An integrated framework for office information systems design and management

Information Technologies are complex and this is true even in the smallest piece of equipment. But this kind of complexity is nothing comparejwith the one that arises when this technology interact with society. Office Automation has been traditionally considered as a technical field but there is no way to find solutions from a technical point of view when the problems are primarily social in their origin. Technology management has to change its focus from a pure technical perspective to a sociotechnical point of view. To facilitate this change, we propose a model that allows a better understanding between the managerial and the technical world, offering a coherent, complete and integrated perspective of both. The base for this model is an unfolding of the complexity found in information Technologies and a matching of these complexities with several levels considered within the Office, Office Automation and Human Factors dimensions. Each one of these domains is studied trough a set of distinctions that create a new and powerful understanding of its reality. Using this model we build up a map of Office Automation to be use^not only by managers but also by technicians because the primaty advantage of such a framework is that it allows a comprehensive evaluation of technology without requhing extensive technical knowledge. Thus, the model can be seen as principle for design and diagnosis of Office Automation and as a common reference for managers and specialist avoiding the severe limitations arising from the language used by the last

People and Facility Management. The team: the main asset of any management

From the moment we enter a large office building until we leave it, we receive a lot of attentions served by the management of services to the user. However, it is usually quite inappreciable the work that is being developed to keep things running smoothly.The services provided in a building are carried out by people. However, we often tend to forget these people when we talk about the tasks that make that a building operates properly 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.But, for example, what would happen if one day the service provided by the reception in a large building did not function as it should? What would it be like if one day the person performing the service of maintenance of the building's cleaning were not at his post? How would the working day develop if there were not a correct air handling system?People are the foundation of the proper functioning of a building. The work of the Facilities Manager and the Facility Management is the management of their functions: the responsible management of the team.

People and Facility Management. The team: The main asset of any management

From the moment we enter a large office building until we leave it, we receive a lot of attentions served by the management of services to the user. However, it is usually quite inappreciable the work that is being developed to keep things running smoothly. The services provided in a building are carried out by people. However, we often tend to forget these people when we talk about the tasks that make that a building operates properly 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. But, for example, what would happen if one day the service provided by the reception in a large building did not function as it should? What would it be like if one day the person performing the service of maintenance of the building's cleaning were not at his post? How would the working day develop if there were not a correct air handling system? People are the foundation of the proper functioning of a building. The work of the Facilities Manager and the Facility Management is the management of their functions: the responsible management of the team.

Gestión intelectual de las prácticas comunicativas en arquitectura : S, M, L, XL, el gran evento = The intellectual management of communication practices in architecture : S, M, L, XL, the big event

La tesis doctoral se centra en la posibilidad de entender que la práctica de arquitectura puede encontrar en las prácticas comunicativas un apoyo instrumental, que sobrepasa cualquier simplificación clásica del uso de los medios como una mera aplicación superficial, post-producida o sencillamente promocional. A partir de esta premisa se exponen casos del último cuarto del siglo XX y se detecta que amenazas como el riesgo de la banalización, la posible saturación de la imagen pública o la previsible asociación incorrecta con otros individuos en presentaciones grupales o por temáticas, han podido influir en un crecimiento notable de la adquisición de control, por parte de los arquitectos, en sus oportunidades mediáticas. Esto es, como si la arquitectura hubiera empezado a superar y optimizar algo inevitable, que las fórmulas expositivas y las publicaciones, o más bien del exponer(se) y publicar(se), son herramientas disponibles para activar algún tipo de gestión intelectual de la comunicación e información circulante sobre si misma. Esta práctica de “autoedición” se analiza en un periodo concreto de la trayectoria de OMA -Office for Metropolitan Architecture-, estudio considerado pionero en el uso eficiente, oportunista y personalizado de los medios. Así, la segunda parte de la tesis se ocupa del análisis de su conocida monografía S,M,L,XL (1995), un volumen que contó con gran participación por parte de sus protagonistas durante la edición, y de cuyo proceso de producción apenas se había investigado. Esta publicación señaló un punto de inflexión en su género alterando todo formato y restricciones anteriores, y se ha convertido en un volumen emblemático para la disciplina que ninguna réplica posterior ha podido superar. Aquí se presenta a su vez como el desencadenante de la construcción de un “gran evento” que concluye en la transformación de la identidad de OMA en 10 años, paradójicamente entre el nacimiento de la Fundación Groszstadt y el arranque de la actividad de AMO, dos entidades paralelas clave anexas a OMA. Este planteamiento deviene de cómo la investigación desvela que S,M,L,XL es una pieza más, central pero no independiente, dentro de una suma de acciones e individuos, así como otras publicaciones, exposiciones, eventos y también artículos ensayados y proyectos, en particular Bigness, Generic City, Euralille y los concursos de 1989. Son significativos aspectos como la apertura a una autoría múltiple, encabezada por Rem Koolhaas y el diseñador gráfico Bruce Mau, acompañados en los agradecimientos de la editora Jennifer Sigler y cerca de una centena de nombres, cuyas aportaciones no necesariamente se basan en la construcción de fragmentos del libro. La supresión de ciertos límites permite superar también las tareas inicialmente relevantes en la edición de una publicación. Un objetivo general de la tesis es también la reflexión sobre relaciones anteriormente cuestionadas, como la establecida entre la arquitectura y los mercados o la economía. Tomando como punto de partida la idea de “design intelligence” sugerida por Michael Speaks (2001), se extrae de sus argumentos que lo esencial es el hallazgo de la singularidad o inteligencia propia de cada estudio de arquitectura o diseño. Asimismo se explora si en la construcción de ese tipo de fórmulas magistrales se alojaban también combinaciones de interés y productivas entre asuntos como la eficiencia y la creatividad, o la organización y las ideas. En esta dinámica de relaciones bidireccionales, y en ese presente de exceso de información, se fundamenta la propuesta de una equivalencia más evidenciada entre la “socialización” del trabajo del arquitecto, al compartirlo públicamente e introducir nuevas conversaciones, y la relación inversa a partir del trabajo sobre la “socialización” misma. Como si la consciencia sobre el uso de los medios pudiera ser efectivamente instrumental, y contribuir al desarrollo de la práctica de arquitectura, desde una perspectiva idealmente comprometida e intelectual. ABSTRACT The dissertation argues the possibility to understand that the practice of architecture can find an instrumental support in the practices of communication, overcoming any classical simplification of the use of media, generally reduced to superficial treatments or promotional efforts. Thus some cases of the last decades of the 20th century are presented. Some threats detected, such as the risk of triviality, the saturation of the public image or the foreseeable wrong association among individuals when they are introduced as part of thematic groups, might have encouraged a noticeable increase of command taken by architects when there is chance to intervene in a media environment. In other words, it can be argued that architecture has started to overcome and optimize the inevitable, the fact that exhibition formulas and publications, or simply the practice of (self)exhibition or (self)publication, are tools at our disposal for the activation of any kind of intellectual management of communication and circulating information about itself. This practice of “self-edition” is analyzed in a specific timeframe of OMA’s trajectory, an office that is considered as a ground-breaking actor in the efficient and opportunistic use of media. Then the second part of the thesis dissects their monograph S,M,L,XL (1995), a volume in which its main characters were deeply involved in terms of edition and design, a process barely analyzed up to now. This publication marked a turning point in its own genre, disrupting old formats and traditional restrictions. It became such an emblematic volume for the discipline that none of the following attempts of replica has ever been able to improve this precedent. Here, the book is also presented as the element that triggers the construction of a “big event” that concludes in the transformation of OMA identity in 10 years. Paradoxically, between the birth of the Groszstadt Foundation and the early steps of AMO, both two entities parallel and connected to OMA. This positions emerge from how the research unveils that S,M,L,XL is one more piece, a key one but not an unrelated element, within a sum of actions and individuals, as well as other publications, exhibitions, articles and projects, in particular Bigness, Generic City, Euralille and the competitions of 1989. Among the remarkable innovations of the monograph, there is an outstanding openness to a regime of multiple authorship, headed by Rem Koolhaas and the graphic designer Bruce Mau, who share the acknowledgements page with the editor, Jennifer Sigler, and almost 100 people, not necessarily responsible for specific fragments of the book. In this respect, the dissolution of certain limits made possible that the expected tasks in the edition of a publication could be trespassed. A general goal of the thesis is also to open a debate on typically questioned relations, particularly between architecture and markets or economy. Using the idea of “design intelligence”, outlined by Michael Speaks in 2001, the thesis pulls out its essence, basically the interest in detecting the singularity, or particular intelligence of every office of architecture and design. Then it explores if in the construction of this kind of ingenious formulas one could find interesting and useful combinations among issues like efficiency and creativity, or organization and ideas. This dynamic of bidirectional relations, rescued urgently at this present moment of excess of information, is based on the proposal for a more evident equivalence between the “socialization” of the work in architecture, anytime it is shared in public, and the opposite concept, the work on the proper act of “socialization” itself. As if a new awareness of the capacities of the use of media could turn it into an instrumental force, capable of contributing to the development of the practice of architecture, from an ideally committed and intelectual perspective.