“Culture change cannot happen overnight“

Overworking, unclear leadership structures, lack of diversity, criticisms of the curriculum, cases of sexual harassment: the independent analysis conducted by Engagement Arts (see info box) does not hold back in its criticisms of D-ARCH. Is the situation in your department really so dire?

Tom Emerson: No. Many things run extremely well in our department. D-ARCH has an excellent national and international reputation and both students and employees express a strong sense of loyalty towards the department, as the report from Engagement Arts also highlights. Even so, some things are far from perfect – and yes, the report does identify certain problem areas we need to address. The way I see it, there are two key priorities: on the one hand we need to do more to support the well-being of our D-ARCH community and call into question the “overworking” culture that is prevalent in the world of architecture. In addition, we clearly need to raise awareness even further regarding sexism and bullying, and establish a culture of zero tolerance.

Why did D-ARCH commission this report itself?

There’s been ongoing discussion in the department for some years now about topics such as overworking, equal opportunities and diversity. The Parity Group, a grass-roots movement of our students and scientific staff,and the later founded Diversity Commission (PDK) both have been especially active, organising together the Parity Talks, amongst other things. A representative from Engagement Arts, a movement dedicated to tackling sexism and abuse of power in the Belgian arts scene, attended one of these talks and made such an impression that D-ARCH commissioned them to conduct an analysis of the department from an external perspective and highlight specific critical issues. This report does not provide an overall picture of the current status of our department, but deliberately addresses particular problem areas.

The report is based on 59 statements from respondents and groups in the department.  Is that representative enough?

Of course not, but that was never the intention. This report is just one of many instruments we want to use to support the department’s ongoing development. While other tools, such as the student survey “#WiegEHTs” or the ETH Zurich staff survey, provide a broad picture, this report deliberately casts a critical and slightly lop-sided look at our culture. It gets to the heart of problems we may only have been previously aware of through anecdotal evidence. In addition, I think it’s particularly important to stress that broad representation is irrelevant as far as sexism or bullying are concerned – any incidence at all is one case too many.

The issues raised come up time and time again. Criticisms have been voiced repeatedly over the past years – has D-ARCH failed to take them seriously?

We are in the midst of culture change, and that takes time. Even so, we have already done a lot. I mentioned earlier our regular Parity Talks. We’ve also updated our recruitment procedure, for example, and this has helped us improve diversity. And the fact that we are openly discussing difficulties and have also commissioned a critical report on the department shows that general awareness of these issues has grown significantly. But sure, if we want our current students to reap the benefit of these positive developments, we need to step up our efforts.

What do you consider to be the most important conclusions produced by the report?

In my view the three key areas for attention are study content, mutual respect and work culture. When it comes to study content, we need to align our curriculum with societal realities. Topics such as climate change and diversity should be more deeply embedded in course content. As for the second area of attention: the report shows that we are still unable to offer everyone a respectful and safe environment within the department. We have a duty to change this. The third area of attention concerns culture change. We want to make it clear to everyone that a healthy work environment has a positive influence on individual performance and quality of work, rather than encouraging people to work as many hours as possible. When we eased performance requirements slightly during lockdown, for instance, the quality of students’ work did not suffer, but actually improved in some cases.

Are there some claims in the report you disagree with?

One thing the report doesn’t make clear is the many recommendations for action that we have already implemented, or at least are on our to-do list. We are currently undertaking curriculum reform to put greater emphasis on diversity. In addition, this year we have focused on the topic of respect in all our introductory events at the start of the semester. Awareness is being raised even further with the current Respect campaign targeting the whole university. The report essentially provides an external perspective and obviously not all recommendations are appropriate. But that’s not the point. The issues raised in the report are another stimulus for us to discuss which measures we now need to prioritise in order to improve ourselves and our culture. If we don’t treat the report as an instruction manual, it can be a very useful instrument for us.

How did the professors react to the results?

We have discussed the report at length at a Professors’ Conference. There is plenty of openness, generally speaking. Some colleagues are also critical of some of the claims. I perfectly understand that – the report is painful to read in places. I certainly felt so. It’s tough when you do your level best for a department but then discover that things are not perfect.

So what are the next steps?

First we need to share and discuss the report’s findings across the entire department. To this end we invited all D-ARCH members to a special information event. Over the coming months the findings will be passed through all department bodies such as the Curriculum Group, the PDK, the scientific staff and study associations so they can propose concrete measures. In addition, the next Parity Talk is scheduled for March 2022. We are also in close contact with the Vice President for Personnel Development and Leadership domain headed by Julia Dannath with a view to developing proposals specifically tailored to D-ARCH.

When will students see the effects of these measures?

Culture change does not happen overnight. It’s not something that can simply be imposed from above. What we can do, however, is improve our understanding and awareness of the issues raised. I am convinced that we will only be able to achieve culture change if we talk about our weaknesses openly and transparently. Our students, and every member of D-ARCH, should already sense this heightened awareness and openness.