Section One: Bidding
Section One: Bidding
Introduction This document covers the experiences of the UK team, from the moment we decided to bid, including the state of the UK team at that point, to the successful bid at INCM 008 Cyprus it also contains elements of the aftermath of that which were more related to the bid than to organising. In many ways I see this as the most important section in the Final Report, the reason being that, though not produced every year, there many final reports as well as other documents of all types but to our knowledge there has never been a bid report even though there have obviously been more bids in the history of EASA than there have been summer assemblies. I felt it was important for us to create this document for the network as a whole. Generally only organising teams have access to final reports, or have an opportunity to or, importantly, the inclination to read them. Despite this at INCM all teams are part of the evaluation process of the bid presentation, the choice of EASA host nation and the evaluation of the event itself, furthermore all teams are in the position of being one INCM away from hosting a summer assembly, so long as they bid. Yet, naturally, most participants and even NCs consider EASA from the only viewpoint they have – that of a participant. I would contest that it is not until a participant has gone through the process of seriously considering proposing an EASA, by which I mean taking the first steps of planning the logistics and approaching relevant persons as opposed to a series of conversations around a table in a bar or coffee house or even on EASA, that they can understand the work that goes on before and during the assembly and as such be able to actively take on responsibility and step away from the standard served / server dynamic. There is no specific problem with people attending EASA with the sole ambition to remain participants, but EASA is a network that relies on all members at all times, furthermore as a network it relies on the oral tradition to pass on
page 10
easa010 Final Report
understanding and on older members to help newer members progress to become in turn become the ones passing on knowledge. Without this process EASA would surely have ended up with no willing hosts at some point already. This document is more likely to be read by teams in comparison to the Final Report as a whole as such it is intended to take the opportunity to demystify the organisation of EASA as well as take some of the fear out of proposing an EASA – personally I would like a situation where every single EASA country is confident and engaged enough to be considering hosting an EASA, SESAM or INCM. It is in this spirit that we hope that the Bid section of this report will add to the overall understanding; it is also worth noting that we consider this is a product of our experiences only and recommend it should be considered part of the puzzle. This section is intended to act as a standalone document, but as with the rest of the Final Report it section was written post EASA allowing for the process to have come full circle, it therefore benefits from hindsight of the organisation process too, and is intended to feed into that process and give advice on where we could have improved, or things we would have addressed in the bid process given the advice. [cma]
page 11
Section One: Bidding
Chapter 1 - Thoughts and advice We should start by talking about choosing the host nation for an EASA as the process is not always the same, despite going through a period of normalisation in the more recent years previous to this report. The fact this section is called Bidding is a bit misleading in its self as many times there has been no bid as such, by that I mean that at the time of the decision there was no element of competition. The first EASA in 1981, for instance, was intended to be a one off event, but participants from Delft thought so highly of it that they announced a winter meeting in the Netherlands, a sort of proto INCM, and subsequently hosted the second EASA the following summer. Much more recently, in 2007, Italy were the only nation to propose an EASA so they didn’t technically bid, they presented to the network where it would be held. There has even been an occasion where two nations hosted an EASA in the same year. Before you decide to bid you should consider the impact organising will have on you personally. Organising EASA is a commitment to undertaking a huge task, for the main organisers it is the equivalent of taking on an unpaid full time job, the difference being you will not have a boss to be telling you what to do. On the flip side organising EASA can have a dramatic and positive effect on the course of your life, it can bring you into contact with people you would never have met. Having each decided your team is ready for the commitment the other thing to reflect on before you think of anything to do with planning EASA is what is EASA to you, and what do people outside your team expect from a summer assembly? These two questions will give you a depth to the amount of work required to deliver an assembly. Having decided to go ahead and bid and before you make any decisions on location or theme, your team has to ask the most important question it will
page 12
easa010 Final Report
face, why do you want to bid? I don’t want to suggest there is a right or wrong answer to this question - though I would hope it involves the betterment of the network in some way. The answer may be both simple and obvious or complex and layered, either way it is important you all have a definition of the reason written down and agreed as, most importantly, it will help inform every decision you make. A good understanding of why you are doing it will also help you to explain the event to people and make your bid more understandable. The final thing may sound dramatic, but if you know exactly why you are doing it you will be able to face the tough times much more easily. Having decided to bid, and agreed why, the next thing is to listen, talk, listen. More than likely you are friends with previous organisers and people that have been to multiple EASAs, now is the time to take a bit more time to take on bored their opinions and those of people you don’t know so well. Try to talk Remember - hosting EASA is a huge opportunity, for you, for the host location and for the network itself.
to as many people as possible, probe and provoke them to find out what they really think. This is something
that should not stop from day of decision to the final presentation. It is important when putting a bid together that you plan ahead - that at this stage the planning runs at two speeds. While making sure you have a solid presentation for the bid process at INCM you should always be thinking ‘What if we win?’
The bid is actually the start of the organisation, and considering
the bid is 21 months before the assembly it is important to think ahead. Though there is no magic formula for a successful bid, there are core things your bid should focus on in order for the network to be able to make an informed judgement - location, reason for bidding, theme, team. Notice I didn’t say accommodation, budget, food etc, at the point of bidding it is most important to demonstrate that the future of the assembly would be in good hands, that you are well organised, confident and have the resources to pull together everything needed.
page 13
Section One: Bidding
The presentation itself should be well organised and slick, but not professional. It is important that your team presents itself in the best light, but EASA is not a professional organisation so it is important to not remove your self from the network. I’d like to take this opportunity to add one personal plea as well, EASA is a community, a network that relies on all parties, it is important that at times of bidding that teams stay friendly and don’t allow rivalry to enter into the process. If incentive is needed, it is unseemly in the eyes of those discussing the bid. Any bidding nation, and any hosting nation should pay due respect to other teams, whether they are also bidding or they are hosting prior to your event. This includes not talking about other bids - even saying positive things can be misunderstood - and self control about web based promotion.
page 14
easa010 Final Report
page 15
Section One: Bidding
Chapter 2 - Our Approach History <<<<<< The UK has had a mixed history within the easa network. Although the network was created in Liverpool during 1981, by the beginning of the 2000s, the UK’s participation in the Summer assemblies had waned significantly. At this time, the majority of places on the UK quota were either unfilled or taken by non-domestic Erasmus students, who had learned of EASA in their native country. In 2004, the UK was invited to host an INCM, which happened to coincide with a small increase in the number of domestic participants in the UK team. This small group worked to host the event in Brighton in November 2005. A direct result of having the INCM on UK soil was an increase in visibility within the UK leading to a full UK quota in the 2006 assembly.
Ever since I first walked into an EASA meeting in 2005 I had wanted to organise an assembly Manchester, but I made a promise to my self to wait until someone suggested it to me.
Despite members of the 2005 INCM organising team leaving the network the UK team continued to grow in strength. At the 2007 INCM in Motovun members of the UK team decided to work towards bidding to host a summer assembly. Deciding to bid <<<<<< We decided to bid based on recent EASAs and a feeling we had that within the network the assembly was undergoing a period of normalisation. Having spoken to people who remembered older events, and remembered stories from ones outside living memory it seemed to us that things looked upon as ‘tradition’ were often only one or two years old in the assembly. It was our opinion that summer assemblies were defined by their level of ambition and creativity, we wanted to revisit ideas that had been done before and shake up people’s preconceptions of what can happen when you bring together around 400 architecture students for 2 weeks.
page 16
easa010 Final Report
Deciding to bid at an INCM gives a full 12 months to work on a bid, it is a huge head start compared to deciding while on EASA. For the UK though it meant that only I was in the host location for the next year, as Paul was living and working in Berlin and the other current participants were spread around the continent. >>>>>> Decision making Early discussions about the nature of the event itself regarded location for the event. With the whole of the United Kingdom available as a potential locations this decision was seen the single most critical decision for the success and feel of the assembly. It was decided that the event should be held in one of the UK’s many vibrant cities to showcase most fully what the contemporary UK has to offer. It was also felt that an urban environment would be more stimulating for the production of what we are determined will be a successful Paul: “We should host EASA” Chris: “... Where?” Paul: “Manchester?” Chris: “OK then” Motovun 2007
and inspiring assembly Having decided to work towards an
urban assembly Manchester was singled out as the ideal location to host an event of this type for numerous reasons. The city enjoys an inspiring past; among many other things Manchester was the birthplace of the industrial revolution and later played an integral role in the information revolution. Where better to bring architecture students to inspire them towards the future of architecture? Manchester also enjoys a healthy status on the world stage, with the recent hosting of the commonwealth games and both major UEFA club football finals. Finally and possibly most importantly Manchester was seen as a positively minded city, with a track record of supporting similar events, that would embrace the EASA community and show the ambition required to live up to the expectations and efforts the organisers are investing in bringing this internationally respected event to England.
page 17
Section One: Bidding
Having chosen a location the other major aspect of the assembly to be agreed on was the Theme. It was felt the theme should simultaneously be relevant to the wide world of architecture and its practice today and specifically relevant to the chosen location. Identity was chosen for the theme as it relates to urban branding, and it’s increased role in urban planning, a shift that directly impacts architecture, it is especially relevant to Manchester due to the city’s history of apparent reinvention and the council’s reluctance to use urban branding as policy of urban planning. Having chosen a host city and the theme, we then laid out the main thoughts we had for the assembly, we called them ‘the pillars of the bid’: I was invited to write an article for 4ARK in 2009 on The easaUK2010 bid was based on the theme identity, it is included in Section Five and four Pillars, which we believe reflect deals with the choice of the the deals of the network as well as theme for easa010 establishing firm foundations upon which to build our assembly. Urbanity: To allow the assembly’s participants to experience the excitement and diversity of life in Manchester, as well as to provide an appropriate setting, it is essential that the sites for accommodation, workshops etc are as close to the city centre as possible. Density: As a rule, participants commute on foot. For practical reasons, as well as to create a good group atmosphere, all sites should be as close together as possible. Integration: To make the most of this opportunity of bringing such a an event to the city of Manchester, easaUK2010 is committed to integrating the event with city in an engaging, creative way. Legacy: easa presents an opportunity to create a lasting impression on Manchester; there are many ways this could manifest.
Knowing that they would face competition from other bid nations, as well as
page 18
easa010 Final Report
the size of the task ahead, the first thing on the agenda was to create a strong team to represent the UK at the 2008 summer assembly in Ireland. >>>>>> Getting started The UK took 13 people to Ireland, filling a large quota. Included in this contingent were tutors running two workshops, a first in living memory for the UK. As well as ensuring a good showing at Ireland 2009, the bid team worked intensively on cultivating links and ties with institutions throughout the city of Manchester. Our approach was rather than knocking on peoples doors, or introducing our selves through e-mails, letters or phone calls cold, we would at every stage roll the support we had into new support. The place to start was with relevant institutions - there is no point going to Copies of the letters of support are available in Section Five
the Council as architecture students before you have the support of the
school of architecture, for example. Having met with the School of Architecture and the Manchester Society of Architects we could add their logos to our letter head, and we approached major developers, the council, the two universities, architects and other relevant organisations. For each new approach we went as high in the organisation as we could with the aim of catching their imagination, we didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t expect any direct meetings with the Leader of the council, but if they liked the idea of EASA they would pass it down to someone - and when work comes from above it is more likely to get done than if it comes from below. This approach was hugely successful in terms of helping us organise the assembly but that left us to demonstrate this support when it came to the bid. We reasoned that anyone could get hold of the relevant logos for a presentation slide, so what we decided to do was get letters of support, tangible proof to demonstrate the strength of the organisation. It was during this period that we started to build the skeleton of the assembly,
page 19
Section One: Bidding
we worked on looking for spaces - accommodation, workshops, etc - we worked on getting the support of the council in order to smooth the way in terms of gaining the permissions required. Organising <<<<<< At this early stage we faced difficulties in the same magnitude as we had successes it seemed. There was a real difficulty pinning down a location for the accommodation, though this wasn’t a concern for us in the bigger picture - we were always confident of securing somewhere in the city in time for the assembly - we were concerned that to have no accommodation at the bid would make it difficult for the decision to favour us. This was resolved close to the INCM itself when we were made assurances of a Mill building in the Ancotes region of the city. Though the building was not in an ideal part of the city for us we made the decision to commit it to it for the sake of the bid, and look around for alternatives if and when we one the bid. Bid launch <<<<<< The week before we set off for INCM 2008 we held an event we called ‘the bid launch’, in the conference space of the North West’s Architecture Gallery, CUBE. The space was provided for us by the University of Salford as part of their sponsorship of the bid. The bid launch brought together all the important people in the city that we would be working with in the event of a successful bid, hosting such an event helped us to grab their attention and allow us to demonstrate that we were capable of organising such events. The and the location also made a statement about the commitment and legitimacy of EASA, and it’s status as anything but a typical student run event. For the exhibition we utilised the workshop posters from easa008 which the Manchester School of Architecture printed for us as part of their sponsorship, and respected Mancunian Architect Roger Stephenson agreed to be the key note speaker on the evening. The presentation <<<<<< For the presentation itself we were concerned about the impression our team would give, there were just four boys of us in Cyprus to present, so we made
page 20
easa010 Final Report
sure to explain the nature of our team, to demonstrate the depth of support we had around the UK and Europe. It was also important for us to split the presentation between the group to allow everyone to talk to show that each of us knew what was happening. >>>>>> Numbers The bid ran at a very small operating cost, which we covered with generous sponsorship from Salford University School of the Built Environment and Manchester School of Architecture. Manchester School of Architecture: £1,500 cash £250 equivalent print budget University of Salford: £1,000 cash £650 equivalent use of CUBE conference space [cma]
page 21
Section One: Bidding
Chapter 3 - INCM 2008 In 2008 the INCM was held in Cyprus, The distance between the Islands of Cyprus and Great Britain is amongst the longest of any two nations in EASA so getting there was always going to be an expensive affair for the team. To aid with this the we secured sponsorship from both the University of Salford and the University of Manchester. Part of the sponsorship went towards payment of fees and travel to the event, the idea being to allow more time away from work for the team to put the bid together and to allow the team to not have to worry about personal finance in the run up to an EASA event for once. At the time we were bidding for the 2010 summer assembly at the same time as the Turkish team. It had been known for some time that we were going to bid, while the Turkish proposal was officially announced in the couple of months before the INCM. We made a decision early on that we wouldn’t create a facebook group, or any other sort of promotion for EASA Manchester in the run up to the INCM out of respect for the other team, we felt that in preparing a bid there is enough pressure without the impression the other team is in direct competition, it wasn’t the kind of atmosphere we wanted to foster for easa010. Likewise when we arrived in Cyprus we had decided that we wouldn’t talk about the either the Manchester or the Turkey bid before the presentations. Despite people’s curiosity we felt that the network would come to a reasoned decision in the discussions and therefore speculation beforehand was unproductive. Unfortunately the presentations were scheduled for the Thursday of the INCM meaning there was an inestimable wait during the week - it’s hard to resist talking to your friends about the work you’ve been doing for 12 months!
page 22
easa010 Final Report
On the morning of the presentation there was a great mood of nervous energy in the team, confidence in your work is one thing, but having been involved in INCM decisions about future EASAs and INCMs we knew that small unforeseen issues could take the debates of in whole new directions unpredictably. As part of the budget we had secured the team had produced small handouts which we distributed in the moments before we entered the debating space. These handouts were very well produced and summed up the core aspects of our proposal, they had a huge impact on the networkâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s impression of the teams professionalism. In the debate space it was decided that the teams would toss a coin to decide who would present first, the other team would then leave the room, and then switch.
Once both teams had presented they would be called back for a
question and answer session before being dismissed again while a decision is reached. To my great delight we won the coin toss and decided to present second thus began our first wait of the day. Turkey took to the podium at about 10am while we waited nervously down stairs. At 11:30am we were called to the hall to present. We took great care to talk slowly and clearly. We had prepared relevant slides for all the points we wanted to make and of course we had the obligatory presentation video to get us started. We were wrapped up in 45 minutes, just half the time of the Turkish presentation - what had they been saying? - What had we left out? Again we were sent out of the room and told to wait until the network had agreed on a set of questions for us. An hour later we were back in the room, this time the only time both teams together. We faced a series of questions about finances, recession and team strength. We seemed to be doing quite well, especially when we talked about theme and the reasons we wanted to host EASA. Then one final time we were sent out to wait. It was about 2:30pm
page 23
Section One: Bidding
by now and we were in for the longest wait of our lives. Knowing the rest was totally out of our hands and being caught in the middle of post presentation high and the nervous wait we thought about going for a beer, but the length of the wait we could be facing made us think it might not be so good to return to the hall less than sober! Instead we met some locals and played some backgammon, and as such the first hours passed quite easily, after that we headed for dinner then back to the accommodation. By this point the four of us had gone through the emotions of having and losing confidence, we had talked every aspect over and over, and were reduced to sitting and not talking at all. Then we got the call to head back for the decision. In the 30 minutes or so it took us to get back to the hall the decision felt like Schrodingerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s cat - easa010 Manchester was either alive or dead, but we had to open the box to find out. Knowing the great importance the hosting of the assembly was to the Turkish team, the four of us had made an agreement that what ever the result of the announcement we would act in a restrained way, we would save our celebration until later. The responsibility of announcing the winner was given to Neal Patterson of the former hosts, the Irish team. To his credit, he knew the emotion of the moment too having been through it himself and was very somber in his tone when announcing that the 2010 EASA would be held in Manchester. Straight after the hugs and holding back of tears (by me you understand) I was on the phone to the UK informing our sponsors and backers of the good news. Organisation proper had begun. [cma]
page 24
easa010 Final Report
page 25
Section One: Bidding
Chapter 4 - Review To review any part of the last three years is inevitably to parcel it up into good things and bad things, which is a shame I think, there is no separating the result from the path and in many ways I wouldn’t have changed a single thing about the 12 months of the bid. It would be foolish though to not reflect on those 12 months, as there are inevitably lessons there to build on, which is exactly what we did following the bid in order to improve how to organise. So that is a good place to start I guess - if you are going to bid I suggest giving yourself 12 months to prepare. For us this time was vital due to the small team we had working on it, but for a larger team a lot of the groundwork can be put in during the period to ease the burden It can’t be stated enough that not much will change later. after the bid, so it is important to get your set up right from the start. Our experience with looking for accommodation so early gave the team as a whole valuable lessons about the importance of chasing every lead, to not believe anything until the contract is signed. EASA attracts many interested people, unfortunately not everything works out the way people hope, so don’t rely on someone’s word alone no matter their intentions, get a back up and get it in writing. For the presentation itself I would say the thing that most negatively affected the organisation of easa010 was that we didn’t get to see either the Turkish bid or the discussions that followed. This meant that the network had been through all the issues and become resolved on them, but we had no idea what the worries or hopes of EASA in general were. This not only left us blind in organising, it left us feeling disconnected to the network as a whole. We did of course spend time talking to people we knew, but this is too small a sample size. On the whole, of course, the bid went well - it was a success - but it is
page 26
easa010 Final Report
worth future organisers keeping in mind, that what went well in the bid went well in the organising, and likewise all the problems we had we kept having throughout the organising. [cma]
page 27