ABSTRACT
It is generally understood that even doing bad architecture is somewhat difficult. Thousands of decisions need to be constantly made in order to manage the complex process of design and construction. Multiple agendas from the client, the municipality, architects, consultants, code officials and the general public must be managed in order to reach a common goal. Coordinating this myriad of concerns is frequently the responsibility of the architect and becomes particularly more difficult on large projects with expansive consultant and client groups. How the decisions are made and fundamental questions of what the right decisions to make must be synthetic to the process of design. This is because the time to isolate and explore these determinations is rarely available. Giles Oliver defines this role:
The central leadership challenge is to understand the diverse ethics of the distinct team members, tolerating diverse values as ingredients within a whole project and resolving conflicts where they break out. This calls for ethics in action, "a wise person who knows what is good and spontaneously does it", rather than schemas or rigid protocols. 1
