How to be adaptable

Adrian Gainer explains what it takes to build the perfect adaptable laboratory Adaptability should be a key objective of any research facility design. Its requirement, in order to accommodate change, is widely acknowledged. The term adaptability, along with flexibility is regularly used in this context and often in a loose way. The terms are often interchanged, their definitions often contested. But whilst adaptable and flexible have broadly similar meanings, they are generally not interchangeable. The former means "able to be adapted" (or possibly "able to adapt"), and the latter "able to flex or bend". Adaptable indicates long-term changes; flexible more short-term alterations. A building might be adaptable enough to accommodate a laboratory or a school (a long-term use), or flexible enough to vary the number of rooms by having easily-moved internal walls (a shorter-term change). Previous work has focused on clarifying a definition for adaptability in design by identifying four overarching characteristics; the capacity for change; the ability for the building to remain fit for purpose thereby reducing mismatches between the building and its users; value in terms of maximising the building’s productive use; and finally  time. Firstly to indicate the speed of change and secondly, to indicate through life changes. Their current definition of adaptability, which we take forward, is a synthesis of these four underlying characteristics, namely ‘the capacity of a building to accommodate effectively the evolving demands of its context, thus maximising value through life’. Over the course of a building’s lifetime, change is inevitable, both in the social, economic and physical surroundings, and in the needs and expectations of occupants. All other things being equal, a building that is more adaptable will be utilised more efficiently, and stay in service longer, because it can respond to changes at a lower cost. Our role as architects is to help anticipate these changes. In our laboratory design work at HOK, we consider adaptability as covering three important functional requirements; flexibility, convertibility and expandability. We see these three requirements as subsets of adaptability. Flexibility, in this context, is the ability for a facility to adapt to operational change such as a change in workplace practices. Convertibility is the ability to convert rooms to different functions. Expandability is the ability to expand the building envelope and specific research facility function. These definitions all explore adaptability from the micro, such as lab furniture, to the macro where the emphasis is on the building shell. So, how do we start to think about designing for adaptability? An interesting approach is one that has its origins in ‘futures thinking’. Decision making in lab design can sometimes be too focused on the short term. By opening perspectives beyond immediate constraints, ‘futures thinking’ can enhance our capacity to anticipate change, grasp opportunities and cope with threats. While the future cannot be firmly predicted, we can look forward to a range of possibilities by applying an approach of scenario development. Scenarios are carefully constructed snapshots of the future and the possible ways a field may develop. They help focus thinking on the most important factors affecting change; improve our understanding of change and what we can do to react to it. In our scenario planning work, we look first at a number of change scenarios that may be required and then consider what needs to happen to allow the change and what impacts the accommodation of that change would have. Three typical scenarios we consider are: a change of function within a room (e.g. from a tissue culture lab to an instrument lab); a  change of function from an open primary lab bay to a dedicated secondary lab bay; and a change of function of a laboratory to an office environment. For each of these scenarios it is imperative to review the principle activities that need to take place in order to affect the change, for example do we need to remove a wall, relocate a fire barrier, move laboratory furniture, or reconfigure lighting? Considering the practicalities of these changes, for example the ease of the change, the cost associated with the change, or the disruption it may cause, enables us to assess the potential adaptability of a design. In our design work we consider the ability to change at three levels – building, room and furniture level. At a building level we consider overall adaptability, services capacity and services distribution as priorities. At a room level we examine the change types we are likely to encounter and at the furniture level we consider carefully what we need to provide to allow appropriate change. It is perhaps the lab furniture strategy that is one of the cornerstones of any adaptability strategy for a research facility. Our recommendations to clients when considering a furniture solution that can accommodate change is to buy the best quality they can, maximise standardisation throughout the building, and separate the lab furniture from lab services. We also recommend ensuring typical bench assemblies and cabinetry are interchangeable making changes to lab assignments simple, quick and very cost effective to accommodate, and finally we suggest that all lab furniture components are interchangeable and adjustable. Adaptability should be a design characteristic of all lab buildings and the designer must focus on enabling adaptation to take place. It can only take place with a conscious understanding of the likely demands and that requires that we engage with lab managers, scientists, estates directors, facility managers et al to understand how the building design industry has approached this in the past, the successes and failures and how we might look forward to providing that environment that gives us the ability to accommodate change in the future. As a final note, I would be interested to hear from any readers who have views on this very topic. It is only by better understanding the burning issues with respect to adaptability from the perspective of those on the front line, that we will truly be able to deliver workplaces fit for the future. Author Adrian Gainer , Region Leader, Science and Technology at HOK Contact e: adrian.gainer@hok.com