Request Info | Back to Home Page

 

 

PROVOCATIONS
January 2005

"What Are You Selling? . . . Is it What Your Clients Are Buying?"

by Susan Bilenker

An old friend and I were talking about the perennial challenge of "justifying fees" to clients and collecting on invoices due for architectural services.

After acknowledging the usual trio of fee bases -- hourly rates, percentage of construction cost, and square footage -- he paused and said, "You know, that's not what the client is thinking."

"What do you mean?" I asked.

"The client is thinking, 'I have to pay for what you want.'"

Somewhere between, "I'm going to build my dream house," and "Here is the invoice for the architectural design services you requested for your dream house," there develops a perceptual shift between client and architect. Especially if the budget has ballooned beyond initial estimates, what started out to be the client's dream house has somehow morphed, in the client's mind, into the architect's design statement.

Now picture this scenario happening between a client and a "home builder" or "developer." I'll bet you can't. Why is that? Aren't the architect and the builder offering the same product? A dream home? Why is it that clients feel that architects are profligate, artsy, ego-driven spenders who must be reigned in, yet builders and developers are service businesses hired to turn dream into livable reality?

A clue might lie in examining what it is you, the architect, think you're selling, versus what the client thinks he/she is buying.

For this exercise, I'll ask you to first wear your "architect" hat. You're thinking, I'm selling design, drawings, specifications, and site supervision. I'm selling my time and my expertise and my imagination.

Now, take off that hat and replace it with the "client" hat. Now you're thinking, I'm buying a home. I'm buying construction materials, appliances, flooring, windows, doors, plumbing, electrical systems, heating/air conditioning, landscaping, and the labor to properly install it all. . . I'm buying a home, my home.

Do you see the difference? Thinking like the "architect," the things you are selling are all about you: your talent, your drawings, your expertise, your ideas. And that's what the client hears.

I'm not saying you should stop being an architect; rather I'm suggesting you offer the client what he/she is looking to buy: a home. . . their home.

If you offer them a home, rather than a set of drawings, you may have a better chance at competing for projects against all the builders and developers out there who traditionally capture at least 80% of the market for new homes in this country. Of course, the home you can create for them will be better designed than what the builders are offering, because you're an architect, and you bring so much more to the table in terms of imagination, education, training, and expertise . . . but they'll only get to experience that if you actually get the job. And you'll have a better chance of getting the job if you sell them what they're buying: a home.

Susan Bilenker is Publisher of DesignSite. Her professional practice focuses on marketing and publicity for architects and designers.

Comments about this article? Email Susan Bilenker at info@design-site.net.  Readers Reply:

---

Readers Reply:

From Padriac R. Steinschneider, principal of architectural design firm, 1/13/05:

Good points and well presented. The only difference I would have made would be in the sentence that describes what the architect thinks he is selling. The way you have identified two different values is exactly the dichotomy that is affecting the profession: the difference between architects who look at it as a commercial venture in which their product is represented by drawings, and architects who look at it as a profession in which their product is their time and expertise.

The AIA is pushing the first concept and wants "architectural services" to be as restricted as possible to reduce liability. This results in programming, cost estimating, and assistance during construction being perceived as outside of basic services.

In fact, the AIA isn't taking this step to provide the opportunity to expand the fee. It really believes these other types of services should be provided by others, freeing the architect to assume a role in which he is told what the client needs, what it will cost, and how it will be administrated after preparation of the construction documents.

This has even led to the idea that, since the drawings are finished prior to permitting, representation during the permitting phase is outside basic services.

Someone offering the second version, which flirts with the old time religion of architect as creator, risks the tension between the sacred and the profane, if there is a "product." Time and expertise become commitment and imagination which then become belief and inspiration.

I was explaining the design process at a work session we conducted last week . . .   I was asked how designers come up with their ideas. Obviously a lay person, but sincere and somewhat refreshing. They wanted to know if there were some kind of design rules that tell the designer what to do or if the creative process is more magical.

Someone else at the table, also a lay person, but the type that thinks they know everything, answered that the designer sits around doodling, which is how they can bill for so many hours, and then they are struck by divine inspiration, which takes about 5 minutes.

I feigned puzzlement and answered, "but that assumes that someone besides me is the creator." It used to be that architects who believed in themselves as creators had to forego monetary interests, since being concerned with money would debase their divinity status. We should revisit this, now that organized religions have learned to become so financially oriented. Maybe architects can be creators and well paid.

 

Comments about this article? Email Susan Bilenker at info@design-site.net.

PROVOCATIONS is an online journal of architecture and ideas.

Editor: Susan Bilenker, info@design-site.net.
Publisher: Susan Bilenker Communications for DesignSite™ .
Opinions expressed by authors published in Provocations are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Provocations, DesignSite, or Susan Bilenker Communications.

last update: 1/24/05