How Early Collaboration Shapes High-Performance Research Facilities
Early collaboration and strategic planning shape the success of complex lab projects, as seen in Vanderbilt’s Stevenson Center 6, where early stakeholder alignment uncovered new opportunities for interdisciplinary research. Image: DLR Group
In the complex world of laboratory design, the earliest stages of a project often determine its ultimate success or failure. Before a single wall is drawn or system specified, project teams must align a diverse group of stakeholders around a shared vision—balancing scientific ambition with practical constraints like budget, schedule, and long-term adaptability. Intentional, early collaboration between lab end users and project teams can transform this challenge into a strategic advantage.
The recently announced Stevenson Center 6 project at Vanderbilt University offers a compelling example. Envisioned as a hub for interdisciplinary research across multiple schools, the facility reflects years of planning, engagement, and careful coordination. But as Nicholas Youngkin, RA, senior laboratory planner at DLR Group in Denver, CO, tells Lab Design News, that success begins long before design development.
“Early engagement with a client involves, you know, programming or a feasibility study,” Youngkin says. “Often within that time can team conducts, you know, several engagement sessions to really gather the insights and the vision of what the client and the project warrants.”
For Stevenson Center 6, this meant evaluating existing research spaces, identifying gaps, and understanding long-term institutional goals. What initially began as a study of renovation feasibility ultimately led to a new construction solution—one that expanded opportunities for collaboration across the College of Arts and Science, the School of Engineering, and the School of Basic Sciences.
That shift underscores a key principle: early planning is not just about defining scope, but about uncovering opportunities.
Aligning diverse voices
Laboratory projects bring together a wide range of stakeholders—executive leadership, researchers, facilities teams, and design professionals—each with their own definition of success. Managing these perspectives requires both structure and flexibility.
“Every complex project is going to have a variety of stakeholders,” Youngkin notes. “Each one of those stakeholders has their own vision for the project and what success looks like to them.”
To navigate this complexity, DLR Group emphasizes in-person engagement, particularly during the early stages. Workshops serve as a primary tool for building consensus, allowing stakeholders to voice priorities, identify conflicts, and work toward shared solutions.
“We prefer to conduct those workshops in person, really trying to, you know, foster trust and relationships,” he says. “We’re there to be their advocate and make sure that we’re good stewards of schedule and budget and all of the things that come with all of these complex projects.”
These sessions are not isolated events, but part of an iterative process. Each workshop builds on the last, with the design team synthesizing feedback and presenting refined solutions. This structured cadence ensures that decisions are informed, transparent, and aligned with overarching goals.
Defining success beyond the program
Balancing quantitative requirements with qualitative insights—such as user experience, collaboration, and transparency—enables lab designs like Stevenson Center 6 to align technical performance with a shared, people-centered vision. Image: DLR Group
While quantitative requirements such as space needs and equipment counts are essential, they represent only part of the equation. Equally important are the qualitative factors that shape how a facility functions and feels.
“There’s two ways that we collect information, and, you know, it’s both qualitative and quantitative,” Youngkin explains. “The quantitative aspect really hits on the program—what are the imperatives, and what do we need to accomplish within that project—but qualitatively? How are we articulating that? How are we providing space for others? How are we fostering collaboration?”
At Stevenson Center 6, this dual approach informed design decisions that extend beyond technical performance. For example, users expressed a desire for visual connections between labs, write-up spaces, and public areas—enhancing both collaboration and transparency without compromising safety.
To guide these decisions, the team employs a framework called VALUES (Viewing Architecture through the Lens of User Experience and Sustainability). “We use this actually, to understand those priorities amongst those stakeholder groups and really set that as the North Star for the project,” Youngkin says.
Planning for flexibility and efficiency
Tailored planning, early programming, and continuous, accessible communication help ensure complex lab projects stay aligned with user needs, budgets, and schedules from the outset. Image: DLR Group
One of the greatest challenges in research facility design is balancing immediate needs with future uncertainty. Scientific priorities evolve rapidly, and buildings must be able to adapt without requiring costly overhauls.
For Stevenson Center 6, this meant developing a nuanced approach to lab planning—tailoring environments based on specific research needs rather than applying a one-size-fits-all solution.
“We wanted to make sure that we were tailoring solutions that would accommodate a variety of needs,” Youngkin says. “So that we didn’t just blanket everything with the same set of framework, because it just wouldn’t be good stewards of the budget.”
This strategy extends to infrastructure as well. Early programming helps identify critical systems and shared resources, reducing the risk of costly changes later in the process.
“Early programming planning really act as the primary tools for managing that budget and schedule,” he explains. “Long before the project advances into design.”
Communication as a continuous process
Effective communication is not a one-time effort, but an ongoing commitment. Establishing clear structures early on helps prevent misunderstandings and keeps projects on track.
For large-scale projects like Stevenson Center 6, stakeholder workshops typically occur every three to four weeks, providing enough time for the design team to develop responses while maintaining momentum.
“This allowed the design team to have enough time to be able to respond to the previous workshop, to develop materials and to be able to share things out in advance,” Youngkin says.
Equally important is making complex information accessible. Not all stakeholders are familiar with architectural drawings, so the team uses a range of tools—from simple diagrams to color-coded plans—to help users visualize their future spaces.
“[We are] really trying to make it as tangible as possible for them, beyond just the traditional 3D visualization renderings that help capture the space,” he says.
Building trust to avoid pitfalls
Strong relationships, trust, and a shared sense of purpose are critical to successful lab design, enabling teams to move beyond technical execution and create collaborative, future-focused research environments. Image: DLR Group
Ultimately, the success of a project depends not only on technical expertise, but on the strength of relationships among team members.
“Projects that don’t go well have a lot of finger pointing and a lot of blame,” Youngkin says. In contrast, successful teams are characterized by trust, shared ownership, and open communication.
“When we build trust as a design team, with an owner, with a contractor, we’re really making sure that we’re taking ownership in those decisions,” he says. “There is good collaboration, good conversation. There is diligent communication between all parties, so that nobody is surprised when something changes.”
This culture of collaboration extends beyond formal meetings. Informal gatherings and milestone celebrations help reinforce personal connections, creating a sense of shared investment in the project’s success.
As projects grow in complexity, it becomes easy to lose sight of their underlying purpose. For Youngkin, maintaining that clarity is essential.
“The understanding of the why is incredibly important in this process,” he emphasizes.
By grounding decisions in a shared vision—one that reflects both institutional goals and user needs—project teams can create facilities that go beyond technical performance. They can shape environments that support collaboration, encourage innovation, and draw in the next generation of researchers. As research continues to evolve, the groundwork laid in those earliest stages can ultimately make all the difference.
