The Architectural Profession: Limits to Leadership

Abstract

The objective in this paper is to investigate whether a key element of the professional tradition—the role of the architect as agent of the building entrepreneur—continues to be an appropriate means for enhancing the design capability and authority of architects in the newer, more participative forms of project organization. The functions comprising the leadership role of the architect in these organizations are reviewed and it is shown that they have become not only more complex but also more overlapped in time when compared with the situation existing in the long-standing rigidly sequential form of project organization known as “the system “. A review of leadership in participative social systems—using a functions approach —reveals that there is considerable reluctance on the part of members of such systems to placing both design and management functions in the hands of one individual. The reasons behind this resistance are studied and found to be associated with the contradictory nature of the behaviour patterns required to effectively undertake both functions. An analysis of the connection between the architect's role as representative of the client and the raison d'etre of the professional tradition shows that the retention of this role has little to do with the basic principles of the professional tradition, namely the promotion and protection of competence and integrity among the members of the profession. It is concluded that the architect's agency role no longer provides a viable instrument for enhancing the design capability and authority of members of the architectural profession and that support for retention of the role relies on a misunderstanding of the influence bases on which such capability and authority are founded.