Design with reuse in the architectural design process: practice-based review of changes, challenges, and work routines

Introduction The reuse of building components, despite its ecological importance, remains uncommon. A key reason is the misalignment between reuse requirements and conventional design processes, which rely on standardized materials. Architectural design engages with complex “wicked” problems, and reuse introduces uncertainties in availability, quality, and dimensions, complicating established workflows. Addressing the current research gap in systematic comparisons between reuse-oriented and standard processes, this article examines how component reuse affects material constraints, design modifications, and collaboration across design phases, highlighting design workflow changes and challenges architects encounter in real-world projects. Methods Employing a six-stage, qualitative mixed-methods approach, the study combines semi-structured interviews with pioneering architects, graphic process mapping, and thematic analysis. (1) A review of standard processes and reuse challenges (2) refines research gaps. (3) Twelve interviews with architecture reuse practitioners guided by structured protocols and mental maps capture and (4) analyze workflow logic thematically. (5) Comparing these workflows with standard processes leads to (6) the formalization of three types of reuse integration: early, midway, and late integration, each with distinct work routines (proactive, iterative, and reactive) necessitating shifts in task sequencing, collaboration, and design logic. Results Integrating reuse necessitates rescheduling planning tasks, adapting design approaches to material availability, establishing roles such as demolition coordinators, and coordinating building- and component-level processes. These changes are synthesized into comparative diagrams and a reuse-practice matrix, revealing how reuse workflows vary by phase and building layer, for example, structure (early), façade (midway), and interior (late). Discussion The study proposes a conceptual framework that distinguishes approaches to reuse integration and supports practitioners in navigating reuse-driven design constraints.