22 July 2026
Giovanni Sanna on AI, architectural thinking and the value of choice.
“For us, AI doesn’t replace the design process; it expands certain stages of it,” explains architect Giovanni Sanna, co-founder of a-fact architecture factury […].
For Sanna, AI becomes a means of supporting and extending the design process, rather than replacing it. […] “We mainly use AI as a tool for acceleration and comparison. It helps generate alternatives, test hypotheses, make intuitions more explicit and produce intermediate material that supports critical thinking. It is not, however, the place where a project is automatically born. Design continues to emerge from the relationship between context, constraints, architectural intent and the ability to synthesise them.”
The Need for Direction
The architect’s reflections reveal an important distinction: artificial intelligence can support the creative process, but it cannot replace architectural thinking. On the contrary, its effectiveness depends on the existence of a clear design intention.
“Without direction, AI tends to generate generic images, recurring formal solutions or visually seductive but ultimately weak proposals. The issue is not asking AI to design the project but understanding how to use it to enhance the quality of architectural thinking.” […]
This perspective shifts the discussion from technology itself to the way architects construct knowledge and make decisions.
Organising Knowledge
“The most interesting impact concerns the organisation of work”, says Sanna. “AI is changing how practices collect information, develop scenarios, synthesise data, prepare meetings, structure documents and communicate decisions internally.” […] As processes accelerate and the number of possible outputs increases, however, the architect’s ability to select and interpret becomes increasingly important. “As the amount of available output increases, so does the need for critical selection. AI can multiply possibilities, but it cannot determine what is truly relevant, what is necessary, what is culturally meaningful or what creates value for a specific place and community. It is precisely within this act of interpretation that the essential part of architectural design continues to reside.”
The Value of Choice
[…]The question therefore returns to the role of the architect and to the responsibility inherent in the act of design. “The decisive moment remains the design act itself”, says Sanna. “It is the moment when data, constraints, images, references and possibilities are transformed into a coherent decision. A project is not simply about selecting from different options. It comes into being when someone assumes responsibility for a particular choice and for its consequences. That is where the architect’s responsibility truly lies.” […]
Alongside these opportunities, Sanna also identifies one of the principal risks associated with the widespread adoption of AI: homogenisation. “There is already a recognisable AI aesthetic. […] The real danger is not simply that buildings will begin to resemble one another, but that we gradually lose our ability to produce difference, specificity and meaningful connections to place. This is why these tools must never be used passively.” […]
The architect’s role therefore remains rooted in the ability to interpret possibilities, attribute meaning and transform information into a conscious design decision
