Architects, we have problem!

Historical Context

Is it me, or are project deadlines and timelines getting shorter? There are more late nights and less downtime between projects.

This situation traces its roots back to the global financial crisis of 2007. A period when new work was scarce, and architects were under cutting each other’s fees to win work.

Around this time, advancements in technology began disrupting the industry. Promising greater efficiency, and enhanced accuracy.

Many companies adopted software like Revit and ArchiCAD, hoping for immediate benefits.

What many companies failed to realise was, the implementation of platforms like Revit (Autodesk) and ArchiCAD (Graphisoft) is far more complex than replacing older 2D drawing systems like AutoCAD.

Upgrading from 2D CAD to BIM (Building Information Modelling) is not as simple as a software upgrade.

I often describe the change as being like moving from analogue to digital. You are increasing the data available. Which increases the potential use cases.

Traditional 2D drawings carry limited information. Often specific to a single trade, whereas a BIM model encompasses a vast array of data.

In their rush to achieve efficiency and accuracy, many companies treated tools like Revit as nothing more than drafting tools. Ignoring the broader benefits and disruptions brought by the increased data.

What is the point of owning a modern smartphone if your phone network resembles the networks of the 1990’s?

Current Context

Fast forward to today, it seems architects can no longer compete on cost, they can only compete on time, which is a race to the bottom.

Only this time the consequences reach far deeper than loss of revenue. Competing on time will affect the mental health of staff.

Resulting in high staff turnover and an increase in toxic work culture. All caused by increased stress, fatigue and burn out.

As for the tools. They still promise unrivalled efficiency and accuracy while becoming ever more expensive. Trapping companies into a yearly software expense that is unsustainable. Further reducing the profit margin.

It is also worth noting that this disruption occurred before the recent developments in Artificial Intelligence. Another promise to increase efficiency while further increasing software overheads.

Recognizing Disruption

Architectural firms and tech leaders are eager to embrace the benefits these platforms offer, hoping to replace staff and boost profits. Yet, they fail to realize that the changes go beyond how drawings are created.

Technology is disrupting every part of architectural practice. And businesses need to adapt to digital, data-driven workflows.

This disruption should be a top priority. But right now, we are too focused on larger societal issues to address the challenges within our own industry.

Recently I have been asking colleagues what our product is, and the answer usually given is Architectural services, knowledge and ‘good design’ that all gets distilled down to a set of 2D drawings in a pdf format.

Once construction has completed and construction services rendered, we take some fancy photos for our website and walk away. Until the client, hopefully impressed by the previous venture, comes knocking again.

This business model does not seem to align with the workflow that the new software platforms present.

It certainly ignores an enormous amount of potential that can be realized with some adjustments to the way we think about what we do.

One example of this disruption is with fees. The BIM process moves much of the labour-intensive work to the project's front end, where you need to establish a model.

However, many companies still backload their fees to cover traditionally labour-intensive construction services. Resulting in loss of revenue on the front end.

This shift in the workload dynamics could mean that firms need to rethink how they structure their contracts and revenue models to remain sustainable.

Modern workflows have evolved. We are no longer creating a set of drawings; we are simulating a built environment.

You can think of this change as a full circle moment. Before the renaissance, master builders did not draw plans. They built prototypes and models in a field to assess ideas before implementing on site.

Then the renaissance arrives and the profession of architects drawing plans emerges. Now, thanks to modern technology, we are back to making models and prototypes. Only this time it is digital and the data in this simulation is vastly more valuable than the pdf's we issue.

In fact, I am increasingly seeing the BIM process replace workflows that have traditionally been coordinated with consultants using 2D drawings and a long email chain.

An example being the ability for door hardware suppliers to use the model to specify door hardware. There are many other examples across the industry.

Conclusion

So, I argue our product has changed and we have not realized. Our product is the problems we solve and the models that we produce, and the data held within.

The question is, how do we adapt the business model to harvest and monetize this new product?

There must be ways we can adapt our business model to bring more value to our clients, end users and the industry at large. While discovering new sources of revenue and added value to our businesses.

The issues discussed in this piece are complex, and I am not trying to solve the issues here and now. I do have some thoughts on how we can adapt, which I will cover in future writings.

My intention now is to spark a discussion. Get you to take a step back and see beyond the immediate task at hand and ask yourself the following questions.

Does what I am doing now provide more benefit beyond the impending deadline?

And can I use the work I am doing to extract extra value for my client and for myself?

One answer to these questions might be using Virtual Reality to communicate design ideas to clients.

If you concentrate your workflow on making sure your project is well modelled, you can use that data for visualisation. This is a great way to engage clients on projects.

Only through discussion and education are we going to be able to make the changes necessary to get our industry organized enough to tackle the larger issues in the world.