Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Fee survey graphs: How RIBA damaged architecture

  • 2 Comments

By dropping its fee survey graph the RIBA risks devaluing high quality work, says Kieran Long

The RIBA might think it’s playing a modern, realpolitikal hand in dropping recommended percentage fee scales, but our research suggests that most of you feel that this will be damaging for the quality of architecture. We agree.

It is outrageous that the RIBA should capitulate on fees without suggesting what other method the profession might use to establish how much it should charge clients. With the clarity of fee survey graphs removed, does anyone really think that clients are going to want to pay more to their architects? In fact what the RIBA is doing is pandering to the kinds of practices who are willing and able to cut their own throats on projects, and abandoning the kinds of practices it rewards over and over again in its award schemes.

David Chipperfield, Eric Parry and Feilden Clegg Bradley Studios are outraged at the institute’s attitude

It is no surprise the the likes of David Chipperfield, Eric Parry and Feilden Clegg Bradley Studios are outraged at the institute’s attitude. These are three of the finest, most decorated architects in the UK, and all of them have a simple message: doing good architecture takes longer. No one can claim these architects are just idealistic young bucks with their heads in the clouds. All of them have delivered big buildings to the highest quality. But removing fee survey graphs, to them, only damages the perception of architecture’s value in the construction industry.

The RIBA has muddied the waters about how to charge for design just as it is claiming that the profession must defend the ‘value’ of architecture during the recession. To say that fee survey graphs should work is not pie in the sky. Germany is just one example of a major economy that values architecture highly, and pays those who do it properly.

Perhaps it is the age-old conflict between the institute’s role as both trade union and promoter of good architecture that has put it in this situation. In this case, the RIBA is ignoring warnings about the latter in favour of clients who want to screw down fees. We will look back at this decision as another moment where the authority and value of architects and architecture was eroded.
kieran.long@emap.com

Have your say on RIBA’s decision to drop fee survey graphs at architectsjournal.co.uk/debate

 

  • 2 Comments

Readers' comments (2)

  • hear hear....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • We are currently getting fees well over the fee scales - they are actually holding us back.

    Chew on that.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.

Related Jobs

AJ Jobs