It’s effortless, and relatively, over a year, a small committment of time.

In this case we have a stuborn Erickson who believes himself above these requirements. Instead of spending 15 or so hours a year in pr devel, he has probably spent five times that fighting, arguing, writing – and worse – thinking, occupying valuable creative space. Even worse, his family is also drawn into it, consuming valuable hours.

The AIBC could have – as some pr assoc’s do – swept it away “well, let’s let it slide; no one in our industry will challenge it, let’s put Art down for ’20 hours’ … an admin error in the books …”

Instead, they have withstood, and insisted their pro standards be met. Publicly as well. This is courageous and admirable.

For me personally, what is most dissapointing is that I was taught in business school that even though some pros are highly experienced – and could even be teaching these courses – they should attend to add to the body of knowldge and informall ‘mentor’ younger pros.

So on top of all the valuable time and creativity being wasted, younger architects attending these courses will never get a glimps, a chat and catch a few wise observations from Erickson.