Challenges of a changing market

AH: It is known that Switzerland stands out for its innovation. Since we have few natural resources, we have a culture that promotes creativity and development. This innovative spirit is embedded in our society. Our generation — the ‘baby boomer’s kids’—has grown up in a stable environment that has fostered this aspect of innovation even further. So, although we started from scratch (literally using old doors as working tables), we had the moral support of our parents and community,  encouraging us to take the entrepreneurial leap. This support isn’t unique to architecture. Our society nurtures the drive to take these leaps of faith, though, of course, longevity is another question altogether.

Despite the old saying that the previous generation was better off, we did benefit from a wave of legislative changes that took place in 2013 (post-subprime crisis) mainly aimed at densifying Geneva's fifth zone (also known as the villa zone). We were fortunate to catch that wave and make the most of it. For a decade, the real estate market saw a boost. This reshuffling allowed young, motivated offices to grow and get traction. However, we see how it is more challenging for the younger generation to achieve the same level of impact today. This is mainly due to the legislative complexity we find today. But it’s certainly not impossible.

CT: In the last two decades, we’ve also observed that Switzerland has experienced a significant wave of large-scale construction, largely driven by government initiatives and open competitions. In Geneva, this focus on large projects has reached a near-saturation point, a trend that can be observed globally as well. Additionally, there has been a shift in priorities, particularly regarding sustainability, prompting a rethinking of how we continue to densify and build. 

When we started in 2013, the architectural world was still inspired by star architects and large-scale projects on an international scale and slowly passing the parametric design phase. However, priorities quickly began to shift, and today, in 2024, client expectations—and our own—have evolved considerably! If you're graduating now, your approach and priorities are likely to be very different from ours. Sustainability, though omnipresent, will only become more pressing in the coming years. Questions like ‘Do we need to build more?’, ‘Should we focus on renovation?’, ‘Should we preserve and reuse existing structures?’ are taking priority across the board. Unless there are significant political or global shifts, this focus on sustainable practices is likely to continue. 

We feel this shift within our office and practice, and future generations will feel it even more, prompting greater creativity and innovation to meet these demands. In Europe—and in Switzerland, specifically—our population isn’t growing naturally. It is immigration that keeps a steady growth curve. As long as this continues, we’ll need to keep building. So, the challenge is how we build and find sustainable solutions in the process. Across all sectors, there's a shared commitment to creating a better future, and everyone has a vested interest in this goal.

Meeting the sustainability challenge

CT: It is true that the word sustainability can come off quite empty because we don't really understand what that means. We're still figuring it out. It is mainly an effort of trial and error. We’re all experimenting, trying to find the best ways to address this challenge. If we truly wanted to be sustainable, the simplest answer would be to stop building altogether—but that’s just not realistic. We know there’s no avoiding the need to build, and we’re aware of the urgency of climate change. So, we’re actively searching for solutions despite having no guarantee that they will stand the test of time. All we can do is commit ourselves to the search for a responsible path forward. In Switzerland, the government and many of our clients take active roles in this discourse. Needless to say, the demand is there, and we have an obligation to respond. So, although the word can come off as empty, it’s our only way forward, whether we like it or not.

AH: The keyword when we talk about sustainability in the office is ‘balance’. Because sustainability is about balance, it's not just the materials that we use; it's the economics behind it and the ethical responsibility. How can you be sustainable if the material costs you so much that you have no more yield, right? It's no longer sustainable. So it needs to be sustainable on the economic level, it needs to be sustainable on a climate level, and it needs to be sustainable on a social level. 

In Switzerland, the laws force us to work and to think in a balanced way, and this pushes many constraints on the construction world. We’ve seen the laws shift on a yearly basis. It's mind-boggling. What we build today would have been considered a sustainable miracle a decade ago. Now, it barely meets the lower legislative standards. This drive for improvement is deeply embedded in our culture, and our wealth as a society enables us to push these standards. It’s almost an obligation—because we have the resources, we’re compelled to use them responsibly.

Versatility over specialisation

AH: Our collaboration stems from our studies at the EPFL. During our master’s program at the EPFL, we collaborated on every project, including our thesis, which gave us a lot of room for experimentation. We developed a strong connection with a professor at EPFL, who urged us to establish our own entity to support them on large-scale research projects. The shift was drastic when we started working on small renovation projects in Geneva. In the beginning, around ninety percent of our work was outside Geneva. The local work focused mainly on small tasks like renovating doors and minor repairs. The contrast was stark, from door handles in Geneva to large-scale international projects.

Our local milestone came when we were asked to apply for a densification permit in Geneva’s ‘villa’ zone—something we knew little about initially. So, we went to the archives, gathered all the successful projects from that zone, studied them carefully, and managed to get our project approved in a record time. In contrast, the neighbouring project took 24 months to accomplish what we had done in a couple of months. This efficiency helped us gain recognition in the Geneva construction scene. 

CT: Context has been an essential ingredient in our approach. By context, I mean how we adapt to a specific site and respond to its unique aspects. This approach influenced not only our architectural designs but also the way we developed our practice. We’re adaptable and open-minded, and our communication and concept development have always been straightforward and contextual. This idea of integrating context has guided us from urban-scale projects down to designing something as small as a bookshelf. 

As an emerging studio, we embraced all types of projects without tainting the projects with our ‘ego’. We approached each mandate by asking how we could incorporate elements from our clients, the site, or even in a single room to inform and enrich the project. Although this might sound broad, it’s been a driving force behind our growth, and it’s something inherently part of our practice, even if you don’t always notice it.

AH: When we first started, we made an oath to never specialise in program or scale. To this day, when people ask ‘What do you specialise in?’our answer remains the same: We don’t specialise! We want to stay open-minded to anything and explore various scales and programs. This has enriched and strengthened our projects over time. It’s also what makes our projects so seemingly eclectic.

Optimism and objectivity

AH: Another thing that sets us apart is how overly optimistic we are, which nurtures this open-mindedness. This allows us to discover things that we might not have if we were rigid in our thinking.

CT: A key principle we emphasise with our team is the approach to every project with a collective mindset, always using ‘we’ instead of ‘I’ to talk about the project. This approach eliminates the ego—it's never about ‘I did this’ or ‘I'm doing that.’ This consciously makes the project as objective as possible. By doing so, we can remain open-minded, gather as much information and input as possible to develop the project, and stay receptive to new ideas, which is essential to creating good work.

Early on, we realised that presenting a project with the pronoun ‘I’ makes constructive criticism more challenging. When a project has its own life—independent of us—it can be shaped, refined, and improved freely. It’s like raising a child—it has its own identity, and you want to give it the best possible outcome. You’re doing it for the project, not for yourself, as it will exist beyond ourselves. This objectivity allows us to incorporate context on a more precise and deeper level.

AH: Our early projects were radically contextual, each so uniquely defined by its context. The project existed solely because of that context, which gave it a distinctive beauty. Ultimately, we want each project to grow into its own life. We’re not Picasso-type architects. Our approach is more about nurturing something that’s brewing, letting it grow into its unique form and stand independently.

CT: This openness is also reflected in how we work with our clients. We cultivate a strong, communicative relationship, fostering an ongoing dialogue. Our clients contribute a lot to each project, bringing an element of openness and a sense of democracy to the process. There are no bad ideas or wrong ideas, and we avoid saying, ‘This is it, and we’re sticking to this!’ Instead, we offer an ‘objective viewpoint’ that allows the client to embrace the particularities of the project in a way not possible otherwise.

This objectiveness also allows us to avoid losing ourselves emotionally. It forces us to see each project independently. So, despite the accumulative years and the number of projects we’ve worked on, we try hard to avoid bringing too much baggage with us. We like to keep it lightweight. Carry-on only!