Guest Blogger Willard Williams: Designers Masquerading as Architects
Designers masquerading as architects is a topic within the profession that bothers me deeply. I have had numerous co-workers (architectural educated/trained designers) publicly call themselves architects at cocktail parties, around their peers, to the general public… One even went so far as to be published being referred to as an architect in printed media. I contemplated calling the California Architects Board and filing a complaint against him as he was working in the profession and claiming that he was an architect to his friends and potential clients.
This designer had some real gusto telling people he was an architect and having articles published calling him an architect. Not only that but he designed and built structures that were clearly not up to any code or standard of care in the hills of Malibu County. I wanted to call the county and say “hey there are some surf shacks going up in the hills that are definitely not going to stand up in a fire (not meeting WUI regulations by a long shot) or an earthquake (sitting on a soft story that has not lateral bracing) in your jurisdiction” but that to was a bit too confrontational for me. And in some ways I admire his ability to cultivate projects and get stuff built.
I thought it was remarkable that he was doing all this but then I also thought it sucked: I studied every morning and every night for the past year and never called myself an architect. I even corrected loved ones and friends when they said “My friend is an Architect.” Â I would say “No, no, not yet.” The irony was that when I told my boss at the time that I wanted to take leave for my final exam (California Supplemental Exam) and a few weeks off to spend time with my soon to be born son, he told me that I needed to find a new job. Can you imagine having to deal with losing your job potentially because you were close to getting your license, on the eve of your son’s birth?
Then it dawned on me. Being an architect is not even valuable to architects in the profession. Architects would rather you delude yourself and call yourself an architect and build some houses here and there, and let you risk exposure to liability than give you more responsibility and compensation. Out of fear that you are going to take their clients away, some architects can’t provide good guidance and mentorship along the path toward licensure. As one of my favorite architects said “your not an architect if your buildings don’t have elevators…” (Thom Mayne, Cal Poly Pomona Lecture, 2011). I feel Thom is saying that anyone can build a three story wood structure but you’re not really practicing architecture until you have projects that are a little more complex.
Actually being an Architect is a difficult place to exist because everyone who draws plans is essentially calling themselves architects and the public is agreeing that they are too, architects; but that isn’t the case. Even people who don’t even draw plans or have any formal education in architecture are calling themselves, or being called architects. This is a problem. That’s like calling anyone who has been on a plane a pilot, or anyone who has been operated on a doctor.
Being an architect is a long and difficult road and it gets harder once you become an architect because you realize all the work you have done (5+ years of school, thousands upon thousands of hours of required internship, 7+ exams that are 4 hours a piece), was just to get you to the starting point of a career as an architect. It’s sort of like racing a racecar professionally. You cannot just drive your hot rod commuter car to the track and expect to race, but you can drive as crazy and as fast as you want on the public streets until the cops put you in jail. If you race professionally you have to be licensed, educated, and have the proper vehicle that has been properly inspected and built to the necessary codes. Â Then you get the opportunity to start the race. That is sort of what being an architect is like. If you are a minority or a woman you can imagine how much more disingenuous it is when someone who isn’t an architect says “I’m an Architect.”
The public does not understand this and rarely do they put a value on understanding the process. Lawyers and doctors have it easier: They invest equivalent amounts of time into their profession, as Architects do; but they have a more rigorous public requirement of a license to practice. If there were an option to save some money on your next exam by going to an unlicensed medical provider instead of a licensed doctor, whom would you choose? If an airline started promoting the fact that pilots not certified to fly were flying some of their planes, that would also be a red flag. Doctors and Lawyers are in abundance yet they consistently make more money out of school to start, and throughout their entire career. The market doesn’t necessarily dictate relative importance yet how is it that architects are always on the lower end of the pay spectrum? Partly because you don’t have to be licensed to build things. You don’t have to have any formal education whatsoever to build and design a home, or a three-story structure made of wood. Yet when you cross that gap from being a designer to an architect you would expect higher social value placed on this achievement. Though it’s sort of clouded by the fact that designers surround you who call themselves architects, because it is easier for layman to understand. Well if you are on the way to becoming an architect it should be pretty easy to explain the difference between a designer and an architect. That is a major reason why I joined the American Institute of Architects. So I can be part of a community that supports and qualifies its members as architects.
Do you have some strong feelings about this subject? I’d love to share more people’s views. Subscribe to my blog to read more about the tricky world of being an Architect in the 21st century: Shoegnome on Facebook, Twitter, and the RSS feed.
Phil Allsopp, D.Arch., RIBA, FRSA
Nice article, Willard.
The professional bodies representing architects have not done a very good job at working with the media. As far as the general public are concerned – and you are so right in this – anyone who draws up plans is in their eye “an architect”.
Given my diverse career in management consulting and health care policy (and architecture), I find myself invited from time to time to sit on policy-making commissions and boards; the organizations that shape zoning, planning and in some instances construction regulations. Most of these commissions comprise well-intentioned attorneys, accountants, sociologists and business people. Yet these folks, try as they may, have only the scantest knowledge or experience of the planing, design and construction of human habitats (of all kinds) and rarely do any of them have the slightest understanding of how to measure the characteristics of designed environments for their impact on human well-being, climate and so on. What I have found is that these good people rely mostly on what they hear and read about in the media about what architects do – mostly a case of garnering huge fees for making some pencil sketches of the unbuildable.
As a Chartered Architect Member of the Royal Institute of British Architects and VP of the RIBA-USA’s Board, I share your deep concerns over the casual use of the title “architect” Few in the general public have any idea of the intellectual, psychological and professional marathon that each architect had to undergo before being able to use the title “Architect” Fewer still appreciate the breadth of expertise and scientific know-how that some of the very best architects apply to even the smallest client project. A good friend of mine who a few years ago asked my advice on what they should do to their flooded house in Georgia was taken to the cleaners twice by builders who persuaded him that spending money on an architect was a waste of money. Needless to say, I don’t mention the words “I told you so” when we get together.
Jared Banks
Phil, thanks for the great comment and the best title for a future blog post, or tumblr blog, or some future endeavor of mine.
“pencil sketches of the unbuildable” is just the most amazing phrase I’ve read in a long, long time and it gives me tons of ideas. And not just on the whole analog vs digital soapbox I seem to live on. “Pencil Sketches of the Unbuildable” could reference both intentional and unintentional actions. Oh boy do I love that. Sorry that’s not really the topic of your comment… 🙂
Mark Golden
Willard and Jared,
I can sympathise with you. You and your US colleagues are not Robinson Crusoe in having these concerns. Here in New South Wales, Australia, we have legislation called NSW Architects Act, that regulates our registration and use of the title ‘Architect’. Architects were given no input into the drafting of the legislation, and perhaps we were too trusting of the lawyers who did write to statute. Within the legislation there are many clauses that deal with who can describe themselves an Architect. Unfortunately, the NSW Architects Registration Board only seems interested in persecuting registered architects who have had minor, unsubstantiated and often anonymous complaints made about them. Many of my Architect colleagues have been referring breaches of the Act by non-architects to the Board, with the usual outcome being, they get slapped on the wrist with a warm lettuce leaf and asked not to do it again. The power of the Act is that it is potent only against Architects who wish to be registered and has virtually no teeth when it come to non architects who mislead the public about their qualifications. Another regular issue that has never been addressed is the online search engines and the Yellow pages, who continue to categorise Architects and Building Designers together under the heading of Architects, and the general public assume that we are all cut from the same cloth.
Part of the problem, and it seems to include both USA and Australia, is that the great majority of the general public have been conditioned to devalue the services Architects provide, due in part to the plethora of DIY and Renovation TV shows that do not distinguish between what the average Joe or Jill is capable of doing on their own and where a trained and qualified architect is necessary to achieve a good outcome. Another (generalisation) major factor is that we do not communicate well with people outside the profession and can seem elite and beyond their understanding.
In my advertising I endeavour to promote the distinction between Architects and Building Designers. I ask – Why use an Architect? Then, I give the following explanation to stimulate some thought in the reader as to what it is we can offer.
“An architect is trained in the planning, design and project management for the construction of houses and buildings. An architect’s decisions have the ability to affect public safety; therefore an individual needs to be professionally qualified before practicing as an architect. To gain the necessary qualifications, a person must complete a minimum five-year university degree, then a period of internship working in the industry – usually two years, and finally, they must pass an examination for registration with the relevant Architects Registration Board.
Architects can provide services and advice on the different requirements for varying types of buildings including; residential, commercial, industrial, and educational facilities. Projects that architects provide designs for range from small residential alterations to the design of large skyscrapers, and everything in between. Architects can specialise in different areas of design including sustainable design, restorations, energy conservation, landscape design and Feng Shui.
Architecture is a dynamic and demanding profession that makes a positive contribution to the shaping of our built environment and our culture. The essential skill of an architect is the ability to design buildings and spaces that enhance human living and working environments.
The vocation of being an architect is more than simply drawing plans and project management for a project. An architect not only considers the best interests of their client, but also the implications of their work on the community and society as a whole, when undertaking creative enterprises.
In many parts of Australia, anyone can operate as a building designer with no qualifications or credentials, whatsoever. There are no educational, licensing or competency requirements for building designers in most states and territories.
Registration with a state Architects Registration Board is what defines an ‘architect’ for professional and legal purposes. Even if a person has several degrees in architecture and many years of experience, it’s illegal for them to trade as an architect or the use the term ‘architect’ or ‘architectural’ to describe their services, if they’re not officially registered with a state registration board.
If you are looking for an experienced professional for your building project who can provide all of these benefits, make sure the design professional you choose for your building project is a registered Architect. If you do this, your building project will benefit from the years of training and rigorous accreditation and registration that only an Architect can provide.”
I think we need to take charge of our future and endeavour to connect more relevantly with our potential customer base. Many architects web sites I have visited give the feeling that they are designed to impress other architects more than to connect and educate the public. We are probably guilty of being complacent over the years, while other interest groups have successfully and proactively pushed their own barrows to the detriment of our profession.
Discussing this can only help in facilitating the discussion needed for a change in culture. Thank you for raising this issue on your Guest Blog.
Willard E. Williams Jr., AIA
Thanks Mark, Phil, and Jared for the responses. There are a number of interesting points that are being made here. First we need to have the people approving the work be more concerned with who is submitting the plans. It’s not that hard or complicated to add another level of scrutiny to the practice of construction. You have to be licensed to build something, other than your own home. Why not just add a clause for home owners who want to design and build their own home that they can do that, but no one else can design or build a home without being vetted. The other is that the public in general needs to be more diligent in their understanding and vetting of their would be designer. They need to know what it means to be an architect. The last thing, is that designers need not assume that the public can’t understand the difference between a designer and architect.
The proximity to this issue for me grew two fold in the last week. I was racing on a sailboat and heard that one of the regular crew members on the boat, who happened to be missing the week that I started racing with them, was in fact an architect. Awesome there are for some reason a lot of sailing architects. Maybe because there aren’t any buildings in the sea. Then the next week I meet him for the first time and asked if he was in fact an architect and he said yes. Then I said how long have you been licensed, then he replied oh well I have one more exam. Hello? Your not an architect, no matter how close you are. On friday, ironically the same day I meet this other would be architect I ran into someone I meet at a monthly AIA (American Institute of Architects) San Francisco Chapter, TAP (Technology and Practice) event. I could remember their name and said “Hi, are you an architect, I think we meet at a TAP event?”, they responded “Yes, I am an architect, it’s nice to be recognized.” Then I dug a little deeper and their is no record of them being licensed to practice architecture.
“What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;” (Romeo & Juliet, Shakespeare).
Whether you are a designer, architect, engineer, city planner, city official, or teacher most of us are still missing something very important in our practice of architecture, planning, and spacial development. We are creating these (big and little) boxes, on grids (not oriented towards anything), that are fundamentally destroying the fabric of our communities through our design; regardless of our titles, accomplishments or perceived understanding of the built environment. Like G.I. Joe would say, “Knowing is half the battle.” The other half is doing it right, or at least better than it has been done in recent memory. I just finished a couple books called Dark Age Ahead (Janes Jacobs, 2005), and Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream (Andres Duany, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, Jeff Speck, 2000), which I was reading for fun and research for another article in the pipeline. We have larger problems that we should be dealing with now in various areas within the nation. Poor design, poor representations of architects who are really designers, poor city planning engineering, poor commercial and residential development, and the list goes on. Being an architect means that we should be protecting the health, welfare and safety of the public.