Why should I want to speak to my Architect's past Clients?

Once more I find myself returning to our blog after a substantial absence stemming from an overly complicated and busy life!

This is my last blog dealing with what you should ask your architect before appointing him to your project. If you haven't read the rest of the series, you can click on the links below starting with the first post on this subject.

To summarise the theme, we are very rarely asked the three or four questions that I WOULD ask if I were in a prospective client's shoes. In previous posts I have touched upon the first few questions namely:

1. What are you professional qualifications and/or memberships?

 

2. Do you carry Professional Indemnity Insurance, if so what's the limit of any one claim?

3. Would you be actually working on my project yourself or would other people in your office actually be doing the work, if so, what are their qualifications and how will you be checking their work?

4. Will your quote break down what you have to do into manageable and clearly explained stages so that, if I decide to stop, I know how much I owe you as well as when you will be invoicing me?

and finally, in this post:

"Do you have any Clients I can speak to or completed projects I can visit that are similar to my project?"

You would be amazed at how infrequently we get asked this question by prospective clients (most are simply interested in the bottom line) but occasionally 'switched on' clients ask whether we would mind them speaking with clients for whom we have carried out similar projects and we are more than happy to oblige!

Let me explain why....

Firstly, we are proud of the work that we have completed in the past and the fact that the vast majority of our clients are not only happy to talk about their experiences in working with us on their projects but also happy to show off the finished project to others who are in the same situation that they were when they were considering whether or not to employ us as their Architects.

If you have happy past clients then why would you not be willing to introduce them to prospective clients?

Secondly, working with an Architect is not the same as purchasing a 'product' it is a collaborative exercise where the ability to work together is critical to the success of the project regardless of whether you are simply wanting a Planning Permission or want your Architect to provide a full service up to the completion of your project.

Most Architects are pretty good and experienced at working with clients to understand their requirements and deliver projects that meet them but, as in any sector, some are more 'people orientated' than others.

Unless you have chance to speak with someone who has gone through that process with your chosen Architect you will only find out what they are like to work with once you are committed!

Asking the question posed at the top of this post allows you, as a prospective client, to judge not only the quality of their work but also the manner in which they approach their clients and projects. If someone is unwilling to let you speak with past clients or only offers up contractor clients (where you can not be sure what the relationship is) then this should ring alarm bells - after all if they are not proud of the work they've completed...............

On a different note, I hope that this post will be the start of a period of time where I will be blogging a bit more regularly on architecture & construction generally - so watch this space!
 

Why should I ask about how my Architect's quote will be structured?

This is my penultimate blog in a series about what you should ask your architect before appointing him to your project. The series stems from a period of time where we were being asked a wide variety of questions when quoting, many of which were completely irrelevant and couldn't have been of any realistic help when the (prospective) Clients were considering who to appoint to deliver their project.

As you will have read in my first post on this subject, we are rarely asked the three or four questions that I WOULD ask if I were in their shoes. In previous posts I have touched upon the first few questions namely:

1. What are you professional qualifications and/or memberships?

 

2. Do you carry Professional Indemnity Insurance, if so what's the limit of any one claim?

3. Would you be actually working on my project yourself or would other people in your office actually be doing the work, if so, what are their qualifications and how will you be checking their work?

The next question in my list is as follows:

"Will your quote break down what you have to do into manageable and clearly explained stages so that, if I decide to stop, I know how much I owe you as well as when you will be invoicing me?"

Now you might be forgiven for thinking that the answer to this question is obvious, in fact it often isn't as many architects and other consultants have a variety of ways in which they structure their quotations - some give clarity, others offer clarity if you're prepared to do a bit of research and other methods give little or no clarity at all. Lets look at the most common structures for consultants quotes:

RIBA Outline Plan of Work 2007

 

The RIBA Outline Plan of Work 2007 is a useful document which breaks the life of a construction project down into stages (A through to L) with a description of key tasks associated with each task.

Many Chartered Architects will structure their quotations around the various stages, for example getting you to a Planning Application might cover stages A through D whilst Building Regulations Approval is achieved at the end of stage E with tender actions being covered by stages F through H.

Whilst this is extremely useful on complex projects where many complicated and interlocking tasks have to be carried out, for a smaller project this level of complexity can be somewhat overwhelming and reference to work stages as opposed to outcomes can lead to confusion, particularly for domestic clients who will have to look up the relevant document and then try to work out which stage they are on at any moment in time.

To be fair to the RIBA, they have recognised this and are currently in the process of replacing the Plan of Work with a revamped version, the consultation document can be read here, which will simplify the workstages down to seven easily understood stages that apply equally as well to all scales of project.

Hourly Rates

Some building consultants have chosen to disregard the RIBA Plan of Work and instead have adopted the approach of Solicitors or Accountants, charging by the hour.

Putting to one side, for a moment, what an Architect is "worth" in terms of hourly rates*, I want to focus instead on the lack of transparency involved when someone quotes on the basis of an hourly rate.

How long does it take to prepare and submit a Planning Application or a Building Regulations Application? How long does it take to survey and draw up an existing building? How long is a piece of string? How complicated is your project?

Frankly whilst we as Architects effectivly sell our time and expertise, how can we expect a customer to understand how complex their project is and how involved our role is and thus how long the project is likely to take from our point of view. Most of our clients have no idea how long it takes us to put together a Design Statement, Access Statement or any of the other multitude of documents that we have to submit in support of a Planning Application these days let along the drawings for their project which "coz it's done on a computer probably takes you no time at all"!

If we, as Chartered Architects, are to provide proper support to a client as they embark on their project, surly the first thing we should be doing is being clear about our fees and the added value we bring to a project. Not only does this allow them to budget properly (minimising the risk that they default on our fees) it also builds trust that we will be up front and clear about the costs they might expect to incur.

In my opinion, quotes based on an hourly rate should be stuck straight in the bin!

*Coming back to what an Architect is "worth", consider this:

- Architects train for a minimum of seven years before being eligible to sit their final professional exams which are required before they can register as Architects - more often than not the training takes eight years to complete;

- In contrast Solicitors train for about 6 years, Accountants for 5 years.

- Solicitors can charge £200 plus per hour whilst Accountants will regularly charge £150 plus.

So what's your Architect "worth"........more or less than your Solicitor?

Bespoke stages:

At Architecture & Design Services we quote for the vast majority of projects on the basis of bespoke stages with the outcomes defining the stage. For example a domestic project might be broken down as follows:

Stage 1: Survey the existing building & prepare existing drawings for the basis of further design work.

Stage 2: Prepare outline designs for Client approval, make all neccesary revisions and prepare and submit a Planning Application the agreed scheme.

Stage 3: On receipt of a Planning Applicatiomn, prepare and submit a Full Plans Buildign Regulations Application.

and so on.

The advantages of this approach speak for themselves. The Client knows exactly what to budget for, how much is due at each stage and when that stage falls complete.

So, why ask the question, because frankly you want to know how much you're going to be paying for your Architect's services and when that money is going to be due!

Why should I ask about my architects qualifications and professional memberships?

This is part one of a small series of posts that all stem from a post a couple of days ago (which you can read here) which suggests five keys questions you should ask when looking for an Architect.

Let me give you a hypothetical situation and then ask you a question:

The scenario: You have been fortunate enough to have been given (or to have bought) a high end sportscar (you can visualise whatever you like at this point). Your car now needs a service and some minor but essential repairs and you would also like a couple of added extras!

The question: do you use the authorised dealer or 'Big Jim' under the arches because he's a fraction of the cost?

Now, I am not fortunate enough to own a high end sportscar (one day *sigh*) but I suspect that whilst 'Big Jim' is cheaper most people would opt to use someone who works one their model of sportscar on a regular basis and knows what they are doing, after all, it's an expensive piece of kit!!!

So, let's look at that scenario again:

You want to do some work on your house (your most expensive asset) do you go to 'Really nice Russ' who works out of his garage conversion or someone who is a qualified professional but is likely to be more expensive?

I think that, when considering any alterations to your property, you should make sure that the person or company you decide to use are suitably qualified and experienced!

That's not to say that you should always use an architect because they may not have the relevant skills for your project! Most good architects will tell you, up front, if you really require their services and, if you don't, should be able to point you in the right direction.

Regardless of which 'brand' of consultant you require, the fact remains that the membership of a relevant professional body gives you some confidence that they are 'up to the job'.

For Architects you should visit the ARB website and check that they are actually Architects (it's an offence to pass yourself off as an Architect if you are not registered with the ARB).

For Surveyors and Structural Engineers, the RICS is a great starting point.

'Architectural Technician' is often a term used by unqualified designers but you can check with the CIAT to see if they are actually technicians or simply unqualified 'designers'.

Finally, a word of warning! There is no such thing as an 'Architectural Designer' - if your consultant says that this is what they are dig a bit deeper, after all you wouldn't trust 'Big Jim' with your Bugatti, why trust 'really nice Russ' with your Home?

Collaborate working - what's new?

As those of you who follow me on Twitter will know from recent tweets, I spent most of the weekend at the Parndon Mill Open Studios mixing with the creative community that calls this amazing place home.

Parndon Mill was mentioned in the Domesday Book as having two hives and a goat and is now a hive of creative activity. The four storey mill and outbuildings provide studios and workshops for artists, craftsmen, designers and architects.

As a place to work it is not only fantastically pituresque but also a very real example of how individuals and companies in differing fields can come together to work towards a common goal and suceed.

Since moving in here three and a half years ago, we have worked with almost all the inhabiants of this building to achieve a number of different goals. we have worked on hospitals in Ethiopia with BuildAid who are on the floor above, made templates for handmade classical guitars, advised painters on how to approach large murals and developed sculpters plans for large scale public works.

We regularly have painters & other artists "popping in" to see what is happening in the world of architecture, they contribute to schemes that we are developing, casting a constructive eye across drawings & sketches & making observations that improve our concepts immeasurably.

The Open Days at the weekend were a public outworking of this mentality of collaborative working with everyone mucking in to serve teas and coffees, man the studios and gallery and generally make the event a huge success.

The trade magazines these days are constantly telling us, as a small practice, that we need to get our heads around collaborative working to survive. At the same time those publications are telling us, as Architects, that we need to re-establish our position & respect within the construction sector.

On the face of it this appears to be somewhat of a contradiction but, in my opinion, this is not the case.

During my time at the University of Westminster (BA Hons Architecture) the assumption was always that, as Architects, we would need to collaborate with others to make our designs a success. The University rightly took great pride in bringing together students of different diciplines to work on common projects and develop a language of cooperation and shared goals.

Once I entered the profession and started to see at first hand "the real world" of Construction I was shocked at how confrontational the process was with Clients, Contractors and Local Authorities all treating each other with distrust and, in some case, downright contempt! Ever since I have been absoloutly convinced that building a team ethic between stakeholders in projects is key to the project being delievered to everyones satisfaction.

I do not subscribe to the idea that collaborative working is a new idea but I do think that the current focus on small practices collaborating with larger outfits is simply one element of a larger picture. I believe that, for Architects to regain their reightful position within the industry, we have to be seen to be developing relationship with Local Authorities, Clients, other practices and Contractors alike so that we can initiate useful dialogue around projects and ensure that we genuinely add value throughout a projects gestation and delivery.

We have, for the last year or so, been working this out in practice and are starting to see the rewards. these vary from achieving a Planning Permission for a scheme that faced significant opposition but was approved because of the "high quality of design" through to being invited with another practice to develop proposals for the regeneration/facelift of a key area within Harlow. Neither of these opportunities would have come about without investment in relationships and building trust and respect and there is more fruit on the tree simply waiting to ripen.

If you are interested in developing a relationship with us as a practice, please contact me through our website or drop me a tweet!