Rules and Roles in Architecture

First, what does it really mean to “rule”? There are a few reactions that the word conjures up. Among them are thoughts including creation, governance, and ownership. I’d like us to meander through these perspectives and hopefully arrive at an informed viewpoint. These perspectives invite us to consider architectural design as a complex process where governance, creativity, and regulations intersect.

We could be trite and evade the question with: “Well, obviously, the people who make the architecture, ultimately rule.” While there are many designers who would happily rally for this perspective, I can inform you that my experience has not verified this idea. I have been an architect in New York City for over a decade and from being on the creative side, I can confirm that we do not rule architecture, despite being the people trained and licensed to ideate design solutions that eventually becomes architecture.

The Role of the Architect

Like most service-based industries, architects are brought in to solve a problem within specific parameters. Budget, project scope, and schedule are usually the “big three.” For us, these parameters are typically established by others and carry a range of priority based on the client’s needs. In the event that there is some fluidity among the parameters, we are often tasked with shepherding our client through options that address their priorities. The length and intensity of this iterative process is directly dependent on the client’s control of the desired outcome. Architects are the lead within a design team of talented consultants—including engineers and other specialists—who help arrive at a design solution. While we carry a modicum of clout in how we arrive there, we do not have autonomous rule over the architecture.

The Rules of Architecture

Architecture is a highly-regulated industry. We are responsible for the health, safety, and welfare of the future inhabitants of our spaces. “Authorities Having Jurisdiction” (AHJs) are organizations responsible for enforcing building codes, fire codes and other building and site-related stipulations. AHJs can operate at the county, state, and federal level. Also, they can be governmental or nongovernmental. They are the bodies that standardize the way architecture is built and, therefore, experienced. Within our chest of war stories there is at least one tale of an epic, poetically beautiful design feature that was thwarted because the town’s Department of Buildings refused to approve the drawings. The citizens of that town will never have the experience of gathering on those epic amphitheater steps, but they have security in knowing that the design team preserved their safety by abiding by the rules.

The Power of the Owner

The owner or client is typically the catalyst for the architecture. They often are the folks who identify a design flaw or the outright absence of design. They then call upon the expertise of others—namely architects, consultants, project managers—to help solve the mystery. In many ways, this is the power position. Typically, they identify the issue within their respective kingdom (in this analogy, their building or site), round up their best troops and deploy them on a quest to determine options for the best way forward. The clients have final say on the solutions presented.

All documents of the American Institute of Architects (AIA) and Owner-Architect contracts identify the drawings created by the architect’s team as “instruments of service” to them. Reflecting on the previous point of architecture being a service-based industry, the clients are essentially purchasing their design solution. They set the budget, design scope, and timeline internally, then provide these parameters and their priorities to qualified architects as part of the project’s “Requests for Proposals” (RFP). Through the RFP process, clients set the terms that the architect's team will attempt to court them with. My friends in law often joke that those who set the terms are the ones in control, particularly when it’s negotiation time. Usually, the team with the culmination of the best design fee, approach, and schedule is the victor.

Considered Conclusions

I have had the privilege of serving as an Owner’s Representative over the last year. It has been an additional education in architecture, taken from the unbiased but supportive stance required to see the project into fruition. On this side of design service, clients are governed by factors that require them to effectively steer the process. Additionally, for clients, there tends to be a compelling business strategy behind their need for design solutions. Whether it is a new hospital wing, student dormitories, or expanded office fit out, the future opportunity of generating revenue is the impetus for the design need.

Current clients have more experience than ever. In a time where a variety of information and expertise is readily accessible, our clients are no longer novices. Further, the AIA recently reported continued declines in billings, which have persisted for much of the last three years. The Architectural Billings Index (ABI) is a monthly litmus test for nonresidential construction activity. April’s ABI declined to 43.2, with the highest national volatility observed in the northeast United States, where I’m based. The business model of architecture is such that it cannot exist without the opportunity to design and be compensated for it. Clients are therefore the driving force, bolstering their rule of architecture with their own knowledge base and experience, eventually becoming fluent in the vocabulary, adept with the acronyms, cadence, and collaborative nature of architecture.

Main image: New York City skyline, overlooking neighboring New Jersey. Photo © Danei Wallen