most of the work the vast majority of your typical architecture firm does is towards project management, contract admin, and lower-cost design solutions using off-the shelf systems.  3D software is primarily used as representation, while a good number of offices have moved towards using it as a coordination tool.

very few people actually understand how to implement complex geometries in building construction, and firms that have the resources to invest in the time and tools it takes are typically much larger and have clients with deep pockets.

I'm going to preempt the luddite comments by saying that too many students graduating today can't even draw a basic wall section - or understand how to frame and detail a simple wood or block house (depending on your region's construction methods).  I'm all for experimenting with the power of technology to help us realize exciting new forms - but without a basic understanding of construction and detailing this stuff is pretty close to useless.

maybe we'll see it used more once these students who learned it over the past decade start to gain enough practical experience and figure out how it can be utilized in smaller practices... we'll see.

^what the appliance said.

@toasteroven well put. well put.

There are some of us using parametric design for more than formal investigation and/or drawing coordination. Parametric change engines that are utilized in some Building Information Modeling software allows geometry to be imbued with characteristic traits that extend beyond simple vectors and planes to include parameters that represent the realistic traits of an object or 'element'. This can result in more accurate predictions regarding the design ranging from structural stability to seismic performance and behavioral modeling. For much of the 90s and early 2000s the focus of parametric design was on structural performance and coordination, and describing complex geometries for fabrication. Simulations that are tied to well crafted models have also been used to test performance criteria such as weatherproofing, energy efficiency, reflectivity, cost estimation, timeline and daylight levels. These 'tests' are dependent on parameters which include the U value of materials, labor costs, solar reflectance, insolation levels, etc... both parameters input by the designer and those which are made available through GIS, product manufacturers or weather services are used. These methods of design are becoming more prevalent in many offices throughout the world as efficiency driven by environmental consciousness and the 'great recession' of the late 2000s further promotes the use of these tools. 

michael - rescheck/comcheck + sketchup shadow studies is about as sophisticated most firms get in terms of performance requirements.

in the late 90s I was working at a firm that still did everything by hand.

I think these processes are pretty well adopted by the "mainstream" at this point within larger-scale practices... SOM, KPF, NBBJ, etc... every twisting tower and wavy airport built in the last 10 years incorporates some of these techniques and tools, from Grasshopper to Revit, Catia, Digital Project...

Even big construction firms like Turner are using Revit for construction managemant and coordination. I know that the definition of "parametricism" is contentious, as is the potential use and abuse of advanced computational tools, but I'd say they are pretty pervasive by now.