We run a postgraduate course for construction industry professionals, Interdisciplinary Design for the Built Environment, at Cambridge University, and we tackle the issues raised in the letter 鈥淩adical thinking鈥� (10 October, page 36).
Although we agree that 鈥渢he industry is full of QSs with poor technical knowledge and engineers

and architects with poor commercial and contractual knowledge鈥�, we are not sure it is realistic to expect that the problem could be solved by a prodigiously talented breed of professionals who are masters of all disciplines. It is, after all, increasingly difficult to be proficient in a single discipline.

Instead, we focus on the effectiveness of individuals in teams. We recognise the value of the expertise that individuals hold but encourage students to broaden their understanding of the 鈥渂igger picture鈥� so that they not only respect their co-professionals but contribute to solving their problems.

The defensive, wholly destructive, protectionism that frequently rears its head in design team interactions usually stems from misunderstanding or ignorance of what others do and what motivates them. The increasing quantity of administration that clogs the industry is perhaps no more than the documentary evidence of

these flawed relationships.

It does not cure them and may even be the cause, as it is often felt by all involved as a hindrance to establishing the trust and generosity that collaboration depends on.

Postscript

Annabel Hollick, IDBE, Cambridge, via email.