Doesn't apply completely to architecture, as architecture isn't a mass-produced product.

When a client comes to me, it's because they know they want something, but they're not sure exactly what. Steve Jobs makes things people don't know they want yet.

Certainly pre-fab architecture and architectural products (faucets, flooring, facade systems) fall closer to the iPad than does a custom home or building. I guess this is why clients of custom architecture aren't fully or only consumers, they are consumers with a curatorial role.

It is the architect's role to determine what the client wants, including what they know they want, what think they want but really don't, and what they don't know yet that they actually do want.

Yes.

Unless it's a no.

Facebook would say: 'it's complicated'.



Oldie, but a goodie.

There's a huge difference between a consumer shelling out several hundred, or even several thousand, dollars to purchase a mass-produced item (which they can touch and operate before buying) and someone committing several hundred thousand (or multiple million) dollars for a unique, one-off building.

Naturally, consumers of design and construction services come in many flavors. I tend to think those consumers planning to build a very large, costly project do have - and should have - a fairly clear idea of what they need and want; most typically, such consumers have built before and bring prior experience with the process to the table. On the other hand, inexperienced consumers building something like a house for the first time may think they know what they want, but often need guidance from us to clarify and refine those thoughts.

What I do know is that it's not our role to impose our own wants and aspirations on to the client. So long as they're providing the financing and paying our fees, it's their building, not ours. We can provide design leadership - we should not dictate.

i agree with quizzical. "design leadership" is a good role for the architect if can be established with the client and usually leads to a very satisfactory product at the end for all involved.
then again, architect's role is defined in many different stages in the project and services provided can vary from design leadership to technical assistance and anything in between.
the client is responsible for hiring the architect and after that it is up to both parties to define what is needed in varying circumstances.
i think as the design professional architect has a pretty good idea of what the client really needs and interpret what they want but sometimes the desire to make more money takes over and and at that point it becomes a milking business (certainly not ethical) or client's ego show.

i can't see the graphic, rusty. can you repost smaller?

elinor. It doesn't scale well due to tiny text. I included a link to it a the end of the post though.

Perhaps Archinect 2018 will support images wider than 400 pixels.

with regard to the ipad, to me, the more interesting corrolary question is, 'can architects create demand?'

YES!

[drumroll]

At the unemployment office.

[/crash]

Thank you. I'll be here all week. Make sure to try the architectural cupcakes.

ah, got it, thanks. very nice.

i'm curious, does anyone use ASHRAE Guideline 0, OPR/BOD (LEED aside) as a way to document and refine design intent prior to getting into the programming?

i think i phrased that a bit awkwardly so here is (i hope) a more legible question

i'm curious, does anyone use ASHRAE Guideline 0, OPR/BOD (aside from LEED related to commissioning) as a way to document and refine design intent prior to getting into the programming?

el jeffe, you hit the exact right question. a few architects have, obviously, been able to create demand for their own work - usually architects with a recognizable "style". As an overall profession, we have done a lousy job of creating demand, in part because most people are afraid that of they hire us all they will get is our personal "style".

i find the most important things clients say are the inadvertent contradictions

such contradictions can give insight into the distinction between their aspirations and their reality or between where they know they have to go with respect to facilities and organizational dynamics versus how they are currently set up.........clues for how to bridge the disjunction through design --- clues that lead to unique features tailored to the client's needs at a deeper level than merely what they ask for

from this perspective, clients 'knowing what they want' doesn't always mean they can come right out and say 'what they want', but it is usually implicit in the contradictions and can be teased out with questioning and targeted sketches and the choice of concepts presented

I built a hunting retreat once. The actual clients were the owner's dogs....

if clients knew what they wanted, they wouldn't hire us.

Paul,

The product/service distinction is important (even if some architects sell their services more like products) although it doesn't seem to me that it would preclude our ability to create something the client 'doesn't realize' they want. As jmang notes just above, it's working through the contradictions most clients bring to a project where a considerable amount of design freedom can be achieved.

The quote is more than a little insincere as well - clearly Senor Jobs is doing a immense amount of study to see how well their offerings will be received and 'wanted'. I think he's simply saying that great ideas aren't merely reactive to the marketplace - they have to create demand as much or more than they react to 'pain points' already identified. And, its a pretty rich quote from a company that tends to build upon (and exquisitely execute) ideas that are already 'out there'. Hence my purchase of the iOS suite of products...

The best architecture is done without clients. We all learned this at our great academic institutions.

Steve Jobs is the closets personality to the architect stereotype - you the know one where the architect doesn't listen to client, charges a lot for stupid opinions based on theory, and obstructs progress of the project by stomping their feet every time the GC figures out a better way for doing something.

I absolutely refuse to buy steve job products for the following reason - he thinks he knows how I should use technology. Just like an architect, telling people how they should live. telling people their nostalgic neo colonialism is wrong.

Anyway to answer the OP question: clients are people, every situation is different. Work and charge accordingly. I can't tell you who you are and how to be.

AND what they can actually afford!

To summarize jbushkey above

Its the architects job to shatter the potential clients dream by telling them its just not possible.

I do not think that was a good summary Olaf. If the budget is tens of thousands of dollars short of their expectations are you going to kick in the extra? I am going to tell them that they will have to make sacrifices and give them some options.

Well making it affordable is part of getting them to identify exactly what they *actually* want. if they really, really want it, they'll find a way to pay for it - but we have to help them identify what is/is not worth that extra effort.