Small Project Design

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Committee for Leadership Education and Small Project Practitioners .
-------------------------------------------
There are many superb responses here.  I feel the need to gather them together, distill the main points, and write a final paper.  For now, though, here is a brief synopsis (by no means all-encompassing) of what I think has been the high points brought up most often...

Before I do that, however, I want to post a portion of one of Eric Rawling's prior posts.  He said:

///I think Architects who have established high values for the sales of their buildings should bring more value to a new project than someone who is not established. This motivates us to do a better job and design more "valuable" buildings and to begin establishing what "value" means. Why wouldn't someone want a Gucci House or a Vera Wang addition? Designers bring more value to all items in America, why not houses? There is a big difference between the amateur and the Architect, but the saddest thing is that I meet more resistance from other Architects on this idea than I do from builders. We have a very lousy perception of ourselves and our self defeatist mentality is holding us back more than "they" are.///

I think this is one of the most important points Eric made.  I think it's valid to compare fashion designers to building designers.  So, it got me thinking: who is the Vera Wang or Gucci of architectural design?  Most likely, it's Zaha Hadid, Frank O. Gehry, Calatravi, I.M. Pei; and, from years gone by, there is Frank Lloyd Wright, Meis van der Rohe, Alvar Aalto, HH Richardson, Louis Sullivan, and Louis Kahn, etc. to name a few and in no particular order.  And let's not forget Julia Morgan, AIA.   What?  You've not heard of her?  Or perhaps you have but most likely not while you were in architecture school. 

Anyways, the likelihood of someone famous in architecture adding their point of view to this discussion is slim to none.  Why?  Because they're too busy doing what we wish we were all doing: creating DESIGNS that people crave.  I guess we can't all reach the heights of a Gucci status brand, but we can try.  Somebody has to make the pants that sell at Walmart.  Not everyone can afford to buy only Guess jeans or Vera Wang gowns.  Putting a Gucci bag with an outfit purchased at Macy's is okay; adding a Michael Grave's addition to a spec home is ridiculous.  But we can try to do it...  Sometimes it's hard to accept that we are bound by certain economies of scale.  Yet, the over-arching point is: as architects, we are equipped- and required/expected- to provide good quality design at any price point.

Back to the idea of prioritizing the main ideas that have surfaced so far...

As I first stated above, I am trying to wrap my mind around all the points that everyone has been making and plan to write them in a coherent manner to share them at a later time.

For now, here is a quick, rough-draft overview:

1. We need to define who we are as architects and what are the core general services we provide. This needs to be separated into two distinct categories: residential and commercial.

2. We need to recapture the training and mindset of the "Master Builder" (i.e. Imhotep; or the architect(s) of the Parthenon, for ex.- how they took care in overseeing the carving of each stone...)

3. We need to revisit our notion of what defines "good design"- aesthetically, functionally, cost-efficiency-wise, environmentally, etc.

4. We need to develop better self-images and we need to really strive to improve our camaraderie and mutual respect between one another, as fellow AIA members, and within the greater architectural community and allied professions.

5. We need to explore more meaningful ways to connect with the public and increase our leadership roles in every facet of society

6. We need to collectively resolve to take back the residential industry/market by storm and work together to create and implement a cohesive, workable strategy to do so.

7.  We need to create a marketing campaign on TV, the internet, social media of all types that will influence how the public perceives architects and their value to society's health, safety, welfare, and aesthetics

8.  We need to get adequately paid for the services we render.  This means, as a pledge to your fellow colleaugues, you will not agree to work for less than an appropriate professional rate for any given architectural service rendered.

Again, this is just a rough draft.

Thanks, again, to everyone who has read and/or posted your thoughts on this topic.  I think everyone's opinion on this forum is valid and has a right to be heard, especially those of you who are fortunate enough to be working and are in the trenches providing architectural services at this time.

Maybe this topic is nearing an end.  Still yet, I always look forward to receiving further input.

Sincerely yours,
Tara

-------------------------------------------
Tara Imani AIA
Architect
Tara Imani Designs, LLC
Houston TX
-------------------------------------------

Tara,

I appreciate the effort you've put into developing a platform for change. I agree with much of what you say, but I have a few issues.

First, I completely disagree that the profession should be divided into two distinct categories: residential and commercial practices. And I'm rather surprised to see such a suggestion on the Small Porject Practioitners Discussion Forum. I don't necessarily equate "small" with "residential". And I think the problem with most state licensing regulations is that most states allow the lion's share of small projects to be designed and built without the benefit of an architect's expertise, as if the majority of the US population doesn't spend most of their days running back and forth between one or two small buildings. Said another way, the health, safety, and welfare of most people in the United States is not deemed important enough to warrant the protection provided by architectural registration regulations.

However, I agree and have been trying to gain support among architects outside my home state for requiring the services of an architect on ALL buildings meant for human habitation, including residential buildings. I don't know another state outside of New Jersey that requires signed and sealed drawings by an architect for single family residences; although I've heard that many local jurisdictions do. This is not merely a "turf battle" between architects and builders, but clearly homes have become more complicated and building codes more complex since most state regulations were developed sometime in the 20th century.

Taking back the residential market is a great goal, and it is going to take a great deal of commitment in terms of time, money and effort. Builders groups like the NAHB have a sizable war chest for us to contend with. They are not gong to be amenable to giving up the control they have without a fight.

Second, I'm not sure how successful another advertising campaign would be given the current economic conditions. Ad campaigns cost money, and the AIA and most of its members are feeling the pinch. I doubt most would agree to chip in $75 per year (the amount of the last ad campaign dues assessment) for a TV and Radio campaign. The social media programs already ongoing seem to be showing signs of connecting member to member; and I would agree that they probably could have a more outward focus.

I would contend that most architects that are engaged in community organizations and programs are better known than they think. Maybe it is a common self-perception of many architects that holds us back. Wouldn't the best place to correct our lack of self-promotion skills be through changes to the college curriculum? Unless you've changed majors sometime in your academic career, most architects have never taken classes in marketing, business law, personnel relations, etc. I think we are so hung up on architecture as an "art" and a "science" that we often forget that in order to be successful we need to treat it as a "business" too. But I'll bet that small firm practitioners understand that better than anyone.

Last, but certainly not least, your item #8 may constitute a violation of anti-trust laws. You should consult with Jay Stevens (if he hasn't already reached out to you) to talk about the limits that must be placed on discussions of this nature.


David Del Vecchio AIA
Architect
David Del Vecchio, Architect, LLC
Cranford NJ
-------------------------------------------