On the Edge of Creativity – How Generative AI Is Transforming Design Work

Architecture and design have always been the meeting point of creativity, human intuition, and engineering rationality. However, in recent years, a new player has entered the design stage: generative artificial intelligence. The question, increasingly pressing within the profession, can be summed up as follows: is AI an inspiring partner, or is it slowly becoming a dominant force that undermines the designer’s autonomy?

A New Source of Inspiration

Generative algorithms are undoubtedly revolutionary tools. They can produce hundreds of design alternatives in minutes — concepts that a human designer might never have thought through. This vast range of possibilities is particularly valuable in areas where sustainability and energy efficiency play a central role.

A good example is the British firm Foster + Partners, globally renowned for its iconic buildings. The company has integrated generative design tools into several projects to find energy-efficient and environmentally optimized solutions. AI did not replace the creative process but rather acted as a catalyst: designers were able to evaluate and compare a wide variety of options faster than ever before, leaving the final decision in human hands. This represents a synergy where technology expands the horizon of human thought.

The Designer as Operator – The Risk to Autonomy

But not every story is so positive. The American firm Gensler, one of the largest design companies in the world, has used generative AI in numerous office design projects to improve efficiency. The software could optimize workflows, lighting conditions, desk placements, and movement patterns. The outcome was indeed efficient: the spaces function well, and office utilization is optimal.

But is that enough?
The criticism begins here. The resulting spaces have often become homogeneous—uniform, mechanical solutions that lost the unique spirit of place. The human touch, the cultural and emotional layers that make architecture truly special, have been pushed into the background. Some designers fear that if AI dictates the “most optimal” solution, then the professional becomes merely an operator, approving machine-generated decisions.

Public AI: Whose Designs Taught It?

Here arises a deeper, less visible question: what data is this AI trained on?
Most generative AI systems—especially public design models—are built on vast datasets composed of the works of human designers and architectural offices. But who consented to that?
Who gave permission for decades of professional experience, personal style, and creative thinking to become the raw material for a machine’s learning process?

This is not only an ethical issue but also a market and professional risk.
If open-source, “public” AI models learn from the world’s leading architects’ design patterns, then anyone—even a non-professional—can use them.
And from there, it’s only a small step until economists, project managers, or developers start “playing” with AI-generated design concepts—bypassing the architect who used to be the central figure in the process.
In this way, AI can slowly become a weapon against the profession: decision-makers, in the name of cost efficiency, could sideline human designers entirely.

This process is especially dangerous in countries where design fees, copyright protection, and the authority of professional chambers are weak. The result: creative work becomes devalued, and the prestige of the profession erodes.

A Paradigm Shift in Design

The debate is therefore not about whether AI will be part of design—it certainly will be. The real question is: who remains the decision-maker, and who owns the knowledge the AI learns from?

If designers maintain their autonomy and use algorithms as consciously integrated tools, AI can become an extension of human creativity. But if the profession passively surrenders to technology, we may lose diversity, authorship, and ultimately, professional identity.

For AI to truly serve the profession, transparent data sources, legal protections, and professional oversight are essential. The algorithm cannot be an independent creator—it must remain a tool in the service of human imagination.

Sources

• Foster + Partners: Official project briefings and press releases

• Gensler Research Institute – AI in Workplace Design reports

• ArchDaily, Dezeen – Interviews with architects on generative AI

• OECD & RIBA: Ethical AI in Architecture and Design (2023)

• EU Artificial Intelligence Act – Draft Regulation, 2024