Brickchat

The recent judgement which ordered Foster + Partners to pay £3.6m in damages to their client John Dhanoa is a wake up call for all architects. The fact that the UK's largest practice has been hauled over the coals for exceeding budget constraints sends a clear message from both clients and lawmakers that cost is king in the construction industry. Such a judgement reiterates the importance of architect's competent management of the briefing and design process.

There are two key responsibilities that architects have to be aware of. First is your duty to your client to get deliver the project for which you have been appointed. The second is to honour and protect your professional standing. A client may have ambitious requirements but insufficient funds with which to deliver them, as seen with the Heathrow hotel project that Foster were appointed to design. It is our duty as architect to warn our client when requirements and resources do not align.

To compound matters, these responsibilities have to be balanced with a creative and positive attitude. Successful architects stay in business by striking the balance between advising their clients to operate within their means while proposing a vision that exceeds expectations. There is a line that architects must walk, because good design will always respond to context and constraints. So when a client instructs you to proceed with a scheme too ambitious for their budget, get everything in writing and make it very, very clear to them that they are doing so at their own risk.

On the other side of the £3.6m coin is the question as to why the client appointed a practice who are not known for their shrewd budgeting. Wembley stadium and the Swiss Re building (The Gherkin) to name but a couple of their works that were either over-budget or late finishing. What did the client expect would happen when they appointed one of the biggest and most ostentatious names in the game?

Either way, it appears that at one stage or another the briefing process came unstuck. When the first cost plan estimate came back double what was budgeted, alarm bells should have been ringing. Cost overrun is a constant problem in the construction industry because no client wants to spend more than they have to to get a building out of the ground. Wouldn't you do the same in their position? Whether it is a basic rear extension or a flashy airport hotel, circumstances change and priorities shift. Architects need to place themselves at the centre of these problems such that their projects can adapt to constraints and exceed expectations.

Disclaimer: I have had no direct involvement with the case and my comments are offered as general points for consideration within the architecture profession.