To do or to consult?

The role of architects has evolved, and it's not uncommon for architects to collaborate with consultants for specific aspects of a building's design. For example, an architect may work with a consultant to design the building's mechanical, electrical, or plumbing systems.

Similarly, the building envelope is an essential aspect of a building's design that requires specialized knowledge and expertise. Consultants specializing in building envelopes can provide valuable input and solutions that enhance the performance and sustainability of a building.

That being said, it's crucial to note that the architect is still responsible for the overall design and functionality of the building. Collaboration with consultants does not diminish the architect's role but enhances it by bringing in specialized expertise.

Therefore, pulling back on the scope of an architect's role to focus solely on the building envelope may not be the best approach. Instead, architects should continue collaborating with consultants while overseeing the project to ensure the building's design meets the intended functionality, aesthetic, and sustainability goals. I can not imagine only designing the building envelope. I'm not convinced we (architects) should pull back on the scope. If we do such, we will lose the role of an architect and be a building envelope consultant - how lame? 

Please enjoy this segment from the Simpsons about Frank Gehry. 👇



Comments

  1. It is important that architects continue to mediate between all aspects of design. The moment we focus only on a single aspect of the design is the moment that the profession dies. Architects have the thoughtfulness and training to navigate the building process, unlike any other profession. We are not experts in anything but know quite a bit about everything.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Architects have a little knowledge on a lot of things. Because of this, we are unable to dig deep on one element of the building and is probably the reason why we rely heavily on our consultants for their expertise. Though I agree with your point, I do believe architects have a unique way of thinking and would be interested in seeing more architects challenging themselves by focusing on one thing vs trying to manage the entire building. The results could be eye opening and possibly resolve other issues we experience through design.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The scope of an architect is already very minimal, and reducing the scope will negatively impact the significance of the profession. I’m glad that our studio project at least tries to cover some of these aspects to expose us to the Building process. From here, It is up to us to take it and decide whether to do it or consult.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hey Taylor! It's so interesting to look at the responsibilities of "architects" in the beginning and compare that to the roles and responsibilities of what we call an "architect" today. They comparatively don't even feel the same and I wonder how this position will continue to change in the future. I believe architects should be the head of design similar to that in the occupations beginning however, with that much responsibility will come requirements in terms of training, experience, etc. Are we willing to take back that much control of design?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts