Architects are excited about the potential of AI, but concerns abound

In a profession where innovation meets responsibility for public health, safety, and welfare, artificial intelligence (AI) sits at that intersection—offering both opportunity and cause for hesitation. Findings in a new AIA research study, Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Architecture, underscore this dichotomy, revealing how AI is used in the profession today and the sentiment around its use in the future. This duality is clear throughout the research, but most notably in this finding: 78% of respondents want to learn more about the potential of AI in the industry, and the same percent noted they have concerns about AI.

To date, AI adoption at architecture firms is small—only 8% of firm leaders report integrating it into their practices. However, there is curiosity and experimentation—another 20% report they are in the process of implementation, and 35% are considering adoption. Most of this activity is driven by the largest firms where there are more likely to be resources dedicated to technology training and implementation. 

Individual practitioners are using or experimenting with it at similar levels—6% of the study respondents report using it regularly, while another 53% are experimenting with its use. Today, most of that adoption is in low-invasive uses—helping with notetaking, recording meeting minutes, writing proposals, drafting communications, and editing: 79% of respondents reported they use Chatbots, 45% use grammar/text analytics, and 25% use transcription or meeting assistants. One small firm leader expressed the broader response well: “We use ChatGPT to write simple project descriptions for marketing purposes.” 

Younger professionals are more likely to use image generators in their work—two-thirds of those under 35 reported using an image generator (e.g., Dall-E), while 55% of those aged 36 to 50 and 41% of those over 50 report the same. Those using image generators mostly do so for concept development, feeding the system with their own work. As one large firm leader noted, “[We are] presently using [it] to move from conceptual massings to character sketches of possible options.”

However, many professionals noted concern about this trend. A recently-licensed architect at a large firm stated, “I don't like the idea of AI-generated design [as in AI designing buildings rather than architects]. I am concerned about the integrity of the practice and the risks posed by AI-generated design to the health, safety, and welfare of the public. There is a problematic misconception among the general public that AI can create art when it actually steals from or copies actual artists.” 

Cautions are not limited to concerns over AI-generated images. Across all areas tested, an overwhelming majority of respondents express multiple concerns in the areas of inaccuracy (94%), unintended consequences (94%), privacy and security (93%), authenticity (90%), and lack of transparency (90%). As one respondent noted, “AI can be useful in sorting through data quickly, as long as the reference databases are secure and valid. The danger is that AI-generated information can look good but be very wrong. I remain concerned that major mistakes will occur by too-early adoption of AI tools.”  

There is a notable opportunity in AI to advance the profession further. To date, these low-risk adoptions do not align with the tasks that architectural professionals find most inefficient—cost estimation and project takeoffs, updating product libraries, and writing technical specs. The one area of alignment between inefficiency and adoption is the use of AI for new product research—while the fourth lowest-rated task in efficiency, it is the third-highest task in AI use or experimentation.  

Like most creative ventures, the tools have a long way to go before they can reliably serve the profession, though there was a general sentiment that they are here to stay. Only 5% of respondents have used AI and then stopped.  

One thing is for sure, AI is ever-changing—and quickly. This firm leader summed it up well: “We will see the AI landscape quite differently in the near future.”  

This report is the latest issue of AIA's The Architect's Journey to Specification research study series produced in partnership with Deltek and ConstructConnect. It is based on a statistically valid survey of architectural professionals, including firm leaders, licensed architects, and those responsible for technology adoption in firms. Download the report for more detailed findings and methodology. 

Michele Russo is Vice President, Research & Practice at AIA.