At B&D, we see firsthand how institutional design guidelines and building design standards shape the success of campus and other facility projects. These documents set the tone for quality, consistency, and alignment with institutional goals. But not all clients start from the same place. Some have well-established standards, while others are building from scratch. Even when standards exist, they may be out of date, overly rigid, or difficult to apply consistently across stakeholders. Left unchecked, these issues can create challenges rather than solutions.
Institutional design guidelines capture the broader vision for a facility or campus and help to strengthen its physical identity and character: things like architectural aesthetics, consistency in material selections, branding, user experience, and sustainability priorities. They often describe “the look and feel” as well as desired outcomes for functionality, space quality, and long-term performance.
Building design standards are typically more technical. They spell out details such as acceptable materials or manufacturers, equipment specifications, systems requirements, or sustainability certifications. They are often organized to follow the same format as construction specifications and help ensure that every building across a portfolio feels consistent and meets the same baseline expectations, often producing efficiency in maintenance and operations.
For owners, these documents serve as a roadmap to ensure continuity across multiple projects. For architects, planners, engineers, and contractors, they set the expectations and parameters for design and construction projects.
Some clients start with no formal standards at all, relying on the design teams for individual projects and case-by-case decision-making. Others have robust, multi-volume standards manuals covering everything from door hardware to lab finishes. Many fall somewhere in between. Clients often hire consultants to draft or refine these documents and support coordination across leadership, facilities staff, design professionals, and sometimes students or end users.
Building technologies, sustainability benchmarks, regulatory requirements, and user expectations evolve rapidly. Standards that remain static quickly become outdated. Ideally these documents should be reviewed every few years to incorporate lessons learned from recent projects and align with changing codes, cost implications, technologies, and institutional goals.
Not all projects require the same approach. For example:
Standards should be seen as a foundation, not a minimum to be achieved. They set expectations while providing the framework for innovation and improvement. Regular review, clear communication, and proactive issue-spotting keep standards relevant and effective.
Design Guidelines and Building Design Standards provide the framework for quality, consistency, and identity across a campus or building portfolio. But they work best when they evolve alongside changing needs and technologies.
At B&D, we support clients at every stage of this process. Our team:
By treating standards as living documents and helping clients put them into action, B&D ensures these tools deliver long-term value and contribute to the success of every project across a portfolio.