The Role of Architect in User-Centered Design

The clash of architect and user is a problematic one—if we grant the architect free reign over a project, he/she is likely to design a beautiful but insensitive object. If we allow the users to design, are we admitting our own redundancy?

The proposition that the user group has better insight into what is useful and necessary for their project than the architect does seems obvious, but troubling. In a world where many buildings are built without architects, how do we defend our already weakened position in a world that favors user input over our own? We say you need an architect to build, but for what? After all, anyone can design four walls and a roof, right? What do we offer to user-centered design and how to we make that known?

I would argue that the role of the architect in user-centered design is that of a moderator and synthesizer. We moderate discussion between user groups and the client, and synthesize their needs with our own construction, context, and yes, design expertise. The role of today’s architect is not to impose a singular vision on an unsuspecting community, but to synthesize several competing visions into one, seemingly singular idea that responds to the community around it. Not just anyone can do that.