Custom Residential Architects Network

Folks,
I wasn't trying to imply that graduates from NAAB certified universities are not entitled to some sort of designation that properly designates their apprenticeship roles on their way to a diligently pursued taking of the ARE and subsequent architectural licensure.
What I was reacting to was the specific designation presently used by the AIA: "Assoc. AIA"  or "Associate AIA." 

The AIA has been quite successful in their marketing efforts to have the public believe that use of the letters: "AIA" = licensed, capable real Architect. 

Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword.  I have personally witnessed where abuses of the term "Assoc. AIA" have confused the public into thinking that ANY use of the letters "AIA" = licensed Architect.  That's the point. 

And I have seen where such practices have appeared to intentionally mislead the public in this regard.  People who have no intentions of ever taking the ARE or who are no longer in an apprenticeship role, and who are practicing architectural design on their own, in competition in the free marketplace, in my opinion, should not be allowed to use designations after their name that seem intended to purposely and willfully confuse the public about what their education, training, and licensure or lack thereof should indicate, regardless of what State laws may allow them to do. 

Professional organizations like the AIA are supposed to stand for something more: a higher level of what we in the profession have spent decades to become and successfully jumped over all the hurdles in the process to become.  There should be something sacred about designations that are intended to identify: Architects.  Otherwise, the George Costanzas of the world can pay a fee and pretend to be the real McCoy, hoping that people don't notice the "Assoc."  in front of "AIA."  

Here's an example:  George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, Ass. AIA, NCARB, AIBD
And another: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, AIA, NCARB, AIBD

Okay: how many of you really believe that the public will notice the difference?  Or care?  Until they discover (if they ever do) that whom they've been doing business with isn't a real, licensed Architect after all?  I have seen this happen.  Shouldn't ALL of us care about this? Especially those of you who are struggling so hard to "get there?"  Shouldn't the designations you use mean something more?  Something that reflects what you have striven for, for so long to attain?  Do you really think it is fair or reasonable to allow others who haven't attained your level of education, licensure and experience to be viewed as having the same background as you? 

Architects in Training, should, perhaps, have a different designation, such as what the Engineering disciplines use: AIT.  Nothing wrong about that, is there? 

In the AIA's desire to obtain funding for their 200+ person staff payroll, there should be more attention given to those whom this organization was originally conceived to serve and represent: Architects.  Real.  Licensed. Architects. 

Also, there is nothing intended about these comments to refer to age of anyone in any role, whether young, in between, or more mature.  This has to do with little letters meaning big things, that's all. 

I believe that when any professional organization bestows the right to use letters after names, that to the public means "real", that it mean something unequivocally, with no ifs, ands, or "associates" about it. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------

If you want to go by originally conceived then AIA membership was only for those who have obtained an architecture degree. Remember, architectural licensing did not exist when AIA was conceived. If we go by definition of architect when AIA was conceived then I am an architect based on definitions of the time. It was 40-50 years after AIA was founded when Illinois (the first state to adopt architectural licensing law) and it was at that time in the 1890s that the concept of architect meaning "licensed" even existed. It was over the next 50 years or so that all 50 states finally enacted architectural licensing laws. The idea of architectural licensing in the eyes of the general public means nothing to them. After all, they never voted for these licensing laws. They weren't adopted by public ballot vote. Those laws were adopted by legislation in a time when they weren't held accountable to the public and opaque as the color black. Transparency of public government didn't happen until the 1950s, 1960s and after. Before hand, it wasn't the norm. As for those who are members of the AIBD, so what. Many of the certified members of the AIBD/NCBDC are as good as most architects in the residential sector. A license doesn't make you better and you need to drop this 'entitlement' thinking that just because you are licensed that you are better than someone who isn't. It is business and some of them are going to promote their business and their service. Lets get right to the facts, it isn't alphabet soup that will land you or the other guy the job. In addition, who cares if associate members of AIA or even architect members of AIA are also members of the AIBD. It means you are paying dues to two proffesional societies. Some people in life do have to make choices that delay pursuit of licensure. Why should "Associate" members of the AIA be bound to some "rolling clock" to complete IDP, ARE and NCARB degree and get licensed ? The process to become license may take 7/8 years or even 50 years. Who cares? What is your real motives? Are you trying to impose some rule that Associate members can't engage as a building designer when State laws permits them to? You realize that the days of traditional employment opportunities are numbered and nearing an end when firms no longer post job position offerings anymore in most of the U.S. Even if I choose to get NCBDC certified, doesn't mean I no longer pursuing architectural licensing. Sometimes, those processes slow down because opportunities are limited or not immediately available. As far as we know, AIA can mean the person is an archaelogist so lets not get bent out of shape. What is important is use of title "Architect" or more specifically, "Registered Architect" / "Licensed Architect". If it is not used then it is not a violation of law. Public doesn't care. In most of the U.S., it doesn't matter who designs houses. What matters is delivering the best possible service to the client in fulfilling the client's needs, desires, and budget where possible in designing houses and other buildings. In cases, we have envionmental and regulatory responsibilities as well. ------------------------------------------- Richard Balkins, Assoc. AIA Building Designer / owner Richard W.C. Balkins, Building Designer Astoria, OR -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 01-13-2014 17:52 From: Rand Soellner Subject: What AIA means to the Public Folks, I wasn't trying to imply that graduates from NAAB certified universities are not entitled to some sort of designation that properly designates their apprenticeship roles on their way to a diligently pursued taking of the ARE and subsequent architectural licensure. What I was reacting to was the specific designation presently used by the AIA: "Assoc. AIA" or "Associate AIA." The AIA has been quite successful in their marketing efforts to have the public believe that use of the letters: "AIA" = licensed, capable real Architect. Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword. I have personally witnessed where abuses of the term "Assoc. AIA" have confused the public into thinking that ANY use of the letters "AIA" = licensed Architect. That's the point. And I have seen where such practices have appeared to intentionally mislead the public in this regard. People who have no intentions of ever taking the ARE or who are no longer in an apprenticeship role, and who are practicing architectural design on their own, in competition in the free marketplace, in my opinion, should not be allowed to use designations after their name that seem intended to purposely and willfully confuse the public about what their education, training, and licensure or lack thereof should indicate, regardless of what State laws may allow them to do. Professional organizations like the AIA are supposed to stand for something more: a higher level of what we in the profession have spent decades to become and successfully jumped over all the hurdles in the process to become. There should be something sacred about designations that are intended to identify: Architects. Otherwise, the George Costanzas of the world can pay a fee and pretend to be the real McCoy, hoping that people don't notice the "Assoc." in front of "AIA." Here's an example: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, Ass. AIA, NCARB, AIBD And another: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, AIA, NCARB, AIBD Okay: how many of you really believe that the public will notice the difference? Or care? Until they discover (if they ever do) that whom they've been doing business with isn't a real, licensed Architect after all? I have seen this happen. Shouldn't ALL of us care about this? Especially those of you who are struggling so hard to "get there?" Shouldn't the designations you use mean something more? Something that reflects what you have striven for, for so long to attain? Do you really think it is fair or reasonable to allow others who haven't attained your level of education, licensure and experience to be viewed as having the same background as you? Architects in Training, should, perhaps, have a different designation, such as what the Engineering disciplines use: AIT. Nothing wrong about that, is there? In the AIA's desire to obtain funding for their 200+ person staff payroll, there should be more attention given to those whom this organization was originally conceived to serve and represent: Architects. Real. Licensed. Architects. Also, there is nothing intended about these comments to refer to age of anyone in any role, whether young, in between, or more mature. This has to do with little letters meaning big things, that's all. I believe that when any professional organization bestows the right to use letters after names, that to the public means "real", that it mean something unequivocally, with no ifs, ands, or "associates" about it. ------------------------------------------- Rand Soellner Architect/Owner/Principal Home Architects Cashiers NC -------------------------------------------

To "pile on" a little bit, here's another example:
"George Costanza, Associate, AIA"
"George Costanza, Associate AIA"

A single comma makes the difference between someone who is on track to become a licensed architect versus someone who is a licensed architect and an associate in their firm. It's this kind of potential confusion among consumers of architectural services that I resist--confusion that can lead to avoidable risks to human health and safety and confusion that is diluting the value of architects in the marketplace.

-------------------------------------------
Sean Catherall AIA
Architect
Herriman UT
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 01-13-2014 18:23
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

Folks,
I wasn't trying to imply that graduates from NAAB certified universities are not entitled to some sort of designation that properly designates their apprenticeship roles on their way to a diligently pursued taking of the ARE and subsequent architectural licensure.
What I was reacting to was the specific designation presently used by the AIA: "Assoc. AIA"  or "Associate AIA." 

The AIA has been quite successful in their marketing efforts to have the public believe that use of the letters: "AIA" = licensed, capable real Architect. 

Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword.  I have personally witnessed where abuses of the term "Assoc. AIA" have confused the public into thinking that ANY use of the letters "AIA" = licensed Architect.  That's the point. 

And I have seen where such practices have appeared to intentionally mislead the public in this regard.  People who have no intentions of ever taking the ARE or who are no longer in an apprenticeship role, and who are practicing architectural design on their own, in competition in the free marketplace, in my opinion, should not be allowed to use designations after their name that seem intended to purposely and willfully confuse the public about what their education, training, and licensure or lack thereof should indicate, regardless of what State laws may allow them to do. 

Professional organizations like the AIA are supposed to stand for something more: a higher level of what we in the profession have spent decades to become and successfully jumped over all the hurdles in the process to become.  There should be something sacred about designations that are intended to identify: Architects.  Otherwise, the George Costanzas of the world can pay a fee and pretend to be the real McCoy, hoping that people don't notice the "Assoc."  in front of "AIA."  

Here's an example:  George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, Ass. AIA, NCARB, AIBD
And another: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, AIA, NCARB, AIBD

Okay: how many of you really believe that the public will notice the difference?  Or care?  Until they discover (if they ever do) that whom they've been doing business with isn't a real, licensed Architect after all?  I have seen this happen.  Shouldn't ALL of us care about this? Especially those of you who are struggling so hard to "get there?"  Shouldn't the designations you use mean something more?  Something that reflects what you have striven for, for so long to attain?  Do you really think it is fair or reasonable to allow others who haven't attained your level of education, licensure and experience to be viewed as having the same background as you? 

Architects in Training, should, perhaps, have a different designation, such as what the Engineering disciplines use: AIT.  Nothing wrong about that, is there? 

In the AIA's desire to obtain funding for their 200+ person staff payroll, there should be more attention given to those whom this organization was originally conceived to serve and represent: Architects.  Real.  Licensed. Architects. 

Also, there is nothing intended about these comments to refer to age of anyone in any role, whether young, in between, or more mature.  This has to do with little letters meaning big things, that's all. 

I believe that when any professional organization bestows the right to use letters after names, that to the public means "real", that it mean something unequivocally, with no ifs, ands, or "associates" about it. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------

As for any of this, what if a person is licensed in some states and not licensed in others. It might be worth getting the facts in order before accusation anyone of violating any rules. ------------------------------------------- Richard Balkins, Assoc. AIA Building Designer / owner Richard W.C. Balkins, Building Designer Astoria, OR -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 01-13-2014 18:32 From: Sean Catherall Subject: What AIA means to the Public To "pile on" a little bit, here's another example: "George Costanza, Associate, AIA" "George Costanza, Associate AIA" A single comma makes the difference between someone who is on track to become a licensed architect versus someone who is a licensed architect and an associate in their firm. It's this kind of potential confusion among consumers of architectural services that I resist--confusion that can lead to avoidable risks to human health and safety and confusion that is diluting the value of architects in the marketplace. ------------------------------------------- Sean Catherall AIA Architect Herriman UT -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 01-13-2014 18:23 From: Rand Soellner Subject: What AIA means to the Public Folks, I wasn't trying to imply that graduates from NAAB certified universities are not entitled to some sort of designation that properly designates their apprenticeship roles on their way to a diligently pursued taking of the ARE and subsequent architectural licensure. What I was reacting to was the specific designation presently used by the AIA: "Assoc. AIA" or "Associate AIA." The AIA has been quite successful in their marketing efforts to have the public believe that use of the letters: "AIA" = licensed, capable real Architect. Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword. I have personally witnessed where abuses of the term "Assoc. AIA" have confused the public into thinking that ANY use of the letters "AIA" = licensed Architect. That's the point. And I have seen where such practices have appeared to intentionally mislead the public in this regard. People who have no intentions of ever taking the ARE or who are no longer in an apprenticeship role, and who are practicing architectural design on their own, in competition in the free marketplace, in my opinion, should not be allowed to use designations after their name that seem intended to purposely and willfully confuse the public about what their education, training, and licensure or lack thereof should indicate, regardless of what State laws may allow them to do. Professional organizations like the AIA are supposed to stand for something more: a higher level of what we in the profession have spent decades to become and successfully jumped over all the hurdles in the process to become. There should be something sacred about designations that are intended to identify: Architects. Otherwise, the George Costanzas of the world can pay a fee and pretend to be the real McCoy, hoping that people don't notice the "Assoc." in front of "AIA." Here's an example: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, Ass. AIA, NCARB, AIBD And another: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, AIA, NCARB, AIBD Okay: how many of you really believe that the public will notice the difference? Or care? Until they discover (if they ever do) that whom they've been doing business with isn't a real, licensed Architect after all? I have seen this happen. Shouldn't ALL of us care about this? Especially those of you who are struggling so hard to "get there?" Shouldn't the designations you use mean something more? Something that reflects what you have striven for, for so long to attain? Do you really think it is fair or reasonable to allow others who haven't attained your level of education, licensure and experience to be viewed as having the same background as you? Architects in Training, should, perhaps, have a different designation, such as what the Engineering disciplines use: AIT. Nothing wrong about that, is there? In the AIA's desire to obtain funding for their 200+ person staff payroll, there should be more attention given to those whom this organization was originally conceived to serve and represent: Architects. Real. Licensed. Architects. Also, there is nothing intended about these comments to refer to age of anyone in any role, whether young, in between, or more mature. This has to do with little letters meaning big things, that's all. I believe that when any professional organization bestows the right to use letters after names, that to the public means "real", that it mean something unequivocally, with no ifs, ands, or "associates" about it. ------------------------------------------- Rand Soellner Architect/Owner/Principal Home Architects Cashiers NC -------------------------------------------

I haven't accused anyone of breaking any rules. The examples I cited are both legal titles. I'm resisting avoidable, dangerous and unfair confusion in the marketplace, whether introduced by unlicensed people on track to be architects, unlicensed people not pursuing licensure, the AIA itself, NCARB itself or state architecture review boards themselves, without making any accusations against specific individuals.

-------------------------------------------
Sean Catherall AIA
Architect
Herriman UT
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 01-13-2014 18:38
From: Richard Balkins
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

As for any of this, what if a person is licensed in some states and not licensed in others. It might be worth getting the facts in order before accusation anyone of violating any rules.

-------------------------------------------
Richard Balkins, Assoc. AIA
Building Designer / owner
Richard W.C. Balkins, Building Designer
Astoria, OR

-------------------------------------------

Thanks for clarifying your point. It would only be fair of me to clarify myself to you in that I did not mean or intend to mean that you were accusing anyone but I was writing quickly and meant in a rhetorical "you" vs actually you. I think we are good. ------------------------------------------- Richard Balkins, Assoc. AIA Building Designer / owner Richard W.C. Balkins, Building Designer Astoria, OR -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 01-13-2014 23:48 From: Sean Catherall Subject: What AIA means to the Public I haven't accused anyone of breaking any rules. The examples I cited are both legal titles. I'm resisting avoidable, dangerous and unfair confusion in the marketplace, whether introduced by unlicensed people on track to be architects, unlicensed people not pursuing licensure, the AIA itself, NCARB itself or state architecture review boards themselves, without making any accusations against specific individuals. ------------------------------------------- Sean Catherall AIA Architect Herriman UT -------------------------------------------
Original Message: Sent: 01-13-2014 18:38 From: Richard Balkins Subject: What AIA means to the Public As for any of this, what if a person is licensed in some states and not licensed in others. It might be worth getting the facts in order before accusation anyone of violating any rules. ------------------------------------------- Richard Balkins, Assoc. AIA Building Designer / owner Richard W.C. Balkins, Building Designer Astoria, OR -------------------------------------------

I think the proper order in your first example is "George Costanza, AIA, Associate".

You should read "Eats, Shoots & Leaves". Etiquette, protocol and punctuation matter!

-------------------------------------------
Carol De Tine AIA
Principal
Carriage House Studio Architects, LLC
Portland ME
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2014 11:26
From: Sean Catherall
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

To "pile on" a little bit, here's another example:
"George Costanza, Associate, AIA"
"George Costanza, Associate AIA"

A single comma makes the difference between someone who is on track to become a licensed architect versus someone who is a licensed architect and an associate in their firm. It's this kind of potential confusion among consumers of architectural services that I resist--confusion that can lead to avoidable risks to human health and safety and confusion that is diluting the value of architects in the marketplace.

-------------------------------------------
Sean Catherall AIA
Architect
Herriman UT
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 01-13-2014 18:23
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

Folks,
I wasn't trying to imply that graduates from NAAB certified universities are not entitled to some sort of designation that properly designates their apprenticeship roles on their way to a diligently pursued taking of the ARE and subsequent architectural licensure.
What I was reacting to was the specific designation presently used by the AIA: "Assoc. AIA"  or "Associate AIA." 

The AIA has been quite successful in their marketing efforts to have the public believe that use of the letters: "AIA" = licensed, capable real Architect. 

Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword.  I have personally witnessed where abuses of the term "Assoc. AIA" have confused the public into thinking that ANY use of the letters "AIA" = licensed Architect.  That's the point. 

And I have seen where such practices have appeared to intentionally mislead the public in this regard.  People who have no intentions of ever taking the ARE or who are no longer in an apprenticeship role, and who are practicing architectural design on their own, in competition in the free marketplace, in my opinion, should not be allowed to use designations after their name that seem intended to purposely and willfully confuse the public about what their education, training, and licensure or lack thereof should indicate, regardless of what State laws may allow them to do. 

Professional organizations like the AIA are supposed to stand for something more: a higher level of what we in the profession have spent decades to become and successfully jumped over all the hurdles in the process to become.  There should be something sacred about designations that are intended to identify: Architects.  Otherwise, the George Costanzas of the world can pay a fee and pretend to be the real McCoy, hoping that people don't notice the "Assoc."  in front of "AIA."  

Here's an example:  George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, Ass. AIA, NCARB, AIBD
And another: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, AIA, NCARB, AIBD

Okay: how many of you really believe that the public will notice the difference?  Or care?  Until they discover (if they ever do) that whom they've been doing business with isn't a real, licensed Architect after all?  I have seen this happen.  Shouldn't ALL of us care about this? Especially those of you who are struggling so hard to "get there?"  Shouldn't the designations you use mean something more?  Something that reflects what you have striven for, for so long to attain?  Do you really think it is fair or reasonable to allow others who haven't attained your level of education, licensure and experience to be viewed as having the same background as you? 

Architects in Training, should, perhaps, have a different designation, such as what the Engineering disciplines use: AIT.  Nothing wrong about that, is there? 

In the AIA's desire to obtain funding for their 200+ person staff payroll, there should be more attention given to those whom this organization was originally conceived to serve and represent: Architects.  Real.  Licensed. Architects. 

Also, there is nothing intended about these comments to refer to age of anyone in any role, whether young, in between, or more mature.  This has to do with little letters meaning big things, that's all. 

I believe that when any professional organization bestows the right to use letters after names, that to the public means "real", that it mean something unequivocally, with no ifs, ands, or "associates" about it. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------

And the general public is supposed to know the difference between "...AIA, Assoc.," "...Assoc., AIA" and "...Assoc. AIA"? Just sayin'.

-------------------------------------------
Sean Catherall AIA
Architect
Herriman UT
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 01-22-2014 22:29
From: Carol De Tine
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

I think the proper order in your first example is "George Costanza, AIA, Associate".

You should read "Eats, Shoots & Leaves". Etiquette, protocol and punctuation matter!

-------------------------------------------
Carol De Tine AIA
Principal
Carriage House Studio Architects, LLC
Portland ME
-------------------------------------------

We are talking about adults that supposedly had completed high school. If they have money, they should have completed some level of college. 

"Joe Blow, Assoc. AIA"
"Joe Blow, AIA, Assoc."
"Joe Blow, Assoc., AIA"

Each has differences visually. Different placement of commas. Different quantity. The first says the person is an associate member of AIA. The Second says the person is an AIA member and is an Associate of the firm. The Third says Joe is an Associate of the firm and is an AIA member. The comma separates Associate from the AIA which means the Associate is not in association with the AIA as in the case of an Associate member of the AIA. It does take a little reading comprehension. An adult is suppose to have college level academic research skills. Especially if they are a professional in some field that customarily requires a degree. An adult can find out what the membership levels of AIA through a simple google search. They are suppose to exercise an adult level prudence like some basic background research and not picking people on the spot.

We should stop treating our clients as if they are in kindergarten and can't make decisions for themselves. This 'protectionism' can go a bit excessive. Just some thoughts. 

-------------------------------------------
Richard Balkins, Assoc. AIA
Building Designer / owner
Richard W.C. Balkins, Building Designer
Astoria, OR

-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 01-23-2014 20:21
From: Sean Catherall
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

And the general public is supposed to know the difference between "...AIA, Assoc.," "...Assoc., AIA" and "...Assoc. AIA"? Just sayin'.

-------------------------------------------
Sean Catherall AIA
Architect
Herriman UT
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 01-22-2014 22:29
From: Carol De Tine
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

I think the proper order in your first example is "George Costanza, AIA, Associate".

You should read "Eats, Shoots & Leaves". Etiquette, protocol and punctuation matter!

-------------------------------------------
Carol De Tine AIA
Principal
Carriage House Studio Architects, LLC
Portland ME
-------------------------------------------

This conversation has gone from marginally ridiculous to completely ridiculous, but I do have to say: All effective consumer protection agencies in the U.S. have regulations precisely to prevent this kind of confusion. Similar regulations should apply to the consumption of all services on which the health and safety of consumers rely. Even the Realtors' market has more stringent protections against consumer confusion than we do.

And, as asides: If I assumed that only college graduates with money were potential clients, my market would be far smaller. You also give people far too much credit for understanding punctuation and syntax. Most people I know still say "irregardless" and 99% of them think "AIA" in any form is synonymous with "licensed architect". Just sayin',

-------------------------------------------
Sean Catherall AIA
Architect
Herriman UT
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2014 18:55
From: Richard Balkins
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

We are talking about adults that supposedly had completed high school. If they have money, they should have completed some level of college. 

"Joe Blow, Assoc. AIA"
"Joe Blow, AIA, Assoc."
"Joe Blow, Assoc., AIA"

Each has differences visually. Different placement of commas. Different quantity. The first says the person is an associate member of AIA. The Second says the person is an AIA member and is an Associate of the firm. The Third says Joe is an Associate of the firm and is an AIA member. The comma separates Associate from the AIA which means the Associate is not in association with the AIA as in the case of an Associate member of the AIA. It does take a little reading comprehension. An adult is suppose to have college level academic research skills. Especially if they are a professional in some field that customarily requires a degree. An adult can find out what the membership levels of AIA through a simple google search. They are suppose to exercise an adult level prudence like some basic background research and not picking people on the spot.

We should stop treating our clients as if they are in kindergarten and can't make decisions for themselves. This 'protectionism' can go a bit excessive. Just some thoughts. 

-------------------------------------------
Richard Balkins, Assoc. AIA
Building Designer / owner
Richard W.C. Balkins, Building Designer
Astoria, OR

-------------------------------------------

One more note (in answer to a previous post that seemed unsure):
According to the current Member Benefits and Resources guide (http://www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/aia/documents/pdf/aiab093541.pdf), "These abbreviations, which AIA members (except for Allied members) may show after their names, indicate membership to clients, the public, and other industry professionals:...Assoc. AIA: Unlicensed to practice architecture but meeting other professional criteria."

-------------------------------------------
Sean Catherall AIA
Architect
Herriman UT
-------------------------------------------

I stand corrected. Thank you for clarifying this, Sean!

-------------------------------------------
Edward Shannon AIA
Architect
Imprint Architects
Des Moines IA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 01-13-2014 19:46
From: Sean Catherall
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

One more note (in answer to a previous post that seemed unsure):
According to the current Member Benefits and Resources guide (http://www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/aia/documents/pdf/aiab093541.pdf), "These abbreviations, which AIA members (except for Allied members) may show after their names, indicate membership to clients, the public, and other industry professionals:...Assoc. AIA: Unlicensed to practice architecture but meeting other professional criteria."

-------------------------------------------
Sean Catherall AIA
Architect
Herriman UT
-------------------------------------------

Respectfully, I think that being inclusive is important. Associates are architectural intern members of the AIA. The "Associate AIA" designation expresses that. Withholding the "AIA" would not communicate their member status.

The Associate AIA members I know are careful in their communications with clients and the public in general. I know I was before I was licensed. Getting rid of the "Assoc", being able to call myself an Architect - these were my major motivations in completing the ARE. 

Goodness knows there is no room for laziness anywhere in our profession. Those who take more time to pass the ARE, or don't get 'round to it, are not lazy. The ones I know have family responsibilities, work long hours and often have other challenges in their lives. They are also incredibly vital to the firms where they work. Do you really want to strip them of the Associate AIA after their names? Who would that serve? Certainly not the firms who employ them.

Those who want to get ahead by misleading the public will always find a way. 

(I wonder if there is similar discontent amongst LEED professionals now that LEED has expanded their designations. LEED AP BD&C vs. LEEP AP ID&C vs. LEED AP Homes vs. LEED Green Associate. Yikes!) 

-------------------------------------------
Carol De Tine AIA
Principal
Carriage House Studio Architects, LLC
Portland ME
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2014 10:46
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

Folks,
I wasn't trying to imply that graduates from NAAB certified universities are not entitled to some sort of designation that properly designates their apprenticeship roles on their way to a diligently pursued taking of the ARE and subsequent architectural licensure.
What I was reacting to was the specific designation presently used by the AIA: "Assoc. AIA"  or "Associate AIA." 

The AIA has been quite successful in their marketing efforts to have the public believe that use of the letters: "AIA" = licensed, capable real Architect. 

Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword.  I have personally witnessed where abuses of the term "Assoc. AIA" have confused the public into thinking that ANY use of the letters "AIA" = licensed Architect.  That's the point. 

And I have seen where such practices have appeared to intentionally mislead the public in this regard.  People who have no intentions of ever taking the ARE or who are no longer in an apprenticeship role, and who are practicing architectural design on their own, in competition in the free marketplace, in my opinion, should not be allowed to use designations after their name that seem intended to purposely and willfully confuse the public about what their education, training, and licensure or lack thereof should indicate, regardless of what State laws may allow them to do. 

Professional organizations like the AIA are supposed to stand for something more: a higher level of what we in the profession have spent decades to become and successfully jumped over all the hurdles in the process to become.  There should be something sacred about designations that are intended to identify: Architects.  Otherwise, the George Costanzas of the world can pay a fee and pretend to be the real McCoy, hoping that people don't notice the "Assoc."  in front of "AIA."  

Here's an example:  George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, Ass. AIA, NCARB, AIBD
And another: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, AIA, NCARB, AIBD

Okay: how many of you really believe that the public will notice the difference?  Or care?  Until they discover (if they ever do) that whom they've been doing business with isn't a real, licensed Architect after all?  I have seen this happen.  Shouldn't ALL of us care about this? Especially those of you who are struggling so hard to "get there?"  Shouldn't the designations you use mean something more?  Something that reflects what you have striven for, for so long to attain?  Do you really think it is fair or reasonable to allow others who haven't attained your level of education, licensure and experience to be viewed as having the same background as you? 

Architects in Training, should, perhaps, have a different designation, such as what the Engineering disciplines use: AIT.  Nothing wrong about that, is there? 

In the AIA's desire to obtain funding for their 200+ person staff payroll, there should be more attention given to those whom this organization was originally conceived to serve and represent: Architects.  Real.  Licensed. Architects. 

Also, there is nothing intended about these comments to refer to age of anyone in any role, whether young, in between, or more mature.  This has to do with little letters meaning big things, that's all. 

I believe that when any professional organization bestows the right to use letters after names, that to the public means "real", that it mean something unequivocally, with no ifs, ands, or "associates" about it. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------

I have been following these CRAN discussions for some time and find all of them quite interesting, and the ones on this topic more than a little distressing.  Perhaps it is inevitable, but there seems to me to be too much of a "Rodney Dangerfield" concern here about getting no respect and thinking AIA can somehow wave a magic wand to set things right.  It really goes much further than that, and I think the operative word is not "respect", but rather is "relevance".  While not exactly CRAN's cup of tea, this 4-page article in the current "Metropolis Magazine" at  http://www.metropolismag.com/January-2014/Game-Changer-Alastair-Parvin/  shows the Brits have a similar concern about professional prerogatives vis a vis societal relevance.  It may not affect your practice, but it is interesting to see that other ways of solving the individual need for places to live are very much in the works.

Best wishes to you all.

-------------------------------------------
Sidney Delson, FAIA Emeritus
East Hampton NY
-------------------------------------------



Original Message:
Sent: 01-22-2014 17:34
From: Carol De Tine
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

Respectfully, I think that being inclusive is important. Associates are architectural intern members of the AIA. The "Associate AIA" designation expresses that. Withholding the "AIA" would not communicate their member status.

The Associate AIA members I know are careful in their communications with clients and the public in general. I know I was before I was licensed. Getting rid of the "Assoc", being able to call myself an Architect - these were my major motivations in completing the ARE. 

Goodness knows there is no room for laziness anywhere in our profession. Those who take more time to pass the ARE, or don't get 'round to it, are not lazy. The ones I know have family responsibilities, work long hours and often have other challenges in their lives. They are also incredibly vital to the firms where they work. Do you really want to strip them of the Associate AIA after their names? Who would that serve? Certainly not the firms who employ them.

Those who want to get ahead by misleading the public will always find a way. 

(I wonder if there is similar discontent amongst LEED professionals now that LEED has expanded their designations. LEED AP BD&C vs. LEEP AP ID&C vs. LEED AP Homes vs. LEED Green Associate. Yikes!) 

-------------------------------------------
Carol De Tine AIA
Principal
Carriage House Studio Architects, LLC
Portland ME
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2014 10:46
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

Folks,
I wasn't trying to imply that graduates from NAAB certified universities are not entitled to some sort of designation that properly designates their apprenticeship roles on their way to a diligently pursued taking of the ARE and subsequent architectural licensure.
What I was reacting to was the specific designation presently used by the AIA: "Assoc. AIA"  or "Associate AIA." 

The AIA has been quite successful in their marketing efforts to have the public believe that use of the letters: "AIA" = licensed, capable real Architect. 

Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword.  I have personally witnessed where abuses of the term "Assoc. AIA" have confused the public into thinking that ANY use of the letters "AIA" = licensed Architect.  That's the point. 

And I have seen where such practices have appeared to intentionally mislead the public in this regard.  People who have no intentions of ever taking the ARE or who are no longer in an apprenticeship role, and who are practicing architectural design on their own, in competition in the free marketplace, in my opinion, should not be allowed to use designations after their name that seem intended to purposely and willfully confuse the public about what their education, training, and licensure or lack thereof should indicate, regardless of what State laws may allow them to do. 

Professional organizations like the AIA are supposed to stand for something more: a higher level of what we in the profession have spent decades to become and successfully jumped over all the hurdles in the process to become.  There should be something sacred about designations that are intended to identify: Architects.  Otherwise, the George Costanzas of the world can pay a fee and pretend to be the real McCoy, hoping that people don't notice the "Assoc."  in front of "AIA."  

Here's an example:  George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, Ass. AIA, NCARB, AIBD
And another: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, AIA, NCARB, AIBD

Okay: how many of you really believe that the public will notice the difference?  Or care?  Until they discover (if they ever do) that whom they've been doing business with isn't a real, licensed Architect after all?  I have seen this happen.  Shouldn't ALL of us care about this? Especially those of you who are struggling so hard to "get there?"  Shouldn't the designations you use mean something more?  Something that reflects what you have striven for, for so long to attain?  Do you really think it is fair or reasonable to allow others who haven't attained your level of education, licensure and experience to be viewed as having the same background as you? 

Architects in Training, should, perhaps, have a different designation, such as what the Engineering disciplines use: AIT.  Nothing wrong about that, is there? 

In the AIA's desire to obtain funding for their 200+ person staff payroll, there should be more attention given to those whom this organization was originally conceived to serve and represent: Architects.  Real.  Licensed. Architects. 

Also, there is nothing intended about these comments to refer to age of anyone in any role, whether young, in between, or more mature.  This has to do with little letters meaning big things, that's all. 

I believe that when any professional organization bestows the right to use letters after names, that to the public means "real", that it mean something unequivocally, with no ifs, ands, or "associates" about it. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------

Most of us spent about a decade of our lives qualifying for the title Architect, thus we can be rather sensitive toward those who threaten our "status". The amount of investment verses the pay per hour is rather lousy and we often are not recognized the way we'd like to be. Most of the sensitivity surrounding this subject comes from the Residential sector, which dwarfs the Commercial sector. There are about 10 new houses built for every commercial building and at the top of the boom, the residential sector made 2x as much GDP. According to the US Census Bureau, residential has outperformed commercial every year except 2008 (going back several decades). Since a license is not required for home design and many misuse the title, it leaves the few of us in the homebuilding industry that bothered to get licenses a bit peeved and not properly recognized. No professional likes being compared as an equal to an amateur.

The fact of the matter is that no residential client has ever hired me because I was licensed, nor do they care. They hire me because they like what they see. In the homebuilding industry, if you're worried about unlicensed designers outperforming you, then simply having a license is going to help you, nor should it. The fact that you bothered to obtain the license says something about your commitment to your craft, but it shouldn't be a free pass for getting work or making more money. Your ability alone is responsible for your destiny and obsessing too much about why one may think they deserve more just because they have a license is, in my opinion, a sign of insecurity and weakness. 

-------------------------------------------
Eric Rawlings AIA
Owner
Rawlings Design, Inc.
Decatur GA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 01-22-2014 19:29
From: Carol De Tine
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

Respectfully, I think that being inclusive is important. Associates are architectural intern members of the AIA. The "Associate AIA" designation expresses that. Withholding the "AIA" would not communicate their member status.

The Associate AIA members I know are careful in their communications with clients and the public in general. I know I was before I was licensed. Getting rid of the "Assoc", being able to call myself an Architect - these were my major motivations in completing the ARE. 

Goodness knows there is no room for laziness anywhere in our profession. Those who take more time to pass the ARE, or don't get 'round to it, are not lazy. The ones I know have family responsibilities, work long hours and often have other challenges in their lives. They are also incredibly vital to the firms where they work. Do you really want to strip them of the Associate AIA after their names? Who would that serve? Certainly not the firms who employ them.

Those who want to get ahead by misleading the public will always find a way. 

(I wonder if there is similar discontent amongst LEED professionals now that LEED has expanded their designations. LEED AP BD&C vs. LEEP AP ID&C vs. LEED AP Homes vs. LEED Green Associate. Yikes!) 

-------------------------------------------
Carol De Tine AIA
Principal
Carriage House Studio Architects, LLC
Portland ME
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 01-21-2014 10:46
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

Folks,
I wasn't trying to imply that graduates from NAAB certified universities are not entitled to some sort of designation that properly designates their apprenticeship roles on their way to a diligently pursued taking of the ARE and subsequent architectural licensure.
What I was reacting to was the specific designation presently used by the AIA: "Assoc. AIA"  or "Associate AIA." 

The AIA has been quite successful in their marketing efforts to have the public believe that use of the letters: "AIA" = licensed, capable real Architect. 

Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword.  I have personally witnessed where abuses of the term "Assoc. AIA" have confused the public into thinking that ANY use of the letters "AIA" = licensed Architect.  That's the point. 

And I have seen where such practices have appeared to intentionally mislead the public in this regard.  People who have no intentions of ever taking the ARE or who are no longer in an apprenticeship role, and who are practicing architectural design on their own, in competition in the free marketplace, in my opinion, should not be allowed to use designations after their name that seem intended to purposely and willfully confuse the public about what their education, training, and licensure or lack thereof should indicate, regardless of what State laws may allow them to do. 

Professional organizations like the AIA are supposed to stand for something more: a higher level of what we in the profession have spent decades to become and successfully jumped over all the hurdles in the process to become.  There should be something sacred about designations that are intended to identify: Architects.  Otherwise, the George Costanzas of the world can pay a fee and pretend to be the real McCoy, hoping that people don't notice the "Assoc."  in front of "AIA."  

Here's an example:  George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, Ass. AIA, NCARB, AIBD
And another: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, AIA, NCARB, AIBD

Okay: how many of you really believe that the public will notice the difference?  Or care?  Until they discover (if they ever do) that whom they've been doing business with isn't a real, licensed Architect after all?  I have seen this happen.  Shouldn't ALL of us care about this? Especially those of you who are struggling so hard to "get there?"  Shouldn't the designations you use mean something more?  Something that reflects what you have striven for, for so long to attain?  Do you really think it is fair or reasonable to allow others who haven't attained your level of education, licensure and experience to be viewed as having the same background as you? 

Architects in Training, should, perhaps, have a different designation, such as what the Engineering disciplines use: AIT.  Nothing wrong about that, is there? 

In the AIA's desire to obtain funding for their 200+ person staff payroll, there should be more attention given to those whom this organization was originally conceived to serve and represent: Architects.  Real.  Licensed. Architects. 

Also, there is nothing intended about these comments to refer to age of anyone in any role, whether young, in between, or more mature.  This has to do with little letters meaning big things, that's all. 

I believe that when any professional organization bestows the right to use letters after names, that to the public means "real", that it mean something unequivocally, with no ifs, ands, or "associates" about it. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------
Bil Taylor AIA
Bil Taylor Assoc. Inc. (Taylor Design & Build)
Tucson AZ
-------------------------------------------

I think Rand has it just about right!




Original Message:
Sent: 01-23-2014 19:29
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

Folks,
I wasn't trying to imply that graduates from NAAB certified universities are not entitled to some sort of designation that properly designates their apprenticeship roles on their way to a diligently pursued taking of the ARE and subsequent architectural licensure.
What I was reacting to was the specific designation presently used by the AIA: "Assoc. AIA"  or "Associate AIA." 

The AIA has been quite successful in their marketing efforts to have the public believe that use of the letters: "AIA" = licensed, capable real Architect. 

Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword.  I have personally witnessed where abuses of the term "Assoc. AIA" have confused the public into thinking that ANY use of the letters "AIA" = licensed Architect.  That's the point. 

And I have seen where such practices have appeared to intentionally mislead the public in this regard.  People who have no intentions of ever taking the ARE or who are no longer in an apprenticeship role, and who are practicing architectural design on their own, in competition in the free marketplace, in my opinion, should not be allowed to use designations after their name that seem intended to purposely and willfully confuse the public about what their education, training, and licensure or lack thereof should indicate, regardless of what State laws may allow them to do. 

Professional organizations like the AIA are supposed to stand for something more: a higher level of what we in the profession have spent decades to become and successfully jumped over all the hurdles in the process to become.  There should be something sacred about designations that are intended to identify: Architects.  Otherwise, the George Costanzas of the world can pay a fee and pretend to be the real McCoy, hoping that people don't notice the "Assoc."  in front of "AIA."  

Here's an example:  George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, Ass. AIA, NCARB, AIBD
And another: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, AIA, NCARB, AIBD

Okay: how many of you really believe that the public will notice the difference?  Or care?  Until they discover (if they ever do) that whom they've been doing business with isn't a real, licensed Architect after all?  I have seen this happen.  Shouldn't ALL of us care about this? Especially those of you who are struggling so hard to "get there?"  Shouldn't the designations you use mean something more?  Something that reflects what you have striven for, for so long to attain?  Do you really think it is fair or reasonable to allow others who haven't attained your level of education, licensure and experience to be viewed as having the same background as you? 

Architects in Training, should, perhaps, have a different designation, such as what the Engineering disciplines use: AIT.  Nothing wrong about that, is there? 

In the AIA's desire to obtain funding for their 200+ person staff payroll, there should be more attention given to those whom this organization was originally conceived to serve and represent: Architects.  Real.  Licensed. Architects. 

Also, there is nothing intended about these comments to refer to age of anyone in any role, whether young, in between, or more mature.  This has to do with little letters meaning big things, that's all. 

I believe that when any professional organization bestows the right to use letters after names, that to the public means "real", that it mean something unequivocally, with no ifs, ands, or "associates" about it. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------

Here's an example:  George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, Ass. AIA, NCARB, AIBD
And another: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, AIA, NCARB, AIBD

If I were George I wouldn't put "Ass. AIA" after my name.
 
-------------------------------------------
Ken Brogno AIA
Architect AIA LEED AP
San Francisco CA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 01-24-2014 17:45
From: Bil Taylor
Subject: What AIA means to the Public



-------------------------------------------
Bil Taylor AIA
Bil Taylor Assoc. Inc. (Taylor Design & Build)
Tucson AZ
-------------------------------------------

I think Rand has it just about right!




Original Message:
Sent: 01-23-2014 19:29
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: What AIA means to the Public

Folks,
I wasn't trying to imply that graduates from NAAB certified universities are not entitled to some sort of designation that properly designates their apprenticeship roles on their way to a diligently pursued taking of the ARE and subsequent architectural licensure.
What I was reacting to was the specific designation presently used by the AIA: "Assoc. AIA"  or "Associate AIA." 

The AIA has been quite successful in their marketing efforts to have the public believe that use of the letters: "AIA" = licensed, capable real Architect. 

Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword.  I have personally witnessed where abuses of the term "Assoc. AIA" have confused the public into thinking that ANY use of the letters "AIA" = licensed Architect.  That's the point. 

And I have seen where such practices have appeared to intentionally mislead the public in this regard.  People who have no intentions of ever taking the ARE or who are no longer in an apprenticeship role, and who are practicing architectural design on their own, in competition in the free marketplace, in my opinion, should not be allowed to use designations after their name that seem intended to purposely and willfully confuse the public about what their education, training, and licensure or lack thereof should indicate, regardless of what State laws may allow them to do. 

Professional organizations like the AIA are supposed to stand for something more: a higher level of what we in the profession have spent decades to become and successfully jumped over all the hurdles in the process to become.  There should be something sacred about designations that are intended to identify: Architects.  Otherwise, the George Costanzas of the world can pay a fee and pretend to be the real McCoy, hoping that people don't notice the "Assoc."  in front of "AIA."  

Here's an example:  George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, Ass. AIA, NCARB, AIBD
And another: George John Costanza, LEED AP, M.A. Architecture, AIA, NCARB, AIBD

Okay: how many of you really believe that the public will notice the difference?  Or care?  Until they discover (if they ever do) that whom they've been doing business with isn't a real, licensed Architect after all?  I have seen this happen.  Shouldn't ALL of us care about this? Especially those of you who are struggling so hard to "get there?"  Shouldn't the designations you use mean something more?  Something that reflects what you have striven for, for so long to attain?  Do you really think it is fair or reasonable to allow others who haven't attained your level of education, licensure and experience to be viewed as having the same background as you? 

Architects in Training, should, perhaps, have a different designation, such as what the Engineering disciplines use: AIT.  Nothing wrong about that, is there? 

In the AIA's desire to obtain funding for their 200+ person staff payroll, there should be more attention given to those whom this organization was originally conceived to serve and represent: Architects.  Real.  Licensed. Architects. 

Also, there is nothing intended about these comments to refer to age of anyone in any role, whether young, in between, or more mature.  This has to do with little letters meaning big things, that's all. 

I believe that when any professional organization bestows the right to use letters after names, that to the public means "real", that it mean something unequivocally, with no ifs, ands, or "associates" about it. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------