Why isn’t Stage 0 the same as a Feasibility Study?

This is most easily understood by thinking about the different information that is known at the start of each of these stages (see table 3.1).

By its very nature, Stage 0 has less of a formal structure than the other stages of the Plan of Work. This means that it may:

• Vary in length very considerably, from a few days to a number of years, depending on the complexity of the issues and the need for external input.
• Be undertaken by a team comprising anything from one person to a large team with specialist advisors, who are involved for part or all of the process.
• Be broken down into a number of separate elements of work that are undertaken by different people.
• Follow a more-or-less formal process with reporting mechanisms/approval processes, or proceed via informal discussions – or, as frequently transpires, be a combination of both.

To get the best out of Stage 0 at the outset of a project, it should be ensured that the appropriate strategic issues are considered and agreed. This process sets out in detail the importance of the Strategic Brief as the principal output of this stage and, in particular, how critical this is in evidencing the decisions that have been made to define a project. This ensures that the move into Stage 1 is robust, and establishes the benchmark for ongoing project-review processes.

The client’s role at Stage 0 is to make sure that they put the right people in place to help develop and understand their idea or problem as a vision, supported by the necessary and appropriate financial, legal, technical and design-related advice. The client also has a role in terms of leadership – in ensuring that the work is moving in the right direction, and that they are clear in terms of their evolving vision. There is also a need for restraint: jumping into problem-solving (design) too early is an ever-present risk. Stage 0 must always focus on defining the criteria for subsequent design, never solving. However tempting it is to begin to sketch, to begin to imagine a building, this confuses and compromises the robust or rational analysis of an idea or problem. One of the greatest skills of an architect is that of an advocate for a design solution; however, at Stage 0 this must be kept in check, and skills and energies deployed in understanding through analysis.

Clients often will have clear ideas or problems to solve; however, they will not necessarily know or understand how that translates into a project. This is the necessary skill and expertise that they require and commission at Stage 0. The greatest value of this stage lies in not rushing into a design solution – or, worse still, the construction of a building that does not best suit their needs or requirements. Stage 0 will always result in the best possible Project Outcomes. Not undertaking Stage 0 will always result in abortive work and lower-value Project Outcomes.

Key risks and mitigation: what happens if a project isn’t strategically defined before later stages commence, and how can Stage 0 empower and enable client value?

What is most important at the end of Stage 0 is that the needs of a client have been clearly identified, and the subsequent resolution of them explored and potential options defined. This is the most effective way to determine if there should be a project, and to make progress into Stage 1 – and, if such is the case, that this is done with the lowest possibility of abortive work, delays to the target Project Programme, avoidable unnecessary additional costs and erosion of value. The risks that any client and their team potentially face as a result of poor-quality Stage 0 work could include, but certainly are not limited to, the following:

• Overreliance on gut feeling or incomplete or ‘siloed’ information (siloed meaning that information is not correlated or cross-referenced, such as capital cost not being considered alongside and in relation to operational costs), with the inevitable unforeseen consequences that will be abortive and costly in both time and money.
• The vision and statement of need are not clear, so that the principal purpose of the project has not led the definition of the Strategic Brief, resulting in poor and inappropriate work in the later stages and negative-design irritation as a result of having to revisit Stage 0 tasks once some work has progressed on to later stages.
• The Business Case is neither robust nor specific to the actual client needs, and, as such, cannot accurately consider what may happen if external economic factors, such as inflation or construction costs, should change significantly – or if this should be expected.
• The future direction of the project will be unclear if the Strategic Brief and the principles of the Business Case are not shared with key project team members. Again, abortive work is the biggest risk.
• The strategic options appraisal has not considered sustainability issues, so there is no clear direction on this issue.
• The Strategic Brief has not been collated into a clear and concise document that sets out the recommendations for the way forward, and the assumptions that have informed these decisions are not presented in a manner that can best inform Stage 1 and be understood by all stakeholders.
• Critical high-risk site investigation or baseline assessments that affect the ability to deliver the work have not been undertaken. Whilst most baseline surveys can be concurrent with Stage 1, some strategic issues mean that, wherever possible, early investigations should be carried out. This may be needed in order to inform the site-selection process.
• The client is not committed to a particular site and yet wants work to proceed to the next stages.
• The assumptions made during Stage 0 are wrong or poorly considered. The right advisors or stakeholders were not consulted at the right time.
• Key stakeholders object to the project because they were not consulted or given the opportunity to participate in the development of the Strategic Brief.
• The Project Programme is too unrealistic.
• There is no clear plan for how or, more significantly, why the next stages of the project will be delivered, or what should happen next.

Conversely, a robust and well-executed Stage 0 enhances client value and effectiveness by:

• Identifying, organising and assembling a good stakeholder team with the necessary decision-support tools. A decisive client is a value optimiser.
• Robustly defining the Business Case: what does the client do, and how do facilities support the creation of value? Who are the stakeholders? Is there really a need for building work? If so, is the site or existing building choice sensible? What will success ‘look like’?
• Enabling clients to focus on what they know best – their business, their clients or how they live their life – freeing them from the burden of making potentially ill-informed decisions outside of their sphere of expertise.
• Facilitating the definition of a Strategic Brief that the suppliers (project team) need to deliver; agreeing the elements with all stakeholders, including external ones such as planners and funders.
• Supporting the decision on how the project is to be procured, ensuring that the choice fits the Strategic Brief and the client’s risk appetite. A sound risk-management approach will help to preserve value in all of its facets.
• Considering methods such as the use of benchmarked or target costing, integrated teams, Building Information Modelling and Soft Landings in order to achieve high performance in the team.
• Careful team selection, shaped to the Project Objectives.
• Maintaining the initial vision as others join the project team, and as challenges arise.
• Supporting the client in their role by asking questions, and by challenging and understanding their requirements from the briefing process in order to support decision-making.

Who is best placed to strategically define a project?

Stage 0 is entirely client focused, and as such clients are at the heart of this stage and it cannot realistically be undertaken without them. Clients instigate Stage 0, but in many cases will not necessarily understand the need to – especially first-time or occasional clients. Speaking with clients about their needs, wants and desires without leaping to design solutions is a key skill to be learnt and developed. Almost all clients will need some degree of support and advice to set the agenda for, and complete, this stage.

There are many different types of client; who they are has a strong impact on the type of work that is required at Stage 0. They might be:

• The end user of the building or project (eg a householder or a business), who has specific needs, wants and desires that are to be met. If a building does not optimally support a household’s lifestyle, it could compromise their wellbeing. A business that does not have a work environment that optimally aligns with their commercial activities could suffer loss of productivity.
• An individual or an organisation wishing to develop a building for the use of others (a developer). The needs and requirements of these end users must be understood so that the developer can optimally align their investment for best return.
• The owner of a site wanting to find a viable and deliverable use for it (a landowner), and needing to know how best to utilise a land asset for sale, rent or other purposes.

The detail and scope of Stage 0, and the team that will be needed to support the client through it, will depend on the size and nature of the project and the range of issues that need to be considered. Sometimes this work is carried out in-house at the client organisation; at other times, it will need external consultants.

Examples of the teams that might be appropriate to support Stage 0 are set out for the project scenarios at the end of each chapter.

How do you select the level of detail to be included in the information to be exchanged at the end of Stage 0?

At the end of Stage 0, the client should be in a position to make a decision about proceeding with the project or not. Therefore, the information to be exchanged will either comprise the reasons a project is not valid or the Strategic Brief establishing the basis for the project and subsequent stages. One of the most challenging aspects of Stage 0 is establishing exactly what needs to be tested or confirmed in order to enable this critical decision to be made. Sometimes having been through a number of strategic options further work is required, meaning that Stage 0 is not yet complete. It is vital to always remember that Stage 0 is about asking questions that explore the needs, wants and desires of the client; it is not about answering them, however tempting this may be.

Deciding to commence with the next stages of a project – Stage 1 onwards – is a big step that involves the expenditure of considerable time and resources. The value of pursuing Stage 0 is that the evidence to support this decision will be in place. It is perfectly possible that a new building is not the right answer to a client’s problem, or that it is not appropriate at the current time. In order to support the sound use of scarce resources, should be taken care not to conclude that intent to build is necessarily the result of Stage 0.

The client vision: what it is and how it is defined?

The client vision is a form of foresight. It defines a future plan.

Buildings in use constitute complex, adaptive systems. Understanding all the interrelated factors that influence and determine the success, or otherwise, of any system is complicated. This is the value of Stage 7: understanding these complex interactions to inform a better subsequent version of the same, or a related, system – ie a building in use. Therefore, a vision for a new requirement, an idea or a problem to be solved must always describe the project outcome and not the output.

It is important, when helping a client to define a vision, to not influence what they are seeking as an outcome or to predetermine an output that might provide it. During visioning, an advisor or advisors encourage a client to succinctly and concisely define their idea or problem as a vision statement. This initial task of the Stage 0 Strategic Brief process is about talking, listening, understanding and challenging the client, their team and key stakeholders – and then clearly recording this information in a way that others can understand, support and supplement. For an individual or family, this process might be complete in as little as a few hours or a day; for a large, multinational organisation, this might take weeks or months and will involve many stakeholders and input from other advisors. Whilst participating in a visioning process, you will get to know your client and what makes them ‘tick’; this is invaluable for the next stage, but, as always, be wary of the lure of leaping into ‘solving their problems’ before these are fully understood – possibly by them, and certainly by you.

For some clients and their stakeholders, the concept of ‘vision’ can be too far removed from prosaic reality. In which case, the exercise becomes one of defining a statement of need. The principles are the same, but whilst a vision might comprise aspects of ‘must, should and could’, a statement of need is more likely to focus on ‘must’. Deciding which way to best work with a client, and whether the emphasis should be on vision or statement of need, is the product of experience and professional empathy. Nonetheless, whichever scenario is adopted, there should be a clear relationship between vision or statement of need and the eventual Project Outcomes.

The statement of need is best set out as a concise, but carefully considered, document that is easily understood and has been shaped by the input of a range of key stakeholders. These statements are the link between Project Objectives and the client vision.

Option appraisal; how might a vision be realised?

Development of a vision or statement of need will invariably begin to raise questions that require further detailed investigation in order to obtain valid answers. The best method by which to accomplish this is through strategic option appraisal. It is important to understand this activity as strategic, and, as such, they will probably include many options – and certainly not just those understood as a building design and construction project. The primary purpose of this exercise is to explore all possible routes, to eliminate the inappropriate and to identify the most viable.

The variety and extent of options to be considered will obviously vary from client to client. The impact of such work on a client can be profound, and any advisor should always ensure that they have the requisite skill, knowledge and experience to be making a particular option suggestion. If in doubt, seek advice from the appropriate sources, but do not simply ignore something because you do not have the necessary knowledge or expertise.

Having undertaken an appropriately robust and wide exploration of all possible options, a manageable shortlist can be drawn up. It is appropriate that ‘do nothing’ be included in the shortlist, so that each level of intervention proposed can be interrogated robustly against a common baseline. This allows for effective evaluation of each against cost, benefit and risk, with resultant measures of value for each of the options. Costs and benefit assessment of as many matters as possible should be included, with consideration of those not readily financially quantifiable but having an impact on vision and outcome. This approach establishes an iterative relationship with the development of the Business Case.

This process may include some capacity testing of what can be accommodated on a site, or it may be about the combination of uses to be delivered. It will not comprise looking in detail at a proposal, nor will it involve considering specific designs – although an understanding of design, and what can be delivered, is critical to ensuring that this task is completed successfully.

The objectives and statement of need should be used to assess each of the strategic options, in order to see how they perform and which best meets the client’s vision.

One of the most effective methods for undertaking option appraisal thoroughly is to interrogate the vision with the principle of ‘Five Ws and one H’. These are questions whose answers form the basis of information-gathering for any Strategic Brief. They constitute a formula for getting the complete picture underpinning any vision. These questions also form the interrelationship with Stage 7, and asking them may instigate further Stage 7 work or provide a reason for Stage 7 to inform Stage 0. With respect to the vision, they are:

• Who is it about?
• What happened, or should happen?
• When did it, or should it, take place?
• Where did it, or should it, take place?
• Why did it, or did it not, happen?
• How did it, or did it not, happen?

3.2 Diagnosing a problem or idea to inform a Strategic Brief with the ‘Five Ws and one H’.

Each question should have a factual answer: facts necessary to the Strategic Brief and to inform the Business Case. Significantly, none of these questions can be answered with a simple yes or no. It is important to ensure that all possible options are properly considered, including that a building project may not be the answer. This work should ideally be undertaken or informed by a team that is independent of the outcome of Stage 0, and does not have a vested interest in any particular solution. Therefore, an architect undertaking Stage 0 will do so in the prior knowledge that they might not be designing the solution, but that they may be be retained as a client advisor.

Very often, the actual data and information needed to fully answer each question will not be known during Stage 0; however, strategic Risk Assessment and site-based research will enable reasonable assumptions to be made. This will help to identify whether there are any ‘show-stoppers’ that need to be resolved or further investigated before the Strategic Brief can be finalised and the project can proceed.

Why site appraisal is a subset of strategic options appraisal

A site appraisal is similar to a strategic options appraisal in that it considers different locations or sites for a proposal. As part of this process, it will appraise broadly what can be accommodated with the purpose of evaluating which of the sites are suitable. The wider strategic option appraisal work will determine whether site appraisal is undertaken; it will not always be necessary. When it is, however, it needs to ensure that all sites are assessed against the same criteria, related to the statement of need and the Project Objectives.

An example process might consider site appraisal first, to identify a site, and then use a strategic options appraisal to see if it can accommodate what is required of it and if this has any likelihood of being delivered.

3.3 Options appraisal could consider various sites in order to look at different ways that a particular client’s outcomes could be achieved. Here, the capacity of sites is being tested for a new edge-of-town office location.

Table 3.3 The differences between site appraisal and a Feasibility Study.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A STRATEGIC/SITE APPRAISAL AND A FEASIBILITY STUDY
STRATEGIC /SITE APPRAISAL (STAGE 0)	FEASIBILITY STUDY (STAGE 1)
Related to strategic high-level issues such as the site location, whether it can be accessed and whether the site is big enough	Focused on testing one site to see if it can meet the identified need/initial project brief
	Intended to appraise if the proposed development is ‘feasible’, to inform the brief and to test what can be accommodated
May consider a variety of sites to see which is best able to meet the client's vision and objectives
Will look broadly at site capacity, if relevant	NOT about design proposals, but may involve testing sample layouts to be sure that the intended use/purpose can be accommodated on the site
NOT about design proposals, although may be about high-level capacity testing (could the site physically accommodate the Project outcomes?)

The Business Case: what it is and how it is defined

This important task is about considering the financial implications of delivering a vision, including how much it might cost to design, construct and operate; how it would be funded; what return it might produce once complete, and over its useful life; the cost of disposal at the end of its useful life; and any other factors that might influence the size, scope and affordability of a future project.

Once the initial option appraisal has been completed, the Business Case can be developed to explain the justification of particular options being included in or excluded from the Strategic Brief. Each option should be considered and assessed against financial and value criteria relevant to the client. Such work will necessarily require cost and financial advice, which, in all but the most simplistic of projects, requires cost consultants. The development of the Business Case may often be an iterative process along with option appraisal; however, it is critical that the process starts with an initial strategic option appraisal so that cost does not skew or direct the project inappropriately. But it is of the utmost importance that option appraisal is informed by, and influences, the Business Case. All projects, from the smallest domestic extension to the most complex facility for a global corporation, require a Business Case, and all will result in optimal client value if that Business Case is the result of robust option appraisal in response to a defined vision. All that will vary between projects is the diversity of advisors, consultants and experts required, and the duration of their involvement.

The Business Case is a specialised document, and will necessarily require input from cost consultants and business advisors. On all but the most basic of domestic projects, it is unlikely to be authored or prepared by an architect alone.

All Business Cases are likely to comprise:

• A financial definition and argument of how the vision or statement of need meets the client’s objectives and required outcomes; these could be business objectives, personal objectives or other reasons why the project is needed.
• An outline of the likely costs associated with identified outputs of the option appraisal, and an initial financial appraisal of each.
• Strategic considerations of value for money.
• A consideration of the principal financial risks associated with each option.

The Strategic Brief: what it is and how it is defined

A Strategic Brief must be written in a plain and easily understandable language; the client must be able to clearly understand and, most importantly, relate to what it says. As such, the document should summarise where a client is, where they would like to be and the routes to get there. The document will make reference to the detail from the option appraisal work and the relevant sections or topics within the full Business Case. A good Strategic Brief will assist a client in understanding the viability of an idea, whilst never detracting from the idea itself. To put it another way, it should define a problem in such a way that a client has the confidence and clarity to proceed to Stage 1 or not, as the case may be. It is recommended that a client sign off and adopt the Strategic Brief as theirs.

The Strategic Brief brings together the vision, option appraisal and Business Case into a concise and succinct document. It is a report and a summary of the results of Stage 0.

What roles are likely to be required?

Remember that this is about strategic principles, it is not about testing detailed feasibility and it is certainly not about design in the sense of a specific proposal or approach. It also needs to be understood that not all members of project and design teams have the particular skills to think at this strategic level without pushing towards solutions.

The roles that may be required include:

• Project sponsor/client lead.
• Design champion/client design advisor.
• Independent client advisor, to support and coordinate the process; they can be either in-house or external to the client organisation.
• Project team for options appraisal:
  • ~ Designer, to test capacities or appraise sites.
  • ~ Engineer, to appraise sites and advise on any significant constraints.

• Viability/funding and/or property advisor, to also assess cost considerations.
• Legal advisor, covering land ownership or related issues.
• Specialist planning advisor.
• Sustainability advisor.
• Business process advisor.
• Advisors specific to a particular client or organisation.

Planning and compliance: anticipating and influencing planning policy

Whether you can get planning permission for a particular project or building is fundamental in its ability to deliver a client vision or outcomes. Whilst it is not usually possible to get a firm answer to this question during Stage 0, this is a good time to ask some pertinent questions about its likelihood and to better understand the key risks involved. This makes planning considerations an important issue for the Strategic Brief.

What does planning policy say about the site or proposal?

The place to start in assessing the ability of a project to obtain planning permission is to understand what planning policy says about it. This can mean asking for specialist advice from a planning advisor on their interpretation of planning policy in this case, or, for small projects, asking the local authority directly for their view. In some cases a pre-application discussion can be helpful, although it is often not easy to obtain clear advice before the brief or potential of a project is fully scoped out, and before Stages 1 or 2 are complete.

One thing to bear in mind is that for some uses, and in many urban situations, it is possible to use higher-level policy to increase floor space, development density or change of use within broad parameters without needing site-specific planning policy to support the change. Examples include the recent temporary change to allow office to residential conversions in most areas, the ability to deliver more housing to support growth on allocated sites and the loosening of permitted development rules for individual householders.

In all cases there will be restrictions, and the ability to deliver an acceptable design proposal is almost always a key consideration – even where the principle of the alternative use or scale of development is considered acceptable.

Is this a good time to try to influence planning policy?

For some projects, existing site-related planning policy may not support the client’s objectives or vision, and it can sometimes be useful to ask whether it is worth seeking to influence planning policy at the next review point (new local plan or site-allocations-policy document). An example of this might be a large organisation wishing to take over a significant site that is currently in a different use class, and which does not contain much development. Through the planning process, it may be possible to agree with the local authority that its site allocations or site-specific policy should be changed or that a development brief should be put in place to support the proposals. This is a technical process that will normally need specialist input from a development planner. In this case, the Strategic Brief cannot really be finalised – or, at least, will be subject to further review – until the appropriate measures are in place. Equally, early consultations may show very clearly that the site is not considered appropriate for the proposed use or project, and that another site or approach needs to be found.

What other statutory considerations should be part of Stage 0?

Most building types need to consider a range of other statutory issues or approvals. The simple process of listing out likely approvals, and when they are required as part of the production of the Strategic Brief, is a useful task that will help to ensure that these are considered at the outset and throughout the project. It is helpful to identify whose role it is to review this, and whether stakeholder engagement is needed to fully understand these issues.

Not all future issues can be anticipated, but by being aware of the questions and including them in review processes you can better prepare for issues that would arise in later stages because of a decision or choice made in Stage 0. It is not until Stage 1 and beyond that any specifics or details will be established.

Why Stage 7 feedback into Stage 0 is so important

The most important support task at Stage 0 is obtaining Feedback from previous projects in order to inform the potential project options and consideration of the Business Case. This information may be about how others have decided to deal with same problem, how much previous examples have cost to build, or about building performance. However, much of the widely available information on most projects is empirical rather than quantifiable. It is about design solutions and details, rather than about how effective that scheme was in delivering the intended client outcomes and vision – including how it performed in use, both functionally and operationally.

Some projects are ‘one-offs’, but nearly every project can add value in learning from previous experience. This could be about how similar projects dealt with specific brief-related issues, how they were constructed or how they have performed in use – eg in terms of efficiency, functionality or environmental performance. Such projects can be those within the client organisation or ones that the project team have done before, but ideally they would also include a much wider pool of examples, including as many as possible from the same sector or building type.

For all potential projects, it is worth researching other similar schemes to see what was done and how well it worked out. In some cases, specific technical, design or detail information will be available; other cases will involve talking to those who have been involved and, ideally, the end users. These precedent studies would preferably be included in the Strategic Brief, and may be further reinforced in the Initial Project Brief at Stage 1. At Stage 0, it is important to consider how clients with the same problem or vision took forward the proposition, and whether this resulted in a new building project, a change to an existing building or a different solution altogether.

This stage of a potential project is also a useful time to think about how the delivered project itself will be able to contribute to the availability of building or project data/information once completed, and how that could be shared with others. This should be a consideration for both the client and the design team.

Involving stakeholders in the Strategic Brief

All projects have a range of stakeholders; they are different in each situation, but can include the client and related organisations/departments; end users or user groups; the local community; funders or backers; and regulatory bodies such as planning, highways and Building Control. There are also other stakeholders who may need to be consulted for sensitive, larger or more significant projects, such as local councillors; amenity societies or heritage groups; and other advisory bodies, eg the GLA (Greater London Assembly) in London.

The right time to consult with different stakeholders will vary, and it is unlikely that there is much added value in consulting with most of them at Stage 0 when the principle of a potential development is being decided. The question to ask is: which stakeholders need to be included in order to undertake the Strategic Brief, including options appraisal, and in order to have enough information to build the Business Case?

The stakeholders involved in any project should be identified and involved in communication and the development of the vision or subsequent statement of need from the earliest possible point in any project, and continually updated throughout the process. Stakeholder engagement usefully informs the statement of need or requirements, and provides insight into the Project Outcomes necessary to deliver the client vision. Sometimes, engagement is related specifically to the development of a Strategic Brief or to consulting on the principle of its implementation.

The key tasks in any stakeholder-engagement process are to:

• Record the details of any consultations or meetings, and summarise any relevant inputs or feedback in the Strategic Brief.
• Identify which stakeholders should be consulted and why, weighting input as necessary (the loudest voice is rarely the most important).
• Work out what input you want from them and what information they will need from you in order to engage.
• Agree the best time and way to involve them.

You also need to consider whether you are giving information and seeking Feedback from the relevant stakeholders (which is usually called consultation), or whether you actually want to involve the stakeholders in shaping the Strategic Brief or making the strategic decision about whether to proceed (often called participation).