Three programmes, twenty-four years
The practice's record holds three interior programmes that bracket its whole history: Sunrise Export in 2002, sixteen hundred square feet of office interiors in Aligarh; Kirloskar Brothers in 2006, forty-five hundred square feet in Delhi; Organon Institute in 2026, a coaching-institute fit-out back home. Different decades, different cities, different budgets. Read the programmes side by side and one method holds them together: the workflow was drawn first, and the aesthetics were decided inside it.
What the workflows asked
Sunrise Export, 2002. The recorded programme: two director cabins, accounts room, conference room, reception and waiting lounge, staff room, entry toilet. Read that list as a document about hierarchy and flow. A visitor is received and cannot wander. Two principals get equal, separate rooms. Accounts sits where movement can be seen. The staff room is placed where the staff can be reached without crossing the reception. In sixteen hundred square feet, that is a complete theory of the company, and the interior merely executes it.
Kirloskar Brothers, 2006. The programme reads as a sales system: spacious reception and waiting, manager cabin, workstations laid out for productivity, director cabin. The aesthetic question, what the office should look like, was subordinate to a layout question: how a visitor flows from the door to a desk to a decision. Twenty years later that office would be dressed differently. It would be planned the same way, because the plan is the client's business wearing a floor plan.
Organon Institute, 2026. The newest programme is the most specific: reception and waiting, counselling chamber, four classrooms, toilet, pantries, and constraints that arrive from regulation and technology rather than fashion: fire NOC compliance, digital boards with recording cameras for virtual classes, and an industrial interior, grey ceiling and 2x2 flooring, with fluted louvers. The aesthetic is stated inside the brief itself, calm, industrial, recordable, because a coaching institute's interior is a teaching instrument. The camera must see the board and the students; the acoustics must survive four classrooms running at once; the grey ceiling admits what it is and lets the lighting do the work.
The pattern across all three
The room list is a business document: read properly, an interior programme tells you how an organisation actually works, who meets whom, who watches whom, who arrives from outside. Draw that before drawing a single aesthetic line.
Position is then the primary aesthetic act. The reception feels welcoming because it sees the door; the cabin feels calm because it sits at the end of the flow; the classroom works because the camera's sightline was treated as a design line. Clients experience all of this as beauty, and it is circulation, decided early.
Surface comes last and costs least. The fluted louver, the grey ceiling and the stone are the interior's vocabulary, chosen within the workflow's skeleton. Reverse the order and you get the district's familiar disappointment: interiors that photograph beautifully in their first month and fight their users for the next ten years.
For the client planning an interior
Bring the workflow, not the mood board, to the first meeting. Who comes in, who sits where, what must be watched, what must be quiet, what must be recorded. The mood board is a five-minute exercise at the end. The workflow is the design.
The practice's interiors and the buildings that hold them are in the work archive, and the deliverables of an interiors engagement are on what you receive.