The Five Worst Reasons for Choosing an Architect
November 26th, 2007 by Jeff
1. Because the architect is the cheapest: 
A bad architect will cost the church their difference in fee many times over in the design and construction process. The best architect is always the least expensive by the end of the construction process.
2. Because the architect is a member of the church:
We have a policy within our Office to not work as a paid professional with our own churches. We need our own church to be the place we worship. Relationships are often strained in the design and construction process. This does not mean that a fine Architect cannot be chosen from within the church, but it should not be the only consideration.
3. Because some contractor in the church knows an architect:
Does that architect have experience in working with churches? This is valuable not simply from the standpoint of design, but the architect should also be experienced in working with ministry leaders to help them develop a vision for ministry and to illustrate how that vision can be supported by the built Environment.
4. Because the architect is a local guy that knows some people at the township:
The architect tends to be a minor player in the township site approval process. This is actually a more important issue when choosing a civil engineer or attorney.
5. Because we really don’t trust architects we would rather work with a builder who will just wrap the design fees into his fees:
In an attempt to make things simple the church often makes their life more difficult. A bad experience with one architect does not mean that all architects are bad. There are numerous reasons that this is a bad approach, but the primary one is that when the architect works for the builder, construction considerations become top priority rather than the vision and ministry of the church. A better approach is to choose the architect who could then help the church choose a construction manager early in the process as a member of a collaborative team.
I love it that you don’t pull punches in this blog. We’ve seen people make all five of the mistakes you listed.
My favorite best reasons for choosing an architect? Experience, innovation and chemistry.
Churches are nothing like office buildings or warehouses. An architect with experience in things like circulation and spaces that create connection, will create a space for worship that works. Do you really want an architect “cutting their teeth” on your project? Isn’t it worth the money to pay for someone who already has the scars?
Architects committed to innovation are architects who are continuing to learn. This keeps them creatively fresh in solving your problems, instead of being handed the architectural equivalent of a “#5 combo meal.”
Chemistry is important. Churches will develop a relationship with their architect that lasts over the course of the project (years) and probably beyond that (development of the campus). Respect and likability are huge assets.
If only architects followed this same advice with their consultants. Particularly rule #1.
I couldn’t agree more, (that architects need to follow the same advice.) An inefficent or inexperienced consultant is far more costly for us than one that meets deadline and provides efficent and well documented designs. It is rare for us to use new consultants and when it happens it is usually at the urging of the client or construction manager. It sounds like you may have had a bad experience.