Should we be building more efficient homes or focusing on delivering homes more efficiently?

It’s a question that keeps coming up — especially as pressure mounts to solve the housing crisis and meet ambitious carbon targets.

On the one hand, we need homes that are genuinely low-energy, low-carbon, healthy, and future-proof. On the other, we need to build a lot of them — faster, cheaper, and with more certainty.

Most people would say we need both. And that’s true. But the order we tackle them in? That matters.

We’ve spent years perfecting the product — but the process still breaks.

Designers know what good looks like. There are plenty of standards, benchmarks, toolkits and performance targets. The challenge now isn’t ambition — it’s delivery.

Too often, we see well-intentioned, high-performance designs stall or fall apart when they hit the build phase. Conflicting details. Poor sequencing. Trades working against each other. MVHR duct runs with nowhere to go. ASHPs bolted into awkward corners.

We keep designing complex buildings as if the process will magically sort itself out later.

Spoiler: it won’t.

Start with the platform, not the finish line.

What if instead of tweaking specs and chasing the next performance gain, we focused first on how we deliver homes — and designed around that?

That means thinking early — and seriously — about the whole construction methodology:

• What build method are we using? Traditional masonry? Panelised timber? Volumetric?

• How will the building go together — step by step — on site or in a factory?

• How are services run and maintained? Can we actually get ductwork where it needs to go? What happens when it needs replacing?

• Are we leaving enough space for change? Not just today's tech — but future systems, future repairs, and future upgrades?

Get those things wrong, and even the best-performing envelope will underdeliver.

Get them right, and you create a repeatable system — one that can support better homes, again and again.

Designing for performance is important — but designing for delivery is essential.

There’s been a lot of focus on fabric-first over the years. Which is great — airtightness, insulation, thermal bridging, it all matters.

But the less sexy stuff matters too.

If you haven’t coordinated the ductwork layout from day one, or designed in proper access zones for MVHR, ASHPs, and hot water tanks, you’re just pushing the problem downstream.

And what happens when new tech comes along?

Or a future tenant needs a new system installed?

Or a landlord wants to swap a heat pump out for a networked solution in 15 years?

If we don’t plan for that now, we’re baking in obsolescence.

Standardisation isn’t a limitation — it’s leverage

People hear “standardisation” and assume bland, boring, cookie-cutter housing.

But it’s actually the opposite.

Standardisation gives you a base to build from — repeatable room modules, consistent service zones, structural rules that reduce errors. You can still vary façades, layouts, materials. You just don’t start from scratch every time.

And once you’ve locked in a solid platform — structurally and spatially — then you can layer in envelope improvements, test new materials, refine details.

Design gets more ambitious because the delivery is already under control.

This is the thinking we need to scale

If we’re serious about building at volume, this kind of process-first, platform-thinking has to come first.

That’s where work like the Creu Cartref kit-of-parts comes in — modular room types, coordinated in BIM, construction-method agnostic, and designed for industrialised delivery.

The blog how can we design for the future? gets right to the point: it’s not just about picking the right kit now — it’s about making sure what we build today can adapt to what’s coming next.

That means designing for services. For upgrades. For flexibility.

It means understanding that the real gains come not just from what we build, but how we plan to build it — and how we keep it working over time.

Conclusion: Get the delivery system right — and quality will follow

If we want more homes, better homes, and homes that last, we need to flip the question.

Don’t start with what we want the house to be.

Start with what it needs to do — now and in the future.

Then build the platform that allows it to do that again and again.

Once the system is working — construction method, layout logic, service integration — then envelope efficiencies can evolve. Carbon can drop. Comfort can rise.

But without that platform, we’re just making nice one-offs.

And one-offs won’t solve the housing crisis.

Further reading:

https://www.creucartref.com/post/creu-cartref-s-idwal-apartment-a-closer-look

https://www.creucartref.com/post/what-is-good-design

https://www.creucartref.com/post/new-year-new-plan

https://www.creucartref.com/post/is-it-time-to-draw-the-line

https://www.creucartref.com/post/volumetric-modular-construction-is-not-the-answer

https://www.creucartref.com/post/streamlining-construction-with-industrialisation-embracing-a-kit-of-parts-approach

https://www.creucartref.com/post/the-impact-of-open-innovation-lessons-from-volvo-s-three-point-safety-belt

https://www.creucartref.com/post/reviving-the-joy-of-building-reimagining-bayko-for-modern-construction

https://www.creucartref.com/post/what-do-mc-donald-s-buns-have-to-do-with-mmc

https://www.creucartref.com/post/how-can-we-prototype-more

https://www.creucartref.com/post/world-book-day

https://www.creucartref.com/post/is-this-design-and-build

https://www.creucartref.com/post/is-the-solution-to-delivering-housing-5000-years-old

https://www.creucartref.com/post/did-you-know-that-square-watermelons-are-making-waves-in-the-agricultural-industry

https://www.creucartref.com/post/design-or-production-what-should-the-construction-industry-be-learning-from-the-automotive-industr

https://www.creucartref.com/post/54321-5-treats-to-the-bar