What I would REALLY like is if the AIA put some efforts into educating the public in the difference between what it is that we do in comparison to what is seen on HGTV AND what it means to "hire a contractor" who claims to be a designer.
I have to admit it, many contractors have amazing marketing skills, slick tongues and can sell the average homeowner on hiring them to forego the use of an architect and put the design in their hands. Architects have been branded as someone who slows down the process, and will make everything more expensive while the contractor will save them time, money, while making it look just as nice..
maybe "just as nice" is the hard part to overcome....
or maybe it's the "slick marketing brochures", you know, the ones that make us cringe... the ones that get contractors work...
I agree, I'd like to see the AIA do a little more for the community and stop being so self-serving. I mean, they do "do" things for the registered architects that pay their fee to the AIA, but for the rest of the suckas out there, those Reg. Archs....they do nothing. Now I am not asking for amnesty type membership, but more along the lines of what you suggested Curt.
Have them be more responsive to the goings-on in our profession, and do something to enliven and even enrich the idea of our profession to what it should be, and that is....better respected!
The AIA could also start getting computer engineers and software programmers to stop calling themselves architects...
Notice when you go to a job search on any of the web-based services, you type in 'architect' and there will be pages and pages of computer-related shit like "software architect" or "network systems architect..." etc, etc...
Very annoying. I even met a guy who adressed himself as an architect to everyone at this party and then when he met me, he said he was a "software designer." His card even said architect on it.
I would like to see the AIA start lobbying the state legislators to pass a state law that enforces that all new home construction (regardless of size) must be from the loins of a licensed architect.
Educating the public about what we do and what we are good for is "happy talk", but it won't do any good because it is the dollar that drives people's decisions. Any professional organization should first, and foremost, serve to protect and serve the interests of its members.
i am so broke right now that i am going to agree with bryden. why the fuck not. what is my license worth if a non licensed person is allowed to do the same thing without it?
single family homes, 2 stories or under can be done by a designer in most states and that constitutes the 80% of all the construction (commercial, institutional, etc.) in this country.
i guess being broke makes you selfish. but the fact is, 99% of the time you have to go to a certified md in order to get a medical care. this includes insurance claims etc. the other day this lady, an accointance, called me to ask how a concrete slab is reinforced. well, she is a certified home inspector..
educating public is too nice of a word indeed. you have to make them hire an architect. bullshit they don't have money, if they are building a custom home. it is a fact, most architects design better buildings than most others.
it is a heavily regulated profession on paper but when it comes to applying it to build environment, it means nothing or very little.
something wrong here i think.
i mean if it is going to matter very little, why require a registration at all? we are to protect safety, health and well being of the public but public is telling us to fuck off.
i heard one the AIA radio ads yesterday afternoon...it was convincing enough for a 30 second spot, but it didn't really say much.
i think the policies for the profession need to change to absolutely require a licensed architect for any construction. i don't know that there's any way to convince the public that we're useful unless it affects their bottom line. require an architect's stamp for every minimal addition, even the small stuff...making architects a necessary part of the process is the only way to ensure we'll stay useful and involved in a greater percentage of the industry that architects rightfully belong to. it's just unfortunate that it'll also add another step to the procedure of building anything.
folks, the aia can do a lot of things (or not), but please, for the love of god, give up the 'absolutely require a licensed architect for any construction' angle.
it is never, ever, ever, ever going to happen for a single family house.
it's not the aia's fault. it's not the profession as a whole's fault. it just is.
really. you can trace it back, spiritually, to the very founding of america itself. the notion that one can build their own house is deeply embedded in the frontier psyche. in fact, it's completely intertwined with the notion that one can do whatever they want with their own property (and i'm not talking about legally, just spiritually).
it's not going to change. (of course, the national homebuilder's association isn't going to let it change either).
here's the other really dirty little secret: every one of the top ten homebuilder corporations in america has multiple licensed architects on staff who do the actual design work. now, we can all probably agree that the product they produce isn't so hot, but they aren't being done by some back room yokel either.
point is - give up that strain of thought. it is never, ever going to change. no matter what you, i, or the aia does.
now, back to the original question: i would like to see the aia put more effort into their overall publicity push and do more to educate the general public on what constitutes 'good design' (after all, at the root of some of the bitching above, that's really what's being said). there are several ways you can do that - initiate public education curricula to implement in k-12 schools so that you can get to the kids early; sponsor and organize community or city wide forums on good design; work with the profession to help them demystify how their firms work; organize seminars that can be given to fortune 500 companies that talk about how to evaluate and push for good design.
by no means is this list complete, but you get the idea.
finally, like steven just said - either wake up and realize that we have one and only one real organization that has any clout to speak for the profession, join it, and institute the change. or, keep bitching and wonder why the profession as we know it could keep slipping away...
i don't buy the whole you can't criticize it until you're a member schtick. it's a lot like "love it, or leave it." nice argument there. i've seen too many people burn out trying to change it. face it, folks, it ain't goin' to happen. the people that stay with it long enough to enter a position of leadership are completely indoctrinated by that time. if you have views outside of the local leadership, it's unlikely your voice will ever be heard. it's a shame we don't have a professional organization that is willing to truly represent the profession, not just a select few firms (usually the ones doing the most prosaic and banal work). i recommend putting your energy into other avenues - local and national non-profits, community build groups, even local government - the AIA, don't get too worked up over it.
for a first post, investigation has pretty much nailed it. as a national body, it does little, but local orgs seemingly do more and impact more on the local scene. i have given up thinking that the aia could change anything on a national level. i am disheartened when i see the national undermine those architects that are not willing to join. i do however participate in the aia - although not a member - when they participate in local events. i do what i can when they do what they can, i just refuse to join and therefor refuse to voice a need for change...
there is local AIA and then there is National AIA. We'd all love national to change, almost as much as we want NCARB to change. The local guys are great drinking buddies/golfing partners most of the time.
In contrast with some of unions I've been privy to, at least you can choose to join or not to join the grand ol' institute. it's not like your employers is taking 20% of your pay every week and sending of to jimmy hoffa.
So what can the AIA do better?
I've heard better representation to local, state and national government- ok, that takes getting members (not just staff) into the halls of power to lobby a little.
Better public outreach and education? hmm, maybe we all should volunteer at the local school once a year (maybe we'd even meet a few potential clients), otherwise we're stuck with the lame PR company our dues have hired.
No body's complaining about ethics- but are we really challenged for lack of a compass today?
I thought that everyone joined the AIA just because no potential clients know what the hell a registered architect is.
seriously, i think if you've spent several years breaking your back to get a license, they should give you the AIA title for $0.75 or so a year, not the $350 BS they're charging right now, because they essentially have a monopoly on the term architect.
I think what's probably needed to get us back in this whole game isn't so much a change in the AIA's stance but a change in the profession as a whole. Years ago if you wanted a building built, you hired an architect. You didn't have to hire an army of personel to put a building together. It seems however that academia has gotten so far removed from real-world practice that most grads don't really have the first clue about what the profession actually entails. Over the years, we've lost our expertiese to engineers and other members of the industry. Frankly, i say train architects like doctors. Have four years of pre-arch that is heavy on the practice side, then another 3 or so of theory/application of practice. The Idea of the architect as Master Builder is long dead, maybe if we could revive it, starting with education, we could improve our lot.
investigation, the comment i made isn't anything like 'love it or leave it'. it's 'if you hate it, fix it.' the local aia chapters always need energetic young architects and associates to get things done.
your 'completely indoctrinated' comment leaves me scratching my head because i have never heard any aia doctrine. it's a bunch of people trying to figure out how to increase the standing and impact of a profession we all feel is valuable but don't know how to sell. our local chapter does it through charrettes, through a architect's house tour, and various other activities that favor no particular architects but just try to raise the awareness of who we are.
of course the organization is 'willing to truly represent the profession'. it is made UP of the profession. the architects i see at local aia chapter meetings are also the architects with whom i come into contact at project tours, with whom i compete in the proposal process, and with whom i drink on fridays. there are no 'select' firms represented.
it's true that we don't often see the impact of local leadership as they go into state and national positions. but it happens. my old boss is now a state officer and another prominent professional from here in ky has just finished up a stint as a national officer. these aren't old stodgy entrenched politicians, but they are busy architects like the rest of us, but who made the time to also be aia leaders. in other words, they stuck around.
i'm not sure where you even get some of these ideas. you must be going on a reputation concocted by a generation of architecture-types that have enjoyed their outsider status. have you ever participated in local chapter activities?
by the way, i also recommend putting your energy into other avenues - local and national non-profits, community build groups, even local government. in our area, it's not unlikely that you'll be working next to an aia member.
...but SW, at the same time you have to recognize that the "join it and fix it" ain't working either. i almost never hear from anyone in the AIA that they do hear the concerns of non-members, and their reasons for not joining. part of my, and many others, unwillingness to join is partly an effort to say to the AIA when you recognize the problem[s] and pose solutions to fix it, then i we would reconsider. pressure from the outside is what will cause change, not from within, after all if you are a dues paying member what is the incentive to change?
steven ward is right (as usual)... as much as i hate to say it, "you can only get back if you put in"... for those in the "all construction should be designed by architects" camp, the AIA will never be able to out-spend or out-lobby the NAHB when only 50% of registered architects are members... there simply isn't enough money to compete...
i've told this story a few times here, but i'll repeat it here too...
i begrudgingly joined the AIA about 4-5 years ago when my firm was up for local firm of the year and wanted to have 100% membership of their employees... it didn't cost me anything since i had recently graduated (1 year of membership is free for recent graduates) so i decided to go ahead and join... the first year or so i didn't really do anything and was frustrated by the entrenched local leadership and the lack of doing anything that i viewed as constructive... then a few years ago we had a good chapter president that sent out an email to all members to ask if anyone was interested in starting a young architects group... about 10-12 people responded and met at a bar to discuss... that marked the birth of ETBA (emerging tampa bay architects)... we made the decision that ETBA would function outside the bounds of the AIA and would have no membership fees...
now a few years later i like to think that we've accomplished quite a lot... here's a small list of what we've done: organized a successful community design charrette for an economically depressed neighborhood, organized several design competitions, lobbied for and organized a state-wide emerging architects conference that features david lewis of ltl architects as the keynote speaker, lobbied city council and the preservation committee on behalf of a park that was designed by dan kiley, organized a roundtable/workshop on starting your own firm (coming up on saturday), and i could go on... now we have the public approaching us for help on several fronts... we're organizing a design competition for a small museum that is hoping to raise funds for a new building and we're designing some park structures for a neighborhood that is looking for grants to get them built...
while some of the leadership of ETBA are AIA members, a lot are not... however, the associate (un-licensed) membership of our local chapter has increased by 40% in the last 2 years since we've been active... i like to think that is because we are changing the perception that the AIA is for stuffy old white men... we're are still officially unattached to the AIA, but this year we received about $4000 from our local chapter to support our activities since we are increasing the visibility of the profession...
get involved and make change happen... otherwise quit bitching...
requiring an architect to stamp every type of construction would not raise the quality of design or the "beauty" of the built environment because many architects will gladly stamp drawings that they had no part in building. even though this is illegal it is done all the time. that said, hey abra my niece cuts hair part time out of her house in chandler arizona and makes ten grand more than me a year!
Sorry, I am firm believer in professional responsibility to yourself and to your peers. While vado is mostly right, requiring an architect to stamp every construction wouldn't raise the quality of design in all cases, it would protect our professional turf in more cases.
Other professional organizations have members that gladly pay dues to make sure that their livelihood is protected. Those dues pays for the lobbyists that keep the wheels greased in government. I can understand why architects are turned off by this practice, but I also cannot understand why architects continue to bitch and moan about their problems, yet are unwilling to do anything to make change happen for their own benefit.
I don't think there is any silver bullet that will make the world beautiful, but having an architect, with a civic voice of competence and reason, will help. Demonstating our competence has to be more than just beauty, it is about making sure that there is a trained professional in the loop that has an understanding of the consequences with any construction...for the immediate benefit of the owner, its neighbors, and the community at large...but also for the future. That isn't the case now.
I think that the AIA needs critics within and without. Groupthink isn't a conscious effort, but needs to be checked from within and without.
We need ornery professionals from outside to constantly nitpick the AIA to keep them honest. And when the local AIA has its head on straight, we should join them. That being said, my local AIA sucks and will never see a dime from me (or 60+% of the other local professionals).
As for Architects at large, until we start to put real value into our educational credentials, we will never really receive the same benefits and other "real" professionals. The fact that there are x number of different ways to enter the profession undermines the general status of us all. If 8 years of construction is equivalent to 5+ years of higher education, we really are no better than a trade serving the construction business.
And enough complaining about the disconnect between school and practice, when you have set it up so one organization oversees school accreditation and another organization oversees professional licensing and a still separate organization represents practicing professionals, you are going to get a disconnect. We really need to scrap the system and start all over again.
j
a huge problem for the aia is the diversity of its members (and critics) -- each of who wants the aia to tackle their own particular problem, issue or priority as the first priority of the institute.
i've been working at the national level of aia for years and have rubbed elbows regularly with many members of the national board. the breadth of issues they are asked to tackle is staggering. just trying to prioritize those issues results in endless argument and debate. and, when you layer on the change of elected leadership each year, establishing and maintaining a coherent set of priorities and programs is almost impossible.
nevertheless, the aia's the best professional organization we have. i second stephen ward's view and raise the tired and worn out old saying -- "either you're part of the solution or you're part of the problem."
i really like working within the aia because i get to meet and know - on a personal level - a large number of good folks like yourself. i learn a lot in the process and feel as though the projects and committees i've worked on have made a difference for the entire profession.
but, is that work changing the world -- probably not.
it sounds like from a number of these posts that there are local chapters of the aia that are involved and doing good work. from my own experience, i believe that there are greater opportunities to affect change through architecture through other organizations. this is where i place my priorities. so why would i spend my precious little time outside of practice trying to change a lumbering bureaucratic organization when there are more direct routes to my own professional goals? quizzical is right; the organization cannot possibly address all of the individual concerns of the profession, and it's not worth trying to squeeze your own personal issue into a professional organization that is already stretched far too thin. if you like what the aia is doing, contribute to it and make it stronger; if you don't, go somewhere else that can fulfill your goals and interests, but trying to change the organization is a losing proposition. so yes, steven ward, perhaps i was only stating my own opinion when i said love it, or leave it.
"...but SW, at the same time you have to recognize that the "join it and fix it" ain't working either. i almost never hear from anyone in the AIA that they do hear the concerns of non-members, and their reasons for not joining. part of my, and many others, unwillingness to join is partly an effort to say to the AIA when you recognize the problem[s] and pose solutions to fix it, then i we would reconsider."
stourley -
you're engaging in a chicken-egg rhetorical argument that isn't going to do any good, ultimately. why? because we only have one organization with any real clout (all apologies to the sara group). and we need one main organization to deal with issues on the national level. think about it - how much clout would the lawyers have if there were more than one group representing them (the bar)? and, as a matter of comparison, they have more than 99% of all lawyers as members. we have a little over 60%.
the other thing i wanted to address is your second sentance - that no one from aia hears your concerns. well, here's your chance.
currently, i'm on a seven person advisory committee for the young architects forum group within aia. basically, we cover anyone within the first 10 years of becoming registered. between our membership group and the associates, we represent about 40% of the entire aia membership. when i say we have the attention and ear of the national leadership of the aia, i'm not bragging, but just trying give you a sense where i can put your comments. my own views on the aia are very similar to quizzical - participating at the national level has had some very real rewards and opportunities. but, like everyone else, i'm just a volunteer who still has to pay the bills doing real work.
so, here's the question for you (or anyone else) - give me some specific suggestions of what you'd like the aia to do better at the national level and i will, at the end of the day tomorrow, make sure that they are given to the current president (rk stewart) by that evening. and, if you've got something that the young architects group can work on, let me know that as well and i'll put in front of our committee by the end of the day. basically, i'm promising to take what's suggested and make sure the people who can do something about it at least see it.
real, viable suggestions (and there are some above) are what interests me - none of this 'make us more money' general whining.
I would say the AIA should stand up and take over the NCARB. Take all the money their stashing away and put it into the AIAorganization,
so they are propery funded. I could never figure out why they functioned as two seperate institutions.
It could be based upon a number of comments made in this site.
Number one: How can it take so long to get an answer out of them?
Thanks for being our voice at the top! this means something.
COTE seems to be where the action is these days. Just cause the AIA has signed onto Architecture 2030 doesn't mean it's getting the message across. The AIA needs to bang some heads against the concrete to shake the majority of the membership into acting.
So they spent $$$ on the advertising campaign telling the public that architects are good. They must shift the message to emphasize that architects have the only skills to design sustainable buildings, period. No joe blow contractor/construction manager/design-build has anything that can touch the bread and butter sustainable work that even an average LEED-AP architect can produce. (And no engineer can save as much energy with the latest and greatest HVAC system as a properly designed, sited, insulated and windowed building).
SO WHY AM I NOT HEARING THIS MESSAGE ON THE RADIO??????
Action:
The YAF can join with COTE to spread the message and figure out how we change our practices to save the planet. Most of the talent and passion for sustainable design is in the associate category/recently licensed and haven't learned enough bad habits to be jaded about making radical changes.
Another action for YAF:
Beat up NCARB to include sustainable design in the ARE4.0 and in IDP. WHY IS SUSTAINABILITY NOT A REQUIRED SKILL FOR OUR INTERNSHIP OR OUR LICENSE?
Drop me an email if you want more input along these lines...
ps- I'm going to post this on the COTE-Listserve to get the message to Washington in stereo. I'll report back on what responses I get.
my green tint is starting to fade and the bulging muscles are relaxing, now I just have to figure out what to do with my shredded clothing.
fiscal responsibility is an issue for me. spending money on advertising, that on it's face suggests that the only architect the public should consider is one that is AIA affiliated.
perhaps a question like this; why is it that movie stars, television shows, and movies do a better job of [mis]representing our profession than the AIA. what i mean is, those things seemingly connect with a receptive populace and spread a message that the public sees as a "correct" reflection of what it is we do. what and how can the AIA seek to change that?
what kind of check and balance should the AIA provide to NCARB?
why are emerging professionals forgotten in the AIA? we have constantly complained, often to deaf ears, that NCARB is unresponsive to criticisms, and the AIA unwilling to help provide a voice for our concerns.
IDP forces interns to meet standards before taking the ARE, but where is the mechanism that forces licensed professionals to provide interns the required components for IDP? the AIA and some states i believe, say that licensed professionals must get so many learning units every year in order to be a member, so why not do the same when it comes to interns and IDP? if you as an AIA member cannot document that you have provided an intern in your office with an anticipated number of units towards their IDP training, then you lose your membership. doing this will prevent the whitewashing and out right lies that many have to succumb to in order to sit for the ARE.
some good questions - kind of interesting that they seem to be gravitating more around ncarb and it's relationship to aia.
i should point out - i'm not going to 'pass judgement' on the questions and screen them out. what you guys put down, i'm passing along. think of it more as a neutral filter.
that said, i'll offer a couple of opinions about what i know the relationship between aia and ncarb to be (and this is very little in the grand scheme of things - there are others out there much more credible and knowledgeable than me).
first - if you think aia is dysfunctional, try ncarb out. it'll make the lapel guys look like microsoft or something. basically, ncarb is very protective of it's turf. it works with aia, naab, acsa, and other groups, but is very clear that it is its own being. my own opinion, and i'm really curious as to what the aia brass says about this, is that aia is trying to be more assertive about influencing ncarb policy. one example is the 'emerging professionals companion' that the aia produced a couple of years ago which allows interns to gain IDP credits themselves (via online). you can see more about it at http://www.epcompanion.org basically, it's trying to switch credit towards evidence based learning (what you actually know) versus the 'ass in the seat' time based method. aia is pushing ncarb fairly hard to make more IDP credits available this way and i think, in the next couple of years, that you'll see ncarb roll a bit on this and make most of the idp credits available through self-directed education. none of this replaces the responsibility that a firm owes to training it's interns and i really like the notion of putting much more responsibility back on the principals to make sure that the interns get the exposure they need (losing your membership being one stick to wield).
stourley - can you expand on one comment - 'why are emerging professionals forgotten in aia?' is it solely tied to the following comment about the aia not pressuring ncarb to do more or is there some other basis, because i don't think, at all, that the aia has forgotten emerging professionals. quite the contrary. they are perfectly willing to devote whatever resources we tend to ask for - we usually have a harder time figuring out what the top priorities are of our membership. so, assume that money (to a degree) isn't the issue. what else is aia doing that is neglecting the needs of emerging professionals?
in our local aia chapter, there are various subcommittees devoted to the interests of young professionals. the problem is that when issues are brought from the various subcommittees to the executive committee, the local chapter is absolutely unwilling to take action if it involves a political stand. this has come up multiple times. the excomm applauds our efforts, but will not grant adequate funding and has in fact gone to some lengths to obstruct some of the programs and presentations put forward by the subcommittees. i realize this a very specific problem within our chapter, but i also believe it is emblematic of a larger disconnect between young professionals and the old guard at the top. the old guard would like to believe they are being progressive by lending an ear, but it really doesn't mean anything if they cannot take action.
My initial thought was based on me being frustrated with having to educate every single new client about what it is we as Architects do....
Everyone thinks they know what we do, then you roll out a set of CD's and explain why you did these drawings and then they're like, "oh...."
I wish there was a way for the education level of clients to improve so you don't have to start at square one with every project... it would be nice from time to time to have a client who has an understanding of what we do and why we are asking them to pay us all this money...
I'm out sick for a day and its interesting where the thread went.... I like most people feel NCARB is like the mafia of the architecture profession, but i have never seen or thought that AIA could benefit from influencing NCARB policy.... it just seems weird to think that two seemingly dysfunctional organizations will somehow improve if you combine the two...
investigation, take a look at my post above... we were experiencing some similar problems regarding oversight from the local aia excom... as a result our emerging architects group is set up as a separate organization... thus, we can do what we want without any meddling from the old guys... depending on the make-up with the excom we've been drifted closer to or further away from the aia... sometimes we have their full support, sometimes they want to distance themselves (particularly in politically sensitive topics)... some of our events are paid for with money that the aia allocated for us in their budget, some stuff is paid for with a grant that we got from aia national, and some is paid for with sponsorships... early on, some of the stuff was even self funded by interested members... after our first year or so of existence the local aia seemed to realize the value that we've been bringing to the architectural community and they've been more supportive... of course there is also the issue that sometimes they try to take credit for some of the stuff that we do, but that's a whole other discussion...
What the AIA should be doing...
What I would REALLY like is if the AIA put some efforts into educating the public in the difference between what it is that we do in comparison to what is seen on HGTV AND what it means to "hire a contractor" who claims to be a designer.
I have to admit it, many contractors have amazing marketing skills, slick tongues and can sell the average homeowner on hiring them to forego the use of an architect and put the design in their hands. Architects have been branded as someone who slows down the process, and will make everything more expensive while the contractor will save them time, money, while making it look just as nice..
maybe "just as nice" is the hard part to overcome....
or maybe it's the "slick marketing brochures", you know, the ones that make us cringe... the ones that get contractors work...
what would you like the AIA to focus on?
I think it's high time we started hustlin'
the AIA is a joke...although you do get a bitchin' lapel pin
I agree, I'd like to see the AIA do a little more for the community and stop being so self-serving. I mean, they do "do" things for the registered architects that pay their fee to the AIA, but for the rest of the suckas out there, those Reg. Archs....they do nothing. Now I am not asking for amnesty type membership, but more along the lines of what you suggested Curt.
Have them be more responsive to the goings-on in our profession, and do something to enliven and even enrich the idea of our profession to what it should be, and that is....better respected!
The AIA could also start getting computer engineers and software programmers to stop calling themselves architects...
Notice when you go to a job search on any of the web-based services, you type in 'architect' and there will be pages and pages of computer-related shit like "software architect" or "network systems architect..." etc, etc...
Very annoying. I even met a guy who adressed himself as an architect to everyone at this party and then when he met me, he said he was a "software designer." His card even said architect on it.
in the reasons to join the AIA, they actually mention the lapel pin...because they know that there are really no legitimate reasons to join
why should we wait for the AIA to do something?
AIA-COTE listserve is rad... the best perk so far!
lapel pins...lapel pins
nothing says 'hey, I'm a badass designer' like a lapel pin
Vado
Write me a song about lapel pins
I would like to see the AIA start lobbying the state legislators to pass a state law that enforces that all new home construction (regardless of size) must be from the loins of a licensed architect.
Educating the public about what we do and what we are good for is "happy talk", but it won't do any good because it is the dollar that drives people's decisions. Any professional organization should first, and foremost, serve to protect and serve the interests of its members.
If I am going to build a house and can have the contractor draw me up some plans, why would I want to pay an architect $$$ to do so?
i am so broke right now that i am going to agree with bryden. why the fuck not. what is my license worth if a non licensed person is allowed to do the same thing without it?
single family homes, 2 stories or under can be done by a designer in most states and that constitutes the 80% of all the construction (commercial, institutional, etc.) in this country.
i guess being broke makes you selfish. but the fact is, 99% of the time you have to go to a certified md in order to get a medical care. this includes insurance claims etc. the other day this lady, an accointance, called me to ask how a concrete slab is reinforced. well, she is a certified home inspector..
educating public is too nice of a word indeed. you have to make them hire an architect. bullshit they don't have money, if they are building a custom home. it is a fact, most architects design better buildings than most others.
it is a heavily regulated profession on paper but when it comes to applying it to build environment, it means nothing or very little.
something wrong here i think.
i mean if it is going to matter very little, why require a registration at all? we are to protect safety, health and well being of the public but public is telling us to fuck off.
abra
did you prick yourself with you AIA lapel pin?
i heard one the AIA radio ads yesterday afternoon...it was convincing enough for a 30 second spot, but it didn't really say much.
i think the policies for the profession need to change to absolutely require a licensed architect for any construction. i don't know that there's any way to convince the public that we're useful unless it affects their bottom line. require an architect's stamp for every minimal addition, even the small stuff...making architects a necessary part of the process is the only way to ensure we'll stay useful and involved in a greater percentage of the industry that architects rightfully belong to. it's just unfortunate that it'll also add another step to the procedure of building anything.
mdler, i think i did. ouch. fuck'r . i'm gonna get me an aia lapel pin from mc arthur park. you want one too?
did you know barber's and architect's licence is identical? i am thinking...
join the aia and make the change.
otherwise, clam up.
the aia is not a 'they', it's a 'we'.
folks, the aia can do a lot of things (or not), but please, for the love of god, give up the 'absolutely require a licensed architect for any construction' angle.
it is never, ever, ever, ever going to happen for a single family house.
it's not the aia's fault. it's not the profession as a whole's fault. it just is.
really. you can trace it back, spiritually, to the very founding of america itself. the notion that one can build their own house is deeply embedded in the frontier psyche. in fact, it's completely intertwined with the notion that one can do whatever they want with their own property (and i'm not talking about legally, just spiritually).
it's not going to change. (of course, the national homebuilder's association isn't going to let it change either).
here's the other really dirty little secret: every one of the top ten homebuilder corporations in america has multiple licensed architects on staff who do the actual design work. now, we can all probably agree that the product they produce isn't so hot, but they aren't being done by some back room yokel either.
point is - give up that strain of thought. it is never, ever going to change. no matter what you, i, or the aia does.
now, back to the original question: i would like to see the aia put more effort into their overall publicity push and do more to educate the general public on what constitutes 'good design' (after all, at the root of some of the bitching above, that's really what's being said). there are several ways you can do that - initiate public education curricula to implement in k-12 schools so that you can get to the kids early; sponsor and organize community or city wide forums on good design; work with the profession to help them demystify how their firms work; organize seminars that can be given to fortune 500 companies that talk about how to evaluate and push for good design.
by no means is this list complete, but you get the idea.
finally, like steven just said - either wake up and realize that we have one and only one real organization that has any clout to speak for the profession, join it, and institute the change. or, keep bitching and wonder why the profession as we know it could keep slipping away...
i don't buy the whole you can't criticize it until you're a member schtick. it's a lot like "love it, or leave it." nice argument there. i've seen too many people burn out trying to change it. face it, folks, it ain't goin' to happen. the people that stay with it long enough to enter a position of leadership are completely indoctrinated by that time. if you have views outside of the local leadership, it's unlikely your voice will ever be heard. it's a shame we don't have a professional organization that is willing to truly represent the profession, not just a select few firms (usually the ones doing the most prosaic and banal work). i recommend putting your energy into other avenues - local and national non-profits, community build groups, even local government - the AIA, don't get too worked up over it.
for a first post, investigation has pretty much nailed it. as a national body, it does little, but local orgs seemingly do more and impact more on the local scene. i have given up thinking that the aia could change anything on a national level. i am disheartened when i see the national undermine those architects that are not willing to join. i do however participate in the aia - although not a member - when they participate in local events. i do what i can when they do what they can, i just refuse to join and therefor refuse to voice a need for change...
there is local AIA and then there is National AIA. We'd all love national to change, almost as much as we want NCARB to change. The local guys are great drinking buddies/golfing partners most of the time.
In contrast with some of unions I've been privy to, at least you can choose to join or not to join the grand ol' institute. it's not like your employers is taking 20% of your pay every week and sending of to jimmy hoffa.
So what can the AIA do better?
I've heard better representation to local, state and national government- ok, that takes getting members (not just staff) into the halls of power to lobby a little.
Better public outreach and education? hmm, maybe we all should volunteer at the local school once a year (maybe we'd even meet a few potential clients), otherwise we're stuck with the lame PR company our dues have hired.
No body's complaining about ethics- but are we really challenged for lack of a compass today?
so what else????
I thought that everyone joined the AIA just because no potential clients know what the hell a registered architect is.
seriously, i think if you've spent several years breaking your back to get a license, they should give you the AIA title for $0.75 or so a year, not the $350 BS they're charging right now, because they essentially have a monopoly on the term architect.
I think what's probably needed to get us back in this whole game isn't so much a change in the AIA's stance but a change in the profession as a whole. Years ago if you wanted a building built, you hired an architect. You didn't have to hire an army of personel to put a building together. It seems however that academia has gotten so far removed from real-world practice that most grads don't really have the first clue about what the profession actually entails. Over the years, we've lost our expertiese to engineers and other members of the industry. Frankly, i say train architects like doctors. Have four years of pre-arch that is heavy on the practice side, then another 3 or so of theory/application of practice. The Idea of the architect as Master Builder is long dead, maybe if we could revive it, starting with education, we could improve our lot.
Just a late nite musing.
investigation, the comment i made isn't anything like 'love it or leave it'. it's 'if you hate it, fix it.' the local aia chapters always need energetic young architects and associates to get things done.
your 'completely indoctrinated' comment leaves me scratching my head because i have never heard any aia doctrine. it's a bunch of people trying to figure out how to increase the standing and impact of a profession we all feel is valuable but don't know how to sell. our local chapter does it through charrettes, through a architect's house tour, and various other activities that favor no particular architects but just try to raise the awareness of who we are.
of course the organization is 'willing to truly represent the profession'. it is made UP of the profession. the architects i see at local aia chapter meetings are also the architects with whom i come into contact at project tours, with whom i compete in the proposal process, and with whom i drink on fridays. there are no 'select' firms represented.
it's true that we don't often see the impact of local leadership as they go into state and national positions. but it happens. my old boss is now a state officer and another prominent professional from here in ky has just finished up a stint as a national officer. these aren't old stodgy entrenched politicians, but they are busy architects like the rest of us, but who made the time to also be aia leaders. in other words, they stuck around.
i'm not sure where you even get some of these ideas. you must be going on a reputation concocted by a generation of architecture-types that have enjoyed their outsider status. have you ever participated in local chapter activities?
by the way, i also recommend putting your energy into other avenues - local and national non-profits, community build groups, even local government. in our area, it's not unlikely that you'll be working next to an aia member.
...but SW, at the same time you have to recognize that the "join it and fix it" ain't working either. i almost never hear from anyone in the AIA that they do hear the concerns of non-members, and their reasons for not joining. part of my, and many others, unwillingness to join is partly an effort to say to the AIA when you recognize the problem[s] and pose solutions to fix it, then i we would reconsider. pressure from the outside is what will cause change, not from within, after all if you are a dues paying member what is the incentive to change?
f the police...err aia.
go ARA....
http://www.sara-national.org/join/join.html
[not endorsing, just presenting an option]
steven ward is right (as usual)... as much as i hate to say it, "you can only get back if you put in"... for those in the "all construction should be designed by architects" camp, the AIA will never be able to out-spend or out-lobby the NAHB when only 50% of registered architects are members... there simply isn't enough money to compete...
i've told this story a few times here, but i'll repeat it here too...
i begrudgingly joined the AIA about 4-5 years ago when my firm was up for local firm of the year and wanted to have 100% membership of their employees... it didn't cost me anything since i had recently graduated (1 year of membership is free for recent graduates) so i decided to go ahead and join... the first year or so i didn't really do anything and was frustrated by the entrenched local leadership and the lack of doing anything that i viewed as constructive... then a few years ago we had a good chapter president that sent out an email to all members to ask if anyone was interested in starting a young architects group... about 10-12 people responded and met at a bar to discuss... that marked the birth of ETBA (emerging tampa bay architects)... we made the decision that ETBA would function outside the bounds of the AIA and would have no membership fees...
now a few years later i like to think that we've accomplished quite a lot... here's a small list of what we've done: organized a successful community design charrette for an economically depressed neighborhood, organized several design competitions, lobbied for and organized a state-wide emerging architects conference that features david lewis of ltl architects as the keynote speaker, lobbied city council and the preservation committee on behalf of a park that was designed by dan kiley, organized a roundtable/workshop on starting your own firm (coming up on saturday), and i could go on... now we have the public approaching us for help on several fronts... we're organizing a design competition for a small museum that is hoping to raise funds for a new building and we're designing some park structures for a neighborhood that is looking for grants to get them built...
while some of the leadership of ETBA are AIA members, a lot are not... however, the associate (un-licensed) membership of our local chapter has increased by 40% in the last 2 years since we've been active... i like to think that is because we are changing the perception that the AIA is for stuffy old white men... we're are still officially unattached to the AIA, but this year we received about $4000 from our local chapter to support our activities since we are increasing the visibility of the profession...
get involved and make change happen... otherwise quit bitching...
requiring an architect to stamp every type of construction would not raise the quality of design or the "beauty" of the built environment because many architects will gladly stamp drawings that they had no part in building. even though this is illegal it is done all the time. that said, hey abra my niece cuts hair part time out of her house in chandler arizona and makes ten grand more than me a year!
Sorry, I am firm believer in professional responsibility to yourself and to your peers. While vado is mostly right, requiring an architect to stamp every construction wouldn't raise the quality of design in all cases, it would protect our professional turf in more cases.
Other professional organizations have members that gladly pay dues to make sure that their livelihood is protected. Those dues pays for the lobbyists that keep the wheels greased in government. I can understand why architects are turned off by this practice, but I also cannot understand why architects continue to bitch and moan about their problems, yet are unwilling to do anything to make change happen for their own benefit.
I don't think there is any silver bullet that will make the world beautiful, but having an architect, with a civic voice of competence and reason, will help. Demonstating our competence has to be more than just beauty, it is about making sure that there is a trained professional in the loop that has an understanding of the consequences with any construction...for the immediate benefit of the owner, its neighbors, and the community at large...but also for the future. That isn't the case now.
I think that the AIA needs critics within and without. Groupthink isn't a conscious effort, but needs to be checked from within and without.
We need ornery professionals from outside to constantly nitpick the AIA to keep them honest. And when the local AIA has its head on straight, we should join them. That being said, my local AIA sucks and will never see a dime from me (or 60+% of the other local professionals).
As for Architects at large, until we start to put real value into our educational credentials, we will never really receive the same benefits and other "real" professionals. The fact that there are x number of different ways to enter the profession undermines the general status of us all. If 8 years of construction is equivalent to 5+ years of higher education, we really are no better than a trade serving the construction business.
And enough complaining about the disconnect between school and practice, when you have set it up so one organization oversees school accreditation and another organization oversees professional licensing and a still separate organization represents practicing professionals, you are going to get a disconnect. We really need to scrap the system and start all over again.
j
Vado
Librarians make more than architects
a huge problem for the aia is the diversity of its members (and critics) -- each of who wants the aia to tackle their own particular problem, issue or priority as the first priority of the institute.
i've been working at the national level of aia for years and have rubbed elbows regularly with many members of the national board. the breadth of issues they are asked to tackle is staggering. just trying to prioritize those issues results in endless argument and debate. and, when you layer on the change of elected leadership each year, establishing and maintaining a coherent set of priorities and programs is almost impossible.
nevertheless, the aia's the best professional organization we have. i second stephen ward's view and raise the tired and worn out old saying -- "either you're part of the solution or you're part of the problem."
i really like working within the aia because i get to meet and know - on a personal level - a large number of good folks like yourself. i learn a lot in the process and feel as though the projects and committees i've worked on have made a difference for the entire profession.
but, is that work changing the world -- probably not.
but, it has made it better.
Heres the problem -
Clients
and the other problem -
Architects
One thinks they know what they want and the other thinks they know what they need. If you can figure out which ones which your halfway there.
Now in comes contractor, he knows the one thing they all want to know, how much for it. For what you ask? For this he says. And so it goes....
it sounds like from a number of these posts that there are local chapters of the aia that are involved and doing good work. from my own experience, i believe that there are greater opportunities to affect change through architecture through other organizations. this is where i place my priorities. so why would i spend my precious little time outside of practice trying to change a lumbering bureaucratic organization when there are more direct routes to my own professional goals? quizzical is right; the organization cannot possibly address all of the individual concerns of the profession, and it's not worth trying to squeeze your own personal issue into a professional organization that is already stretched far too thin. if you like what the aia is doing, contribute to it and make it stronger; if you don't, go somewhere else that can fulfill your goals and interests, but trying to change the organization is a losing proposition. so yes, steven ward, perhaps i was only stating my own opinion when i said love it, or leave it.
lapel pins!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
mdler i have found the pin for both of us. will do?
link
now that's an AIA we can all support!
lOVE IT SOMEONE STOLE THERE HANDLE....OR DO YOU THINK IT WAS THE OTHER WAY AROUND. I SEE A LAW SUIT IN THE NOT TO DISTANT FUTURE.
Mdlr Porn stars make more than Architects~
"...but SW, at the same time you have to recognize that the "join it and fix it" ain't working either. i almost never hear from anyone in the AIA that they do hear the concerns of non-members, and their reasons for not joining. part of my, and many others, unwillingness to join is partly an effort to say to the AIA when you recognize the problem[s] and pose solutions to fix it, then i we would reconsider."
stourley -
you're engaging in a chicken-egg rhetorical argument that isn't going to do any good, ultimately. why? because we only have one organization with any real clout (all apologies to the sara group). and we need one main organization to deal with issues on the national level. think about it - how much clout would the lawyers have if there were more than one group representing them (the bar)? and, as a matter of comparison, they have more than 99% of all lawyers as members. we have a little over 60%.
the other thing i wanted to address is your second sentance - that no one from aia hears your concerns. well, here's your chance.
currently, i'm on a seven person advisory committee for the young architects forum group within aia. basically, we cover anyone within the first 10 years of becoming registered. between our membership group and the associates, we represent about 40% of the entire aia membership. when i say we have the attention and ear of the national leadership of the aia, i'm not bragging, but just trying give you a sense where i can put your comments. my own views on the aia are very similar to quizzical - participating at the national level has had some very real rewards and opportunities. but, like everyone else, i'm just a volunteer who still has to pay the bills doing real work.
so, here's the question for you (or anyone else) - give me some specific suggestions of what you'd like the aia to do better at the national level and i will, at the end of the day tomorrow, make sure that they are given to the current president (rk stewart) by that evening. and, if you've got something that the young architects group can work on, let me know that as well and i'll put in front of our committee by the end of the day. basically, i'm promising to take what's suggested and make sure the people who can do something about it at least see it.
real, viable suggestions (and there are some above) are what interests me - none of this 'make us more money' general whining.
so - floor's open....
I would say the AIA should stand up and take over the NCARB. Take all the money their stashing away and put it into the AIAorganization,
so they are propery funded. I could never figure out why they functioned as two seperate institutions.
It could be based upon a number of comments made in this site.
Number one: How can it take so long to get an answer out of them?
Laru-
Thanks for being our voice at the top! this means something.
COTE seems to be where the action is these days. Just cause the AIA has signed onto Architecture 2030 doesn't mean it's getting the message across. The AIA needs to bang some heads against the concrete to shake the majority of the membership into acting.
So they spent $$$ on the advertising campaign telling the public that architects are good. They must shift the message to emphasize that architects have the only skills to design sustainable buildings, period. No joe blow contractor/construction manager/design-build has anything that can touch the bread and butter sustainable work that even an average LEED-AP architect can produce. (And no engineer can save as much energy with the latest and greatest HVAC system as a properly designed, sited, insulated and windowed building).
SO WHY AM I NOT HEARING THIS MESSAGE ON THE RADIO??????
Action:
The YAF can join with COTE to spread the message and figure out how we change our practices to save the planet. Most of the talent and passion for sustainable design is in the associate category/recently licensed and haven't learned enough bad habits to be jaded about making radical changes.
Another action for YAF:
Beat up NCARB to include sustainable design in the ARE4.0 and in IDP. WHY IS SUSTAINABILITY NOT A REQUIRED SKILL FOR OUR INTERNSHIP OR OUR LICENSE?
Drop me an email if you want more input along these lines...
ps- I'm going to post this on the COTE-Listserve to get the message to Washington in stereo. I'll report back on what responses I get.
my green tint is starting to fade and the bulging muscles are relaxing, now I just have to figure out what to do with my shredded clothing.
WHY ISN'T GOOD DESIGN A REQUIRED SKILL FOR OUR INTERNSHIP OR OUR LICENSE?
you are assuming that an agreement exists as to what constitutes "good" design. much of what is heralded these days makes me throw up a little.
fiscal responsibility is an issue for me. spending money on advertising, that on it's face suggests that the only architect the public should consider is one that is AIA affiliated.
perhaps a question like this; why is it that movie stars, television shows, and movies do a better job of [mis]representing our profession than the AIA. what i mean is, those things seemingly connect with a receptive populace and spread a message that the public sees as a "correct" reflection of what it is we do. what and how can the AIA seek to change that?
what kind of check and balance should the AIA provide to NCARB?
why are emerging professionals forgotten in the AIA? we have constantly complained, often to deaf ears, that NCARB is unresponsive to criticisms, and the AIA unwilling to help provide a voice for our concerns.
IDP forces interns to meet standards before taking the ARE, but where is the mechanism that forces licensed professionals to provide interns the required components for IDP? the AIA and some states i believe, say that licensed professionals must get so many learning units every year in order to be a member, so why not do the same when it comes to interns and IDP? if you as an AIA member cannot document that you have provided an intern in your office with an anticipated number of units towards their IDP training, then you lose your membership. doing this will prevent the whitewashing and out right lies that many have to succumb to in order to sit for the ARE.
some good questions - kind of interesting that they seem to be gravitating more around ncarb and it's relationship to aia.
i should point out - i'm not going to 'pass judgement' on the questions and screen them out. what you guys put down, i'm passing along. think of it more as a neutral filter.
that said, i'll offer a couple of opinions about what i know the relationship between aia and ncarb to be (and this is very little in the grand scheme of things - there are others out there much more credible and knowledgeable than me).
first - if you think aia is dysfunctional, try ncarb out. it'll make the lapel guys look like microsoft or something. basically, ncarb is very protective of it's turf. it works with aia, naab, acsa, and other groups, but is very clear that it is its own being. my own opinion, and i'm really curious as to what the aia brass says about this, is that aia is trying to be more assertive about influencing ncarb policy. one example is the 'emerging professionals companion' that the aia produced a couple of years ago which allows interns to gain IDP credits themselves (via online). you can see more about it at http://www.epcompanion.org basically, it's trying to switch credit towards evidence based learning (what you actually know) versus the 'ass in the seat' time based method. aia is pushing ncarb fairly hard to make more IDP credits available this way and i think, in the next couple of years, that you'll see ncarb roll a bit on this and make most of the idp credits available through self-directed education. none of this replaces the responsibility that a firm owes to training it's interns and i really like the notion of putting much more responsibility back on the principals to make sure that the interns get the exposure they need (losing your membership being one stick to wield).
stourley - can you expand on one comment - 'why are emerging professionals forgotten in aia?' is it solely tied to the following comment about the aia not pressuring ncarb to do more or is there some other basis, because i don't think, at all, that the aia has forgotten emerging professionals. quite the contrary. they are perfectly willing to devote whatever resources we tend to ask for - we usually have a harder time figuring out what the top priorities are of our membership. so, assume that money (to a degree) isn't the issue. what else is aia doing that is neglecting the needs of emerging professionals?
in our local aia chapter, there are various subcommittees devoted to the interests of young professionals. the problem is that when issues are brought from the various subcommittees to the executive committee, the local chapter is absolutely unwilling to take action if it involves a political stand. this has come up multiple times. the excomm applauds our efforts, but will not grant adequate funding and has in fact gone to some lengths to obstruct some of the programs and presentations put forward by the subcommittees. i realize this a very specific problem within our chapter, but i also believe it is emblematic of a larger disconnect between young professionals and the old guard at the top. the old guard would like to believe they are being progressive by lending an ear, but it really doesn't mean anything if they cannot take action.
My initial thought was based on me being frustrated with having to educate every single new client about what it is we as Architects do....
Everyone thinks they know what we do, then you roll out a set of CD's and explain why you did these drawings and then they're like, "oh...."
I wish there was a way for the education level of clients to improve so you don't have to start at square one with every project... it would be nice from time to time to have a client who has an understanding of what we do and why we are asking them to pay us all this money...
I'm out sick for a day and its interesting where the thread went.... I like most people feel NCARB is like the mafia of the architecture profession, but i have never seen or thought that AIA could benefit from influencing NCARB policy.... it just seems weird to think that two seemingly dysfunctional organizations will somehow improve if you combine the two...
besides the owner, our firm has two other registered RQTEX. One let her aia membership lapse and the other guy has no interest in joining.
investigation, take a look at my post above... we were experiencing some similar problems regarding oversight from the local aia excom... as a result our emerging architects group is set up as a separate organization... thus, we can do what we want without any meddling from the old guys... depending on the make-up with the excom we've been drifted closer to or further away from the aia... sometimes we have their full support, sometimes they want to distance themselves (particularly in politically sensitive topics)... some of our events are paid for with money that the aia allocated for us in their budget, some stuff is paid for with a grant that we got from aia national, and some is paid for with sponsorships... early on, some of the stuff was even self funded by interested members... after our first year or so of existence the local aia seemed to realize the value that we've been bringing to the architectural community and they've been more supportive... of course there is also the issue that sometimes they try to take credit for some of the stuff that we do, but that's a whole other discussion...
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.