• Today, let's shine a light on the journey of adoption! While recent news about the exposure of sensitive data from adoption agencies reminds us of the importance of privacy and care , it also highlights the incredible love and hope that surrounds the adoption process! Every child deserves a loving home, and every parent deserves support in this beautiful journey.

    Together, we can advocate for stronger protections for families and children, ensuring that their stories remain sacred and their futures bright! Let's keep spreading positivity and awareness about the importance of safeguarding the information that connects families forever!

    #AdoptionAwareness #ChildSafety #LoveInAdoption #FamilyFirst #PositiveChange
    🌟✨ Today, let's shine a light on the journey of adoption! While recent news about the exposure of sensitive data from adoption agencies reminds us of the importance of privacy and care 🛡️, it also highlights the incredible love and hope that surrounds the adoption process! ❤️ Every child deserves a loving home, and every parent deserves support in this beautiful journey. Together, we can advocate for stronger protections for families and children, ensuring that their stories remain sacred and their futures bright! 🌈💖 Let's keep spreading positivity and awareness about the importance of safeguarding the information that connects families forever! #AdoptionAwareness #ChildSafety #LoveInAdoption #FamilyFirst #PositiveChange
    Adoption Agency Data Exposure Revealed Information About Children and Parents
    A trove of 1.1 million records left accessible on the open web shows how much sensitive information can be created—and made vulnerable—during the adoption process.
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    113
    1 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • In the dim corners of my heart, I feel the weight of isolation, like a heavy fog that refuses to lift. Each day, I log into my dreams of creating an online store, hoping to sell products that would resonate with others, yet the silence is deafening. I’ve read countless guides on how to sell online, how to choose the right products, and how to set up an eCommerce site, but the loneliness wraps around me like a cold embrace.

    It's hard to muster the energy to take the first step when every click feels like a reminder of my solitude. I envision the vibrant storefront filled with items that tell stories, yet I am trapped in my own narrative of despair. The excitement of launching a new venture is overshadowed by the fear of failure, a fear that's grown louder than my ambitions.

    The idea of setting up a payment gateway seems trivial, but it symbolizes so much more – a connection to the outside world, a bridge to potential customers who may never see me or hear my voice. I wonder if anyone would care about the products I offer or if my dreams of entrepreneurship are just a fleeting fantasy, lost in the vastness of the internet.

    I often scroll through social media, seeing others succeed, their triumphs illuminating their paths like stars in the night. Yet, I remain in the shadows, an observer in a world where my presence feels insignificant. The steps to create a successful online store seem like mountains I cannot climb, each one a reminder of my struggles, of the whispered doubts in my mind.

    In this endless cycle of hope and despair, I cling to the belief that one day I will find my way. That somehow, amidst the loneliness, I will break free and build something that connects me to the world. Until then, I hold onto my dreams tightly, even as they slip through my fingers like sand, leaving me with nothing but the ache of what could have been.

    #Loneliness #Dreams #Entrepreneurship #OnlineBusiness #Heartbreak
    In the dim corners of my heart, I feel the weight of isolation, like a heavy fog that refuses to lift. Each day, I log into my dreams of creating an online store, hoping to sell products that would resonate with others, yet the silence is deafening. I’ve read countless guides on how to sell online, how to choose the right products, and how to set up an eCommerce site, but the loneliness wraps around me like a cold embrace. It's hard to muster the energy to take the first step when every click feels like a reminder of my solitude. I envision the vibrant storefront filled with items that tell stories, yet I am trapped in my own narrative of despair. The excitement of launching a new venture is overshadowed by the fear of failure, a fear that's grown louder than my ambitions. The idea of setting up a payment gateway seems trivial, but it symbolizes so much more – a connection to the outside world, a bridge to potential customers who may never see me or hear my voice. I wonder if anyone would care about the products I offer or if my dreams of entrepreneurship are just a fleeting fantasy, lost in the vastness of the internet. I often scroll through social media, seeing others succeed, their triumphs illuminating their paths like stars in the night. Yet, I remain in the shadows, an observer in a world where my presence feels insignificant. The steps to create a successful online store seem like mountains I cannot climb, each one a reminder of my struggles, of the whispered doubts in my mind. In this endless cycle of hope and despair, I cling to the belief that one day I will find my way. That somehow, amidst the loneliness, I will break free and build something that connects me to the world. Until then, I hold onto my dreams tightly, even as they slip through my fingers like sand, leaving me with nothing but the ache of what could have been. #Loneliness #Dreams #Entrepreneurship #OnlineBusiness #Heartbreak
    Cómo vender por Internet con una Tienda Online en 10 pasos
    Cómo vender por Internet con una Tienda Online en 10 pasos En esta guía vas a aprender a cómo vender por Internet con tu tienda online, desde la decisión de qué producto vender, hasta la plataforma para montar tu eCommerce y su pasarela de pagos. Si
    Like
    Love
    Wow
    Sad
    Angry
    600
    1 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • ‘Color Lim’ Changes Your Hue to Solve Platforming Puzzles

    Color Lim is a puzzle platformer where you need to use your slimy color-switching ability to solve puzzles and save a small village.

    This is a fantastic, smooth puzzle platform that has you playing a colorless slime called Lim who is looking to find their true color. At first, you aren’t really colorless – you are blue, but this isn’t your true and only color, as you can change and adapt when needed. Why is that important? Because in this world, color determines everything.

    Being able to absorb and transform to different colors allows you to go through specific platforms or to spray slime and then slide into the walls of the world, finding a new way to navigate around. There isn’t a limit on your own slime, so you are able to blast out some goop and then inject yourself into the walls, moving quickly around levels and solving puzzles. There are enemies that are looking to harm you, too, but these can be easily avoided most of the time.
    Color Lim doesn’t just have endless platforms to enjoy, but also has a little story showcased through cute characters who seem quite helpful! In this world, something bad has happened, and now there is a small village that is rebuilding, needing your help. As someone with such a great ability, you can find yourself using your colors to help them.

    I got to play a short demo of Color Lim at Pocket Gamer Connects Barcelona where I really liked how sleek and fast the movement felt for the game. The cute characters and little hints of a story captivated me, especially when exploring the town. However, I did feel that sometimes it wasn’t obvious what to do next or where to go – especially in the town where the platforms were hard to determine against what was just the background. Hopefully, these minor issues will be fixed before release.

    Color Lim is currently in development, but in the meantime, you can add it to your Steam Wishlist.
    About The Author
    #color #lim #changes #your #hue
    ‘Color Lim’ Changes Your Hue to Solve Platforming Puzzles
    Color Lim is a puzzle platformer where you need to use your slimy color-switching ability to solve puzzles and save a small village. This is a fantastic, smooth puzzle platform that has you playing a colorless slime called Lim who is looking to find their true color. At first, you aren’t really colorless – you are blue, but this isn’t your true and only color, as you can change and adapt when needed. Why is that important? Because in this world, color determines everything. Being able to absorb and transform to different colors allows you to go through specific platforms or to spray slime and then slide into the walls of the world, finding a new way to navigate around. There isn’t a limit on your own slime, so you are able to blast out some goop and then inject yourself into the walls, moving quickly around levels and solving puzzles. There are enemies that are looking to harm you, too, but these can be easily avoided most of the time. Color Lim doesn’t just have endless platforms to enjoy, but also has a little story showcased through cute characters who seem quite helpful! In this world, something bad has happened, and now there is a small village that is rebuilding, needing your help. As someone with such a great ability, you can find yourself using your colors to help them. I got to play a short demo of Color Lim at Pocket Gamer Connects Barcelona where I really liked how sleek and fast the movement felt for the game. The cute characters and little hints of a story captivated me, especially when exploring the town. However, I did feel that sometimes it wasn’t obvious what to do next or where to go – especially in the town where the platforms were hard to determine against what was just the background. Hopefully, these minor issues will be fixed before release. Color Lim is currently in development, but in the meantime, you can add it to your Steam Wishlist. About The Author #color #lim #changes #your #hue
    INDIEGAMESPLUS.COM
    ‘Color Lim’ Changes Your Hue to Solve Platforming Puzzles
    Color Lim is a puzzle platformer where you need to use your slimy color-switching ability to solve puzzles and save a small village. This is a fantastic, smooth puzzle platform that has you playing a colorless slime called Lim who is looking to find their true color. At first, you aren’t really colorless – you are blue, but this isn’t your true and only color, as you can change and adapt when needed. Why is that important? Because in this world, color determines everything. Being able to absorb and transform to different colors allows you to go through specific platforms or to spray slime and then slide into the walls of the world, finding a new way to navigate around. There isn’t a limit on your own slime, so you are able to blast out some goop and then inject yourself into the walls, moving quickly around levels and solving puzzles. There are enemies that are looking to harm you, too, but these can be easily avoided most of the time. Color Lim doesn’t just have endless platforms to enjoy, but also has a little story showcased through cute characters who seem quite helpful! In this world, something bad has happened, and now there is a small village that is rebuilding, needing your help. As someone with such a great ability, you can find yourself using your colors to help them. I got to play a short demo of Color Lim at Pocket Gamer Connects Barcelona where I really liked how sleek and fast the movement felt for the game. The cute characters and little hints of a story captivated me, especially when exploring the town. However, I did feel that sometimes it wasn’t obvious what to do next or where to go – especially in the town where the platforms were hard to determine against what was just the background. Hopefully, these minor issues will be fixed before release. Color Lim is currently in development, but in the meantime, you can add it to your Steam Wishlist. About The Author
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • Rewriting SymCrypt in Rust to modernize Microsoft’s cryptographic library 

    Outdated coding practices and memory-unsafe languages like C are putting software, including cryptographic libraries, at risk. Fortunately, memory-safe languages like Rust, along with formal verification tools, are now mature enough to be used at scale, helping prevent issues like crashes, data corruption, flawed implementation, and side-channel attacks.
    To address these vulnerabilities and improve memory safety, we’re rewriting SymCrypt—Microsoft’s open-source cryptographic library—in Rust. We’re also incorporating formal verification methods. SymCrypt is used in Windows, Azure Linux, Xbox, and other platforms.
    Currently, SymCrypt is primarily written in cross-platform C, with limited use of hardware-specific optimizations through intrinsicsand assembly language. It provides a wide range of algorithms, including AES-GCM, SHA, ECDSA, and the more recent post-quantum algorithms ML-KEM and ML-DSA. 
    Formal verification will confirm that implementations behave as intended and don’t deviate from algorithm specifications, critical for preventing attacks. We’ll also analyze compiled code to detect side-channel leaks caused by timing or hardware-level behavior.
    Proving Rust program properties with Aeneas
    Program verification is the process of proving that a piece of code will always satisfy a given property, no matter the input. Rust’s type system profoundly improves the prospects for program verification by providing strong ownership guarantees, by construction, using a discipline known as “aliasing xor mutability”.
    For example, reasoning about C code often requires proving that two non-const pointers are live and non-overlapping, a property that can depend on external client code. In contrast, Rust’s type system guarantees this property for any two mutably borrowed references.
    As a result, new tools have emerged specifically for verifying Rust code. We chose Aeneasbecause it helps provide a clean separation between code and proofs.
    Developed by Microsoft Azure Research in partnership with Inria, the French National Institute for Research in Digital Science and Technology, Aeneas connects to proof assistants like Lean, allowing us to draw on a large body of mathematical proofs—especially valuable given the mathematical nature of cryptographic algorithms—and benefit from Lean’s active user community.
    Compiling Rust to C supports backward compatibility  
    We recognize that switching to Rust isn’t feasible for all use cases, so we’ll continue to support, extend, and certify C-based APIs as long as users need them. Users won’t see any changes, as Rust runs underneath the existing C APIs.
    Some users compile our C code directly and may rely on specific toolchains or compiler features that complicate the adoption of Rust code. To address this, we will use Eurydice, a Rust-to-C compiler developed by Microsoft Azure Research, to replace handwritten C code with C generated from formally verified Rust. Eurydicecompiles directly from Rust’s MIR intermediate language, and the resulting C code will be checked into the SymCrypt repository alongside the original Rust source code.
    As more users adopt Rust, we’ll continue supporting this compilation path for those who build SymCrypt from source code but aren’t ready to use the Rust compiler. In the long term, we hope to transition users to either use precompiled SymCrypt binaries, or compile from source code in Rust, at which point the Rust-to-C compilation path will no longer be needed.

    Microsoft research podcast

    Ideas: AI and democracy with Madeleine Daepp and Robert Osazuwa Ness
    As the “biggest election year in history” comes to an end, researchers Madeleine Daepp and Robert Osazuwa Ness and Democracy Forward GM Ginny Badanes discuss AI’s impact on democracy, including the tech’s use in Taiwan and India.

    Listen now

    Opens in a new tab
    Timing analysis with Revizor 
    Even software that has been verified for functional correctness can remain vulnerable to low-level security threats, such as side channels caused by timing leaks or speculative execution. These threats operate at the hardware level and can leak private information, such as memory load addresses, branch targets, or division operands, even when the source code is provably correct. 
    To address this, we’re extending Revizor, a tool developed by Microsoft Azure Research, to more effectively analyze SymCrypt binaries. Revizor models microarchitectural leakage and uses fuzzing techniques to systematically uncover instructions that may expose private information through known hardware-level effects.  
    Earlier cryptographic libraries relied on constant-time programming to avoid operations on secret data. However, recent research has shown that this alone is insufficient with today’s CPUs, where every new optimization may open a new side channel. 
    By analyzing binary code for specific compilers and platforms, our extended Revizor tool enables deeper scrutiny of vulnerabilities that aren’t visible in the source code.
    Verified Rust implementations begin with ML-KEM
    This long-term effort is in alignment with the Microsoft Secure Future Initiative and brings together experts across Microsoft, building on decades of Microsoft Research investment in program verification and security tooling.
    A preliminary version of ML-KEM in Rust is now available on the preview feature/verifiedcryptobranch of the SymCrypt repository. We encourage users to try the Rust build and share feedback. Looking ahead, we plan to support direct use of the same cryptographic library in Rust without requiring C bindings. 
    Over the coming months, we plan to rewrite, verify, and ship several algorithms in Rust as part of SymCrypt. As our investment in Rust deepens, we expect to gain new insights into how to best leverage the language for high-assurance cryptographic implementations with low-level optimizations. 
    As performance is key to scalability and sustainability, we’re holding new implementations to a high bar using our benchmarking tools to match or exceed existing systems.
    Looking forward 
    This is a pivotal moment for high-assurance software. Microsoft’s investment in Rust and formal verification presents a rare opportunity to advance one of our key libraries. We’re excited to scale this work and ultimately deliver an industrial-grade, Rust-based, FIPS-certified cryptographic library.
    Opens in a new tab
    #rewriting #symcrypt #rust #modernize #microsofts
    Rewriting SymCrypt in Rust to modernize Microsoft’s cryptographic library 
    Outdated coding practices and memory-unsafe languages like C are putting software, including cryptographic libraries, at risk. Fortunately, memory-safe languages like Rust, along with formal verification tools, are now mature enough to be used at scale, helping prevent issues like crashes, data corruption, flawed implementation, and side-channel attacks. To address these vulnerabilities and improve memory safety, we’re rewriting SymCrypt—Microsoft’s open-source cryptographic library—in Rust. We’re also incorporating formal verification methods. SymCrypt is used in Windows, Azure Linux, Xbox, and other platforms. Currently, SymCrypt is primarily written in cross-platform C, with limited use of hardware-specific optimizations through intrinsicsand assembly language. It provides a wide range of algorithms, including AES-GCM, SHA, ECDSA, and the more recent post-quantum algorithms ML-KEM and ML-DSA.  Formal verification will confirm that implementations behave as intended and don’t deviate from algorithm specifications, critical for preventing attacks. We’ll also analyze compiled code to detect side-channel leaks caused by timing or hardware-level behavior. Proving Rust program properties with Aeneas Program verification is the process of proving that a piece of code will always satisfy a given property, no matter the input. Rust’s type system profoundly improves the prospects for program verification by providing strong ownership guarantees, by construction, using a discipline known as “aliasing xor mutability”. For example, reasoning about C code often requires proving that two non-const pointers are live and non-overlapping, a property that can depend on external client code. In contrast, Rust’s type system guarantees this property for any two mutably borrowed references. As a result, new tools have emerged specifically for verifying Rust code. We chose Aeneasbecause it helps provide a clean separation between code and proofs. Developed by Microsoft Azure Research in partnership with Inria, the French National Institute for Research in Digital Science and Technology, Aeneas connects to proof assistants like Lean, allowing us to draw on a large body of mathematical proofs—especially valuable given the mathematical nature of cryptographic algorithms—and benefit from Lean’s active user community. Compiling Rust to C supports backward compatibility   We recognize that switching to Rust isn’t feasible for all use cases, so we’ll continue to support, extend, and certify C-based APIs as long as users need them. Users won’t see any changes, as Rust runs underneath the existing C APIs. Some users compile our C code directly and may rely on specific toolchains or compiler features that complicate the adoption of Rust code. To address this, we will use Eurydice, a Rust-to-C compiler developed by Microsoft Azure Research, to replace handwritten C code with C generated from formally verified Rust. Eurydicecompiles directly from Rust’s MIR intermediate language, and the resulting C code will be checked into the SymCrypt repository alongside the original Rust source code. As more users adopt Rust, we’ll continue supporting this compilation path for those who build SymCrypt from source code but aren’t ready to use the Rust compiler. In the long term, we hope to transition users to either use precompiled SymCrypt binaries, or compile from source code in Rust, at which point the Rust-to-C compilation path will no longer be needed. Microsoft research podcast Ideas: AI and democracy with Madeleine Daepp and Robert Osazuwa Ness As the “biggest election year in history” comes to an end, researchers Madeleine Daepp and Robert Osazuwa Ness and Democracy Forward GM Ginny Badanes discuss AI’s impact on democracy, including the tech’s use in Taiwan and India. Listen now Opens in a new tab Timing analysis with Revizor  Even software that has been verified for functional correctness can remain vulnerable to low-level security threats, such as side channels caused by timing leaks or speculative execution. These threats operate at the hardware level and can leak private information, such as memory load addresses, branch targets, or division operands, even when the source code is provably correct.  To address this, we’re extending Revizor, a tool developed by Microsoft Azure Research, to more effectively analyze SymCrypt binaries. Revizor models microarchitectural leakage and uses fuzzing techniques to systematically uncover instructions that may expose private information through known hardware-level effects.   Earlier cryptographic libraries relied on constant-time programming to avoid operations on secret data. However, recent research has shown that this alone is insufficient with today’s CPUs, where every new optimization may open a new side channel.  By analyzing binary code for specific compilers and platforms, our extended Revizor tool enables deeper scrutiny of vulnerabilities that aren’t visible in the source code. Verified Rust implementations begin with ML-KEM This long-term effort is in alignment with the Microsoft Secure Future Initiative and brings together experts across Microsoft, building on decades of Microsoft Research investment in program verification and security tooling. A preliminary version of ML-KEM in Rust is now available on the preview feature/verifiedcryptobranch of the SymCrypt repository. We encourage users to try the Rust build and share feedback. Looking ahead, we plan to support direct use of the same cryptographic library in Rust without requiring C bindings.  Over the coming months, we plan to rewrite, verify, and ship several algorithms in Rust as part of SymCrypt. As our investment in Rust deepens, we expect to gain new insights into how to best leverage the language for high-assurance cryptographic implementations with low-level optimizations.  As performance is key to scalability and sustainability, we’re holding new implementations to a high bar using our benchmarking tools to match or exceed existing systems. Looking forward  This is a pivotal moment for high-assurance software. Microsoft’s investment in Rust and formal verification presents a rare opportunity to advance one of our key libraries. We’re excited to scale this work and ultimately deliver an industrial-grade, Rust-based, FIPS-certified cryptographic library. Opens in a new tab #rewriting #symcrypt #rust #modernize #microsofts
    WWW.MICROSOFT.COM
    Rewriting SymCrypt in Rust to modernize Microsoft’s cryptographic library 
    Outdated coding practices and memory-unsafe languages like C are putting software, including cryptographic libraries, at risk. Fortunately, memory-safe languages like Rust, along with formal verification tools, are now mature enough to be used at scale, helping prevent issues like crashes, data corruption, flawed implementation, and side-channel attacks. To address these vulnerabilities and improve memory safety, we’re rewriting SymCrypt (opens in new tab)—Microsoft’s open-source cryptographic library—in Rust. We’re also incorporating formal verification methods. SymCrypt is used in Windows, Azure Linux, Xbox, and other platforms. Currently, SymCrypt is primarily written in cross-platform C, with limited use of hardware-specific optimizations through intrinsics (compiler-provided low-level functions) and assembly language (direct processor instructions). It provides a wide range of algorithms, including AES-GCM, SHA, ECDSA, and the more recent post-quantum algorithms ML-KEM and ML-DSA.  Formal verification will confirm that implementations behave as intended and don’t deviate from algorithm specifications, critical for preventing attacks. We’ll also analyze compiled code to detect side-channel leaks caused by timing or hardware-level behavior. Proving Rust program properties with Aeneas Program verification is the process of proving that a piece of code will always satisfy a given property, no matter the input. Rust’s type system profoundly improves the prospects for program verification by providing strong ownership guarantees, by construction, using a discipline known as “aliasing xor mutability”. For example, reasoning about C code often requires proving that two non-const pointers are live and non-overlapping, a property that can depend on external client code. In contrast, Rust’s type system guarantees this property for any two mutably borrowed references. As a result, new tools have emerged specifically for verifying Rust code. We chose Aeneas (opens in new tab) because it helps provide a clean separation between code and proofs. Developed by Microsoft Azure Research in partnership with Inria, the French National Institute for Research in Digital Science and Technology, Aeneas connects to proof assistants like Lean (opens in new tab), allowing us to draw on a large body of mathematical proofs—especially valuable given the mathematical nature of cryptographic algorithms—and benefit from Lean’s active user community. Compiling Rust to C supports backward compatibility   We recognize that switching to Rust isn’t feasible for all use cases, so we’ll continue to support, extend, and certify C-based APIs as long as users need them. Users won’t see any changes, as Rust runs underneath the existing C APIs. Some users compile our C code directly and may rely on specific toolchains or compiler features that complicate the adoption of Rust code. To address this, we will use Eurydice (opens in new tab), a Rust-to-C compiler developed by Microsoft Azure Research, to replace handwritten C code with C generated from formally verified Rust. Eurydice (opens in new tab) compiles directly from Rust’s MIR intermediate language, and the resulting C code will be checked into the SymCrypt repository alongside the original Rust source code. As more users adopt Rust, we’ll continue supporting this compilation path for those who build SymCrypt from source code but aren’t ready to use the Rust compiler. In the long term, we hope to transition users to either use precompiled SymCrypt binaries (via C or Rust APIs), or compile from source code in Rust, at which point the Rust-to-C compilation path will no longer be needed. Microsoft research podcast Ideas: AI and democracy with Madeleine Daepp and Robert Osazuwa Ness As the “biggest election year in history” comes to an end, researchers Madeleine Daepp and Robert Osazuwa Ness and Democracy Forward GM Ginny Badanes discuss AI’s impact on democracy, including the tech’s use in Taiwan and India. Listen now Opens in a new tab Timing analysis with Revizor  Even software that has been verified for functional correctness can remain vulnerable to low-level security threats, such as side channels caused by timing leaks or speculative execution. These threats operate at the hardware level and can leak private information, such as memory load addresses, branch targets, or division operands, even when the source code is provably correct.  To address this, we’re extending Revizor (opens in new tab), a tool developed by Microsoft Azure Research, to more effectively analyze SymCrypt binaries. Revizor models microarchitectural leakage and uses fuzzing techniques to systematically uncover instructions that may expose private information through known hardware-level effects.   Earlier cryptographic libraries relied on constant-time programming to avoid operations on secret data. However, recent research has shown that this alone is insufficient with today’s CPUs, where every new optimization may open a new side channel.  By analyzing binary code for specific compilers and platforms, our extended Revizor tool enables deeper scrutiny of vulnerabilities that aren’t visible in the source code. Verified Rust implementations begin with ML-KEM This long-term effort is in alignment with the Microsoft Secure Future Initiative and brings together experts across Microsoft, building on decades of Microsoft Research investment in program verification and security tooling. A preliminary version of ML-KEM in Rust is now available on the preview feature/verifiedcrypto (opens in new tab) branch of the SymCrypt repository. We encourage users to try the Rust build and share feedback (opens in new tab). Looking ahead, we plan to support direct use of the same cryptographic library in Rust without requiring C bindings.  Over the coming months, we plan to rewrite, verify, and ship several algorithms in Rust as part of SymCrypt. As our investment in Rust deepens, we expect to gain new insights into how to best leverage the language for high-assurance cryptographic implementations with low-level optimizations.  As performance is key to scalability and sustainability, we’re holding new implementations to a high bar using our benchmarking tools to match or exceed existing systems. Looking forward  This is a pivotal moment for high-assurance software. Microsoft’s investment in Rust and formal verification presents a rare opportunity to advance one of our key libraries. We’re excited to scale this work and ultimately deliver an industrial-grade, Rust-based, FIPS-certified cryptographic library. Opens in a new tab
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • Mock up a website in five prompts

    “Wait, can users actually add products to the cart?”Every prototype faces that question or one like it. You start to explain it’s “just Figma,” “just dummy data,” but what if you didn’t need disclaimers?What if you could hand clients—or your team—a working, data-connected mock-up of their website, or new pages and components, in less time than it takes to wireframe?That’s the challenge we’ll tackle today. But first, we need to look at:The problem with today’s prototyping toolsPick two: speed, flexibility, or interactivity.The prototyping ecosystem, despite having amazing software that addresses a huge variety of needs, doesn’t really have one tool that gives you all three.Wireframing apps let you draw boxes in minutes but every button is fake. Drag-and-drop builders animate scroll triggers until you ask for anything off-template. Custom code frees you… after you wave goodbye to a few afternoons.AI tools haven’t smashed the trade-off; they’ve just dressed it in flashier costumes. One prompt births a landing page, the next dumps a 2,000-line, worse-than-junior-level React file in your lap. The bottleneck is still there. Builder’s approach to website mockupsWe’ve been trying something a little different to maintain speed, flexibility, and interactivity while mocking full websites. Our AI-driven visual editor:Spins up a repo in seconds or connects to your existing one to use the code as design inspiration. React, Vue, Angular, and Svelte all work out of the box.
    Lets you shape components via plain English, visual edits, copy/pasted Figma frames, web inspos, MCP tools, and constant visual awareness of your entire website.
    Commits each change as a clean GitHub pull request your team can review like hand-written code. All your usual CI checks and lint rules apply.And if you need a tweak, you can comment to @builderio-bot right in the GitHub PR to make asynchronous changes without context switching.This results in a live site the café owner can interact with today, and a branch your devs can merge tomorrow. Stakeholders get to click actual buttons and trigger real state—no more “so, just imagine this works” demos.Let’s see it in action.From blank canvas to working mockup in five promptsToday, I’m going to mock up a fake business website. You’re welcome to create a real one.Before we fire off a single prompt, grab a note and write:Business name & vibe
    Core pages
    Primary goal
    Brand palette & toneThat’s it. Don’t sweat the details—we can always iterate. For mine, I wrote:1. Sunny Trails Bakery — family-owned, feel-good, smells like warm cinnamon.
    2. Home, About, Pricing / Subscription Box, Menu.
    3. Drive online orders and foot traffic—every CTA should funnel toward “Order Now” or “Reserve a Table.”
    4. Warm yellow, chocolate brown, rounded typography, playful copy.We’re not trying to fit everything here. What matters is clarity on what we’re creating, so the AI has enough context to produce usable scaffolds, and so later tweaks stay aligned with the client’s vision. Builder will default to using React, Vite, and Tailwind. If you want a different JS framework, you can link an existing repo in that stack. In the near future, you won’t need to do this extra step to get non-React frameworks to function.An entire website from the first promptNow, we’re ready to get going.Head over to Builder.io and paste in this prompt or your own:Create a cozy bakery website called “Sunny Trails Bakery” with pages for:
    • Home
    • About
    • Pricing
    • Menu
    Brand palette: warm yellow and chocolate brown. Tone: playful, inviting. The restaurant is family-owned, feel-good, and smells like cinnamon.
    The goal of this site is to drive online orders and foot traffic—every CTA should funnel toward "Order Now" or "Reserve a Table."Once you hit enter, Builder will spin up a new dev container, and then inside that container, the AI will build out the first version of your site. You can leave the page and come back when it’s done.Now, before we go further, let’s create our repo, so that we get version history right from the outset. Click “Create Repo” up in the top right, and link your GitHub account.Once the process is complete, you’ll have a brand new repo.If you need any help on this step, or any of the below, check out these docs.Making the mockup’s order system workFrom our one-shot prompt, we’ve already got a really nice start for our client. However, when we press the “Order Now” button, we just get a generic alert. Let’s fix this.The best part about connecting to GitHub is that we get version control. Head back to your dashboard and edit the settings of your new project. We can give it a better name, and then, in the “Advanced” section, we can change the “Commit Mode” to “Pull Requests.”Now, we have the ability to create new branches right within Builder, allowing us to make drastic changes without worrying about the main version. This is also helpful if you’d like to show your client or team a few different versions of the same prototype.On a new branch, I’ll write another short prompt:Can you make the "Order Now" button work, even if it's just with dummy JSON for now?As you can see in the GIF above, Builder creates an ordering system and a fully mobile-responsive cart and checkout flow.Now, we can click “Send PR” in the top right, and we have an ordinary GitHub PR that can be reviewed and merged as needed.This is what’s possible in two prompts. For our third, let’s gussy up the style.If you’re like me, you might spend a lot of time admiring other people’s cool designs and learning how to code up similar components in your own style.Luckily, Builder has this capability, too, with our Chrome extension. I found a “Featured Posts” section on OpenAI’s website, where I like how the layout and scrolling work. We can copy and paste it onto our “Featured Treats” section, retaining our cafe’s distinctive brand style.Don’t worry—OpenAI doesn’t mind a little web scraping.You can do this with any component on any website, so your own projects can very quickly become a “best of the web” if you know what you’re doing.Plus, you can use Figma designs in much the same way, with even better design fidelity. Copy and paste a Figma frame with our Figma plugin, and tell the AI to either use the component as inspiration or as a 1:1 to reference for what the design should be.Now, we’re ready to send our PR. This time, let’s take a closer look at the code the AI has created.As you can see, the code is neatly formatted into two reusable components. Scrolling down further, I find a CSS file and then the actual implementation on the homepage, with clean JSON to represent the dummy post data.Design tweaks to the mockup with visual editsOne issue that cropped up when the AI brought in the OpenAI layout is that it changed my text from “Featured Treats” to “Featured Stories & Treats.” I’ve realized I don’t like either, and I want to replace that text with: “Fresh Out of the Bakery.”It would be silly, though, to prompt the AI just for this small tweak. Let’s switch into edit mode.Edit Mode lets you select any component and change any of its content or underlying CSS directly. You get a host of Webflow-like options to choose from, so that you can finesse the details as needed.Once you’ve made all the visual changes you want—maybe tweaking a button color or a border radius—you can click “Apply Edits,” and the AI will ensure the underlying code matches your repo’s style.Async fixes to the mockup with Builder BotNow, our pull request is nearly ready to merge, but I found one issue with it:When we copied the OpenAI website layout earlier, one of the blog posts had a video as its featured graphic instead of just an image. This is cool for OpenAI, but for our bakery, I just wanted images in this section. Since I didn’t instruct Builder’s AI otherwise, it went ahead and followed the layout and created extra code for video capability.No problem. We can fix this inside GItHub with our final prompt. We just need to comment on the PR and tag builderio-bot. Within about a minute, Builder Bot has successfully removed the video functionality, leaving a minimal diff that affects only the code it needed to. For example: Returning to my project in Builder, I can see that the bot’s changes are accounted for in the chat window as well, and I can use the live preview link to make sure my site works as expected:Now, if this were a real project, you could easily deploy this to the web for your client. After all, you’ve got a whole GitHub repo. This isn’t just a mockup; it’s actual code you can tweak—with Builder or Cursor or by hand—until you’re satisfied to run the site in production.So, why use Builder to mock up your website?Sure, this has been a somewhat contrived example. A real prototype is going to look prettier, because I’m going to spend more time on pieces of the design that I don’t like as much.But that’s the point of the best AI tools: they don’t take you, the human, out of the loop.You still get to make all the executive decisions, and it respects your hard work. Since you can constantly see all the code the AI creates, work in branches, and prompt with component-level precision, you can stop worrying about AI overwriting your opinions and start using it more as the tool it’s designed to be.You can copy in your team’s Figma designs, import web inspos, connect MCP servers to get Jira tickets in hand, and—most importantly—work with existing repos full of existing styles that Builder will understand and match, just like it matched OpenAI’s layout to our little cafe.So, we get speed, flexibility, and interactivity all the way from prompt to PR to production.Try Builder today.
    #mock #website #five #prompts
    Mock up a website in five prompts
    “Wait, can users actually add products to the cart?”Every prototype faces that question or one like it. You start to explain it’s “just Figma,” “just dummy data,” but what if you didn’t need disclaimers?What if you could hand clients—or your team—a working, data-connected mock-up of their website, or new pages and components, in less time than it takes to wireframe?That’s the challenge we’ll tackle today. But first, we need to look at:The problem with today’s prototyping toolsPick two: speed, flexibility, or interactivity.The prototyping ecosystem, despite having amazing software that addresses a huge variety of needs, doesn’t really have one tool that gives you all three.Wireframing apps let you draw boxes in minutes but every button is fake. Drag-and-drop builders animate scroll triggers until you ask for anything off-template. Custom code frees you… after you wave goodbye to a few afternoons.AI tools haven’t smashed the trade-off; they’ve just dressed it in flashier costumes. One prompt births a landing page, the next dumps a 2,000-line, worse-than-junior-level React file in your lap. The bottleneck is still there. Builder’s approach to website mockupsWe’ve been trying something a little different to maintain speed, flexibility, and interactivity while mocking full websites. Our AI-driven visual editor:Spins up a repo in seconds or connects to your existing one to use the code as design inspiration. React, Vue, Angular, and Svelte all work out of the box. Lets you shape components via plain English, visual edits, copy/pasted Figma frames, web inspos, MCP tools, and constant visual awareness of your entire website. Commits each change as a clean GitHub pull request your team can review like hand-written code. All your usual CI checks and lint rules apply.And if you need a tweak, you can comment to @builderio-bot right in the GitHub PR to make asynchronous changes without context switching.This results in a live site the café owner can interact with today, and a branch your devs can merge tomorrow. Stakeholders get to click actual buttons and trigger real state—no more “so, just imagine this works” demos.Let’s see it in action.From blank canvas to working mockup in five promptsToday, I’m going to mock up a fake business website. You’re welcome to create a real one.Before we fire off a single prompt, grab a note and write:Business name & vibe Core pages Primary goal Brand palette & toneThat’s it. Don’t sweat the details—we can always iterate. For mine, I wrote:1. Sunny Trails Bakery — family-owned, feel-good, smells like warm cinnamon. 2. Home, About, Pricing / Subscription Box, Menu. 3. Drive online orders and foot traffic—every CTA should funnel toward “Order Now” or “Reserve a Table.” 4. Warm yellow, chocolate brown, rounded typography, playful copy.We’re not trying to fit everything here. What matters is clarity on what we’re creating, so the AI has enough context to produce usable scaffolds, and so later tweaks stay aligned with the client’s vision. Builder will default to using React, Vite, and Tailwind. If you want a different JS framework, you can link an existing repo in that stack. In the near future, you won’t need to do this extra step to get non-React frameworks to function.An entire website from the first promptNow, we’re ready to get going.Head over to Builder.io and paste in this prompt or your own:Create a cozy bakery website called “Sunny Trails Bakery” with pages for: • Home • About • Pricing • Menu Brand palette: warm yellow and chocolate brown. Tone: playful, inviting. The restaurant is family-owned, feel-good, and smells like cinnamon. The goal of this site is to drive online orders and foot traffic—every CTA should funnel toward "Order Now" or "Reserve a Table."Once you hit enter, Builder will spin up a new dev container, and then inside that container, the AI will build out the first version of your site. You can leave the page and come back when it’s done.Now, before we go further, let’s create our repo, so that we get version history right from the outset. Click “Create Repo” up in the top right, and link your GitHub account.Once the process is complete, you’ll have a brand new repo.If you need any help on this step, or any of the below, check out these docs.Making the mockup’s order system workFrom our one-shot prompt, we’ve already got a really nice start for our client. However, when we press the “Order Now” button, we just get a generic alert. Let’s fix this.The best part about connecting to GitHub is that we get version control. Head back to your dashboard and edit the settings of your new project. We can give it a better name, and then, in the “Advanced” section, we can change the “Commit Mode” to “Pull Requests.”Now, we have the ability to create new branches right within Builder, allowing us to make drastic changes without worrying about the main version. This is also helpful if you’d like to show your client or team a few different versions of the same prototype.On a new branch, I’ll write another short prompt:Can you make the "Order Now" button work, even if it's just with dummy JSON for now?As you can see in the GIF above, Builder creates an ordering system and a fully mobile-responsive cart and checkout flow.Now, we can click “Send PR” in the top right, and we have an ordinary GitHub PR that can be reviewed and merged as needed.This is what’s possible in two prompts. For our third, let’s gussy up the style.If you’re like me, you might spend a lot of time admiring other people’s cool designs and learning how to code up similar components in your own style.Luckily, Builder has this capability, too, with our Chrome extension. I found a “Featured Posts” section on OpenAI’s website, where I like how the layout and scrolling work. We can copy and paste it onto our “Featured Treats” section, retaining our cafe’s distinctive brand style.Don’t worry—OpenAI doesn’t mind a little web scraping.You can do this with any component on any website, so your own projects can very quickly become a “best of the web” if you know what you’re doing.Plus, you can use Figma designs in much the same way, with even better design fidelity. Copy and paste a Figma frame with our Figma plugin, and tell the AI to either use the component as inspiration or as a 1:1 to reference for what the design should be.Now, we’re ready to send our PR. This time, let’s take a closer look at the code the AI has created.As you can see, the code is neatly formatted into two reusable components. Scrolling down further, I find a CSS file and then the actual implementation on the homepage, with clean JSON to represent the dummy post data.Design tweaks to the mockup with visual editsOne issue that cropped up when the AI brought in the OpenAI layout is that it changed my text from “Featured Treats” to “Featured Stories & Treats.” I’ve realized I don’t like either, and I want to replace that text with: “Fresh Out of the Bakery.”It would be silly, though, to prompt the AI just for this small tweak. Let’s switch into edit mode.Edit Mode lets you select any component and change any of its content or underlying CSS directly. You get a host of Webflow-like options to choose from, so that you can finesse the details as needed.Once you’ve made all the visual changes you want—maybe tweaking a button color or a border radius—you can click “Apply Edits,” and the AI will ensure the underlying code matches your repo’s style.Async fixes to the mockup with Builder BotNow, our pull request is nearly ready to merge, but I found one issue with it:When we copied the OpenAI website layout earlier, one of the blog posts had a video as its featured graphic instead of just an image. This is cool for OpenAI, but for our bakery, I just wanted images in this section. Since I didn’t instruct Builder’s AI otherwise, it went ahead and followed the layout and created extra code for video capability.No problem. We can fix this inside GItHub with our final prompt. We just need to comment on the PR and tag builderio-bot. Within about a minute, Builder Bot has successfully removed the video functionality, leaving a minimal diff that affects only the code it needed to. For example: Returning to my project in Builder, I can see that the bot’s changes are accounted for in the chat window as well, and I can use the live preview link to make sure my site works as expected:Now, if this were a real project, you could easily deploy this to the web for your client. After all, you’ve got a whole GitHub repo. This isn’t just a mockup; it’s actual code you can tweak—with Builder or Cursor or by hand—until you’re satisfied to run the site in production.So, why use Builder to mock up your website?Sure, this has been a somewhat contrived example. A real prototype is going to look prettier, because I’m going to spend more time on pieces of the design that I don’t like as much.But that’s the point of the best AI tools: they don’t take you, the human, out of the loop.You still get to make all the executive decisions, and it respects your hard work. Since you can constantly see all the code the AI creates, work in branches, and prompt with component-level precision, you can stop worrying about AI overwriting your opinions and start using it more as the tool it’s designed to be.You can copy in your team’s Figma designs, import web inspos, connect MCP servers to get Jira tickets in hand, and—most importantly—work with existing repos full of existing styles that Builder will understand and match, just like it matched OpenAI’s layout to our little cafe.So, we get speed, flexibility, and interactivity all the way from prompt to PR to production.Try Builder today. #mock #website #five #prompts
    WWW.BUILDER.IO
    Mock up a website in five prompts
    “Wait, can users actually add products to the cart?”Every prototype faces that question or one like it. You start to explain it’s “just Figma,” “just dummy data,” but what if you didn’t need disclaimers?What if you could hand clients—or your team—a working, data-connected mock-up of their website, or new pages and components, in less time than it takes to wireframe?That’s the challenge we’ll tackle today. But first, we need to look at:The problem with today’s prototyping toolsPick two: speed, flexibility, or interactivity.The prototyping ecosystem, despite having amazing software that addresses a huge variety of needs, doesn’t really have one tool that gives you all three.Wireframing apps let you draw boxes in minutes but every button is fake. Drag-and-drop builders animate scroll triggers until you ask for anything off-template. Custom code frees you… after you wave goodbye to a few afternoons.AI tools haven’t smashed the trade-off; they’ve just dressed it in flashier costumes. One prompt births a landing page, the next dumps a 2,000-line, worse-than-junior-level React file in your lap. The bottleneck is still there. Builder’s approach to website mockupsWe’ve been trying something a little different to maintain speed, flexibility, and interactivity while mocking full websites. Our AI-driven visual editor:Spins up a repo in seconds or connects to your existing one to use the code as design inspiration. React, Vue, Angular, and Svelte all work out of the box. Lets you shape components via plain English, visual edits, copy/pasted Figma frames, web inspos, MCP tools, and constant visual awareness of your entire website. Commits each change as a clean GitHub pull request your team can review like hand-written code. All your usual CI checks and lint rules apply.And if you need a tweak, you can comment to @builderio-bot right in the GitHub PR to make asynchronous changes without context switching.This results in a live site the café owner can interact with today, and a branch your devs can merge tomorrow. Stakeholders get to click actual buttons and trigger real state—no more “so, just imagine this works” demos.Let’s see it in action.From blank canvas to working mockup in five promptsToday, I’m going to mock up a fake business website. You’re welcome to create a real one.Before we fire off a single prompt, grab a note and write:Business name & vibe Core pages Primary goal Brand palette & toneThat’s it. Don’t sweat the details—we can always iterate. For mine, I wrote:1. Sunny Trails Bakery — family-owned, feel-good, smells like warm cinnamon. 2. Home, About, Pricing / Subscription Box, Menu (with daily specials). 3. Drive online orders and foot traffic—every CTA should funnel toward “Order Now” or “Reserve a Table.” 4. Warm yellow, chocolate brown, rounded typography, playful copy.We’re not trying to fit everything here. What matters is clarity on what we’re creating, so the AI has enough context to produce usable scaffolds, and so later tweaks stay aligned with the client’s vision. Builder will default to using React, Vite, and Tailwind. If you want a different JS framework, you can link an existing repo in that stack. In the near future, you won’t need to do this extra step to get non-React frameworks to function.(Free tier Builder gives you 5 AI credits/day and 25/month—plenty to follow along with today’s demo. Upgrade only when you need it.)An entire website from the first promptNow, we’re ready to get going.Head over to Builder.io and paste in this prompt or your own:Create a cozy bakery website called “Sunny Trails Bakery” with pages for: • Home • About • Pricing • Menu Brand palette: warm yellow and chocolate brown. Tone: playful, inviting. The restaurant is family-owned, feel-good, and smells like cinnamon. The goal of this site is to drive online orders and foot traffic—every CTA should funnel toward "Order Now" or "Reserve a Table."Once you hit enter, Builder will spin up a new dev container, and then inside that container, the AI will build out the first version of your site. You can leave the page and come back when it’s done.Now, before we go further, let’s create our repo, so that we get version history right from the outset. Click “Create Repo” up in the top right, and link your GitHub account.Once the process is complete, you’ll have a brand new repo.If you need any help on this step, or any of the below, check out these docs.Making the mockup’s order system workFrom our one-shot prompt, we’ve already got a really nice start for our client. However, when we press the “Order Now” button, we just get a generic alert. Let’s fix this.The best part about connecting to GitHub is that we get version control. Head back to your dashboard and edit the settings of your new project. We can give it a better name, and then, in the “Advanced” section, we can change the “Commit Mode” to “Pull Requests.”Now, we have the ability to create new branches right within Builder, allowing us to make drastic changes without worrying about the main version. This is also helpful if you’d like to show your client or team a few different versions of the same prototype.On a new branch, I’ll write another short prompt:Can you make the "Order Now" button work, even if it's just with dummy JSON for now?As you can see in the GIF above, Builder creates an ordering system and a fully mobile-responsive cart and checkout flow.Now, we can click “Send PR” in the top right, and we have an ordinary GitHub PR that can be reviewed and merged as needed.This is what’s possible in two prompts. For our third, let’s gussy up the style.If you’re like me, you might spend a lot of time admiring other people’s cool designs and learning how to code up similar components in your own style.Luckily, Builder has this capability, too, with our Chrome extension. I found a “Featured Posts” section on OpenAI’s website, where I like how the layout and scrolling work. We can copy and paste it onto our “Featured Treats” section, retaining our cafe’s distinctive brand style.Don’t worry—OpenAI doesn’t mind a little web scraping.You can do this with any component on any website, so your own projects can very quickly become a “best of the web” if you know what you’re doing.Plus, you can use Figma designs in much the same way, with even better design fidelity. Copy and paste a Figma frame with our Figma plugin, and tell the AI to either use the component as inspiration or as a 1:1 to reference for what the design should be.(You can grab our design-to-code guide for a lot more ideas of what this can help you accomplish.)Now, we’re ready to send our PR. This time, let’s take a closer look at the code the AI has created.As you can see, the code is neatly formatted into two reusable components. Scrolling down further, I find a CSS file and then the actual implementation on the homepage, with clean JSON to represent the dummy post data.Design tweaks to the mockup with visual editsOne issue that cropped up when the AI brought in the OpenAI layout is that it changed my text from “Featured Treats” to “Featured Stories & Treats.” I’ve realized I don’t like either, and I want to replace that text with: “Fresh Out of the Bakery.”It would be silly, though, to prompt the AI just for this small tweak. Let’s switch into edit mode.Edit Mode lets you select any component and change any of its content or underlying CSS directly. You get a host of Webflow-like options to choose from, so that you can finesse the details as needed.Once you’ve made all the visual changes you want—maybe tweaking a button color or a border radius—you can click “Apply Edits,” and the AI will ensure the underlying code matches your repo’s style.Async fixes to the mockup with Builder BotNow, our pull request is nearly ready to merge, but I found one issue with it:When we copied the OpenAI website layout earlier, one of the blog posts had a video as its featured graphic instead of just an image. This is cool for OpenAI, but for our bakery, I just wanted images in this section. Since I didn’t instruct Builder’s AI otherwise, it went ahead and followed the layout and created extra code for video capability.No problem. We can fix this inside GItHub with our final prompt. We just need to comment on the PR and tag builderio-bot. Within about a minute, Builder Bot has successfully removed the video functionality, leaving a minimal diff that affects only the code it needed to. For example: Returning to my project in Builder, I can see that the bot’s changes are accounted for in the chat window as well, and I can use the live preview link to make sure my site works as expected:Now, if this were a real project, you could easily deploy this to the web for your client. After all, you’ve got a whole GitHub repo. This isn’t just a mockup; it’s actual code you can tweak—with Builder or Cursor or by hand—until you’re satisfied to run the site in production.So, why use Builder to mock up your website?Sure, this has been a somewhat contrived example. A real prototype is going to look prettier, because I’m going to spend more time on pieces of the design that I don’t like as much.But that’s the point of the best AI tools: they don’t take you, the human, out of the loop.You still get to make all the executive decisions, and it respects your hard work. Since you can constantly see all the code the AI creates, work in branches, and prompt with component-level precision, you can stop worrying about AI overwriting your opinions and start using it more as the tool it’s designed to be.You can copy in your team’s Figma designs, import web inspos, connect MCP servers to get Jira tickets in hand, and—most importantly—work with existing repos full of existing styles that Builder will understand and match, just like it matched OpenAI’s layout to our little cafe.So, we get speed, flexibility, and interactivity all the way from prompt to PR to production.Try Builder today.
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • Mirela Cialai Q&A: Customer Engagement Book Interview

    Reading Time: 9 minutes
    In the ever-evolving landscape of customer engagement, staying ahead of the curve is not just advantageous, it’s essential.
    That’s why, for Chapter 7 of “The Customer Engagement Book: Adapt or Die,” we sat down with Mirela Cialai, a seasoned expert in CRM and Martech strategies at brands like Equinox. Mirela brings a wealth of knowledge in aligning technology roadmaps with business goals, shifting organizational focuses from acquisition to retention, and leveraging hyper-personalization to drive success.
    In this interview, Mirela dives deep into building robust customer engagement technology roadmaps. She unveils the “PAPER” framework—Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, Refine—a simple yet effective strategy for marketers.
    You’ll gain insights into identifying gaps in your Martech stack, ensuring data accuracy, and prioritizing initiatives that deliver the greatest impact and ROI.
    Whether you’re navigating data silos, striving for cross-functional alignment, or aiming for seamless tech integration, Mirela’s expertise provides practical solutions and actionable takeaways.

     
    Mirela Cialai Q&A Interview
    1. How do you define the vision for a customer engagement platform roadmap in alignment with the broader business goals? Can you share any examples of successful visions from your experience?

    Defining the vision for the roadmap in alignment with the broader business goals involves creating a strategic framework that connects the team’s objectives with the organization’s overarching mission or primary objectives.

    This could be revenue growth, customer retention, market expansion, or operational efficiency.
    We then break down these goals into actionable areas where the team can contribute, such as improving engagement, increasing lifetime value, or driving acquisition.
    We articulate how the team will support business goals by defining the KPIs that link CRM outcomes — the team’s outcomes — to business goals.
    In a previous role, the CRM team I was leading faced significant challenges due to the lack of attribution capabilities and a reliance on surface-level metrics such as open rates and click-through rates to measure performance.
    This approach made it difficult to quantify the impact of our efforts on broader business objectives such as revenue growth.
    Recognizing this gap, I worked on defining a vision for the CRM team to address these shortcomings.
    Our vision was to drive measurable growth through enhanced data accuracy and improved attribution capabilities, which allowed us to deliver targeted, data-driven, and personalized customer experiences.
    To bring this vision to life, I developed a roadmap that focused on first improving data accuracy, building our attribution capabilities, and delivering personalization at scale.

    By aligning the vision with these strategic priorities, we were able to demonstrate the tangible impact of our efforts on the key business goals.

    2. What steps did you take to ensure data accuracy?
    The data team was very diligent in ensuring that our data warehouse had accurate data.
    So taking that as the source of truth, we started cleaning the data in all the other platforms that were integrated with our data warehouse — our CRM platform, our attribution analytics platform, etc.

    That’s where we started, looking at all the different integrations and ensuring that the data flows were correct and that we had all the right flows in place. And also validating and cleaning our email database — that helped, having more accurate data.

    3. How do you recommend shifting organizational focus from acquisition to retention within a customer engagement strategy?
    Shifting an organization’s focus from acquisition to retention requires a cultural and strategic shift, emphasizing the immense value that existing customers bring to long-term growth and profitability.
    I would start by quantifying the value of retention, showcasing how retaining customers is significantly more cost-effective than acquiring new ones. Research consistently shows that increasing retention rates by just 5% can boost profits by at least 25 to 95%.
    This data helps make a compelling case to stakeholders about the importance of prioritizing retention.
    Next, I would link retention to core business goals by demonstrating how enhancing customer lifetime value and loyalty can directly drive revenue growth.
    This involves shifting the organization’s focus to retention-specific metrics such as churn rate, repeat purchase rate, and customer LTV. These metrics provide actionable insights into customer behaviors and highlight the financial impact of retention initiatives, ensuring alignment with the broader company objectives.

    By framing retention as a driver of sustainable growth, the organization can see it not as a competing priority, but as a complementary strategy to acquisition, ultimately leading to a more balanced and effective customer engagement strategy.

    4. What are the key steps in analyzing a brand’s current Martech stack capabilities to identify gaps and opportunities for improvement?
    Developing a clear understanding of the Martech stack’s current state and ensuring it aligns with a brand’s strategic needs and future goals requires a structured and strategic approach.
    The process begins with defining what success looks like in terms of technology capabilities such as scalability, integration, automation, and data accessibility, and linking these capabilities directly to the brand’s broader business objectives.
    I start by doing an inventory of all tools currently in use, including their purpose, owner, and key functionalities, assessing if these tools are being used to their full potential or if there are features that remain unused, and reviewing how well tools integrate with one another and with our core systems, the data warehouse.
    Also, comparing the capabilities of each tool and results against industry standards and competitor practices and looking for missing functionalities such as personalization, omnichannel orchestration, or advanced analytics, and identifying overlapping tools that could be consolidated to save costs and streamline workflows.
    Finally, review the costs of the current tools against their impact on business outcomes and identify technologies that could reduce costs, increase efficiency, or deliver higher ROI through enhanced capabilities.

    Establish a regular review cycle for the Martech stack to ensure it evolves alongside the business and the technological landscape.

    5. How do you evaluate whether a company’s tech stack can support innovative customer-focused campaigns, and what red flags should marketers look out for?
    I recommend taking a structured approach and first ensure there is seamless integration across all tools to support a unified customer view and data sharing across the different channels.
    Determine if the stack can handle increasing data volumes, larger audiences, and additional channels as the campaigns grow, and check if it supports dynamic content, behavior-based triggers, and advanced segmentation and can process and act on data in real time through emerging technologies like AI/ML predictive analytics to enable marketers to launch responsive and timely campaigns.
    Most importantly, we need to ensure that the stack offers robust reporting tools that provide actionable insights, allowing teams to track performance and optimize campaigns.
    Some of the red flags are: data silos where customer data is fragmented across platforms and not easily accessible or integrated, inability to process or respond to customer behavior in real time, a reliance on manual intervention for tasks like segmentation, data extraction, campaign deployment, and poor scalability.

    If the stack struggles with growing data volumes or expanding to new channels, it won’t support the company’s evolving needs.

    6. What role do hyper-personalization and timely communication play in a successful customer engagement strategy? How do you ensure they’re built into the technology roadmap?
    Hyper-personalization and timely communication are essential components of a successful customer engagement strategy because they create meaningful, relevant, and impactful experiences that deepen the relationship with customers, enhance loyalty, and drive business outcomes.
    Hyper-personalization leverages data to deliver tailored content that resonates with each individual based on their preferences, behavior, or past interactions, and timely communication ensures these personalized interactions occur at the most relevant moments, which ultimately increases their impact.
    Customers are more likely to engage with messages that feel relevant and align with their needs, and real-time triggers such as cart abandonment or post-purchase upsells capitalize on moments when customers are most likely to convert.

    By embedding these capabilities into the roadmap through data integration, AI-driven insights, automation, and continuous optimization, we can deliver impactful, relevant, and timely experiences that foster deeper customer relationships and drive long-term success.

    7. What’s your approach to breaking down the customer engagement technology roadmap into manageable phases? How do you prioritize the initiatives?
    To create a manageable roadmap, we need to divide it into distinct phases, starting with building the foundation by addressing data cleanup, system integrations, and establishing metrics, which lays the groundwork for success.
    Next, we can focus on early wins and quick impact by launching behavior-based campaigns, automating workflows, and improving personalization to drive immediate value.
    Then we can move to optimization and expansion, incorporating predictive analytics, cross-channel orchestration, and refined attribution models to enhance our capabilities.
    Finally, prioritize innovation and scalability, leveraging AI/ML for hyper-personalization, scaling campaigns to new markets, and ensuring the system is equipped for future growth.
    By starting with foundational projects, delivering quick wins, and building towards scalable innovation, we can drive measurable outcomes while maintaining our agility to adapt to evolving needs.

    In terms of prioritizing initiatives effectively, I would focus on projects that deliver the greatest impact on business goals, on customer experience and ROI, while we consider feasibility, urgency, and resource availability.

    In the past, I’ve used frameworks like Impact Effort Matrix to identify the high-impact, low-effort initiatives and ensure that the most critical projects are addressed first.
    8. How do you ensure cross-functional alignment around this roadmap? What processes have worked best for you?
    Ensuring cross-functional alignment requires clear communication, collaborative planning, and shared accountability.
    We need to establish a shared understanding of the roadmap’s purpose and how it ties to the company’s overall goals by clearly articulating the “why” behind the roadmap and how each team can contribute to its success.
    To foster buy-in and ensure the roadmap reflects diverse perspectives and needs, we need to involve all stakeholders early on during the roadmap development and clearly outline each team’s role in executing the roadmap to ensure accountability across the different teams.

    To keep teams informed and aligned, we use meetings such as roadmap kickoff sessions and regular check-ins to share updates, address challenges collaboratively, and celebrate milestones together.

    9. If you were to outline a simple framework for marketers to follow when building a customer engagement technology roadmap, what would it look like?
    A simple framework for marketers to follow when building the roadmap can be summarized in five clear steps: Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, and Refine.
    In one word: PAPER. Here’s how it breaks down.

    Plan: We lay the groundwork for the roadmap by defining the CRM strategy and aligning it with the business goals.
    Audit: We evaluate the current state of our CRM capabilities. We conduct a comprehensive assessment of our tools, our data, the processes, and team workflows to identify any potential gaps.
    Prioritize: initiatives based on impact, feasibility, and ROI potential.
    Execute: by implementing the roadmap in manageable phases.
    Refine: by continuously improving CRM performance and refining the roadmap.

    So the PAPER framework — Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, and Refine — provides a structured, iterative approach allowing marketers to create a scalable and impactful customer engagement strategy.

    10. What are the most common challenges marketers face in creating or executing a customer engagement strategy, and how can they address these effectively?
    The most critical is when the customer data is siloed across different tools and platforms, making it very difficult to get a unified view of the customer. This limits the ability to deliver personalized and consistent experiences.

    The solution is to invest in tools that can centralize data from all touchpoints and ensure seamless integration between different platforms to create a single source of truth.

    Another challenge is the lack of clear metrics and ROI measurement and the inability to connect engagement efforts to tangible business outcomes, making it very hard to justify investment or optimize strategies.
    The solution for that is to define clear KPIs at the outset and use attribution models to link customer interactions to revenue and other key outcomes.
    Overcoming internal silos is another challenge where there is misalignment between teams, which can lead to inconsistent messaging and delayed execution.
    A solution to this is to foster cross-functional collaboration through shared goals, regular communication, and joint planning sessions.
    Besides these, other challenges marketers can face are delivering personalization at scale, keeping up with changing customer expectations, resource and budget constraints, resistance to change, and others.
    While creating and executing a customer engagement strategy can be challenging, these obstacles can be addressed through strategic planning, leveraging the right tools, fostering collaboration, and staying adaptable to customer needs and industry trends.

    By tackling these challenges proactively, marketers can deliver impactful customer-centric strategies that drive long-term success.

    11. What are the top takeaways or lessons that you’ve learned from building customer engagement technology roadmaps that others should keep in mind?
    I would say one of the most important takeaways is to ensure that the roadmap directly supports the company’s broader objectives.
    Whether the focus is on retention, customer lifetime value, or revenue growth, the roadmap must bridge the gap between high-level business goals and actionable initiatives.

    Another important lesson: The roadmap is only as effective as the data and systems it’s built upon.

    I’ve learned the importance of prioritizing foundational elements like data cleanup, integrations, and governance before tackling advanced initiatives like personalization or predictive analytics. Skipping this step can lead to inefficiencies or missed opportunities later on.
    A Customer Engagement Roadmap is a strategic tool that evolves alongside the business and its customers.

    So by aligning with business goals, building a solid foundation, focusing on impact, fostering collaboration, and remaining adaptable, you can create a roadmap that delivers measurable results and meaningful customer experiences.

     

     
    This interview Q&A was hosted with Mirela Cialai, Director of CRM & MarTech at Equinox, for Chapter 7 of The Customer Engagement Book: Adapt or Die.
    Download the PDF or request a physical copy of the book here.
    The post Mirela Cialai Q&A: Customer Engagement Book Interview appeared first on MoEngage.
    #mirela #cialai #qampampa #customer #engagement
    Mirela Cialai Q&A: Customer Engagement Book Interview
    Reading Time: 9 minutes In the ever-evolving landscape of customer engagement, staying ahead of the curve is not just advantageous, it’s essential. That’s why, for Chapter 7 of “The Customer Engagement Book: Adapt or Die,” we sat down with Mirela Cialai, a seasoned expert in CRM and Martech strategies at brands like Equinox. Mirela brings a wealth of knowledge in aligning technology roadmaps with business goals, shifting organizational focuses from acquisition to retention, and leveraging hyper-personalization to drive success. In this interview, Mirela dives deep into building robust customer engagement technology roadmaps. She unveils the “PAPER” framework—Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, Refine—a simple yet effective strategy for marketers. You’ll gain insights into identifying gaps in your Martech stack, ensuring data accuracy, and prioritizing initiatives that deliver the greatest impact and ROI. Whether you’re navigating data silos, striving for cross-functional alignment, or aiming for seamless tech integration, Mirela’s expertise provides practical solutions and actionable takeaways.   Mirela Cialai Q&A Interview 1. How do you define the vision for a customer engagement platform roadmap in alignment with the broader business goals? Can you share any examples of successful visions from your experience? Defining the vision for the roadmap in alignment with the broader business goals involves creating a strategic framework that connects the team’s objectives with the organization’s overarching mission or primary objectives. This could be revenue growth, customer retention, market expansion, or operational efficiency. We then break down these goals into actionable areas where the team can contribute, such as improving engagement, increasing lifetime value, or driving acquisition. We articulate how the team will support business goals by defining the KPIs that link CRM outcomes — the team’s outcomes — to business goals. In a previous role, the CRM team I was leading faced significant challenges due to the lack of attribution capabilities and a reliance on surface-level metrics such as open rates and click-through rates to measure performance. This approach made it difficult to quantify the impact of our efforts on broader business objectives such as revenue growth. Recognizing this gap, I worked on defining a vision for the CRM team to address these shortcomings. Our vision was to drive measurable growth through enhanced data accuracy and improved attribution capabilities, which allowed us to deliver targeted, data-driven, and personalized customer experiences. To bring this vision to life, I developed a roadmap that focused on first improving data accuracy, building our attribution capabilities, and delivering personalization at scale. By aligning the vision with these strategic priorities, we were able to demonstrate the tangible impact of our efforts on the key business goals. 2. What steps did you take to ensure data accuracy? The data team was very diligent in ensuring that our data warehouse had accurate data. So taking that as the source of truth, we started cleaning the data in all the other platforms that were integrated with our data warehouse — our CRM platform, our attribution analytics platform, etc. That’s where we started, looking at all the different integrations and ensuring that the data flows were correct and that we had all the right flows in place. And also validating and cleaning our email database — that helped, having more accurate data. 3. How do you recommend shifting organizational focus from acquisition to retention within a customer engagement strategy? Shifting an organization’s focus from acquisition to retention requires a cultural and strategic shift, emphasizing the immense value that existing customers bring to long-term growth and profitability. I would start by quantifying the value of retention, showcasing how retaining customers is significantly more cost-effective than acquiring new ones. Research consistently shows that increasing retention rates by just 5% can boost profits by at least 25 to 95%. This data helps make a compelling case to stakeholders about the importance of prioritizing retention. Next, I would link retention to core business goals by demonstrating how enhancing customer lifetime value and loyalty can directly drive revenue growth. This involves shifting the organization’s focus to retention-specific metrics such as churn rate, repeat purchase rate, and customer LTV. These metrics provide actionable insights into customer behaviors and highlight the financial impact of retention initiatives, ensuring alignment with the broader company objectives. By framing retention as a driver of sustainable growth, the organization can see it not as a competing priority, but as a complementary strategy to acquisition, ultimately leading to a more balanced and effective customer engagement strategy. 4. What are the key steps in analyzing a brand’s current Martech stack capabilities to identify gaps and opportunities for improvement? Developing a clear understanding of the Martech stack’s current state and ensuring it aligns with a brand’s strategic needs and future goals requires a structured and strategic approach. The process begins with defining what success looks like in terms of technology capabilities such as scalability, integration, automation, and data accessibility, and linking these capabilities directly to the brand’s broader business objectives. I start by doing an inventory of all tools currently in use, including their purpose, owner, and key functionalities, assessing if these tools are being used to their full potential or if there are features that remain unused, and reviewing how well tools integrate with one another and with our core systems, the data warehouse. Also, comparing the capabilities of each tool and results against industry standards and competitor practices and looking for missing functionalities such as personalization, omnichannel orchestration, or advanced analytics, and identifying overlapping tools that could be consolidated to save costs and streamline workflows. Finally, review the costs of the current tools against their impact on business outcomes and identify technologies that could reduce costs, increase efficiency, or deliver higher ROI through enhanced capabilities. Establish a regular review cycle for the Martech stack to ensure it evolves alongside the business and the technological landscape. 5. How do you evaluate whether a company’s tech stack can support innovative customer-focused campaigns, and what red flags should marketers look out for? I recommend taking a structured approach and first ensure there is seamless integration across all tools to support a unified customer view and data sharing across the different channels. Determine if the stack can handle increasing data volumes, larger audiences, and additional channels as the campaigns grow, and check if it supports dynamic content, behavior-based triggers, and advanced segmentation and can process and act on data in real time through emerging technologies like AI/ML predictive analytics to enable marketers to launch responsive and timely campaigns. Most importantly, we need to ensure that the stack offers robust reporting tools that provide actionable insights, allowing teams to track performance and optimize campaigns. Some of the red flags are: data silos where customer data is fragmented across platforms and not easily accessible or integrated, inability to process or respond to customer behavior in real time, a reliance on manual intervention for tasks like segmentation, data extraction, campaign deployment, and poor scalability. If the stack struggles with growing data volumes or expanding to new channels, it won’t support the company’s evolving needs. 6. What role do hyper-personalization and timely communication play in a successful customer engagement strategy? How do you ensure they’re built into the technology roadmap? Hyper-personalization and timely communication are essential components of a successful customer engagement strategy because they create meaningful, relevant, and impactful experiences that deepen the relationship with customers, enhance loyalty, and drive business outcomes. Hyper-personalization leverages data to deliver tailored content that resonates with each individual based on their preferences, behavior, or past interactions, and timely communication ensures these personalized interactions occur at the most relevant moments, which ultimately increases their impact. Customers are more likely to engage with messages that feel relevant and align with their needs, and real-time triggers such as cart abandonment or post-purchase upsells capitalize on moments when customers are most likely to convert. By embedding these capabilities into the roadmap through data integration, AI-driven insights, automation, and continuous optimization, we can deliver impactful, relevant, and timely experiences that foster deeper customer relationships and drive long-term success. 7. What’s your approach to breaking down the customer engagement technology roadmap into manageable phases? How do you prioritize the initiatives? To create a manageable roadmap, we need to divide it into distinct phases, starting with building the foundation by addressing data cleanup, system integrations, and establishing metrics, which lays the groundwork for success. Next, we can focus on early wins and quick impact by launching behavior-based campaigns, automating workflows, and improving personalization to drive immediate value. Then we can move to optimization and expansion, incorporating predictive analytics, cross-channel orchestration, and refined attribution models to enhance our capabilities. Finally, prioritize innovation and scalability, leveraging AI/ML for hyper-personalization, scaling campaigns to new markets, and ensuring the system is equipped for future growth. By starting with foundational projects, delivering quick wins, and building towards scalable innovation, we can drive measurable outcomes while maintaining our agility to adapt to evolving needs. In terms of prioritizing initiatives effectively, I would focus on projects that deliver the greatest impact on business goals, on customer experience and ROI, while we consider feasibility, urgency, and resource availability. In the past, I’ve used frameworks like Impact Effort Matrix to identify the high-impact, low-effort initiatives and ensure that the most critical projects are addressed first. 8. How do you ensure cross-functional alignment around this roadmap? What processes have worked best for you? Ensuring cross-functional alignment requires clear communication, collaborative planning, and shared accountability. We need to establish a shared understanding of the roadmap’s purpose and how it ties to the company’s overall goals by clearly articulating the “why” behind the roadmap and how each team can contribute to its success. To foster buy-in and ensure the roadmap reflects diverse perspectives and needs, we need to involve all stakeholders early on during the roadmap development and clearly outline each team’s role in executing the roadmap to ensure accountability across the different teams. To keep teams informed and aligned, we use meetings such as roadmap kickoff sessions and regular check-ins to share updates, address challenges collaboratively, and celebrate milestones together. 9. If you were to outline a simple framework for marketers to follow when building a customer engagement technology roadmap, what would it look like? A simple framework for marketers to follow when building the roadmap can be summarized in five clear steps: Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, and Refine. In one word: PAPER. Here’s how it breaks down. Plan: We lay the groundwork for the roadmap by defining the CRM strategy and aligning it with the business goals. Audit: We evaluate the current state of our CRM capabilities. We conduct a comprehensive assessment of our tools, our data, the processes, and team workflows to identify any potential gaps. Prioritize: initiatives based on impact, feasibility, and ROI potential. Execute: by implementing the roadmap in manageable phases. Refine: by continuously improving CRM performance and refining the roadmap. So the PAPER framework — Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, and Refine — provides a structured, iterative approach allowing marketers to create a scalable and impactful customer engagement strategy. 10. What are the most common challenges marketers face in creating or executing a customer engagement strategy, and how can they address these effectively? The most critical is when the customer data is siloed across different tools and platforms, making it very difficult to get a unified view of the customer. This limits the ability to deliver personalized and consistent experiences. The solution is to invest in tools that can centralize data from all touchpoints and ensure seamless integration between different platforms to create a single source of truth. Another challenge is the lack of clear metrics and ROI measurement and the inability to connect engagement efforts to tangible business outcomes, making it very hard to justify investment or optimize strategies. The solution for that is to define clear KPIs at the outset and use attribution models to link customer interactions to revenue and other key outcomes. Overcoming internal silos is another challenge where there is misalignment between teams, which can lead to inconsistent messaging and delayed execution. A solution to this is to foster cross-functional collaboration through shared goals, regular communication, and joint planning sessions. Besides these, other challenges marketers can face are delivering personalization at scale, keeping up with changing customer expectations, resource and budget constraints, resistance to change, and others. While creating and executing a customer engagement strategy can be challenging, these obstacles can be addressed through strategic planning, leveraging the right tools, fostering collaboration, and staying adaptable to customer needs and industry trends. By tackling these challenges proactively, marketers can deliver impactful customer-centric strategies that drive long-term success. 11. What are the top takeaways or lessons that you’ve learned from building customer engagement technology roadmaps that others should keep in mind? I would say one of the most important takeaways is to ensure that the roadmap directly supports the company’s broader objectives. Whether the focus is on retention, customer lifetime value, or revenue growth, the roadmap must bridge the gap between high-level business goals and actionable initiatives. Another important lesson: The roadmap is only as effective as the data and systems it’s built upon. I’ve learned the importance of prioritizing foundational elements like data cleanup, integrations, and governance before tackling advanced initiatives like personalization or predictive analytics. Skipping this step can lead to inefficiencies or missed opportunities later on. A Customer Engagement Roadmap is a strategic tool that evolves alongside the business and its customers. So by aligning with business goals, building a solid foundation, focusing on impact, fostering collaboration, and remaining adaptable, you can create a roadmap that delivers measurable results and meaningful customer experiences.     This interview Q&A was hosted with Mirela Cialai, Director of CRM & MarTech at Equinox, for Chapter 7 of The Customer Engagement Book: Adapt or Die. Download the PDF or request a physical copy of the book here. The post Mirela Cialai Q&A: Customer Engagement Book Interview appeared first on MoEngage. #mirela #cialai #qampampa #customer #engagement
    WWW.MOENGAGE.COM
    Mirela Cialai Q&A: Customer Engagement Book Interview
    Reading Time: 9 minutes In the ever-evolving landscape of customer engagement, staying ahead of the curve is not just advantageous, it’s essential. That’s why, for Chapter 7 of “The Customer Engagement Book: Adapt or Die,” we sat down with Mirela Cialai, a seasoned expert in CRM and Martech strategies at brands like Equinox. Mirela brings a wealth of knowledge in aligning technology roadmaps with business goals, shifting organizational focuses from acquisition to retention, and leveraging hyper-personalization to drive success. In this interview, Mirela dives deep into building robust customer engagement technology roadmaps. She unveils the “PAPER” framework—Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, Refine—a simple yet effective strategy for marketers. You’ll gain insights into identifying gaps in your Martech stack, ensuring data accuracy, and prioritizing initiatives that deliver the greatest impact and ROI. Whether you’re navigating data silos, striving for cross-functional alignment, or aiming for seamless tech integration, Mirela’s expertise provides practical solutions and actionable takeaways.   Mirela Cialai Q&A Interview 1. How do you define the vision for a customer engagement platform roadmap in alignment with the broader business goals? Can you share any examples of successful visions from your experience? Defining the vision for the roadmap in alignment with the broader business goals involves creating a strategic framework that connects the team’s objectives with the organization’s overarching mission or primary objectives. This could be revenue growth, customer retention, market expansion, or operational efficiency. We then break down these goals into actionable areas where the team can contribute, such as improving engagement, increasing lifetime value, or driving acquisition. We articulate how the team will support business goals by defining the KPIs that link CRM outcomes — the team’s outcomes — to business goals. In a previous role, the CRM team I was leading faced significant challenges due to the lack of attribution capabilities and a reliance on surface-level metrics such as open rates and click-through rates to measure performance. This approach made it difficult to quantify the impact of our efforts on broader business objectives such as revenue growth. Recognizing this gap, I worked on defining a vision for the CRM team to address these shortcomings. Our vision was to drive measurable growth through enhanced data accuracy and improved attribution capabilities, which allowed us to deliver targeted, data-driven, and personalized customer experiences. To bring this vision to life, I developed a roadmap that focused on first improving data accuracy, building our attribution capabilities, and delivering personalization at scale. By aligning the vision with these strategic priorities, we were able to demonstrate the tangible impact of our efforts on the key business goals. 2. What steps did you take to ensure data accuracy? The data team was very diligent in ensuring that our data warehouse had accurate data. So taking that as the source of truth, we started cleaning the data in all the other platforms that were integrated with our data warehouse — our CRM platform, our attribution analytics platform, etc. That’s where we started, looking at all the different integrations and ensuring that the data flows were correct and that we had all the right flows in place. And also validating and cleaning our email database — that helped, having more accurate data. 3. How do you recommend shifting organizational focus from acquisition to retention within a customer engagement strategy? Shifting an organization’s focus from acquisition to retention requires a cultural and strategic shift, emphasizing the immense value that existing customers bring to long-term growth and profitability. I would start by quantifying the value of retention, showcasing how retaining customers is significantly more cost-effective than acquiring new ones. Research consistently shows that increasing retention rates by just 5% can boost profits by at least 25 to 95%. This data helps make a compelling case to stakeholders about the importance of prioritizing retention. Next, I would link retention to core business goals by demonstrating how enhancing customer lifetime value and loyalty can directly drive revenue growth. This involves shifting the organization’s focus to retention-specific metrics such as churn rate, repeat purchase rate, and customer LTV. These metrics provide actionable insights into customer behaviors and highlight the financial impact of retention initiatives, ensuring alignment with the broader company objectives. By framing retention as a driver of sustainable growth, the organization can see it not as a competing priority, but as a complementary strategy to acquisition, ultimately leading to a more balanced and effective customer engagement strategy. 4. What are the key steps in analyzing a brand’s current Martech stack capabilities to identify gaps and opportunities for improvement? Developing a clear understanding of the Martech stack’s current state and ensuring it aligns with a brand’s strategic needs and future goals requires a structured and strategic approach. The process begins with defining what success looks like in terms of technology capabilities such as scalability, integration, automation, and data accessibility, and linking these capabilities directly to the brand’s broader business objectives. I start by doing an inventory of all tools currently in use, including their purpose, owner, and key functionalities, assessing if these tools are being used to their full potential or if there are features that remain unused, and reviewing how well tools integrate with one another and with our core systems, the data warehouse. Also, comparing the capabilities of each tool and results against industry standards and competitor practices and looking for missing functionalities such as personalization, omnichannel orchestration, or advanced analytics, and identifying overlapping tools that could be consolidated to save costs and streamline workflows. Finally, review the costs of the current tools against their impact on business outcomes and identify technologies that could reduce costs, increase efficiency, or deliver higher ROI through enhanced capabilities. Establish a regular review cycle for the Martech stack to ensure it evolves alongside the business and the technological landscape. 5. How do you evaluate whether a company’s tech stack can support innovative customer-focused campaigns, and what red flags should marketers look out for? I recommend taking a structured approach and first ensure there is seamless integration across all tools to support a unified customer view and data sharing across the different channels. Determine if the stack can handle increasing data volumes, larger audiences, and additional channels as the campaigns grow, and check if it supports dynamic content, behavior-based triggers, and advanced segmentation and can process and act on data in real time through emerging technologies like AI/ML predictive analytics to enable marketers to launch responsive and timely campaigns. Most importantly, we need to ensure that the stack offers robust reporting tools that provide actionable insights, allowing teams to track performance and optimize campaigns. Some of the red flags are: data silos where customer data is fragmented across platforms and not easily accessible or integrated, inability to process or respond to customer behavior in real time, a reliance on manual intervention for tasks like segmentation, data extraction, campaign deployment, and poor scalability. If the stack struggles with growing data volumes or expanding to new channels, it won’t support the company’s evolving needs. 6. What role do hyper-personalization and timely communication play in a successful customer engagement strategy? How do you ensure they’re built into the technology roadmap? Hyper-personalization and timely communication are essential components of a successful customer engagement strategy because they create meaningful, relevant, and impactful experiences that deepen the relationship with customers, enhance loyalty, and drive business outcomes. Hyper-personalization leverages data to deliver tailored content that resonates with each individual based on their preferences, behavior, or past interactions, and timely communication ensures these personalized interactions occur at the most relevant moments, which ultimately increases their impact. Customers are more likely to engage with messages that feel relevant and align with their needs, and real-time triggers such as cart abandonment or post-purchase upsells capitalize on moments when customers are most likely to convert. By embedding these capabilities into the roadmap through data integration, AI-driven insights, automation, and continuous optimization, we can deliver impactful, relevant, and timely experiences that foster deeper customer relationships and drive long-term success. 7. What’s your approach to breaking down the customer engagement technology roadmap into manageable phases? How do you prioritize the initiatives? To create a manageable roadmap, we need to divide it into distinct phases, starting with building the foundation by addressing data cleanup, system integrations, and establishing metrics, which lays the groundwork for success. Next, we can focus on early wins and quick impact by launching behavior-based campaigns, automating workflows, and improving personalization to drive immediate value. Then we can move to optimization and expansion, incorporating predictive analytics, cross-channel orchestration, and refined attribution models to enhance our capabilities. Finally, prioritize innovation and scalability, leveraging AI/ML for hyper-personalization, scaling campaigns to new markets, and ensuring the system is equipped for future growth. By starting with foundational projects, delivering quick wins, and building towards scalable innovation, we can drive measurable outcomes while maintaining our agility to adapt to evolving needs. In terms of prioritizing initiatives effectively, I would focus on projects that deliver the greatest impact on business goals, on customer experience and ROI, while we consider feasibility, urgency, and resource availability. In the past, I’ve used frameworks like Impact Effort Matrix to identify the high-impact, low-effort initiatives and ensure that the most critical projects are addressed first. 8. How do you ensure cross-functional alignment around this roadmap? What processes have worked best for you? Ensuring cross-functional alignment requires clear communication, collaborative planning, and shared accountability. We need to establish a shared understanding of the roadmap’s purpose and how it ties to the company’s overall goals by clearly articulating the “why” behind the roadmap and how each team can contribute to its success. To foster buy-in and ensure the roadmap reflects diverse perspectives and needs, we need to involve all stakeholders early on during the roadmap development and clearly outline each team’s role in executing the roadmap to ensure accountability across the different teams. To keep teams informed and aligned, we use meetings such as roadmap kickoff sessions and regular check-ins to share updates, address challenges collaboratively, and celebrate milestones together. 9. If you were to outline a simple framework for marketers to follow when building a customer engagement technology roadmap, what would it look like? A simple framework for marketers to follow when building the roadmap can be summarized in five clear steps: Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, and Refine. In one word: PAPER. Here’s how it breaks down. Plan: We lay the groundwork for the roadmap by defining the CRM strategy and aligning it with the business goals. Audit: We evaluate the current state of our CRM capabilities. We conduct a comprehensive assessment of our tools, our data, the processes, and team workflows to identify any potential gaps. Prioritize: initiatives based on impact, feasibility, and ROI potential. Execute: by implementing the roadmap in manageable phases. Refine: by continuously improving CRM performance and refining the roadmap. So the PAPER framework — Plan, Audit, Prioritize, Execute, and Refine — provides a structured, iterative approach allowing marketers to create a scalable and impactful customer engagement strategy. 10. What are the most common challenges marketers face in creating or executing a customer engagement strategy, and how can they address these effectively? The most critical is when the customer data is siloed across different tools and platforms, making it very difficult to get a unified view of the customer. This limits the ability to deliver personalized and consistent experiences. The solution is to invest in tools that can centralize data from all touchpoints and ensure seamless integration between different platforms to create a single source of truth. Another challenge is the lack of clear metrics and ROI measurement and the inability to connect engagement efforts to tangible business outcomes, making it very hard to justify investment or optimize strategies. The solution for that is to define clear KPIs at the outset and use attribution models to link customer interactions to revenue and other key outcomes. Overcoming internal silos is another challenge where there is misalignment between teams, which can lead to inconsistent messaging and delayed execution. A solution to this is to foster cross-functional collaboration through shared goals, regular communication, and joint planning sessions. Besides these, other challenges marketers can face are delivering personalization at scale, keeping up with changing customer expectations, resource and budget constraints, resistance to change, and others. While creating and executing a customer engagement strategy can be challenging, these obstacles can be addressed through strategic planning, leveraging the right tools, fostering collaboration, and staying adaptable to customer needs and industry trends. By tackling these challenges proactively, marketers can deliver impactful customer-centric strategies that drive long-term success. 11. What are the top takeaways or lessons that you’ve learned from building customer engagement technology roadmaps that others should keep in mind? I would say one of the most important takeaways is to ensure that the roadmap directly supports the company’s broader objectives. Whether the focus is on retention, customer lifetime value, or revenue growth, the roadmap must bridge the gap between high-level business goals and actionable initiatives. Another important lesson: The roadmap is only as effective as the data and systems it’s built upon. I’ve learned the importance of prioritizing foundational elements like data cleanup, integrations, and governance before tackling advanced initiatives like personalization or predictive analytics. Skipping this step can lead to inefficiencies or missed opportunities later on. A Customer Engagement Roadmap is a strategic tool that evolves alongside the business and its customers. So by aligning with business goals, building a solid foundation, focusing on impact, fostering collaboration, and remaining adaptable, you can create a roadmap that delivers measurable results and meaningful customer experiences.     This interview Q&A was hosted with Mirela Cialai, Director of CRM & MarTech at Equinox, for Chapter 7 of The Customer Engagement Book: Adapt or Die. Download the PDF or request a physical copy of the book here. The post Mirela Cialai Q&A: Customer Engagement Book Interview appeared first on MoEngage.
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • Cape to Cairo: the making and unmaking of colonial road networks

    In 2024, Egypt completed its 1,155km stretch of the Cairo–Cape Town Highway, a 10,228km‑long road connecting 10 African countries – Egypt, Sudan, South Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Botswana and South Africa.  
    The imaginary of ‘Cape to Cairo’ is not new. In 1874, editor of the Daily Telegraph Edwin Arnold proposed a plan to connect the African continent by rail, a project that came to be known as the Cape to Cairo Railway project. Cecil Rhodes expressed his support for the project, seeing it as a means to connect the various ‘possessions’ of the British Empire across Africa, facilitating the movement of troops and natural resources. This railway project was never completed, and in 1970 was overlaid by a very different attempt at connecting the Cape to Cairo, as part of the Trans‑African Highway network. This 56,683km‑long system of highways – some dating from the colonial era, some built as part of the 1970s project, and some only recently built – aimed to create lines of connection across the African continent, from north to south as well as east to west. 
    Here, postcolonial state power invested in ‘moving the continent’s people and economies from past to future’, as architectural historians Kenny Cupers and Prita Meier write in their 2020 essay ‘Infrastructure between Statehood and Selfhood: The Trans‑African Highway’. The highways were to be built with the support of Kenya’s president Jomo Kenyatta, Ghana’s president Kwame Nkrumah and Ghana’s director of social welfare Robert Gardiner, as well as the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. This project was part of a particular historical moment during which anticolonial ideas animated most of the African continent; alongside trade, this iteration of Cape to Cairo centred social and cultural connection between African peoples. But though largely socialist in ambition, the project nevertheless engaged modernist developmentalist logics that cemented capitalism. 
    Lead image: Over a century in the making, the final stretches of the Cairo–Cape Town Highway are being finished. Egypt completed the section within its borders last year and a section over the dry Merille River in Kenya was constructed in 2019. Credit: Allan Muturi / SOPA / ZUMA / Alamy. Above: The route from Cairo to Cape Town, outlined in red, belongs to the Trans‑African Highway network, which comprises nine routes, here in black

    The project failed to fully materialise at the time, but efforts to complete the Trans‑African Highway network have been revived in the last 20 years; large parts are now complete though some links remain unbuilt and many roads are unpaved or hazardous. The most recent attempts to realise this project coincide with a new continental free trade agreement, the agreement on African Continental Free Trade Area, established in 2019, to increase trade within the continent. The contemporary manifestation of the Cairo–Cape Town Highway – also known as Trans‑African Highway4 – is marked by deepening neoliberal politics. Represented as an opportunity to boost trade and exports, connecting Egypt to African markets that the Egyptian government view as ‘untapped’, the project invokes notions of trade steeped in extraction, reflecting the neoliberal logic underpinning contemporary Egyptian governance; today, the country’s political project, led by Abdel Fattah El Sisi, is oriented towards Egyptian dominance and extraction in relation to the rest of the continent. 
    Through an allusion to markets ripe for extraction, this language brings to the fore historical forms of domination that have shaped the connections between Egypt and the rest of the continent; previous iterations of connection across the continent often reproduced forms of domination stretching from the north of the African continent to the south, including the Trans‑Saharan slave trade routes across Africa that ended in various North African and Middle Eastern territories. These networks, beginning in the 8th century and lasting until the 20th, produced racialised hierarchies across the continent, shaping North Africa into a comparably privileged space proximate to ‘Arabness’. This was a racialised division based on a civilisational narrative that saw Arabs as superior, but more importantly a political economic division resulting from the slave trade routes that produced huge profits for North Africa and the Middle East. In the contemporary moment, these racialised hierarchies are bound up in political economic dependency on the Arab Gulf states, who are themselves dependent on resource extraction, land grabbing and privatisation across the entire African continent. 
    ‘The Cairo–Cape Town Highway connects Egypt to African markets viewed as “untapped”, invoking notions steeped in extraction’
    However, this imaginary conjured by the Cairo–Cape Town Highway is countered by a network of streets scattered across Africa that traces the web of Egyptian Pan‑African solidarity across the continent. In Lusaka in Zambia, you might find yourself on Nasser Road, as you might in Mwanza in Tanzania or Luanda in Angola. In Mombasa in Kenya, you might be driving down Abdel Nasser Road; in Kampala in Uganda, you might find yourself at Nasser Road University; and in Tunis in Tunisia, you might end up on Gamal Abdel Nasser Street. These street names are a reference to Gamal Abdel Nasser, Egypt’s first postcolonial leader and president between 1956 and 1970. 
    Read against the contemporary Cairo–Cape Town Highway, these place names signal a different form of connection that brings to life Egyptian Pan‑Africanism, when solidarity was the hegemonic force connecting the continent, coming up against the notion of a natural or timeless ‘great divide’ within Africa. From the memoirs of Egyptian officials who were posted around Africa as conduits of solidarity, to the broadcasts of Radio Cairo that were heard across the continent, to the various conferences attended by anticolonial movements and postcolonial states, Egypt’s orientation towards Pan‑Africanism, beginning in the early 20th century and lasting until the 1970s, was both material and ideological. Figures and movements forged webs of solidarity with their African comrades, imagining an Africa that was united through shared commitments to ending colonialism and capitalist extraction. 
    The route between Cape Town in South Africa and Cairo in Egypt has long occupied the colonial imaginary. In 1930, Margaret Belcher and Ellen Budgell made the journey, sponsored by car brand Morris and oil company Shell
    Credit: Fox Photos / Getty
    The pair made use of the road built by British colonisers in the 19th century, and which forms the basis for the current Cairo–Cape Town Highway. The road was preceded by the 1874 Cape to Cairo Railway project, which connected the colonies of the British Empire
    Credit: Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division
    This network of eponymous streets represents attempts to inscribe anticolonial power into the materiality of the city. Street‑naming practices are one way in which the past comes into the present, ‘weaving history into the geographic fabric of everyday life’, as geographer Derek Alderman wrote in his 2002 essay ‘Street Names as Memorial Arenas’. In this vein, the renaming of streets during decolonisation marked a practice of contesting the production of colonial space. In the newly postcolonial city, renaming was a way of ‘claiming the city back’, Alderman continues. While these changes may appear discursive, it is their embedding in material spaces, through signs and maps, that make the names come to life; place names become a part of the everyday through sharing addresses or giving directions. This quality makes them powerful; consciously or unconsciously, they form part of how the spaces of the city are navigated. 
    These are traces that were once part of a dominant historical narrative; yet when they are encountered in the present, during a different historical moment, they no longer act as expressions of power but instead conjure up a moment that has long passed. A street in Lusaka named after an Egyptian general made more sense 60 years ago than it does today, yet contextualising it recovers a marginalised history of Egyptian Pan‑Africanism. 
    Markers such as street names or monuments are simultaneously markers of anticolonial struggle as well as expressions of state power – part of an attempt, by political projects such as Nasser’s, to exert their own dominance over cities, towns and villages. That such traces are expressions of both anticolonial hopes and postcolonial state power produces a sense of tension within them. For instance, Nasser’s postcolonial project in Egypt was a contradictory one; it gave life to anticolonial hopes – for instance by breaking away from European capitalism and embracing anticolonial geopolitics – while crushing many parts of the left through repression, censorship and imprisonment. Traces of Nasser found today inscribe both anticolonial promises – those that came to life and those that did not – while reproducing postcolonial power that in most instances ended in dictatorship. 
    Recent efforts to complete the route build on those of the post‑independence era – work on a section north of Nairobi started in 1968
    Credit: Associated Press / Alamy
    The Trans‑African Highway network was conceived in 1970 in the spirit of Pan‑Africanism

    At that time, the routes did not extend into South Africa, which was in the grip of apartheid. The Trans‑African Highway initiative was motivated by a desire to improve trade and centre cultural links across the continent – an ambition that was even celebrated on postage stamps

    There have been long‑standing debates about the erasure of the radical anticolonial spirit from the more conservative postcolonial states that emerged; the promises and hopes of anticolonialism, not least among them socialism and a world free of white supremacy, remain largely unrealised. Instead, by the 1970s neoliberalism emerged as a new hegemonic project. The contemporary instantiation of Cape to Cairo highlights just how pervasive neoliberal logics continue to be, despite multiple global financial crises and the 2011 Egyptian revolution demanding ‘bread, freedom, social justice’. 
    But the network of streets named after anticolonial figures and events across the world is testament to the immense power and promise of anticolonial revolution. Most of the 20th century was characterised by anticolonial struggle, decolonisation and postcolonial nation‑building, as nations across the global south gained independence from European empire and founded their own political projects. Anticolonial traces, present in street and place names, point to the possibility of solidarity as a means of reorienting colonial geographies. They are a reminder that there have been other imaginings of Cape to Cairo, and that things can be – and have been – otherwise.

    2025-06-13
    Kristina Rapacki

    Share
    #cape #cairo #making #unmaking #colonial
    Cape to Cairo: the making and unmaking of colonial road networks
    In 2024, Egypt completed its 1,155km stretch of the Cairo–Cape Town Highway, a 10,228km‑long road connecting 10 African countries – Egypt, Sudan, South Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Botswana and South Africa.   The imaginary of ‘Cape to Cairo’ is not new. In 1874, editor of the Daily Telegraph Edwin Arnold proposed a plan to connect the African continent by rail, a project that came to be known as the Cape to Cairo Railway project. Cecil Rhodes expressed his support for the project, seeing it as a means to connect the various ‘possessions’ of the British Empire across Africa, facilitating the movement of troops and natural resources. This railway project was never completed, and in 1970 was overlaid by a very different attempt at connecting the Cape to Cairo, as part of the Trans‑African Highway network. This 56,683km‑long system of highways – some dating from the colonial era, some built as part of the 1970s project, and some only recently built – aimed to create lines of connection across the African continent, from north to south as well as east to west.  Here, postcolonial state power invested in ‘moving the continent’s people and economies from past to future’, as architectural historians Kenny Cupers and Prita Meier write in their 2020 essay ‘Infrastructure between Statehood and Selfhood: The Trans‑African Highway’. The highways were to be built with the support of Kenya’s president Jomo Kenyatta, Ghana’s president Kwame Nkrumah and Ghana’s director of social welfare Robert Gardiner, as well as the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. This project was part of a particular historical moment during which anticolonial ideas animated most of the African continent; alongside trade, this iteration of Cape to Cairo centred social and cultural connection between African peoples. But though largely socialist in ambition, the project nevertheless engaged modernist developmentalist logics that cemented capitalism.  Lead image: Over a century in the making, the final stretches of the Cairo–Cape Town Highway are being finished. Egypt completed the section within its borders last year and a section over the dry Merille River in Kenya was constructed in 2019. Credit: Allan Muturi / SOPA / ZUMA / Alamy. Above: The route from Cairo to Cape Town, outlined in red, belongs to the Trans‑African Highway network, which comprises nine routes, here in black The project failed to fully materialise at the time, but efforts to complete the Trans‑African Highway network have been revived in the last 20 years; large parts are now complete though some links remain unbuilt and many roads are unpaved or hazardous. The most recent attempts to realise this project coincide with a new continental free trade agreement, the agreement on African Continental Free Trade Area, established in 2019, to increase trade within the continent. The contemporary manifestation of the Cairo–Cape Town Highway – also known as Trans‑African Highway4 – is marked by deepening neoliberal politics. Represented as an opportunity to boost trade and exports, connecting Egypt to African markets that the Egyptian government view as ‘untapped’, the project invokes notions of trade steeped in extraction, reflecting the neoliberal logic underpinning contemporary Egyptian governance; today, the country’s political project, led by Abdel Fattah El Sisi, is oriented towards Egyptian dominance and extraction in relation to the rest of the continent.  Through an allusion to markets ripe for extraction, this language brings to the fore historical forms of domination that have shaped the connections between Egypt and the rest of the continent; previous iterations of connection across the continent often reproduced forms of domination stretching from the north of the African continent to the south, including the Trans‑Saharan slave trade routes across Africa that ended in various North African and Middle Eastern territories. These networks, beginning in the 8th century and lasting until the 20th, produced racialised hierarchies across the continent, shaping North Africa into a comparably privileged space proximate to ‘Arabness’. This was a racialised division based on a civilisational narrative that saw Arabs as superior, but more importantly a political economic division resulting from the slave trade routes that produced huge profits for North Africa and the Middle East. In the contemporary moment, these racialised hierarchies are bound up in political economic dependency on the Arab Gulf states, who are themselves dependent on resource extraction, land grabbing and privatisation across the entire African continent.  ‘The Cairo–Cape Town Highway connects Egypt to African markets viewed as “untapped”, invoking notions steeped in extraction’ However, this imaginary conjured by the Cairo–Cape Town Highway is countered by a network of streets scattered across Africa that traces the web of Egyptian Pan‑African solidarity across the continent. In Lusaka in Zambia, you might find yourself on Nasser Road, as you might in Mwanza in Tanzania or Luanda in Angola. In Mombasa in Kenya, you might be driving down Abdel Nasser Road; in Kampala in Uganda, you might find yourself at Nasser Road University; and in Tunis in Tunisia, you might end up on Gamal Abdel Nasser Street. These street names are a reference to Gamal Abdel Nasser, Egypt’s first postcolonial leader and president between 1956 and 1970.  Read against the contemporary Cairo–Cape Town Highway, these place names signal a different form of connection that brings to life Egyptian Pan‑Africanism, when solidarity was the hegemonic force connecting the continent, coming up against the notion of a natural or timeless ‘great divide’ within Africa. From the memoirs of Egyptian officials who were posted around Africa as conduits of solidarity, to the broadcasts of Radio Cairo that were heard across the continent, to the various conferences attended by anticolonial movements and postcolonial states, Egypt’s orientation towards Pan‑Africanism, beginning in the early 20th century and lasting until the 1970s, was both material and ideological. Figures and movements forged webs of solidarity with their African comrades, imagining an Africa that was united through shared commitments to ending colonialism and capitalist extraction.  The route between Cape Town in South Africa and Cairo in Egypt has long occupied the colonial imaginary. In 1930, Margaret Belcher and Ellen Budgell made the journey, sponsored by car brand Morris and oil company Shell Credit: Fox Photos / Getty The pair made use of the road built by British colonisers in the 19th century, and which forms the basis for the current Cairo–Cape Town Highway. The road was preceded by the 1874 Cape to Cairo Railway project, which connected the colonies of the British Empire Credit: Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division This network of eponymous streets represents attempts to inscribe anticolonial power into the materiality of the city. Street‑naming practices are one way in which the past comes into the present, ‘weaving history into the geographic fabric of everyday life’, as geographer Derek Alderman wrote in his 2002 essay ‘Street Names as Memorial Arenas’. In this vein, the renaming of streets during decolonisation marked a practice of contesting the production of colonial space. In the newly postcolonial city, renaming was a way of ‘claiming the city back’, Alderman continues. While these changes may appear discursive, it is their embedding in material spaces, through signs and maps, that make the names come to life; place names become a part of the everyday through sharing addresses or giving directions. This quality makes them powerful; consciously or unconsciously, they form part of how the spaces of the city are navigated.  These are traces that were once part of a dominant historical narrative; yet when they are encountered in the present, during a different historical moment, they no longer act as expressions of power but instead conjure up a moment that has long passed. A street in Lusaka named after an Egyptian general made more sense 60 years ago than it does today, yet contextualising it recovers a marginalised history of Egyptian Pan‑Africanism.  Markers such as street names or monuments are simultaneously markers of anticolonial struggle as well as expressions of state power – part of an attempt, by political projects such as Nasser’s, to exert their own dominance over cities, towns and villages. That such traces are expressions of both anticolonial hopes and postcolonial state power produces a sense of tension within them. For instance, Nasser’s postcolonial project in Egypt was a contradictory one; it gave life to anticolonial hopes – for instance by breaking away from European capitalism and embracing anticolonial geopolitics – while crushing many parts of the left through repression, censorship and imprisonment. Traces of Nasser found today inscribe both anticolonial promises – those that came to life and those that did not – while reproducing postcolonial power that in most instances ended in dictatorship.  Recent efforts to complete the route build on those of the post‑independence era – work on a section north of Nairobi started in 1968 Credit: Associated Press / Alamy The Trans‑African Highway network was conceived in 1970 in the spirit of Pan‑Africanism At that time, the routes did not extend into South Africa, which was in the grip of apartheid. The Trans‑African Highway initiative was motivated by a desire to improve trade and centre cultural links across the continent – an ambition that was even celebrated on postage stamps There have been long‑standing debates about the erasure of the radical anticolonial spirit from the more conservative postcolonial states that emerged; the promises and hopes of anticolonialism, not least among them socialism and a world free of white supremacy, remain largely unrealised. Instead, by the 1970s neoliberalism emerged as a new hegemonic project. The contemporary instantiation of Cape to Cairo highlights just how pervasive neoliberal logics continue to be, despite multiple global financial crises and the 2011 Egyptian revolution demanding ‘bread, freedom, social justice’.  But the network of streets named after anticolonial figures and events across the world is testament to the immense power and promise of anticolonial revolution. Most of the 20th century was characterised by anticolonial struggle, decolonisation and postcolonial nation‑building, as nations across the global south gained independence from European empire and founded their own political projects. Anticolonial traces, present in street and place names, point to the possibility of solidarity as a means of reorienting colonial geographies. They are a reminder that there have been other imaginings of Cape to Cairo, and that things can be – and have been – otherwise. 2025-06-13 Kristina Rapacki Share #cape #cairo #making #unmaking #colonial
    WWW.ARCHITECTURAL-REVIEW.COM
    Cape to Cairo: the making and unmaking of colonial road networks
    In 2024, Egypt completed its 1,155km stretch of the Cairo–Cape Town Highway, a 10,228km‑long road connecting 10 African countries – Egypt, Sudan, South Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Botswana and South Africa.   The imaginary of ‘Cape to Cairo’ is not new. In 1874, editor of the Daily Telegraph Edwin Arnold proposed a plan to connect the African continent by rail, a project that came to be known as the Cape to Cairo Railway project. Cecil Rhodes expressed his support for the project, seeing it as a means to connect the various ‘possessions’ of the British Empire across Africa, facilitating the movement of troops and natural resources. This railway project was never completed, and in 1970 was overlaid by a very different attempt at connecting the Cape to Cairo, as part of the Trans‑African Highway network. This 56,683km‑long system of highways – some dating from the colonial era, some built as part of the 1970s project, and some only recently built – aimed to create lines of connection across the African continent, from north to south as well as east to west.  Here, postcolonial state power invested in ‘moving the continent’s people and economies from past to future’, as architectural historians Kenny Cupers and Prita Meier write in their 2020 essay ‘Infrastructure between Statehood and Selfhood: The Trans‑African Highway’. The highways were to be built with the support of Kenya’s president Jomo Kenyatta, Ghana’s president Kwame Nkrumah and Ghana’s director of social welfare Robert Gardiner, as well as the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA). This project was part of a particular historical moment during which anticolonial ideas animated most of the African continent; alongside trade, this iteration of Cape to Cairo centred social and cultural connection between African peoples. But though largely socialist in ambition, the project nevertheless engaged modernist developmentalist logics that cemented capitalism.  Lead image: Over a century in the making, the final stretches of the Cairo–Cape Town Highway are being finished. Egypt completed the section within its borders last year and a section over the dry Merille River in Kenya was constructed in 2019. Credit: Allan Muturi / SOPA / ZUMA / Alamy. Above: The route from Cairo to Cape Town, outlined in red, belongs to the Trans‑African Highway network, which comprises nine routes, here in black The project failed to fully materialise at the time, but efforts to complete the Trans‑African Highway network have been revived in the last 20 years; large parts are now complete though some links remain unbuilt and many roads are unpaved or hazardous. The most recent attempts to realise this project coincide with a new continental free trade agreement, the agreement on African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), established in 2019, to increase trade within the continent. The contemporary manifestation of the Cairo–Cape Town Highway – also known as Trans‑African Highway (TAH) 4 – is marked by deepening neoliberal politics. Represented as an opportunity to boost trade and exports, connecting Egypt to African markets that the Egyptian government view as ‘untapped’, the project invokes notions of trade steeped in extraction, reflecting the neoliberal logic underpinning contemporary Egyptian governance; today, the country’s political project, led by Abdel Fattah El Sisi, is oriented towards Egyptian dominance and extraction in relation to the rest of the continent.  Through an allusion to markets ripe for extraction, this language brings to the fore historical forms of domination that have shaped the connections between Egypt and the rest of the continent; previous iterations of connection across the continent often reproduced forms of domination stretching from the north of the African continent to the south, including the Trans‑Saharan slave trade routes across Africa that ended in various North African and Middle Eastern territories. These networks, beginning in the 8th century and lasting until the 20th, produced racialised hierarchies across the continent, shaping North Africa into a comparably privileged space proximate to ‘Arabness’. This was a racialised division based on a civilisational narrative that saw Arabs as superior, but more importantly a political economic division resulting from the slave trade routes that produced huge profits for North Africa and the Middle East. In the contemporary moment, these racialised hierarchies are bound up in political economic dependency on the Arab Gulf states, who are themselves dependent on resource extraction, land grabbing and privatisation across the entire African continent.  ‘The Cairo–Cape Town Highway connects Egypt to African markets viewed as “untapped”, invoking notions steeped in extraction’ However, this imaginary conjured by the Cairo–Cape Town Highway is countered by a network of streets scattered across Africa that traces the web of Egyptian Pan‑African solidarity across the continent. In Lusaka in Zambia, you might find yourself on Nasser Road, as you might in Mwanza in Tanzania or Luanda in Angola. In Mombasa in Kenya, you might be driving down Abdel Nasser Road; in Kampala in Uganda, you might find yourself at Nasser Road University; and in Tunis in Tunisia, you might end up on Gamal Abdel Nasser Street. These street names are a reference to Gamal Abdel Nasser, Egypt’s first postcolonial leader and president between 1956 and 1970.  Read against the contemporary Cairo–Cape Town Highway, these place names signal a different form of connection that brings to life Egyptian Pan‑Africanism, when solidarity was the hegemonic force connecting the continent, coming up against the notion of a natural or timeless ‘great divide’ within Africa. From the memoirs of Egyptian officials who were posted around Africa as conduits of solidarity, to the broadcasts of Radio Cairo that were heard across the continent, to the various conferences attended by anticolonial movements and postcolonial states, Egypt’s orientation towards Pan‑Africanism, beginning in the early 20th century and lasting until the 1970s, was both material and ideological. Figures and movements forged webs of solidarity with their African comrades, imagining an Africa that was united through shared commitments to ending colonialism and capitalist extraction.  The route between Cape Town in South Africa and Cairo in Egypt has long occupied the colonial imaginary. In 1930, Margaret Belcher and Ellen Budgell made the journey, sponsored by car brand Morris and oil company Shell Credit: Fox Photos / Getty The pair made use of the road built by British colonisers in the 19th century, and which forms the basis for the current Cairo–Cape Town Highway. The road was preceded by the 1874 Cape to Cairo Railway project, which connected the colonies of the British Empire Credit: Library of Congress, Geography and Map Division This network of eponymous streets represents attempts to inscribe anticolonial power into the materiality of the city. Street‑naming practices are one way in which the past comes into the present, ‘weaving history into the geographic fabric of everyday life’, as geographer Derek Alderman wrote in his 2002 essay ‘Street Names as Memorial Arenas’. In this vein, the renaming of streets during decolonisation marked a practice of contesting the production of colonial space. In the newly postcolonial city, renaming was a way of ‘claiming the city back’, Alderman continues. While these changes may appear discursive, it is their embedding in material spaces, through signs and maps, that make the names come to life; place names become a part of the everyday through sharing addresses or giving directions. This quality makes them powerful; consciously or unconsciously, they form part of how the spaces of the city are navigated.  These are traces that were once part of a dominant historical narrative; yet when they are encountered in the present, during a different historical moment, they no longer act as expressions of power but instead conjure up a moment that has long passed. A street in Lusaka named after an Egyptian general made more sense 60 years ago than it does today, yet contextualising it recovers a marginalised history of Egyptian Pan‑Africanism.  Markers such as street names or monuments are simultaneously markers of anticolonial struggle as well as expressions of state power – part of an attempt, by political projects such as Nasser’s, to exert their own dominance over cities, towns and villages. That such traces are expressions of both anticolonial hopes and postcolonial state power produces a sense of tension within them. For instance, Nasser’s postcolonial project in Egypt was a contradictory one; it gave life to anticolonial hopes – for instance by breaking away from European capitalism and embracing anticolonial geopolitics – while crushing many parts of the left through repression, censorship and imprisonment. Traces of Nasser found today inscribe both anticolonial promises – those that came to life and those that did not – while reproducing postcolonial power that in most instances ended in dictatorship.  Recent efforts to complete the route build on those of the post‑independence era – work on a section north of Nairobi started in 1968 Credit: Associated Press / Alamy The Trans‑African Highway network was conceived in 1970 in the spirit of Pan‑Africanism At that time, the routes did not extend into South Africa, which was in the grip of apartheid. The Trans‑African Highway initiative was motivated by a desire to improve trade and centre cultural links across the continent – an ambition that was even celebrated on postage stamps There have been long‑standing debates about the erasure of the radical anticolonial spirit from the more conservative postcolonial states that emerged; the promises and hopes of anticolonialism, not least among them socialism and a world free of white supremacy, remain largely unrealised. Instead, by the 1970s neoliberalism emerged as a new hegemonic project. The contemporary instantiation of Cape to Cairo highlights just how pervasive neoliberal logics continue to be, despite multiple global financial crises and the 2011 Egyptian revolution demanding ‘bread, freedom, social justice’.  But the network of streets named after anticolonial figures and events across the world is testament to the immense power and promise of anticolonial revolution. Most of the 20th century was characterised by anticolonial struggle, decolonisation and postcolonial nation‑building, as nations across the global south gained independence from European empire and founded their own political projects. Anticolonial traces, present in street and place names, point to the possibility of solidarity as a means of reorienting colonial geographies. They are a reminder that there have been other imaginings of Cape to Cairo, and that things can be – and have been – otherwise. 2025-06-13 Kristina Rapacki Share
    Love
    1
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • 30 Best Architecture and Design Firms in New Zealand

    These annual rankings were last updated on June 13, 2025. Want to see your firm on next year’s list? Continue reading for more on how you can improve your studio’s ranking.
    New Zealand is a one-of-a-kind island in the Pacific, famous for its indigenous Maori architecture. The country has managed to preserve an array of historical aboriginal ruins, such as maraeand wharenui, despite its European colonization during the 19th century.
    Apart from the country’s ancient ruins, New Zealand is also home to several notable architectural landmarks like the famous Sky Tower piercing the Auckland skyline to the organic forms of the Te Papa Tongarewa Museum in Wellington. Renowned architects like Sir Ian Athfield, whose works blend modernist principles with a deep respect for the natural landscape, have left an indelible mark on the country’s architectural legacy.
    Being home to a stunning tropical landscape, New Zealand architects have developed eco-friendly residential designs that harness the power of renewable energy as well as visionary urban developments prioritizing livability and connectivity. A notable example is Turanga Central Library in Christchurch, a project that exceeds all eco-friendly design standards and benchmark emissions. Finally, concepts like passive design are increasingly becoming standard practice in architectural circles.
    With so many architecture firms to choose from, it’s challenging for clients to identify the industry leaders that will be an ideal fit for their project needs. Fortunately, Architizer is able to provide guidance on the top design firms in New Zealand based on more than a decade of data and industry knowledge.
    How are these architecture firms ranked?
    The following ranking has been created according to key statistics that demonstrate each firm’s level of architectural excellence. The following metrics have been accumulated to establish each architecture firm’s ranking, in order of priority:

    The number of A+Awards wonThe number of A+Awards finalistsThe number of projects selected as “Project of the Day”The number of projects selected as “Featured Project”The number of projects uploaded to ArchitizerEach of these metrics is explained in more detail at the foot of this article. This ranking list will be updated annually, taking into account new achievements of New Zealand architecture firms throughout the year.
    Without further ado, here are the 30 best architecture firms in New Zealand:

    30. CoLab Architecture

    © CoLab Architecture Ltd

    CoLab Architecture is a small practice of two directors, Tobin Smith and Blair Paterson, based in Christchurch New Zealand. Tobin is a creative designer with a wealth of experience in the building industry. Blair is a registered architect and graduate from the University of Auckland.
    “We like architecture to be visually powerful, intellectually elegant, and above all timeless. For us, timeless design is achieved through simplicity and strength of concept — in other words, a single idea executed beautifully with a dedication to the details. We strive to create architecture that is conscious of local climateand the environment.”
    Some of CoLab Architecture’s most prominent projects include:

    Urban Cottage, Christchurch, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped CoLab Architecture Ltd achieve 30th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    1

    Total Projects
    1

    29. Paul Whittaker

    © Paul Whittaker

    Paul Whittaker is an architecture firm based in New Zealand. Its work revolves around residential architecture.
    Some of Paul Whittaker’s most prominent projects include:

    Whittaker Cube, Kakanui, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Paul Whittaker achieve 29th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    1

    Total Projects
    1

    28. Space Division

    © Simon Devitt Photographer

    Space Division is a boutique architectural practice that aims to positively impact the lives and environment of its clients and their communities by purposefully producing quality space. We believe our name reflects both the essence of what we do, but also how we strive to do it – succinctly and simply. Our design process is inclusive and client focused with their desires, physical constraints, budgets, time frames, compliance and construction processes all carefully considered and incorporated into our designs.
    Space Division has successfully applied this approach to a broad range of project types within the field of architecture, ranging from commercial developments, urban infrastructure to baches, playhouses and residential homes. Space Divisions team is committed to delivering a very personal and complete service to each of their clients, at each stage of the process. To assist in achieving this Space Division collaborates with a range of trusted technical specialists, based on the specific needs of our client. Which ensures we stay focussed, passionate agile and easily scalable.
    Some of Space Division’s most prominent projects include:

    Stradwick House, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Space Division achieve 28th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    1

    Total Projects
    1

    27. Sumich Chaplin Architects

    © Sumich Chaplin Architects

    Sumich Chaplin Architects undertake to provide creative, enduring architectural design based on a clear understanding and interpretation of a client’s brief. We work with an appreciation and respect for the surrounding landscape and environment.
    Some of Sumich Chaplin Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Millbrook House, Arrowtown, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Sumich Chaplin Architects achieve 27th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    1

    Total Projects
    1

    26. Daniel Marshall Architects

    © Simon Devitt Photographer

    Daniel Marshall Architectsis an Auckland based practice who are passionate about designing high quality and award winning New Zealand architecture. Our work has been published in periodicals and books internationally as well as numerous digital publications. Daniel leads a core team of four individually accomplished designers who skillfully collaborate to resolve architectural projects from their conception through to their occupation.
    DMA believe architecture is a ‘generalist’ profession which engages with all components of an architectural project; during conceptual design, documentation and construction phases.  We pride ourselves on being able to holistically engage with a complex of architectural issues to arrive at a design solution equally appropriate to its contextand the unique ways our clients prefer to live.
    Some of Daniel Marshall Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Lucerne, Auckland, New Zealand
    House in Herne Bay, Herne Bay, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Daniel Marshall Architects achieve 26th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    1

    Total Projects
    2

    25. AW Architects

    © AW Architects

    Creative studio based in Christchurch, New Zealand. AW-ARCH is committed to an inclusive culture where everyone is encouraged to share their perspectives – our partners, our colleagues and our clients. Our team comes from all over the globe, bringing with them a variety of experiences. We embrace the differences that shape people’s lives, including race, ethnicity, identity and ability. We come together around the drawing board, the monitor, and the lunch table, immersed in the free exchange of ideas and synthesizing the diverse viewpoints of creative people, which stimulates innovative design and makes our work possible.
    Mentorship is key to engagement within AW-ARCH, energizing our studio and feeding invention. It’s our social and professional responsibility and helps us develop and retain a dedicated team. This includes offering internships that introduce young people to our profession, as well as supporting opportunities for our people outside the office — teaching, volunteering and exploring.
    Some of AW Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    OCEAN VIEW TERRACE HOUSE, Christchurch, New Zealand
    212 CASHEL STREET, Christchurch, New Zealand
    LAKE HOUSE, Queenstown, New Zealand
    RIVER HOUSE, Christchurch, New Zealand
    HE PUNA TAIMOANA, Christchurch, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped AW Architects achieve 25th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    A+Awards Finalist
    1

    Total Projects
    9

    24. Archimedia

    © Patrick Reynolds

    Archimedia is a New Zealand architecture practice with NZRAB and green star accredited staff, offering design services in the disciplines of architecture, interiors and ecology. Delivering architecture involves intervention in both natural eco-systems and the built environment — the context within which human beings live their lives.
    Archimedia uses the word “ecology” to extend the concept of sustainability to urban design and master planning and integrates this holistic strategy into every project. Archimedia prioritizes client project requirements, functionality, operational efficiency, feasibility and programme.
    Some of Archimedia’s most prominent projects include:

    Te Oro, Auckland, New Zealand
    Auckland Art Gallery Toi o Tamaki, Auckland, New Zealand
    Hekerua Bay Residence, New Zealand
    Eye Institute , Remuera, Auckland, New Zealand
    University of Auckland Business School, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Archimedia achieve 24th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    1

    Total Projects
    25

    23. MC Architecture Studio

    © MC Architecture Studio Ltd

    The studio’s work, questioning the boundary between art and architecture, provides engaging and innovative living space with the highest sustainability standard. Design solutions are tailored on client needs and site’s characteristics. Hence the final product will be unique and strongly related to the context and wider environment.
    On a specific-project basis, the studio, maintaining the leadership of the whole process, works in a network with local and international practices to achieve the best operational efficiency and local knowledge worldwide to accommodate the needs of a big scale project or specific requirements.
    Some of MC Architecture Studio’s most prominent projects include:

    Cass Bay House, Cass Bay, Lyttelton, New Zealand
    Ashburton Alteration, Ashburton, New Zealand
    restaurant/cafe, Ovindoli, Italy
    Private Residence, Christchurch, New Zealand
    Private Residence, Christchurch, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped MC Architecture Studio Ltd achieve 23rd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    2

    Total Projects
    19

    22. Architecture van Brandenburg

    © Architecture van Brandenburg

    Van Brandenburg is a design focused studio for architecture, landscape architecture, urbanism, and product design with studios in Queenstown and Dunedin, New Zealand. With global reach Van Brandenburg conducts themselves internationally, where the team of architects, designers and innovators create organic built form, inspired by nature, and captured by curvilinear design.
    Some of Architecture van Brandenburg’s most prominent projects include:

    Marisfrolg Fashion Campus, Shenzhen, China

    The following statistics helped Architecture van Brandenburg achieve 22nd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    A+Awards Winner
    1

    Featured Projects
    1

    Total Projects
    1

    21. MacKayCurtis

    © MacKayCurtis

    MacKay Curtis is a design led practice with a mission to create functional architecture of lasting beauty that enhances peoples lives.
    Some of MacKayCurtis’ most prominent projects include:

    Mawhitipana House, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped MacKayCurtis achieve 21st place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    A+Awards Winner
    1

    Featured Projects
    1

    Total Projects
    1

    20. Gerrad Hall Architects

    © Gerrad Hall Architects

    We aspire to create houses that are a joyful sensory experience.
    Some of Gerrad Hall Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Inland House, Mangawhai, New Zealand
    Herne Bay Villa Alteration, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Gerrad Hall Architects achieve 20th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    2

    Total Projects
    2

    19. Dorrington Atcheson Architects

    © Dorrington Atcheson Architects

    Dorrington Atcheson Architects was founded as Dorrington Architects & Associates was formed in 2010, resulting in a combined 20 years of experience in the New Zealand architectural market. We’re a boutique architecture firm working on a range of projects and budgets. We love our work, we pride ourselves on the work we do and we enjoy working with our clients to achieve a result that resolves their brief.
    The design process is a collaborative effort, working with the client, budget, site and brief, to find unique solutions that solve the project at hand. The style of our projects are determined by the site and the budget, with a leaning towards contemporary modernist design, utilizing a rich natural material palette, creating clean and tranquil spaces.
    Some of Dorrington Atcheson Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Lynch Street
    Coopers Beach House, Coopers Beach, New Zealand
    Rutherford House, Tauranga Taupo, New Zealand
    Winsomere Cres
    Kathryn Wilson Shoebox, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Dorrington Atcheson Architects achieve 19th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    2

    Total Projects
    14

    18. Andrew Barre Lab

    © Marcela Grassi

    Andrew Barrie Lab is an architectural practice that undertakes a diverse range of projects. We make buildings, books, maps, classes, exhibitions and research.
    Some of Andrew Barre Lab’s most prominent projects include:

    Learning from Trees, Venice, Italy

    The following statistics helped Andrew Barre Lab achieve 18th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    A+Awards Finalist
    2

    Featured Projects
    1

    Total Projects
    1

    17. Warren and Mahoney

    © Simon Devitt Photographer

    Warren and Mahoney is an insight led multidisciplinary architectural practice with six locations functioning as a single office. Our clients and projects span New Zealand, Australia and the Pacific Rim. The practice has over 190 people, comprising of specialists working across the disciplines of architecture, workplace, masterplanning, urban design and sustainable design. We draw from the wider group for skills and experience on every project, regardless of the location.
    Some of Warren and Mahoney’s most prominent projects include:

    MIT Manukau & Transport Interchange, Auckland, New Zealand
    Carlaw Park Student Accommodation, Auckland, New Zealand
    Pt Resolution Footbridge, Auckland, New Zealand
    Isaac Theatre Royal, Christchurch, New Zealand
    University of Auckland Recreation and Wellness Centre, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Warren and Mahoney achieve 17th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    2

    Total Projects
    5

    16. South Architects Limited

    © South Architects Limited

    Led by Craig South, our friendly professional team is dedicated to crafting for uniqueness and producing carefully considered architecture that will endure and be loved. At South Architects, every project has a unique story. This story starts and ends with our clients, whose values and aspirations fundamentally empower and inspire our whole design process.
    Working together with our clients is pivotal to how we operate and we share a passion for innovation in design. We invite you to meet us and explore what we can do for you. As you will discover, our client focussed process is thorough, robust and responsive. We see architecture as the culmination of a journey with you.
    Some of South Architects Limited’s most prominent projects include:

    Three Gables, Christchurch, New Zealand
    Concrete Copper Home, Christchurch, New Zealand
    Driftwood Home, Christchurch, New Zealand
    Half Gable Townhouses, Christchurch, New Zealand
    Kilmore Street, Christchurch, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped South Architects Limited achieve 16th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    3

    Total Projects
    6

    15. Pac Studio

    © Pac Studio

    Pac Studio is an ideas-driven design office, committed to intellectual and artistic rigor and fueled by a strong commitment to realizing ideas in the world. We believe a thoughtful and inclusive approach to design, which puts people at the heart of any potential solution, is the key to compelling and positive architecture.
    Through our relationships with inter-related disciplines — furniture, art, landscape and academia — we can create a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. We are open to unconventional propositions. We are architects and designers with substantial experience delivering highly awarded architectural projects on multiple scales.
    Some of Pac Studio’s most prominent projects include:

    Space Invader, Auckland, New Zealand
    Split House, Auckland, New Zealand
    Yolk House, Auckland, New Zealand
    Wanaka Crib, Wanaka, New Zealand
    Pahi House, Pahi, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Pac Studio achieve 15th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    3

    Total Projects
    8

    14. Jasmax

    © Jasmax

    Jasmax is one of New Zealand’s largest and longest established architecture and design practices. With over 250 staff nationwide, the practice has delivered some of the country’s most well known projects, from the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa to major infrastructure and masterplanning projects such as Auckland’s Britomart Station.
    From our four regional offices, the practice works with clients, stakeholders and communities across the following sectors: commercial, cultural and civic, education, infrastructure, health, hospitality, retail, residential, sports and recreation, and urban design.
    Environmentally sustainable design is part of everything we do, and we were proud to work with Ngāi Tūhoe to design one of New Zealand’s most advanced sustainable buildings, Te Uru Taumatua; which has been designed to the stringent criteria of the International Living Future Institute’s Living Building Challenge.
    Some of Jasmax’s most prominent projects include:

    The Surf Club at Muriwai, Muriwai, New Zealand
    Auckland University Mana Hauora Building, Auckland, New Zealand
    The Fonterra Centre, Auckland, New Zealand
    Auckland University of Technology Sir Paul Reeves Building , Auckland, New Zealand
    NZI Centre, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Jasmax achieve 14th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    3

    Total Projects
    21

    13. Condon Scott Architects

    © Condon Scott Architects

    Condon Scott Architects is a boutique, award-winning NZIA registered architectural practice based in Wānaka, New Zealand. Since inception 35 years ago, Condon Scott Architects has been involved in a wide range of high end residential and commercial architectural projects throughout Queenstown, Wānaka, the Central Otago region and further afield.
    Director Barry Condonand principal Sarah Scott– both registered architects – work alongside a highly skilled architectural team to deliver a full design and construction management service. This spans from initial concept design right through to tender management and interior design.
    Condon Scott Architect’s approach is to view each commission as a bespoke and site specific project, capitalizing on the unique environmental conditions and natural surroundings that are so often evident in this beautiful part of the world.
    Some of Condon Scott Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Sugi House, Wānaka, New Zealand
    Wanaka Catholic Church, Wanaka, New Zealand
    Mount Iron Barn, Wanaka, New Zealand
    Bendigo Terrace House, New Zealand
    Bargour Residence, Wanaka, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Condon Scott Architects achieve 13th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    4

    Total Projects
    17

    12. Glamuzina Paterson Architects

    © Glamuzina Paterson Architects

    Glamuzina Architects is an Auckland based practice established in 2014. We strive to produce architecture that is crafted, contextual and clever. Rather than seeking a particular outcome we value a design process that is rigorous and collaborative.
    When designing we look to the context of a project beyond just its immediate physical location to the social, political, historical and economic conditions of place. This results in architecture that is uniquely tailored to the context it sits within.
    We work on many different types of projects across a range of scales; from small interiors to large public buildings. Regardless of a project’s budget we always prefer to work smart, using a creative mix of materials, light and volume in preference to elaborate finishes or complex detailing.
    Some of Glamuzina Paterson Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Lake Hawea Courtyard House, Otago, New Zealand
    Blackpool House, Auckland, New Zealand
    Brick Bay House, Auckland, New Zealand
    Giraffe House, Auckland, New Zealand
    Giraffe House, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Glamuzina Paterson Architects achieve 12th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    4

    Total Projects
    5

    11. Cheshire Architects

    © Patrick Reynolds

    Cheshire Architects does special projects, irrespective of discipline, scale or type. The firm moves fluidly from luxury retreat to city master plan to basement cocktail den, shaping every aspect of an environment in pursuit of the extraordinary.
    Some of Cheshire Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Rore kahu, Te Tii, New Zealand
    Eyrie, New Zealand
    Milse, Takanini, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Cheshire Architects achieve 11th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    3

    Total Projects
    3

    10. Patterson Associates

    © Patterson Associates

    Pattersons Associates Architects began its creative story with architect Andrew Patterson in 1986 whose early work on New Zealand’s unspoiled coasts, explores relationships between people and landscape to create a sense of belonging. The architecture studio started based on a very simple idea; if a building can feel like it naturally ‘belongs,’ or fits logically in a place, to an environment, a time and culture, then the people that inhabit the building will likely feel a sense of belonging there as well. This methodology connects theories of beauty, confidence, economy and comfort.
    In 2004 Davor Popadich and Andrew Mitchell joined the firm as directors, taking it to another level of creative exploration and helping it grow into an architecture studio with an international reputation.
    Some of Patterson Associates’ most prominent projects include:

    Seascape Retreat, Canterbury, New Zealand
    The Len Lye Centre, New Plymouth, New Zealand
    Country House in the City, Auckland, New Zealand
    Scrubby Bay House, Canterbury, New Zealand
    Parihoa House, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Patterson Associates achieve 10th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    5

    Total Projects
    5

    9. Team Green Architects

    © Team Green Architects

    Established in 2013 by Sian Taylor and Mark Read, Team Green Architects is a young committed practice focused on designing energy efficient buildings.
    Some of Team Green Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Dalefield Guest House, Queenstown, New Zealand
    Olive Grove House, Cromwell, New Zealand
    Hawthorn House, Queenstown, New Zealand
    Frankton House, Queenstown, New Zealand
    Contemporary Sleepout, Arthurs Point, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Team Green Architects achieve 9th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    5

    Total Projects
    7

    8. Creative Arch

    © Creative Arch

    Creative Arch is an award-winning, multi-disciplined architectural design practice, founded in 1998 by architectural designer and director Mark McLeay. The range of work at Creative Arch is as diverse as our clients, encompassing residential homes, alterations and renovations, coastal developments, sub-division developments, to commercial projects.
    The team at Creative Arch are an enthusiastic group of talented professional architects and architectural designers, with a depth of experience, from a range of different backgrounds and cultures. Creative Arch is a client-focused firm committed to providing excellence in service, culture and project outcomes.
    Some of Creative Arch’s most prominent projects include:

    Rothesay Bay House, North Shore, New Zealand
    Best Pacific Institute of Education, Auckland, New Zealand
    Sumar Holiday Home, Whangapoua, New Zealand
    Cook Holiday Home, Omaha, New Zealand
    Arkles Bay Residence, Whangaparaoa, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Creative Arch achieve 8th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    5

    Total Projects
    18

    7. Crosson Architects

    © Crosson Architects

    At Crosson Architects we are constantly striving to understand what is motivating the world around us.
    Some of Crosson Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Hut on Sleds, Whangapoua, New Zealand
    Te Pae North Piha Surf Lifesaving Tower, Auckland, New Zealand
    Coromandel Bach, Coromandel, New Zealand
    Tutukaka House, Tutukaka, New Zealand
    St Heliers House, Saint Heliers, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Crosson Architects achieve 7th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    A+Awards Winner
    1

    A+Awards Finalist
    2

    Featured Projects
    4

    Total Projects
    6

    6. Bossley Architects

    © Bossley Architects

    Bossley Architects is an architectural and interior design practice with the express purpose of providing intense input into a deliberately limited number of projects. The practice is based on the belief that innovative yet practical design is essential for the production of good buildings, and that the best buildings spring from an open and enthusiastic collaboration between architect, client and consultants.
    We have designed a wide range of projects including commercial, institutional and residential, and have amassed special expertise in the field of art galleries and museums, residential and the restaurant/entertainment sector. Whilst being very much design focused, the practice has an overriding interest in the pragmatics and feasibility of construction.
    Some of Bossley Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Ngā Hau Māngere -Old Māngere Bridge Replacement, Auckland, New Zealand
    Arruba, Waiuku, New Zealand
    Brown Vujcich House
    Voyager NZ Maritime Museum
    Omana Luxury Villas, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Bossley Architects achieve 6th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    Featured Projects
    6

    Total Projects
    21

    5. Smith Architects

    © Simon Devitt Photographer

    Smith Architects is an award-winning international architectural practice creating beautiful human spaces that are unique, innovative and sustainable through creativity, refinement and care. Phil and Tiffany Smith established the practice in 2007. We have spent more than two decades striving to understand what makes some buildings more attractive than others, in the anticipation that it can help us design better buildings.
    Some of Smith Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Kakapo Creek Children’s Garden, Mairangi Bay, Auckland, New Zealand
    New Shoots Children’s Centre, Kerikeri, Kerikeri, New Zealand
    GaiaForest Preschool, Manurewa, Auckland, New Zealand
    Chrysalis Childcare, Auckland, New Zealand
    House of Wonder, Cambridge, Cambridge, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Smith Architects achieve 5th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    A+Awards Finalist
    1

    Featured Projects
    6

    Total Projects
    23

    4. Monk Mackenzie

    © Monk Mackenzie

    Monk Mackenzie is an architecture and design firm based in New Zealand. Monk Mackenzie’s design portfolio includes a variety of architectural projects, such as transport and infrastructure, hospitality and sport, residential, cultural and more.
    Some of Monk Mackenzie’s most prominent projects include:

    X HOUSE, Queenstown, New Zealand
    TURANGANUI BRIDGE, Gisborne, New Zealand
    VIVEKANANDA BRIDGE
    EDITION
    Canada Street Bridge, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Monk Mackenzie achieve 4th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    A+Awards Winner
    2

    A+Awards Finalist
    4

    Featured Projects
    4

    Total Projects
    17

    3. Irving Smith Architects

    © Irving Smith Architects

    Irving Smith Jackhas been developed as a niche architecture practice based in Nelson, but working in a variety of sensitive environments and contexts throughout New Zealand. ISJ demonstrates an ongoing commitment to innovative, sustainable and researched based design , backed up by national and international award and publication recognition, ongoing research with both the Universities of Canterbury and Auckland, and regular invitations to lecture on their work.
    Timber Awards include NZ’s highest residential, commercial and engineering timber designs. Key experience, ongoing research and work includes developing structural timber design solutions in the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquakes. Current projects include cultural, urban, civic and residential projects spread throughout New Zealand, and recently in the United States and France.
    Some of Irving Smith Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    SCION Innovation Hub – Te Whare Nui o Tuteata, Rotorua, New Zealand
    Mountain Range House, Brightwater, New Zealand
    Alexandra Tent House, Wellington, New Zealand
    Te Koputu a te Whanga a Toi : Whakatane Library & Exhibition Centre, Whakatane, New Zealand
    offSET Shed House, Gisborne, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Irving Smith Architects achieve 3rd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    A+Awards Winner
    2

    A+Awards Finalist
    1

    Featured Projects
    6

    Total Projects
    13

    2. Fearon Hay Architects

    © Fearon Hay Architects

    Fearon Hay is a design-led studio undertaking a broad range of projects in diverse environments, the firm is engaged in projects on sites around the world. Tim Hay and Jeff Fearon founded the practice in 1993 as a way to enable their combined involvement in the design and delivery of each project. Together, they lead an international team of experienced professionals.
    The studio approached every project with a commitment to design excellence, a thoughtful consideration of site and place, and an inventive sense of creativity. Fearon Hay enjoys responding to a range of briefs: Commercial projects for office and workplace, complex heritage environments, public work within the urban realm or wider landscape, private dwellings and detailed bespoke work for hospitality and interior environments.
    Some of Fearon Hay Architects’ most prominent projects include:

    Bishop Hill The Camp, Tawharanui Peninsula, New Zealand
    Matagouri, Queenstown, New Zealand
    Alpine Terrace House, Queenstown, New Zealand
    Island Retreat, Auckland, New Zealand
    Bishop Selwyn Chapel, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped Fearon Hay Architects achieve 2nd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    A+Awards Winner
    2

    A+Awards Finalist
    3

    Featured Projects
    8

    Total Projects
    17

    1. RTA Studio

    © RTA Studio

    Richard Naish founded RTA Studio in 1999 after a successful career with top practices in London and Auckland. We are a practice that focuses on delivering exceptional design with a considered and personal service. Our work aims to make a lasting contribution to the urban and natural context by challenging, provoking and delighting.
    Our studio is constantly working within the realms of public, commercial and urban design as well as sensitive residential projects. We are committed to a sustainable built environment and are at the forefront developing carbon neutral buildings. RTA Studio has received more than 100 New Zealand and international awards, including Home of The Year, a World Architecture Festival category win and the New Zealand Architecture Medal.
    Some of RTA Studio’s most prominent projects include:

    SCION Innovation Hub – Te Whare Nui o Tuteata, Rotorua, New Zealand
    OBJECTSPACE, Auckland, New Zealand
    C3 House, New Zealand
    Freemans Bay School, Freemans Bay, Auckland, New Zealand
    ARROWTOWN HOUSE, Arrowtown, New Zealand
    Featured image: E-Type House by RTA Studio, Auckland, New Zealand

    The following statistics helped RTA Studio achieve 1st place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand:

    A+Awards Winner
    2

    A+Awards Finalist
    6

    Featured Projects
    6

    Total Projects
    16

    Why Should I Trust Architizer’s Ranking?
    With more than 30,000 architecture firms and over 130,000 projects within its database, Architizer is proud to host the world’s largest online community of architects and building product manufacturers. Its celebrated A+Awards program is also the largest celebration of architecture and building products, with more than 400 jurors and hundreds of thousands of public votes helping to recognize the world’s best architecture each year.
    Architizer also powers firm directories for a number of AIAChapters nationwide, including the official directory of architecture firms for AIA New York.
    An example of a project page on Architizer with Project Award Badges highlighted
    A Guide to Project Awards
    The blue “+” badge denotes that a project has won a prestigious A+Award as described above. Hovering over the badge reveals details of the award, including award category, year, and whether the project won the jury or popular choice award.
    The orange Project of the Day and yellow Featured Project badges are awarded by Architizer’s Editorial team, and are selected based on a number of factors. The following factors increase a project’s likelihood of being featured or awarded Project of the Day status:

    Project completed within the last 3 years
    A well written, concise project description of at least 3 paragraphs
    Architectural design with a high level of both functional and aesthetic value
    High quality, in focus photographs
    At least 8 photographs of both the interior and exterior of the building
    Inclusion of architectural drawings and renderings
    Inclusion of construction photographs

    There are 7 Projects of the Day each week and a further 31 Featured Projects. Each Project of the Day is published on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram Stories, while each Featured Project is published on Facebook. Each Project of the Day also features in Architizer’s Weekly Projects Newsletter and shared with 170,000 subscribers.
     

     
    We’re constantly look for the world’s best architects to join our community. If you would like to understand more about this ranking list and learn how your firm can achieve a presence on it, please don’t hesitate to reach out to us at editorial@architizer.com.
    The post 30 Best Architecture and Design Firms in New Zealand appeared first on Journal.
    #best #architecture #design #firms #new
    30 Best Architecture and Design Firms in New Zealand
    These annual rankings were last updated on June 13, 2025. Want to see your firm on next year’s list? Continue reading for more on how you can improve your studio’s ranking. New Zealand is a one-of-a-kind island in the Pacific, famous for its indigenous Maori architecture. The country has managed to preserve an array of historical aboriginal ruins, such as maraeand wharenui, despite its European colonization during the 19th century. Apart from the country’s ancient ruins, New Zealand is also home to several notable architectural landmarks like the famous Sky Tower piercing the Auckland skyline to the organic forms of the Te Papa Tongarewa Museum in Wellington. Renowned architects like Sir Ian Athfield, whose works blend modernist principles with a deep respect for the natural landscape, have left an indelible mark on the country’s architectural legacy. Being home to a stunning tropical landscape, New Zealand architects have developed eco-friendly residential designs that harness the power of renewable energy as well as visionary urban developments prioritizing livability and connectivity. A notable example is Turanga Central Library in Christchurch, a project that exceeds all eco-friendly design standards and benchmark emissions. Finally, concepts like passive design are increasingly becoming standard practice in architectural circles. With so many architecture firms to choose from, it’s challenging for clients to identify the industry leaders that will be an ideal fit for their project needs. Fortunately, Architizer is able to provide guidance on the top design firms in New Zealand based on more than a decade of data and industry knowledge. How are these architecture firms ranked? The following ranking has been created according to key statistics that demonstrate each firm’s level of architectural excellence. The following metrics have been accumulated to establish each architecture firm’s ranking, in order of priority: The number of A+Awards wonThe number of A+Awards finalistsThe number of projects selected as “Project of the Day”The number of projects selected as “Featured Project”The number of projects uploaded to ArchitizerEach of these metrics is explained in more detail at the foot of this article. This ranking list will be updated annually, taking into account new achievements of New Zealand architecture firms throughout the year. Without further ado, here are the 30 best architecture firms in New Zealand: 30. CoLab Architecture © CoLab Architecture Ltd CoLab Architecture is a small practice of two directors, Tobin Smith and Blair Paterson, based in Christchurch New Zealand. Tobin is a creative designer with a wealth of experience in the building industry. Blair is a registered architect and graduate from the University of Auckland. “We like architecture to be visually powerful, intellectually elegant, and above all timeless. For us, timeless design is achieved through simplicity and strength of concept — in other words, a single idea executed beautifully with a dedication to the details. We strive to create architecture that is conscious of local climateand the environment.” Some of CoLab Architecture’s most prominent projects include: Urban Cottage, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped CoLab Architecture Ltd achieve 30th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 29. Paul Whittaker © Paul Whittaker Paul Whittaker is an architecture firm based in New Zealand. Its work revolves around residential architecture. Some of Paul Whittaker’s most prominent projects include: Whittaker Cube, Kakanui, New Zealand The following statistics helped Paul Whittaker achieve 29th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 28. Space Division © Simon Devitt Photographer Space Division is a boutique architectural practice that aims to positively impact the lives and environment of its clients and their communities by purposefully producing quality space. We believe our name reflects both the essence of what we do, but also how we strive to do it – succinctly and simply. Our design process is inclusive and client focused with their desires, physical constraints, budgets, time frames, compliance and construction processes all carefully considered and incorporated into our designs. Space Division has successfully applied this approach to a broad range of project types within the field of architecture, ranging from commercial developments, urban infrastructure to baches, playhouses and residential homes. Space Divisions team is committed to delivering a very personal and complete service to each of their clients, at each stage of the process. To assist in achieving this Space Division collaborates with a range of trusted technical specialists, based on the specific needs of our client. Which ensures we stay focussed, passionate agile and easily scalable. Some of Space Division’s most prominent projects include: Stradwick House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Space Division achieve 28th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 27. Sumich Chaplin Architects © Sumich Chaplin Architects Sumich Chaplin Architects undertake to provide creative, enduring architectural design based on a clear understanding and interpretation of a client’s brief. We work with an appreciation and respect for the surrounding landscape and environment. Some of Sumich Chaplin Architects’ most prominent projects include: Millbrook House, Arrowtown, New Zealand The following statistics helped Sumich Chaplin Architects achieve 27th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 26. Daniel Marshall Architects © Simon Devitt Photographer Daniel Marshall Architectsis an Auckland based practice who are passionate about designing high quality and award winning New Zealand architecture. Our work has been published in periodicals and books internationally as well as numerous digital publications. Daniel leads a core team of four individually accomplished designers who skillfully collaborate to resolve architectural projects from their conception through to their occupation. DMA believe architecture is a ‘generalist’ profession which engages with all components of an architectural project; during conceptual design, documentation and construction phases.  We pride ourselves on being able to holistically engage with a complex of architectural issues to arrive at a design solution equally appropriate to its contextand the unique ways our clients prefer to live. Some of Daniel Marshall Architects’ most prominent projects include: Lucerne, Auckland, New Zealand House in Herne Bay, Herne Bay, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Daniel Marshall Architects achieve 26th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 2 25. AW Architects © AW Architects Creative studio based in Christchurch, New Zealand. AW-ARCH is committed to an inclusive culture where everyone is encouraged to share their perspectives – our partners, our colleagues and our clients. Our team comes from all over the globe, bringing with them a variety of experiences. We embrace the differences that shape people’s lives, including race, ethnicity, identity and ability. We come together around the drawing board, the monitor, and the lunch table, immersed in the free exchange of ideas and synthesizing the diverse viewpoints of creative people, which stimulates innovative design and makes our work possible. Mentorship is key to engagement within AW-ARCH, energizing our studio and feeding invention. It’s our social and professional responsibility and helps us develop and retain a dedicated team. This includes offering internships that introduce young people to our profession, as well as supporting opportunities for our people outside the office — teaching, volunteering and exploring. Some of AW Architects’ most prominent projects include: OCEAN VIEW TERRACE HOUSE, Christchurch, New Zealand 212 CASHEL STREET, Christchurch, New Zealand LAKE HOUSE, Queenstown, New Zealand RIVER HOUSE, Christchurch, New Zealand HE PUNA TAIMOANA, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped AW Architects achieve 25th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Finalist 1 Total Projects 9 24. Archimedia © Patrick Reynolds Archimedia is a New Zealand architecture practice with NZRAB and green star accredited staff, offering design services in the disciplines of architecture, interiors and ecology. Delivering architecture involves intervention in both natural eco-systems and the built environment — the context within which human beings live their lives. Archimedia uses the word “ecology” to extend the concept of sustainability to urban design and master planning and integrates this holistic strategy into every project. Archimedia prioritizes client project requirements, functionality, operational efficiency, feasibility and programme. Some of Archimedia’s most prominent projects include: Te Oro, Auckland, New Zealand Auckland Art Gallery Toi o Tamaki, Auckland, New Zealand Hekerua Bay Residence, New Zealand Eye Institute , Remuera, Auckland, New Zealand University of Auckland Business School, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Archimedia achieve 24th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 25 23. MC Architecture Studio © MC Architecture Studio Ltd The studio’s work, questioning the boundary between art and architecture, provides engaging and innovative living space with the highest sustainability standard. Design solutions are tailored on client needs and site’s characteristics. Hence the final product will be unique and strongly related to the context and wider environment. On a specific-project basis, the studio, maintaining the leadership of the whole process, works in a network with local and international practices to achieve the best operational efficiency and local knowledge worldwide to accommodate the needs of a big scale project or specific requirements. Some of MC Architecture Studio’s most prominent projects include: Cass Bay House, Cass Bay, Lyttelton, New Zealand Ashburton Alteration, Ashburton, New Zealand restaurant/cafe, Ovindoli, Italy Private Residence, Christchurch, New Zealand Private Residence, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped MC Architecture Studio Ltd achieve 23rd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 19 22. Architecture van Brandenburg © Architecture van Brandenburg Van Brandenburg is a design focused studio for architecture, landscape architecture, urbanism, and product design with studios in Queenstown and Dunedin, New Zealand. With global reach Van Brandenburg conducts themselves internationally, where the team of architects, designers and innovators create organic built form, inspired by nature, and captured by curvilinear design. Some of Architecture van Brandenburg’s most prominent projects include: Marisfrolg Fashion Campus, Shenzhen, China The following statistics helped Architecture van Brandenburg achieve 22nd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 1 Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 21. MacKayCurtis © MacKayCurtis MacKay Curtis is a design led practice with a mission to create functional architecture of lasting beauty that enhances peoples lives. Some of MacKayCurtis’ most prominent projects include: Mawhitipana House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped MacKayCurtis achieve 21st place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 1 Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 20. Gerrad Hall Architects © Gerrad Hall Architects We aspire to create houses that are a joyful sensory experience. Some of Gerrad Hall Architects’ most prominent projects include: Inland House, Mangawhai, New Zealand Herne Bay Villa Alteration, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Gerrad Hall Architects achieve 20th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 2 19. Dorrington Atcheson Architects © Dorrington Atcheson Architects Dorrington Atcheson Architects was founded as Dorrington Architects & Associates was formed in 2010, resulting in a combined 20 years of experience in the New Zealand architectural market. We’re a boutique architecture firm working on a range of projects and budgets. We love our work, we pride ourselves on the work we do and we enjoy working with our clients to achieve a result that resolves their brief. The design process is a collaborative effort, working with the client, budget, site and brief, to find unique solutions that solve the project at hand. The style of our projects are determined by the site and the budget, with a leaning towards contemporary modernist design, utilizing a rich natural material palette, creating clean and tranquil spaces. Some of Dorrington Atcheson Architects’ most prominent projects include: Lynch Street Coopers Beach House, Coopers Beach, New Zealand Rutherford House, Tauranga Taupo, New Zealand Winsomere Cres Kathryn Wilson Shoebox, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Dorrington Atcheson Architects achieve 19th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 14 18. Andrew Barre Lab © Marcela Grassi Andrew Barrie Lab is an architectural practice that undertakes a diverse range of projects. We make buildings, books, maps, classes, exhibitions and research. Some of Andrew Barre Lab’s most prominent projects include: Learning from Trees, Venice, Italy The following statistics helped Andrew Barre Lab achieve 18th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Finalist 2 Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 17. Warren and Mahoney © Simon Devitt Photographer Warren and Mahoney is an insight led multidisciplinary architectural practice with six locations functioning as a single office. Our clients and projects span New Zealand, Australia and the Pacific Rim. The practice has over 190 people, comprising of specialists working across the disciplines of architecture, workplace, masterplanning, urban design and sustainable design. We draw from the wider group for skills and experience on every project, regardless of the location. Some of Warren and Mahoney’s most prominent projects include: MIT Manukau & Transport Interchange, Auckland, New Zealand Carlaw Park Student Accommodation, Auckland, New Zealand Pt Resolution Footbridge, Auckland, New Zealand Isaac Theatre Royal, Christchurch, New Zealand University of Auckland Recreation and Wellness Centre, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Warren and Mahoney achieve 17th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 5 16. South Architects Limited © South Architects Limited Led by Craig South, our friendly professional team is dedicated to crafting for uniqueness and producing carefully considered architecture that will endure and be loved. At South Architects, every project has a unique story. This story starts and ends with our clients, whose values and aspirations fundamentally empower and inspire our whole design process. Working together with our clients is pivotal to how we operate and we share a passion for innovation in design. We invite you to meet us and explore what we can do for you. As you will discover, our client focussed process is thorough, robust and responsive. We see architecture as the culmination of a journey with you. Some of South Architects Limited’s most prominent projects include: Three Gables, Christchurch, New Zealand Concrete Copper Home, Christchurch, New Zealand Driftwood Home, Christchurch, New Zealand Half Gable Townhouses, Christchurch, New Zealand Kilmore Street, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped South Architects Limited achieve 16th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 6 15. Pac Studio © Pac Studio Pac Studio is an ideas-driven design office, committed to intellectual and artistic rigor and fueled by a strong commitment to realizing ideas in the world. We believe a thoughtful and inclusive approach to design, which puts people at the heart of any potential solution, is the key to compelling and positive architecture. Through our relationships with inter-related disciplines — furniture, art, landscape and academia — we can create a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. We are open to unconventional propositions. We are architects and designers with substantial experience delivering highly awarded architectural projects on multiple scales. Some of Pac Studio’s most prominent projects include: Space Invader, Auckland, New Zealand Split House, Auckland, New Zealand Yolk House, Auckland, New Zealand Wanaka Crib, Wanaka, New Zealand Pahi House, Pahi, New Zealand The following statistics helped Pac Studio achieve 15th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 8 14. Jasmax © Jasmax Jasmax is one of New Zealand’s largest and longest established architecture and design practices. With over 250 staff nationwide, the practice has delivered some of the country’s most well known projects, from the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa to major infrastructure and masterplanning projects such as Auckland’s Britomart Station. From our four regional offices, the practice works with clients, stakeholders and communities across the following sectors: commercial, cultural and civic, education, infrastructure, health, hospitality, retail, residential, sports and recreation, and urban design. Environmentally sustainable design is part of everything we do, and we were proud to work with Ngāi Tūhoe to design one of New Zealand’s most advanced sustainable buildings, Te Uru Taumatua; which has been designed to the stringent criteria of the International Living Future Institute’s Living Building Challenge. Some of Jasmax’s most prominent projects include: The Surf Club at Muriwai, Muriwai, New Zealand Auckland University Mana Hauora Building, Auckland, New Zealand The Fonterra Centre, Auckland, New Zealand Auckland University of Technology Sir Paul Reeves Building , Auckland, New Zealand NZI Centre, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Jasmax achieve 14th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 21 13. Condon Scott Architects © Condon Scott Architects Condon Scott Architects is a boutique, award-winning NZIA registered architectural practice based in Wānaka, New Zealand. Since inception 35 years ago, Condon Scott Architects has been involved in a wide range of high end residential and commercial architectural projects throughout Queenstown, Wānaka, the Central Otago region and further afield. Director Barry Condonand principal Sarah Scott– both registered architects – work alongside a highly skilled architectural team to deliver a full design and construction management service. This spans from initial concept design right through to tender management and interior design. Condon Scott Architect’s approach is to view each commission as a bespoke and site specific project, capitalizing on the unique environmental conditions and natural surroundings that are so often evident in this beautiful part of the world. Some of Condon Scott Architects’ most prominent projects include: Sugi House, Wānaka, New Zealand Wanaka Catholic Church, Wanaka, New Zealand Mount Iron Barn, Wanaka, New Zealand Bendigo Terrace House, New Zealand Bargour Residence, Wanaka, New Zealand The following statistics helped Condon Scott Architects achieve 13th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 17 12. Glamuzina Paterson Architects © Glamuzina Paterson Architects Glamuzina Architects is an Auckland based practice established in 2014. We strive to produce architecture that is crafted, contextual and clever. Rather than seeking a particular outcome we value a design process that is rigorous and collaborative. When designing we look to the context of a project beyond just its immediate physical location to the social, political, historical and economic conditions of place. This results in architecture that is uniquely tailored to the context it sits within. We work on many different types of projects across a range of scales; from small interiors to large public buildings. Regardless of a project’s budget we always prefer to work smart, using a creative mix of materials, light and volume in preference to elaborate finishes or complex detailing. Some of Glamuzina Paterson Architects’ most prominent projects include: Lake Hawea Courtyard House, Otago, New Zealand Blackpool House, Auckland, New Zealand Brick Bay House, Auckland, New Zealand Giraffe House, Auckland, New Zealand Giraffe House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Glamuzina Paterson Architects achieve 12th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 5 11. Cheshire Architects © Patrick Reynolds Cheshire Architects does special projects, irrespective of discipline, scale or type. The firm moves fluidly from luxury retreat to city master plan to basement cocktail den, shaping every aspect of an environment in pursuit of the extraordinary. Some of Cheshire Architects’ most prominent projects include: Rore kahu, Te Tii, New Zealand Eyrie, New Zealand Milse, Takanini, New Zealand The following statistics helped Cheshire Architects achieve 11th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 3 10. Patterson Associates © Patterson Associates Pattersons Associates Architects began its creative story with architect Andrew Patterson in 1986 whose early work on New Zealand’s unspoiled coasts, explores relationships between people and landscape to create a sense of belonging. The architecture studio started based on a very simple idea; if a building can feel like it naturally ‘belongs,’ or fits logically in a place, to an environment, a time and culture, then the people that inhabit the building will likely feel a sense of belonging there as well. This methodology connects theories of beauty, confidence, economy and comfort. In 2004 Davor Popadich and Andrew Mitchell joined the firm as directors, taking it to another level of creative exploration and helping it grow into an architecture studio with an international reputation. Some of Patterson Associates’ most prominent projects include: Seascape Retreat, Canterbury, New Zealand The Len Lye Centre, New Plymouth, New Zealand Country House in the City, Auckland, New Zealand Scrubby Bay House, Canterbury, New Zealand Parihoa House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Patterson Associates achieve 10th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 5 Total Projects 5 9. Team Green Architects © Team Green Architects Established in 2013 by Sian Taylor and Mark Read, Team Green Architects is a young committed practice focused on designing energy efficient buildings. Some of Team Green Architects’ most prominent projects include: Dalefield Guest House, Queenstown, New Zealand Olive Grove House, Cromwell, New Zealand Hawthorn House, Queenstown, New Zealand Frankton House, Queenstown, New Zealand Contemporary Sleepout, Arthurs Point, New Zealand The following statistics helped Team Green Architects achieve 9th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 5 Total Projects 7 8. Creative Arch © Creative Arch Creative Arch is an award-winning, multi-disciplined architectural design practice, founded in 1998 by architectural designer and director Mark McLeay. The range of work at Creative Arch is as diverse as our clients, encompassing residential homes, alterations and renovations, coastal developments, sub-division developments, to commercial projects. The team at Creative Arch are an enthusiastic group of talented professional architects and architectural designers, with a depth of experience, from a range of different backgrounds and cultures. Creative Arch is a client-focused firm committed to providing excellence in service, culture and project outcomes. Some of Creative Arch’s most prominent projects include: Rothesay Bay House, North Shore, New Zealand Best Pacific Institute of Education, Auckland, New Zealand Sumar Holiday Home, Whangapoua, New Zealand Cook Holiday Home, Omaha, New Zealand Arkles Bay Residence, Whangaparaoa, New Zealand The following statistics helped Creative Arch achieve 8th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 5 Total Projects 18 7. Crosson Architects © Crosson Architects At Crosson Architects we are constantly striving to understand what is motivating the world around us. Some of Crosson Architects’ most prominent projects include: Hut on Sleds, Whangapoua, New Zealand Te Pae North Piha Surf Lifesaving Tower, Auckland, New Zealand Coromandel Bach, Coromandel, New Zealand Tutukaka House, Tutukaka, New Zealand St Heliers House, Saint Heliers, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Crosson Architects achieve 7th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 1 A+Awards Finalist 2 Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 6 6. Bossley Architects © Bossley Architects Bossley Architects is an architectural and interior design practice with the express purpose of providing intense input into a deliberately limited number of projects. The practice is based on the belief that innovative yet practical design is essential for the production of good buildings, and that the best buildings spring from an open and enthusiastic collaboration between architect, client and consultants. We have designed a wide range of projects including commercial, institutional and residential, and have amassed special expertise in the field of art galleries and museums, residential and the restaurant/entertainment sector. Whilst being very much design focused, the practice has an overriding interest in the pragmatics and feasibility of construction. Some of Bossley Architects’ most prominent projects include: Ngā Hau Māngere -Old Māngere Bridge Replacement, Auckland, New Zealand Arruba, Waiuku, New Zealand Brown Vujcich House Voyager NZ Maritime Museum Omana Luxury Villas, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Bossley Architects achieve 6th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 21 5. Smith Architects © Simon Devitt Photographer Smith Architects is an award-winning international architectural practice creating beautiful human spaces that are unique, innovative and sustainable through creativity, refinement and care. Phil and Tiffany Smith established the practice in 2007. We have spent more than two decades striving to understand what makes some buildings more attractive than others, in the anticipation that it can help us design better buildings. Some of Smith Architects’ most prominent projects include: Kakapo Creek Children’s Garden, Mairangi Bay, Auckland, New Zealand New Shoots Children’s Centre, Kerikeri, Kerikeri, New Zealand GaiaForest Preschool, Manurewa, Auckland, New Zealand Chrysalis Childcare, Auckland, New Zealand House of Wonder, Cambridge, Cambridge, New Zealand The following statistics helped Smith Architects achieve 5th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Finalist 1 Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 23 4. Monk Mackenzie © Monk Mackenzie Monk Mackenzie is an architecture and design firm based in New Zealand. Monk Mackenzie’s design portfolio includes a variety of architectural projects, such as transport and infrastructure, hospitality and sport, residential, cultural and more. Some of Monk Mackenzie’s most prominent projects include: X HOUSE, Queenstown, New Zealand TURANGANUI BRIDGE, Gisborne, New Zealand VIVEKANANDA BRIDGE EDITION Canada Street Bridge, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Monk Mackenzie achieve 4th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 4 Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 17 3. Irving Smith Architects © Irving Smith Architects Irving Smith Jackhas been developed as a niche architecture practice based in Nelson, but working in a variety of sensitive environments and contexts throughout New Zealand. ISJ demonstrates an ongoing commitment to innovative, sustainable and researched based design , backed up by national and international award and publication recognition, ongoing research with both the Universities of Canterbury and Auckland, and regular invitations to lecture on their work. Timber Awards include NZ’s highest residential, commercial and engineering timber designs. Key experience, ongoing research and work includes developing structural timber design solutions in the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquakes. Current projects include cultural, urban, civic and residential projects spread throughout New Zealand, and recently in the United States and France. Some of Irving Smith Architects’ most prominent projects include: SCION Innovation Hub – Te Whare Nui o Tuteata, Rotorua, New Zealand Mountain Range House, Brightwater, New Zealand Alexandra Tent House, Wellington, New Zealand Te Koputu a te Whanga a Toi : Whakatane Library & Exhibition Centre, Whakatane, New Zealand offSET Shed House, Gisborne, New Zealand The following statistics helped Irving Smith Architects achieve 3rd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 1 Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 13 2. Fearon Hay Architects © Fearon Hay Architects Fearon Hay is a design-led studio undertaking a broad range of projects in diverse environments, the firm is engaged in projects on sites around the world. Tim Hay and Jeff Fearon founded the practice in 1993 as a way to enable their combined involvement in the design and delivery of each project. Together, they lead an international team of experienced professionals. The studio approached every project with a commitment to design excellence, a thoughtful consideration of site and place, and an inventive sense of creativity. Fearon Hay enjoys responding to a range of briefs: Commercial projects for office and workplace, complex heritage environments, public work within the urban realm or wider landscape, private dwellings and detailed bespoke work for hospitality and interior environments. Some of Fearon Hay Architects’ most prominent projects include: Bishop Hill The Camp, Tawharanui Peninsula, New Zealand Matagouri, Queenstown, New Zealand Alpine Terrace House, Queenstown, New Zealand Island Retreat, Auckland, New Zealand Bishop Selwyn Chapel, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Fearon Hay Architects achieve 2nd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 3 Featured Projects 8 Total Projects 17 1. RTA Studio © RTA Studio Richard Naish founded RTA Studio in 1999 after a successful career with top practices in London and Auckland. We are a practice that focuses on delivering exceptional design with a considered and personal service. Our work aims to make a lasting contribution to the urban and natural context by challenging, provoking and delighting. Our studio is constantly working within the realms of public, commercial and urban design as well as sensitive residential projects. We are committed to a sustainable built environment and are at the forefront developing carbon neutral buildings. RTA Studio has received more than 100 New Zealand and international awards, including Home of The Year, a World Architecture Festival category win and the New Zealand Architecture Medal. Some of RTA Studio’s most prominent projects include: SCION Innovation Hub – Te Whare Nui o Tuteata, Rotorua, New Zealand OBJECTSPACE, Auckland, New Zealand C3 House, New Zealand Freemans Bay School, Freemans Bay, Auckland, New Zealand ARROWTOWN HOUSE, Arrowtown, New Zealand Featured image: E-Type House by RTA Studio, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped RTA Studio achieve 1st place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 6 Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 16 Why Should I Trust Architizer’s Ranking? With more than 30,000 architecture firms and over 130,000 projects within its database, Architizer is proud to host the world’s largest online community of architects and building product manufacturers. Its celebrated A+Awards program is also the largest celebration of architecture and building products, with more than 400 jurors and hundreds of thousands of public votes helping to recognize the world’s best architecture each year. Architizer also powers firm directories for a number of AIAChapters nationwide, including the official directory of architecture firms for AIA New York. An example of a project page on Architizer with Project Award Badges highlighted A Guide to Project Awards The blue “+” badge denotes that a project has won a prestigious A+Award as described above. Hovering over the badge reveals details of the award, including award category, year, and whether the project won the jury or popular choice award. The orange Project of the Day and yellow Featured Project badges are awarded by Architizer’s Editorial team, and are selected based on a number of factors. The following factors increase a project’s likelihood of being featured or awarded Project of the Day status: Project completed within the last 3 years A well written, concise project description of at least 3 paragraphs Architectural design with a high level of both functional and aesthetic value High quality, in focus photographs At least 8 photographs of both the interior and exterior of the building Inclusion of architectural drawings and renderings Inclusion of construction photographs There are 7 Projects of the Day each week and a further 31 Featured Projects. Each Project of the Day is published on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram Stories, while each Featured Project is published on Facebook. Each Project of the Day also features in Architizer’s Weekly Projects Newsletter and shared with 170,000 subscribers.     We’re constantly look for the world’s best architects to join our community. If you would like to understand more about this ranking list and learn how your firm can achieve a presence on it, please don’t hesitate to reach out to us at editorial@architizer.com. The post 30 Best Architecture and Design Firms in New Zealand appeared first on Journal. #best #architecture #design #firms #new
    ARCHITIZER.COM
    30 Best Architecture and Design Firms in New Zealand
    These annual rankings were last updated on June 13, 2025. Want to see your firm on next year’s list? Continue reading for more on how you can improve your studio’s ranking. New Zealand is a one-of-a-kind island in the Pacific, famous for its indigenous Maori architecture. The country has managed to preserve an array of historical aboriginal ruins, such as marae (meeting grounds) and wharenui (meeting houses), despite its European colonization during the 19th century. Apart from the country’s ancient ruins, New Zealand is also home to several notable architectural landmarks like the famous Sky Tower piercing the Auckland skyline to the organic forms of the Te Papa Tongarewa Museum in Wellington. Renowned architects like Sir Ian Athfield, whose works blend modernist principles with a deep respect for the natural landscape, have left an indelible mark on the country’s architectural legacy. Being home to a stunning tropical landscape, New Zealand architects have developed eco-friendly residential designs that harness the power of renewable energy as well as visionary urban developments prioritizing livability and connectivity. A notable example is Turanga Central Library in Christchurch, a project that exceeds all eco-friendly design standards and benchmark emissions. Finally, concepts like passive design are increasingly becoming standard practice in architectural circles. With so many architecture firms to choose from, it’s challenging for clients to identify the industry leaders that will be an ideal fit for their project needs. Fortunately, Architizer is able to provide guidance on the top design firms in New Zealand based on more than a decade of data and industry knowledge. How are these architecture firms ranked? The following ranking has been created according to key statistics that demonstrate each firm’s level of architectural excellence. The following metrics have been accumulated to establish each architecture firm’s ranking, in order of priority: The number of A+Awards won (2013 to 2025) The number of A+Awards finalists (2013 to 2025) The number of projects selected as “Project of the Day” (2009 to 2025) The number of projects selected as “Featured Project” (2009 to 2025) The number of projects uploaded to Architizer (2009 to 2025) Each of these metrics is explained in more detail at the foot of this article. This ranking list will be updated annually, taking into account new achievements of New Zealand architecture firms throughout the year. Without further ado, here are the 30 best architecture firms in New Zealand: 30. CoLab Architecture © CoLab Architecture Ltd CoLab Architecture is a small practice of two directors, Tobin Smith and Blair Paterson, based in Christchurch New Zealand. Tobin is a creative designer with a wealth of experience in the building industry. Blair is a registered architect and graduate from the University of Auckland. “We like architecture to be visually powerful, intellectually elegant, and above all timeless. For us, timeless design is achieved through simplicity and strength of concept — in other words, a single idea executed beautifully with a dedication to the details. We strive to create architecture that is conscious of local climate (hunker down in the winter and open up in summer) and the environment (scale and relationship to other buildings and the natural environment).” Some of CoLab Architecture’s most prominent projects include: Urban Cottage, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped CoLab Architecture Ltd achieve 30th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 29. Paul Whittaker © Paul Whittaker Paul Whittaker is an architecture firm based in New Zealand. Its work revolves around residential architecture. Some of Paul Whittaker’s most prominent projects include: Whittaker Cube, Kakanui, New Zealand The following statistics helped Paul Whittaker achieve 29th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 28. Space Division © Simon Devitt Photographer Space Division is a boutique architectural practice that aims to positively impact the lives and environment of its clients and their communities by purposefully producing quality space. We believe our name reflects both the essence of what we do, but also how we strive to do it – succinctly and simply. Our design process is inclusive and client focused with their desires, physical constraints, budgets, time frames, compliance and construction processes all carefully considered and incorporated into our designs. Space Division has successfully applied this approach to a broad range of project types within the field of architecture, ranging from commercial developments, urban infrastructure to baches, playhouses and residential homes. Space Divisions team is committed to delivering a very personal and complete service to each of their clients, at each stage of the process. To assist in achieving this Space Division collaborates with a range of trusted technical specialists, based on the specific needs of our client. Which ensures we stay focussed, passionate agile and easily scalable. Some of Space Division’s most prominent projects include: Stradwick House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Space Division achieve 28th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 27. Sumich Chaplin Architects © Sumich Chaplin Architects Sumich Chaplin Architects undertake to provide creative, enduring architectural design based on a clear understanding and interpretation of a client’s brief. We work with an appreciation and respect for the surrounding landscape and environment. Some of Sumich Chaplin Architects’ most prominent projects include: Millbrook House, Arrowtown, New Zealand The following statistics helped Sumich Chaplin Architects achieve 27th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 26. Daniel Marshall Architects © Simon Devitt Photographer Daniel Marshall Architects (DMA) is an Auckland based practice who are passionate about designing high quality and award winning New Zealand architecture. Our work has been published in periodicals and books internationally as well as numerous digital publications. Daniel leads a core team of four individually accomplished designers who skillfully collaborate to resolve architectural projects from their conception through to their occupation. DMA believe architecture is a ‘generalist’ profession which engages with all components of an architectural project; during conceptual design, documentation and construction phases.  We pride ourselves on being able to holistically engage with a complex of architectural issues to arrive at a design solution equally appropriate to its context (site and surrounds) and the unique ways our clients prefer to live. Some of Daniel Marshall Architects’ most prominent projects include: Lucerne, Auckland, New Zealand House in Herne Bay, Herne Bay, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Daniel Marshall Architects achieve 26th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 2 25. AW Architects © AW Architects Creative studio based in Christchurch, New Zealand. AW-ARCH is committed to an inclusive culture where everyone is encouraged to share their perspectives – our partners, our colleagues and our clients. Our team comes from all over the globe, bringing with them a variety of experiences. We embrace the differences that shape people’s lives, including race, ethnicity, identity and ability. We come together around the drawing board, the monitor, and the lunch table, immersed in the free exchange of ideas and synthesizing the diverse viewpoints of creative people, which stimulates innovative design and makes our work possible. Mentorship is key to engagement within AW-ARCH, energizing our studio and feeding invention. It’s our social and professional responsibility and helps us develop and retain a dedicated team. This includes offering internships that introduce young people to our profession, as well as supporting opportunities for our people outside the office — teaching, volunteering and exploring. Some of AW Architects’ most prominent projects include: OCEAN VIEW TERRACE HOUSE, Christchurch, New Zealand 212 CASHEL STREET, Christchurch, New Zealand LAKE HOUSE, Queenstown, New Zealand RIVER HOUSE, Christchurch, New Zealand HE PUNA TAIMOANA, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped AW Architects achieve 25th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Finalist 1 Total Projects 9 24. Archimedia © Patrick Reynolds Archimedia is a New Zealand architecture practice with NZRAB and green star accredited staff, offering design services in the disciplines of architecture, interiors and ecology. Delivering architecture involves intervention in both natural eco-systems and the built environment — the context within which human beings live their lives. Archimedia uses the word “ecology” to extend the concept of sustainability to urban design and master planning and integrates this holistic strategy into every project. Archimedia prioritizes client project requirements, functionality, operational efficiency, feasibility and programme. Some of Archimedia’s most prominent projects include: Te Oro, Auckland, New Zealand Auckland Art Gallery Toi o Tamaki, Auckland, New Zealand Hekerua Bay Residence, New Zealand Eye Institute , Remuera, Auckland, New Zealand University of Auckland Business School, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Archimedia achieve 24th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 25 23. MC Architecture Studio © MC Architecture Studio Ltd The studio’s work, questioning the boundary between art and architecture, provides engaging and innovative living space with the highest sustainability standard. Design solutions are tailored on client needs and site’s characteristics. Hence the final product will be unique and strongly related to the context and wider environment. On a specific-project basis, the studio, maintaining the leadership of the whole process, works in a network with local and international practices to achieve the best operational efficiency and local knowledge worldwide to accommodate the needs of a big scale project or specific requirements. Some of MC Architecture Studio’s most prominent projects include: Cass Bay House, Cass Bay, Lyttelton, New Zealand Ashburton Alteration, Ashburton, New Zealand restaurant/cafe, Ovindoli, Italy Private Residence, Christchurch, New Zealand Private Residence, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped MC Architecture Studio Ltd achieve 23rd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 19 22. Architecture van Brandenburg © Architecture van Brandenburg Van Brandenburg is a design focused studio for architecture, landscape architecture, urbanism, and product design with studios in Queenstown and Dunedin, New Zealand. With global reach Van Brandenburg conducts themselves internationally, where the team of architects, designers and innovators create organic built form, inspired by nature, and captured by curvilinear design. Some of Architecture van Brandenburg’s most prominent projects include: Marisfrolg Fashion Campus, Shenzhen, China The following statistics helped Architecture van Brandenburg achieve 22nd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 1 Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 21. MacKayCurtis © MacKayCurtis MacKay Curtis is a design led practice with a mission to create functional architecture of lasting beauty that enhances peoples lives. Some of MacKayCurtis’ most prominent projects include: Mawhitipana House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped MacKayCurtis achieve 21st place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 1 Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 20. Gerrad Hall Architects © Gerrad Hall Architects We aspire to create houses that are a joyful sensory experience. Some of Gerrad Hall Architects’ most prominent projects include: Inland House, Mangawhai, New Zealand Herne Bay Villa Alteration, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Gerrad Hall Architects achieve 20th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 2 19. Dorrington Atcheson Architects © Dorrington Atcheson Architects Dorrington Atcheson Architects was founded as Dorrington Architects & Associates was formed in 2010, resulting in a combined 20 years of experience in the New Zealand architectural market. We’re a boutique architecture firm working on a range of projects and budgets. We love our work, we pride ourselves on the work we do and we enjoy working with our clients to achieve a result that resolves their brief. The design process is a collaborative effort, working with the client, budget, site and brief, to find unique solutions that solve the project at hand. The style of our projects are determined by the site and the budget, with a leaning towards contemporary modernist design, utilizing a rich natural material palette, creating clean and tranquil spaces. Some of Dorrington Atcheson Architects’ most prominent projects include: Lynch Street Coopers Beach House, Coopers Beach, New Zealand Rutherford House, Tauranga Taupo, New Zealand Winsomere Cres Kathryn Wilson Shoebox, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Dorrington Atcheson Architects achieve 19th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 14 18. Andrew Barre Lab © Marcela Grassi Andrew Barrie Lab is an architectural practice that undertakes a diverse range of projects. We make buildings, books, maps, classes, exhibitions and research. Some of Andrew Barre Lab’s most prominent projects include: Learning from Trees, Venice, Italy The following statistics helped Andrew Barre Lab achieve 18th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Finalist 2 Featured Projects 1 Total Projects 1 17. Warren and Mahoney © Simon Devitt Photographer Warren and Mahoney is an insight led multidisciplinary architectural practice with six locations functioning as a single office. Our clients and projects span New Zealand, Australia and the Pacific Rim. The practice has over 190 people, comprising of specialists working across the disciplines of architecture, workplace, masterplanning, urban design and sustainable design. We draw from the wider group for skills and experience on every project, regardless of the location. Some of Warren and Mahoney’s most prominent projects include: MIT Manukau & Transport Interchange, Auckland, New Zealand Carlaw Park Student Accommodation, Auckland, New Zealand Pt Resolution Footbridge, Auckland, New Zealand Isaac Theatre Royal, Christchurch, New Zealand University of Auckland Recreation and Wellness Centre, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Warren and Mahoney achieve 17th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 2 Total Projects 5 16. South Architects Limited © South Architects Limited Led by Craig South, our friendly professional team is dedicated to crafting for uniqueness and producing carefully considered architecture that will endure and be loved. At South Architects, every project has a unique story. This story starts and ends with our clients, whose values and aspirations fundamentally empower and inspire our whole design process. Working together with our clients is pivotal to how we operate and we share a passion for innovation in design. We invite you to meet us and explore what we can do for you. As you will discover, our client focussed process is thorough, robust and responsive. We see architecture as the culmination of a journey with you. Some of South Architects Limited’s most prominent projects include: Three Gables, Christchurch, New Zealand Concrete Copper Home, Christchurch, New Zealand Driftwood Home, Christchurch, New Zealand Half Gable Townhouses, Christchurch, New Zealand Kilmore Street, Christchurch, New Zealand The following statistics helped South Architects Limited achieve 16th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 6 15. Pac Studio © Pac Studio Pac Studio is an ideas-driven design office, committed to intellectual and artistic rigor and fueled by a strong commitment to realizing ideas in the world. We believe a thoughtful and inclusive approach to design, which puts people at the heart of any potential solution, is the key to compelling and positive architecture. Through our relationships with inter-related disciplines — furniture, art, landscape and academia — we can create a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. We are open to unconventional propositions. We are architects and designers with substantial experience delivering highly awarded architectural projects on multiple scales. Some of Pac Studio’s most prominent projects include: Space Invader, Auckland, New Zealand Split House, Auckland, New Zealand Yolk House, Auckland, New Zealand Wanaka Crib, Wanaka, New Zealand Pahi House, Pahi, New Zealand The following statistics helped Pac Studio achieve 15th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 8 14. Jasmax © Jasmax Jasmax is one of New Zealand’s largest and longest established architecture and design practices. With over 250 staff nationwide, the practice has delivered some of the country’s most well known projects, from the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa to major infrastructure and masterplanning projects such as Auckland’s Britomart Station. From our four regional offices, the practice works with clients, stakeholders and communities across the following sectors: commercial, cultural and civic, education, infrastructure, health, hospitality, retail, residential, sports and recreation, and urban design. Environmentally sustainable design is part of everything we do, and we were proud to work with Ngāi Tūhoe to design one of New Zealand’s most advanced sustainable buildings, Te Uru Taumatua; which has been designed to the stringent criteria of the International Living Future Institute’s Living Building Challenge. Some of Jasmax’s most prominent projects include: The Surf Club at Muriwai, Muriwai, New Zealand Auckland University Mana Hauora Building, Auckland, New Zealand The Fonterra Centre, Auckland, New Zealand Auckland University of Technology Sir Paul Reeves Building , Auckland, New Zealand NZI Centre, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Jasmax achieve 14th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 21 13. Condon Scott Architects © Condon Scott Architects Condon Scott Architects is a boutique, award-winning NZIA registered architectural practice based in Wānaka, New Zealand. Since inception 35 years ago, Condon Scott Architects has been involved in a wide range of high end residential and commercial architectural projects throughout Queenstown, Wānaka, the Central Otago region and further afield. Director Barry Condon (ANZIA) and principal Sarah Scott (FNZIA) – both registered architects – work alongside a highly skilled architectural team to deliver a full design and construction management service. This spans from initial concept design right through to tender management and interior design. Condon Scott Architect’s approach is to view each commission as a bespoke and site specific project, capitalizing on the unique environmental conditions and natural surroundings that are so often evident in this beautiful part of the world. Some of Condon Scott Architects’ most prominent projects include: Sugi House, Wānaka, New Zealand Wanaka Catholic Church, Wanaka, New Zealand Mount Iron Barn, Wanaka, New Zealand Bendigo Terrace House, New Zealand Bargour Residence, Wanaka, New Zealand The following statistics helped Condon Scott Architects achieve 13th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 17 12. Glamuzina Paterson Architects © Glamuzina Paterson Architects Glamuzina Architects is an Auckland based practice established in 2014. We strive to produce architecture that is crafted, contextual and clever. Rather than seeking a particular outcome we value a design process that is rigorous and collaborative. When designing we look to the context of a project beyond just its immediate physical location to the social, political, historical and economic conditions of place. This results in architecture that is uniquely tailored to the context it sits within. We work on many different types of projects across a range of scales; from small interiors to large public buildings. Regardless of a project’s budget we always prefer to work smart, using a creative mix of materials, light and volume in preference to elaborate finishes or complex detailing. Some of Glamuzina Paterson Architects’ most prominent projects include: Lake Hawea Courtyard House, Otago, New Zealand Blackpool House, Auckland, New Zealand Brick Bay House, Auckland, New Zealand Giraffe House, Auckland, New Zealand Giraffe House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Glamuzina Paterson Architects achieve 12th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 5 11. Cheshire Architects © Patrick Reynolds Cheshire Architects does special projects, irrespective of discipline, scale or type. The firm moves fluidly from luxury retreat to city master plan to basement cocktail den, shaping every aspect of an environment in pursuit of the extraordinary. Some of Cheshire Architects’ most prominent projects include: Rore kahu, Te Tii, New Zealand Eyrie, New Zealand Milse, Takanini, New Zealand The following statistics helped Cheshire Architects achieve 11th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 3 Total Projects 3 10. Patterson Associates © Patterson Associates Pattersons Associates Architects began its creative story with architect Andrew Patterson in 1986 whose early work on New Zealand’s unspoiled coasts, explores relationships between people and landscape to create a sense of belonging. The architecture studio started based on a very simple idea; if a building can feel like it naturally ‘belongs,’ or fits logically in a place, to an environment, a time and culture, then the people that inhabit the building will likely feel a sense of belonging there as well. This methodology connects theories of beauty, confidence, economy and comfort. In 2004 Davor Popadich and Andrew Mitchell joined the firm as directors, taking it to another level of creative exploration and helping it grow into an architecture studio with an international reputation. Some of Patterson Associates’ most prominent projects include: Seascape Retreat, Canterbury, New Zealand The Len Lye Centre, New Plymouth, New Zealand Country House in the City, Auckland, New Zealand Scrubby Bay House, Canterbury, New Zealand Parihoa House, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Patterson Associates achieve 10th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 5 Total Projects 5 9. Team Green Architects © Team Green Architects Established in 2013 by Sian Taylor and Mark Read, Team Green Architects is a young committed practice focused on designing energy efficient buildings. Some of Team Green Architects’ most prominent projects include: Dalefield Guest House, Queenstown, New Zealand Olive Grove House, Cromwell, New Zealand Hawthorn House, Queenstown, New Zealand Frankton House, Queenstown, New Zealand Contemporary Sleepout, Arthurs Point, New Zealand The following statistics helped Team Green Architects achieve 9th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 5 Total Projects 7 8. Creative Arch © Creative Arch Creative Arch is an award-winning, multi-disciplined architectural design practice, founded in 1998 by architectural designer and director Mark McLeay. The range of work at Creative Arch is as diverse as our clients, encompassing residential homes, alterations and renovations, coastal developments, sub-division developments, to commercial projects. The team at Creative Arch are an enthusiastic group of talented professional architects and architectural designers, with a depth of experience, from a range of different backgrounds and cultures. Creative Arch is a client-focused firm committed to providing excellence in service, culture and project outcomes. Some of Creative Arch’s most prominent projects include: Rothesay Bay House, North Shore, New Zealand Best Pacific Institute of Education, Auckland, New Zealand Sumar Holiday Home, Whangapoua, New Zealand Cook Holiday Home, Omaha, New Zealand Arkles Bay Residence, Whangaparaoa, New Zealand The following statistics helped Creative Arch achieve 8th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 5 Total Projects 18 7. Crosson Architects © Crosson Architects At Crosson Architects we are constantly striving to understand what is motivating the world around us. Some of Crosson Architects’ most prominent projects include: Hut on Sleds, Whangapoua, New Zealand Te Pae North Piha Surf Lifesaving Tower, Auckland, New Zealand Coromandel Bach, Coromandel, New Zealand Tutukaka House, Tutukaka, New Zealand St Heliers House, Saint Heliers, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Crosson Architects achieve 7th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 1 A+Awards Finalist 2 Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 6 6. Bossley Architects © Bossley Architects Bossley Architects is an architectural and interior design practice with the express purpose of providing intense input into a deliberately limited number of projects. The practice is based on the belief that innovative yet practical design is essential for the production of good buildings, and that the best buildings spring from an open and enthusiastic collaboration between architect, client and consultants. We have designed a wide range of projects including commercial, institutional and residential, and have amassed special expertise in the field of art galleries and museums, residential and the restaurant/entertainment sector. Whilst being very much design focused, the practice has an overriding interest in the pragmatics and feasibility of construction. Some of Bossley Architects’ most prominent projects include: Ngā Hau Māngere -Old Māngere Bridge Replacement, Auckland, New Zealand Arruba, Waiuku, New Zealand Brown Vujcich House Voyager NZ Maritime Museum Omana Luxury Villas, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Bossley Architects achieve 6th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 21 5. Smith Architects © Simon Devitt Photographer Smith Architects is an award-winning international architectural practice creating beautiful human spaces that are unique, innovative and sustainable through creativity, refinement and care. Phil and Tiffany Smith established the practice in 2007. We have spent more than two decades striving to understand what makes some buildings more attractive than others, in the anticipation that it can help us design better buildings. Some of Smith Architects’ most prominent projects include: Kakapo Creek Children’s Garden, Mairangi Bay, Auckland, New Zealand New Shoots Children’s Centre, Kerikeri, Kerikeri, New Zealand Gaia (Earth) Forest Preschool, Manurewa, Auckland, New Zealand Chrysalis Childcare, Auckland, New Zealand House of Wonder, Cambridge, Cambridge, New Zealand The following statistics helped Smith Architects achieve 5th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Finalist 1 Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 23 4. Monk Mackenzie © Monk Mackenzie Monk Mackenzie is an architecture and design firm based in New Zealand. Monk Mackenzie’s design portfolio includes a variety of architectural projects, such as transport and infrastructure, hospitality and sport, residential, cultural and more. Some of Monk Mackenzie’s most prominent projects include: X HOUSE, Queenstown, New Zealand TURANGANUI BRIDGE, Gisborne, New Zealand VIVEKANANDA BRIDGE EDITION Canada Street Bridge, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Monk Mackenzie achieve 4th place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 4 Featured Projects 4 Total Projects 17 3. Irving Smith Architects © Irving Smith Architects Irving Smith Jack (ISJ) has been developed as a niche architecture practice based in Nelson, but working in a variety of sensitive environments and contexts throughout New Zealand. ISJ demonstrates an ongoing commitment to innovative, sustainable and researched based design , backed up by national and international award and publication recognition, ongoing research with both the Universities of Canterbury and Auckland, and regular invitations to lecture on their work. Timber Awards include NZ’s highest residential, commercial and engineering timber designs. Key experience, ongoing research and work includes developing structural timber design solutions in the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquakes. Current projects include cultural, urban, civic and residential projects spread throughout New Zealand, and recently in the United States and France. Some of Irving Smith Architects’ most prominent projects include: SCION Innovation Hub – Te Whare Nui o Tuteata, Rotorua, New Zealand Mountain Range House, Brightwater, New Zealand Alexandra Tent House, Wellington, New Zealand Te Koputu a te Whanga a Toi : Whakatane Library & Exhibition Centre, Whakatane, New Zealand offSET Shed House, Gisborne, New Zealand The following statistics helped Irving Smith Architects achieve 3rd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 1 Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 13 2. Fearon Hay Architects © Fearon Hay Architects Fearon Hay is a design-led studio undertaking a broad range of projects in diverse environments, the firm is engaged in projects on sites around the world. Tim Hay and Jeff Fearon founded the practice in 1993 as a way to enable their combined involvement in the design and delivery of each project. Together, they lead an international team of experienced professionals. The studio approached every project with a commitment to design excellence, a thoughtful consideration of site and place, and an inventive sense of creativity. Fearon Hay enjoys responding to a range of briefs: Commercial projects for office and workplace, complex heritage environments, public work within the urban realm or wider landscape, private dwellings and detailed bespoke work for hospitality and interior environments. Some of Fearon Hay Architects’ most prominent projects include: Bishop Hill The Camp, Tawharanui Peninsula, New Zealand Matagouri, Queenstown, New Zealand Alpine Terrace House, Queenstown, New Zealand Island Retreat, Auckland, New Zealand Bishop Selwyn Chapel, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped Fearon Hay Architects achieve 2nd place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 3 Featured Projects 8 Total Projects 17 1. RTA Studio © RTA Studio Richard Naish founded RTA Studio in 1999 after a successful career with top practices in London and Auckland. We are a practice that focuses on delivering exceptional design with a considered and personal service. Our work aims to make a lasting contribution to the urban and natural context by challenging, provoking and delighting. Our studio is constantly working within the realms of public, commercial and urban design as well as sensitive residential projects. We are committed to a sustainable built environment and are at the forefront developing carbon neutral buildings. RTA Studio has received more than 100 New Zealand and international awards, including Home of The Year, a World Architecture Festival category win and the New Zealand Architecture Medal. Some of RTA Studio’s most prominent projects include: SCION Innovation Hub – Te Whare Nui o Tuteata, Rotorua, New Zealand OBJECTSPACE, Auckland, New Zealand C3 House, New Zealand Freemans Bay School, Freemans Bay, Auckland, New Zealand ARROWTOWN HOUSE, Arrowtown, New Zealand Featured image: E-Type House by RTA Studio, Auckland, New Zealand The following statistics helped RTA Studio achieve 1st place in the 30 Best Architecture Firms in New Zealand: A+Awards Winner 2 A+Awards Finalist 6 Featured Projects 6 Total Projects 16 Why Should I Trust Architizer’s Ranking? With more than 30,000 architecture firms and over 130,000 projects within its database, Architizer is proud to host the world’s largest online community of architects and building product manufacturers. Its celebrated A+Awards program is also the largest celebration of architecture and building products, with more than 400 jurors and hundreds of thousands of public votes helping to recognize the world’s best architecture each year. Architizer also powers firm directories for a number of AIA (American Institute of Architects) Chapters nationwide, including the official directory of architecture firms for AIA New York. An example of a project page on Architizer with Project Award Badges highlighted A Guide to Project Awards The blue “+” badge denotes that a project has won a prestigious A+Award as described above. Hovering over the badge reveals details of the award, including award category, year, and whether the project won the jury or popular choice award. The orange Project of the Day and yellow Featured Project badges are awarded by Architizer’s Editorial team, and are selected based on a number of factors. The following factors increase a project’s likelihood of being featured or awarded Project of the Day status: Project completed within the last 3 years A well written, concise project description of at least 3 paragraphs Architectural design with a high level of both functional and aesthetic value High quality, in focus photographs At least 8 photographs of both the interior and exterior of the building Inclusion of architectural drawings and renderings Inclusion of construction photographs There are 7 Projects of the Day each week and a further 31 Featured Projects. Each Project of the Day is published on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram Stories, while each Featured Project is published on Facebook. Each Project of the Day also features in Architizer’s Weekly Projects Newsletter and shared with 170,000 subscribers.     We’re constantly look for the world’s best architects to join our community. If you would like to understand more about this ranking list and learn how your firm can achieve a presence on it, please don’t hesitate to reach out to us at editorial@architizer.com. The post 30 Best Architecture and Design Firms in New Zealand appeared first on Journal.
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
  • Decoding The SVG <code>path</code> Element: Line Commands

    In a previous article, we looked at some practical examples of how to code SVG by hand. In that guide, we covered the basics of the SVG elements rect, circle, ellipse, line, polyline, and polygon.
    This time around, we are going to tackle a more advanced topic, the absolute powerhouse of SVG elements: path. Don’t get me wrong; I still stand by my point that image paths are better drawn in vector programs than coded. But when it comes to technical drawings and data visualizations, the path element unlocks a wide array of possibilities and opens up the world of hand-coded SVGs.
    The path syntax can be really complex. We’re going to tackle it in two separate parts. In this first installment, we’re learning all about straight and angular paths. In the second part, we’ll make lines bend, twist, and turn.
    Required Knowledge And Guide Structure
    Note: If you are unfamiliar with the basics of SVG, such as the subject of viewBox and the basic syntax of the simple elements, I recommend reading my guide before diving into this one. You should also familiarize yourself with <text> if you want to understand each line of code in the examples.
    Before we get started, I want to quickly recap how I code SVG using JavaScript. I don’t like dealing with numbers and math, and reading SVG Code with numbers filled into every attribute makes me lose all understanding of it. By giving coordinates names and having all my math easy to parse and write out, I have a much better time with this type of code, and I think you will, too.
    The goal of this article is more about understanding path syntax than it is about doing placement or how to leverage loops and other more basic things. So, I will not run you through the entire setup of each example. I’ll instead share snippets of the code, but they may be slightly adjusted from the CodePen or simplified to make this article easier to read. However, if there are specific questions about code that are not part of the text in the CodePen demos, the comment section is open.
    To keep this all framework-agnostic, the code is written in vanilla JavaScript.
    Setting Up For Success
    As the path element relies on our understanding of some of the coordinates we plug into the commands, I think it is a lot easier if we have a bit of visual orientation. So, all of the examples will be coded on top of a visual representation of a traditional viewBox setup with the origin in the top-left corner, then moves diagonally down to. The command is: M10 10 L100 100.
    The blue line is horizontal. It starts atand should end at. We could use the L command, but we’d have to write 55 again. So, instead, we write M10 55 H100, and then SVG knows to look back at the y value of M for the y value of H.
    It’s the same thing for the green line, but when we use the V command, SVG knows to refer back to the x value of M for the x value of V.
    If we compare the resulting horizontal path with the same implementation in a <line> element, we may

    Notice how much more efficient path can be, and
    Remove quite a bit of meaning for anyone who doesn’t speak path.

    Because, as we look at these strings, one of them is called “line”. And while the rest doesn’t mean anything out of context, the line definitely conjures a specific image in our heads.
    <path d="M 10 55 H 100" />
    <line x1="10" y1="55" x2="100" y2="55" />

    Making Polygons And Polylines With Z
    In the previous section, we learned how path can behave like <line>, which is pretty cool. But it can do more. It can also act like polyline and polygon.
    Remember, how those two basically work the same, but polygon connects the first and last point, while polyline does not? The path element can do the same thing. There is a separate command to close the path with a line, which is the Z command.

    const polyline2Points = M${start.x} ${start.y} L${p1.x} ${p1.y} L${p2.x} ${p2.y};
    const polygon2Points = M${start.x} ${start.y} L${p1.x} ${p1.y} L${p2.x} ${p2.y} Z;

    So, let’s see this in action and create a repeating triangle shape. Every odd time, it’s open, and every even time, it’s closed. Pretty neat!
    See the Pen Alternating Trianglesby Myriam.
    When it comes to comparing path versus polygon and polyline, the other tags tell us about their names, but I would argue that fewer people know what a polygon is versus what a line is. The argument to use these two tags over path for legibility is weak, in my opinion, and I guess you’d probably agree that this looks like equal levels of meaningless string given to an SVG element.
    <path d="M0 0 L86.6 50 L0 100 Z" />
    <polygon points="0,0 86.6,50 0,100" />

    <path d="M0 0 L86.6 50 L0 100" />
    <polyline points="0,0 86.6,50 0,100" />

    Relative Commands: m, l, h, v
    All of the line commands exist in absolute and relative versions. The difference is that the relative commands are lowercase, e.g., m, l, h, and v. The relative commands are always relative to the last point, so instead of declaring an x value, you’re declaring a dx value, saying this is how many units you’re moving.
    Before we look at the example visually, I want you to look at the following three-line commands. Try not to look at the CodePen beforehand.
    const lines =;

    As I mentioned, I hate looking at numbers without meaning, but there is one number whose meaning is pretty constant in most contexts: 0. Seeing a 0 in combination with a command I just learned means relative manages to instantly tell me that nothing is happening. Seeing l 0 20 by itself tells me that this line only moves along one axis instead of two.
    And looking at that entire blue path command, the repeated 20 value gives me a sense that the shape might have some regularity to it. The first path does a bit of that by repeating 10 and 30. But the third? As someone who can’t do math in my head, that third string gives me nothing.
    Now, you might be surprised, but they all draw the same shape, just in different places.
    See the Pen SVG Compound Pathsby Myriam.
    So, how valuable is it that we can recognize the regularity in the blue path? Not very, in my opinion. In some cases, going with the relative value is easier than an absolute one. In other cases, the absolute is king. Neither is better nor worse.
    And, in all cases, that previous example would be much more efficient if it were set up with a variable for the gap, a variable for the shape size, and a function to generate the path definition that’s called from within a loop so it can take in the index to properly calculate the start point.

    Jumping Points: How To Make Compound Paths
    Another very useful thing is something you don’t see visually in the previous CodePen, but it relates to the grid and its code.
    I snuck in a grid drawing update.
    With the method used in earlier examples, using line to draw the grid, the above CodePen would’ve rendered the grid with 14 separate elements. If you go and inspect the final code of that last CodePen, you’ll notice that there is just a single path element within the .grid group.
    It looks like this, which is not fun to look at but holds the secret to how it’s possible:

    <path d="M0 0 H110 M0 10 H110 M0 20 H110 M0 30 H110 M0 0 V45 M10 0 V45 M20 0 V45 M30 0 V45 M40 0 V45 M50 0 V45 M60 0 V45 M70 0 V45 M80 0 V45 M90 0 V45" stroke="currentColor" stroke-width="0.2" fill="none"></path>

    If we take a close look, we may notice that there are multiple M commands. This is the magic of compound paths.
    Since the M/m commands don’t actually draw and just place the cursor, a path can have jumps.

    So, whenever we have multiple paths that share common styling and don’t need to have separate interactions, we can just chain them together to make our code shorter.
    Coming Up Next
    Armed with this knowledge, we’re now able to replace line, polyline, and polygon with path commands and combine them in compound paths. But there is so much more to uncover because path doesn’t just offer foreign-language versions of lines but also gives us the option to code circles and ellipses that have open space and can sometimes also bend, twist, and turn. We’ll refer to those as curves and arcs, and discuss them more explicitly in the next article.
    Further Reading On SmashingMag

    “Mastering SVG Arcs,” Akshay Gupta
    “Accessible SVGs: Perfect Patterns For Screen Reader Users,” Carie Fisher
    “Easy SVG Customization And Animation: A Practical Guide,” Adrian Bece
    “Magical SVG Techniques,” Cosima Mielke
    #decoding #svg #ampltcodeampgtpathampltcodeampgt #element #line
    Decoding The SVG <code>path</code> Element: Line Commands
    In a previous article, we looked at some practical examples of how to code SVG by hand. In that guide, we covered the basics of the SVG elements rect, circle, ellipse, line, polyline, and polygon. This time around, we are going to tackle a more advanced topic, the absolute powerhouse of SVG elements: path. Don’t get me wrong; I still stand by my point that image paths are better drawn in vector programs than coded. But when it comes to technical drawings and data visualizations, the path element unlocks a wide array of possibilities and opens up the world of hand-coded SVGs. The path syntax can be really complex. We’re going to tackle it in two separate parts. In this first installment, we’re learning all about straight and angular paths. In the second part, we’ll make lines bend, twist, and turn. Required Knowledge And Guide Structure Note: If you are unfamiliar with the basics of SVG, such as the subject of viewBox and the basic syntax of the simple elements, I recommend reading my guide before diving into this one. You should also familiarize yourself with <text> if you want to understand each line of code in the examples. Before we get started, I want to quickly recap how I code SVG using JavaScript. I don’t like dealing with numbers and math, and reading SVG Code with numbers filled into every attribute makes me lose all understanding of it. By giving coordinates names and having all my math easy to parse and write out, I have a much better time with this type of code, and I think you will, too. The goal of this article is more about understanding path syntax than it is about doing placement or how to leverage loops and other more basic things. So, I will not run you through the entire setup of each example. I’ll instead share snippets of the code, but they may be slightly adjusted from the CodePen or simplified to make this article easier to read. However, if there are specific questions about code that are not part of the text in the CodePen demos, the comment section is open. To keep this all framework-agnostic, the code is written in vanilla JavaScript. Setting Up For Success As the path element relies on our understanding of some of the coordinates we plug into the commands, I think it is a lot easier if we have a bit of visual orientation. So, all of the examples will be coded on top of a visual representation of a traditional viewBox setup with the origin in the top-left corner, then moves diagonally down to. The command is: M10 10 L100 100. The blue line is horizontal. It starts atand should end at. We could use the L command, but we’d have to write 55 again. So, instead, we write M10 55 H100, and then SVG knows to look back at the y value of M for the y value of H. It’s the same thing for the green line, but when we use the V command, SVG knows to refer back to the x value of M for the x value of V. If we compare the resulting horizontal path with the same implementation in a <line> element, we may Notice how much more efficient path can be, and Remove quite a bit of meaning for anyone who doesn’t speak path. Because, as we look at these strings, one of them is called “line”. And while the rest doesn’t mean anything out of context, the line definitely conjures a specific image in our heads. <path d="M 10 55 H 100" /> <line x1="10" y1="55" x2="100" y2="55" /> Making Polygons And Polylines With Z In the previous section, we learned how path can behave like <line>, which is pretty cool. But it can do more. It can also act like polyline and polygon. Remember, how those two basically work the same, but polygon connects the first and last point, while polyline does not? The path element can do the same thing. There is a separate command to close the path with a line, which is the Z command. const polyline2Points = M${start.x} ${start.y} L${p1.x} ${p1.y} L${p2.x} ${p2.y}; const polygon2Points = M${start.x} ${start.y} L${p1.x} ${p1.y} L${p2.x} ${p2.y} Z; So, let’s see this in action and create a repeating triangle shape. Every odd time, it’s open, and every even time, it’s closed. Pretty neat! See the Pen Alternating Trianglesby Myriam. When it comes to comparing path versus polygon and polyline, the other tags tell us about their names, but I would argue that fewer people know what a polygon is versus what a line is. The argument to use these two tags over path for legibility is weak, in my opinion, and I guess you’d probably agree that this looks like equal levels of meaningless string given to an SVG element. <path d="M0 0 L86.6 50 L0 100 Z" /> <polygon points="0,0 86.6,50 0,100" /> <path d="M0 0 L86.6 50 L0 100" /> <polyline points="0,0 86.6,50 0,100" /> Relative Commands: m, l, h, v All of the line commands exist in absolute and relative versions. The difference is that the relative commands are lowercase, e.g., m, l, h, and v. The relative commands are always relative to the last point, so instead of declaring an x value, you’re declaring a dx value, saying this is how many units you’re moving. Before we look at the example visually, I want you to look at the following three-line commands. Try not to look at the CodePen beforehand. const lines =; As I mentioned, I hate looking at numbers without meaning, but there is one number whose meaning is pretty constant in most contexts: 0. Seeing a 0 in combination with a command I just learned means relative manages to instantly tell me that nothing is happening. Seeing l 0 20 by itself tells me that this line only moves along one axis instead of two. And looking at that entire blue path command, the repeated 20 value gives me a sense that the shape might have some regularity to it. The first path does a bit of that by repeating 10 and 30. But the third? As someone who can’t do math in my head, that third string gives me nothing. Now, you might be surprised, but they all draw the same shape, just in different places. See the Pen SVG Compound Pathsby Myriam. So, how valuable is it that we can recognize the regularity in the blue path? Not very, in my opinion. In some cases, going with the relative value is easier than an absolute one. In other cases, the absolute is king. Neither is better nor worse. And, in all cases, that previous example would be much more efficient if it were set up with a variable for the gap, a variable for the shape size, and a function to generate the path definition that’s called from within a loop so it can take in the index to properly calculate the start point. Jumping Points: How To Make Compound Paths Another very useful thing is something you don’t see visually in the previous CodePen, but it relates to the grid and its code. I snuck in a grid drawing update. With the method used in earlier examples, using line to draw the grid, the above CodePen would’ve rendered the grid with 14 separate elements. If you go and inspect the final code of that last CodePen, you’ll notice that there is just a single path element within the .grid group. It looks like this, which is not fun to look at but holds the secret to how it’s possible: <path d="M0 0 H110 M0 10 H110 M0 20 H110 M0 30 H110 M0 0 V45 M10 0 V45 M20 0 V45 M30 0 V45 M40 0 V45 M50 0 V45 M60 0 V45 M70 0 V45 M80 0 V45 M90 0 V45" stroke="currentColor" stroke-width="0.2" fill="none"></path> If we take a close look, we may notice that there are multiple M commands. This is the magic of compound paths. Since the M/m commands don’t actually draw and just place the cursor, a path can have jumps. So, whenever we have multiple paths that share common styling and don’t need to have separate interactions, we can just chain them together to make our code shorter. Coming Up Next Armed with this knowledge, we’re now able to replace line, polyline, and polygon with path commands and combine them in compound paths. But there is so much more to uncover because path doesn’t just offer foreign-language versions of lines but also gives us the option to code circles and ellipses that have open space and can sometimes also bend, twist, and turn. We’ll refer to those as curves and arcs, and discuss them more explicitly in the next article. Further Reading On SmashingMag “Mastering SVG Arcs,” Akshay Gupta “Accessible SVGs: Perfect Patterns For Screen Reader Users,” Carie Fisher “Easy SVG Customization And Animation: A Practical Guide,” Adrian Bece “Magical SVG Techniques,” Cosima Mielke #decoding #svg #ampltcodeampgtpathampltcodeampgt #element #line
    SMASHINGMAGAZINE.COM
    Decoding The SVG <code>path</code> Element: Line Commands
    In a previous article, we looked at some practical examples of how to code SVG by hand. In that guide, we covered the basics of the SVG elements rect, circle, ellipse, line, polyline, and polygon (and also g). This time around, we are going to tackle a more advanced topic, the absolute powerhouse of SVG elements: path. Don’t get me wrong; I still stand by my point that image paths are better drawn in vector programs than coded (unless you’re the type of creative who makes non-logical visual art in code — then go forth and create awe-inspiring wonders; you’re probably not the audience of this article). But when it comes to technical drawings and data visualizations, the path element unlocks a wide array of possibilities and opens up the world of hand-coded SVGs. The path syntax can be really complex. We’re going to tackle it in two separate parts. In this first installment, we’re learning all about straight and angular paths. In the second part, we’ll make lines bend, twist, and turn. Required Knowledge And Guide Structure Note: If you are unfamiliar with the basics of SVG, such as the subject of viewBox and the basic syntax of the simple elements (rect, line, g, and so on), I recommend reading my guide before diving into this one. You should also familiarize yourself with <text> if you want to understand each line of code in the examples. Before we get started, I want to quickly recap how I code SVG using JavaScript. I don’t like dealing with numbers and math, and reading SVG Code with numbers filled into every attribute makes me lose all understanding of it. By giving coordinates names and having all my math easy to parse and write out, I have a much better time with this type of code, and I think you will, too. The goal of this article is more about understanding path syntax than it is about doing placement or how to leverage loops and other more basic things. So, I will not run you through the entire setup of each example. I’ll instead share snippets of the code, but they may be slightly adjusted from the CodePen or simplified to make this article easier to read. However, if there are specific questions about code that are not part of the text in the CodePen demos, the comment section is open. To keep this all framework-agnostic, the code is written in vanilla JavaScript (though, really, TypeScript is your friend the more complicated your SVG becomes, and I missed it when writing some of these). Setting Up For Success As the path element relies on our understanding of some of the coordinates we plug into the commands, I think it is a lot easier if we have a bit of visual orientation. So, all of the examples will be coded on top of a visual representation of a traditional viewBox setup with the origin in the top-left corner (so, values in the shape of 0 0 ${width} ${height}. I added text labels as well to make it easier to point you to specific areas within the grid. Please note that I recommend being careful when adding text within the <text> element in SVG if you want your text to be accessible. If the graphic relies on text scaling like the rest of your website, it would be better to have it rendered through HTML. But for our examples here, it should be sufficient. So, this is what we’ll be plotting on top of: See the Pen SVG Viewbox Grid Visual [forked] by Myriam. Alright, we now have a ViewBox Visualizing Grid. I think we’re ready for our first session with the beast. Enter path And The All-Powerful d Attribute The <path> element has a d attribute, which speaks its own language. So, within d, you’re talking in terms of “commands”. When I think of non-path versus path elements, I like to think that the reason why we have to write much more complex drawing instructions is this: All non-path elements are just dumber paths. In the background, they have one pre-drawn path shape that they will always render based on a few parameters you pass in. But path has no default shape. The shape logic has to be exposed to you, while it can be neatly hidden away for all other elements. Let’s learn about those commands. Where It All Begins: M The first, which is where each path begins, is the M command, which moves the pen to a point. This command places your starting point, but it does not draw a single thing. A path with just an M command is an auto-delete when cleaning up SVG files. It takes two arguments: the x and y coordinates of your start position. const uselessPathCommand = `M${start.x} ${start.y}`; Basic Line Commands: M , L, H, V These are fun and easy: L, H, and V, all draw a line from the current point to the point specified. L takes two arguments, the x and y positions of the point you want to draw to. const pathCommandL = `M${start.x} ${start.y} L${end.x} ${end.y}`; H and V, on the other hand, only take one argument because they are only drawing a line in one direction. For H, you specify the x position, and for V, you specify the y position. The other value is implied. const pathCommandH = `M${start.x} ${start.y} H${end.x}`; const pathCommandV = `M${start.x} ${start.y} V${end.y}`; To visualize how this works, I created a function that draws the path, as well as points with labels on them, so we can see what happens. See the Pen Simple Lines with path [forked] by Myriam. We have three lines in that image. The L command is used for the red path. It starts with M at (10,10), then moves diagonally down to (100,100). The command is: M10 10 L100 100. The blue line is horizontal. It starts at (10,55) and should end at (100, 55). We could use the L command, but we’d have to write 55 again. So, instead, we write M10 55 H100, and then SVG knows to look back at the y value of M for the y value of H. It’s the same thing for the green line, but when we use the V command, SVG knows to refer back to the x value of M for the x value of V. If we compare the resulting horizontal path with the same implementation in a <line> element, we may Notice how much more efficient path can be, and Remove quite a bit of meaning for anyone who doesn’t speak path. Because, as we look at these strings, one of them is called “line”. And while the rest doesn’t mean anything out of context, the line definitely conjures a specific image in our heads. <path d="M 10 55 H 100" /> <line x1="10" y1="55" x2="100" y2="55" /> Making Polygons And Polylines With Z In the previous section, we learned how path can behave like <line>, which is pretty cool. But it can do more. It can also act like polyline and polygon. Remember, how those two basically work the same, but polygon connects the first and last point, while polyline does not? The path element can do the same thing. There is a separate command to close the path with a line, which is the Z command. const polyline2Points = M${start.x} ${start.y} L${p1.x} ${p1.y} L${p2.x} ${p2.y}; const polygon2Points = M${start.x} ${start.y} L${p1.x} ${p1.y} L${p2.x} ${p2.y} Z; So, let’s see this in action and create a repeating triangle shape. Every odd time, it’s open, and every even time, it’s closed. Pretty neat! See the Pen Alternating Triangles [forked] by Myriam. When it comes to comparing path versus polygon and polyline, the other tags tell us about their names, but I would argue that fewer people know what a polygon is versus what a line is (and probably even fewer know what a polyline is. Heck, even the program I’m writing this article in tells me polyline is not a valid word). The argument to use these two tags over path for legibility is weak, in my opinion, and I guess you’d probably agree that this looks like equal levels of meaningless string given to an SVG element. <path d="M0 0 L86.6 50 L0 100 Z" /> <polygon points="0,0 86.6,50 0,100" /> <path d="M0 0 L86.6 50 L0 100" /> <polyline points="0,0 86.6,50 0,100" /> Relative Commands: m, l, h, v All of the line commands exist in absolute and relative versions. The difference is that the relative commands are lowercase, e.g., m, l, h, and v. The relative commands are always relative to the last point, so instead of declaring an x value, you’re declaring a dx value, saying this is how many units you’re moving. Before we look at the example visually, I want you to look at the following three-line commands. Try not to look at the CodePen beforehand. const lines = [ { d: `M10 10 L 10 30 L 30 30`, color: "var(--_red)" }, { d: `M40 10 l 0 20 l 20 0`, color: "var(--_blue)" }, { d: `M70 10 l 0 20 L 90 30`, color: "var(--_green)" } ]; As I mentioned, I hate looking at numbers without meaning, but there is one number whose meaning is pretty constant in most contexts: 0. Seeing a 0 in combination with a command I just learned means relative manages to instantly tell me that nothing is happening. Seeing l 0 20 by itself tells me that this line only moves along one axis instead of two. And looking at that entire blue path command, the repeated 20 value gives me a sense that the shape might have some regularity to it. The first path does a bit of that by repeating 10 and 30. But the third? As someone who can’t do math in my head, that third string gives me nothing. Now, you might be surprised, but they all draw the same shape, just in different places. See the Pen SVG Compound Paths [forked] by Myriam. So, how valuable is it that we can recognize the regularity in the blue path? Not very, in my opinion. In some cases, going with the relative value is easier than an absolute one. In other cases, the absolute is king. Neither is better nor worse. And, in all cases, that previous example would be much more efficient if it were set up with a variable for the gap, a variable for the shape size, and a function to generate the path definition that’s called from within a loop so it can take in the index to properly calculate the start point. Jumping Points: How To Make Compound Paths Another very useful thing is something you don’t see visually in the previous CodePen, but it relates to the grid and its code. I snuck in a grid drawing update. With the method used in earlier examples, using line to draw the grid, the above CodePen would’ve rendered the grid with 14 separate elements. If you go and inspect the final code of that last CodePen, you’ll notice that there is just a single path element within the .grid group. It looks like this, which is not fun to look at but holds the secret to how it’s possible: <path d="M0 0 H110 M0 10 H110 M0 20 H110 M0 30 H110 M0 0 V45 M10 0 V45 M20 0 V45 M30 0 V45 M40 0 V45 M50 0 V45 M60 0 V45 M70 0 V45 M80 0 V45 M90 0 V45" stroke="currentColor" stroke-width="0.2" fill="none"></path> If we take a close look, we may notice that there are multiple M commands. This is the magic of compound paths. Since the M/m commands don’t actually draw and just place the cursor, a path can have jumps. So, whenever we have multiple paths that share common styling and don’t need to have separate interactions, we can just chain them together to make our code shorter. Coming Up Next Armed with this knowledge, we’re now able to replace line, polyline, and polygon with path commands and combine them in compound paths. But there is so much more to uncover because path doesn’t just offer foreign-language versions of lines but also gives us the option to code circles and ellipses that have open space and can sometimes also bend, twist, and turn. We’ll refer to those as curves and arcs, and discuss them more explicitly in the next article. Further Reading On SmashingMag “Mastering SVG Arcs,” Akshay Gupta “Accessible SVGs: Perfect Patterns For Screen Reader Users,” Carie Fisher “Easy SVG Customization And Animation: A Practical Guide,” Adrian Bece “Magical SVG Techniques,” Cosima Mielke
    0 Yorumlar 0 hisse senetleri 0 önizleme
CGShares https://cgshares.com