If it works……….

Some time ago I came across an illustration depicting three individuals on three separate levels of a steep mountain face. A caption identified the individual at the summit as the Owner. The next level down depicted the Contractor and at the bottom of the mountain, covering his head from the barrage of material raining down on him, was the Architect. Upon closer examination, I realized that he was desperately trying to protect himself from "Shifting Responsibility." The author went on to explain the growing trend among Owners of shifting site and pre-construction responsibilities that would usually fall under the Contractor's umbrella, to the Architect. Needless to say, the author, an architect himself, was vehemently opposed to this relatively new practice as the current AIA Contracts already provided for these types of responsibilites under a section appropriately titled "Additional Services." Attempting to view this trend as an opportunity rather than a hindrance, I anxiously awaited the manifestation of this “new” thought of the Architect taking the leadership role in the profession armed with the latest computer equipment and smart programs. To my chagrin, I realized that the responsibility that was being shifted had little or nothing to do with the problems that the computer or higher education would resolve but rather with the time-tested quality control components that architects have universally employed during the pre-construction and construction phases of a Project. Components such as Shop Drawings and full-time site supervisors were being omitted with the Owner expecting the Architect to fill this void. Take Shop Drawings, for example. This is a vital tool of communication between Architect, Contractor and Owner. Short of becoming a mind reader, it is the only true and tested way for the Architect to determine that the Contractor fully grasps the design intent down to the minutest details. It is also gives the Owner an opportunity to have a last look before the costly job of creating custom millwork begins. But more and more we find that Owners are willing to bypass this important step and have the millwork built directly from the Architects' Drawings. Shifting responsibility.



An experienced Site Supervisor is an invaluable asset to the Owner during the construction phase. The day to day supervision of Contractors & their Subs is impossible for an Architect to provide. Having another set of impartial eyes and ears on the job can save time, money and aggravation. But yet again, the growing trend is for Owners to refuse a Site Supervisor and put the burden of day to day supervision squarely on the Architect. The result oftentimes is that mistakes are caught too late to be fixed and in the end a misguided attempt to reduce costs results in not only more time and money, but dissatisfied Owners.

This brings me to the crux of my argument; Design Build. A Design Build scenario in which the Architect is also the Builder and where the the Sub-Contractors are already familiar with the Architect's style and ideas can be the vehicle that moves this discussion forward. This can be a win-win situation for both Owner and Architect. The Owner will get his/her wish to have the Architect or Architect's Rep on site at all times and the Architect will have more control over the usual trouble spots; Costs, Change Orders, Deadlines, etc. A well executed Design-Build scenario can successfully move the industry from the traditional triage of Owner/Architect/Contractor to Owner/Architect. At the same time, time-tested, industry wide standards such as Shop Drawings and Site Supervision can be maintained without the Owner incurring additional costs. As I said, a win-win-situation.

You get what you want

Services

Convincing the potential client that the service you provide requires a monetary exchange rates number 1 among the required assets of an architect’s arsenal of required skills. My thought is that we (architects and designers) artistically intellectualize, usually while trying to explain our design, resulting in a confusing conversation for the client. So what I’ve proposed is a Rosetta Stone , so to speak, of some of the services we provide. First I’ll explain what one gets for what one has paid for followed by how that translates into real world action.

Type # 1, Traditional Fee Structure

Soup to Nuts (Full service)

The Process
(Architect Speak)

Schematic Design: Rough drawings are created and dialogue is had between Consultants and Owners to flush out the design goals and intent.

Preliminary Design: The development of rough drawings and dialogue between Consultants and Owners to flush out the design goals and intent.

Design development: Rough drawings are further developed. A significant amount of detail has been established and design goals have been reached between Consultants and Owners. At this point a clear understanding of what the project goals has been established.

Construction Documents: Detailed drawings are created to communicate to the contractor the design intent.

Construction Administration: The architect and contractor work together to bring the Owners vision to fruition.

Construction Management: The architect works with the contractor in more of a managerial position. It is considered a much more labor intensive position usually requiring additional fees because of the additional project oversight.


The Process:
(Owner Speak)

You tell us what you want
You tell us what you want again and we tell you if it’s possible
You tell us what you want we make it possible
We tell the contractor what you want
We tell the contractor what you want again
We tell the contractor what you want contractor again and again and again
We beg, plead and bribe the contractor while telling them what you want again
We tell the contractor what you want and they tell us if it’s possible
We tell the contractor what you want again and they make it possible
You get what you want



Type # 2, Abbreviated Fee Structure

The Process
(Architect Speak)


Schematic design: Rough drawings are created and dialogue is had between Consultants and Owners to flush out the design goals and intent. Changes are limited changes

Construction documents: Detailed drawings are created to communicate to the contractor the design intent. There is no interior design/ coordination

No cabinetry design, appliances specification, plumbing specification, lighting specification etc. All are additional services and usually done by the contractor.

Additional Services: Project Management is considered an additional service

The Process:
(Owner Speak)


You tell us what you want
You tell us what you want again and we tell you if it’s possible
You tell us what you want we make it possible
We tell the contractor what you want
The contractor may make it possible, may not
You get some of what you want


Type # 3, Alternate Fee Structure

The Process
(Architect Speak)

Design/ Build Services

Architects with the chutzpa are taking the challenge of becoming builders. The Architect works with the Owner to realize their vision. In lieu of now giving the project to a third party the Architect executes the work creating all manner of cost saving for the Owner. Bear in mind this can also be done with a method of construction call turn-key. The difference being that the contractor professional is involved at the end of each phase and executes the work as the third party as the direction is being given. Example: the architect finishes the drawing showing the building footprint. The contractor begins building the footprint immediately. This would happen at every stage of the job in a turn-key application

The Process:
(Owner speak)

You tell us ( the contractor and the architect) what you want
You tell us ( the contractor and the architect) what you want again and we tell you if it’s possible
You tell us ( the contractor and the architect) what you want we make it possible
We make it possible
You get what you want

I think you get the idea. Your wish is our command. In the end all are happy as long as you get what you want.