It may be that the monolithic edifices that typify so many favorite dystopian worlds don't lend themselves to scaling up or down as an organization grows or contracts.
Perhaps only organizations that are immune to market vagaries can handle an architecture that does not respond easily to growth/change. Also, many prefer to lease rather than own, and real estate developers are almost universally conservative and conventional, thus unlikely to underwrite the costs of aesthetically significant architecture.
(In my experience it costs at least twice as much to construct things in a way that is outside standard convention.)
A mixed example, Apple's new campus is a more friendly-faced monolith, but will be difficult to expand without breaking the trademark purity of its circular geometry. (An aside, at least as shown in photos, that building puts my creative mind to sleep and carries a message of conformity, like any monoculture gone to far.)
Perhaps only organizations that are immune to market vagaries can handle an architecture that does not respond easily to growth/change. Also, many prefer to lease rather than own, and real estate developers are almost universally conservative and conventional, thus unlikely to underwrite the costs of aesthetically significant architecture.
(In my experience it costs at least twice as much to construct things in a way that is outside standard convention.)
A mixed example, Apple's new campus is a more friendly-faced monolith, but will be difficult to expand without breaking the trademark purity of its circular geometry. (An aside, at least as shown in photos, that building puts my creative mind to sleep and carries a message of conformity, like any monoculture gone to far.)