Practice Management Member Conversations

I rarely, if ever, post messages on forums like this (thankfully I am busy enough as it is) but I must applaud and concur with Howard Littman. He may call his message a rant, but it is succinct, to the point, and the truth. He enumerates all the issues I have thought about over the years, many of which which only add to the perceived elitism of our profession. The disconnection from everyday, working architects, by magazine editors, the profession's "high flyers" and the central AIA organization results in disenchantment in our chosen profession. Where is the AIA in pressing newspapers and magazines to identify the architects of buildings? More often than not, articles name the Owners, contractors, and of course the usual bevy of opportunistic, self-promoting politicians at ribbon cuttings, grand openings etc. with nary a mention of the architect.
I could go on, but I doubt I can express myself as well as Howard Littman.
Well done, sir!

-------------------------------------------
Stuart Galloway AIA
Kluger Architects, Inc.
Signal Hill CA
-------------------------------------------

To Stuart, and others who have been so kind as to add your voices:

I may from time to time, as time permits, in the next few days, add a few follow-up thoughts.  I want to specifically add another twist to what you mentioned, Stuart, regarding the lack of recognition afforded Architects in connection with projects that otherwise receive widespread notice. 

I should state in advance that this has nothing to do with the AIA, but does have to do with the way our 'next generation' designers are recognized (or not) for what they do.  This involves the way that firms treat their personnel internally - and how that differs from what the public sees.

I recall two specific projects from my 'old days' when I was still an active designer, and partner in charge of design.  Each of the two were, at the time, what I considered important projects for the firm in which I was a partner.  Each involved a rather elaborate and well-promoted groundbreaking ceremony.  In each instance, I was invited to attend the ceremonies (one local and one out of town).  In each instance there was the usual bevy of community players, politicians, media, the Owners, etc.   When it came time to recognize the Architect(s), in each instance a principal of the firm(s) was called upon to speak after being lauded for the excellence of the project about to be constructed.  In each instance the principal took the credit, even though they were not directly involved in the design - because they were the the named partners.  I patiently awaited the moment at which they would turn aside and at a minimum introduce (or at least mention) the partner that was directly responsible for the creation of the project.  That moment never arrived.  The firm took credit and the name partner took credit, and all of the others involved were in effect related to wallflower status. 

I see the same mentality driving much of the publicity that comes out of AIA publications.  Architects and 'Starchitects' of a select few large firms continue to grow in stature but do not go out of their way to point out the 'little people' that actually make the projects come alive.  As a forensic specialist I get to see how projects are actually borne.  More often than not the person that gets the applause is only peripherally involved.  If the AIA and our senior practitioners were truly interested in ensuring the future of our profession they would take extra pains to share the limelight with those in the trenches.  I read interview after interview of 'name architects' and almost never is there a humble comment acknowledging the key nature of contributions made by others.  It's as though major, billion dollar projects are borne whole from napkin sketches - and the rest is just 'routine'.  Let's face it, folks - that is not the way it works.

If the AIA understands and wants to promote the future of this profession, it would be well advised to start digging into how projects are brought to fruition, and focus articles on the still-low-level aspiring stars whose momentary brilliance sitting at a drafting table or computer is what really elevated the project into the stratosphere of excellence.  Most likely, the named principal was out marketing, and had little (and sometimes nothing) to do with the design once the client signed off on the contract and the basic concept.  As an example I recently reviewed a project in which the design fees were in the multi-millions, and the principal that took all the credit logged all of one-half man-week's involvement post-contract execution (i.e. beyond the PR 'pitch').  Even a little acknowledgement and encouragement would go a long way to make up for the low salaries and long hours (here I will reference this month's edition of Architect, in which average salaries are reviewed).  

Another late night rant, inspired by a good Chianti. 

As an aside, I will note that since my original post appeared I have received a number of private email responses from people that do not want to publicly post for fear of rocking the boat.  As I can, I will try to cut and paste or paraphrase some of their comments, anonymously, in that they may prove of interest to 'board' readers (no pun intended).

-------------------------------------------
Howard Littman AIA
Forensic Architect, Expert Witness
Howard I. Littman, AIA
Agoura Hills CA
-------------------------------------------

Thanks again, Mr. Littman, for your well reasoned comments.

But surely you remember that the last phase of a project is "Praise and Honor for the Non-Participants"?  At my last "Grand Opening" experience, the speakers included the initial client (who had to sell the project), the current client, his gaming division president, the general manager, and local politicians.  We did, as a firm, and the principal specifically got mentioned, but it was gallling to see the politicians revel in the good feelings at that time after they had done so little to help bring things about, or even opposed them.

At least I got to go (it was out of town).  One engineering firm I know of would confiscate invitations to grand openings for staff members, so that only the principal would go.  The never officially invited people would find out about it however, and that was always a part of the reasons they would leave and start their own firms.  I think that one outfit fathered 4 or 5 other firms over time.

You make a good point too about what the architectural publications focus on.  I blog here from time to time on project management, as I believe it is essential to successfully bringing a building into being - yet the hard work that architectural PM's put in is given no recognition by the press or the AIA.  No silver medal for project managment, I'm afraid.  Yet - if we continue to move to an Integrated Project Delivery model we MUST learn better PM practices if are to work as equal colleagues with the contractors.  They have planned out every phase, every step of the construction process, creating schedules, reports, drawings, etc. to document the process.  Compare that to what the design professions typically have.

I would also encourage those people that have written to you privately to share their opinions here.  It is important for AIA leadership and staff to understand where their members stand on various issues.  For them to know we all need to speak out and participate.  I'm sure the leadership and staff of the AIA would like to know their membership backs them up on their initiatives and programs, or at least avoids doing what is not supported by a majority.



-------------------------------------------
Klaus Steinke AIA
Las Vegas NV
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-02-2011 02:12
From: Howard Littman
Subject: AIA Renewal

To Stuart, and others who have been so kind as to add your voices:

I may from time to time, as time permits, in the next few days, add a few follow-up thoughts.  I want to specifically add another twist to what you mentioned, Stuart, regarding the lack of recognition afforded Architects in connection with projects that otherwise receive widespread notice. 

I should state in advance that this has nothing to do with the AIA, but does have to do with the way our 'next generation' designers are recognized (or not) for what they do.  This involves the way that firms treat their personnel internally - and how that differs from what the public sees.

I recall two specific projects from my 'old days' when I was still an active designer, and partner in charge of design.  Each of the two were, at the time, what I considered important projects for the firm in which I was a partner.  Each involved a rather elaborate and well-promoted groundbreaking ceremony.  In each instance, I was invited to attend the ceremonies (one local and one out of town).  In each instance there was the usual bevy of community players, politicians, media, the Owners, etc.   When it came time to recognize the Architect(s), in each instance a principal of the firm(s) was called upon to speak after being lauded for the excellence of the project about to be constructed.  In each instance the principal took the credit, even though they were not directly involved in the design - because they were the the named partners.  I patiently awaited the moment at which they would turn aside and at a minimum introduce (or at least mention) the partner that was directly responsible for the creation of the project.  That moment never arrived.  The firm took credit and the name partner took credit, and all of the others involved were in effect related to wallflower status. 

I see the same mentality driving much of the publicity that comes out of AIA publications.  Architects and 'Starchitects' of a select few large firms continue to grow in stature but do not go out of their way to point out the 'little people' that actually make the projects come alive.  As a forensic specialist I get to see how projects are actually borne.  More often than not the person that gets the applause is only peripherally involved.  If the AIA and our senior practitioners were truly interested in ensuring the future of our profession they would take extra pains to share the limelight with those in the trenches.  I read interview after interview of 'name architects' and almost never is there a humble comment acknowledging the key nature of contributions made by others.  It's as though major, billion dollar projects are borne whole from napkin sketches - and the rest is just 'routine'.  Let's face it, folks - that is not the way it works.

If the AIA understands and wants to promote the future of this profession, it would be well advised to start digging into how projects are brought to fruition, and focus articles on the still-low-level aspiring stars whose momentary brilliance sitting at a drafting table or computer is what really elevated the project into the stratosphere of excellence.  Most likely, the named principal was out marketing, and had little (and sometimes nothing) to do with the design once the client signed off on the contract and the basic concept.  As an example I recently reviewed a project in which the design fees were in the multi-millions, and the principal that took all the credit logged all of one-half man-week's involvement post-contract execution (i.e. beyond the PR 'pitch').  Even a little acknowledgement and encouragement would go a long way to make up for the low salaries and long hours (here I will reference this month's edition of Architect, in which average salaries are reviewed).  

Another late night rant, inspired by a good Chianti. 

As an aside, I will note that since my original post appeared I have received a number of private email responses from people that do not want to publicly post for fear of rocking the boat.  As I can, I will try to cut and paste or paraphrase some of their comments, anonymously, in that they may prove of interest to 'board' readers (no pun intended).

-------------------------------------------
Howard Littman AIA
Forensic Architect, Expert Witness
Howard I. Littman, AIA
Agoura Hills CA
-------------------------------------------

This lengthy and worthwhile discussion originally began as a question regarding the value of AIA membership vs. its cost, sparked by this being renewal season.

I have been an AIA member since 1979 and would like to weigh in, unofficially, as the current 2011 Chair of the AIA Practice Management Knowledge Community.

AIA members can select free and unlimited "membership" from among approximately 18 Knowledge Communities when paying dues. More than 8,000 have chosen to be "members" of the Practice Management Knowledge Community and our 5-person Advisory Group (each of us busy AIA members volunteering our time, and well-supported by capable AIA staff members) works hard to provide value to our fellow members. As examples, we:

Publish a quarterly online Practice Management Digest that is emailed to our members, each issue with timely and relevant articles aimed at helping architects manage their firms more successfully.

Produce six free webinars per year, also with the same goal as the Digest. (I'd point out that other professional associations similar to the AIA that serve engineers charge $200 or more to their members for each of their webinars.)

Are working to reorganize and revamp the AIA's Best Practices, a compendium of 400+ short articles on every aspect of practice management available free online at aia.org.

Stage an annual fall conference in association with a different AIA state or regional organization in which we solicit and evaluate presenters of timely content.

Support and produce workshops and seminars at each year's AIA national convention.

Award scholarships each year to up-and-coming young architects.

You get the idea...if you're interested, go to www.aia.org/pm.

Our greatest disappointment comes when so many architects appear to be unaware of the value that the AIA offers to its members; and we are just one of 18 such Knowledge Communities offering similar value to our members.

Of course the AIA can improve, in many ways. And as many of the contributors to this online conversation, I too would like to see the image of my profession elevated and think the AIA should lead that initiative. But at the root of this discussion, it appears to me that many of those who question the the value of the AIA vs. the cost of membership do not consider many of the components that comprise the value side of that equation.

-------------------------------------------
Ray Kogan AIA
President
Kogan & Company
Arlington VA

2011 Chair, Practice Management Knowledge Community
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-02-2011 02:12
From: Howard Littman
Subject: AIA Renewal

To Stuart, and others who have been so kind as to add your voices:

I may from time to time, as time permits, in the next few days, add a few follow-up thoughts.  I want to specifically add another twist to what you mentioned, Stuart, regarding the lack of recognition afforded Architects in connection with projects that otherwise receive widespread notice. 

I should state in advance that this has nothing to do with the AIA, but does have to do with the way our 'next generation' designers are recognized (or not) for what they do.  This involves the way that firms treat their personnel internally - and how that differs from what the public sees.

I recall two specific projects from my 'old days' when I was still an active designer, and partner in charge of design.  Each of the two were, at the time, what I considered important projects for the firm in which I was a partner.  Each involved a rather elaborate and well-promoted groundbreaking ceremony.  In each instance, I was invited to attend the ceremonies (one local and one out of town).  In each instance there was the usual bevy of community players, politicians, media, the Owners, etc.   When it came time to recognize the Architect(s), in each instance a principal of the firm(s) was called upon to speak after being lauded for the excellence of the project about to be constructed.  In each instance the principal took the credit, even though they were not directly involved in the design - because they were the the named partners.  I patiently awaited the moment at which they would turn aside and at a minimum introduce (or at least mention) the partner that was directly responsible for the creation of the project.  That moment never arrived.  The firm took credit and the name partner took credit, and all of the others involved were in effect related to wallflower status. 

I see the same mentality driving much of the publicity that comes out of AIA publications.  Architects and 'Starchitects' of a select few large firms continue to grow in stature but do not go out of their way to point out the 'little people' that actually make the projects come alive.  As a forensic specialist I get to see how projects are actually borne.  More often than not the person that gets the applause is only peripherally involved.  If the AIA and our senior practitioners were truly interested in ensuring the future of our profession they would take extra pains to share the limelight with those in the trenches.  I read interview after interview of 'name architects' and almost never is there a humble comment acknowledging the key nature of contributions made by others.  It's as though major, billion dollar projects are borne whole from napkin sketches - and the rest is just 'routine'.  Let's face it, folks - that is not the way it works.

If the AIA understands and wants to promote the future of this profession, it would be well advised to start digging into how projects are brought to fruition, and focus articles on the still-low-level aspiring stars whose momentary brilliance sitting at a drafting table or computer is what really elevated the project into the stratosphere of excellence.  Most likely, the named principal was out marketing, and had little (and sometimes nothing) to do with the design once the client signed off on the contract and the basic concept.  As an example I recently reviewed a project in which the design fees were in the multi-millions, and the principal that took all the credit logged all of one-half man-week's involvement post-contract execution (i.e. beyond the PR 'pitch').  Even a little acknowledgement and encouragement would go a long way to make up for the low salaries and long hours (here I will reference this month's edition of Architect, in which average salaries are reviewed).  

Another late night rant, inspired by a good Chianti. 

As an aside, I will note that since my original post appeared I have received a number of private email responses from people that do not want to publicly post for fear of rocking the boat.  As I can, I will try to cut and paste or paraphrase some of their comments, anonymously, in that they may prove of interest to 'board' readers (no pun intended).

-------------------------------------------
Howard Littman AIA
Forensic Architect, Expert Witness
Howard I. Littman, AIA
Agoura Hills CA
-------------------------------------------

To Howard, in response to your latest post:

I think I read Stuart's post a little differently than you.  You seem to be looking for personal recognition for your input into a particular project.  I believe Stuart may be looking for media attention to the fact that an Architect was involved and that the project is better for it. 

I work for a small firm.  As such, I spend a lot of time marketing our firm in addition to designing, detailing, and observing construction.  My goal in getting attention is to promote the firm and get more projects, not to collect glory for myself.  I know that many in this profession would like to be the larger than life 'name architect', but the real purpose for getting mentioned in the article, or speaking at the ground breaking is to promote the firm, not the individual.  In our case, the best person suited for that purpose is frequently the one who's name is on the door.  This is not to steal glory from other individuals, but because he is usually the one who is best at putting forward a clear message representing the firm's work.  I am lucky to work for in a firm that has a leader who is good at this, and he is also gracious at spreading the spotlight to include the hard working people on the team.  I know in a lot of firms, this is not the case.

My advice is that if you are an individual that craves the spotlight and the attention of being in front of those types of situations, than you need to learn how to convey the message that the firm needs to have out there, and work at putting yourself in the position of helping your firm spread its name.  You may be more interested in your name, then the firm's name.  There is nothing wrong with that, but you should recognize that the firm has other priorities.  In that instance, you may be better off creating a firm around your name.  Very few people get name recognition by working quietly in the corner and then complaining that no one notices them.  

Back to Stuart's comment, I think a valid service we should expect our orginization to work on is recognition about the need for an architect on a project.  We need to somehow get it into the media's brain that when they are covering a story about a new project, that in addition to the owner, the construction firm and the finance company, they should be seeking input from the architect.  I am not sure how to get it done.  I spend a lot of time talking to media sources, but have so far not been very successful.  I would be interested in comments from others who have strategies that work.

-------------------------------------------
Robert Humason AIA
Architect
ATA Beilharz Architects
Cincinnati OH
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-02-2011 02:12
From: Howard Littman
Subject: AIA Renewal

To Stuart, and others who have been so kind as to add your voices:

I may from time to time, as time permits, in the next few days, add a few follow-up thoughts.  I want to specifically add another twist to what you mentioned, Stuart, regarding the lack of recognition afforded Architects in connection with projects that otherwise receive widespread notice. 

I should state in advance that this has nothing to do with the AIA, but does have to do with the way our 'next generation' designers are recognized (or not) for what they do.  This involves the way that firms treat their personnel internally - and how that differs from what the public sees.

I recall two specific projects from my 'old days' when I was still an active designer, and partner in charge of design.  Each of the two were, at the time, what I considered important projects for the firm in which I was a partner.  Each involved a rather elaborate and well-promoted groundbreaking ceremony.  In each instance, I was invited to attend the ceremonies (one local and one out of town).  In each instance there was the usual bevy of community players, politicians, media, the Owners, etc.   When it came time to recognize the Architect(s), in each instance a principal of the firm(s) was called upon to speak after being lauded for the excellence of the project about to be constructed.  In each instance the principal took the credit, even though they were not directly involved in the design - because they were the the named partners.  I patiently awaited the moment at which they would turn aside and at a minimum introduce (or at least mention) the partner that was directly responsible for the creation of the project.  That moment never arrived.  The firm took credit and the name partner took credit, and all of the others involved were in effect related to wallflower status. 

I see the same mentality driving much of the publicity that comes out of AIA publications.  Architects and 'Starchitects' of a select few large firms continue to grow in stature but do not go out of their way to point out the 'little people' that actually make the projects come alive.  As a forensic specialist I get to see how projects are actually borne.  More often than not the person that gets the applause is only peripherally involved.  If the AIA and our senior practitioners were truly interested in ensuring the future of our profession they would take extra pains to share the limelight with those in the trenches.  I read interview after interview of 'name architects' and almost never is there a humble comment acknowledging the key nature of contributions made by others.  It's as though major, billion dollar projects are borne whole from napkin sketches - and the rest is just 'routine'.  Let's face it, folks - that is not the way it works.

If the AIA understands and wants to promote the future of this profession, it would be well advised to start digging into how projects are brought to fruition, and focus articles on the still-low-level aspiring stars whose momentary brilliance sitting at a drafting table or computer is what really elevated the project into the stratosphere of excellence.  Most likely, the named principal was out marketing, and had little (and sometimes nothing) to do with the design once the client signed off on the contract and the basic concept.  As an example I recently reviewed a project in which the design fees were in the multi-millions, and the principal that took all the credit logged all of one-half man-week's involvement post-contract execution (i.e. beyond the PR 'pitch').  Even a little acknowledgement and encouragement would go a long way to make up for the low salaries and long hours (here I will reference this month's edition of Architect, in which average salaries are reviewed).  

Another late night rant, inspired by a good Chianti. 

As an aside, I will note that since my original post appeared I have received a number of private email responses from people that do not want to publicly post for fear of rocking the boat.  As I can, I will try to cut and paste or paraphrase some of their comments, anonymously, in that they may prove of interest to 'board' readers (no pun intended).

-------------------------------------------
Howard Littman AIA
Forensic Architect, Expert Witness
Howard I. Littman, AIA
Agoura Hills CA
-------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------
Gary Bruck AIA
Columbus OH
-------------------------------------------
Stuart, our local chapter AIA office ran a program for 10 years called Architectural Awareness. I sat on this committee for the duration, chairing for the last 2 years. The emphasis was to raise the public awareness of what architects do, so as to dispel the classic question "don't you just draw up blueprints???". This was accomplished by budgeting for a media consultant to proactively ensure that when a publication, news outlet, or tv and radio spot needed to speak about a project, the architect was not only mentioned, but usually interviewed. This process slowly raised the awareness level of those doing the writing or reporting, as they realized that the architect plays a vital role in sculpting our built enviroment. All of this was made possible through the efforts of a lot of faithful AIA volunteers and the support (especially the financial support) of the local chapter office.

The present economic climate has understandably taken its toll on membership, lowering operating budgets and eliminating the funding for a media consultant and therefore the Architectural Awareness committee. This will facilitate the erosion of the media mindset regarding thinking about the architects role, and we will slowly take a step backwards. I encourage all architects to realize that membership can have good consequences and to take proactive steps to be involved. Brown bag 5-6 lunches a month, your dues will be covered and you will walk away with more than just heartburn!