What Is The Value Of An Architect?

A follow-up from the previous article, ‘The perception of architects’ fees’, If you have not yet read it, please do, it’s not mandatory, however it discusses the perspectives of architects’ fees both within the industry and outside of it. As it is mentioned, the perception of architects fees leads to the question, what is the value of an architect? In a monetary and non-monetary sense. So, before recognising the value of an architect, we need to understand the difference between monetary and non-monetary value. The typical, or the most obvious, connotation is that the value is of financial or monetary cost. This is before understanding or evaluating what a product or service can provide and how it is beneficial. Therefore, the value of architecture is deeper and broader than one may realise. It goes beyond the financial cost value and the typical skills an architect possesses. With the nature of the profession, these typical skills can be broad, and are best discussed at another time.

So, just like many other creative fields, this concept of non-monetary value crosses over into another realm. This realm, of which has many complexities, is not always tangible to linear or logical thinking. When we think in terms of non-monetary value, it is usually the value, or values, an individual or group places on someone or something. As obvious as this may seem, it may be more subconscious than we realise. Generally speaking, we don’t normally think about this until questioned as to why someone or something is better or greater than the next. There is no right or wrong answer here. It is subjective and very individual and it can change overtime with the growth of the individual, group, or collective’s perception and experience.

As this is subjective and individual in nature, our personal values are broad goals motivating our actions and serving as guiding principles. Which leads to the question, what are the values that have stemmed from an individual’s culture, upbringing, and experiences? What influences these? How can they be translated into the built environment, if they are not already? These personal values are an aspect that may or may not be believed directly or indirectly related to spatial design disciplines. Understandably, it is somewhat esoteric. These elements lie in the deeper, philosophical and theoretical aspect of which architecture draws upon. It is not always apparent, nor does it need to be. Architecture is based on and is a reflection of human activity, experiences, and thought. Much like any other creative or artistic discipline, or any kind of wider activity for that matter, it will always be present, no matter how subtle or obvious. This, then, allows the built form to act as a bridge between what is imagined and what is built that can contribute to a more fulfilled and successful society, and the human experience overall.

Further to this is the emotive connection to our built environment. How do we, as individuals, feel in any given space, both positive and negative? Are we even aware that we are feeling this and do or don’t value this? Maybe what we notice or experience the most in any given space, as we pass through or dwell in, is the atmosphere. An atmosphere will always be there, whether it is a positive celebration or something more sad and melancholy, and it can also change in a moment. This is where the built form can, perhaps, only enhance this. It is through understanding this that gives our built environment greater value. If it is good architecture and design that can enhance an atmosphere of a space or place, it shows there is a play between how we shape the built environment, then how it shapes us. It also shows us there’s a constant evolution and adaptation that is a direct reflection of our society and advancements taken, and yet to take. In looking back through history, we can reflect on each era or period of human life, and the activities encompassed to see what was valued and the values held.

“Architecture is based on and is a reflection of human activity, experiences and thought.”

Today, we still view historic architectural structures and monuments as significant, due to the (non-monetary) value we have, as a collective, placed on them. It is what they provide for us, the remembrance and reflection. Through walking or dwelling in these spaces and buildings, a spark of realisation in the values we hold emerges, some of which are still the same. Whether they are in the back of our mind, as something we have forgotten, but are always there, or we never realised what we valued until it’s in front of us. Our imagination has the capacity to take us through a multidimensional and embodied experience. If we value these historic buildings, structures, or monuments in such a way, how will we value what is built now, the contemporary, in the future? Will there be too much construction, reconstruction, and development?

In relation to the industries of the built environment as a whole, architecture is smaller than one may realise. This too is a reflection of societal evolution and is also for further exploration at a later time. Through evolution, it is yet to be determined whether more value will be placed on contemporary architecture or not. Yet, given where our built environment is currently, perhaps it has a much bigger role to play than we can perceive and through this, we will always need this profession, even as circumstances grow and change. So, what is the value of an architect and is it worth working with or engaging with one? In short, it is most definitely worth engaging or working with an architect when appropriate. Architects draw on these non-tangible theoretics, philosophy, and psychology, even if they don’t realise it, or are not particularly focused on it. With this, they create a connection to the more physical and tangible aspects of the design process, construction and practicalities, while also meeting and managing deadlines, budgets and contractors.

This connection adds to the non-monetary value and is part of knowing the full scope in the macro and micro. This allows an ability of shifting focus between the two throughout the project. In the design process, an architect may place themselves as the occupant in the space. This is to understand the experience of the imagined space that is informed and bound by the brief and physical requirements. In this process, full collaboration of teamwork and consultants makes the imagined space become a reality. Both the creative and practical give an architectural project the expression and experience in its entirety.

‘If we continue to demolish existing structurally sound buildings, what does it say about our values, toward sustainability or our historic buildings?’

Buildings generally have a long lifespan, and in getting it ‘right’ the first time may be more sustainable. Yes, original purposes may change, as well as the needs of the client or future occupants and owners, and as this is a part of evolution, it is also to be accepted as part of the story. However, if we continue to demolish existing structurally sound buildings, what does it say about our values, toward sustainability or our historic buildings? This leads to a sensitivity in the nature of how an architect can achieve a given project, as existing buildings don’t necessarily need to be demolished. Combining this sensitivity with non-tangible and tangible processes allows the best possible outcome for a comfortable space to be occupied. Because, let’s face it, if one is not comfortable in any given space, one will not dwell, or stay for very long.

‘We’re all deserving of comfortable spaces, and yet, it starts with knowing and understanding what we value and how we value them.’

So, as we all know, for anything to be designed and built, there is a monetary value with an overall budget for any given project. However, while very much necessary, it almost needs to become secondary to the outcome and the non-monetary values being instilled in any given project. As part of the process of brief and design, the architect will always attempt to achieve a cost that is as low as possible without compromising on the quality of the overall experiences of the final built form. A lower budget may create a more simple, though, just as innovative approach and outcome, while a higher budget may allow for more flexibility in what can be achieved.

We’re all deserving of comfortable spaces, and yet, it starts with knowing and understanding what we value and how we value them. It’s not valuing one aspect over another, it’s finding a balance between monetary and non-monetary, the tangible and intangible and where personal values sit within them. When finding clarity, these values can be expressed and drawn upon by an architect to create the best possible outcome for the built form to be experienced.