Samuel Schultze im Interview mit Catherine Iselin

Carolin: What does ‘collaborative working’ mean with respect to our clients?

Christina: That has a lot to do with trust, and trust in turn has a lot to do with transparency. If we can work with our planning partners or clients to formulate a shared objective, perhaps with a slightly different focus but still with something in common, we have gained a great deal. Being committed to pulling in the same direction is a very good starting point.

Carolin: Burckhardt brings together many different services under one roof. The way I experience this is that negotiation processes, in the positive sense of the word, between the companies, locations and partners, are an integral part of everyday life here. Does this circumstance create a certain mindset that also comes into play when dealing with clients and planning partners?

Kenzo: Yes, I think it does. It helps that we’re accustomed to fulfilling different roles. We’re both architects and developers, plus we are also active in marketing. We’re well acquainted with the different perspectives and can relate to the corresponding mindset in each case.

Wolfgang: And we’re open about the fact that the success of a project is always dependent on the contributions from different individuals, parties, and perspectives. That’s why it is comparatively easy for us to embrace agile working methods or new operating methods such as Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), whereby the client, planners and contractors jointly conclude a multi-party contract and the entire team works together in a co-location.

Carolin: What does ‘great’ mean to you in the sentence “The joy of working together enables us to achieve great things”?

Kenzo: In our own site developments, it’s all about a consistently high quality of building culture, from the development work, to the architecture, to the issues of an operational nature. With a project that creates added value not just for the user and the client but also for the neighborhood – be it the community or the city – we make a positive contribution to society as a whole.

Carolin: Martin H. Burckhardt frequently emphasized architects’ social responsibility, which Christina and Kenzo have just mentioned. As we now put it, “What we do has consequences for the future.” In what way does Burckhardt account for the future?

Wolfgang: It is a well-known fact that the construction industry is responsible for a very large proportion of global CO₂ emissions. This entails a clear responsibility. It is not an option, but an obligation for us to move ever further towards ecological sustainability.

Christina: Burckhardt has always pursued a high standard of social sustainability. When you build, you influence people’s living or working environment. This, too, results in a great responsibility.

Christof: I think it’s about building culture in the comprehensive sense, as defined in the 2018 Davos Declaration. What characterizes good architecture today is that it frees itself from the status of a mere object. It is not primarily about having a perfect-looking building when it’s completed. More important is how it responds to its context, what free spaces it constitutes, or what qualities it will still have 20, 30, or even 50 years from now. And it has to be flexible so that it can be appropriated by the users differently than we had originally planned. It must be able to react to changing needs. If we succeed in this, we will have anticipated a piece of the future; for me that’s another aspect of our responsibility.

Wolfgang: But because we ourselves also develop, it goes well beyond individual buildings. With our development services, we are also involved in the early phases of the process and thus in programmatic interventions. Many parameters are decided on an urban planning scale, from the quality of the outdoor spaces to questions of density, functional mix, and social diversity, through to mobility-related aspects. isBauThis gives us the opportunity to make a contribution to building culture in a very holistic sense and thus assume responsibility in a different way.

Rafael: I’m interested in the question of where the boundary lies: On the one hand, we’re a service provider and stress that our work is in partnership with our clients. On the other hand, we want to stand up for our values and our corporate culture. That can result in a conflict of priorities. I think it is important for us to openly discuss whether we refuse commissions that go against our values.

Christof: I see myself not only as a service provider, but also as an advisor that comes alongside the client and brings new ideas and solutions into play. We should actually be much more active in showing our clients ways of minimizing space and volume and reusing existing buildings. This isn’t helpful for us in economic terms, but makes sense in that it benefits society. I’m waiting for the time when, as architects, we are paid for what is not built. At the moment, everything still follows the logic: the bigger the building, the higher the fees.

Rafael: That makes it sound as if the term ‘service’ has negative connotations. If you look at the entire life cycle of a building, including our services in Burckhardt Immobilien such as marketing, management, maintenance, servicing, and repairs, then it’s all about service. And, of course, good advice is also part of the service.

Christof: Agreed!

Wolfgang: I would like to come back to Rafael’s question about the boundary: There have been and will certainly continue to be projects that we reject unequivocally on ethical grounds. But they are the exception. Much more often there are projects where it’s not so black and white. In these grey areas, we try to work with persuasion. Every project is a shared journey. I remember a few clients that we managed to persuade to adopt more sustainable solutions as things progressed. Persuasion is the long haul.

Christof: I think that also fits in with our role as a large office: We need to drive forward the scaling of sustainable solutions, and that requires staying power.

Wolfgang: To answer Rafael’s question about openness: I think we have that. Because we’re not controlled by anyone else, but belong to ourselves. But also because with the Partner Panel, we have a team where they trust one other and regularly discuss and decide on major issues together.

Carolin: I’d like to come back to the developments. One could ask critically here whether the developers’ cool, calculating approach doesn’t ‘contaminate’ the aspiration to high standards of building culture. What would you say to that?

Kenzo: Just because I understand the investment side, it doesn’t mean in the slightest that I’m giving up on my principles. On the contrary. My motivation is to set the framework to ensure a high quality of urban development and architecture. In fact, I’d even go so far as to say this is your obligation if you have the means to develop neighborhoods. Whether the criticism is justified depends on the quality, and we have to keep that consistently high.

Oliver: I can definitely underscore what Kenzo says. That’s my experience, too. In the projects we’ve carried out with our developers in French-speaking Switzerland to date, such as most recently the Chasseron residential building in Lausanne, the quality of the architecture was a very high priority; there was no question about that.

Kenzo: That also has to do with our team’s background in development: All of them come from the field of architecture and have gone on to gain further qualifications. It’s noticeable that their motivation stems largely from a commitment to building culture and from the societal dimension. That’s what defines our profile.

Wolfgang: As architects, we always give our all. If we see a better solution, we want to implement it. Even if we don’t get paid for it.

Carolin: A kind of idealism, in other words.

Wolfgang: No question! And I’d like to add another aspect: Building is a highly compartmentalized process. As a rule, there are different stakeholders who pursue their particular interests and still all have to work together, which is not always easy – from the investor, to the planners and contractors, to the facility manager.

The fact that our broad range of services covers everything from development to marketing means that we can take a holistic view of things. We aspire to create added value that goes beyond the mere profit goals. I see this as a privilege and a great strength.

Carolin: I probably wouldn’t have come to Burckhardt if I hadn’t had a few conversations with you, Wolfgang, and others beforehand. Much of what makes Burckhardt an interesting place is not obvious at first glance. To name just a few examples: Hardly anyone knows that Burckhardt developed the first closed cavity façade, has been working for many years with international offices such as SOM – where Martin H. Burckhardt completed an internship back in the day – or that it has its own foundation that supports employees in emergencies. It almost seems as if there is a tradition of doing interesting things without talking about them. Is that a typical Basel trait?

Rafael: Yes, this is very deeply rooted in our regional culture. In Basel, we’re very self-effacing. You learn that as a child. Donations are also made anonymously in Basel.

Christina: For me, this is also closely linked to the idealism that I have as an architect. You pour all your energy into a project; talking about it is less important. And you want to meet your own high standards, so in the end you may be a bit more self-critical if you didn’t quite achieve what you wanted.

Oliver: We have fair working conditions, there are many opportunities – promotion, further training, teaching positions – and mutual appreciation in the team. We win competitions and deliver very good buildings, many of which are also in the public sector. Word gets around and it speaks for itself.

Carolin: That’s the Basel mindset again. I’d like to end with a personal question for you: What keeps you at Burckhardt?

Oliver: Before joining Burckhardt, I worked for international offices in the USA, among other places. I often saw people there being squeezed like lemons. At Burckhardt, we look out for each other and are there for each other. That’s why I still feel very comfortable here.

Christina: I came to Burckhardt from Paris after my studies and didn’t intend to stay for long. After the first successful competition, I wanted to see the project through. Then it was time to start a family, and Burckhardt gave me the opportunity to combine family and career. That was very special for an architecture firm. And it’s one of the main reasons why I stayed.

Kenzo: I find the participation system exciting and the opportunity to take on entrepreneurial responsibility. I also find the breadth of our services very valuable, from project development and all phases of architectural work, including tendering and construction management, to marketing and management. It’s a model that hardly exists anywhere else. 

Carolin: Rafael, I have to rephrase the question for you: You came back to Burckhardt after a few years elsewhere. Why?

Rafael: For me, it felt like coming home again – there are some traditions that have survived, and I also know the culture of appreciation from before. At the same time, I also realized that there is a desire for change in the company and that I could make a difference if I came back to Burckhardt.

Carolin: Jantos, how about you?

Jantos: The mutual respect between colleagues and the way we work together are important to me, too. Somehow, as a structure, we manage to develop further, pick up on new topics, and work on them. That’s one thing that keeps me here. I believe in the promise that Burckhardt once made to me: that I would be able to help shape the future.

Carolin: Thank you very much for taking the time for this interview.