b'Construction briefingWHAT EXPERTS SAYWhat makes a good brief? This book aims to provide an answer to that question, but obviously there isnt just one right answer. To broaden this books perspective, this chapter features ten short interviews with experts from the construction industry, each with their own view on briefing. The interviewees are:-John Worthington, Co-founder DEGW-Kristian Kreiner, Prof. Em., Copenhagen Business School-Erik Wiers, Chief Flemish Government Architect-Gijs Rikken, Associate Design Director at MVRDV-Harald Nikolasen, Director-General at Statsbygg-Jaap de Koning, procurement expert at Witteveen + Bos-Leentje Volker, Prof., University of Twente-Arto Kiviniemi, Prof. Em., University of Liverpool-Kurt Neubek, Practice leader health care at Page-Evodia Alaterou, Principal and design strategy leader, Hassell-Silvio Carta, Head of Design, University of HertfordshireEach of the interviewees was asked 4-6 short questions about briefing, with one question as a constant: what makes a good brief? The answers were surprisingly varied, but there were many common themes. One is that a brief should refrain from prescribing design solutions. Architect Erik Wiers says that Ideally, it doesnt make any assumptions about design solutionsDecisions about the nature of the building should be left to designers. Not so surprising perhaps coming from an architect, but it is a widely shared view. Academic Leentje Volker puts it like this: A good brief leaves room for designers and engineers to show their professionalism.Another common theme is that the brief should not be seen as a static product, but as a part of a process. Briefing authority John Worthington refers to briefing as a trajectory in which you explore, learn, develop and test your needs and ideas, adding that it never stops. Kurt Neubek and Arto Kiviniemi make a similar case and use the term requirements management in this respect, which is a fairly new concept in the construction industry (see also page 33).One point of debate is the question of how open and extensive a brief should be. Procurement expert Jaap de Koning is of the opinion that a good brief should be complete and comprehensive, covering all the projects technical aspects, and that it should be free of multi-interpretable requirements. Academic Kristian Kreiner questions whether that is possible, or even desirable, and states that a brief should reflect the ambiguity of the situation, the dynamic nature of preferences and the unknowability of the real economic and technological delimitations of the task. Gijs Rikken, architect at MVRDV, takes a nuanced view and says: A good brief manages to find a balance between accuracy and completeness and design freedom. Full design freedom may sound appealing to an architect, but I dont think it leads to innovation. In my experience, innovation comes from having to deal with particular constraints, targets or ambitions that push your creativity. Having said that, it is just as true that having too many constraints stifles creativity and leads to generic, standardized solutions. He concludes: It is all about balance.179'