Protection and projection: two sides of the architecture marketing coin
This is Part 1 of the “Architect” / Salary / Well-being series. Read Part 2 on architects’ salaries here, Part 3 - which collates readers responses so far - here, and Part 4 - that sets out the magic bullet here.
Architects are fortunate that their professional title is protected under law in Australia, but this legal protection is no substitute for a considered and strategic approach to business development and marketing.
These legal protections were hard won by the profession – I’ve been writing about architecture for 22+ years – and I remember the lobbying and advocacy that accompanied the Institute’s efforts to see the Architects Act passed in NSW in 2003 (where I lived at the time).
However, they have not contributed to significant increases in architectural salaries and most architects are relatively poorly remunerated compared to other disciplines that also require five-year degrees, followed by further specialisation and registration obligations.
Like architects, lawyers and doctors complete five year degrees, and they tend to earn higher salaries.
Photography by Renaldo Matamoro @rmvisuals via Unsplash.
I’m referring specifically to legal and medical practitioners, and I’ve compiled some salary comparisons for your consideration, and you can see those in Part 2 of this series.
Firstly though, I’d like to provide an overview of registration and the benefits it provides for architects.
When were the registration provisions for architects introduced?
We can see from the list below, sourced from the AACA website that NSW, Queensland, WA and the ACT all ratified their Acts in the period 2002-2004, with SA following in 2009.
Only Tasmania (1929!), the NT (1963) and Victoria (1991) had legal protections in place last century.
So, these protections haven’t always existed, and older architects who operated without them prior to those Acts being passed don’t take them for granted.
Photography byJeremy Alford via Unsplash.
NSW Architects Registration Board – Architects Act 2003 (NSW)
Architects Registration Board of Victoria – Architects Act 1991 (VIC)
Board of Architects of Queensland – Architects Act 2002 (QLD)
The Architectural Practice Board of South Australia – Architectural Practice ACT 2009 (SA)
Architects Board of Western Australia – Architects Act 2004 (WA)
Australian Capital Territory Architects Board – Architects Act 2004 (ACT)
Board of Architects of Tasmania – Architects Act 1929 (TAS)
Northern Territory Architects Board – Architects Act 1963 (NT)
We can also see from the current push by the Interior Design sector to advocate for protections around the title Interior Designer (for more information on that campaign spearheaded by the DIA, click here) that legal protections that define and enshrine professional capabilities for a particular discipline are perceived to be of great importance and value.
But they are not a cure-all for design professionals generally – and architects specifically – who struggle to articulate their value in a crowded market place.
From a marketing perspective, legal protections offer few benefits on their own, where professional roles (whether tightly regulated and controlled like architects, or completely unregulated like interior designers) jostle for business alongside other types of disciplines and professions.
In the residential sector particularly, they all appeal to clients who typically have little knowledge or understanding of the factors and attributes that distinguish the highly-qualified from people with shorter qualifications, or even those with no qualifications (did you know there are some unqualified, self-taught people competing in the new home and renovation space?).
Your potential clients typically don’t understand what sets a draftsperson apart from a building designer, or an interior designer, or a Graduate of Architecture, or an Architect.
And the legal protection of the title “architect” doesn’t sufficiently distinguish or explain the difference/s.
In addition, most of your potential clients – and even some of your past and current clients – have little knowledge about the onerousness of the registration path that architects traverse, or how those qualifications and the associated legal obligations – such as the requirement to carry professional insurances and undertake annual CPD – actually benefit them in a meaningful and tangible way.
That’s where business development and marketing come into play.
Which means that you have to take responsibility – individually at a practice level, and collectively at a professional level – to articulate and communicate what sets you apart, why your service is the best fit for your intended client, and most importantly, WHY THEY SHOULD CARE.
(#Sorrynotsorry for shouting!).
That’s why I work with practices to help them identify what makes them unique, so they can stand out in the marketplace and to their preferred clients – regardless of any qualifications they may have. Because clients buy a result or outcome, not any particular discipline, yet most architecture marketing doesn’t easily describe what sets a practice apart from its competitors – or a draftsperson – by explaining what the tangible benefits are for the client.
What do the legal protections mean, in practice?
The words “architect” and its derivatives are protected by law in Australia.
Photography by Giammarco Boscaro via Unsplash.
The words “architect” and its close cousins “architects”, “architecture” and “architectural” are protected by various state and territory Acts, which means that in order for a person to legally have the right to call themselves an architect, or to describe their role or services as being “architecture” or “architectural”, they must meet certain education and registration obligations (these vary from state to territory, so familiarise yourself with the local rules via the links above).
These protections even apply to newly minted graduates and young practitioners (or even older professionals who haven’t registered for various reasons): they are not permitted to call themselves an “Architectural Graduate” but must instead use the clumsier but legally correct term “Graduate of Architecture”, “Architectural Graduate” or “Graduate with Architectural Degree”. (Note that these rules vary from state to state, so please check the provisions in your own jurisdiction via the links to the various states and territories, above.)
There are some exceptions to the use of the protected words, and these usually pertain to their use in professions outside architecture, such as:
“naval architect and naval architecture;
landscape architect and landscape architecture; and
golf course architect and golf course architecture”.1
Although confusingly these exceptions sometimes relate to areas within or adjacent to architecture, such as:
“architectural drafter and architectural drafting; and
architectural technician or architectural assistant who provides support services to an architect.”2
(These definitions are from the Western Australian Board of Architects – I encourage you to refer to the relevant references for your state or territory – see the summary list above – to confirm how the words are protected and what exceptions exist in your own jurisdiction/s.)
There are some other exemptions too, and these relate to:
“the manufacture, supply or naming of products or materials for use in the practice of architecture or the construction of buildings;
the title or description of an educational institution in relation to the provision of education in architecture; and
in circumstances where the word is clearly not connected with the design and construction of buildings (i.e website architecture, IT architect etc.,)”.3
The Tweet where I questioned the use of the words “architecturally designed” by a Knockdown Rebuild specialist in 2019.
These protections mean that if a person or company claims to be an architect or to provide architectural services, and there isn’t a registered architect on the team, the Board in the relevant state or territory can take action and compel them to adjust their communications and/or messaging.
I led a public campaign to call out a major project home builder that was running paid advertisements for “architecturally designed homes” in 2019 and you can read about that advocacy – and the positive result - here.
That campaign was a one-off, to draw attention to this issue, and now, If I see possible breaches or infringements, I make a report to the relevant State or Territory board and leave it to them to investigate.
I’ll provide details about how to report these breaches in Part 4 of this series, so watch this space if you’d like access to our resources around that advocacy.
What are the rules around registration?
Most architects already know and understand the ins-and-outs of this long and arduous process – especially the ones who have completed their registration and can now legally use the title – so I won’t go into that topic in great detail here.
If you’re still unsure and would like to find out more, you can learn about the process of registration – which leads to the ability to call yourself an architect – via the pathway map on the AACA website, here.
The National Standard of Competency for Architects set out the pathways to registration.
Suffice to say that I often hear architects lament the fact that they are required to undergo education and training for a minimum of 7+ years – on a par with medical practitioners and barristers, both of whom undertake additional desk-based and on-the-job training beyond their five-year medical and law degrees – to rack up 7, 8, 9, or 10 years of study and training on their path to qualification.
Yet the graduate and established practitioner salaries for architects are much lower than for medical or legal professionals. (See the comparison datasets in Part 2 of this series).
And with university fees being what they are, and the cost of living being what it is, and the fact that the profession is trying to attract more diverse students into the field so that it can be more representative of the broad communities it would like to serve… these are all critical concerns that will have a profound impact on the future of the profession, and architecture’s ability to respond to some of the most challenging issues of our time.
Did you know for example that salary surveys demonstrate that architects’ salaries are lower than those of project managers and construction managers, which many architects find galling – and it’s one of the reasons that my next point is so critical...
Continue reading in Part 2 of this series, where I compare architecture salaries with other roles across the construction sector and other professions.
You can also subscribe on the Contact page to get alerts when future articles are published, and feel free to share this article with friends and colleagues.
References
1. Protection of the Title ‘Architect’, Info sheet 22, Architects Board of Western Australia, 9 October 2019, https://architectsboard.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Info-Sheet-22-Protection-of-the-Title-Architect-Oct-2019.pdf, viewed on Weds 7 Feb 2024.
2. As above
3. As above