‘Back to the User’ addresses a critical issue in contemporary architectural practice: the dissociation from the user. In the software industry, 10% to 40% of a project’s budget is allocated to ‘User Experience (UX) Research’, which focuses on assessing and fulfilling users’ needs and experiences throughout the entire design process. This investment not only doubles sales but also nearly triples user satisfaction. Despite its proven value, UX Research is significantly underrepresented in architecture. This paper explores how to better integrate and utilize UX Research in architectural practice, proposing a new methodology.

The methodology closest to UX Research in architecture is ‘Post-Occupancy Evaluation’ (POE), but only 5% of architectural firms in the EU offer (and even fewer conduct) it during the design phase. Architects may talk closely with clients, but not with users. Additionally, most UX Research involves 1:1 prototype testing with users to ensure that the design meets its intended benefits. In architecture, ‘prototyping’ usually consists of 2D plans, visualizations, or scaled models, which are often not comprehensible, accurate, or immersive enough. While constructing a full 1:1 prototype is possible, it is not economically, spatially, or sustainably feasible for large projects—or is it?

With the rise of Virtual Reality (VR), we can now test virtually unlimited 1:1 designs, leading to more objective, evidence-based conclusions. This paper explores this approach through participatory qualitative sessions using VR, where multiple design variations are tested and rated by users based on their satisfaction levels. The data collected informs design decisions, resulting in a final proposal to address the challenges of post-Soviet, concrete-prefab panel construction in the ‘Jižní Město’ district of Prague, Czech Republic. This ‘Back to the User’ methodology, is in fact a practice’s step ‘Back to the Future’.

Although formed by thousands of individual practices, the field of architecture is represented in media by only a narrow group of offices that gained a significant influence throughout their career. On highly visited internet websites such as ArchDaily, or Dezeen, we recognize a reoccurring pattern of these influential offices with their most recent projects or theories. The frequency and visibility of their work provide them with the power to set up trends and directions within the field, thus becoming an interesting subject of research. This paper focuses on what makes these world-renowned offices stand out from the average via parameters provided by architectural councils' annual reports.

The research is limited to US and EU markets only, for the reason of quick data accessibility and the presence of mutual current and historical influence on each other. Furthermore, a time frame was chosen between 2008, at the time of the last great financial crisis, and 2020 at the time of the covid pandemic. Both crises had a significant influence on the capital and workability of individuals, larger corporates, or even countries, thus including the building industry. On the contrary, between these two terms, a stable rise of economies around the world was occurrent, allowing architecture to flourish providing valuable data for the research.

The key sources became study reports by architectural councils in the US and EU bringing exact data about the markets. This data was then compared to interviews with renowned offices and a theoretical body about management in the field of design. At the end of the paper, conclusions are made about what are some of the keys to a successful architectural practice and what problems stand against that endeavor. Such info then serves as an inspiration for other offices, talent-seekers, investors, governmental institutions, scholars, and new generations of architects in the field.