Practice Management Member Conversations

The brochure, "You and Your Architect", chronicles the process of working with an architect. Hard copies are accompanied by a DVD program with Sarah Susanka, FAIA. This is an inventoried item at Balmar. A local component can certainly order copies of the brochure from Balmar (order form, see item N802). Brochures are free, except for shipping.

You may also visit the How Design Works micro-site, http://howdesignworks.aia.org/. A .pdf version of the "You" brochure can be downloaded from the "AIA Tools for You" tab on the site. (By the way, this entire site is intended for members to use with prospective clients.)

The brochure, "You and Your Architect", chronicles the process of working with an architect. Hard copies are accompanied by a DVD program with Sarah Susanka, FAIA. This is an inventoried item at Balmar. A local component can certainly order copies of the brochure from Balmar (order form, see item N802). Brochures are free, except for shipping.

You may also visit the How Design Works micro-site, http://howdesignworks.aia.org/. A .pdf version of the "You" brochure can be downloaded from the "AIA Tools for You" tab on the site. (By the way, this entire site is intended for members to use with prospective clients.)

The brochure, "You and Your Architect", chronicles the process of working with an architect. Hard copies are accompanied by a DVD program with Sarah Susanka, FAIA. This is an inventoried item at Balmar. A local component can certainly order copies of the brochure from Balmar (order form, see item N802). Brochures are free, except for shipping.

You may also visit the How Design Works micro-site, http://howdesignworks.aia.org/. A .pdf version of the "You" brochure can be downloaded from the "AIA Tools for You" tab on the site. (By the way, this entire site is intended for members to use with prospective clients.)

Jerry, perhaps you have oversimplified the situation a bit but your point is well taken and perhaps re-phrases a portion of the question a little more clearly.

To expand upon this specific situation a bit further; I went to the project site over the course of a weekend and discussed the project with the potential client over the course of a two days. During that time various questions arose over what the client wanted to achieve and what the needs where, both form a physical building perspective and also from a stake holder view. The client could not answer some of the questions and needed to look into it. With other questions it seemed they needed to develop the business further to answer including adding an entire building end user group to the program.  Other open issues where things like a survey of the site.  We left it at this: when they had some of the questions answered they would write them down and forward to me along with a survey of the site so I could give them a proposal. I could not figure out how to present a proposal without some of those questions answered and I conveyed that to the client. As we all know, the owner has responsibilities during a project as well as the architect.

But it appears they have been developing the project parameters and started design related activities without an architect (see prior post).  So perhaps the tile of my original post was not the best, but this project would have been belter served with an architect, myself or not, involved sooner than later and I am afraid it is too late for this one, they got the ball rolling in the wrong direction.  I am completely sure the needs of the client have not been meet by their own efforts and the efforts of the "free design services" they received from potential contractors.  If I or anther architect do eventually get involved with this project it is already off to a bad start and I guess I am trying to find a way to prevent the same for the next one.

I like your statement "Our potential client's needs are not derived with the purpose of providing architects commissions. They are the result of an Owner's objectives or needs. The architect is either an instrument or an obstacle. We have the potential to shape that opinion for each owner or client." It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?

Jerry, perhaps you have oversimplified the situation a bit but your point is well taken and perhaps re-phrases a portion of the question a little more clearly.

To expand upon this specific situation a bit further; I went to the project site over the course of a weekend and discussed the project with the potential client over the course of a two days. During that time various questions arose over what the client wanted to achieve and what the needs where, both form a physical building perspective and also from a stake holder view. The client could not answer some of the questions and needed to look into it. With other questions it seemed they needed to develop the business further to answer including adding an entire building end user group to the program.  Other open issues where things like a survey of the site.  We left it at this: when they had some of the questions answered they would write them down and forward to me along with a survey of the site so I could give them a proposal. I could not figure out how to present a proposal without some of those questions answered and I conveyed that to the client. As we all know, the owner has responsibilities during a project as well as the architect.

But it appears they have been developing the project parameters and started design related activities without an architect (see prior post).  So perhaps the tile of my original post was not the best, but this project would have been belter served with an architect, myself or not, involved sooner than later and I am afraid it is too late for this one, they got the ball rolling in the wrong direction.  I am completely sure the needs of the client have not been meet by their own efforts and the efforts of the "free design services" they received from potential contractors.  If I or anther architect do eventually get involved with this project it is already off to a bad start and I guess I am trying to find a way to prevent the same for the next one.

I like your statement "Our potential client's needs are not derived with the purpose of providing architects commissions. They are the result of an Owner's objectives or needs. The architect is either an instrument or an obstacle. We have the potential to shape that opinion for each owner or client." It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?

Tim, if you put it that way you can see why I need to seek help here in the forums.  Perhaps if I had more experience with proposals I could have submitted something un-specific enough to do something but as I said, there were too many un-known here and I needed my friend and his partners (some of whom are lawyers) to provide some answerers. Most of the questions that prevented me from doing a proposal didn't even involve the actual design of a building. Most of the concerns had to do with what I have been referring to as "stake holder "concerns.

Here are just a few specifics: The site is on a small municipality owned air-port facility. The clients have to make a proposal to the city for the project. The city has to approve that proposal adding multiple layers of approvals to the project. They will not spring for a survey until they get that approval. I felt a survey is required before doing a proposal due to the active site with existing infrastructure, multiple overlapping easements, increased complicated zoning and clearance requirements, extra site security requirements etc. I tried to see if the management of the facility had an existing survey or site plan to use as a starting point and I was told the "applicant" had to ask for that directly. They wouldn't even tell me if a plan exists or not, the question had to go thru the "applicant". The same story goes for my questions on required approvals. The city won't tell me and suggested I asked the applicant, which I did. They did say if I was listed on the applicant project team they would talk to me.

But more importantly, as it turns out, a survey isn't the only thing they didn't want to pay for before getting approval by the city. Design service is another. I got this information months after I started trying to get this job. They didn't want to pay if the project didn't get approved (but they need a design to propose?). I suggested we could work out a deferred payment schedule pending approval of the project, if it doesn't get approved, all I get are reimbursables. This would have to be in the proposal. But to take that risk, I needed to know more about the business plan, the partners, the stake holders and a little about the building requirements too.  I also needed some sort of assurance they would pursue the project with all means and not just give it a try to see what happens.

But they started without design professional services on their own. Now I fear they are too far into it, so I figured I would look for info to share with a client on how to work with an architect hoping it stressed getting design professionals involved sooner than later to use in the future.  Also hoping for something to educate myself as well.

Initially I didn't  want to go into all the specific details in this forum as I didn't think it was necessary for the discussion, I didn't want to reveal too much about the client and I also didn't want fellow architects wondering about this knuckle-head  that wants to get involved with a project that is so discombobulated before it starts. But I guess it may be relevant to the discussion after all so here is some of it.

Jerry, perhaps you have oversimplified the situation a bit but your point is well taken and perhaps re-phrases a portion of the question a little more clearly.

To expand upon this specific situation a bit further; I went to the project site over the course of a weekend and discussed the project with the potential client over the course of a two days. During that time various questions arose over what the client wanted to achieve and what the needs where, both form a physical building perspective and also from a stake holder view. The client could not answer some of the questions and needed to look into it. With other questions it seemed they needed to develop the business further to answer including adding an entire building end user group to the program.  Other open issues where things like a survey of the site.  We left it at this: when they had some of the questions answered they would write them down and forward to me along with a survey of the site so I could give them a proposal. I could not figure out how to present a proposal without some of those questions answered and I conveyed that to the client. As we all know, the owner has responsibilities during a project as well as the architect.

But it appears they have been developing the project parameters and started design related activities without an architect (see prior post).  So perhaps the tile of my original post was not the best, but this project would have been belter served with an architect, myself or not, involved sooner than later and I am afraid it is too late for this one, they got the ball rolling in the wrong direction.  I am completely sure the needs of the client have not been meet by their own efforts and the efforts of the "free design services" they received from potential contractors.  If I or anther architect do eventually get involved with this project it is already off to a bad start and I guess I am trying to find a way to prevent the same for the next one.

I like your statement "Our potential client's needs are not derived with the purpose of providing architects commissions. They are the result of an Owner's objectives or needs. The architect is either an instrument or an obstacle. We have the potential to shape that opinion for each owner or client." It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?

Tim, if you put it that way you can see why I need to seek help here in the forums.  Perhaps if I had more experience with proposals I could have submitted something un-specific enough to do something but as I said, there were too many un-known here and I needed my friend and his partners (some of whom are lawyers) to provide some answerers. Most of the questions that prevented me from doing a proposal didn't even involve the actual design of a building. Most of the concerns had to do with what I have been referring to as "stake holder "concerns.

Here are just a few specifics: The site is on a small municipality owned air-port facility. The clients have to make a proposal to the city for the project. The city has to approve that proposal adding multiple layers of approvals to the project. They will not spring for a survey until they get that approval. I felt a survey is required before doing a proposal due to the active site with existing infrastructure, multiple overlapping easements, increased complicated zoning and clearance requirements, extra site security requirements etc. I tried to see if the management of the facility had an existing survey or site plan to use as a starting point and I was told the "applicant" had to ask for that directly. They wouldn't even tell me if a plan exists or not, the question had to go thru the "applicant". The same story goes for my questions on required approvals. The city won't tell me and suggested I asked the applicant, which I did. They did say if I was listed on the applicant project team they would talk to me.

But more importantly, as it turns out, a survey isn't the only thing they didn't want to pay for before getting approval by the city. Design service is another. I got this information months after I started trying to get this job. They didn't want to pay if the project didn't get approved (but they need a design to propose?). I suggested we could work out a deferred payment schedule pending approval of the project, if it doesn't get approved, all I get are reimbursables. This would have to be in the proposal. But to take that risk, I needed to know more about the business plan, the partners, the stake holders and a little about the building requirements too.  I also needed some sort of assurance they would pursue the project with all means and not just give it a try to see what happens.

But they started without design professional services and started on their own. Now I fear they are too far into it, so I figured I would look for info to share with a client on how to work with an architect hoping it stressed getting design professionals involved sooner than later to use in the future.  Also hoping for something to educate myself as well.

Initially I didn't  want to go into all the specific details in this forum as I didn't think it was necessary for the discussion, I didn't want to reveal too much about the client and I also didn't want fellow architects wondering about this knuckle-head  that wants to get involved with a project that is so discombobulated before it starts. But I guess it may be relevant to the discussion after all so here it is.

Jerry, perhaps you have oversimplified the situation a bit but your point is well taken and perhaps re-phrases a portion of the question a little more clearly.

To expand upon this specific situation a bit further; I went to the project site over the course of a weekend and discussed the project with the potential client over the course of a two days. During that time various questions arose over what the client wanted to achieve and what the needs where, both form a physical building perspective and also from a stake holder view. The client could not answer some of the questions and needed to look into it. With other questions it seemed they needed to develop the business further to answer including adding an entire building end user group to the program.  Other open issues where things like a survey of the site.  We left it at this: when they had some of the questions answered they would write them down and forward to me along with a survey of the site so I could give them a proposal. I could not figure out how to present a proposal without some of those questions answered and I conveyed that to the client. As we all know, the owner has responsibilities during a project as well as the architect.

But it appears they have been developing the project parameters and started design related activities without an architect (see prior post).  So perhaps the tile of my original post was not the best, but this project would have been belter served with an architect, myself or not, involved sooner than later and I am afraid it is too late for this one, they got the ball rolling in the wrong direction.  I am completely sure the needs of the client have not been meet by their own efforts and the efforts of the "free design services" they received from potential contractors.  If I or anther architect do eventually get involved with this project it is already off to a bad start and I guess I am trying to find a way to prevent the same for the next one.

I like your statement "Our potential client's needs are not derived with the purpose of providing architects commissions. They are the result of an Owner's objectives or needs. The architect is either an instrument or an obstacle. We have the potential to shape that opinion for each owner or client." It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?

Jerry, perhaps you have oversimplified the situation a bit but your point is well taken and perhaps re-phrases a portion of the question a little more clearly.

To expand upon this specific situation a bit further; I went to the project site over the course of a weekend and discussed the project with the potential client over the course of a two days. During that time various questions arose over what the client wanted to achieve and what the needs where, both form a physical building perspective and also from a stake holder view. The client could not answer some of the questions and needed to look into it. With other questions it seemed they needed to develop the business further to answer including adding an entire building end user group to the program.  Other open issues where things like a survey of the site.  We left it at this: when they had some of the questions answered they would write them down and forward to me along with a survey of the site so I could give them a proposal. I could not figure out how to present a proposal without some of those questions answered and I conveyed that to the client. As we all know, the owner has responsibilities during a project as well as the architect.

But it appears they have been developing the project parameters and started design related activities without an architect (see prior post).  So perhaps the tile of my original post was not the best, but this project would have been belter served with an architect, myself or not, involved sooner than later and I am afraid it is too late for this one, they got the ball rolling in the wrong direction.  I am completely sure the needs of the client have not been meet by their own efforts and the efforts of the "free design services" they received from potential contractors.  If I or anther architect do eventually get involved with this project it is already off to a bad start and I guess I am trying to find a way to prevent the same for the next one.

I like your statement "Our potential client's needs are not derived with the purpose of providing architects commissions. They are the result of an Owner's objectives or needs. The architect is either an instrument or an obstacle. We have the potential to shape that opinion for each owner or client." It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?

Jerry, perhaps you have oversimplified the situation a bit but your point is well taken and perhaps re-phrases a portion of the question a little more clearly.

To expand upon this specific situation a bit further; I went to the project site over the course of a weekend and discussed the project with the potential client over the course of a two days. During that time various questions arose over what the client wanted to achieve and what the needs where, both form a physical building perspective and also from a stake holder view. The client could not answer some of the questions and needed to look into it. With other questions it seemed they needed to develop the business further to answer including adding an entire building end user group to the program.  Other open issues where things like a survey of the site.  We left it at this: when they had some of the questions answered they would write them down and forward to me along with a survey of the site so I could give them a proposal. I could not figure out how to present a proposal without some of those questions answered and I conveyed that to the client. As we all know, the owner has responsibilities during a project as well as the architect.

But it appears they have been developing the project parameters and started design related activities without an architect (see prior post).  So perhaps the tile of my original post was not the best, but this project would have been belter served with an architect, myself or not, involved sooner than later and I am afraid it is too late for this one, they got the ball rolling in the wrong direction.  I am completely sure the needs of the client have not been meet by their own efforts and the efforts of the "free design services" they received from potential contractors.  If I or anther architect do eventually get involved with this project it is already off to a bad start and I guess I am trying to find a way to prevent the same for the next one.

I like your statement "Our potential client's needs are not derived with the purpose of providing architects commissions. They are the result of an Owner's objectives or needs. The architect is either an instrument or an obstacle. We have the potential to shape that opinion for each owner or client." It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?

Jerry, perhaps you have oversimplified the situation a bit but your point is well taken and perhaps re-phrases a portion of the question a little more clearly.

To expand upon this specific situation a bit further; I went to the project site over the course of a weekend and discussed the project with the potential client over the course of a two days. During that time various questions arose over what the client wanted to achieve and what the needs where, both form a physical building perspective and also from a stake holder view. The client could not answer some of the questions and needed to look into it. With other questions it seemed they needed to develop the business further to answer including adding an entire building end user group to the program.  Other open issues where things like a survey of the site.  We left it at this: when they had some of the questions answered they would write them down and forward to me along with a survey of the site so I could give them a proposal. I could not figure out how to present a proposal without some of those questions answered and I conveyed that to the client. As we all know, the owner has responsibilities during a project as well as the architect.

But it appears they have been developing the project parameters and started design related activities without an architect (see prior post).  So perhaps the tile of my original post was not the best, but this project would have been belter served with an architect, myself or not, involved sooner than later and I am afraid it is too late for this one, they got the ball rolling in the wrong direction.  I am completely sure the needs of the client have not been meet by their own efforts and the efforts of the "free design services" they received from potential contractors.  If I or anther architect do eventually get involved with this project it is already off to a bad start and I guess I am trying to find a way to prevent the same for the next one.

I like your statement "Our potential client's needs are not derived with the purpose of providing architects commissions. They are the result of an Owner's objectives or needs. The architect is either an instrument or an obstacle. We have the potential to shape that opinion for each owner or client." It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?

It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?  

 I don't want it to happen again. Help!

It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?  

 I don't want it to happen again. Help!

Jerry, perhaps you have oversimplified the situation a bit but your point is well taken and perhaps re-phrases a portion of the question a little more clearly.

To expand upon this specific situation a bit further; I went to the project site over the course of a weekend and discussed the project with the potential client over the course of a two days. During that time various questions arose over what the client wanted to achieve and what the needs where, both form a physical building perspective and also from a stake holder view. The client could not answer some of the questions and needed to look into it. With other questions it seemed they needed to develop the business further to answer including adding an entire building end user group to the program.  Other open issues where things like a survey of the site.  We left it at this: when they had some of the questions answered they would write them down and forward to me along with a survey of the site so I could give them a proposal. I could not figure out how to present a proposal without some of those questions answered and I conveyed that to the client. As we all know, the owner has responsibilities during a project as well as the architect.

But it appears they have been developing the project parameters and started design related activities without an architect (see prior post).  So perhaps the tile of my original post was not the best, but this project would have been belter served with an architect, myself or not, involved sooner than later and I am afraid it is too late for this one, they got the ball rolling in the wrong direction.  I am completely sure the needs of the client have not been meet by their own efforts and the efforts of the "free design services" they received from potential contractors.  If I or anther architect do eventually get involved with this project it is already off to a bad start and I guess I am trying to find a way to prevent the same for the next one.

I like your statement "Our potential client's needs are not derived with the purpose of providing architects commissions. They are the result of an Owner's objectives or needs. The architect is either an instrument or an obstacle. We have the potential to shape that opinion for each owner or client." It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?

Jerry, perhaps you have oversimplified the situation a bit but your point is well taken and perhaps re-phrases a portion of the question a little more clearly.

To expand upon this specific situation a bit further; I went to the project site over the course of a weekend and discussed the project with the potential client over the course of a two days. During that time various questions arose over what the client wanted to achieve and what the needs where, both form a physical building perspective and also from a stake holder view. The client could not answer some of the questions and needed to look into it. With other questions it seemed they needed to develop the business further to answer including adding an entire building end user group to the program.  Other open issues where things like a survey of the site.  We left it at this: when they had some of the questions answered they would write them down and forward to me along with a survey of the site so I could give them a proposal. I could not figure out how to present a proposal without some of those questions answered and I conveyed that to the client. As we all know, the owner has responsibilities during a project as well as the architect.

But it appears they have been developing the project parameters and started design related activities without an architect (see prior post).  So perhaps the tile of my original post was not the best, but this project would have been belter served with an architect, myself or not, involved sooner than later and I am afraid it is too late for this one, they got the ball rolling in the wrong direction.  I am completely sure the needs of the client have not been meet by their own efforts and the efforts of the "free design services" they received from potential contractors.  If I or anther architect do eventually get involved with this project it is already off to a bad start and I guess I am trying to find a way to prevent the same for the next one.

I like your statement "Our potential client's needs are not derived with the purpose of providing architects commissions. They are the result of an Owner's objectives or needs. The architect is either an instrument or an obstacle. We have the potential to shape that opinion for each owner or client." It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?

After reviewing the post here one main simplified conclusion can be determined. I blew it.  Some suggestions you all provided, and I appreciate them all, suggested part of the services I could have proposed include helping the client determine what they need, program development and set a direction for the project. I hate to admit, I already took care of some of this. When I meet with the client at the site what we were doing was developing the program, discussing some programing options, talking about building types, building materials, HVAC, some approval issues and we even got into some access and building orientation discussions and talked about the operation of the air-port as well.  I was there for two days and if I subtract out tangent conversations we spent several hours discussing the project. We had a good start on a draft program. This is all stuff that would normally be billable but as I said, it's an old friend, I am aware I was giving some potential services away.  All this lead to the questions he couldn't answer during the meetings, questions that had to be answered to take the project to the next step, and the step we skipped to this point, an agreement. We ended with he was to make some program decisions, determine if a certain building user will be in on the project  and consult with one of his partners on a few other issues and then send me the information, so I waited for it. When it didn't arrive, what did I do? Asked where is it? "I'll send it tonight" ... didn't get it....repeat several times. I should have done something different the second or third time we went around that circle to prevent him from trying to start the design process himself.

I guess I should have titled the original post "educate potential clients on how to work with an architect and educate architects how to work with potential clients". And yes, it feels like my brain has been picked over a bit.

Jerry, perhaps you have oversimplified the situation a bit but your point is well taken and perhaps re-phrases a portion of the question a little more clearly.

To expand upon this specific situation a bit further; I went to the project site over the course of a weekend and discussed the project with the potential client over the course of a two days. During that time various questions arose over what the client wanted to achieve and what the needs where, both form a physical building perspective and also from a stake holder view. The client could not answer some of the questions and needed to look into it. With other questions it seemed they needed to develop the business further to answer including adding an entire building end user group to the program.  Other open issues where things like a survey of the site.  We left it at this: when they had some of the questions answered they would write them down and forward to me along with a survey of the site so I could give them a proposal. I could not figure out how to present a proposal without some of those questions answered and I conveyed that to the client. As we all know, the owner has responsibilities during a project as well as the architect.

But it appears they have been developing the project parameters and started design related activities without an architect (see prior post).  So perhaps the tile of my original post was not the best, but this project would have been belter served with an architect, myself or not, involved sooner than later and I am afraid it is too late for this one, they got the ball rolling in the wrong direction.  I am completely sure the needs of the client have not been meet by their own efforts and the efforts of the "free design services" they received from potential contractors.  If I or anther architect do eventually get involved with this project it is already off to a bad start and I guess I am trying to find a way to prevent the same for the next one.

I like your statement "Our potential client's needs are not derived with the purpose of providing architects commissions. They are the result of an Owner's objectives or needs. The architect is either an instrument or an obstacle. We have the potential to shape that opinion for each owner or client." It looks like I don't know how to shape that opinion, at least in this case and I think that could be the question I am trying to answer. How to shape that opinion?