Design Quality Standards: Intangibles That Bring Hospitals to Life
Design Quality Standards: Intangibles that bring hospitals to life
This research project assesses the effectiveness of a step-by-step model for developing site-specific, meaningful and measurable design quality standards, while creating supporters who were prepared to implement them.
Tye Farrow, BArch, MArch UD, OAA, MAIBC, NSAA, NAA, FRAIC; Sharon VanderKaay, BSc Design, ASID
| Bluewater Health in Sarnia, designed to provide ‘light, life and comfort’
(photo courtesy Farrow Partnership) |
For over 25 years, the terms ‘patient focused care’ and ‘healing environment’ have been in common use by hospital administrators and healthcare design professionals. Despite well-intentioned efforts to provide psychosocially supportive settings, we continue to see spaces that demonstrate little empathy for the vulnerable state of patients, family and staff1.
Canadian architecture critic Lisa Rochon has described the majority of hospital environments as “factories built to contain the ill”. She continues: “Sadly, for the most part, inspired hospital design is wishful thinking.”2
| Figure 1: The Hospital Asset-Liability Pyramid illustrates how intangibles can contribute to wealth creation |
While there are rigorous technical construction codes that dictate the requirements for fire and life safety, no code protects the public from exposure to austere healthcare infrastructure. To avoid the risk of building hospitals that function merely to process sick people, decision-makers must confront the inherent challenges of defining, monitoring and implementing intangibles.
For example, the intangible design qualities of a hospital influence its position on the Asset-Liability Pyramid (Figure 1). In contrast to technical standards, design standards cannot be validated by means of traditional scientific methodologies. However, if such barriers to working with intangibles are viewed as insurmountable, it will be difficult to make a convincing case in support of
This research project assesses the effectiveness of a step-by-step model for developing site-specific, meaningful and measurable design quality standards, while creating supporters who were prepared to implement them.
Tye Farrow, BArch, MArch UD, OAA, MAIBC, NSAA, NAA, FRAIC; Sharon VanderKaay, BSc Design, ASID
| Bluewater Health in Sarnia, designed to provide ‘light, life and comfort’
(photo courtesy Farrow Partnership) |
For over 25 years, the terms ‘patient focused care’ and ‘healing environment’ have been in common use by hospital administrators and healthcare design professionals. Despite well-intentioned efforts to provide psychosocially supportive settings, we continue to see spaces that demonstrate little empathy for the vulnerable state of patients, family and staff1.
Canadian architecture critic Lisa Rochon has described the majority of hospital environments as “factories built to contain the ill”. She continues: “Sadly, for the most part, inspired hospital design is wishful thinking.”2
| Figure 1: The Hospital Asset-Liability Pyramid illustrates how intangibles can contribute to wealth creation |
While there are rigorous technical construction codes that dictate the requirements for fire and life safety, no code protects the public from exposure to austere healthcare infrastructure. To avoid the risk of building hospitals that function merely to process sick people, decision-makers must confront the inherent challenges of defining, monitoring and implementing intangibles.
For example, the intangible design qualities of a hospital influence its position on the Asset-Liability Pyramid (Figure 1). In contrast to technical standards, design standards cannot be validated by means of traditional scientific methodologies. However, if such barriers to working with intangibles are viewed as insurmountable, it will be difficult to make a convincing case in support of
References: 1. Experts call for action on design quality. World Health Design, October 2008, p9. 2. Rochon L. Why is hospital design so unhealthy? The Globe and Mail, 15 December 2007. 3. Angus Reid Strategies. In-depth interviewing qualitative research project: Evaluating the Farrow model of the design standards creation process. 27 May 2009. 4. Lev B. Intangibles: Management, measurement and reporting. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press; 2001. 5. Blair MM, Wallman SMH. Unseen wealth: Report of the Brookings Task Force on intangibles. Washington DC: Brookings Institute Press; 2001. 6. Knowles MS, Holton EF III, Swanson RA. The Adult Learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development. Maryland Heights MO: Elsevier; 2005. 7. Coates GJ. Erik Asmussen, Architect. Stockholm: Byggförlagte; 1997.