OFFICE MANAGEMENT

A R C H I T E C T U R A L M A N A G E M E N T FA LL S

I N T O T W O D I S TI N C T PA RTS ,
O F F IC E M A N A GE M E N T A N D
P R O J E C T M A N A G E M E N T.
O F F I C E M A N A GE ME N T P R OV I D E S A N
OV E R A L L F R A M E W O R K W I TH IN W H I C H
I N D I V I D UA L P R O J E C T S A R E
C O M M ISS I O N E D , D E S I G N E D A N D
COMPLETED.
B O T H PA RT S H AV E T H E S A ME
O B J E C T I V E S BUT A R E TY P I C A LLY
A D D R E SS E D BY S E PA R ATE MA N A G E ME N T

 Office management involves the allocation and

financing of resources, principally premises, trained

staff and computer systems, and on establishing and
charging appropriate fees for the services rendered.
Project management focuses on timescales,

developing a design from initial concept to working

drawings, and managing the construction processThe
essence of architectural management is to ensure
that work on a project is cost effective, to achieve a
balance between profitability and design quality.

Standard management techniques and tools, borrowed

mainly from repetitive industrial processes, have not always

fitted comfortably with the image of the architect as a
creative individual, rather than a professional member of a
business team.
The term architectural management has been in use since
the 1960s as building construction became more complex,
because of a shift from standard traditional construction
details, to innovation and experimentation.

 Architectural practices generally employ an office manager

who may have at their disposal an administration assistant

or team of assistants. Project management is increasingly a
role played by an independent consultant, especially during
the construction phase.
Project managers are typically from one of the surveying
disciplines, leaving only the architectural elements to be
managed in-house by the architects.

Practicing architects typically receive promotions in their

firms to general management positions (GMPs) on the basis

of their track records of professional accomplishments.
Most frequently, they become heads of operating subunits,
such as studios, disciplines, specialty practices, geographic
offices or regions. More often than not, they take on these
positions in addition to their professional engagements. As
a rule, they are named principal at this career stage with
their firms.
These practicing architects have gained experience as
managers of design teams. In recent years, such teams have
grown in size and complexity, comprising not only larger inhouse groups, but also, and often from early conceptual
design phases on, members of other firms.

TEAM MANAGEMENT
Team management yields management experience.

But presiding over an entire operating subunit of the

firm is different from heading up a design team.
This difference is perhaps best exemplified by large
firms that place into their operating subunits authority
and responsibility not only for unit P&L performance,
but also for the
formation/reformation of unit
business
strategy and its implementation.

Solid economic performance joined with great professional

performance by all operating subunits is particularly critical

at a time when, as one observer put it, the business high
tides of past decades in the global construction industry, in
which nearly any professional service provider to the
industry could float, are unlikely to return any time soon.
Also critical during times of level or falling primary demand
is to have embedded in every operating subunit an ability to
win new commissions from existing as well as new clients
and to execute such commissions to the delight of clients
and at positive operating margins.
Such ability requires leaders/managers at these operating
levels who combine high professional competence with high
managerial capability.

company structuring decentralization, demands of

practicing architects in charge of operating subunits that they

possess a firm grounding in strategic/ organizational/financial
management relevant to professional service firms.
Nothing less should be acceptable to the leaders of
architecture firms than to expect of their operating subunits
not only great professional performance in the execution of
client commissions,
but also solid contributions to
firmwide financial results.