The architect, the plumber, the electrician. Issue of Social Standing.
This text is about to explore the role of a professional in the built environment. Based on the collective proposal for the radical model of construction industry which aims to disrupt the status quo by decentralising the power grid, encouraging the grass route initiatives such as co-operatives, and promoting the alternative procurements routes where the developer does not have the power to assess the quality of the project purely from the monetary perspective, which is so common across all sorts of projects today especially housing, to bring the economical, environmental, and most importantly social justice back to the position they deserve in the built environment.
One of the overwhelming problems in the way of the new radical model, is the status of the architect. The professionals having their title protected by law. This imposition of power, institutionalised and accepted as the gold standard however no longer seems to be fit for the current world. What I will explore on the upcoming pages is the encapsulation of knowledge, or even the theoretical idea of a title safeguarding this knowledge, where in practice they do not always go hand in hand. Why is it that this recognition is purely reserved for individuals who complete their RIBA prescribed courses, starting from Part 1, through Part 2 to finally Part 3 examination to gain the title of an Architect, where as people with actual experience of built environment are denoted to lesser social status (if we accept the imaginary high social status of Architects which is another myth worth exploring in itself), which in practice does not allow their knowledge of architecture to be fully explored, stopping the development of built environments in its tracks. We absolutely need the input of newly developing sustainable power technology specialists, urban and regional planners, plumbers, electricians, sociologists or designers to make sure that architecture responds to the need of society that changes at unforeseen pace.
To understand that relation between social status and knowledge I will explore the path and legal hurdles that one has to endure to become a plumber, or an electrician and contrast it with the education path one has to take to become an architect. In doing so, I hope to reveal relations between the two that are not apparent at first glance, through understating that system of relations it may be possible to answer the question if architect’s status is an artefact still embedded in the western model of built environment?
Two case studies that have sparked my interest in those questions are very different from each other, but both do challenge the preconceived notions of the professional. Firstly, Copper Lane development took a radical move which “allowed the group to progress without rules, where decisions were made by a consensus”[1], ultimately leaving a traditional developer in dust to create a co-housing unit. Secondly, Walter Ways in Lewisham where a timber frame construction system developed by architect Walter Segal allowed “relatively unskilled people to build their own homes”[2] overturning the traditional procurement routes. This noble idea of moving away from the beaten path and proposing a new way of understanding the processes that drive the built environment forward is something I want to apply towards the position of architects, their social status.
Firstly, I want to present the definition of the word “a professional” as stated in the Cambridge Dictionary: “Relating to work that needs special training or education”[3]. Based on this definition, one can assume that electricians or plumbers are professional. They obtained educational awards granted by National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) in the past, which were withdrawn in 2015 and replaced by Regulated Qualifications Framework (RQF) that are regulated by the Office of Qualification and Examinations Regulation (Ofqual). Ofqual is a non-ministerial government department meaning the matters which it deals with have been judged unnecessary in terms of direct political oversight. Nonetheless, it “regulates qualifications, exams and tests”[4] in order to maintain high standard and more importantly confidence in the awards it grants. Based on that, it’s safe to assume they do provide work based on the education they obtained, furthermore apprenticeships programmes provide hands on training (which architectural education so often lacks) seemingly making them fit into the definition of a professional. So why is it that in the built environment it would be jarring to see a plumber next to an architect and call both professionals?
It seems like the institutionalized social standing is most definitely a factor. Under section 20 of the Architects Act 1997 the title of ‘Architect’ is protected by law. A statutory body for the registration of architects in the United Kingdom is responsible for keeping track of professionals practicing architecture — architects. Also worth mentioning, RIBA (Royal Institute of British Architects), which is a professional body of 44,000 members does not have any legislative power, but through the sheer size of it, it does hold some leverage into how the profession is steered forward. This makes it input into education especially distinctively prominent. It does map out the pathway to qualify as an architect and is responsible for validating university courses that in turn can grant RIBA accredited awards.
Unsurprisingly, the title of electrician or a plumber is not protected by law and anyone can use them. The only exception I was able to find was the Gas Safe Register. It is stated that “by law all gas businesses must be on the Gas Safe Register”[5], to ensure the quality and foremost the safety of any job involving gas, however, the register is not a union or other legal entity hence its power is limited if at all existing.
In order to justify those differences one might bring your attention to the responsibilities that architects have to bear on their shoulders. Yet in practice it’s difficult to comprehensively outline what architects are responsible for. From RIBA stages of work we may deduce that work related to the brief, concept design, planning application documentation, tender documentation, contract administration or inspection of work are all on the shoulders of architect yet each and one of those tasks or services can be carried out by someone else and it’s well within the law as long as they do not call themselves architects if they are not a member of Architect Registration Board. In my opinion, this fact truly undermines the social standing and prowess of architects. On top of that, “the architect is not the one who decides to build or not to build. That decision is made by others who control the financial and material resources[…]those who own the land or represent the privileged governmental and legal system”[6]. In this late it seems like the architect is no more a prestigious worker than an electrician or a plumber is.
To drive that point even further architects have to follow “Approved Documents that support the technical “Parts” of the Building Regulations’”[7]. Which clearly outline design parameters for stairs, corridors, fire escapes, thermal performance of buildings, ventilation, access and use of building, electrical safety, security of buildings and so on. These approved documents are accessible to any individual and I am keen to point out that 7 years of higher education is not necessary to make sense of guidelines and legislations described in those documents. One may argue that the architect brings in ‘an added value’ to a project through implementing more of a design work that cannot be simply prescribed in a handbook, however, “design work is increasingly being carried out by subcontractors”[8] making the argument rather bleak. In opposition to this narrative Spector argues that “the role of the architect involves obligations that are not easily reduced to issues of mere technical competence. An architect addresses client’s needs through the medium of built environment”[9], yet he fails to see how the client’s needs do not require a title protected by law to be resolved. What is even more frustrating are the proceedings of an investigation when the blame of catastrophic design is pushed from the architect to advisor, to contractor, to subcontractor and Grenfell is a grim example of this convoluted responsibility-blame game. This drives the point even further, the burden of architectural duty is a tricky one to pinpoint. “Public disappointment in architects is founded on the belief that architects have a collective ethical responsibility for public good”[10] but it seems like this collective ethical duty cannot be measured in any way. It might be more beneficial to introduce this responsibility across professionals who provide services in the built industry rather than using it to elevate the status of a single profession. The integration of other services of built environment is unavoidable, meaning that the all powerful architect master builder is a relic of the past. Even further, it seems like this social upstanding is a big part of “the corrosive architectural egotism on the build environment”[11] The game has changed and the industry has to respond to it. The idea of institutionalized knowledge and a title hidden behind paywall of roughly £88,726[12] is simply socially unjust.
I am sure we are all familiar with the paths that takes one to become an architect, the 3 part system that is the traditional route, newly introduced RIBA Studio or apprenticeship route[13], but I wanted to focus this part of the essay on the routes that can be taken to become a plumber or an electrician. In the UK, electrical licenses follow a stage system that is reminiscent of the 3 part system for architecture. Starting of with an apprentice, which is easily achievable as one has to demonstrate they are working towards further tiers of the system. Through restricted electrical worker to a qualified electrician, which had to obtain a level 3 NVQ qualification and BS7671 IEE wiring requirements standard. The fourth license comes in as Assessed Qualified Electrician, this indicated an individual met all of the requirements of SparkSafe Qualified electrician and “assessed on site by a UKAS accredited body to the IET’s Electrotechnical Assessment Specification standard”[14]. Where UKAS — United Kingdom Accreditation Service, is the government recognised accreditation body that not only works with electrical services but other technical professions in the realm of build environment. For UKAS, accreditation is “the formal recognition that an organisation is competent to perform specific processes, activities, or tasks in a reliable credible and accurate manner”[15], this is assessed according to the Institute of Engineering and Technology (IET) guidelines, much like RIBA guidelines for part 3 examination. It really is oddly comparable to the education routes that we have to go through as architects in training. Precisely because of that the disparity between how the general built environment does not consider the knowledge of an electrician with the same gravitas as the knowledge of an architect is a shame. That can be read on two scales, the micro — where the most mundane design choices can just affect the end user experience of the designed architecture, or the macro — where the relation between the architecture and the energy system could benefit from a wholistic approach which must take into account collective knowledge of all parties involved, not just the architect, just the engineer, or just a planner. It’s about time to move from the hierarchical approach to a much needed collective, levelled model.
One could wonder if abolishing the hierarchical systems in favour of a more laterally fluid professional model could benefit us in this situation. Who’s to say that an individual with a strong background in energy technologies cannot laterally shift into architecture, but instead has to start from bottom as part 1 architecture student to get any recognition in this profession? Interestingly, in the plumbing world Tim Sainty (Membership Director at CIPHE (Chartered Institute of Plumbing and Heating Engineering)) argues that licensing could be the solution to plumbing standards in the UK. As it stands, there are no legal requirements needed to set up a plumbing business. Historically the path to this career was very similar to an electrician’s — apprenticeship and NVQ Level 3, but with introduction of diplomas and short courses the waters have muddied[16] and it no longer is clear what level, or what standard is upheld with a given educational award. The underlying argument throughout his text is that providing clear guidance and standards are the way to prove competence, ability, and professionalism. Now the current status of plumbing licensing stands at the opposite ends to established traditional architecture narrative and electrical licenses, and the opposite ends of the spectrum are pulling towards the centre. Whether it’s towards relaxing the institutional stronghold in terms of architecture or introducing law and order into the free for all world of plumbing. It is a balancing act between making sure that the lateral movement within the build environment professions is facilitated to allow the circulation of knowledge that is so desirable in today’s world, but still maintaining a framework that assures the client of ability and competence to provide high quality service. In most cases the legislation did come into place to ensure those qualities, yet in case of architecture one could argue that they became self-serving in order to maintain the social standing of those professionals, safeguarding the access to this elitist member’s club that we now have to pay tens of thousands of pounds to join and do the job that in practice anyone else can do well within the law as long as they do not call themselves an architect.
Based on the collective work that went into the proposal of a new built environment model, the Smart Grid Co-op, and arguments presented on this essay I believe that the social upstanding of architects that is deeply institutionalised is not beneficial for the profession at all. However, I am not arguing for a total banishment of titles and licenses, what I think would push the profession forward is acceptance that the knowledge of built environment comes in a plethora of experiences and each one of these should be valued. In the incredibly fast paced environment lateral movement between the professions can only benefit the final outcome of any project, but also provide a much more balanced social landscape.
[1] Fogel, Baiba. (2016) Socio-technical transitions: a case study of co-housing in London. Dissertation, MSc degree in Sustainable Cities at King’s College London. p40
[2] Holland, Charles. (2018) Wild Architecture: The Potential of Self‐Build Settlements. Special Issue: Architecture and Freedom: Searching for Agency in a Changing World. Volume 88, Issue 3. p107
[3]Cambridge Dictionary, Meaning of professional in English https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/professional accessed 05/01/21.
[4]Corporate Information: Ofqual. What do we do. https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ofqual#what-we-do accessed 05/01/21.
[5] Gas Safe Register. What is Gas Safe Register. https://www.gassaferegister.co.uk/who-we-are/what-is-gas-safe-register/ accessed 08/01/21.
[6] Woods, Lebbeus. (2015) Slow Manifesto — Lebbeus Woods Blog. Eddited by Clare Jacobsen. Princeton Architectural Press, New York. p8
[7] Planning Portal, Approved Documets. https://www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200135/approved_documents accessed 06/01/21
[8] Jamieson, Claire (2011) The Future for Architects? Project Report. Royal
Institute of British Architects, London. p12
[9] Spector, Tom. (2001) The Ethical Architect: The Dilemma of Contemporary Practice. Princeton Architectural Press, New York. p5
[10] Samuel, Flora. (2018) Why Architects Matter: Evidencing and Communicating the Value of Architects. Routledge, Oxon. p15
[11] Glendinning, Miles. (2010) Architecture’s Evil Empire? The triumph and tragedy of global modernism. Reaktion Books, London. p140
[12] Merlin Fulcher Survey: cost of studying architecture to hit £88k. Architects’ Journal. https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/archive/survey-cost-of-studying-architecture-to-hit-88k accessed 09/01/21
[13] RIBA, Pathways to Qualify as an architect. https://www.architecture.com/education-cpd-and-careers/how-to-become-an-architect accessed 09/01/21
[14] SparkSafe, What are license types for electrical workers. https://sparksafeltp.co.uk/faq/licence-types-electrical-workers/ accessed 03/01/21
[15] UKAS United Kingdom Accreditation Service (2020), What is accreditation. p3.
[16] Tim Sainty, HVP Magazine. LICENSING COULD BE THE SOLUTION TO PLUMBING STANDARDS IN THE UK. https://www.hvpmag.co.uk/Licensing-could-be-the-solution-to-plumbing-standards-in-the-UK/11051#:~:text=Currently%2C%20there%20are%20no%20legal,Gas%20Safe%20Register%20is%20essential. Accessed: 08/01/21