Flexibility vs. Adaptability: understanding the distinction
Two terms are often thrown interchangeably: Flexibility and Adaptability. Yet, these concepts, though closely related, offer distinct approaches to how we plan, design, and use these spaces.
Defining Flexibility
Flexibility refers to the ability to modify a space or system without undergoing a significant reconfiguration. According to Sarah Borg Bonnici, Aryium CEO and Co-Director, flexibility means the ability to "bring in a recirculating biological safety cabinet that would be flexible" or "add additional benching" without altering the overall structure or adding new utilities. Essentially, the changes are minor and do not affect the broader fabric of the building.
In her example from the University of Edinburgh's Easter Bush campus, Incubator and Accelerator Lab, flexibility was built into the space by anticipating future needs. “We created spaces that anticipated more power, more data, and more gases," she explains. This excess capacity allowed the space to accommodate changes later on without needing to install new systems. Flexibility is about planning for potential unknowns by providing over-capacity in terms of utilities and services.
What is Adaptability?
While flexibility focuses on minor changes, adaptability is more about adjusting the physical structure of the space. Sarah differentiates adaptability as "the ability to change the physical nature of the space." She offers an example of needing to install a "fume hood that is ducted up," which would involve physically altering the building by adding penetrations or making structural changes.
This was a key consideration in the Edinburgh University Incubator and Accelerator Lab project, where the adaptability of the building was built into the design. As Bonnici explains, the facility was designed to allow "reconfigurable" spaces by adding "glass partitioning" and separating labs with shared services like HVAC systems and storage. This kind of adaptability enables a space to meet evolving needs by allowing tenants to physically change the environment to fit new functions.
Flexibility vs. Adaptability in Practice
The distinction between flexibility and adaptability is often a matter of scale. Sarah describes flexibility as being able to "wheel in a bench" or "add equipment without overloading the room’s heat load parameters." Adaptability, on the other hand, might involve altering the core building fabric—installing walls, expanding rooms, or adjusting systems like HVAC to accommodate new research processes.
Adaptability generally involves “more planning and more cost”, especially since it’s about making provisions that allow for future physical changes. Bonnici sums it up well: “Flexibility costs more than adaptability, because flexibility is the provision of things in the hope that they will be used later.”
Both flexibility and adaptability aim to future-proof environments, allowing them to meet a variety of needs, but they do so in different ways. Sarah clarifies the differences and discusses their impact on time, cost, and sustainability—three crucial factors that drive decisions in the design and operation of spaces in industries like life sciences, tech, and more.
The Key Considerations: Time, Cost, and Sustainability
When thinking about flexibility and adaptability, three main considerations come into play: time, economics, and sustainability.
Time:
Every time you alter a space—whether flexibly or adaptably—you incur a time cost. Bonnici emphasizes the importance of minimizing this downtime: “Every time you're adding something or taking something away, this is time that you're not spending doing the research, the science, the generation of whatever it is you're generating.” The quicker you can implement changes, the better it is for productivity.
Economics:
Flexibility tends to have higher upfront costs because you are preparing for future possibilities, whereas adaptability involves building in infrastructure to allow for future modifications. However, adaptability can sometimes be more economical long-term, particularly when structural changes become necessary.
Sustainability:
From a sustainability point of view, adaptability is often the more sustainable option. According to Bonnici, by “doing the minimum amount of intervention,” you are also "doing the minimum amount of additional carbon," which contributes to better environmental outcomes. Flexibility, while useful, may result in over-engineering spaces with features that might never be used, wasting resources and energy.
Striking a balance
The balance between flexibility and adaptability allows projects to maximize the environment’s utility while keeping future costs and interventions to a minimum. As Bonnici puts it, “It’s about creating the environment to be able to do those sort of things potentially in the future.”
Flexibility vs. Adaptability: Which is Right for You?
In the end, both flexibility and adaptability have their place, and deciding which to prioritise depends on your unique needs. As Bonnici explains, "When briefing this sort of thing, instead of briefing it from the point of view of, well, we're trying to get it to achieve X, it's about trying to get it so that people or companies...are able to do 80% of their research or development within these facilities."
As industries like life sciences, pharmaceuticals, and technology continue to evolve, the spaces that support them must evolve too. Balancing flexibility and adaptability is key to ensuring that your space is future-proof, cost-effective, and sustainable.
At Aryium, we help you define and design these spaces, focusing on what matters most to you—whether it's accommodating new technologies, scaling up production, or meeting sustainability goals.