Skidmore Owings MerrillEdit
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP (SOM) stands as one of the most influential architecture, engineering, and urban planning firms in the modern era. Founded in 1936 in Chicago by Louis Skidmore and Nathaniel Owings, the practice quickly embraced a disciplined, design-forward approach that integrated structural ingenuity with sleek, geometric aesthetics. Over the decades, SOM expanded beyond standalone buildings to become a global engine of design and project delivery, shaping skylines from North America to the Middle East and Asia. The firm’s work helped crystallize the tall, glass-washed modernist city that many economies prize for productivity, efficiency, and recognizable corporate identity. Its legacy is visible in thousands of projects, large and small, and in the method by which architecture and engineering are coordinated under a single umbrella.
SOM’s portfolio reflects a distinctive fusion of architectural form, structural logic, and urban intent. The practice has been instrumental in popularizing the high-rise as a productive, flexible work environment while also pushing the boundaries of engineering—making ambitious projects feasible through innovations in wind engineering, modular planning, and project delivery. The firm has also been a focal point in debates about the role of corporate architecture in urban life, offering a lens through which one can evaluate the interaction of market needs, city form, and engineering constraint. This article surveys the firm’s history, notable works, and the debates surrounding its influence on cities and industry, drawing on the broader context of modern architecture and urban planning.
History
Origins and early work (1936–1950s)
SOM was established by Louis Skidmore and Nathaniel Owings with an eye toward integrating architecture and engineering into a unified practice. The early era set a template for a methodological, detail-oriented approach to design that emphasized clarity of form and the practicalities of construction. In New York and Chicago, the firm began to gain a reputation for projects that balanced contemporary aesthetics with dependable performance. The Lever House in New York (1952) became a touchstone of mid-century corporate modernism, notable for its curtain-wall composition and understated elegance, and it helped define a new standard for glass-and-steel office buildings Lever House.
Expansion during the mid-century skyscraper era (1950s–1970s)
During the postwar period, SOM expanded its reach into major urban centers and earned a reputation for large-scale, technically sophisticated skyscrapers. Notable examples include the John Hancock Center in Chicago (1969), where the distinctive exoskeletal support system and modular design addressed both structural efficiency and rentable floor space. The firm’s work during this era also reflected a broader consolidation of engineering and architectural practice, with engineers such as Fazlur R. Khan contributing to the development of high-rise strategies that would influence the industry for decades. The culmination of this period’s emphasis on form, function, and massing can be seen in buildings that redefined city silhouettes and introduced a new standard for corporate architecture John Hancock Center.
Global reach and mega-projects (1980s–2010s)
SOM extended its influence around the world, taking on projects that required a synthesis of master planning, environmental considerations, and structural innovation. The firm played a leading role in designs that addressed rapid urban growth and the need for scalable, efficient work environments. Its work on iconic towers and mixed-use developments demonstrated how engineering clarity and architectural legibility could be applied at global scales, often integrating advanced façade systems, sustainable design strategies, and complex programmatic requirements. Among the most widely recognized contemporary landmarks associated with SOM are the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, which embodies a tiered, setback strategy optimized for both wind performance and microclimatic considerations, and One World Trade Center in New York City, where the project combined symbolic, urban, and structural objectives under a disciplined design process Burj Khalifa One World Trade Center.
Architecture, engineering, and design approach
SOM is renowned for its integrated practice, aligning architectural vision with sophisticated engineering. The firm’s technical culture emphasizes wind analysis, modular planning, and the use of computer-aided design and engineering to coordinate complex systems. This approach has yielded tall buildings with efficient vertical circulation, adaptable floor plates, and robust structural systems, such as tube-frame concepts and bundled-tube configurations that maximize stiffness and interior flexibility. The collaboration between architects and engineers under SOM’s roof helped advance the idea that high performance does not come at the expense of expressive form. Notable projects in this vein include the U.S. Steel Building and other major Chicago skyscrapers, which advanced the practice of combining massing, façade articulation, and structural efficiency into recognizable urban icons Fazlur Khan.
The firm has also embedded urban planning and master planning capabilities into its practice, producing comprehensive projects that consider street-level vitality, transit integration, and long-range city growth. This broader perspective has shaped how corporations think about the built environment in relation to public space, mobility, and economic activity. For readers interested in the broader context of this approach, see Urban planning and Master planning.
Notable projects and influence
SOM’s portfolio includes fixtures of the modern city, with tall buildings, corporate campuses, and urban design work that influenced design language and construction practice worldwide. Key examples include Lever House Lever House, the John Hancock Center John Hancock Center, the Willis Tower (formerly Sears Tower) in Chicago, the Aon Center and related Chicago towers, and the firm’s more recent contributions to global towers such as the Burj Khalifa Burj Khalifa and the master planning components of large urban districts. In New York, One World Trade Center—designed by SOM as the design architect under a team led by David Childs—stands as a modern symbol of resilient urban redevelopment and architectural clarity. The firm’s ongoing global footprint includes projects that blend commercial imperatives with urban-scale thinking, reinforcing SOM’s role in shaping the contemporary skyline One World Trade Center Willis Tower.
SOM’s work has often been discussed in relation to the broader currents of modern architecture, including the International Style and late 20th-century corporate modernism. Its emphasis on structural rationalism and modular design has influenced both the language of architecture and the methods by which large, technically complex projects are delivered. The firm’s leadership has included notable figures such as Gordon Bunshaft and Bruce Graham, who helped advance a design aesthetic that balanced monumentality with practical performance, and whose legacies continue to inform architectural education and practice Gordon Bunshaft Bruce Graham.
Controversies and debates
As with any firm that has shaped major urban skylines, SOM’s work has sparked debates about aesthetics, urban life, and social impact. Critics often point to large glass towers as symbols of corporate power and as contributors to urban form that prioritizes high-value office space over street life, transit accessibility, and neighborhood diversity. Proponents respond that the same towers deliver efficient work environments, tax revenue, employment, and durable urban infrastructure, and that the design language can be adapted to emphasize street-level vitality and sustainability. The controversy, in short, centers on how the built environment reflects economic priorities and whether iconic architecture serves broad urban interests or concentrates them in centralized, high-cost districts. For readers exploring these tensions, the discussions intersect with broader conversations about urban planning, economic development, and architectural symbolism Urban planning.
Another axis of debate concerns the globalization of architectural styles and the export of streamlined, high-rise forms to rapidly developing cities. Supporters argue that SOM’s expertise helps cities manage growth, modernize infrastructure, and attract investment, while critics worry about homogenization, cultural distinctiveness, and the gentrification pressures that can accompany major redevelopment. In evaluating these debates, it is important to consider the role of rigorous engineering, safety standards, and urban sustainability as central elements of any long-term city strategy, alongside aesthetic preferences and the public realm. See also discussions around Urban planning and Sustainable design.
Despite these debates, SOM’s influence on the field is widely acknowledged. The firm’s approach to integrating architectural form, engineering discipline, and urban thinking has created a template for major projects that remain legible, efficient, and technically advanced. The ongoing conversation about the role of architecture in society continues to reference SOM’s work as a benchmark for how large practices can balance economic realities with design integrity.