Skip to main content
Lillian Holmes
Director of Public Works
Asked a question 2 years ago

What is the difference between an architectural technician and an architect?

What is the difference between an architectural technician and an architect? Is it essential to hire both for my construction project?

Where am I?

In TheConstructor you can ask and answer questions and share your experience with others!

Architects make plans for new construction projects, modifications, and redevelopments. They utilize their expert development information and significant level drawing skills to design structures that are functional, safe, sustainable, and aesthetically pleasing. Architects remain included all through the development procedure, adjusting their arrangements as indicated by spending requirements, natural elements, or customer needs. In that capacity, they work as a feature of a general undertaking configuration group, working intimately with a scope of development experts from amount assessors to building administration engineers.

Architectural technicians are answerable for any technical specifications of a specific part of the architectural project. They create and design segments of the task with great detail, indicating definite estimations. They are typically entrusted with breaking down the usefulness of the project, just as assessing what potential mistakes could happen. Because of the precision required from the drafts and portrays, the technicians are appointed, they typically should draw a few representations of a similar segment with shifting edges and perspectives for the construction group.

Terry Collins
Sustainability consultant

Building designers or architectural technician are not architect.

The architectural technician is more focused on technical aspects of building design, their bye-laws, values from codes, conceptual drawing through CAD basically etc. Architectural technician deals with 3D models, all software for building designing must be compulsory.

Architect deals with the technical terms of the building as well as science and art of designing. The architect is always ready to adopt new construction and design concepts.

To become an architect one must do an architectural Engineering which is 5 years engineering course. To become an architectural technician, one must complete a 3-year diploma course in architecture.

Technologists specialize in the technical aspects of architecture, as opposed to the creative, organizational and management side. 

They are generally not qualified in design, although many architects who have failed to complete their architectural courses for whatever reason often become technologists, wherein many parts of the world there are no specific qualifications required. It's entirely possible to become a good technologist without formal study but learning on the job. The same cannot be said of an architect. 

They are not usually qualified or experienced to design major buildings, but it is common for them to design houses for example. 

I don't mean to devalue the role of technologists, for example, because many are much better than architects in terms of their level of understanding of how to build and detail reliably. Many are also competent and creative designers in their own right, despite not being qualified as such. They do a lot of the 'heavy lifting' behind the scenes and tend to produce a lot more drawings than architects. 

A great many of the most impressive and prestigious buildings could not have been created without architectural technologists, and for some duties, I would take a technologist over an architect any day! 

Generally speaking, technologists cannot 'sign off' buildings. They are not bound by the requirement to carry professional indemnity insurance. 

Architects have a much broader range of skills than technologists, but they are not necessarily superior in the shared ones. Architecture is a profession, and an architectural technologist is a job? 

If you're asking about the difference between an architect and architectural technologist that's different then. Architects have more responsibilities and can focus on everything from design to site inspections to the administration of contracts. Generally, 5% of their time is spent in front of a computer drawing, whilst the rest of the time is answering emails, coordinating with other members of the design team, clients, contractors. Or on-site inspecting projects and making decisions on unexpected problems.

 Except for in rare cases, a technologist is more likely to be office-based, and their knowledge is generally more based on construction and services. At least in the office, I work in, they are also in charge of the majority of CAD drawings and help transform architects' scribbles in legible documents.