By Neil Turner, Director, Howarth Litchfield
I read with interest that George Clark, architect (and TV presenter) has recently argued against the RIBA campaign for greater protection of the title and role of ‘architect.’
At first, it looks like a slightly sensational headline, but I understand the point that he makes. He advocates the use of architects but only because of the benefits that they can bring to a project or service. RIBA is campaigning hard for reserving ‘critical activities to those who are regulated’.
However, throughout my career I have come across lots of people who purport to be designers, architectural designer, arkitects – yes even spelling it differently – to design buildings without being registered or trained.
An architect spends a minimum seven years to train and qualify, learning a huge number of skills, knowledge and talents; so that they can advise clients, people and bodies on our built environment. An architect is qualified and they must take mandatory courses, re-training constantly to satisfy yearly requirements. This is real value.
Registration and protection of the title is important. Just like when you see a doctor, an accountant or lawyer you want the re-assurance that they are highly skilled professionals, who maintain their knowledge.
When I bid for work, I am often asked for my qualifications, skills and CV, so I don’t see why more mandatory compliance is a problem. I have written before that many European countries require a competent person – an architect – to sign off planning permissions.
What is wrong with insisting that certain projects require an architect or review bodies to have greater say on planning applications – using skilled architects and other professionals, to increase design quality.
I think the public is more interested in design than ever, partly due to the large number of TV shows. But what they don’t see is that producing is building is far more than good design.
A building project needs cost control, structures, an environmental approach, detail and material knowledge. Many architects focus on the design and lack the experience to fully detail projects. Contract administration is a further skill on traditional projects and there is great enjoyment in working with contractors to turn a design into a built form, on time and to an agreed budget.
So, I applaud the RIBA for trying to protect the role and status. We can’t force people to use an architect, but I think we can make if far clearer on the advantages of using a skilled professional on a project.
The role has changed through my career, and I think greater emphasis is needed on the training of architects to include business, cost control and technical aspects, besides the artistic and creative abilities.
So, when you have a building project, it should be your first decision to employ a professional team and especially the architect. I am bound to say that, of course. But I strongly believe the benefits of the accreditation offer protection for the public, clients and companies in all aspects of work.
Neil Turner, Director, Howarth Litchfield can be contacted on 0191 384 9470 or email n.turner@hlpuk.com
www.howarthlitchfield.com