Are you an Architect or a "designer"?

There was a little flurry of architecture activity on Twitter yesterday, and it’s worth diving deeper into the topic, because it’s multi-layered and complex (a bit like Architecture itself). 

 It kicked off with a report from The Age announcing that the Victorian registration board will have more funds to go after rogue architects. 

“The Architects Registration Board of Victoria will also be “strengthened and modernised” under the proposed legislation to allow for the immediate suspension of members of the profession who repeatedly design unsafe or substandard buildings.”

Warwick Mihaly rightly questioned whether architects were to blame for the current construction industry crisis, to which I provided some stats from a previous article in the Sydney Morning Herald.

“Mr Bannerman said in the hundreds of claims he had made on behalf of owners’ corporations, in only 2 per cent of cases did a builder cross-claim against a designer. ‘Rarely is it the designers’ fault,’ he said.

Mr Jurdeczka said: ‘Design is not usually the main cause of building defects; poor quality construction is.’”

That’s right: less than 2% of litigation involves a claim against “a designer”.

By now we are getting into really tricky territory. 

Also writing yesterday, David Chandler, new Building Commissioner in NSW, said that since he was appointed to the role nine weeks ago, he has met with more than 60 stakeholders and reviewed 150 submissions to the minister’s Building Strong Foundations discussion paper 

He lists those stakeholders:

“owner representatives, lawyers, industry associations, developers, financiers, ratings agencies, educators, councils, insurers, regulators, media, builders, materials suppliers and tech companies.”

Do you see Architects on that list? No, me neither. Perhaps it was an oversight in his summary.

Later in the article he refers to “designers”, not Architects, which brings me to my next point.

This discussion is still fixated on “design” and “designers”, not on the other critical stages that an Architect can and should oversee in the construction process. You know what I’m talking about: design development, documentation, contract administration, tender, handover and defects (and dare I say it, post-occupancy evaluation??). 

It’s in these stages that the construction quality slips, and sometimes fails, and that’s why Architects need to reassert themselves as project lead.

I’m not sure whether the government initiatives in Victoria or NSW – which are aimed at restoring confidence in the construction sector – have fully grappled with this point. It seems to me they are attempting to shore up the industry with new regulations when the act of making it mandatory for Architects to oversee construction onsite would resolve many of the issues that have come to light. Am I understanding the scale of the problem and the potential solution here, or I am missing a key point?

I believe the peak bodies – the Institute and ACA – need to continue to advocate for better procurement and contracting practices, and to reiterate to governments and clients that an Architects’ role is not complete – nor should it be dispensed with – as soon as schematic design is done.

In addition, Architecture practices need to take responsibility for informing and educating future clients – and the general public – about the complete package of services they offer, not just the fun part: design. 

One architect I know has acted upon the opportunity presented here, and will run workshops to explain her practice’s five-step program as a marketing activity, targeted via social media advertising at potential new clients. However, in my experience, her pro-active approach is highly atypical for Architects, who prefer to fly under the radar and hope their work will speak for itself.

It’s time for Architects to speak up and reassert themselves as critical members of the construction process. Is that something that you are already doing, in your firm?

Architects also need to keep abreast of industry news – policy, regulation, initiatives, projects, targets and trends – although I realise that can be difficult with so much going on. I’ve referred to three articles in this one blog post, from Sydney, Melbourne and The Fifth Estate, and busy Architects can’t be expected to be across everything. 

This entire conversation played out on Twitter, so that’s one location you could choose to become more involved, or that prospect is too daunting, you can sign up for The Drill, my weekly newsletter that collates and curates articles from around the world and Australia, to keep you up to speed.

You can subscribe for free by filling in the Newsletter form on the right of this page. And please send me an email if you are taking action to inform government or clients about the complete range of services that an Architect delivers - I’d love to hear about your approach.