The Value of Design Practice

In their graduate seminar this Spring entitled “Exploring New Value in Design Practice"see note 1 at Yale's School of Architecture, Phil Bernstein and Brian Kenet, both Professors of Practice--one at Yale the other at Harvard's Graduate School of Design (GSD), respectively--are taking on a topic that I have been debating for YEARS with former and current colleagues and associates in the architecture field:  Why does the practice of architecture--not the architecture itself, but the people and processes needed to conceptualize and formulate a realistic notion of a design concept--not seem to garner the same respect and value that the planners, developers and constructors of the built environment do?  And, why does it not command the same profit margin? 

In a process notorious for accepting the lowest bidder, the architect, and his/her consultants, are often the ones squeezed down to minimal, if any profit, particularly prevalent in the current economic climate we have been stuck in for the past 4-5 years.  Although it is quite a problem now with many design professionals squeezed to bare bone economics barely hanging on to their firms, cutting benefits and salaries along the way, it is not a problem borne of the current economic crisis. 

As a young design professional (nearly 20 years ago!), fresh out of the academic realm where we did not speak much about the economic realities of a practice, I was not overly curious about the process of marketing a project, securing the win and negotiating a contract.  It was only after a few years of gaining experience in a firm that I began to question the process and how the architect went about securing a contract with a client and getting an entire team of designers and engineers to come together on an agreed upon sum to actually perform the work and fulfill the contract for servicing the client.

For the most part, the architect/designer, being in the driver's seat, either requests a fee from their consultants or offers them a sum that they are willing to pay them to work for/with them.  The latter has become more prevalent in the past decade.  It is a tough job to be part of these negotiations, even harder to be the one to have to send it back and discuss 'sharpening their pencils."  All the while the Architect is also doing the same with the Client, negotiating a fee for the architect's firm that must include all consultants.  Often--and, this occurs in both private- and publicly-funded projects, large and small--this can take weeks and months before the final contract is signed with hours of meetings, phone calls and emails between lawyers, consultants and the architect. 

Another fact--which is not often discussed or acknowledged within a firm itself--is that all the while that the contract is being negotiated, the client often requests that the design team begin work on the project.  Of course, the designers have the right to say no until the contract is signed, but the reality is is that they need to keep the client happy and wanting to enlist their services again in the future, so they often begin the work without a contract signed.  There is great risk associated with moving forward without a signed contract, to be sure, and any representative from a firm's professional liability insurance company will talk at great lengths about minimizing risk.see note 2  This act, though not the lone culprit, undermines the profession's need to be seen and valued as a bonafide profession not as a spurious one that can be cast aside at whim. 

 

In order to redefine and strenghthen the value of the design professions, particularly that of architecture (a profession that requires years of education, internship, licensure and continuing education), the architects practicing today must rise up and say no when appropriate, not for the mere act of saying no but because the profession deserves respect.  That being said, the architecture profession can only earn that respect when it shows that it respects itself and the people and processes inherent in it.  Although this is a tougher decision to make and follow through on today due to the economic malaise and heightened competition for work between firms, architects must do better, for the future of their profession and those it employs.

Notes:

1.  Go here for Professor Bernstein's blog: Exploring New Value in Design Practice: 0, 1, 2)

2.  See article on professional liability insurance (http://archrecord.construction.com/practice/startUps/0712insurance-1.asp). From the article, note: "...not all clients pay their fees; it is common for an architect who brings a suit to recover fees to be subject to a counterclaim that the architect was negligent."