The Architect-Contractor Relationship
At PMG, we have always had great relationships with architects. But in our industry, that is not always the case. In most cases, the architect and contractor work together towards a common goal. That’s even considering that their views on roles, responsibilities, and methods may not perfectly align. There is a lot we can learn to understand better what it takes to ensure the kind of working relationship that gets the results we all want.
The Architect's Role
The architect’s primary role, as defined by the American Institute of Architects (AIA), is to interpret the client’s requirements into a design solution that balances aesthetics, functionality, regulations, and practicality. During construction, their responsibility is to oversee and ensure fulfillment of the design intent. Architects are in a unique position during construction. On one hand, they must represent and defend the owner’s best interests. On the other hand, they must build a relationship with the contractor to ensure the work gets done right, on budget, and on time.
The Value of the Working Relationship
The success of a construction project relies on the working relationship between the architect and contractor. Both parties are vested in meeting the client/owner’s expectations. But they have different roles, responsibilities, and accountability. In most cases, the architect and contractor collaborate to bring the project to a successful completion even though there might be instances where the two might have different expectations and intentions.
The American Institute of Architects (AIA), in collaboration with the Associated General Contractors of America (AGCA), surveyed architects and contractors to better understand the architect-contractor relationship. What was working and what was not. The findings were summarized in their Architect’s Journey to Specification Study which is referenced in the insights that follow.
“In construction, two key players are positioned to act in the best interests of the owner: the architect and the general contractor. Yet, they each play a different role that often puts them at odds with one another. The supposed conflict over good design versus effective cost management is typically posited as an excuse for continued friction.”
Fulfilling Expectation Opportunities
According to the AIA/AGCA report on the architect-contractor relationship there were three key areas where the expectations between the two were different. But differences are also opportunities and understanding their respective views provides some instructive insights.
1. Design Intent
From the architect’s point of view, they want contractors to commit to the design by more fully understanding the vision behind it. This is particularly true when it comes to value engineering and material/product substitutions, in which budget and performance may not necessarily align with design intent.
“The area in which architects place the most importance with contractors, acting in the client’s best interests when proposing product substitutions, is also one of the two areas in which they are least satisfied.” AIA The Architects Journey to Specification Study
The challenge from the contractor’s perspective is that no matter how complete the drawings and specifications are, they never seem complete enough. Many of the final details are left to shop drawings, which fall into subcontractors’ design intent interpretation.
“If contractors could improve only one thing about working with architects, they would choose more complete documents and drawings. Contractors feel design intent is often unclear or documents are incomplete.” AIA The Architects Journey to Specification Study
According to the AIA study the contractor is looking for more detailed information in the construction documents. While the architect expects contractors to be more open-minded and committed to the design intent.
2. Collaboration
Every project has its share of challenges. But these provide opportunities to improve, increase efficiency, reduce costs, and save time. Collaboration is the key. Architects and contractors generally agree that collaboration will yield the best results. But agreeing in principle isn’t necessarily the same as agreeing in practice.
Where the two differ is in when and how collaboration should work. Ideally, collaboration starts in the schematic, design, and construction development phases. However, the traditional bidding process generally precludes that. This leaves collaboration for the construction phase. And where collaboration is of real value is in problem-solving and value engineering. Both parties are vested in finding better efficiency, superior product performance, and time and budget savings. However, architects and contractors have different priorities. Architects are perceived to be only design-focused. Contractors are seen to be primarily cost-focused. This is fine when they work together in a collaborative way to find reasonable compromise. But it can be a key point of contention if the two fail to meet eye to eye.
Product substitutions seem to be the sore point between architects and contractors. The best case scenario is when both work to compromise on their respective priorities to achieve design and performance objectives. The worst case scenario is when the two work independently, increasing conflict that only compromises the end result. Architects expect the kind of collaboration in which all parties compromise and agree on what is in the project’s best interests.
3. Advocacy
Who is primarily responsible for acting in the best interests of the client? The answer is complicated. In reality, both architects and contractors share responsibility. However, there are some disagreements in specific responsibility areas during the construction phase. It’s a matter of opinion as to who has primary versus secondary responsibility.
From the architect’s perspective, the contractor is primarily responsible for setting realistic client expectations before construction, ensuring the client’s budget is met, and delivering the project on time. Contractors, on the other hand, feel that meeting budget objectives are equally shared with the architect.
Architects expect contractors to consult with them on matters that impact the design intent. Value engineering, product substitutions, and changes in construction details can alter the vision of the design for which the architect is responsible. The architect is the design advocate for the project, ensuring that the client’s expectation on the project’s end result is fulfilled. Respect for the architect-contractor roles and good communication will generally meet expectations for all parties to the project.
Final Thoughts
The AIA/AGCA study provides valuable insights into the relationship between architects and contractors. It points out areas of agreement and disagreement regarding expectations. Most importantly, the study highlights opportunities to understand better each other’s perspectives, challenges, and priorities. Architects expect more from contractors, and contractors expect more from architects. It’s probably safe to say that clients expect more from both architects and contractors.
The more we understand, the more open we are, the better our expectations can be met . . . that’s progress in how we think about collaborative relationships.