On Branding / by Fakhry Akkad

Do architects ever think of their companies as brands?

A brand is a recognisable attribute under which services and/or products are defined vis-a-vis competitors. Architecture is both a service and a product yet the concept of branding sounds like a foreign, arcane language to many in the profession. In a property market that is fiercely competitive, saturated with architects, how do architectural practices stand out?

I would argue that successful architecture studios are not only those that have built a reputation but also those who have become recognisable outside architectural circles: A true metric of success is attracting clients over and over again who want to avail themselves of the service you provide regardless of what your fees are. Therein lies the forte of a strong brand: clients are willing pay for it even when your competitors are underbidding you. This is different to track record or what is affectionately referred to as a ‘safe pair of hands’. Developers also operate in a fiercely competitive property market and they also are vying for tenants and buyers who can afford to be picky.

So what are the possible tenets of a brand in architecture?

  1. Design. It’s rudimentary: Architects don’t win new commissions based on Grade-3 waterproofing and K-10 packages. Kitchen extracts surprisingly don’t catch the eye of a developer. Architecture is a service where design adds value to property. Architecture is also a product but production has been outsourced to contractors with the prevalence of ‘design-and-build’ contracts leaving architects the opportunity to focus on design and innovation, even manufacture taste. Design is what sets companies apart and by design I don’t particularly mean style which some companies become hostages to, but rather a sense of freshness, even sexiness which is associated with the brand that taps into what people want or never realised they wanted in the first place. Design is a mode of thinking.

  2. Recognition. An architectural brand needs to be recognisable and this means it needs to be communicated properly to the right audience. Unfortunately, for many architects, the epitome of their ambition is to give lectures in industry-related conferences that only people in architecture and sometimes property attend: Instead of thinking bigger or giving their PR consultants more creative rein, architects limit their PR consultant’s brief to gaining a speaking opportunity in an NLA or a BCO conference or at best, MIPIM. Why don’t architects advertise? Why don’t they pay their PR consultants to gain a platform in lifestyle magazines or even TV shows ranging from drama to documentaries to comedy panel shows. This can either be an outright advert or subtle product placement and name-dropping. This is not a quick process but it is worth strategising even if takes a few years to build up one’s profile to get there. Architecture permeates almost every facet of modern life yet architects are introverts who only deal with their own.

  3. Presentation. An architectural brand needs people who can represent it well, whether in the way they dress or the way they express themselves. Architects need to look and talk the business. Almost every other profession is conscious of the image of its ranks but not not architecture. Attending client meetings looking dishevelled is alas a common occurrence. It is a poor reflection of the brand these unkempt architects represent if not the profession as a whole. How can clients trust architects with designing projects worth millions of pounds if these architects cannot dress themselves? How can clients have confidence that architects will coordinate a finishes palette when these architects fail to coordinate the colour of their own outfits?

  4. Flexibility. Many architects are fixated with production and building sites that they are oblivious to how flexible their remit is. I wrote some months ago on abstraction and this has never rung so true than now with lockdown when construction is almost grinding to a halt. Why have architects not expanded their business model to the gaming industry or to film post-production (special effects and CGIs)? The opportunities for architectural design in these somewhat non-orthodox sectors are legion.

Brands are fundamental in creative, service-led industries and whilst some architects have successfully concocted them, many in the profession do not have a sense of purpose or identity. It is erroneously thought that brands are the preserve of only starchitects but starchitects are only the apotheosis of architectural branding, architecture’s counterpart to luxury commodities. Just like fashion, the spectrum for architectural brands is vast, catering to disparate tastes and purchasing powers. Some architects can be Dior, others Zara and all that in between.