Architects are portrayed as disconnected from the realities of construction costs and taking home owners for an expensive ride in this article in the NYTimes.
Are we that greedy and uncaring a profession?
Architects need to learn to team up with great trade contractors and include them on their designs for input of finance and quality. Architects have completely left out trade contractors only to credit the general contractor today. Look at architects like Frank Lloyd Wright who hand picked teams in not just one state but many and accomplished beautiful, realistic on budget projects. The key was input from the people who actual put his designs into realty. Too often the general contractor is just a paper contractor there to supervise the trades who actually build the design. Wake up America stop being stuck ups and realize the people that get dirty make your perfect pretty little lives a reality as well as the other professions people are stuck on putting above the actual labor trades....also architects, designers and general contractors are all guilty of not specifying anything when it comes to the workmanship of the trades and the products the install which is a big miss. I don’t even use the word sub contractor it’s degrading to the actual builders saying they are somehow below all these other building professions which is a big illusion!
All 21 Comments
Interesting use of gender when describing the architect?
proxy: The use of 'she' as a general pronoun instead of 'he' is becoming a lot more common these days. However, in the case of this article, the author doesn't use a general pronoun in association with 'architect' until the very end: either the author did this deliberately or she got lazy. In either case, the author very easily could have said 'they' instead, especially considering how in every instance prior to her conclusion, a gendered pronoun is unnnecessary.
They need to do a follow-up feature discussing how often an architect spends several hours meeting with and discussing a homeowner's desires, only to lose the job with no consultation fee when she is honest in her assessment that the homeowner's budget will hardly begin to cover what they want to do.
We know something about construction costs, yes, but the market is constantly changing and I find that when I'm honest with people about what I think things will cost they usually run away scared - and unless I start charging for initital consultations (which some architects do) I write all that time off as marketing.
*sigh* today I hate the NYTimes.
I hate the NYT today for this one-sided drivel as well. Nice use of 'she' as a general pronoun, lib.
Drivel is the perfect word, Marlin. I was thinking "sensationalist" but it's not even interesting enough for that adjective.
The NY Times in not drivel…it just seems that way to grey and beige Fox News country folk living between New York and Los Angeles. :P C'mon, bad articles are written everyday in every newspaper...even in the Times. In this case, they should have interviewed the architect involved and gotten the other side of the story.
I, for one, would like to know more about the "architect" involved in the story. Is this really an architect with a legit office setup, or simply "a friend of a friend / who just got out of school recently / working from home on a bitchin’ cool Mac / looking to build a client list…so you can save money this way" kind of “architect”? You can find bad "architects" or "architectural designers" who are completely unprepared for the job just as you can find bad clients who are out to always get something on the cheap…sort of the Priceline mentality that consumers treat with everything of value.
To me, the article has merits because it does reveal the detached element that exists within the profession. We face an enormous credibility gap when we take the risk of proposing a design and having it conflict with the checks and balances authority with contractor. Of course we look "disconnected" because we are…and we need to find a way to narrow that gap and limit our risk. This is exactly why people would prefer to skip the architectural process altogether and deal directly with the contractor. If we want to be seen as relevant or of value, then we need to have our sh*t together and be just a competent and capable of knowing the current building costs as the contractors and builders.
...
...
I think the bigger question we have to ask ourselves as a profession is this: Where is the checks and balances system here among us and how can we ensure that a bad seed planted in a crummy newspaper article doesn't evolve into full blown tree of negative perceptions to the public at large? This article makes architects look like a hit or miss gamble…and it can’t be that way. By not knowing who this “architect” is, it makes us look like we allow fly by night gypsies and circus performers to call themselves an “architect”. If this was a lawyer, a doctor, an account, or anyone who is expected to perform up to a professional standard of performance, ethics, and legitimacy…then the name of this “architect” would be provided. With no name, I am not convinced this was really an “architect”…licensed or by whatever murky definition it goes by today.
Seriously, instead of bitching and moaning about this in architecture blogs all day and expressing our dissatisfaction with the profession on t-shirts, we need to take articles like this seriously and find the answers to these very real credibility problems we have and the misconceptions the public has about us. This is a problem that our profession created and only we, as a profession, can solve it.
The profession can solve nothing.
In point of fact, 'the profession' is powerless.
In a society where doctors can charge $1500 for 30 minutes of their precious time and still constitute 'most valued members of society' architecture is lost...
Doctors have big pharma, plus insurance companies pick up the tab no matter how obscene...
Architects on the other hand have a ridiculous outfit known as the AIA and very little else.
Except 'prestige', forgot about that one.
bryden, you definitely raise good points re: the one-sidedness of the story and the question of rather the "architects" referred to in the story are actually architects or not and what bearing their experience has on their ability to do a good job.
On the other hand, if I may borrow your emoticon, fuck off :P for the "Fox news country people" comment. I read the NYTimes nearly daily every day for ten years and in that time have seen their style-oriented features become both more elitist and more shallow. Frankly this story is the type I expect from the alternative weekly in Indianapolis, not the goddamn Times.
As for how architects can increase our credibility, I don't know any big answers but can repeat what I said above: I always tell clients to expect the worst, plus at least a 10% contingency. Certain educated and intelligent clients can understand this, and others run scared only to then be further screwed by the contractor they hire to "do the design themselves".
My apologies if you took it so personally Liberty Bell. The emoticon used ( :P ) is the standard smiley with the tongue sticking out...which meant it was a statement used in jest. I am not sure what emoticons you are referring to, but if there is a "fuck off emoticon", please share the keyboard shortcuts.
About the topic at hand, the point I was trying to set forth is that is really doesn't matter what you, I, or anyone else does when dealing with clients. We, meaning ourselves as a profession, really needs a checks and balance system set up to provide the potential and uneducated client with the assurances that the person who is calling themselves an "architect" is actually an "architect capable of providing a professional standard of service and competence". The AIA obviously isn't seen as that checks and balance system, nor do people seem to really care about the AIA from what I glean from others.
Again, I really have my doubts that the person cast as the "architect" in the article is really an architect...AIA or otherwise. The idea that a story like this can be written about the profession, and others thinking that we are simply powerless to fix it or prevent it...really leaves me wondering if I did make the right decision with architecture? We may be extraordinarily passionate, smart, and creative in what we do, but we sure are apathetic when it comes down to the very things truly impact our careers and ultimate livelihood.
In other professions, I think there would be outrage and, of course, safeguards in place to prevent any perceptions of their profession as a scam...but in architecture, it seems we are content with the acceptance of this...simply by shrugging our shoulders, wearing our passive-aggressive protest T-shirts, and going on about our business being overworked, underappreciated, and undercompensated for what we do…resolved to the fatalist notion that this is just how it is.
The worst part of the article is that the initial homowner paid $1,000 for a $30,000 percieved job. That means said author expected to get profesional service for 3%. Above author got what they paid for.
you could always respond......
Your commentary published February 17, 2007 in shortcuts
revealed only half the story. It conveniently pointed out the horror
stories the author and a others experienced when using
professional architectural services without addressing the
other side of a larger issue. Specifically, the author of the article
felt that paying 5% was all a professional architect was worth.
Architectural services, like any other product, are only as
valuable as the consumer of those services is willing to
pay. Even more disturbing is that most middle class Americans
now will think nothing of buying $45,000 worth of automobile
while balking at the idea of spending more than $20,000 on
improving their home, their single largest investment and the
one most likely to accrue in value rather than depreciate.
in this case, the author got exactly what she paid for.
Excellent letter, evilp, bravo.
bryden, I was using your jest emoticon in exactly the spirit you were using it in teasing about the flyover states, I'm not really telling you to fuck off. Though yes, I would also often make use of a fuck off emoticon!
As for policing the profession: If someone gets screwed by an architect, who do they report to? It seems that for bad doctors and lawyers there are more obvious routes for reporting unprofessional behavior. I would know to go to a professional state licensing agency, but how many homeowners know that?
My biggest beef with this article is that it was published at all, because it's brainless fluff. It's of the caliber of a Cosmo article on how upset one gets after a bad hair dye job. I'm especially upset that a newspaper would publish it, and even moreso the usually-respected New York Times.
I'll send the Times a letter saying same, but not today, or anytime before Wednesday, because I'm too busy trying to meet the dreams and budgets of my current clients.
My experience has been that homeowners are simply not aware of how much it costs to build or remodel a home.
A family recently wanted me to design a 1000 sf extension to their house, which they wanted to build for $30,000 (the husband was going to do "most of the labor.") I told them it wasn't possible to do it for that little money. Expensive neighborhood, and they wanted an expensive design. They said to me "we'll make it possible." They paid me $2000 for the drawings, despite my warning that the project would probably come in closer to $60,000. And then, when they found that they couldn't afford it, they blamed me. (and I spent about 200 hours on the work and coordination.)
Architects need to be better about giving people realistic expectations.
But it's true that when a person hires a lawyer, and doesn't win a case, and basically forfeits the money, they don' write an article in the Times destroying lawyers. Or when they contract cancer, and don't win that battle, they don't blame the doctors. So why do they blame architects for their own poor planning?
People are social animals, thus they tend to view the lawyer as a nessessary navigator of the emotional jungle. People are fearfull of death, thus they respect in awe the doctor. Most people are not mechanicaly adept and thus do not understand the intracacies of the world around them and thus they mistrust what they dont understand - architects, contractors and auto mechanics.
This article is fluff and exists for sensation only. I too, doubt the "architects" in the articles are little more than recent grads or students.
There are plenty of articles out there bad-mouthing contractors and what scam artists they are. Perhaps the article should have been about what do you do if you are unsatisfied with your architectural services instead?
Actually, the real problem is a disconnect between architects and contractors. Architects are not estimators; contactors often are. But I think the general public assumes that architects can just give an off the top of their head estimate and it will be right.
Architects have a limited ability to screw anyone out of their money. Contracts and so forth generally favor clients when it comes to this. But contractors, through change orders, escalation, and blaming the architect, can very easily screw over the client.
i've seen architects who'd fit the description in the article as i've seen clients who are arrogant enough to blame the architect for their beyond means demands and telling the architect to put the information in on the drawings now and value engineer later and then accuse 'her' for the moment. haha. anything can happen..
people should hire a 1000$ architect to 'create' a dormer window but pay for the subsequent 'creation', if they want to have it. a good architect would warn the clients if they are beyond their means. and a good client should look up a little bit about what architects do, if they are going to hire one. because there is enough information about that everywhere including most building departments' advice section and in aia publications on hiring an architect.
they should told/know the difference between 'putting a dormer window and partition in' and 'architect creating a space that didn't existed before'.
writer sounds like an angry homeowner who didn't do her homework or an angry homeowner who can't have what she likes.
note: please don't find my comment right or wrong. smiley.
Architects need to learn to team up with great trade contractors and include them on their designs for input of finance and quality. Architects have completely left out trade contractors only to credit the general contractor today. Look at architects like Frank Lloyd Wright who hand picked teams in not just one state but many and accomplished beautiful, realistic on budget projects. The key was input from the people who actual put his designs into realty. Too often the general contractor is just a paper contractor there to supervise the trades who actually build the design. Wake up America stop being stuck ups and realize the people that get dirty make your perfect pretty little lives a reality as well as the other professions people are stuck on putting above the actual labor trades....also architects, designers and general contractors are all guilty of not specifying anything when it comes to the workmanship of the trades and the products the install which is a big miss. I don’t even use the word sub contractor it’s degrading to the actual builders saying they are somehow below all these other building professions which is a big illusion!
The problem is a corrupt value system in which money is the only measure of anything. These values permeate all aspects of society and are readily evident.
Those buying services want the most value (cheapest price).
Those providing services want the most profit (highest price).
This value system is diametrically opposed to itself and effectively places related parties in conflict. True measures of value have to do with performance, which is routinely mistaken for cost because price is the only measure.
I build everything I design. It's still very challenging to design on budget. Costs are going up and it's very difficult to find good labor. I'm always told my construction costs are too high. I started telling people $250/s.f. before I meet with them. If they don't value good design and just want cheap I'm not the guy for them. Next...
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.