failure, farming and food security

Claire Penniceard bred and raised hardy independent self managing beef cattle, on a zero input enterprise – no supplements no hay, no fertilizers. She bred grand champions but it was not economically or environmentally sustainable. She was the best, but the best was not good enough.

Having explored issues of dietary energy and food security around the world within parameters like environmental sustainability and animal friendliness, she walked off her successful beef farm to go into pig farming. It takes 74 of best beef farms to equal in production what one great pig farm does. Now she produces nine million dollars worth of export quality pig. They are housed and managed to enact all their natural life.

Dr Peter Farrell AM, CEO, ResMed, Innovation and entrepreneurship, the engines of economic growth

Entrepreneurs are often considered to be risk takers. They are not. They are opportunity seekers. Innovation is not creativity but requires it. Innovation occurs when a concept is anointed by the marketplace, when someone writes you a cheque. When we apply a new technology to something we know it’s called productivity, but when we apply it to something new it’s called innovation.

Stefan Cassomenos, Pianist, conductor, composer, From improvisation to composition

Failure is part of the creative process, and Cassomenos believes his entire process of composition depends on failure in some way before creativity is born.

Professor Patrick McGorry, Executive Director, Orygen Youth Health, Australian of the Year, Mental health and mental wealth

Australia’s health is its greatest natural resource, yet mental health is seriously neglected. It effects four to five million Australians and is the greatest killer in Australians under the age of 40.

Yet in terms of mental health care, an apartheid system exists: compare the facilities provided, staff numbers, visitors even flowers delivered to a patient with breast cancer, to those someone hospitalised for a mental health problem receives.

Professor Stephen Heppell, Director, ULTRALAB, Playful learning and why we all need cheering up

Play in learning is joyful, it surprises, challenges and engages. It teaches us to cope with the unexpected. Yet we lose sight of playfulness on our learning journey through life. We have to put play back into the centre of learning if we are going to be flexible thinkers, able to cope with change and with the unexpected.

Professor Peter Shergold, AC, The Centre for Social Impact, Empowering communities to transform democracy

Exciting and innovative stuff happens at the margins often on poorly funded pilot programs, where needs are greatest. The challenge for Australia is to become a hot bed of social innovation – political innovation and community innovation, drawing on a history of such initiatives as bush nursing.

Mark Scott, Managing Director, ABC, Building the digital town square

Fifty people in rural Australia are taking production skills and facilities to the communities, teaching people to put their stories online. If we can collaborate and share our stories we will understand each other more and have a real national conversation recognising the choice and expertise of the community is just as interesting as anything the ABC has to offer.

The experience of the Q&A audience which is growing every week has shown the value of audience led current affairs.

The future is not a place we are going is a place we are making.

Austin Williams, Director, Future Cities Project, Constructing communities, a contradiction in terms?

What is it about communities that politicians are trying to capture and bottle and sell back to us as the elixir of new ways of living? Why is it the community motif which means local and parochial is becoming central to national agenda? Three key elements of a healthy community are: voluntarism, purposefulness and autonomy. Initiatives like the big lunch which funded neighbourhood lunch events in the UK, are corrosive and insular. Is the world around you your neighbourhood or is it a bigger place? Communities are things of flux and change and should transcend the merely local. We are being taught to be good citizens rather than to be educated citizens – but through education comes citizenship.

David Rock, CEO, Results Coaching Systems, The neuroscience of creativity

We have a very small capacity for solving problems in a linear way. Most of the problems we solve at work are too big for our conscious resources so we have to access the unconscious which, relative to the conscious area of the brain is like tapping into the Milky Way.

The neuroscience of insight is the culmination of five years of study on how we can have more insights.

The four faces of insight are:

1. Awareness of an impasse, you need to stop and focus on what is not working.

2. Reflection reflection is required for insight to occur, because insight requires low electrical activity. Insights like the ring of a quiet mobile phone at loud party. Anxiety stops insights because it creates electrical signals which can drowned out the quiet electrical signals of insight.

Reflection is internally focussed. It’s relaxed and low effort.

You only need about 2 seconds of quiet to have the insight

Even a tiny threat can inhibit problem solving and insight.

3. Insight, at the moment of insight, dopamine-like substances are released. Having an insight changes the brain and packs a lot of positive energy.

4. Action, insight brings short term urgency for action. Action increases attention density. Attention density deepens insight.

Michael Rennie, Managing Partner, McKinsey and Co, Necessity is the mother of invention

Working at McKinsey and Co is working with the crack troops of western capitalism. Yet Managing Partner, Michael Rennie talked about bringing love to business – a place where there is more likely to be fear. There are two parts to innovation – the creative idea and and making the idea useful and applied. We are all creative. We don’t allow for reflection at work and most of our insights don’t happen at work.

Business21C was a sponsor of Creative Innovation 2010.

Frank Gehry’s UTS Business building

Tuesday, September 14th, 2010

Frank Gehry was inspired by the idea of a cross-disciplinary business school, writes Roy Green, Dean of UTS Business. He wants it to be special.

A Frank Gehry-designed building is a tremendously exciting prospect. But this project’s journey is as thrilling as its destination. Let’s be clear: this building didn’t start with an architectural concept – it started with our vision to become a world-class business school in a world-leading university of technology. To derive this vision, we spent several months in 2009 in a strategic conversation, canvassing everything from how the post-crisis world would re-shape business to what kind of structures and programs would help us build a more ‘integrative’ approach to business education.

In-principle university approval had already been given for a new business school building, providing us with a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reposition ourselves with a distinctive offering in an increasingly competitive and globalised world. A design competition was being prepared as part of the ambitious UTS City Campus Masterplan for the Dairy Farmers warehouse site in Ultimo. This was exciting in itself, but a further thought occurred in our strategic conversation with consultants 2nd Road: how inspirational it would be to attract an architect of Frank Gehry’s calibre to manifest our vision of the future in a uniquely creative building.

We were able to make contact with Gehry himself through his long-time friend and associate Maureen Thurston, a partner at 2nd Road, who said she would ‘give him a call over the weekend’. Gehry was interested. He requested a one-page statement from the faculty setting out its future strategy and expectations for the building. Having received this, he responded with a simple text message: ‘I’m up for it.’ Vice-chancellor Ross Milbourne lost no time in cancelling the design competition and inviting Gehry to Sydney for a private visit to view the site. It was on this visit that, when asked by the vice-chancellor whether he liked the Dairy Farmers site, Gehry replied: ‘I like the problem.’

Frank Gehry famously bases his designs on inspired sketches. Here’s the story behind ours.

On Gehry’s second visit to Sydney in December 2009, he contracted food poisoning. It curtailed his activities somewhat, and his meeting with the faculty had to be cut short. The following day, despite his illness, Kerry O’Brien interviewed him for The 7.30 Report, and we had a few other light meetings. We had a final discussion before he got on the plane in the coffee shop at the Park Hyatt.

Gehry was getting better, and beginning to be his old self again: sketching, talking and thinking about the essence of the building, its metaphor and exactly what it was all about. ‘I’ve got it,’ he said. ‘I’ve been thinking about our discussions.’ We had been talking about trees. ‘This is going to be a tree house, with a trunk and a core of activity, and houses in the branches for people to connect and do their private work.’ That was the moment genius struck. The result was this sketch of the unifying idea Gehry would employ for his design: a tree house, a ‘growing, learning organism with many branches of thought – some robust and some ephemeral and delicate’.

Craig Webb, Gehry Partners’ Chief Designer, looked at the sketch and said: ‘We can work with that’. And it has been the guiding principle of the work being undertaken on the building ever since.

Design philosophy

So far, Frank Gehry has visited Australia three times – four if we count his public lecture almost 30 years ago, which took place by extraordinary coincidence in another iconic Sydney building – the UTS Tower. Gehry himself likes to say that he was ‘waiting by the phone’ for us to call and that he busied himself ‘with a couple of other things’ in the meantime. We have visited some of the buildings with which he busied himself – such as the Disney Concert Hall, Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Stata building, Princeton Library and Weatherhead School of Management – and in the process, we learned more about the Gehry philosophy of design, some of which is particularly relevant to our project.

‘Design from the inside out’

This means starting with the ethos, needs and aspirations of the client, in this case the school and university. Currently, we operate at three locations including our main city campus – a reconstructed heritage site in Haymarket, where the separation of discipline areas is reinforced by a disconnected architecture and where, as a consequence, opportunities for interaction and collaboration are highly constrained.

By contrast, our faculty strategic conversation has placed emphasis on more integrative thinking, on producing students with boundary-crossing skills as well as specialised domain knowledge, and on a more creative element to business education, especially the extent to which we can connect our discipline areas with other faculties and discipline areas, such as design, engineering and IT, communication and the humanities. This emphasis also aligns with the direction of the UTS Strategic Plan, and discussions with the vice-chancellor, the University Council and our external partners in industry and the community.

‘The work is liquid until it is not’

Everything in the design discussions to date has focused on the internal functionality of the building, and this work continues in liquid form until it is crystallised as the final design, prior to the construction phase. Form truly follows function in the Gehry design philosophy, as for the early Bauhaus architects, but in a more organic style that questions and supersedes their idea of a ‘machine for living in’.

The Gehry team is committed to measuring the costs of the project so that it does not run over budget, and the constant three-way dialogue between the aspirations of the client, the interpretation of the architect and the reality of finite resources means that liquid cannot become crystal until the right moment: too early and attachments may be formed where ‘hearts get broken’; too late and the building doesn’t get built. Choosing this moment is part of Gehry’s genius, as is made clear in the Sidney Pollack film Sketches of Frank Gehry. Until this point, to avoid media controversy and misunderstanding, Gehry Partners’ policy is to keep the designs confidential to the client.

‘Making the building porous’

Our aim is also to make this a porous building, both internally and externally. Internally, there will be public and collaborative spaces where interactions can happen between colleagues, students and business-school partners. Academics will have their private ‘think spaces’ but we hope to make the collaborative spaces so inviting that they will choose to use them.

Equally important is the building’s relationship to the outside environment and how it connects with the city, its urban landscape and its communities.

An inspiration for Gehry is the High Line in Manhattan, and its parallels with the Ultimo Pedestrian Network (UPN) between Central Station and Darling Harbour. Like the High Line, the UPN will consist of a string of raised pedestrian walkways converted from old railway tracks. One of Gehry’s first questions about the building was: ‘Where is the entrance?’ Will it be at the UPN level or at street level? ‘The good news is that you can have your cake and eat it too,’ he said. The new building will have the potential to combine a street-level entrance connecting us with the city and an elevated entrance that integrates us with the university and UPN.

Unifying idea

The University Council engaged Gehry to undertake a concept design for the new building soon after his first visit to Sydney. It was on his second visit last December, following an interview on The 7.30 Report with Kerry O’Brien, that he sketched the unifying idea – the metaphor – he would employ for the design. It would be a tree house, with a trunk, a core of activity and tree houses in which people can meet, connect and undertake their academic work.

‘Thinking of it as a tree house came tripping out of my head on the spur of the moment in your presence and was not contrived,’ he wrote later. ‘But on reflection, the metaphor may be apt. A growing, learning organism with many branches of thought – some robust and some ephemeral and delicate. Anyway, it’s a start.’

Indeed it was a start, and elements of the tree house can be seen in the design as it progresses towards crystallisation, which will happen towards the end of this year. In the interim, the vice-chancellor has led a number of trips to Gehry Partners’ studio in Los Angeles, the purpose of which was to understand the Gehry process of design. We examined many of his models, developing an understanding of the relationship between the blocks that represent the building’s physical construction and the technology that goes into making those buildings a reality.

We also saw the architect’s current and recently completed projects in model form, including the Abu Dhabi Guggenheim, the Louis Vuitton Foundation for Creation building in Paris, and the Novartis headquarters in Basel, Switzerland. Much of what we saw helped guide us in our conception of how the design will evolve and, in the end, manifest itself in the final construction. The ideas behind the striking Novartis building in particular have influenced the vice-chancellor’s vision of open office spaces, glass and natural light.

One thing that is clear on examining all of Gehry’s buildings is that no two are alike. While there is a Gehry style common to all, a very different set of structures and finishes emerges from each to create the final result.

Schematic design

We have now moved from the concept design phase to schematic design. This phase will involve at least four visits in the latter half of the year from Gehry Partners and a likely visit by Gehry himself in December to formally crystallise the project, which has been given a completion date of late 2013.

We were doubly fortunate in being able to make the further announcement of a $25 million gift to UTS from Chinese business leader Dr Chau Chak Wing, with $20 million for the building itself and $5 million for scholarships. This is the largest single donation for a university building in Australia’s history and provides further affirmation of our vision and partnership with Gehry.

Significantly, while Gehry is deeply involved in all his projects, he has said about the UTS project: ‘I want to make this special.’ He intends to combine his experience of earlier partnerships with educational institutions, in which he was often the initiator of the conversation around business and design, artistry and creativity, with the ideas already emerging from our faculty.

Gehry sees business itself as a form of artistry and creativity but bemoans the fact that businesspeople are never taught that way. As he told the faculty: ‘I’ve always thought that businesspeople are artists – they work intuitively, like artists. That’s how we work… If you are going to come into the business world that I know now, it’s all messed up, right? Business is searching for how it can contribute to the world, and it’s great to have a businessperson – for me, anyway – who will free-associate. You need an environment to nurture that. That comes from you, too, not only from me. For me, it’s wide open. That’s why I came here.’

There is still a great deal of work to be done. Getting the building right is an almost inconceivably huge and complex challenge. And we are fortunate to have leading the process a vice-chancellor who is committed to its success. More than that, we have to deserve the building that we create, to fill it with faculty who are prepared to give of their talents, intuition, artistry and ideas, students who are searching for answers in a fast-changing world, and partners from the business community who are actively engaging with the academy.