6. Conclusions and implications for research and practice
This study attempted to explore the complexity of the phenomenon of marginalization and invasion of architects’ roles in house projects and to explain why institutional interventions are not adequately addressing the problem. Through in-depth examination of the literature guided by a conceptual framework, the phenomenon of marginalization and role invasion is deemed a super wicked problem. This conceptualization shows that the combined effect of the six propositions in our conceptual framework (the phenomenon is a problem with a difficult definition, the multiple stakeholders attempting to solve the problem are part of the cause, finding a solution involves a large structural and economic burden, time is of the essence, institutional interventions toward addressing the problem are weak or ill-equipped, and institutional interventions discount the future irrationally) account for the inability of architects to solve the problem of marginalization and role invasion. Although architects, at the professional institutional level, recognize the need to act on marginalization and role invasion, they are sometimes reluctant to act. In cases in which they have acted, their motives, coupled with the complex nature of the problem, have rendered their interventions counterproductive. Consequently, these actions have exacerbated the problem of marginalization and role invasion.
The value of framing the phenomenon of marginalization and role invasion as a super wicked problem is seen in at least four distinct ways. As opposed to the dominant focus on the sources of marginalization outside the profession, our framework shifts the analytic lens to how architects at the institutional level are contributing to marginalization and role invasion. This shift in focus has revealed that for the greater part, architects’ institutions have inadvertently worked against the interests of the profession.
