1. Spontaneous association of persons united for political or trade union.
2. In a party or a trade union, a group of persons with liaisons outside of the party, who deal with a specific topic or issue.
1. Fundamental program at the basis of a common action or negotiation carried out by a group.
These two words have become the new cliché terms used by architects.
Collectives or platforms are popping up on a daily basis to participate in competitions, small projects or publicly commissioned research studies.
During the ‘60s and ‘70s, this definition was relevant among students and workers aiming at political discussion; today, these terms have been revived by architects in order to define their more or less formal association and work relationship.
This trend seems to trivialize the meaning of the word “collective.” In fact, it illustrates that architectural firms might be an outdated setting for architecture.
Another phenomenon of architectural practice, which is also experienced by other professionals, is the physical aggregation of their offices within the same compound (or building, block, or neighborhood).
It favours knowledge-sharing, and stimulates collaborations and solidarity; but it also does not eliminate the risk of self– segregation. Because real interdisciplinarity is lacking, the chance to interweave work relationships with professionals of other fields could be missed.