Sunday, September 25, 2005
Crisis of the Architect's Profession
I was reading an interview in the recent RIBAS magazine with Jack Pringle, the 71st President of RIBAS. In his interview, he highlighted problems that the Architect's profession face today such as pay, fees, etc.
My take on this is that the profession needs to review its relevance in today's fast moving world, just as it did a century ago. Companies and governments expect things faster, in fact, it is corporate truism that our bosses always give us our assignments at the end of the day telling us that it was due yesterday!
Similarly, projects are all fast-tracked today. Of course, the artist in the architect would argue that the world should slow down, and that too much haste would not allow quality projects to be delivered. Alas, the world moves on, and the profession either catch up, or be kicked out.
Already, I have heard that Ove Arup developed software that helps in the architectural design process by running through possible design scenarios based on fixed requirements. This speeds up the design process leaving the architect to focus his energy on variables, and to exercise his or her art.
Some negative harbingers will say that such software will replace architects in the future. Maybe so, but rather than enter futile speculation, I have other concerns. In fact, even if such software becomes a norm for the profession, it will not improve the general state of architects today. What it will do though, is line the wallets of the principals of the architecture firms. This is so because architects are trained to work with their passion, and by definition, that also implies accepting the worst conditions and renumeration. Consequently, even if firms adopt such design software, even though working hours might reduce, the firms are likely to just take on more projects. In other words, the profession has already lowered its own level by creating a bizarrely low per hour wage due to their passion, and firms will definitely ride on that.
For the profession to solve its issues, it might be more useful for the profession to relook at its fundamentals, and understand our relevance to our clients, and how we can best provide them value at optimal cost. Also, if firms adopt software such as that mentioned above, the principals should have enough sense to understand that time savings in this instance is only a normalisation of the architect's working hours, and not just another opportunity to grow their bank accounts.
My take on this is that the profession needs to review its relevance in today's fast moving world, just as it did a century ago. Companies and governments expect things faster, in fact, it is corporate truism that our bosses always give us our assignments at the end of the day telling us that it was due yesterday!
Similarly, projects are all fast-tracked today. Of course, the artist in the architect would argue that the world should slow down, and that too much haste would not allow quality projects to be delivered. Alas, the world moves on, and the profession either catch up, or be kicked out.
Already, I have heard that Ove Arup developed software that helps in the architectural design process by running through possible design scenarios based on fixed requirements. This speeds up the design process leaving the architect to focus his energy on variables, and to exercise his or her art.
Some negative harbingers will say that such software will replace architects in the future. Maybe so, but rather than enter futile speculation, I have other concerns. In fact, even if such software becomes a norm for the profession, it will not improve the general state of architects today. What it will do though, is line the wallets of the principals of the architecture firms. This is so because architects are trained to work with their passion, and by definition, that also implies accepting the worst conditions and renumeration. Consequently, even if firms adopt such design software, even though working hours might reduce, the firms are likely to just take on more projects. In other words, the profession has already lowered its own level by creating a bizarrely low per hour wage due to their passion, and firms will definitely ride on that.
For the profession to solve its issues, it might be more useful for the profession to relook at its fundamentals, and understand our relevance to our clients, and how we can best provide them value at optimal cost. Also, if firms adopt software such as that mentioned above, the principals should have enough sense to understand that time savings in this instance is only a normalisation of the architect's working hours, and not just another opportunity to grow their bank accounts.
0 Comments:
