Architecture has always balanced two competing desires: the ambition to impress peers and the responsibility to serve people. In an industry where glossy renderings and award submissions often overshadow the lived experience of buildings, I’ve found myself asking a simple question: Who are we really designing for?
The Trap of Designing for the Jury
I’ve seen teams pour more energy into producing photogenic perspectives than into refining circulation or daylighting. It’s tempting - awards bring recognition, clients, and sometimes funding. But the downside is clear: when a project prioritizes image over substance, the spaces often feel hollow once built.
I remember walking through a recently completed cultural center, celebrated in magazines and shortlisted for multiple prizes. From the outside, it was a striking sculpture. Inside, however, visitors struggled with confusing navigation and poorly shaded lobbies that overheated in summer. The building photographed beautifully - but it wasn’t built for comfort.
The Lessons from Listening
Contrast this with a community clinic I once worked on, modest in scale and budget. There was no jury in mind, only the families and staff who would use it daily. Every design decision - window heights, waiting-room acoustics, natural ventilation - was shaped by their feedback.
The result? A building that never made headlines, but was praised by the people who mattered most. Nurses told us patients seemed calmer, and parents appreciated how easily they could move between spaces. That project taught me more about architecture’s purpose than any competition entry.
Awards vs. Impact
The architectural world often gravitates toward projects that photograph beautifully and look good in award submissions. Yet, real impact is measured in how buildings change lives and shape daily experience.
Take the Medellín Metrocable in Colombia. On the surface, it’s just a cable car system. But for residents of the city’s hillside neighborhoods, it has been nothing short of transformative. Suddenly, journeys that once took hours on foot or by bus became quick and direct connections to schools, hospitals, and job opportunities in the city center. The Metrocable didn’t win acclaim because it dazzled juries with glossy renderings - it earned respect because it redefined accessibility and dignity for underserved communities.
The Metrocable reconnects Medellín’s hillside communities with the city, turning mobility into social equity
Or consider Zaha Hadid’s Phaeno Science Center in Wolfsburg, Germany. Its futuristic design has long been celebrated, but its deeper legacy lies in how it engages people. The building is not just a container for exhibitions - it is itself an interactive landscape that encourages exploration, curiosity, and play. Families, children, and visitors experience science not as a subject behind glass, but as a lived, tactile adventure. The emotional impact here outweighs the formal innovation.
Phaeno Science Center blurs the line between building and landscape, inviting discovery at every turn
These examples remind us that the true value of architecture is not in the awards it collects but in the lives it touches. Recognition is fleeting; human impact endures.
Designing with Empathy
Good design begins with empathy. It means asking:
- How will this space feel after five years of daily use?
- Can someone navigate it without asking for directions?
- Will it make life easier, not harder, for the people who clean, maintain, and occupy it?
These questions don’t appear on awards criteria, but they define whether architecture truly succeeds.
For instance, Lacaton & Vassal’s renovation of social housing in Bordeaux avoided demolition in favor of upgrading existing units with more space and natural light. Residents stayed in their homes throughout construction, and their quality of life improved drastically - at a fraction of the cost of new construction. That decision was deeply empathetic, and though it eventually won the Pritzker Prize, its true value was measured in residents’ satisfaction.
Glass-enclosed balconies bring light, air, and new life into social housing blocks
Similarly, Seattle Central Library by OMA and LMN shows how a public building can be radical yet people-centered. Its spiraling book collection system was designed to make browsing intuitive, while the vast light-filled reading room became a civic living room. The building’s global acclaim was a bonus; its real success was in redefining what a library could feel like for its community.
Seattle Central Library reimagines the public library as a vibrant urban living room
The Real Measure of Success
For me, the most rewarding moments have not come from award nights but from quiet feedback: a teacher saying their students feel more focused in class, a family sharing how their home feels like a sanctuary, or a passerby enjoying shade on a hot day because of a design choice we made.
If architecture is to remain relevant in an age of climate urgency and social inequality, we need to remember: it’s not the juries we should be designing for. It’s the people who will live with our buildings long after the awards season is over.
Save this story. A free account keeps your reading list and the 07:00 email in one place.
CREATE FREE ACCOUNT →SIGN IN
