March 8th, 2010
Bringing Architecture Discipline to the Cleantech Challenge
As many of you know, the challenge for companies in the cleantech sector is how to describe the benefits of their business case without being sidetracked by climate change confounders. In other words, how to make them sticky without compromising the P2P Economy value? We at the ebTDesign Forum advise readers and social media followers to consider the practice of architecture discipline.
Architecture discipline requires adhering to at least three design considerations when developing an architecture description or investment thesis. The benefit for those who choose to practice this discipline is that an architecture description is inherently sticky. The three design considerations that we at the ebTDesign Forum most often propose are:
- Is it simple?
- Is it tangible?
- Is it relevant?
Climate Change Confounders are similar to industry tourists. Confounders are industry experts for hire. They miss use science and the scientific process to lesson the threat of CO2 emissions and other man made contributors. Industry tourists are subject matter experts for hire that come baring silver bullets. Both of these so-called gurus are most distinguished by their propensity for being out of town before the crash but after the checks have been cashed.
Institutional investors and other valued stakeholders constantly suffer from information overload and most cannot tell the difference between good-science versus bad-science without help. Confounders use this knowledge like lawyers in an attempt to raise reasonable doubt. Continued adherence to the concept of architecture discipline will neutralize this strategy because the value of good design is intuitively apparent.
Zachary Alexander
Concepts: architecture-discipline, cleantech, confounders, hydrogen, tourists