Report comment

Lawyers, Doctors and on the whole most professionals are often viewed as arrogant, superior with a god complex by the inexpert receiving their advice. It is a fact of definition the professional will know a great deal more than most of their clients, able to guide and pre-empt errors the inexpert would otherwise fall into, that is why they’re appointed. Architects follow that pattern and have bolted on their particular imaginative skills, which is why someone might hire Gehry instead Grimshaw or visa versa.

However after some very public abuse of such authority, the legal and medical professions are more controlled and during their education now expected to have far better communication skills than those of the past. No more imperious tweed suited Consultants but 'empathetic friends'. The flip side of being admired for or worse still only developing their creative skills is their other professional abilities are forgotten leading clients to a cognitive dissonance of delayed consequences. After all building projects are likely to be far more expensive than any solicitor’s fee and longer to live with than a medical procedure but as it appears mostly about aesthetics the architect and their work can be reduced in importance and their opinions more easily overruled.

If we take ourselves seriously, understand our clients criteria better than they do (that is our professional duty after all) lay these out to them from the outset the aesthetic decision will be perceived in their correct integrated priority. Of course there will always be some clients who don’t want to listen or don’t want what you have to offer. From experience, its best to move on amicably.