Howdy.

Welcome to the 2026 Architecture for Health Lecture Series.

Today we have Candice Goodman from HCS joining us.

Candice is a principal and senior project architect from HKS in Dallas.

She works in the health sector and is committed to designing and detailing healthcare experiences.

We have also more guests who are joining us via zoom.

Today we have Zach Hillyard.

Some of you have already seen Zach.

He has participated in some of our workshops and lecture series before.

Zach is a leader in healthcare innovation and principal at SSR.

He specializes in transforming the way health facilities operate in the era of the Internet of Everything.

And another guest is Brahim Santos, who is an experienced engineer in hospital and healthcare industry from Schneider Electric.

And we have cashier who is an architectural project manager at Nationwide Children's Hospital.

Last but not least, we have Robert Bauer, chief program delivery for New Dallas Pediatric Campus and also a national president for Association of Medical Facility Professionals.

And he also leads billion dollar capital projects as a senior healthcare executive.

So please help our speakers to the podium.

Thank you Roxana.

That was a great introduction.

And thank you all for joining us today.

I really appreciate it.

Thanks for inviting us to give our talk.

This presentation is mostly taken from a presentation that we gave at Healthcare Design Conference just a few months ago in Kansas City.

It was a workshop sponsored through AMF, and so we're basically going to have just a conversation.

I'll be the moderator and we'll have our panelists answering questions.

And then I know there'll be some time for Q&A.

So it may not be your traditional presentation with a bunch of slides.

This is definitely more just a conversation.

So if there are any questions in the middle of the questions that I'm answering, feel free to.

I don't know if they would shout them out or if there's a mic, but it's fine to be interactive.

This was set up as a workshop, so we definitely want to hear from you.

And Roxana did a great job of introducing all of us.

I am going to allow the team to say a little bit more, if they want, about their background with technology, and also answer the question why we think preparing for future technology is important to the healthcare industry.

So, Zach, why don't you kick us off with kind of your take on that question?

And if you want to share anything else about your background working in technology?

Sure.

Thank you for having us.

And it's just almost guaranteed that you always have technical.

Hold on.

We can't hear you or you can't hear me.

Here.

Here we go.

How about now?

Yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you for intentionally perfectly demonstrating technical difficulties for technology talk.

It happens every time.

Yeah.

No to answer.

Kind of like, elaborate on that.

I come from a mixed experience.

I've had different hard hat roles along the PDC cycle.

So I've played the owner, played the contractor, I've played the general contractor, and now I'm on the design side.

So it's really interesting to kind of be a student of the industry through these different phases and see how technology changes, as Roxana did a great job introducing me.

I have a long history in the in the technology space.

I lead technology innovation design, kind of leaning into curiosity and helping people understand context of these new workflows automation, AI, etc.. So happy to join and I'll yield it to the team to give a little bit more bio for themselves.

For him.

Do you want to go next?

Sure.

Hey everyone again, you know, thanks for having us.

We really do appreciate it.

My name is Brahim Santos.

I work for Schneider Electric, similar to Zach.

I've worn many different hats, you know, in this journey that we call advanced technology deployment.

You know, within the segment, my current role with Schneider Electric is I do lead the healthcare segment for Snyder Electric.

So anything and everything that has to do with our product offerings and what is it, health care.

I'm part of that part of that solution set.

Right.

So and then in addition, before joining here, I was on the owner side, and I had the opportunity to work with a mega build about a six and a half, seven year project that was pretty technologically advanced, and it's still discussed to this day.

So much like everyone else on this panel, we love to leverage our experiences, for one, to prevent folks from having to relive things that maybe didn't work, but also to start from where we start.

We ended and then kind of just keep that momentum going.

So I just think we are on the precipice of such a great time in healthcare construction that, yeah, I love to I love panels like this, and I love working with all the individuals that are that are on on the panel with me.

So glad to be here.

Thanks.

Thanks for him.

And do you want to introduce yourself and elaborate on technology for the healthcare industry?

Yeah, so I'm an architect in Bennett Nationwide Children's Hospital, about 20 years.

When I first came here, I remember working closely with a mechanical engineer.

He said, it doesn't pay to build the building if you can't keep people warm or cool.

And that really stuck with me.

But today I can't build a building if the technology doesn't work seamlessly.

And it's about here at Nationwide Children's, how do I get the best outcomes for these kids that are really sick and the families that are going through such hard days?

How do I take care and retain staff?

And it really takes a really robust, seamless system to do that.

And honored to be here talking to some of these experts that know how to make that happen.

Thanks, Ed.

And last but not least, Bob, you want to share?

Yeah.

Thank you.

Candace.

Bob, I'm up the road from you in Dallas, part of the new Dallas pediatric campus at Candace talked about.

It's a $5 billion joint venture between Children's Health, who is my employer, and UT southwestern or Academic Medical partners.

And Candace is actually one of our design executives on that project.

So glad to be presenting here with her, my background a little bit.

Somehow I got into being part of many or several billion dollar plus projects, some in the Middle East, Qatar and Abu Dhabi and others.

So a lot of lessons along the way.

But I think the point to me, as you're listening today, that's becoming more and more relevant in my mind.

20 years ago, hospitals were buildings that contained technology.

Today, hospitals are basically technology platforms that require buildings.

So think about that.

And if you think about that inversion, it really changes everything about how we need to design and how we need to manage these projects and bring these things in, in, in, on time and working and all that stuff.

So looking forward to the conversation to more today to maybe give you some tips on how to do that.

So thank you.

Thanks so much, Bob.

And just a little bit more about me.

Like Bob said, we get the joy of working together on $1 billion new children's hospital in Dallas, which has its slew of technology problems with trying to look to the future, but also what they need to do now, which we'll get into as we go through the questions.

I'm also a fellow Aggie class of 2002.

Had George Man as one of my professors, so it's really good to be back here with all of you.

Like he said, I'm a senior project architect on the the health care project.

And one of the takeaways, I would say, when looking at technology is really just cultivating the relationships that you have, not only with the owner but also your engineers.

I'm really closely, closely work with SSR, which is the firm that Zach works with, good friends with all of those guys.

But it's that relationship that allows us to push and pull when they need certain things for technology, and we're trying to plan certain spaces for the hospital.

So making sure you keep that relationship like a well-oiled machine.

And then even when the contractor comes in.

You know, making sure all of that is just a good working team.

I think it's just great for any projects success.

Okay, so getting into some of our panel questions, Zach, I'm going to have have you kick it off for us once more.

So we often see projects where the technology devices are state of the art at ribbon cutting.

But the underlining infrastructure is already obsolete.

Why do you think this happened and how do we flip that equation?

There's a great question, and there's probably not just one answer.

So I'm going to give you hold on Zach okay.

Good okay okay okay.

What I was saying there.

Never mind.

One more second.

No problem.

Here we go okay.

Testing.

Testing.

One.

Two.

Three.

Well, commissioning is a big part of that.

So, like, that's one thing that we're learning right now is how to commission systems.

But working through those things, I think there's not just one answer to that question.

And it's a great question.

When we look at like our behaviors just as consumers of technology, the cycle is so fast, it changes almost weekly at this point.

So to build a building and have it be fresh and new is a is a tough order to to mean.

So instead of designing, I guess for devices, we we need to like how do I say this.

Because we're designing for devices not for change.

So like looking at how are we going to plan a building for that is designed for change and for evolution optimizing?

I think what is typically out or value engineered out is those invisible layers, those things that kind of make or break workflows.

I think one of the cool tools that we use, and we're a very collaborative practice at SSR, Candace knows us well.

You know, I've collaborated with my my colleagues that are leading that effort hand in hand, and we get different perspectives a lot.

So we're thinking differently about how things go through what I call like the Pace framework, which is power access, connectivity and expandability.

It's kind of a quick mental checklist to walk through those things, and I think that really helps us look at future loads, redundancy like unknown devices, things that we that are not even marketable yet that we're going to have to plan for thinking about access, kind of the a of that.

How are we going to have this not be a mega demolition if we if something were to change?

Connectivity obviously is getting faster better with AI and augmentation edge compute.

So making sure we have the data and the fiber in place.

And then that expandability piece is really how are we going to like grow and re-engineer just one thing, not the whole building.

So I think those are kind of some key takeaways.

Like I said, there's not one answer and it's think it comes with the teamwork and collaboration.

We kind of already hit some of those metrics even earlier in this conversation.

But those are some of my thoughts.

Thanks, Zach.

And I meant to say this at the beginning, but if any of the panelists, if you all want to chime in and offer thoughts on these questions, feel free.

It's not just for one person.

So does anybody else want to offer some thoughts regarding that question?

You know, maybe a non-technical response just to add to it.

And I know one of the things that we're going to discuss in one of the questions that's directed to me in a little bit, Candace, but, you know, it's kind of hedging your bet a little bit, right, when it comes to technology.

So you have to, you know, as Zach alluded, you just have to kind of make sure you design for malleability in the sense that as things happen on, you know, throughout that project lifecycle, right, that you prepare yourself for something that may come up, whether or not it doesn't work as you thought it would be, that maybe there's been an iteration that is a little bit better than when you first started designing, and you have that capability of incorporating that change.

Right.

And to, you know, to Zach's point, we really want to avoid the kind of rip and replace that.

I know when I started in the industry, Zach, that's that's what it was, right?

And that's a scary thing for for owners to think about.

Right?

Because it costs a lot of money.

But but in addition, one of the most valuable resources we understand is time, right.

And if there's one thing that health care systems can ill afford, it's downtime.

Right.

So yeah.

No, no.

But Zach was spot on with his response.

Yeah.

And I would add just from a, from the perspective of a large project where you're trying to integrate our plan for technology, the projects that succeed don't try to predict the future.

They really build the architecture that can adapt to whatever the future brings.

So having a platform based integration instead of point to point interfaces, network infrastructure that has excess capacity approval, governance structures that can evaluate and approve technology changes throughout the life cycle of the project, which is multiple years.

So a lot of that goes into how you can manage these changes appropriately without triggering project wide disruption, which can easily get out of control if you're not on top of it.

Not sure if you guys are speaking.

We can't hear you.

Yeah, can you hear us?

Yeah.

We can't we we cannot hear you guys in the auditorium.

So just to let you guys know.

So can you hear us now?

Yes, yes.

So maybe you want to repeat the question for them?

Sure.

For him.

I was actually just seeing you up for the next question.

As we look at AI and digital twins and how they're transforming, how we design, build and operate health care facilities, how should we how should this impact the infrastructure and the decisions we're making today?

And what are some emerging risks that we should consider?

Yeah, for sure.

And I'm glad you guys didn't think I was just rude not answering.

Candice I'd never do that to her.

So no, no, thanks for the question.

And you know, I think this kind of ties a lot to, you know, Zach's question and ultimately the responses that came from the panel, I think for starters.

Right.

Like more and more, you're going to hear the phrase future ready, right?

I think before the expression started as future proof, but I think more and more and Bob kind of hinted at that we we're understanding that you cannot future proof anything, but instead we need to be future ready.

Right.

So we need to prepare ourselves from imminent change.

I think if there's one thing that is true in healthcare, we all know it.

Whether or not it's in the construction or the operation of a building.

Change is imminent, right?

So we have to future ready ourselves for that.

So, you know, AI, for instance, is a very popular topic these days.

What is clear is that everyone has their own little definition, and there is definitely some, some understanding that is still to be had when it comes to it.

Right?

So, you know, when the question is like when, where and how do we use it, right?

So as we wait for those answers, we can take measures to, quote unquote, ready ourselves.

The best way to do that is to make any and and everything in the physical environment.

Right.

And I would definitely encourage the panel to weigh in on this to, to see if, you know, they agree with this, to make it community like to make give it the ability to communicate.

Right.

So before when we were putting parts and pieces within a building, we might not really care as much as to its capability of communicating, especially when it comes to things outside of its silo.

So if given the option, if not inherent, we need to make sure that we elect for parts and pieces within a building to have communication ability, right.

For that to be enabled, like no more dumb devices, right?

So, you know, with that, if there's a way to allow the devices, the ability to communicate, those options must again be elected.

Same message goes for digital twins, right.

So with the added element that that they show and start in many different ways, it's important right, to understand that we can take information that maybe might start as a design model.

Like take take them for instance.

Right.

If something starts as a design model, ultimately migrates into a fabrication model, right.

If we don't preserve the information that was ingested in it, you might have to start from scratch.

In the event that you're looking for a BIM model to be your starting point for a digital twin, which is ultimately what the owner will will take over after a project is ended.

So things like that, like just really preparing yourself to think about how things can be used and the fact that we need them to talk because we don't know today what the capabilities are tomorrow.

But if we allow for things to be quote unquote smart, then there will be other applications and platforms and whatever the case may be, they can go out and harness that information and collect it and use it.

So it's really, again, just preparing ourselves, hedging ourselves for the future and not just kind of like, you know, discounting or throwing away information that can be preserved and ultimately utilized in the future.

So long rambling answer.

It's hard to kind of like summarize things into, you know, a few words, but but yeah, I think we really just have to make sure we future ready ourselves.

Yeah, I would love to hear what the my colleagues think about that as well.

I'll actually jump in there real quick from an architect.

From an architect's perspective, it's been really interesting with the idea of digital twin.

I worked on a hospital a couple of years ago.

We worked, you know, did the whole model in Revit, our consultants where in Revit.

And then just maybe a couple of months ago, the owner of that at that hospital or facilities person requested that we send them all the model.

So, you know, we were fine and accommodating with that.

And as I was talking to her, she said that she was had engaged the services of a company that would take those models and build a digital twin.

So basically they have our models.

So at the time we weren't thinking these would be used for anything other than documentation, but they have since been able to take that and improve upon it.

I still need to reach out to her to see how it's working, but improve upon that to where they can monitor HVA, HVAC systems, electrical systems, all of the inner workings of that hospital based off of just our Revit models.

That again, to point, we didn't know that they were going to be used for that.

But modeling in such a way that then it can be used as just kind of a cool thing that we've been able to see here recently.

And so as we continue to model for our future projects, keeping that in mind, and how can we future ready even our architectural work so that it can be used or can support clients and hospitals in the future?

So for sure, I think you're maybe going to hop in there or Bob.

Oh, and if I could just add one one second before others jump in to, you know, we talk about BIM and I think I've said this before on other platforms that I and BIM is often forgotten.

Right.

You know, the information or overlooked I should said, I should say.

And, you know, it's a shame sometimes.

And you know this, Candace.

Right?

Like when you utilize that model, others may think that information that you've embedded in those assets may isn't important to them.

So for the model to run a little less clunky, if you will, sometimes they remove information from it.

But at the same time, we need to think, how can this information be leveraged for that day to perpetual operation of the facility?

So yeah.

No, no.

Spot on.

Yeah.

It's so difficult.

You know, like we've built these beautiful buildings, but like, I'm on a campus right now with like 7,000,000ft² and the the maintenance guys, when I came 20 years ago, they would go out with a paper drawing and a wrench and fix stuff, you know, but the newer folks that are coming out, having that digital twin and our AI system behind the scenes, it's looking at predictive maintenance so we can get ahead of maintenance issues.

Combined with that digital digital twin.

That's going to be huge for us.

And we have no idea.

Like things change so fast around the hospital.

No idea how we're going to maintain it, but looking forward to that day.

Awesome.

Thank you all for that.

Those answers.

And we're going to kind of stick with you sharing this question is basically targeted at from an owner's perspective.

So most owners know they need technology expertise early in the process.

But many way until design is well underway, what holds them back and what do you think is really at stake when we delay those kind of conversations?

So right now we're building a $1.3 billion tower.

And one of the first things I wanted to do was to bring in a tech consultant.

And so I got pushback from my leadership.

I was surprised by it.

But there are points to why they would want to hold off is, you know, that that building is 6 to 10 years out.

They want to delay making technology decisions as long as possible.

So they're they're afraid of wasting people's time.

If I get broad based input, get people excited about what technology can do.

And then the technology that we're talking about today is out of date in 3 or 4 years before the building even opens.

It feels like we're chasing our tails a little bit.

So that was that was one big point that they had.

They felt like there's a balance of technology really dollars.

So like if you're balancing technology dollars versus like, what's the latest and greatest piece of medical equipment or a genomic sequencer that may cure cancer?

There's there's so many decisions that have to go in that they felt like they wanted to push some of those decisions out.

We talk about wanting to be cutting edge, not bleeding edge.

There's fear that if we start talking about technology too soon.

We're talking about bleeding edge, very new tech where we would much rather consultants bring us 3 or 4 peer institutions that are doing things well, that we can go talk to and get some lessons learned from.

But as designers, it leaves us kind of in the deficit going into a project.

So, you know, technology takes a large amount of space of power, of cooling.

So we want as much going in as we can.

And I think there's there's a deficit right now of like planning related to that.

And we looked as we go into we look as we go into projects on what our other is doing, can we find 3 or 4 good benchmarks of, you know, leading tech hospitals and how big do they build their TR rooms?

But there's a there's a risk there.

And we need more evidence based design on on what space and system.

So when we talk about building that robust infrastructure, how do we get there.

And I really would like to have the consultant at the table day one, when we're doing planning and starting to get dollars allocated to advise on that.

What do you guys think?

Thanks, Ed.

Anything you'd want to add, Bob?

Also, from an owner perspective, I know we'll get into a little bit detailed question a little bit later, but anything else you want to add?

Yeah, I think Ed pretty much hit the highlights and we may go into a little different take on how to manage it.

My question.

Okay.

One of the things I'll just add to that also, again from an architect's perspective, is it does get tricky when those decisions are delayed because a lot of times that requires people like me and Zach to plan for larger TR rooms or larger infrastructure to allow for those later decisions to come on board, because the contractors got his schedule and obviously wants to keep moving.

So it is a bit of a dance trying to make sure that we're not making decisions too early, but also that the owner isn't buying technology or buying space that he doesn't need.

So it is.

Yeah, just a bit of a dance when looking at technology and knowing that as soon as you pick something, the next best thing is out there.

So just things to always keep and keep keep at the forefront of your mind, especially if you're a owner and you're responsible for paying for that and supporting it in the future.

So, Bob, as we said, we'll kind of get into the weeds a little bit.

But as you know, health care facilities depend on dozens of technology systems that rarely talk to each other.

So you've got your ear, your building automation, medical devices, security, telecommunications.

As project timelines stretch on for 5 to 10 years or more, as you know, with our new pediatric campus, vendors can change and systems evolve.

How do we plan for integration when everything seems to be a moving target?

Yeah.

Thanks, Candice.

I think we really need to put some scale on it so the audience understands.

It's well into the dozens, probably 70 or more distinct technology systems.

As Candice mentioned, electronic health records, lab information systems, radiology, PACs, pharmacy automation, building automation, security, nurse call medical devices like ventilators, monitors, infusion pumps.

I can go on and on and on.

But the point is, each of those have their own vendors.

Over time on these multiyear projects, they have their own update cycle, they have their own security requirements.

And most of those systems aren't standalone.

They need to talk to dozens of others.

So the inner the integration on that isn't just complex, it's additive.

It's just not out of its exponential.

So how do you plan on that when everything is a moving target?

You know, that's that's really the key.

I think the first thing I've learned is when you're on these large construction projects, most projects the technology integration is subordinated to the construction manager.

So if that's the case, it almost guarantees, in my experience, that the integration concerns will get pushed aside until it's a crisis.

So then it forces attention on the owner and, you know, myself and others.

So to help with that, I believe integration on these projects needs its own leadership, its own budget line, its own governance structure.

When technology represents up to more than 20% of your total project costs, you're not managing construction with the tech component.

You're really orchestrating a massive systems integration that happens to include concrete and steel.

So you have to elevate technology integration on these large projects.

Second one, I'm going to sound maybe a little out of maybe.

Maybe it's just my experience and people can push back, but stop blindly trusting vendor promises.

So if there's one thing that I've heard is over time is of course, our systems will work together.

They're all standards compliant.

So when you look at standards and health care technology, that's kind of like saying, well, the United Nations all speaks the same language because they're using words.

You know, you have HL seven, which is standards for clinical data.

You have Dicom, which is standards for imaging.

You have back Net, which is standards for building automation.

And then within each of those major buckets, the vendors that go within those interprets those standards differently, optimizing their own ecosystem.

So seamless integration in a vendor demo rarely survives.

You know, what's Mike Tyson sale plans are good till you get punched in the face, you know, so it really doesn't survive real world complexity.

So to me, you have to test before trusting, not just trust.

They'll deliver.

So you really have to make sure we're testing those things and that that they're going to work before you're down the road and got a crisis on your hand.

And then I guess lastly, Candice, maybe more to directly answer your question, we have to design for technology evolution, not specification.

So you cannot expect technology on a seven year project as if it will remain static.

Core clinical systems you select in year one, we'll see major platform changes before you implement it.

Vendors merge, product lines get discontinued, and tire platforms get rebuilt.

So it's not just bad luck on your project team, it's really should be your expected reality.

So in my opinion, instead of locking in specs specifications, you really need to build adaptable architecture platform based integration approaches rather than point to point interfaces like for humans and internet infrastructure, you need to build excess capacity.

So all that needs to be thought of and approved upfront so that you can adapt.

A technology changes throughout construction without triggering a project wide distribution or I'm sorry, disruption.

So the bottom line is for me anyway, you can't plan for integration by planning harder.

You have to build systems to be able to manage it over time.

Organizational systems approval system contracts that allow you to adapt as technology changes.

So it's a lot.

It's very complex and complicated.

But again, if you're building like we used to multiple years ago and try to spec everything day one, it's going to be a failure in my opinion, in my experience.

Thanks, Bob.

That was really insightful.

Anybody else want to share on that question?

I just want to say we just witnessed a sermon on on advanced technology right there.

And I'm not even just saying that, but I like everything spot on.

It's the truth.

It's you.

The ways that we used to do things are archaic.

If we want to be different, we have to act differently.

And Bob is 100% right.

Like just thinking that you can take something that is really dynamic and inventive and just reduce it to a series of words day one, and walk away and then close your eyes and then come back seven years later and, and think that it would magically be the most technologically advanced thing.

You know, at first, patient is super naive.

It's and I think, you know, Bob, correct me if I'm wrong.

I think part of that equation is people, right?

You if not one of the strongest.

Right.

We're sitting here talking about technology, but you I remember when I was on the project on the other side, we had to take personality test so that we understood how to communicate with one another.

Right.

How to get the best out of each other so that we could be forward thinking, entertain each other's thoughts, and come together for the collective best solution.

And the best way to do it is to look.

I'm not sure of the audience if it's more of an engineering audience, but you know you have a problem statement and then you work backwards to figure out what that solution is.

So it's yeah, no, just loved it all.

Change.

The change over the years is really important to plan for too.

So you're not just thinking about that day one go live that you want this to be, you know, this amazing tech package that's there and working, but it's how are you going to maintain it day by day thereafter?

And when you get to replenish systems in the future?

Do you have spare capacity and extra Rackspace in course to run cables.

So that's that's kind of how we, we think.

How do I build a really robust core that could do almost anything that it's, you know, we're going to throw at it over the next 20 years.

And it's it's tough.

We hope we've guessed right.

You know.

I was going to add just one like, I hope if you're in this conversation, whether on screen or in the room, you like to do puzzles because what you're what you're experiencing right now is a couple things.

One is what puzzle piece fits and where and like how to arrange that.

And Bob did a great job and Brahim as well.

I'll layering this in, understanding how Digital Twin is this new tool that allows earlier decision making is a big thing to take away, but I think the really interesting thing, this is a language issue.

So if we don't have a common language to communicate across all of the things that we've said so far, like you'll hear the term ontology glossary, whatever, that's what Candice and Bob and on that specific Mega project team have to come up with a way to speak to one another with empathy.

That has been a huge benefit to get decisions that stick because the language is understood.

So I think if you can have two takeaways, it's puzzles and language.

It's nothing technical, but then the technical becomes actually quite easy if you if you understand those principles.

Yeah.

Thanks everyone.

Those are really great responses.

I remember I just wanted to bring up, as you've talked about people and communication, I think Ed said this when we were at HD.

But another important part, especially for those of you in healthcare, is just realizing what we think.

Oh, tech is just our computers and mix and things like that.

Really.

Tech for our hospital is what's keeping a baby alive or what's helping a patient heal.

So that just make sure you always keep it real.

Like these are for real people, real healing environments.

It's not just something that lives in the backbone, but it's actually affecting patient care and patient health.

All right.

How are we doing on time?

Do we have a little.

We're doing good okay.

Minutes for questions for Q&A okay.

Just real quick.

Last question.

If you all want to share something that any mistake or powerful lesson or piece of strategic advice kind of, what would you want these A&M students to learn or to take away?

You got about two minutes to just share any kind of insight.

Who do you want to go first?

Candace?

Use that.

Okay.

I think what I've learned the most is like, honestly, it's this whole empathy principle.

And Bob touched on it a little bit of the the different stakeholders involved.

Like, think of the people that are going to touch and service the thing, and I'll just use it generically so that you understand the performance of the outcomes.

And it's important to emphasize outcomes, not outputs.

A lot of times it gets put into a different lens of that's not my job, I've done my part and there's a fine line, and it's a holistic approach to understanding everyone in the life cycle of the of the use case, like who's touching it, who's servicing it, who's the business owner, who's making decisions.

There's a lot to be to be understood there.

So I think don't be be courageous in asking the question.

Let's talk to volunteer services and see how they're going to engage with this.

Let's talk to the parking attendant and make sure that they understand how to use this and see what their if they have any trials and tribulations that they can weigh in.

I think that's really helpful as on the design side, for us to get it right the first time so that we can evolve through a multi-year project.

I yield my time.

I think that's really smart.

It's like we've got to really talk to the people.

We've got to be good listener as we've got a state.

State.

What we hear back to them to make sure we've understood.

Because if I, if I spend millions of dollars on a system that does the wrong thing or people don't want to interface with, that's that's horrible.

Like, I can't do it and it happens all the time.

Unfortunately, you know, and I think that's my advice to you guys.

Be good listeners.

Work with those around you.

When you approach a hospital, think about, you know, you're going in with a project focus, but think about there's also an enterprise, a bigger, bigger story there sometimes that the leaders are dealing with and ask them about what's working well, not just what can we do new, but what's working well.

What would you like to keep, and what are the problems that you have with what you have today?

And and how can we help you overcome your, you know, those problems?

I'll, I'll jump in and I'll say a couple things like one, you know, if you're going to be entering into this workforce and you might find yourself on these major projects.

One thing that I would encourage everyone to do is to trust yourself and your voice.

Right?

Like, you have a seat at that table.

You know, if you have ideas, bring them forward, right?

Because your idea could be the one that is very pivotal for the success of that project.

So, you know, I would just encourage you all to just, again, believe in yourself and bring those ideas forward.

Because if you are part of a good team, you will be heard, right?

So I think that kind of goes along with the whole people aspect.

I really think it is when you're trying to do different things, you need to make sure that you whether or not you're on the owner side and you're procuring the efforts of of another firm, the people that are part of that firm are just as important as what they've done in the past, or whatever tools and parts of pieces they may they may be able to provide for a given project.

And the other thing that I would say is, you know, we didn't really talk about it specifically, but really part of this assess and when it comes to advanced technology is, is lab environments, right.

Being able to tinker, if you will.

Right.

You know, Bob alluded we can't just simply write things and specifications, right.

We need to challenge the vendors, bring things into an environment where they could be used together, right, to see how they interact with one another, because, you know, their interoperability is the most important part.

If we would imagine our bodies, imagine if if one, you know, one group of folks, you know, constructed, you know, the right arm and the others the left, and then you didn't see it until, you know, the whole body was put together.

Right?

So it's like we need to make sure that all the parts and pieces of, of these buildings have the ability to be interoperable, because you might be able to leverage efficiencies and work backwards from a stated use case and be able to solve it across the traditional divisions with maybe one or a few applications instead of a bunch of siloed applications.

So again, I dare you to be different.

Really.

That's probably one of the the things that I'd love to leave you with is, you know, challenge yourself and challenge others around you.

And I would leave you with take away.

I think you've heard is designed for evolution, not specification.

And because technology will change over these long lead projects, and you need to build the systems and organizations to be able to adapt with that.

But I'd like to add one more thing specifically that Brahim said.

For the students, the biggest technology risk on these projects isn't technical.

A lot of times it's really organizational.

And when he said speak up, that is key to these projects.

You know, a 25 year old integration engineer who grew up coding often understands these critical system dependencies better than me, who grew up reading blueprints.

So we're counting on your voice.

Healthcare organizations need to understand that they need to listen to where the expertise is, and you all are the ones that are bringing that expertise to these projects.

So I would echo what Brahim said that please, when you're working with with the owners, make sure your your voice is heard because it's important to the success of these projects, particularly when it comes to technology.

Thank you all.

My last input is again to kind of second what for him?

And Bob said, but definitely use your voice.

A lot of you are in group projects now with your studios.

This is my group project.

Like these are my teammates now.

You know, the owner, the contractor, the engineers.

Those are the people that you're going to be collaborating with and working with.

So those skills of communication, being able to have your voice be heard, but also humility, all of that plays into it.

And even with technology, like Bob said, sometimes the youngest person might have the more the best insight into a technological system.

So I know it may be scary, but don't be afraid.

You know, either mention it to the engineer or, you know, in a meeting with the client.

Those are things that everybody wants to hear.

If you're in the room, like Brahim said, that you're important and you're supposed to be there.

So I would just share that.

Also, you know, start taking those tips from your group projects and just, yeah, look forward to kind of where you guys head off into the future and your different projects that you lead.

But thank you so much for having us.

I guess we'll open it up to some Q&A if you all have any questions, but really appreciate it.

Sharing with you all.

Thank you so much for the discussion.

We appreciate it.

Thank you.

Okay.

We have a very limited time.

So we have maybe we can have one question.

Sorry about that.

From the students it's okay.

And it was a lot of information.

So so we have one question from Caden.

I'm going to give you mic.

It's kind of hard for me a question, you know, about a subject that's ever changing.

As we've mentioned, I think what I found really interesting is how the whole time we've been talking about how we can design for change and how everything's rapidly changing at all times.

So I was wondering, and this is something I believe Ed mentioned, having a tech person.

And on the first day, what would be the benefits of having someone in or a dedicated team throughout the process?

Tracking, you know, vendor changes, mergers, standards and what standards that we need to meet and what communicates best with each other in order to better inform the designs, rather than having the design team spread the thin trying to be an expert on everything.

Fortunately, yeah, that's a great question.

I think I know Bob or or editor.

Do you guys want to tackle that from an owner perspective?

Yeah, I think a lot of start your 100% spot on.

So as Candice said, as she's working with our engineers firm who are designing the technology on this campus, on the owner's part, we don't necessarily have that expertise.

So we went out and hired a technology company.

That's what we consider an owner's rep, that they're there with us.

They have experience on these large projects that are really not.

They go in with the design team, but they're really but not to design, but really to take a more holistic view of of the both the design.

But then the way we're also going to manage our owner's work as far as the IT bill, the technology, as we're looking at how we're setting up our governance structure for approvals and all that.

So I think your 100% spot on that if an owner doesn't have that built in a built a capability within their teams, that they really would be remiss if they didn't go out and get that as owners representation on their team to supplement all the other great work that's going on around the design of it.

So great question.

So I'm fortunate enough to have an internal team.

I've got five dedicated is project managers working under me and one's focused on APS ones focus on infrastructure, two are focused on they're just attending meetings and understanding systems.

And I don't know how you'd survive without it.

So Bob, we'll have to have a talk at some point.

But in addition, then I have a monthly meeting with my leadership and it's it, IT and equipment, basically leadership discussions that happen monthly with with nursing and hospital administration.

My my Is team.

And then I have a huge robust Is enterprise infrastructure committee that's really thinking about where is the hospital going with AI and all sorts of other topics.

So I think we're blessed here to have some internal folks at Nationwide Children's.

I was just going to ask Dory, just real quick.

I'll be real quick.

I think one of the things too is sometimes when there's conversations and Ed alluded to it, you know, it looks as maybe, hey, we're spending too much money too fast or whatever the case may be.

Are we sure this this investments worth it?

Right?

Are they going to be quote unquote doing anything if we bring them on too early?

I think part of the conversation is really that around cash flow, that money has to be spent.

It's really kind of moving it sooner into the project.

And then also, as you speak to some of those financial people within organizations.

The idea is the sooner that you spend the cash, you have a greater chance of actually having increased efficiencies that allow you to possibly save money throughout the project that can maybe be reallocated into different areas of the project, even outside of technology.

So I know for for my instance, when I'm working on a project and having early involvement, we were able to identify redundancies, duplications for one.

But then again, pinpointing a use case and the desired outcome of the use of the building, we were actually able to leverage one platform where it might have required 2 or 3 platforms to provide that type of solution in silos.

So bringing someone in early and having that conversation that, hey, we can mitigate risk and possibly find efficiencies might like, especially when it comes to a financial standpoint, might allow people to maybe embark on bringing in technology professionals a little sooner than than normal or what they're used to.

So wonderful.

Well, thank you so much for joining us today.

That was an excellent discussion, especially for students who are working on their final studies.

And you're thinking about technology integration and what you need to consider to make it work effectively during during the lifespan of the building.