“At NCARB, we want to completely reinvent our approach to conducting a practice analysis,” stated Andy McIntyre, Vice President, Marketing & Communications for the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB).
McIntyre made this comment in reference to the multiphase and multiyear Analysis of Practice project sponsored by NCARB. The purpose of this project is to comprehensively understand how the practice of architecture is being delivered within the United States currently and how it may change in the near future. This project aims to understand the differences and nuances of the profession from the perspectives of thousands of architects and non-architects, as well as a variety of perspectives, including those from different firm sizes, communities, racial and ethnic backgrounds, pursuing license or years since licensed, and specialties.
To better understand why and how NCARB is reinventing their practice analysis approach, we had the privilege of speaking with McIntyre, Jared Zurn (Vice President, Examination at NCARB) and eight practitioners in the built environment:
Why Reinvent?
In the past, NCARB has completed traditional job tasks analyses (JTAs) in which subject matter experts (SMEs) discuss and establish the knowledge, skills, and abilities required of architects during a focus group and then validate the list of tasks in a survey. NCARB believed something more was needed to really capture the field of architecture today. Zurn explained,“ Due to rapid technological, economic, and societal expectations and changes affecting our profession, the idea of doing one more traditional JTA wasn’t going to cut it. It was time to go beyond the traditional approach and take a completely fresh look starting from the ground up.”
McIntyre added that education, experience, and the examination (commonly referred to as the 3 E’s) are the three main components of architectural licensure. Unlike a traditional JTA, the Analysis of Practice project will help NCARB see how these three components work together, how they influence each other, and where improvements could be made.
What do Practitioners Think About the Project?
The practitioners in the built environment added thoughts about why it was important to reinvent the approach with the analysis of practice.
- Bartini shared her thoughts on the 3 E’s and the option of concurrently working on them:
- Roman shared some of his experiences on his licensure journey, such as the struggles to obtain a license in architecture:
- Marshall is also currently pursuing licensure and shared her experience, including the financial responsibility of completing the requirements:
- Nasab emphasized the importance of collaboration with others in related fields:
- De Marco shared his thoughts on how technology is changing the industry, moving from hand drawing to 3-D modeling:
- Sanborn works frequently with architects and shared perspective on the increasing workload of architects:
Starting in a Different Place to Get to a Different Place
Gathering information from architects is a key part of the process, but NCARB didn’t start by talking with architects. Instead, they looked for a different perspective by talking to people who hire architects and engineers, and to others in the built environment who work with them. As Zurn framed it, “We started in a different place to get to a different place.”
“It’s important for us to speak with people who are not architects but work with architects. These are the people that can provide a different perspective”, stated Zurn. “We realize one architect is not often the sole person responsible for the architectural project. We want to understand not only what an architect is doing but what they are doing in collaboration with others. It’s important to understand the ecosystem around the practice and the value of collaboration.”
NCARB’s overriding focus is to connect with as many people in the profession as possible. Seasoned and licensed, newly licensed, pursuing licensure, non-licensed, associated with NCARB or not, all are invited into what NCARB refers to as the “big tent” to participate.
“NCARB is not just trying to connect with mid-career professionals, trying to advance through certification, we’re trying to include, connect, and collaborate with this incredibly diverse pool of people. We’re fortunate to have a diverse audience in the profession and are pleased to have participation of all genders, races, and ages (which span from age 18 into the mid-90’s). We need them in the big tent in order to help move the project forward,” said Zurn.
NCARB is making a concerted effort to get beyond its core audience and dedicated volunteers and certificate holders.
“It’s imperative that we include, connect and collaborate with a broader community within the built environment. In fact, we have an ambitious goal to include feedback from approximately 20,000 people who work in the built environment. We want all these people in the tent contributing and engaging. We don’t want to lose anyone’s perspective because our data gathering methodology just didn’t work for them. Not everything has been perfect, but we’re learning and are feeling optimistic that we are on the right path,” shared McIntyre.
Options for engagement include online bulletin boards, online ethnographies (mobile application that allows participants to document answers to job-related questions via audio and video while they are working), web interviews, social intercepts at conferences, social media surveys, My Story profiles submissions, webinars, mini engagement surveys, and news releases.
“We, as the client, were impressed that Alpine Testing Solutions (Alpine) came to us with multiple different methodologies for collecting data,” said McIntyre. “One of the reasons we selected Alpine as our vendor of choice (along with the Schlesinger Group) is because we appreciated the multipronged approach they proposed. We realize data collection is never going to be perfect, but the fact that Alpine has many spokes in the wheel, gives us confidence that we will have triangulation on different things and it will allow us to gear up a bit. If one data collection method doesn’t work particularly well, it’s not a loss because other methods can compensate. We also appreciate that when the pandemic arose and some spokes designed for in-person engagement activity were no longer feasible, Alpine and Schlesinger Group were able to adapt and pivot to a more digital focus.”
Anticipating a Positive Outcome
The practitioners interviewed for this article had positive comments regarding the approach to the Analysis of Practice and are anticipating positive outcomes from the results.
- Greenidge, when asked what he would see as the ideal outcome of the Analysis of Practice and his vision for the future, shared how he thinks diversity and collaboration could be improved:
- Krejci echoed the importance of collecting a broad set of perspectives and of making room for all in the profession:
This Analysis of Practice project is not only providing valuable data, it is providing a method for ongoing gathering of information from which to learn, improve and to leave a footprint for continuous future improvement.
Zurn summarized the hopes and expectations of the project. “We don’t think we are going to do this work and be done. We’re reinventing so we can rebuild from the ground up...and we’re just getting started!”