Wal-Mart Culture and Wal-Mart Architecture

At first glance most Wal-Marts are the same. Their facades are uncanny and their interiors follow strictly enforced guidelines of product placement. Merchandise is spread across up to 150,000 square feet in, from what I’ve noticed, 4 carefully selected configurations. Similar things can be said about any big box retailer. Their architecture is unmistakable. Is this the architecture of America? Is this the materialization of this culture? Box shaped buildings are the most experienced forms of architecture by Americans. Any Wal-Mart has an unmistakable presence. Without any intention to be symbolic, its monolithic windowless facade at the end of an asphalt plain, pronounces its declaration of cheapness and abundance like a warehouse. Stores like Sam’s Clubs are built as warehouses stocking and selling items in the same space, in bulk.

Box architecture is built with ignorance, disregarding its local circumstances. Thousands of boxes are scattered each year, providing services to people based on simple principles of consumption. If there is a market for a box retailer, one will be built. If there is a market for many, many will be built. These markets are analogous to food for the large corporation. Each box is stocked with bait for markets to be eaten from 10am-9pm and in some cases 24 hours a day; a non-stop gluttonous feast. How the market is created is a whole other subject.

Although this all sounds cynical, my hope is that retailers would recognized the economic and social benefits to customizing specific stores to accommodate the variables of different locations. A policy of local customization would benefit both the retailer and the customer. Wal-Mart has been practicing this overseas as many other multi-national corporations have. In China, Wal-Mart, out of necessity to accommodate its market, has transformed outdoor food markets into more hygienic indoor markets. Couldn’t this kind of tuning occur at local scales, from store to store? It seems logical that the specific catering to local needs would give the store an advantage over others in a tight market.

The current structure of the Wal-Mart hierarchy is as tight as chain of commands get. In 2002 approximately 4000 store managers were overseen by 350 district managers, who report to 35 regional managers, then 6 division heads, then to Tom Coughlin, the head of Wal-Mart Stores. On top of all this there are 55 senior vice presidents reporting to 27 executive vice presidents, who meet with Lee Scott, the CEO. Wal-Mart has managed to create its own culture. Its philosophy is applied through each ‘associate’ from the CEO to the cashier without a hitch. Every employee knows Wal-Mart’s policy, not through a set of instructions, but rather a philosophy, always keeping the original message cohesive and undisputed. Sam Walton’s 3 original basic beliefs are: 1. Respect for the Individual, 2. Service to Our Customers, 3. Strive for Excellence. They seem generic and simple, but all of Wal-Mart’s policies stem from the 3 basic beliefs. A change to a more fluid policy at the store level, will not necessarily conflict with the interests of the greater company, but rather strengthen the original motives behind the institution of the Wal-Mart culture.

Architecturally, each building would address practical issues of transportation, accessibility, and other intangible programs of social interaction the subconscious of the local people. How could a merchant provide services without knowing to whom its services are being provided to?

A change in this landscape will take a change in architectural policy and practice. There will always be hurdles to overcome, mainly the cost of building architecturally sound environments. I believe it is a matter of time before retailers utilize intelligent design to gain on their competition.