What if architects thought of AI as a consultant? After all it’s effectively what it is. We seek out advice or input and trust in what it suggests. We generally don’t have the same level of AI’s knowledge or expertise. And we’re aware that it’s not always right and can make mistakes. Based on our own past knowledge, experience or requirements, we’re also able to suggest improvements, changes and point to problems or errors in it’s output. In most cases AI does the work at least faster and often better than us. It’s discomforting and AI is intangible, opaque and constantly getting better.
There’s an echo in this, to about 50 years ago when Project Managers began to replace some of the scope and responsibilities of the profession. This situation, even now, is still a source of frustration to many in the profession. And there’s now a similar unease about AI. However whilst project managers introduced new processes and reduced architectural scope, AI brings something entirely next level. And it’s not entirely clear as yet what scope it will steal, how far it might go, or even if it will stop.
It might at this point be useful to pause and ask:
What scope and responsibilities can’t AI take over from architects?
And one answer begins with people.
Whilst AI can create nice images, tight design options, as well as write emails and reports, it can’t work with people. AI can’t build trust with a client, play politics or manage the diplomacy required in stakeholder meetings. AI can’t massage the ego of a client or council planner, and it’s most certainly is incapable of managing expectations. AI simply doesn’t have the agency or human skills to manage the people involved in all parts of the delivery of an architectural project.
Hence there’s a choice for architects…
They can view AI as a threat to be wary of, or they can consider it as yet another consultant and collaborator in their process. Freeing them to focus on the deeply human aspects of practice, on empathy, leadership, stewardship, negotiation, and on being curious enough to think differently within (or without) the process. It’s time to consider what they as architects, leaders, creatives and as humans bring to a project? And the answer, at least in part, lies in the work with people involved in a project. In the building of relationships with clients, communities, and collaborators, and all that it involves.
Instead of worrying about what might be taken away by AI, maybe a better question to ask is,
What is an architect’s unique contribution when AI is part of the consultant team?
Because I think I’ve only just begun to answer that question.
AI image generated in Canva
