Well the lawyer biz is pretty much on the ropes, done in for the most part by lawyers themselves. The common sense thing for the architectural profession to do is limit the number of architecture degrees awarded, however this would impact the very generous salaries of architecture deans and architecture professors who are now part of the "club". They are literally picking up an endless supply of taxpayer-guaranteed dollars in tuition. The end result has been borrowed right out of the "guild" mentality of the middle ages - endless hours at as journeyman, low-pay status for the architectural graduates. All the more better the NCARB can run up the old "It's for the safety of the women and children" flag.
No. I really can't wait to move to Liberland, really, I can't wait until I can smother Patrik's body with volcanic mud in the sauna. We'll have all sorts of hedonistic pleasure.
Osl8ing, stop being naive. We all know corporations are people, my friend, and corporations don't break laws, they buy laws. The Justice Department determines who to go after, and when, and what political pressure can be applied.
But as to your post on the previous page, regarding chefs and how little impact the chefs' lobby can have convincing the world that they are only important because of listeria prevention:
Wasn't the #ilookup campaign trying to show the world that architects are influenced by much bigger, more important, and more poetic notions of culture than just making sure the ADA ramp is the right slope? I feel like i look up was about how well we dream, not in the "oops I designed something 3x too expensive for you" sense of dream, but in that we merge the poetic with the pragmatic.
lawyers and doctors are the only ones capable of providing what they provide. They deal with life threatening situations that require urgency as midlander pointed out. Their work also has a direct effect. Architects offer a service that is indirect. It is mostly a luxury service. A competent building can be achieved without an architect. Exceptional buildings or programmatically complicated ones do require an architect. In that respect architects are most like chefs. Chefs make exceptional food as architefts make exceptional buildings. Both food and buildings can and do get produced by others more often than not. Both are fundamental needs (food/shelter,) but the architect and chef elevate that need to an art/luxury. Of course competence is required, but that alone is not what is unique to the profession. AIA and Ncarb is counterproductive because its selling point is hsw, competence, etc...none of which are exclusive traits of the profession. Rather than Ncarb and the aia...imagine a hypothetical organization called the UCA "united chefs of america" Now imagine their entire mantra was based on the idea that they ensure that chefs understand the internal temp of cooked meat, hygene, food safety, the exclusive right of chefs to cook food, etc...This is minimizing imo... That is why these organizations do little to elevate the profession in the eyes of the public.
Wrong.
This argument is based on very very superficial thinking. This superficial thinking glosses over the fact that the architect makes decisions with far deeper than mere issues of cosmetic taste. The lawyers, doctor, and chef are all affected in every aspect of their lives, professional and otherwise, 24/7 365 days a week, by the decisions that architects make.
But its easy to see why the unlicensed folks would be tempted to make such an argument. And especially those who graduated from schools in the last decade as they are in a very sorry state.
Unfortunately, the schools teach the cosmetic depth only and many graduates leave school without a systematic understanding of the value architects provide. Shame on them. Its difficult to blame the misunderstanding as its rooting in ignorance. An ignorance the schools perpetuate and the current state of society does everything to promote.
The AIA, NCARB and NAAB really really ought to focus on:
-compelling the schools to communicate the value architects provide beyond the silly cosmetic pursuits they presently indulge in. Such that every graduate understands the systematic influence architects have on the everyday life of every single individual who interfaces with the built environment.
-promoting an understanding, via empirical studies for example, of the depth of value the architect provides to individuals. For example, every decision an architect makes effects the distance the chef/ doctor/ lawyer etc walks to go to the bathroom, etc etc etc etc...
Well the lawyer biz is pretty much on the ropes, done in for the most part by lawyers themselves. The common sense thing for the architectural profession to do is limit the number of architecture degrees awarded, however this would impact the very generous salaries of architecture deans and architecture professors who are now part of the "club". They are literally picking up an endless supply of taxpayer-guaranteed dollars in tuition. The end result has been borrowed right out of the "guild" mentality of the middle ages - endless hours at as journeyman, low-pay status for the architectural graduates...
This is a great opportunity to point out the fundamental flaw in the thinking of the average architect these days as far as communicating their value to everyday Joe Public:
Wasn't the #ilookup campaign trying to show the world that architects are influenced by much bigger, more important, and more poeticnotions of culture than just making sure the ADA ramp is the right slope? I feel like i look up was about how well we dream, not in the "oops I designed something 3x too expensive for you" sense of dream, but in that we merge the poetic with the pragmatic.
I just threw up a little in my mouth.
---------------------------------------
More profits for architects = more design autonomy.
More design autonomy for architects = better design.
Better design = a healthier, safer, more enjoyable built environment.
a healthier, safer, more enjoyable built environment = a higher quality of life for everyone
At present, Architects are not profitable.
Architects are not profitable because of the aforementioned reasons in this thread.
I.e. it has nothing, nothing, nothing to do with metaphors, abstractions, poems, dreams and least of all: feelings.
As architects we know that these are indispensable aspects of the design process. To attempt to communicate them to the typical client and the public is to bedazzle -confuse!- them with internal jargon. There is a reason the surgeon doesn't attempt to give a medical school education to each patient before surgery. The patient with melanoma isn't concerned about the processes behind their cancer. Even if they were, had the smarts to understand, and were inclined to find out: there isn't enough time to do so. That is why the professional knows what the professional knows and the patient defers to the professional.
Summary of some of the main reasons architecture is not profitable and the quality of the built environment is so much less as a result:
1. First, within our professional culture we share an unwillingness to walk away from a great commission, no matter what the cost. Architects knowingly accept low fees for fear of losing jobs or creating adversarial relationships.
2. Second, sometimes architects fail to obtain fair fees simply because they lack business training, negotiating skills, or an understanding of their real costs.
3. Finally, architects have had difficulty explaining the value of what they have to offer."
4. Architects have not done a good job of computing their real costs. As William F. Fanning, director of research for the Professional Services Management Journal says, ''In other industries, future projections are used to determine prices. Architecture is the opposite. We use last year's cost model to determine next year's prices.''"
The AIA, NCARB and NAAB really really ought to focus on:
-compelling the schools to communicate the value architects provide beyond the silly cosmetic pursuits they presently indulge in.
NCARB's program to create some curricula that will allow licensure upon graduation is moving in that direction. Note that this program is endorsed by ALL of the affiliate organizations, including AIA.
Carrera - like my accountant once said, head down, no cares, keep working. and you are absolutely right about figuring out to charge 2-3 times so same scope. i operate closer to design build but haven't made the step to full CM ype services, will need partnets on that one....i think too much like an architect now.
NCARB's program to create some curricula that will allow licensure upon graduation is moving in that direction. Note that this program is endorsed by ALL of the affiliate organizations, including AIA.
This is a potentially awesome development. Thanks for sharing the info Donna
Good_Knight & Olaf.....Well it’s hard to make money when we don’t do anything….we farm out renderings, the surveying, site/civil, structural, MEP, landscape design, interiors, wayfinding, branding/graphic design, estimating, specs & construction, then the commissioning …hell, I know guys that farm out their CD’s to Vietnam, and others that farm out CA, what’s left? Shouldn’t it be “Broker” instead of “Architect”?
"....explaining the value of what they have to offer"? Offer what? Clients aren’t fools; they know what we’re doing, which isn’t much anymore.
Carrera, to your point, is not the composer and conductor of the orchestra providing value? (I agree but the forest must not be missed because of the density of the trees) Let the bassoonist etc play their part and be good and proud and be compensated as well of course
Jeez, sameold. At least tintt puts some effort into her disdain for an organization she isn't familiar with. What exactly is your attitude based on, have you ever been an AIA member, been to a meeting, volunteered for it or a similar organization? 200+ comments and some really great discussion here means that your comment clearly *isn't* enough said.
Good Knight, as I said, competence is mandatory, but the bare minimum. If that is what you promote then expect people that are only willinh to pay bare minimum fees.
I work in landscape. I am competent in my area. people expect me to be. If I do not know how to do something I find out, ask a specialist, or require that the client engage with one. Clients do not hire me because I know how to draw planting details or how to make a competent fountain ...they hire me to improve their lives...to provide a space for refuge, sanctuary, enjoyment, entertainment....No one cares about the details of architecture any more than they do the engineering plans for the new car they just purchased. Granted, the work that I do is not usually that technically complex...But im sure this is the case for all forms of design.
Donna, yes the look up campaign was an attempt to do this...Not sure how that info can be used though...the average american had zero ability to affect the built environment. Their understanding/appreciation of architecture is not in and of itself empowering..
Donna, I don't want to put you on the spot, or hold you as the voice of the AIA on archinect, but I'm curious what your thoughts are regarding Good Knights 4 points. Won't take offense if you do not wish to dignify with a response lol.
rob_c, I don't disagree with any of them. They certainly apply to a lot, but not al, architects in practice.
Peter Zellner gives a good analysis of how poor we are at figuring out a way to get paid well for what we do in this interview. The pricing discussion is near the end but the whole interview is worth listening to - he's very intelligent and well-spoken.
the first video makes me think that the essential component of a ted talk is delivery over content. in an AIA thread, which i havent read, i can see the video's presumed value. applied to individual practices and client hunting, it's purpose seems to flip: how to make your 'why' flexible in the face of different clients (admittedly outside what im guessing is the agenda of this thread) - otherwise we're all gehries trying to get over 13% or some other type of specialist trying to get over "the chasm" with our "why".
i can convince the mayor with my 'why' but there's a snowball's chance in hell of my convincing the developer with the same 'why'. and i think the mayor is in the developer's pocket.
randomly continuing: rem, or eiseman or zaha or gehry, is an innovator (via the video's terms); bjarke is the chasm jumper. techniques for chasm jumping were notably absent from the video.
the second video frankly seemed like a good argument for architecture school, but i went to fucking great schools and dont have any crippling hatred for my past.
thanks for posting some things that caught your attention.
I just heard about a potential AIA pilot program that could be interesting to a lot of the naysayers here. I can't discuss it, obviously, but if/when it's official we'll see how it's received.
Oh look, what ivorykeyboard just pointed to, and it's not even the same pilot program *I* mentioned in my previous post.
<sarcasm> The Old White Men who just want to keep status quo would *never* launch a program to make sure young graduates know their value and don't consent to work for free! </sarcasm>
The laws are already in place. The old white men have to follow them, just like everyone else. To launch a campaign to say we aren't going to break the law anymore isn't really something to get excited over.
i disagree with that tintt. just because the law is there doesn't mean people are following it.
part of the thing with our profession is that a lot of firms are very small practices being run by people who really have no idea how to run a business. even if they wanted to follow the regulations, there are a lot of them and it's hard find where to learn them. on top of that, it's been my experience that most baby boomers are just too lazy to be bothered with trying to learn new things. it's easier for them to ask people to work for free so they get money for nothing, and sometimes students think it's easier to get a line on their resume if they work for free.
a campaign to educate people and slow this practice down is a good thing.
there was a personal attack against baby boomers in there. i think we can still count this as part of the lack of integrity quondam sites in the other thread.
Aug 7, 15 2:05 pm ·
·
jla-x and Good Knight,
Good Knight wrote"
Sorry, but I have to be that person again: retarded is not acceptable in polite conversation. Not that this conversation is polite, but racial epithets aren't acceptable, and "retarded" is just as bad. Use dumb.
jla-x, serious question: why is Associate AIA not acceptable for those-we-no-longer-call-interns? Is it because that's the same designation as vendors, etc. use? Also, locally our Young Architects Forum is super active; they do a lot to address issues of young practitioners, including the not-yet-licensed.
agreed. Assoc AIA is not acceptable because it lumps architecture grads in with a bunch of vendors. Anyone with a few extra bucks to throw around can get it. (a certain prolific poster for example).
The entire "Assoc AIA" is a scam. Its the AIA brand selling itself for more quick dirty money by association.
Young architecture school grads need their own !exclusive! group/ brand/ title. One that speaks to the passion, drive, and commitment graduates from accredited school have demonstrated by earning their degrees.
The Young Architects Forum is reta....DUMB. Its dumb and demeaning along the same lines as "intern". You pay your dues in green, blood, sweat and tears and earn the professional education, experience, and examination only to be pigeon holed (10 years!) in the category of "Young Architect"? The AIA is reta....asinine in this regard as well."
Let me correct you guys. First, guys, for the love of architecture, lets at least get the AIA membership categories correct.
Sellers/Vendors would be ALLIED members NOT Assoc. AIA members. Next time, just go to:
and get your facts straight on the membership categories so arguments would be based on being informed and proper research was done so the arguments will hold with more credence.
Anybody with a high school diploma or GED can be an Associate AIA member - any vendor who wants an Associate membership can get it - just like building designers and building custodians.
Rick you're walking proof of that, so why try to make it seem as if others don't have their facts straight, or that Associate AIA membership means anything at all.
All you need in order to get Associate membership is a few hundred dollars and an NCARB record - and all you need in order to get an NCARB record is some more money and a high school diploma or a GED.
kjdt, according to that join link you only need to be an enthusiast to become national allied. So really if you enjoy Legos or want to impress your date a la George Castanza.
I've been debating joining and probably will but I feel like that really cheapens being a professional organization.
Yes anyone can be an Allied member. And anyone other than a high school dropout can be an Associate member.
Aug 11, 15 11:13 pm ·
·
kjdt,
Well yes but they have to be enrolled in IDP. You aren't automatically enrolled in IDP just because you have a high school diploma, GED or equivalent.
If you are business is a vendor manufacturing and selling floor tiles... the business would be an Cornerstone Partner member. The salesperson may or may not be associate AIA member. To be an associate member, a person must have a professional degree in Architecture or working under the supervision of an architect, or currently enrolled in IDP (ultimately working toward licensure), or a faculty member in a university program in architecture.
If the salesman has a degree in architecture then fine. If not, they probably aren't qualified for Associate AIA membership. Then you have to next check if they meet any of the other three paths. However, a vendor like the sales rep of Pella (tm) windows may often not be enrolled in IDP, or have a professional degree in Architecture or necessarily be a faculty member at a university with a program in architecture and likely not working under the supervision of an architect. Pella would never be an associate AIA member. Pella would be a Cornerstone Partner member. The salesperson may just be an allied member.
Read the AIA membership
Eligibility for Associate Membership
Associate membership is open to individuals who meet one of the following criteria: professional degree in architecture; currently work under the supervision of an architect; currently enrolled in the Intern Development Program (IDP) and working toward licensure; or faculty member in a university program in architecture.
Eligibility for National Allied Membership
Individuals who do not hold a degree in architecture, but share an interest in the built environment as a professional colleague or enthusiast, are eligible for National Allied membership. Your membership is at the national level. For local or state membership, contact your closest component.
Allied membership would be the category of membership for anyone not pursuing architecture licensing, not actively enrolled in IDP nor have a professional degree in architecture.
What distinguish is an associate member is a person who either on the licensing track by virtue of a professional degree of architecture, or is actively engaged in IDP. A building designer can be an associate member or an allied member. The key is whether someone is on licensure track. If you have an active NCARB record, enrolled in IDP (either working on completion or completed it), working for an architect or otherwise doing the required experience requirements for whatever path to licensure.
Associate members means those on licensure track. Allied members on non-licensure track folks without professional architecture degree.
Those licensed are Architect members.
I'm not saying it is a high standard. I am saying, keep the facts straight. It might not seem like much when you look at the matter from the wrong perspective.
It misses the point. The moment you take your step towards licensure be it active enrollment in IDP, possession of an NAAB accredited degree and working on licensure then you are licensure-track and that makes you qualified as an Associate member.
I was criticizing Good Knight's error in saying it lumps them with vendors. It doesn't.
The Product vendors (ie. Pella, Armstrong, Hubbell, Graphisoft, etc.) - the businesses that manufacture/sells products in connection with architecture, the built environment, etc. are CORNERSTONE PARTNERS members. Individual sales representative can be an Architect member, Associate AIA member or Allied member. This depends on the individual.
We know the lives of individuals can be quite complicated and people get jobs to keep the paying the bills. Even jobs like working in non-architecture jobs like being a sales or marketing rep for a vendor. When people make a grievous error because they don't take the few minutes to check their facts degrades their credibility.
The point is get the facts straight so the points isn't a chain of fallacy built on top of fallacy.
A vendor business would not be a member of the categories for 'individuals'. They would be in the category for corporate/businesses.
Aug 11, 15 11:24 pm ·
·
Just so you know, there already exists an organization that represents you freshly graduated / non-licensed architecture educated or trained folks including folks like jla-x...... its called AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF BUILDING DESIGN ( AIBD ).
Richard it is the "otherwise working toward licensing" part that lets anybody do just what kjdt suggests. I just had a roofing rep in here about a month ago who has "Associate AIA" on his card. I asked if he went to architecture school and he said no but he started an IDP record. Basically any company that wants to pay NCARB and AIA dues can make all their reps into Associate AIA members.
Since NCARB loosened the entry point rules to allow any high school grad to start an IDP record, and AIA counts the existence of an IDP record as satisfying the requirements of "working toward licensing", the Associate membership level has become essentially the same as Allied membership in that neither inherently indicates any particular qualifications. I don't think that was AIA's intent - and actually the AIA bylaws differ from the current Associate membership application and the former doesn't state that the mere existence of an IDP record is enough to establish that one is actively working toward a license - but that's the way it's being applied by AIA's membership administration.
The public is in great danger! Assoc AIA members may really be construction guys...they may actually know how to build things...cant have that or the terrorists win...
Can't let the terrorists win ... that's what happens at those CSI meetings. Current students, recent grads, architects, contractors, specifiers, product reps all rubbing shoulders and networking ... it makes me sick just thinking about it. It's like they'll let anybody join.
Aug 12, 15 11:10 am ·
·
Donna,
Alright.
Aug 12, 15 4:26 pm ·
·
JBeaumont,
It doesn't say "otherwise working toward licensing". I actually quoted the AIA membership requirements for associate AIA members and Allied member (National). International Allied members are very similar to National Allied members, if I recall correctly.
Sure but the sales rep has to maintain their NCARB record if they stop being employed. It isn't something that a vendor is going to actively pay unless they make a real benefit from it. Then there is that things where it says.... "and working toward licensing". So the bottom line comes down to this, are they actively working toward licensing? If so, I don't see it an issue. If not, it can become one but at some point, they ought to get off their duff and complete IDP and continue to complete licensure process... somewhere.
This means, the person is sooner or later is going to need to work under the supervision of an architect and do work pertaining to architecture.
AIA
b3ta has a bad case of partisan derangement syndrome. Ignore him.
Well the lawyer biz is pretty much on the ropes, done in for the most part by lawyers themselves. The common sense thing for the architectural profession to do is limit the number of architecture degrees awarded, however this would impact the very generous salaries of architecture deans and architecture professors who are now part of the "club". They are literally picking up an endless supply of taxpayer-guaranteed dollars in tuition. The end result has been borrowed right out of the "guild" mentality of the middle ages - endless hours at as journeyman, low-pay status for the architectural graduates. All the more better the NCARB can run up the old "It's for the safety of the women and children" flag.
Red and Blue is an illusion...a false dichotomy created to distract you from the big purple dick that is ramming the middle class.
Just don't break the law in the first place... problem solved.
jla-x, I like that analogy, painful but true.
But as to your post on the previous page, regarding chefs and how little impact the chefs' lobby can have convincing the world that they are only important because of listeria prevention:
Wasn't the #ilookup campaign trying to show the world that architects are influenced by much bigger, more important, and more poetic notions of culture than just making sure the ADA ramp is the right slope? I feel like i look up was about how well we dream, not in the "oops I designed something 3x too expensive for you" sense of dream, but in that we merge the poetic with the pragmatic.
lawyers and doctors are the only ones capable of providing what they provide. They deal with life threatening situations that require urgency as midlander pointed out. Their work also has a direct effect. Architects offer a service that is indirect. It is mostly a luxury service. A competent building can be achieved without an architect. Exceptional buildings or programmatically complicated ones do require an architect. In that respect architects are most like chefs. Chefs make exceptional food as architefts make exceptional buildings. Both food and buildings can and do get produced by others more often than not. Both are fundamental needs (food/shelter,) but the architect and chef elevate that need to an art/luxury. Of course competence is required, but that alone is not what is unique to the profession. AIA and Ncarb is counterproductive because its selling point is hsw, competence, etc...none of which are exclusive traits of the profession. Rather than Ncarb and the aia...imagine a hypothetical organization called the UCA "united chefs of america" Now imagine their entire mantra was based on the idea that they ensure that chefs understand the internal temp of cooked meat, hygene, food safety, the exclusive right of chefs to cook food, etc...This is minimizing imo... That is why these organizations do little to elevate the profession in the eyes of the public.
Wrong.
This argument is based on very very superficial thinking. This superficial thinking glosses over the fact that the architect makes decisions with far deeper than mere issues of cosmetic taste. The lawyers, doctor, and chef are all affected in every aspect of their lives, professional and otherwise, 24/7 365 days a week, by the decisions that architects make.
But its easy to see why the unlicensed folks would be tempted to make such an argument. And especially those who graduated from schools in the last decade as they are in a very sorry state.
Unfortunately, the schools teach the cosmetic depth only and many graduates leave school without a systematic understanding of the value architects provide. Shame on them. Its difficult to blame the misunderstanding as its rooting in ignorance. An ignorance the schools perpetuate and the current state of society does everything to promote.
The AIA, NCARB and NAAB really really ought to focus on:
-compelling the schools to communicate the value architects provide beyond the silly cosmetic pursuits they presently indulge in. Such that every graduate understands the systematic influence architects have on the everyday life of every single individual who interfaces with the built environment.
-promoting an understanding, via empirical studies for example, of the depth of value the architect provides to individuals. For example, every decision an architect makes effects the distance the chef/ doctor/ lawyer etc walks to go to the bathroom, etc etc etc etc...
Well the lawyer biz is pretty much on the ropes, done in for the most part by lawyers themselves. The common sense thing for the architectural profession to do is limit the number of architecture degrees awarded, however this would impact the very generous salaries of architecture deans and architecture professors who are now part of the "club". They are literally picking up an endless supply of taxpayer-guaranteed dollars in tuition. The end result has been borrowed right out of the "guild" mentality of the middle ages - endless hours at as journeyman, low-pay status for the architectural graduates...
Yes
This is a great opportunity to point out the fundamental flaw in the thinking of the average architect these days as far as communicating their value to everyday Joe Public:
Wasn't the #ilookup campaign trying to show the world that architects are influenced by much bigger, more important, and more poetic notions of culture than just making sure the ADA ramp is the right slope? I feel like i look up was about how well we dream, not in the "oops I designed something 3x too expensive for you" sense of dream, but in that we merge the poetic with the pragmatic.
I just threw up a little in my mouth.
---------------------------------------
More profits for architects = more design autonomy.
More design autonomy for architects = better design.
Better design = a healthier, safer, more enjoyable built environment.
a healthier, safer, more enjoyable built environment = a higher quality of life for everyone
At present, Architects are not profitable.
Architects are not profitable because of the aforementioned reasons in this thread.
I.e. it has nothing, nothing, nothing to do with metaphors, abstractions, poems, dreams and least of all: feelings.
As architects we know that these are indispensable aspects of the design process. To attempt to communicate them to the typical client and the public is to bedazzle -confuse!- them with internal jargon. There is a reason the surgeon doesn't attempt to give a medical school education to each patient before surgery. The patient with melanoma isn't concerned about the processes behind their cancer. Even if they were, had the smarts to understand, and were inclined to find out: there isn't enough time to do so. That is why the professional knows what the professional knows and the patient defers to the professional.
Summary of some of the main reasons architecture is not profitable and the quality of the built environment is so much less as a result:
1. First, within our professional culture we share an unwillingness to walk away from a great commission, no matter what the cost. Architects knowingly accept low fees for fear of losing jobs or creating adversarial relationships.
2. Second, sometimes architects fail to obtain fair fees simply because they lack business training, negotiating skills, or an understanding of their real costs.
3. Finally, architects have had difficulty explaining the value of what they have to offer."
4. Architects have not done a good job of computing their real costs. As William F. Fanning, director of research for the Professional Services Management Journal says, ''In other industries, future projections are used to determine prices. Architecture is the opposite. We use last year's cost model to determine next year's prices.''"
Good_Knight, you said:
The AIA, NCARB and NAAB really really ought to focus on:
-compelling the schools to communicate the value architects provide beyond the silly cosmetic pursuits they presently indulge in.
NCARB's program to create some curricula that will allow licensure upon graduation is moving in that direction. Note that this program is endorsed by ALL of the affiliate organizations, including AIA.
Carrera - like my accountant once said, head down, no cares, keep working. and you are absolutely right about figuring out to charge 2-3 times so same scope. i operate closer to design build but haven't made the step to full CM ype services, will need partnets on that one....i think too much like an architect now.
NCARB's program to create some curricula that will allow licensure upon graduation is moving in that direction. Note that this program is endorsed by ALL of the affiliate organizations, including AIA.
This is a potentially awesome development. Thanks for sharing the info Donna
Good_Knight & Olaf.....Well it’s hard to make money when we don’t do anything….we farm out renderings, the surveying, site/civil, structural, MEP, landscape design, interiors, wayfinding, branding/graphic design, estimating, specs & construction, then the commissioning …hell, I know guys that farm out their CD’s to Vietnam, and others that farm out CA, what’s left? Shouldn’t it be “Broker” instead of “Architect”?
"....explaining the value of what they have to offer"? Offer what? Clients aren’t fools; they know what we’re doing, which isn’t much anymore.
Carrera, to your point, is not the composer and conductor of the orchestra providing value? (I agree but the forest must not be missed because of the density of the trees) Let the bassoonist etc play their part and be good and proud and be compensated as well of course
Fuck the AIA. Nuff said.
Jeez, sameold. At least tintt puts some effort into her disdain for an organization she isn't familiar with. What exactly is your attitude based on, have you ever been an AIA member, been to a meeting, volunteered for it or a similar organization? 200+ comments and some really great discussion here means that your comment clearly *isn't* enough said.
man this is still going on...
AIA for all... booo!!!
AIA for none....booo!!!
AIA for some, tiny American flags for all!!! woooohooo!!!
If it was good enough for Frank, its good enough for me...
Good Knight, as I said, competence is mandatory, but the bare minimum. If that is what you promote then expect people that are only willinh to pay bare minimum fees.
I work in landscape. I am competent in my area. people expect me to be. If I do not know how to do something I find out, ask a specialist, or require that the client engage with one. Clients do not hire me because I know how to draw planting details or how to make a competent fountain ...they hire me to improve their lives...to provide a space for refuge, sanctuary, enjoyment, entertainment....No one cares about the details of architecture any more than they do the engineering plans for the new car they just purchased. Granted, the work that I do is not usually that technically complex...But im sure this is the case for all forms of design.
Donna, yes the look up campaign was an attempt to do this...Not sure how that info can be used though...the average american had zero ability to affect the built environment. Their understanding/appreciation of architecture is not in and of itself empowering..
Donna, scroll back up, you missed the parts where several members, even long standing members, echoed my sentiments.
I still want to know if there are any AIA members who don't drink alcohol and if so what do they think of the cocktail parties?
why would an architect not drink alcohol?
rob_c, I don't disagree with any of them. They certainly apply to a lot, but not al, architects in practice.
Peter Zellner gives a good analysis of how poor we are at figuring out a way to get paid well for what we do in this interview. The pricing discussion is near the end but the whole interview is worth listening to - he's very intelligent and well-spoken.
First, within our professional culture we share an unwillingness to walk away from any commission
There, I fixed it for you.
I don’t think it’s a matter of walking away; it’s a matter of walking out front.
This might be a better way to explain it….
The first video explains that you’re selling the wrong thing and the second video explains why you are.
https://youtu.be/qp0HIF3SfI4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iG9CE55wbtY
“Innovation distinguishes between a leader and a follower” - Steve Jobs
Count the great innovators that didn’t attend college and you'll run out of fingers & toes.
hi carrera!
the first video makes me think that the essential component of a ted talk is delivery over content. in an AIA thread, which i havent read, i can see the video's presumed value. applied to individual practices and client hunting, it's purpose seems to flip: how to make your 'why' flexible in the face of different clients (admittedly outside what im guessing is the agenda of this thread) - otherwise we're all gehries trying to get over 13% or some other type of specialist trying to get over "the chasm" with our "why".
i can convince the mayor with my 'why' but there's a snowball's chance in hell of my convincing the developer with the same 'why'. and i think the mayor is in the developer's pocket.
randomly continuing: rem, or eiseman or zaha or gehry, is an innovator (via the video's terms); bjarke is the chasm jumper. techniques for chasm jumping were notably absent from the video.
the second video frankly seemed like a good argument for architecture school, but i went to fucking great schools and dont have any crippling hatred for my past.
thanks for posting some things that caught your attention.
I just heard about a potential AIA pilot program that could be interesting to a lot of the naysayers here. I can't discuss it, obviously, but if/when it's official we'll see how it's received.
Donna, will they be giving out free puppies?
http://www.archdaily.com/771436/aia-launches-campaign-against-unpaid-internships
About time!
I just joined the AIA the other day. Then again, my company pays for all my dues so.... that made it easier.
Oh look, what ivorykeyboard just pointed to, and it's not even the same pilot program *I* mentioned in my previous post.
<sarcasm> The Old White Men who just want to keep status quo would *never* launch a program to make sure young graduates know their value and don't consent to work for free! </sarcasm>
The laws are already in place. The old white men have to follow them, just like everyone else. To launch a campaign to say we aren't going to break the law anymore isn't really something to get excited over.
i disagree with that tintt. just because the law is there doesn't mean people are following it.
part of the thing with our profession is that a lot of firms are very small practices being run by people who really have no idea how to run a business. even if they wanted to follow the regulations, there are a lot of them and it's hard find where to learn them. on top of that, it's been my experience that most baby boomers are just too lazy to be bothered with trying to learn new things. it's easier for them to ask people to work for free so they get money for nothing, and sometimes students think it's easier to get a line on their resume if they work for free.
a campaign to educate people and slow this practice down is a good thing.
info.aia.org/salary
that is awesome.
thanks for your point, curt, and thanks for not delivering it with a personal attack, I appreciate it.
there was a personal attack against baby boomers in there. i think we can still count this as part of the lack of integrity quondam sites in the other thread.
jla-x and Good Knight,
Good Knight wrote"
Sorry, but I have to be that person again: retarded is not acceptable in polite conversation. Not that this conversation is polite, but racial epithets aren't acceptable, and "retarded" is just as bad. Use dumb.
jla-x, serious question: why is Associate AIA not acceptable for those-we-no-longer-call-interns? Is it because that's the same designation as vendors, etc. use? Also, locally our Young Architects Forum is super active; they do a lot to address issues of young practitioners, including the not-yet-licensed.
agreed. Assoc AIA is not acceptable because it lumps architecture grads in with a bunch of vendors. Anyone with a few extra bucks to throw around can get it. (a certain prolific poster for example).
The entire "Assoc AIA" is a scam. Its the AIA brand selling itself for more quick dirty money by association.
Young architecture school grads need their own !exclusive! group/ brand/ title. One that speaks to the passion, drive, and commitment graduates from accredited school have demonstrated by earning their degrees.
The Young Architects Forum is reta....DUMB. Its dumb and demeaning along the same lines as "intern". You pay your dues in green, blood, sweat and tears and earn the professional education, experience, and examination only to be pigeon holed (10 years!) in the category of "Young Architect"? The AIA is reta....asinine in this regard as well."
Let me correct you guys. First, guys, for the love of architecture, lets at least get the AIA membership categories correct.
Sellers/Vendors would be ALLIED members NOT Assoc. AIA members. Next time, just go to:
http://www.aia.org/join/
and get your facts straight on the membership categories so arguments would be based on being informed and proper research was done so the arguments will hold with more credence.
Anybody with a high school diploma or GED can be an Associate AIA member - any vendor who wants an Associate membership can get it - just like building designers and building custodians.
Rick you're walking proof of that, so why try to make it seem as if others don't have their facts straight, or that Associate AIA membership means anything at all.
All you need in order to get Associate membership is a few hundred dollars and an NCARB record - and all you need in order to get an NCARB record is some more money and a high school diploma or a GED.
I've been debating joining and probably will but I feel like that really cheapens being a professional organization.
Yes anyone can be an Allied member. And anyone other than a high school dropout can be an Associate member.
kjdt,
Well yes but they have to be enrolled in IDP. You aren't automatically enrolled in IDP just because you have a high school diploma, GED or equivalent.
If you are business is a vendor manufacturing and selling floor tiles... the business would be an Cornerstone Partner member. The salesperson may or may not be associate AIA member. To be an associate member, a person must have a professional degree in Architecture or working under the supervision of an architect, or currently enrolled in IDP (ultimately working toward licensure), or a faculty member in a university program in architecture.
If the salesman has a degree in architecture then fine. If not, they probably aren't qualified for Associate AIA membership. Then you have to next check if they meet any of the other three paths. However, a vendor like the sales rep of Pella (tm) windows may often not be enrolled in IDP, or have a professional degree in Architecture or necessarily be a faculty member at a university with a program in architecture and likely not working under the supervision of an architect. Pella would never be an associate AIA member. Pella would be a Cornerstone Partner member. The salesperson may just be an allied member.
Read the AIA membership
Eligibility for Associate Membership
Associate membership is open to individuals who meet one of the following criteria: professional degree in architecture; currently work under the supervision of an architect; currently enrolled in the Intern Development Program (IDP) and working toward licensure; or faculty member in a university program in architecture.
Eligibility for National Allied Membership
Individuals who do not hold a degree in architecture, but share an interest in the built environment as a professional colleague or enthusiast, are eligible for National Allied membership. Your membership is at the national level. For local or state membership, contact your closest component.
Allied membership would be the category of membership for anyone not pursuing architecture licensing, not actively enrolled in IDP nor have a professional degree in architecture.
What distinguish is an associate member is a person who either on the licensing track by virtue of a professional degree of architecture, or is actively engaged in IDP. A building designer can be an associate member or an allied member. The key is whether someone is on licensure track. If you have an active NCARB record, enrolled in IDP (either working on completion or completed it), working for an architect or otherwise doing the required experience requirements for whatever path to licensure.
Associate members means those on licensure track. Allied members on non-licensure track folks without professional architecture degree.
Those licensed are Architect members.
I'm not saying it is a high standard. I am saying, keep the facts straight. It might not seem like much when you look at the matter from the wrong perspective.
It misses the point. The moment you take your step towards licensure be it active enrollment in IDP, possession of an NAAB accredited degree and working on licensure then you are licensure-track and that makes you qualified as an Associate member.
I was criticizing Good Knight's error in saying it lumps them with vendors. It doesn't.
The Product vendors (ie. Pella, Armstrong, Hubbell, Graphisoft, etc.) - the businesses that manufacture/sells products in connection with architecture, the built environment, etc. are CORNERSTONE PARTNERS members. Individual sales representative can be an Architect member, Associate AIA member or Allied member. This depends on the individual.
We know the lives of individuals can be quite complicated and people get jobs to keep the paying the bills. Even jobs like working in non-architecture jobs like being a sales or marketing rep for a vendor. When people make a grievous error because they don't take the few minutes to check their facts degrades their credibility.
The point is get the facts straight so the points isn't a chain of fallacy built on top of fallacy.
A vendor business would not be a member of the categories for 'individuals'. They would be in the category for corporate/businesses.
Just so you know, there already exists an organization that represents you freshly graduated / non-licensed architecture educated or trained folks including folks like jla-x...... its called AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF BUILDING DESIGN ( AIBD ).
http://www.aibd.org
Richard it is the "otherwise working toward licensing" part that lets anybody do just what kjdt suggests. I just had a roofing rep in here about a month ago who has "Associate AIA" on his card. I asked if he went to architecture school and he said no but he started an IDP record. Basically any company that wants to pay NCARB and AIA dues can make all their reps into Associate AIA members.
Since NCARB loosened the entry point rules to allow any high school grad to start an IDP record, and AIA counts the existence of an IDP record as satisfying the requirements of "working toward licensing", the Associate membership level has become essentially the same as Allied membership in that neither inherently indicates any particular qualifications. I don't think that was AIA's intent - and actually the AIA bylaws differ from the current Associate membership application and the former doesn't state that the mere existence of an IDP record is enough to establish that one is actively working toward a license - but that's the way it's being applied by AIA's membership administration.
The public is in great danger! Assoc AIA members may really be construction guys...they may actually know how to build things...cant have that or the terrorists win...
Can't let the terrorists win ... that's what happens at those CSI meetings. Current students, recent grads, architects, contractors, specifiers, product reps all rubbing shoulders and networking ... it makes me sick just thinking about it. It's like they'll let anybody join.
Donna,
Alright.
JBeaumont,
It doesn't say "otherwise working toward licensing". I actually quoted the AIA membership requirements for associate AIA members and Allied member (National). International Allied members are very similar to National Allied members, if I recall correctly.
Sure but the sales rep has to maintain their NCARB record if they stop being employed. It isn't something that a vendor is going to actively pay unless they make a real benefit from it. Then there is that things where it says.... "and working toward licensing". So the bottom line comes down to this, are they actively working toward licensing? If so, I don't see it an issue. If not, it can become one but at some point, they ought to get off their duff and complete IDP and continue to complete licensure process... somewhere.
This means, the person is sooner or later is going to need to work under the supervision of an architect and do work pertaining to architecture.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.