The Problem with Architects

One of the things that has been the most disturbing to me since I graduated and joined the world of working architects is how little our craft seems to be understood in the United States, not to mention how little demand there is for architects to work on projects. There is a discussion raging over on archinect about the public conception that architects are wealthy, well paid, and always in high demand; while in reality compared to most of the other white collar professions (doctors, lawyers, et al.) it is the opposite. I for the past three weeks I’ve been trying to figure out how to explain why I think this is the case without devolving this post into a history lecture, and I think I’ve finally figured out how to do that. The root behind all of this confusion is two fold.

First, while architects work in the twenty-first century world, we still base our business on a nineteenth century business model. Unlike other doctors and lawyers who offer a mix of relatively small fee quick services (like sick visits and legal consultation) and large fee longterm services (complex procedures and trial and business law) architects perform mostly large fee longterm services for our clients. Most of our billing is for long drawn out projects, and even when we are involved in smaller home renovation services these projects still take weeks. What we need to discover is a way to sell single visit architectural consultation services which would be attractive to the public. To do this we have to determine a way to quantify the value that our services would add and why business and home owners should hire us instead of a less expensive builder driven solution. This leads into the second issue that architects face.

Architecture is a classist profession, it is only seen as necessity for business and government and as a luxury for upper and upper-middle class people. This contrasts sharply with Doctors and Lawyers who are seen as vital components to the modern way of life. Even the person of the most modest means will most likely visit a doctor in their life, whether through a medical clinic, hospital, or health care plan of some sort. In addition, since 50% of marriages end in divorce, even the poorest person has a very good chance of needing legal counsel if not for divorce, for some other reason. Whereas, most people will never work with an architect directly, and if they live in rural or suburban America, they will probably never live in a home designed by an Architect; the closest they will come will be working in buildings which are required by law to be designed by an Architect. This detachment from our industry prevents people from realizing not only the value of our services, but why we charge what we do for them. This lack of knowledge and detachment makes architecture and design a mysterious luxury, one which is far outside the world of most Americans. This will only change when we as a field discovers a way to make quick small fee services which will make us more accessible and affordable and not such a luxury.

Author: spencer

I am an architect in the Washington DC metro area.

14 thoughts on “The Problem with Architects”

  1. Just as the medical profession and the legal profession have fragmented into specialization, so too should the architecture profession. Like the General Practitioner doctor, the all-purpose Architect is lost in today’s world of specialization. You can walk into IKEA, Home Depot, or (the now defunct) Expo to get your kitchen designed and laid out for you. There are specialists for entertainment/media rooms, home landscaping, etc. There are specialists like NKBA (National Kitchen and Bath Association) members who do the kind of work you describe for most people without needing a full-blown Architect. Even NAHB has member homebuilders who employ house designers who are not licensed architects. Then too, the buildings we all work in that are designed by architects are usually not designed by ONE architect. There is a team of people who work on particular aspects of the whole building e.g., design, engineering, lighting, HVAC, landscaping, etc. The all-purpose Architect will continue to be viewed as a luxury just like a country doctor who does house calls.

    1. I think the era of the all-purpose architect ended in the 1990’s or before. We already have architecture firms that have specialized themselves down to what they do best/most often – healthcare, sports, multi-family, interiors, et al.

      The thing is, the General Practitioner doctor is still going strong because of two things, insurance plans and the fees per services they provide. If you have a cough it doesn’t make sense to see a pulmonary specialist or an ENT unless you’ve already seen your GP. First off, you insurance might require you to see your regular GP first and second the rates these specialists charge are much more than a standard office visit with a GP, so most patients only go to a specialist when they have a problem that a general practitioner can’t solve.

  2. Pingback: Miguel Ângelo
  3. Pingback: Kaísa Isabel
  4. Pingback: Ethel Baraona Pohl
  5. Pingback: Various Architects
  6. Pingback: Rodrigo Medina
  7. Pingback: architecture RSS
  8. Pingback: HDA Paris
  9. Pingback: Randy Brown