September 23, 2008

Architecture is a service that creates value — not a commodity — and fees should reflect that

RAIC Corner

Jon Hobbs, FRAIC

“Unlike a car that can be road-tested before you sign
on the dotted line, a new [building or renovation project] requires paying thousands of dollars before you know what you’re getting.” — Washington Post.

The calculation of architectural fees can be complex and daunting especially for new clients or building owners.

Following the Second World War, there was a construction boom in Canada. At that time, expectations and roles within the design and construction industry were consistent and clearly understood.

Architectural services for any building project were very much the same, and generally speaking, builders or general contractors performed well and in a consistent manner based on a standard set of customs and procedures. Therefore, it was relatively easy to identify a typical fee for architectural services for a particular building type. A schedule of fees for architectural services based on a percentage of the construction cost was widely accepted and used.

Today the situation has changed! And it is necessary to examine every single building project to determine the appropriate fee for architectural services. The practice of architecture and the provision of architectural services have evolved considerably.

The architect and client must agree upon a wide range of project requirements and negotiate a fee based on each unique project. Some of the reasons for this include:

•Widely different authorities Having Jurisdiction and approval processes based on building type and jurisdiction

•Increasingly complex and sophisticated building systems and technologies;

•Different forms of project delivery

•Numerous additional specialists to consult and co-ordinate

•Additional (or reduced) levels of services depending on each project and its method of delivery

•Wide variations in construction costs across Canada

•New project design and documentation requirements such as Building Information Modeling

•New demands for rapid construction and tight schedules

•Greater overhead costs as a result of extensive and a complex “requests for proposals” process and other marketing expenses

•Builders of varying capabilities who are now more litigious

Extensive submissions at various stages of project documentation.

Because of these significant changes, it is impossible to assume that the same professional fee will be appropriate for all projects even if the projects are of the same size and the same building type.

The Royal Architectural Institute of Canada has recently appointed a Task Force to develop guidelines to help architects and their clients negotiate appropriate fees for architectural services.

One of the main problems in negotiating appropriate architectural fees is that many owners and clients still do not recognize the value architects bring to a building project.

Many regard architecture and building design as a commodity rather than a service that creates value. In these days of global competition and endless opportunities, the architecture profession needs to educate Canadians and building owners (and indeed all participants in the construction industry) about architecture and the value architects bring when they design durable, innovative, functional, beautiful buildings that are readily constructible and highly competitive in the real estate market.

As the Architects Council of Europe so aptly states:

“Architecture is about ‘idea’ given shape in built form. Idea goes further than the optimum assembly of construction components. Architecture is about environmental quality: warmth and coolness, light and shade: about human scale, about appropriate use of building materials and structure.

It is also about social appropriateness: spaces which support people living or working together or being alone, and which foster and given meaning to peoples’ tasks or activities. It is about ecological and functional appropriateness: long life sustainable materials, low energy consumption, flexibility in use. It is about economic appropriateness: value for money in a cost conscious age. It is about aesthetic appropriateness: portion of form and line, solid and void, silhouette; and about cultural expression or appropriateness: respect for city or landscape context, a vision for the future or an expression of respect for the past.”

To help the public and clients understand the importance of architecture, the RAIC has revised its part of its mission statement and communication theme to: “Architecture Matters.”

And I might add that because Architecture Matters, architects should be also properly compensated for the value they create.

Jon Hobbs, FRAIC, is Executive Director of the The Royal Architectural Institute of Canada

Print | Email | Comment