Choosing the architect who draws over the one who watches
Investors wanted a full architectural set, and I paid for output instead of oversight.
Investors showed interest in a Midtown Phoenix building and wanted a complete architectural set. I needed an architect who could move quickly. One candidate wanted a flat fee to sit in and observe while my team trained AI on creating plans. He would draw nothing himself.
I turned that down and hired the architect who stamps work fast and offered to teach me the process hands-on, over two intense weeks working next to me.
The first man's fee amounted to slowness dressed as oversight. The second delivers stamped work quickly, and when my team learns plan creation firsthand, we own that capability for good instead of paying someone to sit in front of a bottleneck.
The sprint toward an appraisal-ready set kept going. Investor interest, linked to a comparable building sale, stayed alive since the set was actually coming together rather than waiting on a slow review.
Pay for output. Do not pay someone to loom over you while you build the very thing he used to bill you for. I picked the partner willing to teach me over the one who wanted to be paid to watch, because real capability mattered more to me than protecting his fee structure.
Story details
| Project | 301 W Osborn |
|---|---|
| Type | Strong opinion |
| Year | 2026 |
| Firm telling | on the Common Ground wiki |