« H-1B Visas: Necessary? Or Evil? | Main | What issues are important to you? »

What does the term architect mean to you?

Over the last few weeks numerous publications like the Washington Post have run news stories about “architects.” But instead of covering the work of Santiago Calatrava or Antoine Predock, the stories are about politicians or members of the Bush administration, people like outgoing White House adviser Karl Rove, who some have called the “architect” of Bush’s campaign triumphs.

In these cases, the media uses the term architect to refer to an individual who serves as a strategic leader in meeting organizational goals. But it’s not only in the realm of politics: in recent years the hi-tech industry has embraced the titles architect and engineer to identify lead project managers. In these instances the “architects” in question are not designing buildings or communities, but software programs and computer networks. And an anybody who’s followed the controversy over the next Architect of the Capitol (where some in Congress are suggesting that the next Architect need not be an architect) knows, not everybody believes that titles matter. Webster’s II New College Dictionary defines “architect” as: “One who designs and oversees the construction of large structures, such as buildings, bridges, or ships.”  A second definition labels an “architect” as “a planner or deviser.”  The first definition fits the legal definition of an architect held by every architectural licensing board in the country; however, the second description speaks to how the media and others have appropriated the term to describe non-architect positions.

Has the term architect been altered too much to adequately and sufficiently explain what architects do as members of a profession?  Or does the public understand what these different interpretations of the word “architect” mean? (Clients aren’t asking Karl Rove to design their houses, after all.)  And do federal, state, and local governments need to play a stronger role in enforcing the integrity of the title architect?

Tell us what you think.

Posted by AIA Government Affairs on August 30, 2007 4:30 PM |

Comments (72)

Bruce Rich:
I've been a member of the AIA for 33 years. I have designed hundreds of millions of dollars worth of buildings. More than most, I should be qualified to say what an "architect" is. Here it goes: (1) An architect is someone who must do whatever an unlicensed person, often without a college degree, tells him or her to do. That person is called a building inspector. (2) An architect is someone who can be responsible for fifty employees, a $50 million dollar building, and 500 change orders. For this, the architect earns about 1/3 of what other professionals with far less responsibilty earn.

Posted by Bruce Rich | August 30, 2007 7:07 PM

Posted on August 30, 2007 19:07

Brian Johnson:
I have been troubled by the increasing use of "architect" to describe jobs in software and engineering. One sees "architect" advertised in job ads, and upon further reading, the position is for software design. I think this diminishes the value and distinction of the word "architect".

Posted by Brian Johnson | August 30, 2007 7:37 PM

Posted on August 30, 2007 19:37

Gladys Margarita Diaz:
This debate focuses on our roles in 21st Century civilization. Do we remain the effect of our clients, waiting to be hired to design a project? Or do we cause our own projects: do we seek to initiate them by being more, doing more. First, one must explore the root of the word 'architect'. The first part comes from the Greek, ARCHI - akin to arch (beginning), árchos l(leader), árchein (to be the first, command) Also: a combining form with the general sense “first, principal,” that is prefixed to nouns denoting things that are earliest, most basic, or bottommost (archiblast; architrave); or denoting individuals who direct or have precedence or authority over others of their class, usually named by the base noun (archenemy;architect). (from the Random House Unabridged Dictionary) The word tektōn means builder, craftsman. So, if one follows this etymology, the term architect designates the leader, the master builder. But why limit ourselves to building structures? In the 21st century we can expand the universe of responsibilities a 'traditional' architect may have: to not only build buildings, but to build cities, to build our civilization towards environmental sanity and peace. We as architects envision the future, and make it reality. Of all the arts, we are the ones who must confront matter, energy, space and time and address the needs of human existence, while communicating aesthetics in our compositions. Our visions are tempered by the reality of the physical world - gravity, heat, moisture, cold, etc. I am an architect: I see how things are, and project how they could be. I know how to make an environment so others can achieve their goals with it. I am not afraid to handle the challenge of our physical universe, take charge and do what it takes to make the change, and endure the process of change until the completion of what was once two dimensions, is now in three, so it can be experienced spiritually, intellectually and physically by others and I have solved a problem well. I am proud to be an architect, expanding my role every day towards the creation of a better world.

Posted by Gladys Margarita Diaz | August 30, 2007 9:19 PM

Posted on August 30, 2007 21:19

David N. Hauseman:
To me an architect is the leader of the construction process. People like to compare architects to other professionals like attroneys or accountants, but I feel the best comparison is to that of a conductor of an orchestra. An architect is a leader who understands what the end result is suppose to be like look or sound like. The architect has a number of different professionals like an orchestra, with each section needing to inter-react with each other. One can not let all groups play or one would only have noise. Sometimes one section needs to take the lead and another time other sections will lead. That is the way the entire design and construction process works. We have archtitects who are great designers, others who ar egreat detailers and others who know construction and program management. We are the Master Builders and we need to reclaim that position.

Posted by David N. Hauseman | August 30, 2007 10:06 PM

Posted on August 30, 2007 22:06

Milton Gregory Grew, AIA:
When it comes to our profession I believe the term architect means many things. In many ways architects have limited themselves and the meaning of the term to simply designer or planner. To me an architect is a blending of an artist, designer, historian, constructor, advisor, problem solver, advocate, technologist and a few others. When these characteristics are blended, the result are buildings and places that appeal to our senses, raise our awareness, enrich us, and very practically serve their purpose. I know many architects who don't really want to be all that it takes to be that well-rounded architect but I don't think they enjoy their work as much as I do.

Posted by Milton Gregory Grew, AIA | August 30, 2007 10:55 PM

Posted on August 30, 2007 22:55

Robert Schmid, AIA, CSI, NCARB:
Since the dictionary defines Architect to include people like Karl Rove, well OK. What I am against are people like the gentleman in Aspen, CO who called himself an "Architect" while running for city council. He only holds a non-professional bachelor degree. Colorado issued a cease and decist letter, he threatened to sue and Colorado backed down.

Posted by Robert Schmid, AIA, CSI, NCARB | August 30, 2007 11:19 PM

Posted on August 30, 2007 23:19

Karl Hartnack:
I like the definition I found on Wikipedia which is in part: "The word "architect" (Latin: architectus) derives from the Greek arkhitekton (arkhi (chief) + tekton (builder))"). In the broadest sense an architect is a person who translates the user's needs into physical, built solution." It's a convenient term. I have had people, who upon hearing that I am an architect ask me "what kind?" In the future, as the term is used even more broadly, we may have to define "what kind."

Posted by Karl Hartnack | August 31, 2007 3:28 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 03:28

Howard Wong, AIA:
We should feel flattered. The Profession of Architecture needs to expand its prowess to fulfill the expectations of Society---all knowing in planning, politics, esthetics, art, culture, history, building, technology.... Throughout humanity's history, the Architect often held a position of societal power. In the novel/movie "The Fountainhead", the heroic/egocentric Architect Howard Roark does fulfill a fanciful vacuum that society yearns for. Perhaps, the AIA should hire Karl Rove to shape the profession's imagery. Of course, as a group, we can first invigorate our formal/continuing education.

Posted by Howard Wong, AIA | August 31, 2007 3:49 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 03:49

James Deane:
The blog fails to distinguish Architect with architect. The capitalisation making the word a proper noun. Grammar aside, legislating the word architect to explain our profession represents our collective failure to define our role in a way the public can understand. Would anyone suggest that we would have a positive outcome from punishing someone using the phrase 'sofware architect' or would we be seen as being petty and small minded? Embrace the wider definition as it to brings meaning to our profession. When we find an individual offering architectural services who is not an Architect, action must be taken to prevent harm to the public but I believe we and the public can understand the difference, after all Karl Rove as the architect of a campaign is clearly not building a physical structure....

Posted by James Deane | August 31, 2007 4:38 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 04:38

Edd Brashear, AIA:
The use of the term Architect is used more frequently for several applications and events--This serves 2 purposes one that is "positive" is that the term ARCHITECT is in the public awareness, the "negative" is that the increased use of the term actually dilutes the uniqueness and effort to become an Architect. a good anology would be if it becomes popular to use the term Physician in the same context. i.e. Bill Gates has become the PHYSICIAN of the latest computer program OR Even better, Karl Rove has become the "ATTORNEY" of the Presidents plan for recovery of a disaster, You can bet that the Attorneys would rise up in mass to prevent the dilution of their Professions title. The path to become and use the "legal" term ARCHITECT is long and challenging and one should not be able to use the title "officially" without formally earning the title.

Posted by Edd Brashear, AIA | August 31, 2007 7:21 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 07:21

Joseph Nappi:
While attending college and taking the required Architectural courses my professor insisted that the entire class read 'Vitruvius'. In my opinion the true definition of an Architect is noted in Vitruvius Ten Books on Architecture which can be found in Chapter 1. NO other definition regarding an architect is more eloquentley put as 'Vitruvius' explains: "The Architect" should be equipped with knowledge of many branches of study and varied kinds of learning, for it is by his judgement that ALL work done by the other arts is put to the test".

Posted by Joseph Nappi | August 31, 2007 7:26 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 07:26

Jorge Escobar:
What an Architect is has no comparison with none of the definitions mentioned in the article. The Architect is a very specialized professional. He was educated in three main fields: science, arts, construction techniques. However all this knowledge is linked to main concerns about the users of his work: for safe, esthetic and efficient human activities in harmony with the environment.

Posted by Jorge Escobar | August 31, 2007 8:06 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 08:06

Peter Pivko, AIA:
PETER C. PIVKO, AIA 6 Greenwood Drive, Millburn, NJ 07041 ppivko@comcast.net ________________________________________ April 18, 2006 The American Institute of Architects 1735 New York Ave., NW Washington, DC 20006-5292 An open letter to the AIA Re: The dilution of the profession What has happened to our profession? Not long ago we were the master builders. We were absolutely responsible for the design and construction of major structures throughout the world (at times with our lives). Over time, new professions developed that chipped away at our scope of responsibilities. Interior Designers took away the design of interiors, furnishings and space planning. Landscape architects took away the design of the land. Civil Engineers took away the design of the site. Construction Managers took away our abilities to manage the building process. Building Envelope consultants took away our ability to design the exterior details of buildings. Roofing Consultants well….. you get the picture? What started this dialogue was my attempt to enter the job market. When I logged onto various internet jobsites and entered the word ‘architect’ I couldn’t find a single job amongst the myriads of variations of the use of the word. So I started collecting job descriptions that had the word architect but in reality had absolutely nothing to do with architecture. I went back to the definition of architect and these are but 2 examples I found: Dictionary.com defines architect as: 1. One who designs and supervises the construction of buildings or other large structures. 2. One that plans or devises: a country considered to be the chief architect of war in the Middle East. 3. [Latin architectus, from Greek arkhitekt n : arkhi-, archi- + tekt n, builder; see teks- in Indo-European Roots.] and, According to Webster’s Dictionary ar•chi•tect 'är-k&-"tekt (noun) Etymology: Middle French architecte, from Latin architectus, from Greek architektOn master builder, from archi- + tektOn builder, carpenter -- more at TECHNICAL 1 : a person who designs buildings and advises in their construction I am very concerned that the word architect has lost its meaning in society and has been completely eroded from its origins. Examples of current ‘architect’ job advertisements? Editorial Comments italicized ABINITIO ARCHITECT Architect from Italy .net or JAVA Architect, SOA, XML, SD, HTML, GRASP, UML lots of post graduate degrees 30831- Architect only a number Application Architect Master format architect Applications Architect An Architect that doesn't apply Architect, J2EE Junior architect that failed Associate IT Architect - IS / IOD What is he? Barr-Software Architect 5 Must be a new CAD program BI Architect - BCS BS architect? Business Architect (I.T. Planner) Architects don't know business, it's a hobby Business Development Architect Is he/she an architect? Business Intelligence Infrastructure Architect-BCS Finally an architect that works for the CIA Business Resilience Architect The hell with bankruptcies C++ Trading Systems Architect/Product Manager Please give him a B- CCIE-Senior Cisco-Security Architecture Engineer must work night shift CDI Solution Architect BCS Doesn’t produce drawings anymore just CD's BS? CHIEF ARCHITECT oversees a whole bunch of Indians Content Management Specialist/Architect - AIS Some buildings have no content? Must be empty Data Warehouse Architect and ETL Developer Warehouse worker Datawarehouse Developer/Architect person that builds warehouses Decision Support Architect Indecisive Director, Business Architect business architects don't design EAI IT Specalist / Architect MDM Medical architect ENTERPRISE DATABASE ARCHITECT Trekkie job Enterprise Solution Architect the ultimate frontier job ERP Architect western architect FileNet Architect / Sr Workflow Developer office admin Genesys Developer/Architect another trekkie HP Open View Architect operable windows HR Solutions Architect hiring partner INFORMATION ARCHITECT kiosk attendant Information Architect - IA - Interaction Designer part time Infrastructure Architect plumber Intel/Windows Server Consolidation Technical Solution Architect curtain wall specialist IP Engineer/Architect Hmmm Java Architect caffeine freak Lead Architect pretty heavy stuff Linux Architect - Application Migration security issue Middleware Architect - BCS middle child is always problematic Netcool Impact Architect/Manager real hip ODW Solution Architect - BCS Should read BS? Operational Excellence Solutions Architect paramedic Payments Architect-Consultant-BCS What? Architecture is not a hobby? Do we actually get paid? PeopleSoft Technical Architect not a good manager PowerPC Linux Kernel Architect designs a bit at a time Principal Architect (Microcontrollers) finally a senior position SAP XI Architect Consultant electrically charged professional Senior Architect - FCS he does that too Senior Developer/Architect finally an architect hat builds something Senior Network Architect works for NBC Senior Scientist - Architect - PhD, Bayesian, domain expert must be residential Senior SQL Developer/Architect Do we have a need for a junior developer? Services Management Architect Hotel housekeeper Siebel Architect funny name for a firm Software Architect - Banking Industry I thought banking was hard currency Software Architect - Embedded Linux, ATSC, MPEG, C, MHP, Architect with a Linux Tattoo Software Cross Brand Services-Solutions Architect Anybody that pays the bills Sr. Business Systems Architect Architecture a business? Sr. PreSales Systems Engineer / Customer Solutions Architect If he finds the solution does he become an engineer? Storage and Backup Architect I thought we had temps top do that? Technical Architect Ok Technical Architecture - Manager - Health Plan architects get sick a lot Technical Security Architect Got to protect those details Technical Team Leader / IT Architect/Specialist we are getting warmer Technology Architect You must keep up Unix Server Consolidation Technical Solution Architect Consensus builder Validation Architect - Austin, TX - #516105 reminds everybody who is an architect WebMethods Architect A real specialty Websphere Architect Outer space architecture, the new frontier Websphere Commerce Developer OR Architect not too choosy WebSphere Portal Specialist OR Architect architects are multi-talented Wireless IT Architect J2ME/J2EE can design from any Starbuck location What can we do? We should register the name and prevent the prostitution of the title of the second oldest profession and its further deterioration. If action is not taken we will become known as ‘lower case a’ architects. A concerned Architect Sincerely, Peter C. Pivko, AIA Cc: Letters to the Editor, Architectural Record

Posted by Peter Pivko, AIA | August 31, 2007 8:08 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 08:08

Jerry Bienes:
Again as above it is not what architect means but what it does not mean. Am disturbed by use of word for computer data related functions. The word architect is too widely used in this sense.

Posted by Jerry Bienes | August 31, 2007 8:12 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 08:12

tim:
It's about time the AIA did something about the use of the title Architect for anyone who builds anything, including computer networks. If our own orginization is going to require us to spend 10 years working towards the title of Architect (6yr schoool,3yr intern, 2yrs exams) it should not be a title that anyone can just attach to their name.

Posted by tim | August 31, 2007 8:24 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 08:24

James Harvley:
I believe this whole mess started several years ago when rock star Little Richard proclaimed himself as the "Architect of Rock and Roll". Next time a city wants to build their own Rock and Roll Music Hall of Fame building, we should let him design it.

Posted by James Harvley | August 31, 2007 9:10 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 09:10

Michael Huslage:
Unlike political advisors, architects have a code of ethics which, I would say, most follow. How many architects do you see "retiring" when public opinion gets dicey? The media isn't doing the profession of architecture any favor by refering to these politicos like Karl Rove as "architects". How about insulting other professions by calling them choreographers, orchestrators, inventors or engineers?! How about calling them what they are? I'll let each individual fill in that blank.

Posted by Michael Huslage | August 31, 2007 9:15 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 09:15

Anonymous:
Or maybe the term Architect, as it is loosely bandied about, is in reference to anyone who can orhestrate or build a concept, idea, program, or plan of attack. Whether it is a physical 3 dimensional object or a wonderful software program should not really matter - the term "they" use when invoking the title Architect is a complement that pays homage to what "we" do. And, very simply, one is a proper noun and the other is a verb, or something like that. Petty & egotistical will always be our downfall. Also, Amen to Bruce Rich's post.

Posted by Anonymous | August 31, 2007 9:27 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 09:27

Joseph A Buchek:
I too am troubled and annoyed by the increasing use of the word "Architect" to describe political figures, athletic directors and other suspicious characters. As all of us Licensed Architects know, it is a long and winding road to get to the point when we can finally, legally, call ourselves Architects. To see the word so lightly tossed about in the press is a serious afront to our profession. Perhaps this is an area where the American Institute of Architects could act to have the dictionary definition changed and impose serious penalties on authors and publications which misuse the word.

Posted by Joseph A Buchek | August 31, 2007 9:48 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 09:48

Peter Herman:
Architect: Professional chump. A marginalized, underpaid, increasingly unnecessary part of the building process.

Posted by Peter Herman | August 31, 2007 10:15 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 10:15

Chet Orciuch:
In a perfect world an "Architect" would be the registered professional who makes buildings happen. Karl Rove would be the "architect" who takes his small "a" and gets the hell out of the way.

Posted by Chet Orciuch | August 31, 2007 11:14 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 11:14

Lyle Sheneman AIA:
Since all 50 states have laws that govern the conduct of an architect, and the use of the title, I think those using the term to describe somebody that is not a licensed architect by the title 'architect' should be taken to task for it. Why does the AIA sit idly by? Maybe ArchiPAC should address this as they meet with our legislators.

Posted by Lyle Sheneman AIA | August 31, 2007 11:15 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 11:15

Jamie Stitzel:
I would like to quote the California Architects Board (the licensing entity in the state) definition of an architect: "As used in this chapter, architect means a person who is licensed to practice architecture ..." I would say while we all can agree with the dictionary definition of an architect... we must hold out the term to also define that an "architect" is a licensed professional. The purpose of the title is to communicate the fact that the individual is skilled and knowledgeable in the profession and practice of architecture. The public should be made aware of weight the title carries with it. The term "Architect" should not be permitted to be used so casually. Anyone with a strategy or plan should have the right to explain they are doing great work, but they should be able to describe with with a more appropriate term(s).

Posted by Jamie Stitzel | August 31, 2007 11:24 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 11:24

Jamie Stitzel:
I would like to quote the California Architects Board (the licensing entity in the state) definition of an architect: "As used in this chapter, architect means a person who is licensed to practice architecture ..." I would say while we all can agree with the dictionary definition of an architect... we must hold out the term to also define that an "architect" is a licensed professional. The purpose of the title is to communicate the fact that the individual is skilled and knowledgeable in the profession and practice of architecture. The public should be made aware of weight the title carries with it. The term "Architect" should not be permitted to be used so casually. Anyone with a strategy or plan should have the right to explain they are doing great work, but they should be able to describe with with a more appropriate term(s).

Posted by Jamie Stitzel | August 31, 2007 11:25 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 11:25

Lee E. Martin, AIA, LEED AP:
An architect is the person on a building team with the broadest perspective of the importance of the finished product to the owner, various end users and to society in general. By statute, the architect has obligations to each of those groups of people. By tradition and inclination, s/he has obligations to all who have come before and all who will come after those involved in the project durings its design and construction. While the owner is concerned with functionality, and the contractor with constructability, the architect determines, within the constraints of budget, regulation, schedule and other project parameters, how a particular project will fit contextually into the fabric of a community, and all of history up to that point in time. When that job is done well, the process will have enlightened other building team members, and the product will improve the community in which it is placed.

Posted by Lee E. Martin, AIA, LEED AP | August 31, 2007 11:28 AM

Posted on August 31, 2007 11:28

James Knight:
Architects need to do what Realtors did years ago and trademark the name. Then it's use is limited by how we define it's application and like everything of importance in this wonderful country becomes fair game for the lwayers to sort it out with who ever is using it incorrectly.

Posted by James Knight | August 31, 2007 12:18 PM

Posted on August 31, 2007 12:18

Herb Hacker AIA:
I think that the State Boards regulating the profession of "Architect" should write letters to those using architect in another context to cease or face sanctions under that judridictions powers. Might even be a money-maker.

Posted by Herb Hacker AIA | August 31, 2007 1:02 PM

Posted on August 31, 2007 13:02

Peter Gerdin AIA:
The media overuses the word Architect, and frankly I'm a little sick of it. The AIA should have legal counsel notify the higher ups at all the major news networks, and tell them to stop using the word inappropriately, or face legal action.

Posted by Peter Gerdin AIA | August 31, 2007 1:26 PM

Posted on August 31, 2007 13:26

JEROME MORLEY LARSON SR AIA:
Architecture is the DESIGN OF SPACE FOR PEOPLE; the salon of a yacht is space on a small scale; the Golden Gate Bridge is space on a large scale; Bryant Park and Rockefeller Center are wonderful spaces of grand architecture; neither is a building. Space is percieved by light and movement; spaces are decorated to give a sense of scale appropriate to purpose, traditionally with abstracts of nature; these decorations are errouiously called the architecture, but are only a part of the experience. Movement through and between spaces defines them and their relationship with each other; this movement is along the natural axis created by binocular human beings, dictated by their natural balance of symmetry. Cheerful hospital rooms have twice the healing rates of drab; black jail cells incite violence, pink ones are calming; soaring gothic cathedrals scare the devil out of you, The human response to space is so critical that architects are licensed for the health safety and welfare of the public, and undergo rigid examination in the design of space to qualify; that the design has to keep the weather out, sustain a tolerable climate within and not collapse is necessary for the spatial design to function. ALL OF MAN'S INTERFERENCE WITH SPACE ON THE PLANET IS ARCHITECTURE, be it grading a road, planting a tree, laying out a city or building a building; all affects our perception of space and our environment; all needs superb design if we are to accomodate the phenominal wealth being accumulated from today's computer, communications revolution! We have abdicated our role and deserve losing our moniker; we must retake our responsibilities by becoming the developers of the environment and controlling the money; if we don't, the Planet is lost! Jerome Morley Larson Sr AIA

Posted by JEROME MORLEY LARSON SR AIA | August 31, 2007 3:05 PM

Posted on August 31, 2007 15:05

Anonymous:
An Architect is a sorry, pretentious loser, who kids himself that he is doing new, meaningful and "Challenging" work, all the while oblivious to the fact that our cities are getting uglier and that the public has lost interest in what we do. Is it any wonder we make a fraction of what other professionals earn. Look at the pretentious rubbish that gets published. And I'm talking about the photographs. Have you tried reading the sort of drivel that Architects try to write? And look at clowns like Daniel Libeskind and Peter Eisenman, both pretentious hypocrites who both hired other "architects" to design their apartments. What does that say about the status of the "star architects that get worshipped? - What it says very loudly is that the architects who buy into this nonsense are the sad, pathetic, low-earning fools that I mentioned above. Think of that the next time you look in the mirror and wonder why the public think the profession is full of idiots. It is because the people who manage to get all the attention ARE idiots.

Posted by Anonymous | August 31, 2007 4:18 PM

Posted on August 31, 2007 16:18

Myrle D. McLernon A.I.A.:
The term Architect is specific to what we do and how we act. To apply it to other forms of design is diluting the value of the word and our profession. I also agree with trademarking the word, this would solve the arguement permanently.

Posted by Myrle D. McLernon A.I.A. | August 31, 2007 4:20 PM

Posted on August 31, 2007 16:20

Craig E. Burgess, AIA, NCARB:
Unlike a former colleague of mine who seemed to take personal offense at the misuse of the word “architect” to describe someone outside our profession, I was never bothered much by the practice, as long as it was clear the person being described was performing tasks completely unrelated to building design. I even thought that one could make the case for it being a form of flattery, if one were willing to stretch the point. But now, hearing our profession’s appellation applied to someone as personally loathsome as Karl Rove, I find myself rethinking my attitude about the misappropriation of the term. I would prefer that there be no associative links of any kind between him and me. It’s funny, though, that the AIA’s The Angle should mention this practice right now. Our local NPR affiliate just began carrying a sponsor’s message from a new local program underwriter, a company that has raised the misuse of the word “architect” to a whole new level. Hearing the announcer speak the company’s 5-second “tag line,” the very sound of the sentence was so jarring to my ear that I can’t even recall the name of the firm or exactly what service they provide. They may have been an IT or networking outfit, or perhaps they provided some other sort of business-organization service. Whatever it is they do, their slogan makes the claim that they’re the ones to whom you should turn to “architect” a solution to your business needs. That’s right; they use the noun “architect” as a verb, in what I’m guessing is an attempt to coin what I’m sure they hope will be a trendy new synonym for the verb “design.” Unlike the co-opting of other nouns for use as trendy verbs (remember when “impact” was a noun?) this does more than simply offend my sense of proper grammar. Having perhaps a tiny bit of architectural “talent” (however you may choose to define that term), and having paid the heavy price of architecture school, internship and the A.R.E. in order to enjoy what cachet the term “architect” may carry, I find myself resenting anyone who attempts to gain any of that prestige, real or imagined, without enduring the same suffering and sacrifices. And this company is clearly trying to do that (not to mention it makes the radio announcer sound just plain stupid). As someone who relies on the precision of language to allow me to make sometimes subtle points, I never much liked the implications of the public acceptance of word misuse, or for that matter even the sound of it. Still, I never really believed in the Language Police. After all, history has proven that language is a living thing that evolves over time and geography. Trying to enforce proper usage, besides appearing petty, pedantic and being ultimately fruitless, seemed to me to be akin to a form of fascism, if a relatively benign one. Now I’m not so sure it’s a bad thing. In a world where many of our own clients view the required use of architects as a state-mandated necessary evil, and where we’re forced to fight to maintain our own relevancy, we really can’t afford to be further marginalized, even by something as apparently harmless as this practice.

Posted by Craig E. Burgess, AIA, NCARB | August 31, 2007 5:54 PM

Posted on August 31, 2007 17:54

David Curtis:
If you don't know what it means perhaps you should stop using the term? As long as the checks don't bounce I don't care what you all call yourselves. I don't care what you all call me. Send more checks please.

Posted by David Curtis | September 1, 2007 6:44 PM

Posted on September 1, 2007 18:44

David Curtis:
I think, I mis-read the question in my previous post. To me, it means slavery. The word architect primarily means: White, male slavery, and also, the thoughtful coordination of slave labor. Architects are artists who need 100 people to move the "brush" for them.

Posted by David Curtis | September 1, 2007 6:49 PM

Posted on September 1, 2007 18:49

Al Mjorud, AIA CID NCARB:
Every time I here the word "architect" used in such a manner I get a sick feeling in my gut, but how do you stop it.

Posted by Al Mjorud, AIA CID NCARB | September 2, 2007 11:53 AM

Posted on September 2, 2007 11:53

Robert L. Miller, FAIA:
Calling Rove an architect is nothing more or less than a use of metaphor, and insofar as it's being applied to a (once) powerful and (in some quarters) admired person, it might just be a compliment to our profession. The existence of spin doctors, tree surgeons, and American Idol judges seems to have detracted little from the authority of medicine or the bench, and if the House of Windsor self-destructs it can't blame Burger King. The information technology industry's appropriation of the architect title is more worrisome, but not nearly as high-handed as their hijacking of the word "technology." It's what dominant industries do, I guess; in the railroad age engine drivers became locomotive engineers, but the engineering profession seems to have survived that lbit of hyperbole unscathed. Yes, architects lag in public understanding and pay, but we're still better off than the declining guild of residential real estate brokers (capitalized, copyrighted or not) or the post-Enron accountants, who despite their importance are never invoked metaphorically and are even farther han we are from seeing themselves glamorized on cable ("CPA Miami"?). A phrase like "architect of policy," like the old "captain of industry," implies power and competence; it's now up to us to grab that tiny public spotlight to engage our audience in learning about what real archtiects do.

Posted by Robert L. Miller, FAIA | September 2, 2007 9:54 PM

Posted on September 2, 2007 21:54

John Hrivnak, AIA, MBA, NCARB:
Our profession has idly sat by while the terminology, the definition, the title that we continually earn is watered down. Ironically we actually do take action against "designers" who profess to be "architects" without having earned the license to do so while at the same time every IT person is now an architect, every other politician is an architect, and we wonder for yet another decade why the public still has no idea what we do or what value we bring. If you think its not getting confusing, try searching for career/job openings under the title "architect" and nearly all that you'll find are IT roles. We need to fight for the public we serve in a number of ways. 1. If it needs a permit (ostensibly for HSW reasons), it similarly needs an architect's stamp. 2. The above will create the supply/demand curve differences that will boost architect's pay. 3. In many states, only residences over 5,000 s.f. require an architect. Hmmm... HSW applies again... Are we as a profession so pompous that we only care about the Health, Safety and Welfare of the wealthy? If the homeowner can't afford 5,000 s.f or more are we saying we don't care if they're rights to reasonable HSW considerations are absent? 4. Do we want pseudo-architects to take over our profession? 5. Do we want IT people and (shudder) politicians to now be considered "architects?" 6. Are we ready for the equivalent of "domestic engineer", "sanitation engineer" and the like? I hope not. Architects are those entitled by law to use that title. I'd be in deep "stuff" if I were to claim that I was an MD or an attorney. I have an exacto blade - do you want me to do your surgery? Didn't think so... neither should the public be exposed to unlicensed or confusing (due to the dilution of the term Architect) unlicensed professionals in any profession.

Posted by John Hrivnak, AIA, MBA, NCARB | September 2, 2007 10:11 PM

Posted on September 2, 2007 22:11

Dirk De Vault, AIA:
While the American Institute of Architects contemplates the use or abuse of a profession's term, my definition of Architect takes on a completely unique half-tone twist. In this country, a person may be a licensed Architect as defined by the State (architectural licensing board) in which the person receives their initial registration. After the initial registration, without an NCARB certificate, there are few States that will grant the Architect reciprocity. I am an Architect in Maryland. I am not an Architect in Pennsylvania or other surrounding States. These States will not grant me a reciprocal license because I do not meet their licensing requirement - "Without an NAAB accredited degree, you are not eligible for reciprocal licensure in Pennsylvania." I am very proud of my title - Architect. I worked very hard for the honor of the title. I take the title very seriously. My questions are many, but the one that stands out the most is - I took the one national exam, the Architectural Registration Exam, just like every other Architect in the country - and passed. I completed my experience qualification and my Intern Development through NCARB - why am I not an Architect in other states? Am I less qualified to protect the health, safety and welfare of Pennsylvanians than another Architect with a NAAB degree? While the Angle asks their questions, I can't help but wonder if the integrity of the title, "Architect", has slowly degraded over the years through membership's warped version of enforcement. How does the public interpret that I am an Architect in Maryland but not in Pennsylvania? Maybe the following was the initiation of the slow disintegration of the word Architect (elitist separation from Master Builder to Architect) - 'In 1907, the AIA Committee on Education recommended that a prerequisite for a degree in architecture be a proficiency in Latin. They also said an adequate architecture education should consist of a year of prep school; four years in a school of architecture, at least one (and preferably two or three) years of advanced study in Rome, Paris, or American ateliers; and at least a year of travel in Europe'. In another time-line how would the world look and what would the profession be if enforcement meant that Frank Lloyd Wright was not allowed to be an Architect? To add insult to injury - in many states Karl Rove can legally design houses!

Posted by Dirk De Vault, AIA | September 3, 2007 9:51 AM

Posted on September 3, 2007 09:51

Marty Davies:
Architects should be flattered that other professionals are borrowing the term Architect to describe their very important roll or arduousness with regard to their tasks.. Simply, or complexly by using the term Architect, it gives or lends credibility to the particular description of their work, and indeed place a great deal of importance to what they do. (That's their objective, and it's associative.) They nevertheless seek the kind of credence society gives the Architect, whom they know is responsible for the built environment as far buildings are concerned.......The masses are still awed by intriguingly beautiful buildings. Why then should Architects be so sensitive about the "A" word? In this Global environment there are those that are Barefoot Architects although outside our immediate domain.

Posted by Marty Davies | September 3, 2007 1:05 PM

Posted on September 3, 2007 13:05

William B. Tracy, AIA:
I am not concerned about the use of the term architect in connection with fields other than building design. If someone asks you what you do, and you reply "I am an architect", there is only one possible meaning for most people. Unqualified, it means that you design buildings. All other uses of the term require a qualification of some sort; Architect of XZY or something similar, indicating a non-building design context. That qualification is a signal that, as Mr. Davies points out, the term Architect is exapporpriated in another context. In renewing it's licensing law last year, AIA Colorado fought the use of the term "Licensed Architect" that the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies wanted to use in lieu of "Architect". The reason is that without qualification, the noun Architect can mean only one thing.

Posted by William B. Tracy, AIA | September 3, 2007 6:31 PM

Posted on September 3, 2007 18:31

JON SOMMERS AIA, LEEDS A.P.:
bill gates is not the architect of the internet?!?!?

Posted by JON SOMMERS AIA, LEEDS A.P. | September 3, 2007 9:34 PM

Posted on September 3, 2007 21:34

John K. Costa:
I too have been troubled over the last few years when hearing in radio and tv reports people being referred to as the "architect" of this or that. I am a licensed Architect in the State of Michigan, and as a student and intern was always very carefull to not call myself an Architect. I knew that it was a title that was only worthy of someone who had succesfully completed their professional degree in architecture, obtained professional experience, and passed the state licensing examination. It was a hard earned achievement. It is flattering to see in books, movies, and television shows a character identified as an "Architect". It indicates that our proffession is identified as hip or cool and is regarded highly. On the other hand, we know that when people are referred to as architects in the news, that they mean something like leader, originator, organizer,etc. Why does the term "architect" have to be used? Is it being used to try to elevate a particular person into having greater influence and higher regard among the public? In reading some of the other blog entries I see that many Architects are bitter at what they feel the proffession has become. Honestly, I think we all knew what we were getting into from the begining of our careers. We were warned by the many that came before us. I believe most of us have great satisfaction in the results of our work, regardless of financial rewards or public accolades. However, I do think the AIA, at the national and local chapter levels, should encourage news agencies to not use the term "architect". I believe that if continued to be used loosely, that it will erode the respect and significance that the title has in regards to licensed proffessionals.

Posted by John K. Costa | September 3, 2007 10:47 PM

Posted on September 3, 2007 22:47

Keith Silas:
I recently ran into a group called something like "Youth Ministry Architects," a consulting company to churches. I almost wanted to turn them into the state board for unlicenced use of the term.

Posted by Keith Silas | September 4, 2007 7:30 AM

Posted on September 4, 2007 07:30

Gisela Schmidt, AIA:
Using the word architect to describe software engineering and political efforts is confusing with the tradional meaning of the word. It is also ironic that an intern may not call themselves architect, but Karl Rove can. If the term architect is to be used loosely, then real architects with a license to design buildings need a new designation to distinguish them from all these non-architect "architects". An example may be "Building Architect" but this sounds redundant to me.

Posted by Gisela Schmidt, AIA | September 4, 2007 10:45 AM

Posted on September 4, 2007 10:45

Rose Edna Catalano-Ilg, AIA:
THE AIA SHOULD HAVE JUMPED ALL OVER THIS A LONG TIME AGO! It is the illegal use of the term ARCHITECT, plain and simple. No DOCTOR or ATTORNEY would allow this. WHY ARE WE???? IF the AIA wants to serve the profession and make me feel like I get something for my dues - then attack this issue with a vengeance.

Posted by Rose Edna Catalano-Ilg, AIA | September 4, 2007 11:23 AM

Posted on September 4, 2007 11:23

owen beenhouwer:
This question should be addressed to various groups and then the answers compared: e.g. engineers (and other consultants) various types of clients members of public

Posted by owen beenhouwer | September 4, 2007 11:24 AM

Posted on September 4, 2007 11:24

Paul Pellicani, AIA, NCARB:
Probably one of my most frustrating moments with a client happend upon discussion of her husbands occupation. "He is an Architect" she stated proudly. Perplexed by this I had asked why he was not designing there home instead of me. She replied "No, you are the other kind of Architect, he is a software Architect". I AM THE OTHER KIND OF ARCHITECT!! What bizzarro parallel universe have i stumbled into?? At what point in time did computer programers become Architects! If it is illegal for "drafting services" and "designers" to call themselves Architects, why are we allowing computer people to do this?

Posted by Paul Pellicani, AIA, NCARB | September 5, 2007 10:34 AM

Posted on September 5, 2007 10:34

Amy Lloyd, Assoc. AIA :
There is absolutely nothing the architecture profession can or will do about this problem. We are a profession with no money and no power. We can't even get our entire profession to join, believe in and contribute to our professional organization, the AIA. I like the previous comment about the State Boards writing letters, now that really sounds scary. All those Software Architects are going to fall right off their chairs in laughter. If we really want to band together about something lets allow those working in our profession actually use the word. For instance an unlicensed graduate can not use the term "Architectural Intern" or "Graduate Architect" in many states. Those who are unlicensed are resorted to technically calling themselves an Intern or a Project Manger which in itself is ambiguous. In the past when I've used the word "Intern", people assume I am in the medical profession. Maybe if we take the handcuffs off the word "Architect" for our own profession we will not be complaining about this issue because people will understand that those who work for an architecture firm, have graduated with a bachelors or masters of architecture and every day do architecture are (hold onto you hardhat) an ARCHITECT!!!! Last time I checked when my friend graduated from law school she was allowed to call herself an Lawyer and when she passed the bar she called herself and Attorney. My other friend graduated from medical school. He called himself a doctor all through medical school and his residency. When he passed his boards he called himself a Physician and to top it all off he doesn't even have an M.D. he has an O.D. My friend who's a teacher called herself a teacher when she was in grad school, student teaching! She called herself a teacher before she passed her exams too. We've done this to ourselves. We've completely lost our identities as Architects because lack of the use of the word. We will continue to write letters and fine those in our own profession who are not registered and use the term "Architect".

Posted by Amy Lloyd, Assoc. AIA | September 5, 2007 4:08 PM

Posted on September 5, 2007 16:08

Robert Smith:
I disagree with many of the above who have no objection to the unfettered use of the title architect. The fact is that the misuse of the work dilutes the meaning and is a disservice to the profession and the public, but I am not for the regulation of free speech. Let me explain, many of the comments herein mention Karl Rove as the architect of the Bush campaign. (And many are letting their political beliefs cloud their opinion.) But saying that someone was the "architect of such-and-such campaign, process, policy, etc." is not the problem. The problem is better demonstrated by the misuse by the software and IT industry. Without any education or other requirements they have co-opted the education, prestige, and professionalism associated with the role of the architect in order to make their job titles seem more impressive. This is the problem. Go to any job search site and type in architect, you won't find any listings for policy makers, but you will find more technology resumes than you will licensed architects. An aside: Why not let architecture school graduates with an architectural degree be called Architects? Here is why. Architecture school teaches design, history, and theory, but the schools barely (if at all) teach the practical knowledge that can only come from working in an architectural firm, dealing with building inspectors, engineers, and contractors. I am going to keep this short and stop here, but that 3 year internship is CRITICAL!

Posted by Robert Smith | September 6, 2007 10:45 AM

Posted on September 6, 2007 10:45

Robert Smith:
For the record. I have been in the AIA for 9 years and have 15 years professional experience. If we allow the continued misuse of the word architect to the point that other professions adopt it as their own, pretty soon many people will "forget" the original meaning and replace it with the new association. I don't want to ever say I am an architect and have someone ask me if I work on Windows or Linux.

Posted by Robert Smith | September 6, 2007 10:56 AM

Posted on September 6, 2007 10:56

Peter C. Pivko, AIA:
What does 'Architect' mean to you? "Will the real Architect please stand up?" ABINITIO ARCHITECT.net or JAVA/ Architect, SOA, XML, SD, HTML, GRASP, UML/ 30831- Architect/ Application Architect/ Applications Architect/ Architect, J2EE/ Associate IT Architect - IS / IOD/ Barr-Software Architect 5/ BI Architect - BCS/ Business Architect (I.T. Planner/)/ Business Development Architect/ Business Intelligence Infrastructure/ Architect-BCS/ Business Resilience Architect/ C++ Trading Systems Architect/Product/ Manager CCIE-Senior Cisco-Security/ Architecture Engineer/ CDI Solution Architect BCS/ CHIEF ARCHITECT/ Content Management/ Specialist/Architect - AIS/ Data Warehouse Architect and ETL Developer/ Datawarehouse Developer-Architect/ Decision Support Architect/ Director, Business Architect/ EAI IT Specalist / Architect MDM/ ENTERPRISE DATABASE ARCHITECT/ Enterprise Solution Architect/ ERP Architect FileNet Architect-Sr Workflow Developer/ Genesys Developer/Architect/ HP Open View Architect/ HR Solutions Architect/ INFORMATION ARCHITECT/ Information Architect - Interaction Designer/ Infrastructure Architect/ Intel/Windows Server Consolidation/ Technical Solution Architect/ IP Engineer/Architect/ Java Architect/ Lead Architect/ Linux Architect - Application Migration/ Middleware Architect - BCS/ Netcool Impact Architect-Manager/ ODW Solution Architect - BCS/ Operational Excellence Solutions Architect/ Payments Architect-Consultant-BCS/ PeopleSoft Technical Architect/ PowerPC Linux Kernel Architect/ Principal Architect/ (Microcontrollers)/ SAP XI Architect Consultant/ Senior Architect - FCS/ Senior Developer/Architect/ Senior Network Architect/ Senior Scientist - Architect - PhD, Bayesian, domain exper/ Senior SQL Developer-Architect/ Services Management Architect/ Siebel Architect/ Software Architect - Banking Industry/ Software Architect - Embedded Linux, ATSC, MPEG, C, MHP/ Software Cross Brand Services-Solutions Architect/ Sr. Business Systems Architect/ Sr. PreSales Systems Engineer-Customer Solutions Architect/ Storage and Backup Architect/ Technical Architect/ Technical Architecture - Manager - Health Plan/ Technical Security Architect/ Technical Team Leader -IT/ Architect/Specialist/ Technology Architect/ Unix Server Consolidation Technical Solution Architect/ Validation Architect - Austin, TX - #516105/ WebMethods Architect/ Websphere Architect/ Websphere Commerce Developer OR Architect/ WebSphere Portal Specialist OR Architect/ Wireless IT Architect J2ME-J2EE/ Senior Operational Architect-Ft. Leavenworth/ NOT ONE OF THESE RECENT JOB POSTINGS CAN DESIGN A BUILDING!

Posted by Peter C. Pivko, AIA | September 7, 2007 7:51 PM

Posted on September 7, 2007 19:51

Tom r.:
If "Architects" offer a meaningful service to our clients, communities and society in general the word "architect" will be clearly about forming a better "built environment".

Posted by Tom r. | September 10, 2007 11:01 AM

Posted on September 10, 2007 11:01

G. Whiz:
Jewels from Webster's: ARCHITECT: An artificer. ARTIFICER: An enlisted man. One that contrives. A cunning or artful fellow. Framer.

Posted by G. Whiz | September 13, 2007 8:34 PM

Posted on September 13, 2007 20:34

Michael Strogoff:
Architects are society's alchemists, turning hopes and dreams, problems and constraints, nature and science, money and labor, into environments that shelter, nurture and propel the human spirit. They also tend to wear black clothing and speak an odd language.

Posted by Michael Strogoff | September 13, 2007 9:04 PM

Posted on September 13, 2007 21:04

Tobin Weaver:
I agree with Robert Smith, and believe the profession should absolutely be protecting the integrity of its title, as well as urging federal, state and local governments to do so. This is a licensed profession, not an idea. Do you think attorneys would allow another occupation to appropriate their title?

Posted by Tobin Weaver | September 13, 2007 10:44 PM

Posted on September 13, 2007 22:44

tom mccash:
The term architect is about as meaningful as the terms sanitation engineer or domestic engineer. We have allowed to profession to be so diluted, and NCARB believes we are SOLELY designers, that it truly carries little weight. The term Realtor has been copyrighted to a specific member class yet I can call myself a software architect, campaign strategy architect, or a multitude of other "quantifiers" for the term. WAKE UP ARCHITECTS, YOU'RE YOUR OWN WORST ENEMY! FIGHT FOR THE PROFESSION OR BECOME A CONTRACTOR/DEVELOPER...SORRY, wrong terms.... IMPLEMENTATION ARCHITECT/PROJECT VISUALIZATION ARCHITECT. they make more money anyway!

Posted by tom mccash | September 13, 2007 10:59 PM

Posted on September 13, 2007 22:59

Anonymous:
Oh and by the way..I'm now an Implementation Architect AND an Attorney that will take all your money when you screw up...and you will because nothing is perfect and you live in ivory towers!:-)

Posted by Anonymous | September 13, 2007 11:11 PM

Posted on September 13, 2007 23:11

Steve Reardon:
I am one who thinks, "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery." Today we see images of architects on television selling everything from hair color to cell phone services. That is because Wall Street acknowledges the public's perceptions of the architect's credibility. It is obvious that using the term "architect" after "software" or anything else is just a means of borrowing that credibility. When does it matter? Probably when Architect is used without the qualifier. It is probably impossibly to stop the proliferation of inappropriate usage, but we should continue to monitor our moniker.

Posted by Steve Reardon | September 13, 2007 11:29 PM

Posted on September 13, 2007 23:29

Vernon Reed, FAIA:
Frank Lloyd Wright used to say that the word "architect" was derived from "arch" meaning highest, as in "arch-bishop" or "arch-enemy" and "tech" which meant technology. Hence, an architect was the master of the highest technology. The term applied to our profession for at the time the term came into use, building technology was the highest technology. Now there are certainly other forms of technology, which have given rise to the use of the term for other professions. However, state laws do reserve the use of the term to those who are licensed to practice architecture. What is lacking is a determined, persistent effort to notify authorities of such use which is in contravention of the state laws. I have reported such illegal uses all my life as a licensed architect; and I heartily recommend the practice to other architects. If we do not police the profession, who will? The first time I reported a misuse of the term to the county prosecuter, he had a great laugh, and could not believe that it was illegal for a builder to call himself an architect on his construction site. However, after a quick review of the law, he had the sheriff go out to the site and tell the builder he had to take the sign down. Here is the rest of the story. That builder became my client and hired me to design at least a dozen buildings for him. He appreciated the fact that I cared about protecting my profession. Try it. You can do some good.

Posted by Vernon Reed, FAIA | September 14, 2007 10:26 AM

Posted on September 14, 2007 10:26

Cynthia Mueller:

My issue with using the term architect for anyone who works in the field (licensed or not) is that I don't want to diminish the fact that I completed my internship and passed the exam while some of my colleagues have not (or choose not) to do the same. I am proud of myself for completing the exams just like any other professional (attorney, physician) would be and I want a distinction between unlicensed individuals and those of us who have proven ourselves worthy of licensure.

Why not use the term "architect" and "professional architect" to distinguish between those schooled in architecture and those who have a license to practice? Look up "engineer" and "professional engineer" on Wikipedia—there is a difference.

As an aside, I also think our profession should stop rewarding unlicensed individuals—some of them become partners in firms and others head design studios—until they have the credibility of a license. How are they going to earn the respect of their clients and those who work for/with them if they cannot do what it takes to become a licensed architect? My answer is that they cannot and they are kidding themselves if they think otherwise.

Posted by Cynthia Mueller | September 14, 2007 11:02 AM

Posted on September 14, 2007 11:02

William Murray:
Has everyone missed the point? It seems that most of the responders are upset that someone is "steeling" their title and thereby diminishing the value of that title. If the title Architect were not highly valued by the society at large, then what would be the point of "steeling" it. Indeed I think this "theft" would be the crowning statement of respect. However, I do not believe that in most cases, it is an attempt or even a desire to steel a title, but rather a means of describing an action. As such it is confirmation that "everyone" understands that an Architect is THE CREATOR. Whether it be a political position, a software product, an I.T. system, or a building. Architect is synonymous with Creator. With this explination in mind, does the over use of this term deminish the "value" of Architect, or does it reinforce the public's perception of Architect as a position of elevated authority. I would caution that trying to influence the "public perception" is a challenging and tricky task frought with risk of a negative or even opposite reaction. While I agree with the AIA's efforts to prevent the practice of Architecture by unlicensed parties, trying to prevent the use of the term architect may very well backfire. There is enough opinion in the public arena regarding the elitest attitude of many Architects. Lets not reinforce that opinion by laying claim to exclusive use of a word.

Posted by William Murray | September 14, 2007 2:05 PM

Posted on September 14, 2007 14:05

Stuart Martin Berger, AIA CSI-CCS:
The title, Architect, can be used in the US only by an individual who is licensed by a State as a Licensed Architect or a Registered Architect. That is a fact. Every state in the US has laws which govern the practice of architecture and the credentials one must have to use the title, Architect. It is illegal for any individual who is not licensed by the State to use the title, Architect. The ever growing herd of journalists using the title "architect" as an adjective to be bandied about with abject regard, such as, "the architect of the Dayton Peace Accords", "the architect of modern China", "the architect of Bush’s war policy”…has finally reached a point where these writers need to be taken to task. Should the AIA take action? Yes. The ombudsmen of these news organizations should be contacted in order to re-craft their manuals of style to prohibit the use of architect unless they were writing or speaking about licensed practitioners. However, the irony here is that AIA created a media campaign for the National Public Broadcasting Network, yet several NPR reporters, e.g., Brian Inskepe, Linda Gradstein, Nina Totenberg, conspicuously misuse our title almost daily when reporting on individuals who have nothing to do with creating space for human habitation. Next, all the State Boards of Professional Regulation must act decisively to combat this growing scourge of title misappropriation. That there is a proliferation of title misuse is a clear example of the failure of our regulatory authorities to issue cease and desist letters to those companies and individuals who seek the prestige of our title without having earned the title. If Motorola or IBM employees, for example, were notified by the State of Illinois to cease using the title architect or face legal consequences the problem of title misuse would be substantially reduced and other individuals would rapidly follow in renaming their job descriptions. Finally, we the people can write our state representatives and demand redress of this grievance.

Posted by Stuart Martin Berger, AIA CSI-CCS | September 17, 2007 4:01 PM

Posted on September 17, 2007 16:01

jeff burns:
The federal government gives the states the right to administer consumer services, be it pharmacist or architect. It is up to our state boards to enforce the rules. I do think we have a lot more to worry about in the world than proper grammer...

Posted by jeff burns | October 17, 2007 3:47 PM

Posted on October 17, 2007 15:47

Sam:
Someone mentions respect? Please. Many of the greatest architects of the 19th and 20th century had NO training and.or NO license and are certainly historically architects. Many we have studied and honored so please do a little homework on this subject. Anyway who really cares? I don't. It just seems to me some around here are afraid of loosing a job? or can't get one. This whole thread has become ridiculous to me. This appears to be a jealously issue of who is doing what and who can't do anything. If more attention was paid by each person on their own work and what he/she was doing instead of being bitter over someone elses attention - licensed or not - they may get some themselves.

Posted by Sam | October 17, 2007 4:17 PM

Posted on October 17, 2007 16:17

Tim:
Amy Lloyd's comments on architect and other job titles are great. It's interesting to point out that in her examples of Lawyer and Doctor, they both have a much higher starting salary than Architecture. By forcing graduates to avoid the use of "Architect" it lowers the status of their accomplishment. If you design a building and it's built, you are the architect. Now other professions are taking over our naming rights. Frank, Mies and Corbusier should every article ever written about them modified and delete the word architect, because non of them were liscensed architects. Funny to think that they are often looked at as the greatest "architects" of the 20th century.

Posted by Tim | October 25, 2007 1:23 PM

Posted on October 25, 2007 13:23

Peter Youngs:
Isn't it Wonderful to still be challenged by 'Primary' definition? !!!!! Answering the Challenge IS the definition. Under the ‘letter’ of ‘Talmudic’ historic precedent you may be confined to ‘commission’ within the “box”. “I think therefore I am” is great for Christian Science but the coalescence of think AND do is creation, -- The ultimate aphrodisiac. You have the freedom to merge Art – Science, imagination – reality, make the invisible- visible, and perhaps manifest –‘ed’ destiny. The ability to think and do is one description of sentience. Creativity permeates every profession despite the prominence or obscurity of the title. If you do this , and someone calls you an architect then you are. Perhaps one you must contend with for title is ‘above’ you and you are not. ?? (-;) There are those who chase and horde titles, and there are those who earn them. Which one are you?

Posted by Peter Youngs | March 5, 2008 2:18 PM

Posted on March 5, 2008 14:18

Marie Baez:
Look at the current New York skyline. It is depleted of the beautiful old buildings that once defined New York at a glance. Being built are hideous greenish mausoleums costing tenants millions. Or 'green' monstrosities that bend and jut at angles. Buildings with no relationship in size or scope to anything around them; it is architecture of imposition and arrogance. I work in the Village, stop by anytime to see what I mean. As 'architects' you've lost the respect of people who have to see and live with this ugliness, perhaps that why everyone is co-opting your title, in hope someone will 'build' something, anything that touches a human chord.

Posted by Marie Baez | March 29, 2008 8:55 AM

Posted on March 29, 2008 08:55

Mike Lally:
The architects responding in this blog seem to have a real "identity crisis" on how they feel they are perceived by society. There seems to be a sense of low self-esteem by these bloggers as a whole who seem very caught up on the fact that the "definition of architect" should somehow put themselves in some elite pedestal of society. The fact that low salary is mentioned in more than one blog seems to tell the real story of an embittered group of professionals.

Posted by Mike Lally | May 22, 2008 7:49 PM

Posted on May 22, 2008 19:49

Ivan Jordan RIBA:
Much as I appreciate the discourse in primary definitions, I think we should keep it real here, folks. The title "architect" is a protected title, just like "doctor". Anyone who uses it in any context apart from that is breaking the law - assuming we are talking about a country with a registration system. This particularly applies to IT people. Let them find their own title. Registration boards, such as the arb in the UK, should toughen up and start getting court orders to stop the misuse of the title - start with recruitment ads in papers, that's a straightforward breach of legislation, and it will trickle down quickly enough to the nerds. Let's not get sidetracked into a big moan about salaries etc... just stand up for the title we all worked long and hard for and are proud to use. Call your registration board today and ask what they are doing.

Posted by Ivan Jordan RIBA | August 13, 2008 9:18 AM

Posted on August 13, 2008 09:18

m ansari:
AIA should lead the fight for us to use this word "architect". We can talk about it until blue in the face and the I.T. people continue to use "architect" in the job titles. I have a degree in arch and I am taking the exams now, I can't even call my self an architect. I have to say "intern"

Posted by m ansari | February 12, 2009 3:56 PM

Posted on February 12, 2009 15:56

p schultz:
I get offended by this too. It took me many years to get to the point where I can sit for my exams. I hate that all that work gets belittled by other professions that think the term "architect" makes their profession look more credible. Maybe we should be asking doctors if they get offended, and what they do when another professions uses the term "doctor" in their job title. If AIA can legally tackle this problem and retain the integrity of our profession, I would join.

Posted by p schultz | March 8, 2009 2:50 PM

Posted on March 8, 2009 14:50

N D AIA:
THE MAIN ISSUE The issue is not the term is used by non-Architects per se, but that when the media uses the term Architect in the non-traditional manner, 80% of the time, it is with a negative connotation, depicting someone like Karl Rove, or the head of a terrorist or dubious political group, or some Ponzi schemer. I cringe every time I read the term used in this manner in my daily read, the New York Times. The AIA should be on top of this, and trademark the title, both capitalized and not [as someone here has suggested]. And sue the software engineering firms that have only recently co-opted the title. Of course, if we were in a better paid profession, we wouldn't care if the media misused our hard-earned title [see: Doctor of our Demise, Doctor or Destruction, etc.], or if the term was consistently used in a positive light [e.g.: nursing back to health]. But that's not the case. We are our own worst enemy. We don't actively stop the misuse because we are weak and underfunded and not 'business people', which leads to our title becoming diluted and our profession becoming denigrated and misunderstood, which leads to our inability to properly charge for our services, which leads to our being weak and underfunded, etc. etc. The time to stop this abuse is NOW! The AIA should take the helm.

Posted by N D AIA | September 9, 2009 8:17 PM

Posted on September 9, 2009 20:17

Post a comment

Search


About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on August 30, 2007 4:30 PM.

The previous post in this blog was H-1B Visas: Necessary? Or Evil?.

The next post in this blog is What issues are important to you?.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Subscribe to this blog's feed
[What is this?]
Powered by
Movable Type 3.34