Professional Profile: Matt Malone

Matt Malone, science and technology practice leader, Perkins&Will

Matt Malone has returned to Perkins&Will as science and technology practice leader in the New York and Philadelphia offices. Lab Design News spoke to Matt about the evolving intersection of lab design, end-user engagement, and the future of research environments in a changing funding and technological landscape.

Q: If you weren't in this profession, what job would you like to have instead?

A: I was in another profession before re-joining Perkins&Will, albeit a related one. I spent three exciting years working in the developer community, contributing to the creation of space as an owner and landlord. The idea of engaging the lab user group is still there, but you see it with a different hat on, and from another point of view. That experience taught me about broader operational aspects, such as streamlining or right-sizing, and gave me a more acute awareness of the value propositions of designing for expansion and “tailored” flexibility.

Q: How do you see AI and automation influencing lab design in the coming years? 

A: Aspects of AI and automation have been influencing lab design for some time. Now, however, we are seeing a rapid expansion of these applications, along with a greater reliance on and trust in the potential of a good model or dataset. The benefits of robotics go beyond speed and efficiency, extending to the consumption of lab materials. Robotics offer opportunities to run more processes off-hours, which can shorten development time. Robotics and related high-throughput screening often require an open ballroom environment with overhead services for utility access and plug-and-play flexibility.

Additionally, AI aspects are typically managed by data analytics employees, who often want a more quiet or controlled office environment, so there are noise and comfort considerations that should be made. This differs from the open/flexible “office pool” where techs or post-docs tend to gather and collaborate.

Computing power needs will also potentially drive some variations for infrastructure from what is typically seen in traditional wet lab environments. For both robotics and computational labs, this means a likelihood of higher power demands, which will also drive the need for higher cooling loads rather than a wet-lab's dependence on air changes. Much of what is facilitated or accelerated using these new technologies is still in need of lab verification, but ultimately less verification is required because the new methods are filtering and reducing the number of options in need of testing and verification.

Q: If you could collaborate with any architect, designer, or scientist (past or present), who would it be and why?

A: I would be thrilled to be at the table with the team that planned the Murray Hill, NJ-based Bell Labs. I have always been fascinated by the thoughts and design elements that contributed to it being one of the most collaborative and innovative lab environments known. It has more Nobel Prize-winning research and Turing Awards than most countries. The discoveries and development made there directly enabled the phones or computers you are likely reading this on. An architect that I would love to work with is Louis Kahn. He had an interest in both the integration of infrastructure and the quality of life imparted by his designs. His Richards Medical Research Laboratories and the later Salk Institute are separately the prototype and the gold standard for each.

Q: What is one important “soft skill” that all lab design experts should have?

A: Listening—but that is hard, not soft! To be an effective listener, you need to take good notes, be curious, and ask intelligent, probing questions. To be able to do this, you need a comprehensive subject-matter knowledge base in your own discourse—in my case, in architecture and planning for research—to help the end-user trust that you are bringing an additive and educated perspective to the conversation. The questions and responses from this type of engagement result in projects that go beyond basic planning to something that works effectively for the specific scientist and their team.

Q: What’s one feature you think every modern laboratory should have, but many still don’t?

A: This is becoming more commonplace, but access to natural light is an extremely valued “feature,” unless of course it’s prohibited by the science or room function. It may seem obvious, but there are still a great many labs where the design starves the lab—a workplace environment for the scientists and laboratorians within—of light. This can be due to an old or invalidated lab design premise, or because the building’s skin performance challenges the lab controls. Borrowed light, while not as powerful as the real thing, is still a value-add for many reasons, and should be planned for as the science allows.

Q: What trends are you seeing in lab design that you think will shape the future of the industry?

A: As suggested above, I think we will see a shift in the ratio of wet labs, to dry or computational labs and pure office environments. I also see an increase in the proportion of specialized lab spaces within a larger open and flexible environment that enables deep or highly sensitive science to be performed in support of, and in the same environment as, the more open and collaborative lab area. This has a strong impact, as it affords more efficiency and flexibility in the design of the infrastructure, improving energy use and reducing environmental impacts of research space.

Q: What’s the most rewarding feedback you’ve received from a lab end-user?

A: I have been told that I ask good questions; some clients earlier in my career suggested I join their organization and get a chemistry or biology degree to work in their lab. That said, I think the most rewarding feedback I received was over the course of working with two separate research teams. In both of these cases, there was initial skepticism that the design team could get the design right, and concern that they would have to spend valuable time and money doing it themselves after we left. I am proud to say that by the time we were nearing the completion of the design documentation, the same teams were insisting that the documents not go out until I had the opportunity to weigh in on the design or provide guidance on the next design. That was a fulfilling experience and one I take pride in.

Q: What are you most looking forward to in this new role?

A: We are in a challenging time where funding is becoming more scarce, whether venture funding or federal funding, and the value of research is being discounted in the national news media. While working as a developer, I saw firsthand how some of this is directly reducing the design and construction of research space, as well as contributing to a surplus of space. Perhaps more importantly, this has a potential impact on research progress and cures for years to come, because the innovation pipeline is not being filled. I look forward to engaging this head-on as an opportunity to develop “what’s next” to keep our collective industry moving forward. Moving back to broader design leadership from a purely commercial market role, I see potential to engage in that dialogue wherever it may be.