...the answer to the age-old question of why architects don't get fair fees, and then by extension, don't get paid fair salaries:
here it is:
LOOK IN THE MIRROR!....we have some issues...
the reason we don't get paid what we should, is a two prong problem. first, architects don't value enough what we do, and we are so grateful when we do get a project, that we're willing to sell ourselves, and the profession, short just to get the work and put food on the table. very few architects say NO to getting screwed, both at the principal and the employee level, for fear of getting brushed aside for the guy next in line.
this leads the second part of the problem. this profession is filled with people who come from wealth, whether it be from family or spouse, and can thereby afford not to worry about what they get paid for projects, forgetting that by doing so they are ruining the already miniscule respect that clients have for this profession. to those of you who fall into this category (and i know you are reading this, because i know some of you personally): STOP IT!...i know you don't care about the next guy, but for your own sake, cut it out.
and to those of who out there who take low paying, no-benefit, 90 work week jobs at starchitects' offices (i know many of you as well)....shame on you. where's your pride, your self-respect. can't you see you're being used? trust me, it's not worth it. what will it really give you?
now i know these problems are centuries old, beginning in the academies and aristocracy....but it's time...
this whole problem comes down self-esteem. when architects finally get some self-respect, and start standing up for themselves, then we'll start being treated fairly.
also...DO NOT JOIN THE AIA....until they begin addressing some real issues. right now, the AIA is a boys club that is simply used for networking and patting each other on the back. what is your $6000 per year doing for you? until the AIA begins working on the behalf of all architects (rather than just the rich and sycophantic) and starts doing what all Washington lobbyists do (working for our own interests and financial gain), then do not support them.
i know this topic has been discussed many times and in many forms around this forum, but i was taking a random look at the salary poll this morning, and it made me sick to my stomach. how can so many people be getting screwed (many of whom do so knowingly) and not do anything about it? do not settle for table scraps, stand up for what you want......and don't feel that you owe your boss anything. you do your job, they pay you for it.
i'm advocating the start of an architects' civil rights movement. we don't need a national organization for this (supposedly, we already have one), and we don't need to march on Washington, but we do need people to stop whoring themselves and start demanding what they want, rather than just taking what they can get.
the problem is that developers and engineers will do an architects work for a fraction of the cost, becuase they dont give a rats-ass about design and neither does the general public
I have no problem with the first part, i think that does happen... but the argument about architects coming from wealthy backgrounds making it more acceptable for them to be paid less is pretty flimsy...
there is NOOO way that architects come from wealthier backgrounds than doctors lawyers or any other high earning profession.
Privilage breeds privilage no matter what the case may be.
though i will admit there were some very wealthy people in my studios
llet...
the argument isn't that architects are wealthier than other professions, but that it has a more profound affect on society when it comes to architects. for example, when searching for a doctor or lawyer, people are usually looking to pay MORE money because they feel it buys better service....the opposite is true for architects, most people want to spend as little as possible and still expect unreasonable levels of quality and time; wealthier and self-sustained architects are outside of this conundrum.
you're right: privilege breeds privilege, and fosters nothing else.
As you know, jeffe, an architect's work may not have the same critical, immediate impact on someone's health and well-being as a doctor's, but can have enormous impact on their long-term well being. And I think even the medical community is coming to realize the importance of environment on all of us.
el jeffe i think that's cynics point. the modern medical profession is barely, barely 100-125 years old. architects have been around a hell of a lot longer, and we have let ourselves go...
With that in mind perhaps I'll give it all up to become a feng shui consultant - get nervous housewives to pay me the big bucks to move their sofa 8" east and stick a red bowl holding purple rocks in the southwest corner of the room.
(Kidding, and no slam intended on serious feng shui, speaking of old professions.)
cynic - I appreciate your passion for this topic. I myself for the most part agree with your argument. The star-architect slavery issue is one that really burns me. Then again, every year there's a ready supply of fresh sheep even more eager than the past year to work for a pittance just for a name to put on a resume.
I think the issue strectches out in all directions from education to the laws governing our profession. But when it comes down to simple economics, I think it's all about supply and demand.
Right now there are so many architects competing for the work that the price has been lowered. Drop the number of architects in half and the remaining would be so swamped with work they'd either turn down work or take it on for a higher price. Econ 101 laws of supply and demand.
Along the lines of oversupply of architects - think about how the architectural "superheros" that work 80 hours a week contribute to the "surplus" in the equation. Maybe we drop the # of architects, but maybe we also drop the number of hours each architect works. And dammit, principals, stop promising schematics to CDs in a matter of weeks. You know better.
Liberty Bell - my mother-in-law is WAY into feng shui, books, page-a-day calenders telling her what to do. She has colored glass bottles on every window sill in her house for example. I think the blue glass is in the north windows, green for south, something like that. She takes it pretty seriously. But during a recent remodel and addition to thier home, while helping out with the plans, I explained why having two doors into her new bathroom (one to main living area and one to master bedroom) was not a good idea, she didn't believe me. They did it anyways. Also didn't want to listen when I warned that a 9'-8" x 9'-6" room wasn't really big enough for a master bedroom (an existing room, planned to be turned into master, and no closets). If her feng shui book had told her it was no good, she would have understood it. My snotty little opinion probably pissed them off as they BOUGHT the house PLANNING on eventually turning this downstairs office into the master bedroom, and it's too late.
Maybe I suck at explaining things. Maybe architects do in general. We DO tend to argue a lot - we as architects will argue in front of a client, providing contradictory design solutions that each believes is the way to go. What we have to say is often a mere opinion, based on an abstract concept that nobody can see but us. For every reason to do something, there is a reason NOT to do it, and as long as it is just an opinion, the owner is bound to think that their opinion is just as relevant. So what is the architect there for? To fulfill the technical components and provide drafting - to make it work.
while i'd agree that recognizing long-term considerations of our own health in relation to our environment are a valuable development, my point is simply that i think that almost all long-term views are anathema to the current state of speculative real estate and architectural services.
to stick with the medical doctor analogy and expand on my statement above (too cursory perhaps) it isn't often that people select a DOCTOR based upon ROI considerations. They may certainly select a TREATMENT method based upon that equation however.
beta,
i'm not so sure that we (architects) have let ourselves go as much as medical science has risen up past us in terms of maintaining daily life for many.
by way of analogy again, antibiotics are more important than walled cities in our attempts to provide life security anymore. (this despite inane attempts at building fences on our borders.)
medicine is not all the absolutes you want it to be. no one - at least hardly ever - asks a doctor to second guess another doctor, unless they have been given a death sentence, but it proves one thing medical science does not have the answers to everything. yet, when some nut job asks you to design an addition they wonder why your fee is so ridiculous and then they go on about how their contractor friend told them they'd charge some minimal fee. always getting second guessed.
i complain constantly about how crap i get paid... and im one of those kids who is working for crap because the name on my resume will most likely mean a lot when i move to the next firm
but no matter how much i complain...
the truth of the matter is...
i make enough to survive.
i can pay my rent, my electric gas phone internet and cable bills,
i can pay my student loans,
i can pay off my overdue tuition...(oops)
i can buy books, i can buy cds, i can buy beer and plites on the weekend
and i live in a decent apartment in a cool neighborhood in an incredible city
cynic, i could not agree with you more (except on the AIA thing but that in a moment).
the first step to take is to work locally: work towards laws that require an architect's stamp on almost all new buildings, even single-family houses. it's this loophole that is responsible, i believe, for our society's general dismissal of design quality. because people see non-designed crap all around them in the form of crappy SF housing, they learn to filter it out and live with it.
and from a legal and life-safety standpoint, requiring an architect for any structure would increase the quality of construction, guarantee code compliance, and decrease the impact of the built environment on the natural environment.
were it a requirement that almost all construction be designed and stamped by an architect, it would also increase the number of licensed architects out there (a lot of people can get by on houses and never get licensed). the fact that someone CAN be unlicensed and perform the duties of an architect is one of the reasons our profession is devalued.
ok. so a physician's assistant can take your pulse and a paralegal can write a contract. but a PA can't do surgery and a paralegal can't represent you in court.
yet, an unlicensed designer can legally design your house and administer its construction. if that unlicensed designer has been to school, gotten experience, and just hasn't sat for the ARE...then cool. but there's nothing preventing some guy from designing his own house and having a contractor build it...in some cases with no permit or inspections or any oversight whatsoever.
i'm not trying to be an elitist, or to suggest that those who do not have licenses are somehow killing our profession. what i am saying is, our license is the only legal, tangible professional credential we have...we should ALL be licensed as soon as we can do so.
however, i would caution against not joining the AIA...most clients look for those initials, it's just a fact of life.
yeah, people have been making buildings without architects for centuries. buildings have been falling down and failing without architects for centuries, too.
that brings up another crucial step in this architects' civil rights movement.....
GET REGISTERED!
jump through the hoops, and get it done!
i realize that countless unlicensed designers can probably design an equally qualified building...but being licensed is one more way to strengthen our image, both in clients' eyes, and in the eyes of our peers...it won't make you a 'better' architect.....but it will make you a 'legal' one, and it will make more marketable on all levels.
that's not what it's ONLY about....all those things you listed are of course basic things in life....but why be satisfied with the basics? do you think your boss is OK with just the 'basics' in life. ambition makes the world go 'round. do you know any other professions who are content with 'making enough to survive'?
we've all worked long and hard to get where we are...too long and hard just to barely scrape by, when what we do is so crucial to society and history.
so, my friend, at the risk of sounding repetitious, life is much more than 'making enough to survive' and being content with basic responsibilities and pleasures. if you don't want anything more than personally, then that's perfectly fine, but i feel it's the responsibility of everyone in this field to stand and work together in making things better for all.
cynic
im not sure why you are so fiercy tieing economic advantage to ambition. My ambitions in architecture will almost certainly mean i will be only making enough to survive for most of my life. I am not naive to think that i will somehow be owed a large salary because i have amition good experience and respected education.
The point of my post was not to promote lazyness or show a lack of ambition. It was to point out that there are in fact many other ways to judge ones value besides the size of their paychecks.
beyond these simple things i have so many issues with your assertions in the last post all based on fundamental differences in oppinion its really not worth getting into.
lletdownl,
i'm not tying salaries or economic advantage (per se) to ambition or indolence.
i'm not calling you a 'slacker', and i'm also not saying that one's value as an architect is measured by their paycheck. (why is everyone here always so quick to take comments personally?)
the point of my last post is to say that you can do architecture in whatever manner you please, but that you shouldn't settle for what you are getting...not just financially but also in terms of respect. it seems you being a bit of a defeatist by saying that because of your beliefs and values, that you likely won't ever be doing better than you are now....that's selling yourself short; you deserve so much more for what you do (especially since your posts communicate to me that you have a great passion for what you do), and so do the rest of us.
why can't we always put our entire heart, soul, blood, sweat, tears and everything else into architecture and still be respected and compensated for it?!
Thanks, archiphreak, but I think it's the hilarity of el jeffe's "drink our pee" comment that makes him marrying material! ('course he's married already, too!)
i haven't read all of the thread, but i just wanted to respond to the "DO NOT JOIN THE AIA" comment...
i am by no means an AIA cheerleader, and i used to be one of the anti-AIA people... but i joined at the request of my former employer... since that time i've gotten really involved at the local level, particularly as one of the founders of our emerging architects group... the local AIA used to do nothing (at least nothing visible that i was aware of)... now i've helped to change the attitude of the local chapter and we're doing things that i think actually help and promote the profession...
anyways, my main point is... the reason that AIA national can't lobby in washington to the extent that other professional groups do is that in comparison they don't have any money... this is mainly due to the fact that the AIA has only about 50% saturation, meaning that only about half of licensed architects are members...
I have always been anti-traditional, anti-corporate, and especially anti-AIA...but once I get licensed, hopefully this year...I am totally going to join the AIA!
As what comb mentions, I would rather be part of finding a solution to the problems we all suffer from, rather than siting behind a computer and crying about it in an online forum all day.
whether you respect the aia or not, it's still the only organization out there with any chance of representing the interests of architects.
aia fundamentally is a volunteer organization ... if, as a member of the profession ... you're only willing to stand on the outside and throw stones and whine, then (IMHO) you have no real right to complain about the aia's inability to achieve everything that you want it to do for you.
if, on the other hand, you become a member, and devote some of your time, talent and energy to the many positive programs the aia pursues, then feel free to complain all you want ... in that scenario, you've earned the right.
what makes you think that i'm not a current or former member of the AIA? i'm not the kind of person to talk about something outside of my knowledge, nor am i the kind of person to not to take my own advice....in other words, i'm not a shiftless complainer, nor a hypocrite...just someone who wants to stir interest in others to help all of us. if this paradigm shift could be accomplished by one person, trust me, it would have happened by now, but this requires everyone of us to take a stand, which first requires everyone to be aware of the situation, and not jaded by it.
IF ANYONE WANTS TO KNOW...
...the answer to the age-old question of why architects don't get fair fees, and then by extension, don't get paid fair salaries:
here it is:
LOOK IN THE MIRROR!....we have some issues...
the reason we don't get paid what we should, is a two prong problem. first, architects don't value enough what we do, and we are so grateful when we do get a project, that we're willing to sell ourselves, and the profession, short just to get the work and put food on the table. very few architects say NO to getting screwed, both at the principal and the employee level, for fear of getting brushed aside for the guy next in line.
this leads the second part of the problem. this profession is filled with people who come from wealth, whether it be from family or spouse, and can thereby afford not to worry about what they get paid for projects, forgetting that by doing so they are ruining the already miniscule respect that clients have for this profession. to those of you who fall into this category (and i know you are reading this, because i know some of you personally): STOP IT!...i know you don't care about the next guy, but for your own sake, cut it out.
and to those of who out there who take low paying, no-benefit, 90 work week jobs at starchitects' offices (i know many of you as well)....shame on you. where's your pride, your self-respect. can't you see you're being used? trust me, it's not worth it. what will it really give you?
now i know these problems are centuries old, beginning in the academies and aristocracy....but it's time...
this whole problem comes down self-esteem. when architects finally get some self-respect, and start standing up for themselves, then we'll start being treated fairly.
also...DO NOT JOIN THE AIA....until they begin addressing some real issues. right now, the AIA is a boys club that is simply used for networking and patting each other on the back. what is your $6000 per year doing for you? until the AIA begins working on the behalf of all architects (rather than just the rich and sycophantic) and starts doing what all Washington lobbyists do (working for our own interests and financial gain), then do not support them.
i know this topic has been discussed many times and in many forms around this forum, but i was taking a random look at the salary poll this morning, and it made me sick to my stomach. how can so many people be getting screwed (many of whom do so knowingly) and not do anything about it? do not settle for table scraps, stand up for what you want......and don't feel that you owe your boss anything. you do your job, they pay you for it.
i'm advocating the start of an architects' civil rights movement. we don't need a national organization for this (supposedly, we already have one), and we don't need to march on Washington, but we do need people to stop whoring themselves and start demanding what they want, rather than just taking what they can get.
$6000 a year?
no wonder you're pissed!
the problem is that developers and engineers will do an architects work for a fraction of the cost, becuase they dont give a rats-ass about design and neither does the general public
although, an engineer and developers can't stamp drawings...unless it's single family residential
i am right on this, correct?
I have no problem with the first part, i think that does happen... but the argument about architects coming from wealthy backgrounds making it more acceptable for them to be paid less is pretty flimsy...
there is NOOO way that architects come from wealthier backgrounds than doctors lawyers or any other high earning profession.
Privilage breeds privilage no matter what the case may be.
though i will admit there were some very wealthy people in my studios
in many states engineers can stamp architectural drawings...
llet...
the argument isn't that architects are wealthier than other professions, but that it has a more profound affect on society when it comes to architects. for example, when searching for a doctor or lawyer, people are usually looking to pay MORE money because they feel it buys better service....the opposite is true for architects, most people want to spend as little as possible and still expect unreasonable levels of quality and time; wealthier and self-sustained architects are outside of this conundrum.
you're right: privilege breeds privilege, and fosters nothing else.
since when are an architect's services as critical to someone's immediate personal well-being as a doctor?
most architectural services are based upon a ROI.
less upfront = more at the end.
As you know, jeffe, an architect's work may not have the same critical, immediate impact on someone's health and well-being as a doctor's, but can have enormous impact on their long-term well being. And I think even the medical community is coming to realize the importance of environment on all of us.
bravo! bravo!
el jeffe i think that's cynics point. the modern medical profession is barely, barely 100-125 years old. architects have been around a hell of a lot longer, and we have let ourselves go...
With that in mind perhaps I'll give it all up to become a feng shui consultant - get nervous housewives to pay me the big bucks to move their sofa 8" east and stick a red bowl holding purple rocks in the southwest corner of the room.
(Kidding, and no slam intended on serious feng shui, speaking of old professions.)
cynic - I appreciate your passion for this topic. I myself for the most part agree with your argument. The star-architect slavery issue is one that really burns me. Then again, every year there's a ready supply of fresh sheep even more eager than the past year to work for a pittance just for a name to put on a resume.
I think the issue strectches out in all directions from education to the laws governing our profession. But when it comes down to simple economics, I think it's all about supply and demand.
Right now there are so many architects competing for the work that the price has been lowered. Drop the number of architects in half and the remaining would be so swamped with work they'd either turn down work or take it on for a higher price. Econ 101 laws of supply and demand.
Along the lines of oversupply of architects - think about how the architectural "superheros" that work 80 hours a week contribute to the "surplus" in the equation. Maybe we drop the # of architects, but maybe we also drop the number of hours each architect works. And dammit, principals, stop promising schematics to CDs in a matter of weeks. You know better.
Liberty Bell - my mother-in-law is WAY into feng shui, books, page-a-day calenders telling her what to do. She has colored glass bottles on every window sill in her house for example. I think the blue glass is in the north windows, green for south, something like that. She takes it pretty seriously. But during a recent remodel and addition to thier home, while helping out with the plans, I explained why having two doors into her new bathroom (one to main living area and one to master bedroom) was not a good idea, she didn't believe me. They did it anyways. Also didn't want to listen when I warned that a 9'-8" x 9'-6" room wasn't really big enough for a master bedroom (an existing room, planned to be turned into master, and no closets). If her feng shui book had told her it was no good, she would have understood it. My snotty little opinion probably pissed them off as they BOUGHT the house PLANNING on eventually turning this downstairs office into the master bedroom, and it's too late.
Maybe I suck at explaining things. Maybe architects do in general. We DO tend to argue a lot - we as architects will argue in front of a client, providing contradictory design solutions that each believes is the way to go. What we have to say is often a mere opinion, based on an abstract concept that nobody can see but us. For every reason to do something, there is a reason NOT to do it, and as long as it is just an opinion, the owner is bound to think that their opinion is just as relevant. So what is the architect there for? To fulfill the technical components and provide drafting - to make it work.
while i'd agree that recognizing long-term considerations of our own health in relation to our environment are a valuable development, my point is simply that i think that almost all long-term views are anathema to the current state of speculative real estate and architectural services.
to stick with the medical doctor analogy and expand on my statement above (too cursory perhaps) it isn't often that people select a DOCTOR based upon ROI considerations. They may certainly select a TREATMENT method based upon that equation however.
beta,
i'm not so sure that we (architects) have let ourselves go as much as medical science has risen up past us in terms of maintaining daily life for many.
by way of analogy again, antibiotics are more important than walled cities in our attempts to provide life security anymore. (this despite inane attempts at building fences on our borders.)
most doctors are not really needed. If you live your life in a healthy manner, including in a healthy enviroment, you can prevent many sicknesses.
...Just don't grow old or ever have any sort of accident...
mdler, please don't suggest that we start drinking our pee.
the architectural equivalent of drinking our own pee has to be the DIY clinics at home depot.
medicine is not all the absolutes you want it to be. no one - at least hardly ever - asks a doctor to second guess another doctor, unless they have been given a death sentence, but it proves one thing medical science does not have the answers to everything. yet, when some nut job asks you to design an addition they wonder why your fee is so ridiculous and then they go on about how their contractor friend told them they'd charge some minimal fee. always getting second guessed.
i complain constantly about how crap i get paid... and im one of those kids who is working for crap because the name on my resume will most likely mean a lot when i move to the next firm
but no matter how much i complain...
the truth of the matter is...
i make enough to survive.
i can pay my rent, my electric gas phone internet and cable bills,
i can pay my student loans,
i can pay off my overdue tuition...(oops)
i can buy books, i can buy cds, i can buy beer and plites on the weekend
and i live in a decent apartment in a cool neighborhood in an incredible city
isnt that what its all about?
cynic, i could not agree with you more (except on the AIA thing but that in a moment).
the first step to take is to work locally: work towards laws that require an architect's stamp on almost all new buildings, even single-family houses. it's this loophole that is responsible, i believe, for our society's general dismissal of design quality. because people see non-designed crap all around them in the form of crappy SF housing, they learn to filter it out and live with it.
and from a legal and life-safety standpoint, requiring an architect for any structure would increase the quality of construction, guarantee code compliance, and decrease the impact of the built environment on the natural environment.
were it a requirement that almost all construction be designed and stamped by an architect, it would also increase the number of licensed architects out there (a lot of people can get by on houses and never get licensed). the fact that someone CAN be unlicensed and perform the duties of an architect is one of the reasons our profession is devalued.
ok. so a physician's assistant can take your pulse and a paralegal can write a contract. but a PA can't do surgery and a paralegal can't represent you in court.
yet, an unlicensed designer can legally design your house and administer its construction. if that unlicensed designer has been to school, gotten experience, and just hasn't sat for the ARE...then cool. but there's nothing preventing some guy from designing his own house and having a contractor build it...in some cases with no permit or inspections or any oversight whatsoever.
i'm not trying to be an elitist, or to suggest that those who do not have licenses are somehow killing our profession. what i am saying is, our license is the only legal, tangible professional credential we have...we should ALL be licensed as soon as we can do so.
however, i would caution against not joining the AIA...most clients look for those initials, it's just a fact of life.
yeah, people have been making buildings without architects for centuries. buildings have been falling down and failing without architects for centuries, too.
good points ochona...
that brings up another crucial step in this architects' civil rights movement.....
GET REGISTERED!
jump through the hoops, and get it done!
i realize that countless unlicensed designers can probably design an equally qualified building...but being licensed is one more way to strengthen our image, both in clients' eyes, and in the eyes of our peers...it won't make you a 'better' architect.....but it will make you a 'legal' one, and it will make more marketable on all levels.
and by the way, lletdownl...
that's not what it's ONLY about....all those things you listed are of course basic things in life....but why be satisfied with the basics? do you think your boss is OK with just the 'basics' in life. ambition makes the world go 'round. do you know any other professions who are content with 'making enough to survive'?
we've all worked long and hard to get where we are...too long and hard just to barely scrape by, when what we do is so crucial to society and history.
so, my friend, at the risk of sounding repetitious, life is much more than 'making enough to survive' and being content with basic responsibilities and pleasures. if you don't want anything more than personally, then that's perfectly fine, but i feel it's the responsibility of everyone in this field to stand and work together in making things better for all.
cynic
im not sure why you are so fiercy tieing economic advantage to ambition. My ambitions in architecture will almost certainly mean i will be only making enough to survive for most of my life. I am not naive to think that i will somehow be owed a large salary because i have amition good experience and respected education.
The point of my post was not to promote lazyness or show a lack of ambition. It was to point out that there are in fact many other ways to judge ones value besides the size of their paychecks.
beyond these simple things i have so many issues with your assertions in the last post all based on fundamental differences in oppinion its really not worth getting into.
lletdownl,
i'm not tying salaries or economic advantage (per se) to ambition or indolence.
i'm not calling you a 'slacker', and i'm also not saying that one's value as an architect is measured by their paycheck. (why is everyone here always so quick to take comments personally?)
the point of my last post is to say that you can do architecture in whatever manner you please, but that you shouldn't settle for what you are getting...not just financially but also in terms of respect. it seems you being a bit of a defeatist by saying that because of your beliefs and values, that you likely won't ever be doing better than you are now....that's selling yourself short; you deserve so much more for what you do (especially since your posts communicate to me that you have a great passion for what you do), and so do the rest of us.
why can't we always put our entire heart, soul, blood, sweat, tears and everything else into architecture and still be respected and compensated for it?!
amicably,
cynic
liberty, if you weren't already married i'd have to marry you.
Thanks, archiphreak, but I think it's the hilarity of el jeffe's "drink our pee" comment that makes him marrying material! ('course he's married already, too!)
i haven't read all of the thread, but i just wanted to respond to the "DO NOT JOIN THE AIA" comment...
i am by no means an AIA cheerleader, and i used to be one of the anti-AIA people... but i joined at the request of my former employer... since that time i've gotten really involved at the local level, particularly as one of the founders of our emerging architects group... the local AIA used to do nothing (at least nothing visible that i was aware of)... now i've helped to change the attitude of the local chapter and we're doing things that i think actually help and promote the profession...
anyways, my main point is... the reason that AIA national can't lobby in washington to the extent that other professional groups do is that in comparison they don't have any money... this is mainly due to the fact that the AIA has only about 50% saturation, meaning that only about half of licensed architects are members...
...the old catch 22
perhaps if they were more effective, they would have higher membership....the incentive just isn't enough right now
cynic ... what's the old saying ... you're either part of the solution or part of the problem ?
I have always been anti-traditional, anti-corporate, and especially anti-AIA...but once I get licensed, hopefully this year...I am totally going to join the AIA!
As what comb mentions, I would rather be part of finding a solution to the problems we all suffer from, rather than siting behind a computer and crying about it in an online forum all day.
...and so?
why is the aia part of the solution? how is it part of the solution?
whether you respect the aia or not, it's still the only organization out there with any chance of representing the interests of architects.
aia fundamentally is a volunteer organization ... if, as a member of the profession ... you're only willing to stand on the outside and throw stones and whine, then (IMHO) you have no real right to complain about the aia's inability to achieve everything that you want it to do for you.
if, on the other hand, you become a member, and devote some of your time, talent and energy to the many positive programs the aia pursues, then feel free to complain all you want ... in that scenario, you've earned the right.
what makes you think that i'm not a current or former member of the AIA? i'm not the kind of person to talk about something outside of my knowledge, nor am i the kind of person to not to take my own advice....in other words, i'm not a shiftless complainer, nor a hypocrite...just someone who wants to stir interest in others to help all of us. if this paradigm shift could be accomplished by one person, trust me, it would have happened by now, but this requires everyone of us to take a stand, which first requires everyone to be aware of the situation, and not jaded by it.
relax ... i was using the collective "you" !
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.