Architects of Public Knowledge
It took a lesson learned outside the country and an MBA project many years later for me to realize, for the most part, the general public has no idea what an architect does. Not only that, but they have no idea where or how best to find one, let alone how to buy from one. Years ago when I was new to the profession and naïve, someone would ask what I did and I would say, “I’m an architect!” The most common response: ‘so you draw buildings’? Well, yes, kind of, but not really. A close second was, “Neat. I always wanted to be one, but I was not very good at math.” I think a lot of architects chose the profession out of an allergy to math.
My feelings were hurt; the profession of architect has been around thousands of years, unlike say, software developer. A survey should be taken to see what people believe architects do. Then I realized a lot of jobs could be cryptic: do people think lawyers create law? Do people think engineers operate engines?
The options to combat ignorance are two: aggressive public education, like a marketing campaign; or diligently embed architects in crucial societal activities where expertise will be valued regardless of title. People will have no excuse to learn and appreciate the profession when they interact with one every day.
Architects expect something magical to happen when they announce what they do for a living. Truthfully, people generally hold architects in high esteem, especially outside the U.S. where the profession is often seen as equivalent to an attorney or doctor, despite their general ignorance with the profession. It is a wholesome career—not mercenary or predatory, creation-driven, service-oriented and beneficial to society. Architects help make new things and do not prey off ignorance or information manipulations, inflict pain, or affect anyone’s credit rating or legal status.
On an easy-to-understand, dictionary level, and maybe put too simplistically, architects design space. Architects do this by collating a user’s expressed needs, safety requirements (like building codes), human habitation needs and environmental issues, and then wrapping that in a container, a structure, that relates to the user on a functional and aesthetic level. The design of the container, usually a building, is not the endgame (it’s about the space), but to get to that conclusion a new set of design challenges must be addressed, which include collating building technologies, understanding financial constraints, and the construction process. Embedded in designing both the space and its container are the soft skills required to achieve these two goals: team building, coordinating the work of a group, negotiation, selling, communicating a concept, visualizing ideas, drawing, writing and diplomatically debating and defending a position. An architect must be adept at most, if not all, of the above.
Believe it or not, in the U.S. an architect is usually more highly valued as part of any team (like a real estate team) that does architectural services as part of its repertoire, i.e. “bundled”, than as an individually licensed professional with his own shingle. Maybe this has to do with spheres of influence: the more people affected, the greater value. As a teammate services are not questioned and value is inherent. This is reinforced daily by my ongoing relationship as part of a design-build practice. No wonder architects are marginalized in pay and not valued in our construction process—because few citizens are aware of an architect’s real value, especially the value that cannot be assigned a dollar value and compared to other apples and oranges in the world of commerce.
I believe architects, as value contributors to economics and society, are probably best when utilized behind the scenes. Architects should buy on the business a bit, and sell on the creativity. Instead of expending energy to educate the public, we should get to work. Volunteer, run for office, start a company, ascend the corporate ranks, organize, mobilize, manage—like some brand of Project Mayhem from Fight Club. Do not put the architectural service on a platter and ask, ‘what is it worth to you’. No, join other industries. Shape things in different ways. Deploy. To paraphrase David Kelley from IDEO, infuse everything with design thinking. Architects are more powerful as singular entities (within a heterogeneous team) than as a pack (of homogenous architects). They are less domineering and intimidating that way, more able to be accepted. Architects are idea-people, synthesizers. Who could not use that?
I believe architects and those with this knowledge base have extreme power to influence anything they touch in a positive way. Architects are not perfect, but if nothing else, better aesthetics anywhere in our environment is an improvement. If there is anything this world needs, it is more beauty and less banality, more people to think thoughtfully about the world around us and help implement other’s visions. Yes, the general public does not know, or possibly even value, design. So what. Architects should get to work on that. There are ways to elevate this and change the status quo. And to do it subtly, quietly, humbly.
