SD: You have been pursuing your career outside Vienna for a long time: do you follow the scene in Austria?
MG: I am very interested in it. During my business studies in Vienna, I worked in various institutions and it was clear to me that I wanted to do something that brought business and culture together. I found opportunities for this in Switzerland, in the USA and, for the last ten years, in Helsinki. I come to Vienna as a tourist and only have limited insights. There are exciting people with an international presence, such as Klemens Schillinger, EOOS or Vandasye, with whom we have already worked. Institutions such as the MAK or the Vienna Design Week give Austrian design an important external impact. What I don’t see, however, is an active furniture or design industry. We know brands like Bene and Wittmann. If there are also medium-sized companies that consciously bring the expertise of designers into the company,
either as in-house designers or as external designers, then this is not communicated strongly internationally. If that were the case, I would be aware of it because I am very interested in it. I don’t notice such activities from the outside, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
SD: The self-image of proving the capabilities of Austrian designers in the context of large public contracts is not very pronounced. Occasions such as the renovation of the Austrian parliament, the construction of universities, museums or hospitals would always give rise to cooperation with designers and manufacturers.
MG: Unlike in Austria, design in Scandinavia, Switzerland or the Netherlands is an economic factor and part of cultural identity. A few years ago, when the National Museum in Sweden was closed for a few years for renovation, four local design studios were invited to rethink all public areas and develop products for them with Nordic companies. Artek was able to develop the wooden chair for the café with TAF Studio. It didn’t cost the museum any more than if they bought the furniture off the shelf, but it created incredible added value. But that requires political will and people who can make it happen.
SD: You are the interface between designers and manufacturers. How do the two come together?
MG: It goes both ways. In this specific case, TAF approached us with an interesting design for a specific building that fitted in well with the Artek collection. But that doesn’t always work, because we are not project suppliers, but rather series manufacturers. Together with Daniel Rybakken, we developed a collection that we call Domestic Helpers, i.e. wardrobes, mirrors and the like. He works mainly with light and is exclusively committed to one manufacturer, but it was clear to us that his spatial approach to light could also be interesting for furniture.
SD: How do such development processes fit into your planning?
MG: We are small and don’t necessarily launch a product every year. Depending on the type, a piece of furniture takes two to three years to be thoroughly tested before it enters the project business. Two processes come together here; the design and then the task of getting it into serial production. A prototype is built relatively quickly, but a product that has a supply chain and distribution behind
it takes longer.
SD: Is the duration of such a development predictable?
MG: Not always. With natural materials, the craftsmanship aspect comes into play. Bringing a design into the reality is demanding for an industrial company. Even if everyone wants the same thing, factors such as quality assurance, delivery reliability and stability are tough challenges. We know exactly what quality is in terms of longevity, but the question of whether the product really always has to look the same is being asked again today, because the high aesthetic quality criteria mean that a lot of resources are being wasted.