Robert Ivy, FAIA, was appointed Executive Vice President and Chief Executive Officer for the AIA in 2011. After a decade of leadership, Ivy announced he will be retiring at the end of 2021. During his time at the AIA, Ivy was involved in several transitional moments that were "instrumental in successfully moving the organization forward through challenging times, realigning its values with today's membership, and positioning the organization to address society's most pressing challenges, including climate action and racial and ethnic equity," shared current AIA President Peter Exley, FAIA.
Referred to as a "vocal advocate for architects," by the AIA, Ivy joined Archinect for a chat in 2015 where we had him as a guest on the Archinect Sessions podcast. During the conversation he discussed the AIA's "I Look Up" (#ilookup) public awareness campaign.
However, his contributions and "legacy" leading the AIA are not viewed as noteworthy among all its members and those within the industry. While no leadership position is a walk in the park, it's not hard to forget Ivy's grave miss-step in 2016 that caused the organization and its members to re-evaluate the AIA's leadership capabilities and intentions.
Ivy's statements during the 2016 election were received with harsh criticism following the election of Donald Trump. Archinect's extensive coverage and call for response from the community left several AIA members shocked and appalled. The incident led to many leaving the organization or reconsidering their membership renewal. In Archinect Sessions Episode 89, the team spoke with the former AIA National Senior Director of Media Relations Scott Frank. During the episode "How Not to Run a Club," Frank provided some perspective to his reason for leaving the AIA and "how architects can direct the news media discussion to better represent ourselves to the public."
The #notmyaia debacle put a significant dent in Ivy's "legacy" at the AIA. However, since the situation and follow-up apology, Ivy aspired to learn from that moment of tone-deafness and continued to lead the AIA. Since then, he's aided in "bringing together allied and related groups to address central questions facing the design and construction industry, both globally and domestically," explained the AIA in this morning's press release.
Ivy shared in a statement, "my overarching goal has been to position the association and this profession of passionate, talented members for the 21st century." With the announcement of his retirement, the AIA Board of Directors, Exley, and AIA 2020 President Jane Frederick have developed a search committee to find the organization's new Executive VP and CEO.
9 Comments
Don't let the door hit ya, where the good lord split ya. Byyyyyeeeeee.
Kthxbye, Mr. Ivy!
The next leaders salary should be limited to an amount no more than the median earnings for an architect in the USA. They should then have an amount equal to median AIA dues deducted from that amount. Supplemental dues will be charged for their spouse and any children.
The next leader should be a practicing architect with at least 10 years of experience in the field. Enough with political driven editors.
Whoa, now. That's just crazy talk.
ok. and what should they do? this isn't a job where in the field experience is going to be much use. it's not like the role is to show us all how being an architect works so we can do it better.
It's not either/or. At least it shouldn't be. Why not, in that big, expensive candidate search, find someone with political savvy and organizational skill who also has practiced recently enough to remember what their constituents actually do and need? Granted, this narrows the field-- especially if trying to diversify the demographics. But I think it's worth the effort.
This plea also applies to dean searches, and is related to the common lament around here about PMs untrained in architecture.
true, the ideal candidate would be a leader from a large firm who is used to negotiating complex issues with public visibility on behalf of a large group of architects. but i can't imagine it's easy to pull them away from a job like that.
i find it silly that so many people resent having a politician represent them in what is essentially a political job.
more pertinent are the criticisms of his particular political views, which indicate something the search committee should do a better job vetting to suitably represent the views of architects and maybe even help lead them
I agree with you but it is important what kind of politician is advocating what kind of politics for architects.
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.