AS TECHNOLOGY TRANSFORMS THE WAY WE LIVE, WE CONTINUE TO DESIGN SPACES BASED ON PATTERNS THAT NO LONGER REFLECT OUR REALITY.
For decades, we have designed offices for working, schools for learning, homes for living, and industrial facilities for production. Each space served a relatively well-defined function, and architectural programs were organized around activities we considered predictable.
But the way we live is changing.
In previous articles, I have reflected on how technological evolution and, more recently, artificial intelligence are transforming the way we work, learn, and interact with one another. I have also explored how these changes are reshaping our relationship with physical spaces.
This brings us to a question I consider fundamental: Are we designing spaces for emerging human behaviors, or are we still relying on models developed for a reality that is rapidly changing?
Today, a home can serve as an office, a classroom, and a gathering place. Industrial environments are evolving through automation, retail spaces are no longer exclusively places to shop, and offices no longer need to exist solely as places to work.
These functions have not disappeared, but the boundaries between them are becoming increasingly blurred.
Does Form Follow Function?
I remember that during my university years, we studied and analyzed the great masters of architecture, their work, and the ideas that ultimately shaped how we understand and conceive the spaces we inhabit.
One principle I would like to revisit is that of American architect Louis Sullivan, who, in 1896, famously stated that "form follows function."
More than a century later, I believe this principle remains relevant, but it deserves to be reconsidered from a different perspective.
Because what happens when functions are constantly changing?
A home can transform throughout the day to accommodate different needs. An industrial facility must adapt to new relationships between people, machines, and processes. Even a hospital needs to reconsider its spaces as healthcare delivery models and patient journeys evolve.
Perhaps Sullivan was not wrong. What we need to reconsider is how we interpret function.
If form follows function, we must first understand how the behaviors that give meaning to those functions are changing.
Recognize, Understand, and Shape
Personally, I like to approach transformation processes through three actions: recognizing patterns, understanding them, and shaping new ones.
Recognize means observing what actually happens, rather than what we assume should happen. Why does a family use the kitchen as its primary gathering space? Why do certain areas remain empty while others spontaneously become places where people come together?
These everyday behaviors can reveal opportunities that are not always captured in an architectural program.
But observation alone is not enough.
Understand means investigating the reasons behind these behaviors and, importantly, measuring them. This involves combining conversations and observation with data on frequency of use, movement patterns, interactions, and outcomes.
We cannot assume that a space is effective simply because it is occupied, or that a solution is successful because it is visually appealing.
This is where the concept of the journey becomes particularly relevant: understanding people's complete journeys, including their needs, decisions, and interactions before, during, and after using a space.
The Gensler Research Institute, through its Experience Index, has studied how our motivations influence our relationship with physical environments. Its research identifies different ways people experience places, from accomplishing tasks to socializing, discovering, or finding inspiration.
These findings reinforce the importance of understanding not only what people do in a space, but also why they do it and what they expect to find there.
Finally, Shape means transforming that knowledge into new possibilities. It is not simply about responding to existing behaviors, but about creating the conditions for new ones to emerge.
Designing Futures, Not Just Spaces
Understanding current behaviors is essential, but we must also anticipate how they might evolve.
This is where visioning becomes particularly relevant. It is an approach that allows us to work with people to develop shared visions of new ways of living, working, learning, and interacting. It is not simply about imagining what a building might look like ten years from now, but understanding what should happen within it.
Recently, I have had several interesting conversations with people I consider influential voices in Costa Rica. A common concern has emerged in many of these discussions: organizations are making significant investments in artificial intelligence without necessarily having a clear understanding of the problems they aim to solve or the outcomes they expect to achieve.
One of these individuals shared an expression that perfectly captures this contradiction: "AI for everything, but for nothing." Artificial intelligence everywhere, but without a clear purpose.
And I believe something similar may be happening with our spaces.
The pandemic accelerated profound changes in the way we live, work, and interact. Technology continues to amplify these transformations, yet many of the spaces we inhabit still reflect models conceived around previous patterns of behavior.
Just as adopting artificial intelligence does not guarantee meaningful transformation, designing more modern or technologically advanced buildings does not necessarily mean we are responding more effectively to people's needs.
This perspective invites us to question traditional architectural programs and explore new possibilities. But imagining is not enough. We need to experiment, develop pilots, co-create solutions, and measure outcomes before turning our ideas into permanent decisions.
For those of us who design spaces, this represents a responsibility that goes beyond aesthetics, technical expertise, or functionality. We need to become better observers, researchers, and interpreters of human behavior, capable of connecting knowledge with new opportunities.
More than a century ago, Sullivan invited us to understand the relationship between form and function. Today, that reflection takes on a new dimension: our behaviors are changing, and so are the ways we use, share, and give meaning to spaces.
The real challenge is not simply to adapt spaces to new needs, but to recognize and understand the patterns transforming the way we live. Only then can we shape environments that do not reproduce the habits of the past, but instead enable new ways of living, learning, working, and connecting with one another.
Sources
Louis Sullivan (1896). The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered. Essay that develops the principle of form follows function. MIT OpenCourseWare
Gensler Research Institute. Gensler Experience Index. Research exploring people's motivations, behaviors, and interactions across different physical environments. Gensler
Gensler. U.S. Consumer Experience Report. Research examining how people's motivations and expectations influence their relationships with different environments. Gensler