The Value of Architecture:
25.06.2013
Architects - A worthless lot ?
50 years ago an elderly gentleman asked me what I did.
“I’m at university studying Architecture” I said.
“Ah, what a noble profession” said he. But, that was then and now is now.
How has it come about that now, as Australia’s economy is one of the world’s
strongest and our 4 major banks are now seen as the most profitable in the developed
world our once “noble profession”, Architecture has descended to wobble in
uncertainty at the bottom of the professional pile, for like it or not, that is where we
sit ?
As the AIA 2013 awards attest, we, by any standards, design excellent buildings.
But, our role in the construction industry has pitifully and painfully diminished.
There are connections to be made.
During the past half century or so the paradigm of economic rationalism based around
the premise of continuing economic ‘growth’ has, well, prospered.
Remarkably.
To the extent that those who hold the purse strings are in control. They run the show.
And we architects, at the bottom of the money chain, are less than pawns.
In the money lenders’ eyes, we are regarded as fiscal nincompoops, creative beings
perhaps but, not to be trusted with money, or at least, their money.
But our situation is worse than that.
Historically, we have worked for Clients who pay us for our services; sometimes our
professional fees being calculated as a percentage of the Cost of The Works.
And if this be the case then despite the Fee Agreements in place, in the money lenders’
eyes, where is the incentive for the Architect to contain costs within the budget, or
even within the fixed price Contract figure ? The higher the cost, the higher our fees ?
Is this not so ?
There is in banking eyes, a clear conflict of interest.
Which is why we are underneath the very powerful thumbs of “Project Managers”.
And there we generally sit, shafted and short-shifted, more often than not novated to
the complex and onerous confines of a D and C contract and by default absorbing all
of the risks contained therein.
And we are not even allowed, in fact we are disallowed to work to a recognizable and
appropriate fee scale, because that would lead to collusion ??
And Architects, that is us, are supposed to be very well educated and intelligent.
How dumb is that ?
But hang on.
Once we did it all. We managed the whole show.
Maybe not noble, but we were trusted. Architects planned, not just buildings, but
settlements, towns, villages, even cities. Our tasks were over time, clearly defined by
the Architects’ Act supported by a Code of Professional Practice.
Both still exist but to what purpose ? Do we dare read them ?
Look in the mirror.
We, or very many of us are behaving like fools. Screwed stupid. Egos tickled while
being encouraged to brawl and compete with each other for what ?
To sign a Fee Agreement in which we risk all and get paid f... all.
I have a simple premise. Can we do the job for the money - Properly ?
If not we are already negligent...
So how do we change our situation ?
Well, we have to take charge. We have to resume control.
To do that we will have to prove both our professional expertise and integrity and
more importantly than that demonstrate our worth and our value.
Should that be so hard ?
Not if we are united.
Adversarial behavior amongst ourselves will get us nowhere.
We Architects need to collaborate - to clearly pronounce our capabilities, proclaim our
value, agree on our fee scales and participate in the structuring of agreements and
contracts in which all parties are accountable for their actions.
Did not the CSIRO effectively demonstrate some years ago that the value
that the Architect providing “Full Services” to the Client brought to the project far
exceeded the Architect’s professional fees ? And produced a more economic
outcome ?
Where is that report ?
Because, that is what we must demonstrate and soon.
More questions than answers I know, but let’s go.
(I’ll do the ‘educative’ writing...)
Dennis C