(In the picture, the whole of space, tortona 37 milano)
Let’s say that branding is joined by necessity in architecture when architecture is no longer considered the construction of a building, but of a project. What is the difference? Leaving aside the implications inherent to the architecture, in the sense that interests us the difference is that in the summary of costs, not include more just design, materials and labor, but also the money to collect the money needed to build and that to structure the sales campaign. The value necessary to ensure that the project is created and that conveyed to sell comes from the branding project.
During the sale of new buildings, especially in times of economic recession, the brand has become crucial because it allows potential customers to feel somehow imagine the lifestyle for which it was thought the project and the scenario that will live if buy that property. In the case of no-residential buildings and complexes, or not only, the brand has become more important because these buildings become part of the brand of the city. (Article link New York). In the moment in which the materials are chosen, it is decided whether if furnish or not and if yes, so how, when you choose to give a name to the building or to the complex, at the moment when you decide the area on which to build, which is the architectural firm that deals with the project, who will be the recipient of the sale and what will be the strategy of communication, throughout long all this process we are building the brand.
In fact, the brand is necessary before starting work also to convey the values of the intervention on the territory making it clear to the institutions and the community of the intake area, usually in terms of innovation and modernization, which the architectural project will give way, as often it happens, a driving force for a general renewal of the area.
So it becomes increasingly important especially for large projects the brand of the project, because it helps both the sales and the people to accept new buildings as they recognize that such projects have a value that rises the place where themselves live.
Now, before speaking of the brand architecture, we must make a distinction between public projects and private company projects. Those individuals not interested for branding, may be as rare exceptions for the stars in some sectors of the mass market in which to show their “private architecture” increases the value of its brand, but that’s another story.
Returning to the first discriminant value, it is certain that the difference between the brand of a public project than that of a private project is that the private project must reflect at least in part the values of the brand instead for the public that does not happen.
For example: let’s consider the project for a space linked to cultural events because they are typical commissions both from private and public. If it were a public commission, which is in Tokyo or Rome, the project, both of branding and of architecture, should follow certain rules dictated by the territory, which will use the space and dictates some aesthetic and construction related to the contemporary. If the committee were private, all these dictates should not only be in tune with the values of the brand, but to be able to convey them.
In the past twenty years have been characterized by two distinct currents and a third mixed about these two examples of commissions that we did.
In the case of public commissions entrusted with important architecture firms, the brand has become increasingly tied to cosmetics of the archistar who are entrusted with the project. The message that we read between the lines is: even this city deserves a work of … … The idea of this type of architecture is one of the reasons most interest because it shows how a certain environment react at insertion of a architecture work that has like a first degree of attention the respect the dictates of designer aesthetic. The works of Santiago Calatrava, Frank Gehry or Zaha Hadid does not contextualize the environment, we are related. The brand becomes very important in these projects and the conveyance of the working relationship between the city and the superstars become an event of international importance that if properly channeled also bring value to the brand of the city and the star architect.
This relationship between superstars and the commission is just as important for brands that operate as active market.
Over the years have flourished collaborations between great architects and great designers to implement the projects of the store of the strongest brands in the world. Collaborations are many, but certainly the queen of the relationship between architect and designer is one that combines Rem Koolhaas and Miuccia Prada.
What this report is superior to all others? The fact that you do not understand where Koolhass starts and Miuccia ends and vice versa. It seems that the two aesthetics are in fact born to be together and that transcends what might appear as a mere value ratio. In this relationship that currently has four Flagship Store (Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, Tokyo) and the magnificent Fondazione Prada in Milan. In another article we wrote of how partnerships should never be 50% and here it actually might seem, but it is not. First Prada still outweighs Koolhaas especially in communication, but the most important thing is that in reality the relationship is not seen here, seems a thing done by one entity and this addition to the beauty of the work itself is the quid which makes it really fantastic.
In the work that we have seen between superstars and brand, the aesthetics of the brand win for what regards to buildings dedicated to commercial (the store) and aesthetics of the archistar win when it comes to building we could say of back-end, that those not seen by the general public, but only y the experts and specialists in the field. Are Headquarted, administrative offices, production spaces and showrooms.
What is the logic behind this? The brands spend a good part of the budget to communicate the values that distinguish them from others in the market and that make them unique and desirable, so unlikely to allow another aesthetic to prevail on a direct channel with the public as a store.
The speech instead flips when we speak about of back-end buildings because in this case the brand want to show open mind to new aesthetics and philosophies because shows the openness of the leadership towards dialogue and interaction, as well as with the values that the brand will make its own after being “processed” with its DNA.