I agree with you Eric, the system is flawed. In fact years and years ago I took a real estate course as an elective at Illinois and I can remember materials and layout quality were part of the equation, unbeleivable that it is not now. Part of this, in my opinion, is that everyone is using computerized forms, check offs, etc. and there is no subjectiveness to the system like there used to be. I have seen it in home inspections (2 recently) and the person knows nothing about code issues, structural etc. Time is money and they don't take the time so they can make more. It's a reason, but not an excuse.
There is one statement the does however get to the root of the position of our profession -your indication that a 9' overhang should somehow translate to the worth of the home. In this specific instance it may well be that it does. There is no supporting evidence such as "creating an outdoor space to enjoy during hot weather on the south side of the house" for example. There is an overriding opinion among the profession that "design" is the reason we should be worth more, that we should be hired, etc., etc. Even our current AIA president said this in a letter in the "Architect" magazine early this year. Statements such as that ARE THE REASON WE ARE VIEWED AS A COMMODITY. Because we are focused on the "design" instead of the client's need for value.
I retired as a principal in a medium sized firm and joined a general contractor to run pre-construction services and head up design-build projects, using consulting for A/E services. I have worked with many different firms over the past 4-1/2 years and have seen two out of a dozen and a half that "get it". They provide VALUE to the process instead of the usual going beyond what the budget allows or even worse what the client indicates they want because, in the architects' words, "it's the right thing to do". Right according to whom? This attitude has been our downfall for as long as I've been at it, over 35 years. Why do you think sophisticated clients are teaming, using design-build? TO CONTROL COSTS BY CONTROLLING THE ARCHITECT'S DESIGN PROCESS. Why can't we do that without the contractor? Well, we could, but why not use their resources to our advantage? That's why integration and teaming, ( or a few years ago partnering) can work to our advantage, WE should be bringing alternatives to the process, asking the hard questions like how does this benefit the client? And then bring different solutions to the problem that are cost effective and meet the client's goals. Design (and yes even awards) may be great, but again according to whom?
It's amazing to me that after being at the GC side for only 2 weeks, I had more respect at the table, and am perceived as bringing value more than ever before. Architect's fees are beat up still, but adding my time as pre-con coordinator is never questioned. The reason is simple, I am looking out for the client. Not always recommending less expensive/cheaper materials, but by evaluating initial and long term value. Sometimes cheaper materials work, but sometimes adding shape and form, more long term cost effective materials - it's all about them, not us.
Thanks for starting the discussion, we all need to weigh in.
-------------------------------------------
Steven Harms AIA
Vice President
Tri-North Builders, Inc.
Madison WI
-------------------------------------------