My path to being an 'Architect'. Chapter 3 - Does that mean a fee increase?

Money is one of the first practical questions people ask when the subject of engaging an Architect vs choosing a Designer or LBP comes up.

If someone becomes a registered architect, does that mean their fees go up?

The short answer is: not necessarily.

Registration does introduce a few additional obligations. Registered architects must maintain continuing professional development and typically hold membership with professional organisations connected to the profession. There are also regulatory costs associated with maintaining registration through the New Zealand Registered Architects Board.

In reality though, those costs are around $5-10/hr when spread across a year of professional practice. They are not the sort of costs that fundamentally change the economics of a project or massively transform how architectural services are priced.

So architectural fees are rarely determined by the 'Architect' title alone.

What clients are usually paying for is the level of thinking, experience, and attention invested in their project. Architecture is not simply the production of drawings. It involves understanding a brief, exploring design options, coordinating consultants, navigating regulatory requirements, resolving technical details, and guiding the project through construction. Most Architects spend more time on all aspects of the project and are more often involved in project delivery stages than Designers or LBP's.

The time and expertise involved in that process can vary significantly depending on the complexity of the building and the expectations of the client. Some Architects will individually select every fixing and join detail whilst critiquing the contractors throughout to create a masterpiece worthy of design recognition, whilst others concentrate more on mass production of documentation and less interesting buildings.

The highly involved architect who spends time refining design ideas, resolving details and coordinating a team will generally command higher fees than someone providing a lighter level of documentation and oversight. That difference reflects the scope and quality of outcome rather than the title on the business card.

In that sense, architectural fees should reflect how deeply the architect engages with the project rather than whether the person is registered or not.

Registration is better understood as a professional standard than a pricing mechanism. It signals that the architect has demonstrated competence across a broad range of professional areas and is accountable to a regulatory framework.

For clients, the more useful question is rarely “Are you registered?” but rather “How do you approach the design of a building?”

Registration sits alongside that conversation as one indicator of professional standing but should not be the sole determinant of value.

From my perspective, pursuing registration is not about changing how projects are priced. It is about formally recognising the level of professional responsibility that already exists within the work.

The way I approach architecture, the time spent understanding projects, resolving details, and guiding buildings through the realities of construction, remains exactly the same.

Registration simply places that work within the formal framework of the profession.