Teshima: If it is a bond-funded or state-funded project, the state does not put any funds up for informal gathering space. The money goes straight to a programmatic element, which has a curricular to it. It takes a lot of creativity to take the limited square footage or the limited budget that we are given to accommodate both academic curriculum and form the building in a way that it starts to create spaces for community.

GlobeSt.com: You mentioned the importance of timelessness in your buildings. Is it a challenge to accomplish longevity when you are integrating new and changing technologies?

Teshima: That is for sure. By the time the projects we design today open, the technology has drastically changed. We focus on creating flexibility for future technology, which really needs the infrastructure to accommodate it. It is normal today that you have Wi-Fi throughout and LED lighting that you can address individually. Buildings are getting more and more intelligent, and building an infrastructure is the key to allowing future flexibility to occur. The biggest challenge is to balance the cost. It may make sense in the long-run to build certain things in, but the challenge with a state-funded project is that there won't be additional funding in five to 10 years. There is a balance that we have to strike between cutting-edge technology and anticipating that there won't be additional funding in order to change it. We are trying to help our clients to make the most educated decision. One way of attaining flexibility is look at private industry partners and start integrating it into a public institution. That is very difficult because of bureaucracy, but that is your best bet to be on the cutting-edge. Once the project is funded there is a good chance that it isn't going to be funded again for a long time.

GlobeSt.com: You are clearly being thoughtful about the way that students are using your properties. What does the conversation with the client sound like?

Teshima: It depends. What we do as architects, besides designing a building, is synthesize the different stakeholders and their thoughts. Very often, clients don't exactly know what they want. They know what their priorities are. A university president might have a different responsibility than someone in facilities or a person in administration that is trying to increase enrollment. One of the first things that we do is get all of the stakeholders involved and get everything on the table. Then it is up to us to help synthesize all of the goals together. The role as a facilitator is something that we do as architects on an every day basis. It is rare that in an institution, one single entity has the whole vision, but they never claim to have it either. That is challenging, but that is what we enjoy.

GlobeSt.com: Where is design in higher education and healthcare properties headed?

Teshima: On the construction side, delivery methods are changing—and they have been changing. The notion of the low-bid is going out the window, and we see more lease/lease-back type of developments and we have been doing design-build quite a bit. There is an acknowledgment of trying to get the biggest bang for your buck. One of the biggest challenges is that the construction industry is very busy, and that makes it difficult to get competitive bids. That, in turn, has an impact on how we design. That is going to be a continuous struggle this year and we are looking at the same escalation in terms of costs.

From a design point of view, one of the biggest challenges is that the faculty giving us direction now are not tech savvy. As students change the way that they retain knowledge and learn differently, so will the faculty in 10 to 20 years from now. The millennials and gen-Z will eventually be the ones teaching. I think the trend will go more and more toward using technology for learning purposes. The idea of fixed tables is going away. Classrooms have become all-purpose and all-function, and furniture is playing a bigger role than it did a decade ago. Flexible furniture is an extension of the empty room that we are providing so that the room can change from 40 people listening to a presentation to breakout sessions for groups of six people to a round-table discussion. It is a constantly evolving way of how we learn, and we are trying to create that in a physical environment.