Practice Management Member Conversations

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

I've seen a lot of information on AI at AIA conferences recently.  I've attended AI focused sessions at my local level, regional level, and at the recent 2025 AIA Leadership Summit in DC.  Many of them have focused on easy ways to start using AI right now.  I've used what I've learned and have AI helping with writing, rendering, sorting through long text documents, providing meeting minutes for long conversations, and materials research.  Those are things that any architect can start doing right now with a pretty low investment.  Information about how to adopt AI at that level is out there.

I believe that your comment, however, is about the bigger picture and using AI to it's full capacity in our specific industry.  The firms that are doing the most exciting things in AI, right now, are large firms with the resources to create their own proprietary AI systems for generating designs and specifications (mostly in healthcare and multifamily where profits are high).  The Architects I've heard speaking out about using AI have talked about the importance of the human architect acting as the artist using the design tool of AI option generators.

I agree with your comments on the importance of early adoption of technology.  It is not, however, as simple as when CAD was available and architects opted to stick with hand drafting. I think that this is a moment that might lead to the next generation of Computer Aided Drawing and Specification generations. Architects need to push to be involved in that development. I feel like we were far too silent during Revit's development and now we deal with its shortcomings every day.

I also have concerns about the pay to play model where smaller firms who can't afford to hire programmers seem to be left behind.

There are big questions that need to be answered:

"Does the AIA report on what's happening or push to influence how things are developing?"

"How do we know where to focus efforts?"

"Is backing any specific effort a good idea?"

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and review of The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks. 

I also thank everyone who's replied with more great sources of information.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

Such a critical topic, and time and technology are flying by.

I just wrote a bit about A.I. for recruiting and retention for the next issue of the AIA PMKC's PM Digest. I'm also writing about A.I. for the marketing, communications and research side of practice (what it can and can't do) in advance of AIA2025. A.I.'s value in these areas should be a "no brainer" with the LLMs that are out there. A.I. can't create the stuff--the ideas, the intention, challenges and actions of your work on a project that isn't published. But it can do a lot. However, that conversation is for another day.

Thanks all for the great, and somewhat discouraging, insight. 

Phil, I read Machine Learning soon after it came out. The part that isn't dated is about our profession getting hold of its "value proposition." What has stuck with me from the book's latter pages is that at the core of A.I.'s value in architecture is the data from our past and current work. Harnessing that is key to moving the profession forward in more 'non-A.I. replicable' tasks (for now). Your words are like a haunting...

I just attended an AIA Leadership Exchange session for the AIA's KCs. The AIA Strategic Council has a Digital Architecture study group that is coming up with an 18-month AI Action Plan. Fingers crossed. Can't come soon enough. 

I've seen a lot of information on AI at AIA conferences recently.  I've attended AI focused sessions at my local level, regional level, and at the recent 2025 AIA Leadership Summit in DC.  Many of them have focused on easy ways to start using AI right now.  I've used what I've learned and have AI helping with writing, rendering, sorting through long text documents, providing meeting minutes for long conversations, and materials research.  Those are things that any architect can start doing right now with a pretty low investment.  Information about how to adopt AI at that level is out there.

I believe that your comment, however, is about the bigger picture and using AI to it's full capacity in our specific industry.  The firms that are doing the most exciting things in AI, right now, are large firms with the resources to create their own proprietary AI systems for generating designs and specifications (mostly in healthcare and multifamily where profits are high).  The Architects I've heard speaking out about using AI have talked about the importance of the human architect acting as the artist using the design tool of AI option generators.

I agree with your comments on the importance of early adoption of technology.  It is not, however, as simple as when CAD was available and architects opted to stick with hand drafting. I think that this is a moment that might lead to the next generation of Computer Aided Drawing and Specification generations. Architects need to push to be involved in that development. I feel like we were far too silent during Revit's development and now we deal with its shortcomings every day.

I also have concerns about the pay to play model where smaller firms who can't afford to hire programmers seem to be left behind.

There are big questions that need to be answered:

"Does the AIA report on what's happening or push to influence how things are developing?"

"How do we know where to focus efforts?"

"Is backing any specific effort a good idea?"

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and review of The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks. 

I also thank everyone who's replied with more great sources of information.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

Such a critical topic, and time and technology are flying by.

I just wrote a bit about A.I. for recruiting and retention for the next issue of the AIA PMKC's PM Digest. I'm also writing about A.I. for the marketing, communications and research side of practice (what it can and can't do) in advance of AIA2025. A.I.'s value in these areas should be a "no brainer" with the LLMs that are out there. A.I. can't create the stuff--the ideas, the intention, challenges and actions of your work on a project that isn't published. But it can do a lot. However, that conversation is for another day.

Thanks all for the great, and somewhat discouraging, insight. 

Phil, I read Machine Learning soon after it came out. The part that isn't dated is about our profession getting hold of its "value proposition." What has stuck with me from the book's latter pages is that at the core of A.I.'s value in architecture is the data from our past and current work. Harnessing that is key to moving the profession forward in more 'non-A.I. replicable' tasks (for now). Your words are like a haunting...

I just attended an AIA Leadership Exchange session for the AIA's KCs. The AIA Strategic Council has a Digital Architecture study group that is coming up with an 18-month AI Action Plan. Fingers crossed. Can't come soon enough. 

I've seen a lot of information on AI at AIA conferences recently.  I've attended AI focused sessions at my local level, regional level, and at the recent 2025 AIA Leadership Summit in DC.  Many of them have focused on easy ways to start using AI right now.  I've used what I've learned and have AI helping with writing, rendering, sorting through long text documents, providing meeting minutes for long conversations, and materials research.  Those are things that any architect can start doing right now with a pretty low investment.  Information about how to adopt AI at that level is out there.

I believe that your comment, however, is about the bigger picture and using AI to it's full capacity in our specific industry.  The firms that are doing the most exciting things in AI, right now, are large firms with the resources to create their own proprietary AI systems for generating designs and specifications (mostly in healthcare and multifamily where profits are high).  The Architects I've heard speaking out about using AI have talked about the importance of the human architect acting as the artist using the design tool of AI option generators.

I agree with your comments on the importance of early adoption of technology.  It is not, however, as simple as when CAD was available and architects opted to stick with hand drafting. I think that this is a moment that might lead to the next generation of Computer Aided Drawing and Specification generations. Architects need to push to be involved in that development. I feel like we were far too silent during Revit's development and now we deal with its shortcomings every day.

I also have concerns about the pay to play model where smaller firms who can't afford to hire programmers seem to be left behind.

There are big questions that need to be answered:

"Does the AIA report on what's happening or push to influence how things are developing?"

"How do we know where to focus efforts?"

"Is backing any specific effort a good idea?"

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and review of The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks. 

I also thank everyone who's replied with more great sources of information.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

Such a critical topic, and time and technology are flying by.

I just wrote a bit about A.I. for recruiting and retention for the next issue of the AIA PMKC's PM Digest. I'm also writing about A.I. for the marketing, communications and research side of practice (what it can and can't do) in advance of AIA2025. A.I.'s value in these areas should be a "no brainer" with the LLMs that are out there. A.I. can't create the stuff--the ideas, the intention, challenges and actions of your work on a project that isn't published. But it can do a lot. However, that conversation is for another day.

Thanks all for the great, and somewhat discouraging, insight. 

Phil, I read Machine Learning soon after it came out. The part that isn't dated is about our profession getting hold of its "value proposition." What has stuck with me from the book's latter pages is that at the core of A.I.'s value in architecture is the data from our past and current work. Harnessing that is key to moving the profession forward in more 'non-A.I. replicable' tasks (for now). Your words are like a haunting...

I just attended an AIA Leadership Exchange session for the AIA's KCs. The AIA Strategic Council has a Digital Architecture study group that is coming up with an 18-month AI Action Plan. Fingers crossed. Can't come soon enough. 

I've seen a lot of information on AI at AIA conferences recently.  I've attended AI focused sessions at my local level, regional level, and at the recent 2025 AIA Leadership Summit in DC.  Many of them have focused on easy ways to start using AI right now.  I've used what I've learned and have AI helping with writing, rendering, sorting through long text documents, providing meeting minutes for long conversations, and materials research.  Those are things that any architect can start doing right now with a pretty low investment.  Information about how to adopt AI at that level is out there.

I believe that your comment, however, is about the bigger picture and using AI to it's full capacity in our specific industry.  The firms that are doing the most exciting things in AI, right now, are large firms with the resources to create their own proprietary AI systems for generating designs and specifications (mostly in healthcare and multifamily where profits are high).  The Architects I've heard speaking out about using AI have talked about the importance of the human architect acting as the artist using the design tool of AI option generators.

I agree with your comments on the importance of early adoption of technology.  It is not, however, as simple as when CAD was available and architects opted to stick with hand drafting. I think that this is a moment that might lead to the next generation of Computer Aided Drawing and Specification generations. Architects need to push to be involved in that development. I feel like we were far too silent during Revit's development and now we deal with its shortcomings every day.

I also have concerns about the pay to play model where smaller firms who can't afford to hire programmers seem to be left behind.

There are big questions that need to be answered:

"Does the AIA report on what's happening or push to influence how things are developing?"

"How do we know where to focus efforts?"

"Is backing any specific effort a good idea?"

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and review of The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks. 

I also thank everyone who's replied with more great sources of information.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

For context, I am the chair of the Building Performance KC this year and a practicing architect but I dont use AI for anything, not even presorting my email, because I dont think it does a great job. I might finally be the old lady in the office who's getting set in her ways but I still use Revit and draw things and write specs on cloud based software and Im not a total tech neophyte. 

I guess what I dont understand about Architecture and AI, or maybe specifically about the AIA and AI, is that it seems obvious to me that we dont need AI to design buildings. People have creativity and insight and collaboration and all the good stuff it takes to do this work and we dont need shiny renderings of things that are incapable of being realized. But I think AI COULD do a lot of things for architects that would be very useful and it doesnt seem like its being leveraged for those things or that the AIA is considering them as areas we should pursue. Or at least Im unaware of them if they are. 

Why cant AI take RS Means data and help cost estimate from our Revit models? Why cant it take our SD model and help us run interative energy modeling to tell us quickly how much glass we should reduce on which elevation to step down our RTUs to the next size down and reduce our energy consumption based on climate and orientation etc? Why cant it quickly tell me 'Hey Jessica if you just take out xx sf of glass and increase your exterior insulation by xx inches your owner will save xx dollars over the first 10 years in operational costs'? Or you should consider switching to fiberglass clips and keeping your insulation as is and you get the same effect? This building in Florida costs xx dollars in load bearing precast versus reinforced CMU?

I dont want a computer to design some silly all glass tower that no one can build and the world doesnt need. I think we have plenty of creativity and ingenuity to spare and besides thats the fun stuff. I want AI to give us information we can use to design and detail and get rid of the tedious stuff that slows down the process. 

Such a critical topic, and time and technology are flying by.

I just wrote a bit about A.I. for recruiting and retention for the next issue of the AIA PMKC's PM Digest. I'm also writing about A.I. for the marketing, communications and research side of practice (what it can and can't do) in advance of AIA2025. A.I.'s value in these areas should be a "no brainer" with the LLMs that are out there. A.I. can't create the stuff--the ideas, the intention, challenges and actions of your work on a project that isn't published. But it can do a lot. However, that conversation is for another day.

Thanks all for the great, and somewhat discouraging, insight. 

Phil, I read Machine Learning soon after it came out. The part that isn't dated is about our profession getting hold of its "value proposition." What has stuck with me from the book's latter pages is that at the core of A.I.'s value in architecture is the data from our past and current work. Harnessing that is key to moving the profession forward in more 'non-A.I. replicable' tasks (for now). Your words are like a haunting...

I just attended an AIA Leadership Exchange session for the AIA's KCs. The AIA Strategic Council has a Digital Architecture study group that is coming up with an 18-month AI Action Plan. Fingers crossed. Can't come soon enough. 

I've seen a lot of information on AI at AIA conferences recently.  I've attended AI focused sessions at my local level, regional level, and at the recent 2025 AIA Leadership Summit in DC.  Many of them have focused on easy ways to start using AI right now.  I've used what I've learned and have AI helping with writing, rendering, sorting through long text documents, providing meeting minutes for long conversations, and materials research.  Those are things that any architect can start doing right now with a pretty low investment.  Information about how to adopt AI at that level is out there.

I believe that your comment, however, is about the bigger picture and using AI to it's full capacity in our specific industry.  The firms that are doing the most exciting things in AI, right now, are large firms with the resources to create their own proprietary AI systems for generating designs and specifications (mostly in healthcare and multifamily where profits are high).  The Architects I've heard speaking out about using AI have talked about the importance of the human architect acting as the artist using the design tool of AI option generators.

I agree with your comments on the importance of early adoption of technology.  It is not, however, as simple as when CAD was available and architects opted to stick with hand drafting. I think that this is a moment that might lead to the next generation of Computer Aided Drawing and Specification generations. Architects need to push to be involved in that development. I feel like we were far too silent during Revit's development and now we deal with its shortcomings every day.

I also have concerns about the pay to play model where smaller firms who can't afford to hire programmers seem to be left behind.

There are big questions that need to be answered:

"Does the AIA report on what's happening or push to influence how things are developing?"

"How do we know where to focus efforts?"

"Is backing any specific effort a good idea?"

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and review of The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks. 

I also thank everyone who's replied with more great sources of information.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

Hi Jessica.

Totally understand your thinking. If you haven't read Phil Bernstein's Machine Learning, which by Phil's admission is out of date, find a used copy or get it from your local library and read the last few chapters. His is the best explanation I've found of A.I.'s ability to do exactly what you propose with the right data, which is the real issue that stalls its potential to help the design process (not replicate it). If A.I. can take over those tasks and more, think how much more design thinking and sound decision making architects can bring to the table?

Cheers.

For context, I am the chair of the Building Performance KC this year and a practicing architect but I dont use AI for anything, not even presorting my email, because I dont think it does a great job. I might finally be the old lady in the office who's getting set in her ways but I still use Revit and draw things and write specs on cloud based software and Im not a total tech neophyte. 

I guess what I dont understand about Architecture and AI, or maybe specifically about the AIA and AI, is that it seems obvious to me that we dont need AI to design buildings. People have creativity and insight and collaboration and all the good stuff it takes to do this work and we dont need shiny renderings of things that are incapable of being realized. But I think AI COULD do a lot of things for architects that would be very useful and it doesnt seem like its being leveraged for those things or that the AIA is considering them as areas we should pursue. Or at least Im unaware of them if they are. 

Why cant AI take RS Means data and help cost estimate from our Revit models? Why cant it take our SD model and help us run interative energy modeling to tell us quickly how much glass we should reduce on which elevation to step down our RTUs to the next size down and reduce our energy consumption based on climate and orientation etc? Why cant it quickly tell me 'Hey Jessica if you just take out xx sf of glass and increase your exterior insulation by xx inches your owner will save xx dollars over the first 10 years in operational costs'? Or you should consider switching to fiberglass clips and keeping your insulation as is and you get the same effect? This building in Florida costs xx dollars in load bearing precast versus reinforced CMU?

I dont want a computer to design some silly all glass tower that no one can build and the world doesnt need. I think we have plenty of creativity and ingenuity to spare and besides thats the fun stuff. I want AI to give us information we can use to design and detail and get rid of the tedious stuff that slows down the process. 

Such a critical topic, and time and technology are flying by.

I just wrote a bit about A.I. for recruiting and retention for the next issue of the AIA PMKC's PM Digest. I'm also writing about A.I. for the marketing, communications and research side of practice (what it can and can't do) in advance of AIA2025. A.I.'s value in these areas should be a "no brainer" with the LLMs that are out there. A.I. can't create the stuff--the ideas, the intention, challenges and actions of your work on a project that isn't published. But it can do a lot. However, that conversation is for another day.

Thanks all for the great, and somewhat discouraging, insight. 

Phil, I read Machine Learning soon after it came out. The part that isn't dated is about our profession getting hold of its "value proposition." What has stuck with me from the book's latter pages is that at the core of A.I.'s value in architecture is the data from our past and current work. Harnessing that is key to moving the profession forward in more 'non-A.I. replicable' tasks (for now). Your words are like a haunting...

I just attended an AIA Leadership Exchange session for the AIA's KCs. The AIA Strategic Council has a Digital Architecture study group that is coming up with an 18-month AI Action Plan. Fingers crossed. Can't come soon enough. 

I've seen a lot of information on AI at AIA conferences recently.  I've attended AI focused sessions at my local level, regional level, and at the recent 2025 AIA Leadership Summit in DC.  Many of them have focused on easy ways to start using AI right now.  I've used what I've learned and have AI helping with writing, rendering, sorting through long text documents, providing meeting minutes for long conversations, and materials research.  Those are things that any architect can start doing right now with a pretty low investment.  Information about how to adopt AI at that level is out there.

I believe that your comment, however, is about the bigger picture and using AI to it's full capacity in our specific industry.  The firms that are doing the most exciting things in AI, right now, are large firms with the resources to create their own proprietary AI systems for generating designs and specifications (mostly in healthcare and multifamily where profits are high).  The Architects I've heard speaking out about using AI have talked about the importance of the human architect acting as the artist using the design tool of AI option generators.

I agree with your comments on the importance of early adoption of technology.  It is not, however, as simple as when CAD was available and architects opted to stick with hand drafting. I think that this is a moment that might lead to the next generation of Computer Aided Drawing and Specification generations. Architects need to push to be involved in that development. I feel like we were far too silent during Revit's development and now we deal with its shortcomings every day.

I also have concerns about the pay to play model where smaller firms who can't afford to hire programmers seem to be left behind.

There are big questions that need to be answered:

"Does the AIA report on what's happening or push to influence how things are developing?"

"How do we know where to focus efforts?"

"Is backing any specific effort a good idea?"

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and review of The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks. 

I also thank everyone who's replied with more great sources of information.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

Hi Jessica.

Totally understand your thinking. If you haven't read Phil Bernstein's Machine Learning, which by Phil's admission is out of date, find a used copy or get it from your local library and read the last few chapters. His is the best explanation I've found of A.I.'s ability to do exactly what you propose with the right data, which is the real issue that stalls its potential to help the design process (not replicate it). If A.I. can take over those tasks and more, think how much more design thinking and sound decision making architects can bring to the table?

Cheers.

For context, I am the chair of the Building Performance KC this year and a practicing architect but I dont use AI for anything, not even presorting my email, because I dont think it does a great job. I might finally be the old lady in the office who's getting set in her ways but I still use Revit and draw things and write specs on cloud based software and Im not a total tech neophyte. 

I guess what I dont understand about Architecture and AI, or maybe specifically about the AIA and AI, is that it seems obvious to me that we dont need AI to design buildings. People have creativity and insight and collaboration and all the good stuff it takes to do this work and we dont need shiny renderings of things that are incapable of being realized. But I think AI COULD do a lot of things for architects that would be very useful and it doesnt seem like its being leveraged for those things or that the AIA is considering them as areas we should pursue. Or at least Im unaware of them if they are. 

Why cant AI take RS Means data and help cost estimate from our Revit models? Why cant it take our SD model and help us run interative energy modeling to tell us quickly how much glass we should reduce on which elevation to step down our RTUs to the next size down and reduce our energy consumption based on climate and orientation etc? Why cant it quickly tell me 'Hey Jessica if you just take out xx sf of glass and increase your exterior insulation by xx inches your owner will save xx dollars over the first 10 years in operational costs'? Or you should consider switching to fiberglass clips and keeping your insulation as is and you get the same effect? This building in Florida costs xx dollars in load bearing precast versus reinforced CMU?

I dont want a computer to design some silly all glass tower that no one can build and the world doesnt need. I think we have plenty of creativity and ingenuity to spare and besides thats the fun stuff. I want AI to give us information we can use to design and detail and get rid of the tedious stuff that slows down the process. 

Such a critical topic, and time and technology are flying by.

I just wrote a bit about A.I. for recruiting and retention for the next issue of the AIA PMKC's PM Digest. I'm also writing about A.I. for the marketing, communications and research side of practice (what it can and can't do) in advance of AIA2025. A.I.'s value in these areas should be a "no brainer" with the LLMs that are out there. A.I. can't create the stuff--the ideas, the intention, challenges and actions of your work on a project that isn't published. But it can do a lot. However, that conversation is for another day.

Thanks all for the great, and somewhat discouraging, insight. 

Phil, I read Machine Learning soon after it came out. The part that isn't dated is about our profession getting hold of its "value proposition." What has stuck with me from the book's latter pages is that at the core of A.I.'s value in architecture is the data from our past and current work. Harnessing that is key to moving the profession forward in more 'non-A.I. replicable' tasks (for now). Your words are like a haunting...

I just attended an AIA Leadership Exchange session for the AIA's KCs. The AIA Strategic Council has a Digital Architecture study group that is coming up with an 18-month AI Action Plan. Fingers crossed. Can't come soon enough. 

I've seen a lot of information on AI at AIA conferences recently.  I've attended AI focused sessions at my local level, regional level, and at the recent 2025 AIA Leadership Summit in DC.  Many of them have focused on easy ways to start using AI right now.  I've used what I've learned and have AI helping with writing, rendering, sorting through long text documents, providing meeting minutes for long conversations, and materials research.  Those are things that any architect can start doing right now with a pretty low investment.  Information about how to adopt AI at that level is out there.

I believe that your comment, however, is about the bigger picture and using AI to it's full capacity in our specific industry.  The firms that are doing the most exciting things in AI, right now, are large firms with the resources to create their own proprietary AI systems for generating designs and specifications (mostly in healthcare and multifamily where profits are high).  The Architects I've heard speaking out about using AI have talked about the importance of the human architect acting as the artist using the design tool of AI option generators.

I agree with your comments on the importance of early adoption of technology.  It is not, however, as simple as when CAD was available and architects opted to stick with hand drafting. I think that this is a moment that might lead to the next generation of Computer Aided Drawing and Specification generations. Architects need to push to be involved in that development. I feel like we were far too silent during Revit's development and now we deal with its shortcomings every day.

I also have concerns about the pay to play model where smaller firms who can't afford to hire programmers seem to be left behind.

There are big questions that need to be answered:

"Does the AIA report on what's happening or push to influence how things are developing?"

"How do we know where to focus efforts?"

"Is backing any specific effort a good idea?"

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and review of The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks. 

I also thank everyone who's replied with more great sources of information.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

Hi Jessica.

Totally understand your thinking. If you haven't read Phil Bernstein's Machine Learning, which by Phil's admission is out of date, find a used copy or get it from your local library and read the last few chapters. His is the best explanation I've found of A.I.'s ability to do exactly what you propose with the right data, which is the real issue that stalls its potential to help the design process (not replicate it). If A.I. can take over those tasks and more, think how much more design thinking and sound decision making architects can bring to the table?

Cheers.

For context, I am the chair of the Building Performance KC this year and a practicing architect but I dont use AI for anything, not even presorting my email, because I dont think it does a great job. I might finally be the old lady in the office who's getting set in her ways but I still use Revit and draw things and write specs on cloud based software and Im not a total tech neophyte. 

I guess what I dont understand about Architecture and AI, or maybe specifically about the AIA and AI, is that it seems obvious to me that we dont need AI to design buildings. People have creativity and insight and collaboration and all the good stuff it takes to do this work and we dont need shiny renderings of things that are incapable of being realized. But I think AI COULD do a lot of things for architects that would be very useful and it doesnt seem like its being leveraged for those things or that the AIA is considering them as areas we should pursue. Or at least Im unaware of them if they are. 

Why cant AI take RS Means data and help cost estimate from our Revit models? Why cant it take our SD model and help us run interative energy modeling to tell us quickly how much glass we should reduce on which elevation to step down our RTUs to the next size down and reduce our energy consumption based on climate and orientation etc? Why cant it quickly tell me 'Hey Jessica if you just take out xx sf of glass and increase your exterior insulation by xx inches your owner will save xx dollars over the first 10 years in operational costs'? Or you should consider switching to fiberglass clips and keeping your insulation as is and you get the same effect? This building in Florida costs xx dollars in load bearing precast versus reinforced CMU?

I dont want a computer to design some silly all glass tower that no one can build and the world doesnt need. I think we have plenty of creativity and ingenuity to spare and besides thats the fun stuff. I want AI to give us information we can use to design and detail and get rid of the tedious stuff that slows down the process. 

Such a critical topic, and time and technology are flying by.

I just wrote a bit about A.I. for recruiting and retention for the next issue of the AIA PMKC's PM Digest. I'm also writing about A.I. for the marketing, communications and research side of practice (what it can and can't do) in advance of AIA2025. A.I.'s value in these areas should be a "no brainer" with the LLMs that are out there. A.I. can't create the stuff--the ideas, the intention, challenges and actions of your work on a project that isn't published. But it can do a lot. However, that conversation is for another day.

Thanks all for the great, and somewhat discouraging, insight. 

Phil, I read Machine Learning soon after it came out. The part that isn't dated is about our profession getting hold of its "value proposition." What has stuck with me from the book's latter pages is that at the core of A.I.'s value in architecture is the data from our past and current work. Harnessing that is key to moving the profession forward in more 'non-A.I. replicable' tasks (for now). Your words are like a haunting...

I just attended an AIA Leadership Exchange session for the AIA's KCs. The AIA Strategic Council has a Digital Architecture study group that is coming up with an 18-month AI Action Plan. Fingers crossed. Can't come soon enough. 

I've seen a lot of information on AI at AIA conferences recently.  I've attended AI focused sessions at my local level, regional level, and at the recent 2025 AIA Leadership Summit in DC.  Many of them have focused on easy ways to start using AI right now.  I've used what I've learned and have AI helping with writing, rendering, sorting through long text documents, providing meeting minutes for long conversations, and materials research.  Those are things that any architect can start doing right now with a pretty low investment.  Information about how to adopt AI at that level is out there.

I believe that your comment, however, is about the bigger picture and using AI to it's full capacity in our specific industry.  The firms that are doing the most exciting things in AI, right now, are large firms with the resources to create their own proprietary AI systems for generating designs and specifications (mostly in healthcare and multifamily where profits are high).  The Architects I've heard speaking out about using AI have talked about the importance of the human architect acting as the artist using the design tool of AI option generators.

I agree with your comments on the importance of early adoption of technology.  It is not, however, as simple as when CAD was available and architects opted to stick with hand drafting. I think that this is a moment that might lead to the next generation of Computer Aided Drawing and Specification generations. Architects need to push to be involved in that development. I feel like we were far too silent during Revit's development and now we deal with its shortcomings every day.

I also have concerns about the pay to play model where smaller firms who can't afford to hire programmers seem to be left behind.

There are big questions that need to be answered:

"Does the AIA report on what's happening or push to influence how things are developing?"

"How do we know where to focus efforts?"

"Is backing any specific effort a good idea?"

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and review of The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks. 

I also thank everyone who's replied with more great sources of information.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

Hi Jessica.

Totally understand your thinking. If you haven't read Phil Bernstein's Machine Learning, which by Phil's admission is out of date, find a used copy or get it from your local library and read the last few chapters. His is the best explanation I've found of A.I.'s ability to do exactly what you propose with the right data, which is the real issue that stalls its potential to help the design process (not replicate it). If A.I. can take over those tasks and more, think how much more design thinking and sound decision making architects can bring to the table?

Cheers.

For context, I am the chair of the Building Performance KC this year and a practicing architect but I dont use AI for anything, not even presorting my email, because I dont think it does a great job. I might finally be the old lady in the office who's getting set in her ways but I still use Revit and draw things and write specs on cloud based software and Im not a total tech neophyte. 

I guess what I dont understand about Architecture and AI, or maybe specifically about the AIA and AI, is that it seems obvious to me that we dont need AI to design buildings. People have creativity and insight and collaboration and all the good stuff it takes to do this work and we dont need shiny renderings of things that are incapable of being realized. But I think AI COULD do a lot of things for architects that would be very useful and it doesnt seem like its being leveraged for those things or that the AIA is considering them as areas we should pursue. Or at least Im unaware of them if they are. 

Why cant AI take RS Means data and help cost estimate from our Revit models? Why cant it take our SD model and help us run interative energy modeling to tell us quickly how much glass we should reduce on which elevation to step down our RTUs to the next size down and reduce our energy consumption based on climate and orientation etc? Why cant it quickly tell me 'Hey Jessica if you just take out xx sf of glass and increase your exterior insulation by xx inches your owner will save xx dollars over the first 10 years in operational costs'? Or you should consider switching to fiberglass clips and keeping your insulation as is and you get the same effect? This building in Florida costs xx dollars in load bearing precast versus reinforced CMU?

I dont want a computer to design some silly all glass tower that no one can build and the world doesnt need. I think we have plenty of creativity and ingenuity to spare and besides thats the fun stuff. I want AI to give us information we can use to design and detail and get rid of the tedious stuff that slows down the process. 

Such a critical topic, and time and technology are flying by.

I just wrote a bit about A.I. for recruiting and retention for the next issue of the AIA PMKC's PM Digest. I'm also writing about A.I. for the marketing, communications and research side of practice (what it can and can't do) in advance of AIA2025. A.I.'s value in these areas should be a "no brainer" with the LLMs that are out there. A.I. can't create the stuff--the ideas, the intention, challenges and actions of your work on a project that isn't published. But it can do a lot. However, that conversation is for another day.

Thanks all for the great, and somewhat discouraging, insight. 

Phil, I read Machine Learning soon after it came out. The part that isn't dated is about our profession getting hold of its "value proposition." What has stuck with me from the book's latter pages is that at the core of A.I.'s value in architecture is the data from our past and current work. Harnessing that is key to moving the profession forward in more 'non-A.I. replicable' tasks (for now). Your words are like a haunting...

I just attended an AIA Leadership Exchange session for the AIA's KCs. The AIA Strategic Council has a Digital Architecture study group that is coming up with an 18-month AI Action Plan. Fingers crossed. Can't come soon enough. 

I've seen a lot of information on AI at AIA conferences recently.  I've attended AI focused sessions at my local level, regional level, and at the recent 2025 AIA Leadership Summit in DC.  Many of them have focused on easy ways to start using AI right now.  I've used what I've learned and have AI helping with writing, rendering, sorting through long text documents, providing meeting minutes for long conversations, and materials research.  Those are things that any architect can start doing right now with a pretty low investment.  Information about how to adopt AI at that level is out there.

I believe that your comment, however, is about the bigger picture and using AI to it's full capacity in our specific industry.  The firms that are doing the most exciting things in AI, right now, are large firms with the resources to create their own proprietary AI systems for generating designs and specifications (mostly in healthcare and multifamily where profits are high).  The Architects I've heard speaking out about using AI have talked about the importance of the human architect acting as the artist using the design tool of AI option generators.

I agree with your comments on the importance of early adoption of technology.  It is not, however, as simple as when CAD was available and architects opted to stick with hand drafting. I think that this is a moment that might lead to the next generation of Computer Aided Drawing and Specification generations. Architects need to push to be involved in that development. I feel like we were far too silent during Revit's development and now we deal with its shortcomings every day.

I also have concerns about the pay to play model where smaller firms who can't afford to hire programmers seem to be left behind.

There are big questions that need to be answered:

"Does the AIA report on what's happening or push to influence how things are developing?"

"How do we know where to focus efforts?"

"Is backing any specific effort a good idea?"

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and review of The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks. 

I also thank everyone who's replied with more great sources of information.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

Such a critical topic, and time and technology are flying by.

I just wrote a bit about A.I. for recruiting and retention for the next issue of the AIA PMKC's PM Digest. I'm also writing about A.I. for the marketing, communications and research side of practice (what it can and can't do) in advance of AIA2025. A.I.'s value in these areas should be a "no brainer" with the LLMs that are out there. A.I. can't create the stuff--the ideas, the intention, challenges and actions of your work on a project that isn't published. But it can do a lot. However, that conversation is for another day.

Thanks all for the great, and somewhat discouraging, insight. 

Phil, I read Machine Learning soon after it came out. The part that isn't dated is about our profession getting hold of its "value proposition." What has stuck with me from the book's latter pages is that at the core of A.I.'s value in architecture is the data from our past and current work. Harnessing that is key to moving the profession forward in more 'non-A.I. replicable' tasks (for now). Your words are like a haunting...

I just attended an AIA Leadership Exchange session for the AIA's KCs. The AIA Strategic Council has a Digital Architecture study group that is coming up with an 18-month AI Action Plan. Fingers crossed. Can't come soon enough. 

I've seen a lot of information on AI at AIA conferences recently.  I've attended AI focused sessions at my local level, regional level, and at the recent 2025 AIA Leadership Summit in DC.  Many of them have focused on easy ways to start using AI right now.  I've used what I've learned and have AI helping with writing, rendering, sorting through long text documents, providing meeting minutes for long conversations, and materials research.  Those are things that any architect can start doing right now with a pretty low investment.  Information about how to adopt AI at that level is out there.

I believe that your comment, however, is about the bigger picture and using AI to it's full capacity in our specific industry.  The firms that are doing the most exciting things in AI, right now, are large firms with the resources to create their own proprietary AI systems for generating designs and specifications (mostly in healthcare and multifamily where profits are high).  The Architects I've heard speaking out about using AI have talked about the importance of the human architect acting as the artist using the design tool of AI option generators.

I agree with your comments on the importance of early adoption of technology.  It is not, however, as simple as when CAD was available and architects opted to stick with hand drafting. I think that this is a moment that might lead to the next generation of Computer Aided Drawing and Specification generations. Architects need to push to be involved in that development. I feel like we were far too silent during Revit's development and now we deal with its shortcomings every day.

I also have concerns about the pay to play model where smaller firms who can't afford to hire programmers seem to be left behind.

There are big questions that need to be answered:

"Does the AIA report on what's happening or push to influence how things are developing?"

"How do we know where to focus efforts?"

"Is backing any specific effort a good idea?"

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and review of The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks. 

I also thank everyone who's replied with more great sources of information.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.

Such a critical topic, and time and technology are flying by.

I just wrote a bit about A.I. for recruiting and retention for the next issue of the AIA PMKC's PM Digest. I'm also writing about A.I. for the marketing, communications and research side of practice (what it can and can't do) in advance of AIA2025. A.I.'s value in these areas should be a "no brainer" with the LLMs that are out there. A.I. can't create the stuff--the ideas, the intention, challenges and actions of your work on a project that isn't published. But it can do a lot. However, that conversation is for another day.

Thanks all for the great, and somewhat discouraging, insight. 

Phil, I read Machine Learning soon after it came out. The part that isn't dated is about our profession getting hold of its "value proposition." What has stuck with me from the book's latter pages is that at the core of A.I.'s value in architecture is the data from our past and current work. Harnessing that is key to moving the profession forward in more 'non-A.I. replicable' tasks (for now). Your words are like a haunting...

I just attended an AIA Leadership Exchange session for the AIA's KCs. The AIA Strategic Council has a Digital Architecture study group that is coming up with an 18-month AI Action Plan. Fingers crossed. Can't come soon enough. 

I've seen a lot of information on AI at AIA conferences recently.  I've attended AI focused sessions at my local level, regional level, and at the recent 2025 AIA Leadership Summit in DC.  Many of them have focused on easy ways to start using AI right now.  I've used what I've learned and have AI helping with writing, rendering, sorting through long text documents, providing meeting minutes for long conversations, and materials research.  Those are things that any architect can start doing right now with a pretty low investment.  Information about how to adopt AI at that level is out there.

I believe that your comment, however, is about the bigger picture and using AI to it's full capacity in our specific industry.  The firms that are doing the most exciting things in AI, right now, are large firms with the resources to create their own proprietary AI systems for generating designs and specifications (mostly in healthcare and multifamily where profits are high).  The Architects I've heard speaking out about using AI have talked about the importance of the human architect acting as the artist using the design tool of AI option generators.

I agree with your comments on the importance of early adoption of technology.  It is not, however, as simple as when CAD was available and architects opted to stick with hand drafting. I think that this is a moment that might lead to the next generation of Computer Aided Drawing and Specification generations. Architects need to push to be involved in that development. I feel like we were far too silent during Revit's development and now we deal with its shortcomings every day.

I also have concerns about the pay to play model where smaller firms who can't afford to hire programmers seem to be left behind.

There are big questions that need to be answered:

"Does the AIA report on what's happening or push to influence how things are developing?"

"How do we know where to focus efforts?"

"Is backing any specific effort a good idea?"

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and review of The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks. 

I also thank everyone who's replied with more great sources of information.

I just received a copy of  The Architect's Journey to Specification -  Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture Firms: Opportunities & Risks.    It is a very interesting document that looks like it took a lot of work to assemble.  While it reports on the status of AI in the Architectural Arena, it gives virtually no direction as to how an architect or architectural firm might proceed to take advantage of AI.  It points out that only a small percentage of the profession is using AI. 

I don't understand why the AIA is not taking a leadership role in exploring methodologies and directions for its use. It's no wonder that only a small percentage of the profession is using it. While the world is talking about it, understanding its use is not the simplest thing. It takes a little time and effort, but once mastered, its use is limitless. 

I am old enough to remember when CAD first entered the design and building industry.  It took architects years to really adopt it.  However, the engineers and contractors led the way in its implementation.  If we are not proactive now, the same thing is likely to happen with AI.  It is a powerful tool, and if we don't get in on the ground floor, architects will be marginalized even further than they are today.