First a disclosure:  I’m a recovering Architect.  That’s a little tounge-in-cheek, I know.  Don’t get me wrong.  Architecture is endlessly fascinating to me.  I went college because I love architecture and I’m still energized by the design process.  The buildings Architects create have the power to inspire us, heal us, improve our attitudes, improve our living and working conditions, and to make the places we inhabit fun and exciting.  Architects also have a professional obligation to focus on the public’s health, safety and welfare.  They take this obligation very seriously. The number of building failures we have in our country.  Building failures do happen of course but it’s often not because of an Architect’s competency.  I hold Architects in very high regard.

But….

….It doesn’t compare to being an Owner.  And it’s not even close.

“Owner” is a broad term that encompasses anyone (individuals or companies) that build, own and/or operate buildings.  Every building sector has an Owner: residential, commercial office, industrial, healthcare, retail, data centers, schools, government agencies, etc.  Every building needs an Owner.  And the privileges the Owner are superior to those of an Architect.

I feel qualified to address this.  My career started in Architecture and worked for a really large firm for 5 years.  I loved the work and the people.  I was proud of the work we did.  Sometimes I liked the creative process.  Other times I was frustrated by it.  I did not love the intensity.  Nor did I love the mundane parts (drawing toilets).  I did not love the long hours and time spent away from my family. 

So I made the decision to go over to the Ownership side.  I figured (correctly) I could still use my architectural skills while also having a better work/life balance.  I could influence a greater number of projects and get a fuller picture of everything I build do more for each project. So here are 5 reasons why: Owners are better than Architects.

Owners set the vision and direction. Architects respond.

The cliché “follow the money” applies here.  The Owner is at the top of the food chain (unless the bank is financing), and everything flows downhill.  Architects are hired by the Owner to provide an important service.  Codes must be respected, practicalities must be considered, usability must be accommodated.  This is the Architect’s sandbox and she does well here.  But at the end of the day they work for the Owner.  She responds to Ownership requests and demands and she must comply (barring a request for something illegal or dangerous) lest she get fired.  The Owner sets the vision and project goals every time which is the best part of projects anyway!  The Architect is there to help realize the Owner’s vision.

Owners set deadlne and have unilateral discretion on timing

Deadlines and timing affect Architects disproportionately.  Building owners, being at the top of the food chain, get to make all the rules (forget about the bank for a minute).  Just like the overall project vision, the schedule is determined almost unilaterally by the Owner.  And Architects never turn down work.  Show me one and I have some magic beans to sell you.  The economics of the construction industry are very cyclical and Architects shy away from turning away work.  These conditions cause design schedules to become overloaded at times which disproportionally affects Architects over Owners.  Owners say when it will get done and Architects have to actually do it, no matter how much time it might take them.

Owners must deal with solutions, not problems.

Architects must deal with problems.  That’s not say problems don’t affect Owners.  Indeed they do.  But Owners aren’t the experts, even if we often possess expert knowledge.  The Architects are the experts and the expectation is they are providing solutions to the Owner.  Architects that come to Owners with problems they expect to be solved will find their way out of a job very quickly.  In an ideal world the Owner is merely considering several different solutions.  It’s the Architect that has to find the solutions in the first place.

Owners have significant risks (mostly financial), but not like what Architects have.

Owners definitely carry risk.  It’s their money after all (insert “bank” caveat here).  But Architects have to carry professional liability risk.  That’s a different animal all together because it’s risk that is directly tied to an Architect’s competency.  If a problem does manifest and that problem is traced back to a mistake in the design, guess who gets to pay to fix it?  Hint….it’s not the Owner.

Owners hold all the cards (power dynamics strongly favor Owner). 

Above all else, the Owner is the one that matters on any project.  Yes Architects are vital to a project’s success.  But the Owner gets all the say and has all the bragging rights on getting things built.  The power dynamics are in the Owner’s favor.  The Owner holds all the cards all the time and that’s a pretty great place to sit.

Summary

I’ll never fault anyone who feels truly passionate about the Architecture profession.  And there are really famous and successful Architects out there doing astonishing and groundbreaking work.  Their creative skills are rare indeed.  Just remember, every one of those Architects has nothing to design without an Owner.