I completely agree with you formanaught...

It's difficult when trying to find work, and utilizing the web; we aren't even allowed to utilize the name which describes our own work, for political/socio-economic/and legal issues, yet everyone else in all other professions are referred to as "the architects" of so and so.

In addition, I have to agree with you on the annoyance that it builds because we have to alter the way we search for work...(can't just put down architect, even though you might be a licensed professional); you have to resort to words like designer, junior/senior job captains, project manager, etc. It's frustrating and sad!

my $.02 cents for the day

formanaught, while i hear you on your annoyance, i'm not sure dropping the word 'architect' into a search engine is the best way to look for a job.

i guess you could consider rummy an architect too. of the worst kind, of course.

formanaught, who's stopping you from calling yourself an architect?
it's just a word.

I think we should start calling ourselves "Environmental Doctors".

yep, just a word.

jitter....right on...

I love it !!

To expidite things, I ignore all of the Architect job listings which have a starting salary of $80k +

In my country (and obviously others) the term 'architect' and 'architectural' are legally protected. So how come some any mere recruitment agent or IT geek can advertise for or call themselves architects? I cant because I am not registered even though I have an architecture degree, and practice architecture. This really sluts me off too.

When I was at school I did a publication based on this fact - I spent long hours dredging through search results looking for actual architectural content becasue I felt that web-based architectural media was being sidelined due to this kind of discrimination.

Thank God for Archinect.

I agree with e.

I think you need a little education in surfing the web. I mean if you were in the medical profession would you search for a job with the keyword "doctor."

Oh Please, Educate me Defenstrator.

Ofcourse I refined my search. 5 years of university education did teach me something about research methods.

But I typed in the word Architect for a reason; that being, I had a hunch this word was being bandied around by a lot of different industries and out of curiosity used the jobsearch database to confirm my suspicions while I was there.

sheesh...

But what ever I type in the search box is not going to re-write the reality, that is; anyone and everyone (except architectural graduates) are allowed to use the word Architect

Why can they use the word, when we cannot? And do RIBA, AIA, RAIA, etc etc have a problem with them using the word.

Is it because of the Architect in the Matrix, now every tech geek wants to be THE ARCHITECT ha ha

RIBA, AIA, RAIA doing anything about it? Enforcing the IT professions to drop the title Architect?

Isn't it techincally the State that limits the use of an architect calling themself an Architect? As opposed to RIBA, AIA, RAIA-

well, it's the AIA through their add campaign that gives the impression that you are not a registered architect unless you belong to the AIA. i'm sure you have heard the radio spots, "....contact your local registered AIA architect." in my opinion, that has as much obfuscation as "weapons related program activities."
i realize your concern when job hunting and not being able to sort through the litany of software titles and positions, but i think you are going a little far with the assumption that the professional title police are tracking your every move. as an unlicensed person in the field who has fulfilled all of my IDP requirements, i am obviously not going to be considering myself an architect in any legal or official capacity, but when i am meeting family members, or my girlfriend's family and friends, i am long passed the bumbling answer of "i work for an architect," "architect in training," "intern architect," or "associate architect." these descriptions/definitions inherently lead to an explanation of the licensure process and are almost as tedious as answering the "you must be good at math" comments.

i have often toyed at changing my first name legally to registered and my last name to architect to get around the games.

but in all seriousness the problem of other "professions" calling themselves architects (the reason being the architect of the matrix or whatever) jhopkins is right... the professional title police are not going to hunt anyone down if we say architect.

when looking for a new job on the internet clarify with keywords your search...

perhaps jhopkins should pose this problem to his local AIA chapter!

the title police won't hunt them down, but they may hunt you down if you represent yourself as an architect to a client and they uncover the lie.

Hmm. I recently saw come through the office a notice from the IDP folks that falsely representing yourself as an architect can get you up to a one year prison sentence (or fines, which would be more likely). Perhaps if the AIA were to instigate legal cases against those misusing the term Architect in unrelated professions as a method of protecting the title, it would make it a less desirable name for programmers to use.

The AIA gotta make themselves useful for something.

but i have never paid any dues to the AIA, nor will i ever become an AIA member. outside of some discounted legal documents, what else has the AIA provided? i understand i am being a cynic and hyperbolic, but i don't see a whole hell of a lot of difference between being an AIA member and joining a country club - both are exclusive, self-serving, and introverted. bickering over the word architect, and who can use it, only amplifies my disdain.

i apologize for my tone, i'm a little acidic today. i just got out of an office lunch where my boss described that there is no hope for a project because it needs to be "colonial," what ever the hell that means. that dude is a piece of work.

jhopkins, you are correct. what does the AIA provide? not a whole hell of a lot. i'd think you'd get more perks and better treatment at the country club, and you'd probably get better potential clients too.

I am not a country club member, but I suspect that the potential benefits of belonging to a club, even given the higher dues, are greater than paying $500 to the AIA....no other AIA member is going to ever commission you to design anything, while the club members may well keep their business within the club.
jhopkins....I understand the acidic tone all too well...have heard similar comments many times during the last 31 years of practice. I had a principal once tell me, after listenin in amazement to my description of the symbolic aspects of a proposed healthcare building I had designed: "are you really planning to tell the doctors this?" Fortunately a senior staff member saw the merit in what I had done, went to bat for me, and I was allowed to present the scheme...which the client/doctor group then loved....and it ultimately went on to win a couple of design awards....which resulted in that principal sending me a letter (I had been fired in the interim) congratulating me on the design work, and admitting that it was a good building despite his earlier skepticism. Of course, they didn't offer to hire me back, they just enjoyed taking credit for the building at all of the awards ceremonies.
Oops....I am off topic again....letting my bitterness show again.

it is interesting how as pointed out earlier we as architects are bound by legalities of semantic interpretation. as i am non-licensed maybe i can be arrested or "dis-barred" because in this message i referred to myself as an "Architect".

this is how i approach the problem: i have always referred to myself as an Architect if someone asks or am asked to say what i do for a living. Because i have an accredited degree in architecture (the single most important qualifying factor in "most" jurisdictions, i feel i have a right to use that term to describe myself. if pressed for clarification, i have either quantified my response by saying i'm an intern or i'm "not licensed yet" and then delve into detail about the IDP. to the general public, they don't have to know nor do they fully understand the finer nuances of the IDP requirement. my best analogy is to compare it to a medical doctor's residency. i know that those medical doctor's can call themselves doctors upon graduating medical school, but within their profession, there is a division drawn between a doctor in residence and one post-residence. this goes the same for us in this profession, the general public might not care nor understand that because we're not licensed we can't call ourselves architects, but within the profession, we do care (but maybe not that much).

i think the interpretation of the use of the term "Architect" lies within a person trying to pass themselves off as an "Architect" through devious or deceptive measures. it's all about misrepresentation. this rule of not calling yourself an "Architect" was set in place to protect the public from individuals who were not competent or derelict in issues regarding fire, life and safety- who were misrepresenting their ability. the title architect is used as a title to describe that someone has met the MINIMUM requirement with regard to FLS (passing the ARE). it's used to distinguish within our profession, not outside of it.

i prefer to think that those other professions who use the term "Architect" to describe what they do as emulating our profession (the one that actually designs and gives guidance to the built environment). they want to be known as a person who assembles pieces of information and brings it together in a cohesive and productive manner. so what if they do that with ones and zeros and circuit boards? i know the difference, and i'm sure they do to.

if at a party and someone asks what they do for a living i doubt they say "an Architect". they probably say that they're "in information technology" or something similar. the general public is not confused by this title. we as Architects say we are indeed "Architects" at parties and again, the general public is not confused by this. Have you ever said that you're an architect and they respond by asking if you work for Initel, HP, SunMicro, IBM, etc? of course not. further more, i don't care if someone who has an accredited degree and not licensed but who has worked for nine (or more) years calls themselves an architect. i do care if someone doesn't have the education of an architect and is passing themselves off as one- that's misrepresenting.

we must all remember our Shakespeare, but also remember you can't dress a wolf in sheeps clothing.

just my humble opinion.

sorry for the long post.

terroists are now 'architects of terrorist schemes'

dd has it right... but even before i became licensed i called myself an architect... with no qualifications. I DOESN'T MATTER. and the states professional lic. boards could give a shit how you talk about yourself... to anyone. what is problematic is offering services (contract or not) to a client and doing it under their understanding that you are lic. to practice in the state you're conducting the work. go ahead and say you're an architect or whatever and don't feel its wrong... because no ones cares and you're not going to be arrested. also, the aia has NOTHING to do with this... its completely up to the state and its right under federal law to make its own tiles rules, laws and regulations. why is it that this has become so confused?

Hey, we aren't to only ones having our titles ripped off. My father is an engineer and has the very same complaints.

I just don't like how someone who goes to any two year community college or tech school are using professional titles that real graduates should only have.

The AIA has no legal authority to make or enforce laws. However, they do occasionally "censure" or otherwise disciplined their own members and associate members for misrepresentation. Actually this is one of the most common complaints that the AIA does take action against (their case histories and decisions are all available on their website www.aia.org) but as a professional organization the most serious action they can take is to discontinue someone's membership. Usually these cases are instigated by disgruntled clients. There are some that have taken action against unlicensed individuals calling themselves architects, though most have been actions against firms that knowingly list unlicensed employees as architects for purposes of advertising/procuring work.

As for the state boards: some states do routinely fine people for falsely calling themselves architects in a professional context and/or practicing architecture without a license.
But nearly all of these cases involve people who WERE architects but who have - sometimes inadvertently - let their licenses lapse. The state of Pennsylvania for example is usually pursuing charges against 8 or 10 "architects" at any given moment. Nearly all of these people are architects who have not kept up with their annual payments to the state to keep their registrations valid. The state typically uses as "evidence" things like the architects' names on company letterhead or on firm rosters that represent them as architects. The state board typically levies fines in the range of $4000 for this. It seems to be a good revenue generator for the state. I've never heard of them going after an intern or a software "architect" though.

Not that I am for it, but if someone wanted to go after these computer "architects" I don't think they should go after the "architects" themselves, but instead they should probably chase the sources of the titles, which are the sub-deparments of Computer Science departments at universities all over the country which are officially named "Architecture."
It seems to me that if I'd gone through a computer science program that was titled Architecture it would be pretty unfair not to be able to call myself an architect.

As for searching on major job databases: most of them allow boolean searching - i.e. you can search for all listings of "architect" that do NOT include "C++" for example. This helps to narrow it down.

come on guy... we're talking about people who practice building design that misrepresent themselves by offering services under the titled certificate of an architect registered in the state to practice architecture. thats a mouthful but this is WILFUL misrepresentation, not someone who's late in payment for a license to practice.

what most people on this forum are refering to is 'can i call myself an architect... even though im not licensed?' and the answer is YES you can. you can call yourself anything you want. A doctor in new york is still a doctor in california even if the state of california has not issued her a certificate. the BIG difference is that doctor is not allowed to practice medicine in that state. its that simple.

to all you architects who are interns out there... PLEASE, in converstation, call yourself an architect, don't get silly with this bs argument about title law. the aia has nothing to do with it. and who gives a crap if IT people qualify there names with 'architect'... you know what they are. we know who we are. and A... those real grads from a two year program, if in fact they are IT architects are making more money than 'real' architects, so get over the name thing.

Cut the bull, you guys really want the title so badly. The profession beckons with its utopian grasp. You are so close: but it’s such hard work You think about an easier route in life – software architect perhaps?

Those with the title can look on with pride, identity and meaning.
It’s all in a name. It’s the definition of a role in life to be coveted.

I think it’s all getting more and more irrelevant as the profession is floundering, architecture is more pressured and practices are unable to adapt.

http://www.capita.co.uk/Home/MediaCentre/PressReleases/Capita_Symonds_acquires_Percy_Thomas_Architects.htm