Feedback from readers and architects on the blog series about protected titles and architects’ salaries

This is Part 3 of the “Architect” / Salary / Well-being series. Read Part 1 on legal protections for the word architect here, Part 2 on architects’ salaries here, and Part 4 - that sets out the magic bullet here.

If you’ve been following this series, you’ll know that I’m drawing links between the legal protections that exist around the word “architect” and its close cousins, and business development and marketing, and architects’ salaries. In Part 4, I’ll unpack how these relate to architects’ well-being and career satisfaction.

In this article, though, we’re going to pause and take in some feedback from the Sounds Like Design community, including subscribers and people interacting with our content on social media

Comments and insights from Social Media

The post on Instagram that elicited the comments reproduced here (click to visit the original post).

These blog articles have stimulated some great discussions and interesting perspectives on Instagram and LinkedIn, including these comments:

“The Architects professional scope has been getting eroded away for years. Traditional contracts are being substituted for D&C or Managing Contractor. We are no longer Superintendents, we gave that up to Project Managers. You can also do just about everything an architect does as a Building Designer.”

- Josh Wheeldon on Instagram

And

“When real estate agents drop the “architecturally designed” home but never credit the designer always raises eyebrows.”

- Danica Williams on Instagram

Another post on Instagram that prompted some valuable discussions (click the image to see the original post).

And this interesting exchange that touches on some of my concerns around the fact that when it comes to sustainable and affordable housing, we need good design now, more than ever:

Hmm, I have an architecture degree, but did not pursue it further for a range of reasons, but one thing I’ll say is that, protected or not, architects failed the built environment. Focusing on 1% isn’t about equitable solutions, missed a huge environmental impact potential and has left us with the rise of the project home and suburban sprawl. If anyone had the solution/preventative, it was the architect 😢

- Ondine Murrell on Instagram

@ondine_murrill i disagree with the premise. proper policy and planning has the power to effectively structure what you’re discussing; architects are largely irrelevant in this space for various reasons. where architects could (and should) work is on public education campaigns which governing bodies really don’t do anything to help with.

- James Stedman on Instagram

Well there’s no doubt that education always helps so I can’t disagree there. But I really think that architecture could have made it into the mainstream many years ago if it wasn’t so focused on the elite, and it certainly would have changed the built landscape, for the better, had it.

- Ondine Murrell on Instagram

And this thread on the topic of variable quality:

if 'Architect' had a relationship to 'talent' it would be another thing! I have taught too many and I know this is not a given, although generally architects are a touch. better than BDs and certainly better than PMs as designers.....

- Patrick Beale on Instagram

To which I responded:

I agree it’s true that there are poor, middling and exceptional architects, just as there are gradations of talent in any profession…

I think where architecture differs from other professions is that consumers readily understand the difference between a doctor and a paramedic (and both play useful roles) and a barrister and a paralegal (ditto), but they can’t clearly differentiate between an architect and a BD or a draftsperson (who all have different ranges of talent, too, so that some BDs may be more skilled or experienced in a particular typology or sector than some architects…).

So if we think about the BD and the draftsperson as “para-arc*$#tect” - and describe the different qualifications and legal obligations - that may help to inform consumers about the various roles (although the use of the word “para-arc*$#tect” is probably banned under the Acts!)

- Rachael Bernstone on Instagram

Incidentally Nic Granleese – a “registered, but non-practicing architect”, photographer and co-founder of Bowerbird – described himself as a “para-arc*$#tect” in this article back in 2011. He defined the term as architects doing other things – in keeping with definition 1 - beside : alongside of : beyond : aside from - which is different to the way I was using it, with reference to 3b, meaning “associated in a subsidiary or accessory capacity” (both from the Merriam Webster dictionary here).

Anyway, I digress (see how hard it is to untangle these threads and stay on topic!).

Feedback from subscribers via email

I also received some thoughtful and considered responses from readers via email, and those architects gave permission for me to share their views here:

This is such a good topic to discuss.

No the title of Architect doesn’t help.

Firstly, I am tired of being sent lists of potential Architecture jobs that are entirely for the IT industry. They have stolen our title and now completely dominate the searches. Not surprisingly typing “real architect” does not help, there is no way to filter for this. IT people proudly call themselves Architects with no clarification.

More importantly, before I was registered, I was able to do everything an architect can do. I ran a practise, had insurance, and completed architectural projects from start to finish, including contract administration and expert witness services. At least I had a Masters degree in Architecture – many designers do not even have that. Now I’m registered, the only new thing that I can do is submit for the AIA awards in the architect category rather than graduate category.

The problem is that in Australia, legislation does not require an architect to design buildings and this is a big mistake. This has created a lack of respect which is growing. It has enabled the erosion of architectural services. An Architect is no longer a ‘master builder’, like there are in Mexico where my colleagues come from. Architects can be sidelined altogether. Architects can no longer stay involved all the way through a project, they are chopped and changed as an expendable commodity. Governments tender each stage of a project separately with no regard to moral rights. Governments ask builders to tender at design stage! Builders then ask architects to design for free or cheap, because they are not guaranteed to win. This is the real modern slavery.

A registered engineer is ALWAYS required to sign off. So it should be for architects. In Europe, a registered architect is required to sign off every project. I have been asking the Australian Institute of Architects to advocate for us in the same way as Engineers Australia managed to do, to no avail. And it shows, in the lack of building quality and the extreme personal cost of defects.

The title of architect comes only with responsibilities, no rights. Our organisations like Architects Accreditation Council of Australia impose hoops to jump through to create an internal system of quality, which is fine, but not when they don’t do anything to maintain or claw back our standing or power in the real world. There’s no point having high quality architects if they can’t get any work in the building industry.

My two cents 😊

- An anonymous architect, via email

And

Agree there should be some proactive engagement by our institute on this issue in the public realm - addressed specifically to Joe Blogs, not the usual sophisticates we like to swan around with.

It is a great opportunity to get out there on a legal issue - sideways as it were - so we don’t appear to be elitist, or blowing our own trumpet, but blow it hard.

I still find “sophisticated” clients do not fully understand the role of the architect, the scope of work offered, the depth of experience etc. and I am quite frankly sick of builders who still just think of us as drafties and want us “off their job as quick as possible”.

Some builders still see us as a threat, a pain in the A or standing in the way of their greater glory - and of course they get into the ear of the client. This is of course not fully representative as there are some excellent builders that rejoice in having an architect as part of the team.

Thanks for your tireless efforts.

- An anonymous architect, via email

What’s next in this series?

As I mentioned, Part 4 of this series examines well-being and career satisfaction – because all of these issues have a bearing on the practice and culture of architecture, and how much value the public places on the architects’ role and responsibilities.

I’m a firm believer that it’s possible to reposition public perceptions of practices and the profession more broadly via deliberate and intentional business development, marketing and communications strategies. It’s not an easy or quick task, but it’s possible to reframe outmoded ideas of what architects do, who they serve, and who should benefit from good design.

I’ve already seen positive results from the work I’ve done with my clients, and I believe that those results are replicable and scalable, assuming of course that other architects want to take action to get better at how they communicate their value (and notwithstanding the regulatory barriers and procurement obstacles that currently exist – I’m all about taking action over the parts of the business landscape and equation that are within our grasp and control!).

You can find a link to the previous and next instalments by scrolling down to the bottom of this page.

If you’re not yet subscribed to receive our email newsletters, you can join now on this page to be notified when new articles are published.

And if you’re ready to take action now, please read on to find out how we might be able to help you.

Find out more about SLD’s comms services for architects:

Sounds Like Design developed the Six Channel System of business development and marketing for architects, to help practice owners and directors to create or enhance their client and project pipeline, to win more of the work they love.

• You can enrol in Architecture Marketing 360: a CPD course for architects, here.

• You can undertake the Review + Reset one-on-one consulting package with Rachael directly (find more details including pricing and the next available start date, here).

• And if you have a friend or colleague who may also benefit from reading this article, please send them a link and encourage them to subscribe.