Committee on Design

I suppose some of you will think this is an inappropriate use of this medium. Sorry to those. Others I hope will realize that design is at the center of this conversation. December 1, 2014 Dear Colleagues Doctors, lawyers, engineers, accountants, they all have a clearly stated purpose. The public may not always be happy hiring them, but there is no mystery about the need to do so. Architects? They are the EXPERTS about the relationship between humans and the built environment. Although we must never give up our devotion to art, the guiding principle for designers of architecture should be "EVERYTHING FOR A REASON, ARTFULLY DONE". Simple enough? Actually no. In the past ten years, many of the finest minds in our profession have expressed fierce opposition to defining themselves in this way. I have yet to encounter a compelling objection. Some say that the body of knowledge necessary to establish this expertise will limit our creativity. Some caution about the liability that flows from claiming to be such an EXPERT. Others claim that the statement is either empty of meaning, entirely too ambiguous or already the case. The AIA repositioning effort is an acknowledgment of the need for the profession of architecture, and the AIA, to evolve. The AIA Culture Collective (AIACC) is charged with making creative contributions to the repositioning effort. It is a one year effort that will conclude in April of 2015. Send an email to communications@aia.org for more general information about AIACC. AIACC has the following subcommittees. Influence and Prosperity Emerging Firm Culture Emerging Knowledge Exemplary Public Outreach Communications Blue Sky Group 7 Group 7 was founded to foster a meaningful, need I say reasonable, discussion of whether we should define ourselves as experts in the relationship between humans and the built environment. This discussion may lead to an ongoing effort to determine the implications of adopting such a definition and possibly one or more resolutions to be presented to the AIA National Convention in 2016. Humankind's future quality of life will be directly correlated with the extent to which architects effectively design that future. Our ability to do that will be greatly increased if we can genuinely clarify our value to the public Please join this conversation. Should we, can we, be those experts? Will it strengthen our position in our communities? How can we become those experts? How might our practices and education evolve as a result? How can we influence the AIA to move in this direction? For more information about Group 7, send me an email and I will send you the documents we have produced to date. Also, if you would like to comment on the Group 7 proposition, please send it to me and I will share it with Group 7 members, AIACC and the AIA Repositioning Knowledge Community (with your approval). Thank you for your attention. Mike Mense FAIA mmenseArchitect Anchorage Alaska member of the AIA Culture Collective founder of Group 7 mike@mmense.com ------------------------------------------- Mike Mense FAIA Owner mmenseArchitects Anchorage AK -------------------------------------------

I'm sorry to throw water on the embers of one's passion, but Pleaaaaase!

Yet another group/manifesto/vision quest trying to give architects a protected/special place in the world.  If a doctor says 'take this pill' to fix your whatever, you say 'yes Doctor, you're the professional.'  If an architect (specialist in human and environmental interaction) says,' put your sofa in that corner as I'm the expert in this kind of thing,' no doubt you'll say I would rather have it in the other corner.  Same goes for kitchen design, the size of your lecture hall, the color of your cladding, and the shape of your roof.

Everyone is an architect, by this definition.  So let the AIA stay with it's mission of ensuring that if we spend 7 years in training for this glorious yet amorphous role, we get paid the most of everyone.  And that nobody else gets to call themselves 'architect' as flimsy as that term seems to be.  And carve out extra places for our trained abilities rather than miss them (such as Design Thinking and allowing the public to think that LEED is a better qualification than AIA).

Rant over.

-------------------------------------------
John Onken Intl. Assoc. AIA
Director
John Onken Architects Limited
Menlo Park CA
-------------------------------------------

It seems that we've been forever discussing why a doctor's input is more valued than that of an architect. Maybe personal health is just more important than the quality of the physical space with which a person inhabits and interacts? If the AIA can somehow establish and increase the perceived value of an architect, especially that of an "AIA architect", then perhaps we can start moving in a positive direction on this front. The message needs to be clear and compelling, and it needs to be made understandable to the general public. With an increased value perception, increased financial benefits should naturally follow - and perhaps we architects, especially those of us out in the trenches, could actually start to reap some of those benefits. This is especially true for the small firms and sole practitioners out there, who have so much to offer but are typically relegated to the most mundane of projects with the most undesirable clients.

FWIW, in 25+ years of practice and successful completion of hundreds of projects, and despite my best efforts to explain the benefits, I have never, ever, been asked to design a project for LEED certification. I don't think LEED is our magic bullet.

Regardless of the marketing approach employed, in my experience, most prospective clients generally view architects as a necessary evil, whose services (and fees) are to be minimized as much as possible. If we can repair this "culture", and work together to inform the bottom-feeders that exist within our profession that standing firm for better fees is a good thing, we should all see an increase in the architect's perceived value, and experience the related benefits, affording us the opportunity to expend time and resources to create new spaces and systems to benefit all without killing ourselves (or drowning in red ink) in the process. It would move the study of architecture off of those "lowest value college degree" lists, incentivizing subsequent generations of architects to pursue this career choice and thereby limiting the amount of ground our profession gives up to competing forces.



-------------------------------------------
David Barger AIA
Firm Owner/Architect
David Barger Architects Inc.
Rancocas NJ
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-03-2014 23:40
From: John Onken
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA

I'm sorry to throw water on the embers of one's passion, but Pleaaaaase!

Yet another group/manifesto/vision quest trying to give architects a protected/special place in the world.  If a doctor says 'take this pill' to fix your whatever, you say 'yes Doctor, you're the professional.'  If an architect (specialist in human and environmental interaction) says,' put your sofa in that corner as I'm the expert in this kind of thing,' no doubt you'll say I would rather have it in the other corner.  Same goes for kitchen design, the size of your lecture hall, the color of your cladding, and the shape of your roof.

Everyone is an architect, by this definition.  So let the AIA stay with it's mission of ensuring that if we spend 7 years in training for this glorious yet amorphous role, we get paid the most of everyone.  And that nobody else gets to call themselves 'architect' as flimsy as that term seems to be.  And carve out extra places for our trained abilities rather than miss them (such as Design Thinking and allowing the public to think that LEED is a better qualification than AIA).

Rant over.

-------------------------------------------
John Onken Intl. Assoc. AIA
Director
John Onken Architects Limited
Menlo Park CA
-------------------------------------------

see annotations below.  within mr barger's letter
-------------------------------------------
Eugene Ely AIA, LEED AP

San Jose, CA
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-05-2014 13:20
From: David Barger
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA

It seems that we've been forever discussing why a doctor's input is more valued than that of an architect. Maybe personal health is just more important than the quality of the physical space with which a person inhabits and interacts? probably so, and something to come  to grips with and move on   If the AIA can somehow establish and increase the perceived value of an architect, especially that of an "AIA architect", then perhaps we can start moving in a positive direction on this front. The message needs to be clear and compelling, and it needs to be made understandable to the general public. ABSOLUTELY AGREE!  With an increased value perception, increased financial benefits should naturally follow - and perhaps we architects, especially those of us out in the trenches, could actually start to reap some of those benefits. This is especially true for the small firms and sole practitioners out there, who have so much to offer but are typically relegated to the most mundane of projects with the most undesirable clients.

FWIW, in 25+ years of practice and successful completion of hundreds of projects, and despite my best efforts to explain the benefits, I have never, ever, been asked to design a project for LEED certification. many would argue that architects should be  telling  clients  they should be doing LEED projects not  waiting to be  asked I don't think LEED is our magic bullet.

Regardless of the marketing approach employed, in my experience, most prospective clients generally view architects as a necessary evil, whose services (and fees) are to be minimized as much as possible. If we can repair this "culture", and work together to inform the bottom-feeders that exist within our profession that standing firm for better fees is a good thing, AIA got sued  over this years ago and has been gun shy ever  since.  we should all see an increase in the architect's perceived value, and experience the related benefits, affording us the opportunity to expend time and resources to create new spaces and systems to benefit all without killing ourselves (or drowning in red ink) in the process. It would move the study of architecture off of those "lowest value college degree" lists, incentivizing subsequent generations of architects to pursue this career choice and thereby limiting the amount of ground our profession gives up to competing forces.



-------------------------------------------
David Barger AIA
Firm Owner/Architect
David Barger Architects Inc.
Rancocas NJ
-------------------------------------------

I think the value argument hasn't work and never will.  Do you go to a doctor because of value?  Do you use an attorney because of value?  No.  Professional advise is used because we need it.  There is no other reasonable choice.  You cannot get medicine or medical procedures with a doctor involved.  Don't go to court without a lawyer.  You don't want to see what happens.  We need these services to go about life.

What I am saying is all of AIA efforts should be going towards the day when any construction requiring a building permit cannot be performed without a architect.  Thinks of the quality and resiliency of the built environment if architects did have a role in every building.  Think about the improvement in the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Now that would be value.

Need not value is the obstacle to any sell.
-------------------------------------------
Mark Robin AIA
Mark Robin Architecture
Nashville TN
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-08-2014 19:00
From: Eugene Ely
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA


see annotations below.  within mr barger's letter
-------------------------------------------
Eugene Ely AIA, LEED AP

San Jose, CA
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-05-2014 13:20
From: David Barger
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA

It seems that we've been forever discussing why a doctor's input is more valued than that of an architect. Maybe personal health is just more important than the quality of the physical space with which a person inhabits and interacts? probably so, and something to come  to grips with and move on   If the AIA can somehow establish and increase the perceived value of an architect, especially that of an "AIA architect", then perhaps we can start moving in a positive direction on this front. The message needs to be clear and compelling, and it needs to be made understandable to the general public. ABSOLUTELY AGREE!  With an increased value perception, increased financial benefits should naturally follow - and perhaps we architects, especially those of us out in the trenches, could actually start to reap some of those benefits. This is especially true for the small firms and sole practitioners out there, who have so much to offer but are typically relegated to the most mundane of projects with the most undesirable clients.

FWIW, in 25+ years of practice and successful completion of hundreds of projects, and despite my best efforts to explain the benefits, I have never, ever, been asked to design a project for LEED certification. many would argue that architects should be  telling  clients  they should be doing LEED projects not  waiting to be  asked I don't think LEED is our magic bullet.

Regardless of the marketing approach employed, in my experience, most prospective clients generally view architects as a necessary evil, whose services (and fees) are to be minimized as much as possible. If we can repair this "culture", and work together to inform the bottom-feeders that exist within our profession that standing firm for better fees is a good thing, AIA got sued  over this years ago and has been gun shy ever  since.  we should all see an increase in the architect's perceived value, and experience the related benefits, affording us the opportunity to expend time and resources to create new spaces and systems to benefit all without killing ourselves (or drowning in red ink) in the process. It would move the study of architecture off of those "lowest value college degree" lists, incentivizing subsequent generations of architects to pursue this career choice and thereby limiting the amount of ground our profession gives up to competing forces.



-------------------------------------------
David Barger AIA
Firm Owner/Architect
David Barger Architects Inc.
Rancocas NJ
-------------------------------------------

I agree with Mark Robin, let's face it with HGTV everyone believes they are great designers and they can do our jobs just like many nurses believe they can do what the doctors do, the difference is they can't write prescriptions so you have to see the doctor.  Trying to convince the world that an Architect license means someone is a great designer will fall on deaf ears, mine included, some of the best designers I know are not licensed Architects.

The AIA needs to work on requiring a licensed Architect to stamp every plan requiring a building permit, believe me this would cause Architects to be greatly sought after and push the interns to obtain their licenses which they have no urgency to do.  The one item I would add to Mark's comment would be that the AIA needs to push municipalities to require the Architects have Professional liability insurance (just like the Plumbers, Electricians, General Contractor...), this would eliminate the "Basement Architect" who undercuts the legitimate firm and keeps our fees from rising.  I am baffled when I go in for a permit and the municipality doesn't require the Architect to produce their insurance certificate.  If some of the insurance companies knew the homes and buildings they are insuring have an unlicensed and uninsured person designing them they should be worried, get them involved to push our initiative.


-------------------------------------------
Christopher Walsh AIA
Tandem Architecture
Buffalo Grove IL
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-09-2014 18:14
From: Mark Robin
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA

I think the value argument hasn't work and never will.  Do you go to a doctor because of value?  Do you use an attorney because of value?  No.  Professional advise is used because we need it.  There is no other reasonable choice.  You cannot get medicine or medical procedures with a doctor involved.  Don't go to court without a lawyer.  You don't want to see what happens.  We need these services to go about life.

What I am saying is all of AIA efforts should be going towards the day when any construction requiring a building permit cannot be performed without a architect.  Thinks of the quality and resiliency of the built environment if architects did have a role in every building.  Think about the improvement in the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Now that would be value.

Need not value is the obstacle to any sell.
-------------------------------------------
Mark Robin AIA
Mark Robin Architecture
Nashville TN
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-08-2014 19:00
From: Eugene Ely
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA


see annotations below.  within mr barger's letter
-------------------------------------------
Eugene Ely AIA, LEED AP

San Jose, CA
-------------------------------------------

I think we are wearing this thread out, as it sounds like we are preaching to the choir. At the risk of needlessly prolonging the discussion, I feel a need to respond to Christopher Walsh's post, regarding his analogy to nurses and doctors. As an architect working in the healthcare sector, I can safely say I have never worked with a nurse who confused her or his role with that of a physician. And increasingly, we are seeing a shift in healthcare education and delivery where the physician no longer occupies the center of the universe, so to speak, but is the leader of a multidisciplinary team composed of a broad spectrum of providers (sound familiars?). Nurses play distinct but very important roles, and we are seeing more nurse practitioners, who can prescribe medications without physician oversight (though the extent of this authority varies from state to state). Regarding licensure, I agree with Christopher about the importance of licensure. Our firm actively encourages interns to pursue their licenses and become registered. Failure to do so puts a limit on how far they can advance in the firm. However, despite this, only the partners (owners) of the firm can stamp drawings. This is due to our professional liability insurance ... we won't maintain our cover if a non-partner stamps documents. We are a 160-person firm ... maybe policies are structured differently for smaller (or larger) practices? ------------------------------------------- Mark Careaga AIA Associate Principal Payette Associates, Inc. Boston MA -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 12-10-2014 10:16 From: Christopher Walsh Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA I agree with Mark Robin, let's face it with HGTV everyone believes they are great designers and they can do our jobs just like many nurses believe they can do what the doctors do, the difference is they can't write prescriptions so you have to see the doctor. Trying to convince the world that an Architect license means someone is a great designer will fall on deaf ears, mine included, some of the best designers I know are not licensed Architects. The AIA needs to work on requiring a licensed Architect to stamp every plan requiring a building permit, believe me this would cause Architects to be greatly sought after and push the interns to obtain their licenses which they have no urgency to do. The one item I would add to Mark's comment would be that the AIA needs to push municipalities to require the Architects have Professional liability insurance (just like the Plumbers, Electricians, General Contractor...), this would eliminate the "Basement Architect" who undercuts the legitimate firm and keeps our fees from rising. I am baffled when I go in for a permit and the municipality doesn't require the Architect to produce their insurance certificate. If some of the insurance companies knew the homes and buildings they are insuring have an unlicensed and uninsured person designing them they should be worried, get them involved to push our initiative. ------------------------------------------- Christopher Walsh AIA Tandem Architecture Buffalo Grove IL -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 12-09-2014 18:14 From: Mark Robin Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA I think the value argument hasn't work and never will. Do you go to a doctor because of value? Do you use an attorney because of value? No. Professional advise is used because we need it. There is no other reasonable choice. You cannot get medicine or medical procedures with a doctor involved. Don't go to court without a lawyer. You don't want to see what happens. We need these services to go about life. What I am saying is all of AIA efforts should be going towards the day when any construction requiring a building permit cannot be performed without a architect. Thinks of the quality and resiliency of the built environment if architects did have a role in every building. Think about the improvement in the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Now that would be value. Need not value is the obstacle to any sell. ------------------------------------------- Mark Robin AIA Mark Robin Architecture Nashville TN -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 12-08-2014 19:00 From: Eugene Ely Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA see annotations below. within mr barger's letter ------------------------------------------- Eugene Ely AIA, LEED AP San Jose, CA -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 12-05-2014 13:20 From: David Barger Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA It seems that we've been forever discussing why a doctor's input is more valued than that of an architect. Maybe personal health is just more important than the quality of the physical space with which a person inhabits and interacts? probably so, and something to come to grips with and move on If the AIA can somehow establish and increase the perceived value of an architect, especially that of an "AIA architect", then perhaps we can start moving in a positive direction on this front. The message needs to be clear and compelling, and it needs to be made understandable to the general public. ABSOLUTELY AGREE! With an increased value perception, increased financial benefits should naturally follow - and perhaps we architects, especially those of us out in the trenches, could actually start to reap some of those benefits. This is especially true for the small firms and sole practitioners out there, who have so much to offer but are typically relegated to the most mundane of projects with the most undesirable clients. FWIW, in 25+ years of practice and successful completion of hundreds of projects, and despite my best efforts to explain the benefits, I have never, ever, been asked to design a project for LEED certification. many would argue that architects should be telling clients they should be doing LEED projects not waiting to be asked I don't think LEED is our magic bullet. Regardless of the marketing approach employed, in my experience, most prospective clients generally view architects as a necessary evil, whose services (and fees) are to be minimized as much as possible. If we can repair this "culture", and work together to inform the bottom-feeders that exist within our profession that standing firm for better fees is a good thing, AIA got sued over this years ago and has been gun shy ever since. we should all see an increase in the architect's perceived value, and experience the related benefits, affording us the opportunity to expend time and resources to create new spaces and systems to benefit all without killing ourselves (or drowning in red ink) in the process. It would move the study of architecture off of those "lowest value college degree" lists, incentivizing subsequent generations of architects to pursue this career choice and thereby limiting the amount of ground our profession gives up to competing forces. ------------------------------------------- David Barger AIA Firm Owner/Architect David Barger Architects Inc. Rancocas NJ -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 12-03-2014 23:40 From: John Onken Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA I'm sorry to throw water on the embers of one's passion, but Pleaaaaase! Yet another group/manifesto/vision quest trying to give architects a protected/special place in the world. If a doctor says 'take this pill' to fix your whatever, you say 'yes Doctor, you're the professional.' If an architect (specialist in human and environmental interaction) says,' put your sofa in that corner as I'm the expert in this kind of thing,' no doubt you'll say I would rather have it in the other corner. Same goes for kitchen design, the size of your lecture hall, the color of your cladding, and the shape of your roof. Everyone is an architect, by this definition. So let the AIA stay with it's mission of ensuring that if we spend 7 years in training for this glorious yet amorphous role, we get paid the most of everyone. And that nobody else gets to call themselves 'architect' as flimsy as that term seems to be. And carve out extra places for our trained abilities rather than miss them (such as Design Thinking and allowing the public to think that LEED is a better qualification than AIA). Rant over. ------------------------------------------- John Onken Intl. Assoc. AIA Director John Onken Architects Limited Menlo Park CA -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 12-02-2014 13:48 From: Mike Mense Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA I suppose some of you will think this is an inappropriate use of this medium. Sorry to those. Others I hope will realize that design is at the center of this conversation. December 1, 2014 Dear Colleagues Doctors, lawyers, engineers, accountants, they all have a clearly stated purpose. The public may not always be happy hiring them, but there is no mystery about the need to do so. Architects? They are the EXPERTS about the relationship between humans and the built environment. Although we must never give up our devotion to art, the guiding principle for designers of architecture should be "EVERYTHING FOR A REASON, ARTFULLY DONE". Simple enough? Actually no. In the past ten years, many of the finest minds in our profession have expressed fierce opposition to defining themselves in this way. I have yet to encounter a compelling objection. Some say that the body of knowledge necessary to establish this expertise will limit our creativity. Some caution about the liability that flows from claiming to be such an EXPERT. Others claim that the statement is either empty of meaning, entirely too ambiguous or already the case. The AIA repositioning effort is an acknowledgment of the need for the profession of architecture, and the AIA, to evolve. The AIA Culture Collective (AIACC) is charged with making creative contributions to the repositioning effort. It is a one year effort that will conclude in April of 2015. Send an email to communications@aia.org for more general information about AIACC. AIACC has the following subcommittees. Influence and Prosperity Emerging Firm Culture Emerging Knowledge Exemplary Public Outreach Communications Blue Sky Group 7 Group 7 was founded to foster a meaningful, need I say reasonable, discussion of whether we should define ourselves as experts in the relationship between humans and the built environment. This discussion may lead to an ongoing effort to determine the implications of adopting such a definition and possibly one or more resolutions to be presented to the AIA National Convention in 2016. Humankind's future quality of life will be directly correlated with the extent to which architects effectively design that future. Our ability to do that will be greatly increased if we can genuinely clarify our value to the public Please join this conversation. Should we, can we, be those experts? Will it strengthen our position in our communities? How can we become those experts? How might our practices and education evolve as a result? How can we influence the AIA to move in this direction? For more information about Group 7, send me an email and I will send you the documents we have produced to date. Also, if you would like to comment on the Group 7 proposition, please send it to me and I will share it with Group 7 members, AIACC and the AIA Repositioning Knowledge Community (with your approval). Thank you for your attention. Mike Mense FAIA mmenseArchitect Anchorage Alaska member of the AIA Culture Collective founder of Group 7 mike@mmense.com ------------------------------------------- Mike Mense FAIA Owner mmenseArchitects Anchorage AK -------------------------------------------

Christopher you have an excellent point.  In Tennesse to be a liscensed general contractor one must carry general liability and workman compensation insurance.  The requirement is relatively new and in my estimation is the result of a change in state political power and special interests aligned with the powers of state.  Regardless, this situation is probably better for the public as it weeds out potential dangerous contractors and allows certain risks to fall on the proper parties.  So maybe it makes good sense to require persons offering architectural services to the public be insured.

-------------------------------------------
Mark Robin AIA
Mark Robin Architecture
Nashville TN
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-10-2014 10:16
From: Christopher Walsh
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA

I agree with Mark Robin, let's face it with HGTV everyone believes they are great designers and they can do our jobs just like many nurses believe they can do what the doctors do, the difference is they can't write prescriptions so you have to see the doctor.  Trying to convince the world that an Architect license means someone is a great designer will fall on deaf ears, mine included, some of the best designers I know are not licensed Architects.

The AIA needs to work on requiring a licensed Architect to stamp every plan requiring a building permit, believe me this would cause Architects to be greatly sought after and push the interns to obtain their licenses which they have no urgency to do.  The one item I would add to Mark's comment would be that the AIA needs to push municipalities to require the Architects have Professional liability insurance (just like the Plumbers, Electricians, General Contractor...), this would eliminate the "Basement Architect" who undercuts the legitimate firm and keeps our fees from rising.  I am baffled when I go in for a permit and the municipality doesn't require the Architect to produce their insurance certificate.  If some of the insurance companies knew the homes and buildings they are insuring have an unlicensed and uninsured person designing them they should be worried, get them involved to push our initiative.


-------------------------------------------
Christopher Walsh AIA
Tandem Architecture
Buffalo Grove IL
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-09-2014 18:14
From: Mark Robin
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA

I think the value argument hasn't work and never will.  Do you go to a doctor because of value?  Do you use an attorney because of value?  No.  Professional advise is used because we need it.  There is no other reasonable choice.  You cannot get medicine or medical procedures with a doctor involved.  Don't go to court without a lawyer.  You don't want to see what happens.  We need these services to go about life.

What I am saying is all of AIA efforts should be going towards the day when any construction requiring a building permit cannot be performed without a architect.  Thinks of the quality and resiliency of the built environment if architects did have a role in every building.  Think about the improvement in the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Now that would be value.

Need not value is the obstacle to any sell.
-------------------------------------------
Mark Robin AIA
Mark Robin Architecture
Nashville TN
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-08-2014 19:00
From: Eugene Ely
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA


see annotations below.  within mr barger's letter
-------------------------------------------
Eugene Ely AIA, LEED AP

San Jose, CA
-------------------------------------------

I think that the value architects provide is enabling the client to translate their goals and aspirations for their project into brick and mortar within the confines of building codes and the capabilities and limitations of the products and materials available to us.  

I don't see architecture as imposing our will, aka knowledge, on our clients; rather, I think that our expertise should be in listening and interpreting what our clients tell us about the project.  As designers we should be able to make any solution that we design be in good taste, economically viable for the client, and sensitive to the environment.   

-------------------------------------------
Bruce Stone AIA
Specifier
Specification Solutions LLC
Tulsa OK
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-09-2014 18:14
From: Mark Robin
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA

I think the value argument hasn't work and never will.  Do you go to a doctor because of value?  Do you use an attorney because of value?  No.  Professional advise is used because we need it.  There is no other reasonable choice.  You cannot get medicine or medical procedures with a doctor involved.  Don't go to court without a lawyer.  You don't want to see what happens.  We need these services to go about life.

What I am saying is all of AIA efforts should be going towards the day when any construction requiring a building permit cannot be performed without a architect.  Thinks of the quality and resiliency of the built environment if architects did have a role in every building.  Think about the improvement in the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Now that would be value.

Need not value is the obstacle to any sell.
-------------------------------------------
Mark Robin AIA
Mark Robin Architecture
Nashville TN
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-08-2014 19:00
From: Eugene Ely
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA


see annotations below.  within mr barger's letter
-------------------------------------------
Eugene Ely AIA, LEED AP

San Jose, CA
-------------------------------------------

There was an architect, an engineer, and a musician standing on the street.

The architect turns to the others and says, "Do you think what I do is important? I don't feel like our clients care what we do." 

The engineer replied, "Doesn't really matter. The inspector loved the work and blessed it all. It's safe to use, therefore, mission accomplished."

The musician looked up at both of them and said, "I've been playing this song for 10 minutes. It's a song that I've been working on for over 10 years--my personal masterpiece. And the best you guys can toss in my hat is 15 cents?"

-------------------------------------------
Rich Farris
Author of "Principles of Creativity, Architecture's Insight to Invention" 

-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-10-2014 18:21
From: Bruce Stone
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA

I think that the value architects provide is enabling the client to translate their goals and aspirations for their project into brick and mortar within the confines of building codes and the capabilities and limitations of the products and materials available to us.  

I don't see architecture as imposing our will, aka knowledge, on our clients; rather, I think that our expertise should be in listening and interpreting what our clients tell us about the project.  As designers we should be able to make any solution that we design be in good taste, economically viable for the client, and sensitive to the environment.   

-------------------------------------------
Bruce Stone AIA
Specifier
Specification Solutions LLC
Tulsa OK
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-09-2014 18:14
From: Mark Robin
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA

I think the value argument hasn't work and never will.  Do you go to a doctor because of value?  Do you use an attorney because of value?  No.  Professional advise is used because we need it.  There is no other reasonable choice.  You cannot get medicine or medical procedures with a doctor involved.  Don't go to court without a lawyer.  You don't want to see what happens.  We need these services to go about life.

What I am saying is all of AIA efforts should be going towards the day when any construction requiring a building permit cannot be performed without a architect.  Thinks of the quality and resiliency of the built environment if architects did have a role in every building.  Think about the improvement in the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Now that would be value.

Need not value is the obstacle to any sell.
-------------------------------------------
Mark Robin AIA
Mark Robin Architecture
Nashville TN
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-08-2014 19:00
From: Eugene Ely
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA


see annotations below.  within mr barger's letter
-------------------------------------------
Eugene Ely AIA, LEED AP

San Jose, CA
-------------------------------------------

With sadness I see and read most of this discussion - post.

As everyone can see, I'm an International Associate, which means I'm not in the USA.

But I can tell you my vision of your "new" problem, the one we suffer for years here in Chile. Here we have a lot of Architectural Schools, from each one every year graduates near 80 architects (the same you call designers), and unfortunately here our Architects Association doesn't have any interest in regulate that, so all of these newly-unexperienced recently graduates come to the market and offer cheaper, mediocre and inadequate services. By law our Association can do a thing (they doesn't have interest too) about this, by contrary AIA has something like law enforcement and counselling, even they do something like lobby or pressure over congress to get some laws or initiatives. Why don't make some pressure to regulate this issue with a law, by the congress?

We architects pay a considerable amount of taxes(we help the state to get more taxes too) & insurances, we even create a large amount of employment....why the STATE doesn't protect us (you, not me)?

 

Ok.....I'm boring and my English isn't the best.............I know that

 

 

An IDEA to end this post......why if AIA gives us(I'm AIA too) a stamp or seal to put on our drawings plans and technical specs?

 

We pay our annual fee, and we receive our magazine (I only receive two or three in the whole year, don't know why), by the way, it's a very good magazine (congrats to everyone in their editorial committee)....why the AIA doesn't complement tis with a stamp?

 

I would love-like to have my own seal, isn't expensive right?

Maybe this Christmas I'm going to buy a custom made AIA seal for me as a gift....besides I'm the loneliest AIA in Chile (I believe).

-------------------------------------------
Rodrigo Godoy Alcarraz
Intl. Assoc. AIA
Associate NZIA
partner - architect
EcoDiseño Sustentable
Santiago, Chile
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 12-03-2014 23:40
From: John Onken
Subject: the future of architecture and the AIA

I'm sorry to throw water on the embers of one's passion, but Pleaaaaase!

Yet another group/manifesto/vision quest trying to give architects a protected/special place in the world.  If a doctor says 'take this pill' to fix your whatever, you say 'yes Doctor, you're the professional.'  If an architect (specialist in human and environmental interaction) says,' put your sofa in that corner as I'm the expert in this kind of thing,' no doubt you'll say I would rather have it in the other corner.  Same goes for kitchen design, the size of your lecture hall, the color of your cladding, and the shape of your roof.

Everyone is an architect, by this definition.  So let the AIA stay with it's mission of ensuring that if we spend 7 years in training for this glorious yet amorphous role, we get paid the most of everyone.  And that nobody else gets to call themselves 'architect' as flimsy as that term seems to be.  And carve out extra places for our trained abilities rather than miss them (such as Design Thinking and allowing the public to think that LEED is a better qualification than AIA).

Rant over.

-------------------------------------------
John Onken Intl. Assoc. AIA
Director
John Onken Architects Limited
Menlo Park CA
-------------------------------------------