Use these 60 concepts to practise the decisions behind architectural professional practice: defining responsibilities, running a practice, procuring services, checking development constraints and administering projects. Each concept explains a distinction, applies it to an original scenario and identifies a mistake to avoid. Read the foundations first, then use the examples to explain your decisions and the evidence you would need.
Professional regulation and responsibility
1. Regulation and professional membership serve different purposes
BORAQS identifies itself as the regulator of architecture and quantity surveying in Kenya. A regulator's recognition and membership of a professional association are separate matters. When assessing an appointment, identify the body responsible for the particular status being claimed and verify that status through its appropriate records.
Worked example: A consultant presents an association membership card as evidence of registration. The client checks the relevant BORAQS record separately; the card alone does not resolve the registration question.
Mistake to avoid: Treating association membership as interchangeable with regulatory recognition.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
2. Individual and firm status require separate checks
The BORAQS website distinguishes architects from architectural firms in its register categories. Due diligence should therefore identify both the person undertaking professional work and the entity entering the appointment. Record names accurately and confirm any applicable current status requirements rather than assuming one entry answers every question.
Worked example: A proposal names architect Amina and Horizon Studio Ltd. The client checks the individual and firm records separately and confirms that Horizon is the entity named in the appointment.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming an individual's entry establishes the status of every firm they represent.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
3. Competence must match the particular task
Professional recognition does not establish expertise in every building type or technical problem. Assess competence against the proposed task, available staff, experience and specialist support. Where a gap exists, define a suitable specialist contribution or adjust the scope before accepting responsibility for advice that cannot be adequately supported.
Worked example: A practice experienced in houses receives a laboratory brief. It identifies specialist containment requirements and arranges appropriate expert input before promising a coordinated technical solution.
Mistake to avoid: Using general architectural experience as proof of specialist competence.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
4. Independent judgment requires evidence
A professional recommendation should follow the relevant facts, criteria and assigned responsibilities, even when a client prefers a different conclusion. Distinguish advice from the client's commercial decision. Explain uncertainty and alternatives clearly, and do not sign a statement whose factual basis you cannot reasonably substantiate.
Worked example: A client asks the architect to describe an uninspected installation as satisfactory. The architect explains that the available evidence supports no such conclusion and requests the necessary verification.
Mistake to avoid: Allowing client pressure to replace the evidence behind a professional statement.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
5. Conflicts of interest need early disclosure
A conflict arises when another interest could compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, professional judgment. Identify personal, financial and organisational connections before a decision. Disclosure is only the first step: assess whether safeguards are adequate and whether the applicable rules require withdrawal or another response.
Worked example: An architect's sibling owns a shortlisted supplier. The architect discloses the connection before evaluation and checks the procurement rules to determine whether exclusion from the decision is necessary.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming disclosure automatically makes participation acceptable.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs); The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
6. Confidentiality depends on purpose and permission
Handle client and project information according to its purpose, sensitivity and authorised recipients. Permission to use information on a project does not automatically include permission to publish it. Confidentiality can also have lawful exceptions; assess any proposed disclosure against applicable obligations rather than promising absolute secrecy.
Worked example: A practice wants to publish photographs showing a client's security arrangements. It obtains appropriate permission and removes sensitive details before deciding what can appear in its portfolio.
Mistake to avoid: Treating access to information as permission to distribute it.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
7. Safety concerns require a proportionate response
When a credible safety concern emerges, separate immediate risk management from the later allocation of responsibility. Communicate through the appropriate project and emergency procedures, preserve relevant observations and seek competent assessment. Your contractual role determines authority; discovering a hazard does not automatically confer every power needed to resolve it.
Worked example: An architect observes a potentially unstable site barrier beside a public path. The concern is immediately reported through site procedures, with its location recorded for the responsible team's assessment.
Mistake to avoid: Delaying a credible safety report until contractual blame has been settled.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
8. Professional claims must describe actual contributions
Project descriptions should distinguish authorship, employment, collaboration and services actually performed. A person who contributed to one stage should not imply responsibility for the entire commission. Accurate descriptions help clients judge relevant experience and avoid confusion over ownership, competence and the identity of the appointed practice.
Worked example: An architect developed façade details while employed elsewhere. Their portfolio states that contribution and credits the project team, rather than presenting the building as their independent commission.
Mistake to avoid: Claiming whole-project authorship from a limited contribution.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs); The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
9. Responsibility interfaces need named owners
Multidisciplinary work creates interfaces where separate designs must function together. Identify who provides information, who coordinates it and who verifies the resulting interface. Coordination does not automatically transfer a specialist's design responsibility to the architect; responsibilities should remain clear in appointments and the project responsibility matrix.
Worked example: A roof drain passes through a structural zone. The architect coordinates its location, while the drainage and structural designers verify their respective designs before the coordinated detail is issued.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming a coordination meeting transfers all specialist responsibility to its chair.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
10. A decision record should preserve its reasoning
A useful decision record states the issue, available evidence, options considered, decision maker and resulting action. Recording only an outcome loses the assumptions that explain it. Distinguish confirmed facts from estimates so that later reviewers can understand why a decision was reasonable when made.
Worked example: The client selects a façade option because the alternative exceeds the agreed budget. The record captures the cost comparison and assumptions, allowing reassessment when prices later change.
Mistake to avoid: Recording approval without its basis, limitations or responsible decision maker.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs); The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
Managing an architectural practice
11. A brief needs measurable acceptance criteria
Translate aspirations into requirements that can guide design decisions. Separate essential functions, preferences and constraints, and define how each will be checked. An acceptance criterion need not be numerical, but it should identify an observable result rather than an adjective that different participants interpret differently.
Worked example: A client requests a flexible meeting space. The brief defines two independently usable rooms and a combined arrangement, so the proposed layout can be checked against both configurations.
Mistake to avoid: Leaving terms such as flexible or efficient undefined throughout design.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
12. Service scope should identify deliverables and exclusions
A service appointment should connect each stage to its deliverables, required inputs and limits. State exclusions clearly and explain how omitted services will be provided if needed. A project title or broad phrase such as architectural services does not adequately resolve responsibilities for surveys, specialist design or additional submissions.
Worked example: A refurbishment appointment includes measured drawings but excludes an intrusive structural investigation. The client separately commissions the investigation before the architect relies on concealed structural conditions.
Mistake to avoid: Allowing an excluded service to remain an unassigned project need.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
13. A fee estimate should start with the work required
Estimate a service fee from the resources needed to perform the agreed scope. Distinguish staff cost, allocated overhead, external services and the intended return. Check that allowances are not counted twice. This is a business calculation, not a statement of any current Kenyan fee scale.
Worked example: A task needs 60 hours at an internal cost of KES 2,000 per hour, plus KES 30,000 overhead. Its estimated cost is KES 150,000 before profit and other separately identified items.
Mistake to avoid: Applying a desired fee without checking whether it funds the promised work.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
14. Markup and profit margin use different denominators
Markup measures profit against cost; margin measures profit against revenue. With cost C and fee F, markup is (F minus C) divided by C, while margin is (F minus C) divided by F. Confusing them can produce a fee below the practice's intended return.
Worked example: A service costs KES 200,000 and is priced at KES 250,000. Profit is KES 50,000: markup is 25%, while margin is 20%.
Mistake to avoid: Calling a 25% addition to cost a 25% profit margin.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
15. Capacity planning must include coordination and review
Available staff hours are not identical to productive project capacity. Allow for leave, administration, coordination, checking and other commitments before promising delivery dates. Compare required effort with realistic availability by skill, since spare hours in one role may not replace scarce capacity in another.
Worked example: Two designers each have 30 project hours available next week. A package requires 50 design hours and 15 review hours; the 60 design hours available do not solve the missing reviewer capacity.
Mistake to avoid: Treating every available hour as interchangeable across roles.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
16. Profitability and cash availability are different
Profit compares income and expenses under the accounting basis used; cash flow tracks actual receipts and payments. A profitable commission can still create a funding gap when staff and consultants must be paid before the client pays. Forecast payment timing as well as the total expected return.
Worked example: A practice expects KES 400,000 from a completed stage but receives it next month. With KES 250,000 due now and KES 100,000 cash available, the immediate funding gap is KES 150,000.
Mistake to avoid: Using an unpaid invoice as though it were cash in the bank.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
17. Consultant appointments should align with project dependencies
Coordinate consultant deliverables with the dates and information on which other work depends. Clarify who appoints each consultant, how instructions reach them and how outputs will be reviewed. Shared participation in a project does not by itself establish a contractual relationship between every member of the team.
Worked example: The client appoints the engineer directly. The architect's programme identifies when structural information is needed and agrees a coordination route without assuming authority to change the engineer's appointment.
Mistake to avoid: Confusing project coordination with a right to amend another consultant's contract.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
18. Document control distinguishes revision from issue status
A revision identifies a document's content version; its issue status identifies the purpose for which it may be used. Maintain both, together with recipients and superseded records. A newer drawing can still be unsuitable for construction if it was issued only for review or coordination.
Worked example: Drawing A-204 revision D is issued for coordination. Revision C remains the authorised construction issue until the required checks and formal issue of D are completed.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming the latest revision is automatically authorised for site use.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
19. Changes to professional services need their own assessment
A changed client requirement can affect architectural effort even before construction begins. Compare the request with the agreed appointment, identify extra work and assess programme consequences. Follow the appointment's change procedure; do not assume that every redesign attracts extra payment or that every modification is included.
Worked example: After approving a single-storey brief, the client requests a second storey. The practice records the additional investigations, coordination and drawings and seeks agreement under the appointment before proceeding.
Mistake to avoid: Absorbing an expanded brief without assessing its effect on the service agreement.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
20. Continuity planning must test recovery
Continuity depends on restoring usable project information and maintaining essential responsibilities after disruption. Backups alone do not demonstrate recovery capability. Identify critical records, access arrangements, substitute personnel and recovery steps, then test whether current files and permissions can actually be restored.
Worked example: A practice restores a sample project from backup and discovers that linked survey files are missing. It corrects the backup scope before relying on it for an actual interruption.
Mistake to avoid: Equating successful backup creation with successful recovery.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
Procurement and contractual foundations
21. Procurement routes allocate design and coordination differently
Evaluate a procurement route by who develops the design, who engages the builder and where coordination responsibilities sit. Compare the client's need for design control, timing and risk allocation. Route names alone are insufficient: actual appointments and contract terms determine the arrangement and must be read together.
Worked example: A client compares separate designer and builder appointments with an arrangement combining design and construction. The comparison identifies how each handles late design changes and responsibility for design interfaces.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming a procurement label guarantees a particular allocation of risk.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
22. Tender comparison requires a common scope
Prices become meaningfully comparable only after differences in scope, quantities, assumptions and exclusions are identified. Build a comparison that exposes these differences rather than selecting the lowest headline sum. Clarify inconsistencies through the permitted procedure without privately changing the requirements for one tenderer.
Worked example: Bid A is KES 18 million excluding external works; Bid B is KES 19 million including KES 2 million of equivalent external works. On that limited adjustment, A becomes KES 20 million.
Mistake to avoid: Ranking headline totals before checking what each total includes.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
23. Prequalification tests capability rather than a design solution
BORAQS's 2016 competition guidance distinguishes an expression-of-interest stage from a design competition and describes prequalification without design work. The durable distinction is between evidence of capability and a project solution. Match requested material to the selection stage and confirm the current rules governing the particular process.
Worked example: A shortlist exercise requests relevant experience, staffing and delivery capacity. Requiring a developed building scheme would change the nature and effort of that stage, so the request needs clarification.
Mistake to avoid: Treating a capability submission as an unrestricted request for unpaid design.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
24. Competition anonymity protects the assessment process
The 2016 BORAQS competition guidance describes anonymous design assessment and withholding identifying declarations until after the award. Anonymity separates evaluation of the submission from recognition of its author. When anonymity applies, check all submission components against the actual competition conditions, including metadata and identifying presentation features.
Worked example: A competition requires anonymous boards. A team removes its logo and checks filenames and embedded author details before submission, while providing identification only through the specified separate channel.
Mistake to avoid: Checking visible logos but overlooking other identifying material.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
25. Procurement clarifications should preserve equal information
A clarification explains an existing requirement; an amendment changes it. The 2016 BORAQS guidance provides for circulating answers to competitors and distinguishes clarification from alteration of published conditions. In any process, use its authorised procedure so that relevant information and changes reach participants consistently.
Worked example: A bidder asks whether a room area includes storage. The answer explains the existing definition to all bidders. Adding a new storage requirement would require treatment as a change.
Mistake to avoid: Introducing additional scope under the label of a clarification.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
26. Weighted evaluation combines scores only on compatible scales
A weighted score requires defined criteria, compatible scoring scales and weights applied consistently. Establish the method before evaluation and retain the underlying reasons. A calculation cannot repair unclear criteria or biased assessments. Any actual selection formula must come from the applicable procurement documents, not this illustrative exercise.
Worked example: Using hypothetical weights of 70% quality and 30% price, scores of 80 and 60 out of 100 produce 0.70 × 80 + 0.30 × 60 = 74.
Mistake to avoid: Combining a score out of ten with one out of one hundred without normalisation.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
27. An award and a service appointment are separate questions
Selection identifies a preferred participant; the appointment establishes the service relationship and its terms. The legal effect of an award, acceptance or letter depends on its wording and applicable law. Resolve scope, payment, responsibilities and necessary approvals rather than assuming either that no obligations exist or that everything is settled.
Worked example: A practice receives notice that it has been selected. Before mobilising, it reviews the notice and proposed appointment to establish authorised services and any conditions still requiring resolution.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming a selection notice answers every contractual question.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
28. Document precedence must come from the contract
Contracts often contain several documents that may conflict. Identify the applicable precedence and discrepancy provisions rather than inventing a universal hierarchy. Raise contradictions early and use the authorised resolution procedure. Even a stated priority rule may not eliminate the need to clarify how inconsistent information affects the work.
Worked example: A specification describes timber doors while a schedule describes steel doors. The administrator checks the contract's discrepancy procedure and obtains a documented resolution before procurement.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming drawings always override specifications, or the reverse.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
29. Instruction authority is defined by the appointment and contract
Distinguish requesting, advising, approving and formally instructing. These actions can have different contractual consequences, and the person performing one may lack authority for another. Identify the authorised issuer, required form and limits of an instruction before treating a discussion or message as a change to the works.
Worked example: A client representative asks a foreman to relocate a partition. The team records the request and routes it through the contract's instruction procedure before assessing cost and programme consequences.
Mistake to avoid: Treating every client conversation as a valid contractual instruction.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
30. Lump sum and remeasurement pricing respond differently to quantities
A lump sum prices an agreed scope as a total, while remeasurement generally applies agreed rates to measured quantities under the contract. Neither description alone settles every adjustment. Check quantity risk, variations and measurement rules before deciding whether a difference between estimated and actual quantities changes payment.
Worked example: Under a simplified remeasurement arrangement, 120 square metres at KES 3,000 per square metre yields KES 360,000. The same calculation does not automatically revise a lump-sum contract.
Mistake to avoid: Applying remeasurement logic to every quantity difference regardless of contract terms.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
Planning and development constraints
31. Land rights and permission to develop are separate
An interest in land does not by itself establish that a proposed development is permitted. Assess ownership or other rights, relevant restrictions and the development approvals separately. Use appropriate legal and surveying expertise where needed, and verify the responsible authority and current requirements for the actual Kenyan site.
Worked example: A client produces ownership documents for a plot. The architect still investigates whether the proposed use and building form are permissible before treating the site as ready for development.
Mistake to avoid: Treating ownership evidence as approval for the proposed building.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs); The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
32. Site due diligence should track information reliability
Site information has different origins, dates and levels of certainty. Record whether boundaries, levels, services and ground conditions are surveyed, inferred or awaiting verification. The BORAQS competition guidance recognises the relevance of site levels and services; reliable design also requires identifying what a supplied plan does not establish.
Worked example: An old plan shows a drain near the proposed entrance. Because its location is unverified, the design team requests suitable confirmation rather than fixing the entrance around an assumed position.
Mistake to avoid: Treating every feature on an existing site drawing as current and verified.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
33. Planning acceptability and technical compliance answer different questions
Development review can address land use and external effects, while technical requirements address matters such as structural performance, access and building safety. The precise Kenyan procedures must be confirmed locally. Evidence that one aspect is acceptable should not be treated as proof that every other requirement has been satisfied.
Worked example: A proposed clinic is acceptable in principle for the site's use. The team still checks its access, servicing and technical design requirements before concluding that the project can proceed.
Mistake to avoid: Using one approval to imply that all design requirements have been checked.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
34. A requirements matrix links obligations to evidence
A requirements matrix records the applicable requirement, its authoritative source, responsible designer and evidence of satisfaction. Separate mandatory requirements from client preferences and unresolved interpretations. Update the matrix when the design or applicable requirements change; a checklist without traceable evidence can conceal an incomplete assessment.
Worked example: An access requirement is assigned to the architect, with the relevant current reference and coordinated route drawings recorded. An unresolved interpretation remains open rather than being marked compliant.
Mistake to avoid: Ticking compliance without identifying the requirement and supporting evidence.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs); The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
35. Site coverage and floor area ratio measure different things
Site coverage compares the defined building footprint with site area. Floor area ratio compares the defined total floor area with site area. The applicable authority's definitions determine inclusions and exclusions. These calculations describe different development characteristics and do not, by themselves, establish compliance with a local limit.
Worked example: On a 2,000-square-metre site, a defined footprint of 800 square metres gives 40% coverage. A defined total floor area of 2,400 square metres gives a floor area ratio of 1.2.
Mistake to avoid: Using total floor area as the numerator for site coverage.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
36. A buildable envelope is the intersection of constraints
The potential building envelope is shaped by simultaneous constraints, which may include setbacks, height limits, easements, access and site conditions. Check each using current, site-specific evidence. A large gross plot can still have a restricted usable area, and an apparently feasible footprint may fail another constraint.
Worked example: For an illustrative 30-by-40-metre rectangular plot, assumed setbacks of 3 metres on each side and 5 metres front and rear leave 24 × 30 = 720 square metres before other constraints.
Mistake to avoid: Presenting an illustrative setback calculation as a Kenyan regulatory allowance.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs); The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
37. Accessibility is a continuous route problem
Assess accessibility across the whole journey to and through the building, including arrival, entrances, circulation and intended facilities. An isolated accessible feature cannot compensate for a broken route. Verify dimensions and detailed provisions against applicable current requirements and consult appropriate expertise for specialist accessibility questions.
Worked example: An entrance is accessible, but the only meeting room is reached by stairs. The team resolves access to the meeting function rather than declaring the building accessible from its entrance alone.
Mistake to avoid: Evaluating accessibility as a collection of isolated features.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
38. Escape planning requires an integrated strategy
Escape arrangements depend on use, occupancy, layout and the wider fire-safety strategy. Coordinate routes, exits and relevant building systems using current requirements and competent fire-safety input. Avoid treating a single drawing feature as sufficient evidence; changes in occupation or partitions can invalidate assumptions used in the assessment.
Worked example: A floor is changed from storage to a training area. The team reassesses occupancy and escape arrangements instead of assuming the previous circulation plan remains suitable.
Mistake to avoid: Reusing an escape assessment after a material change of use or layout.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
39. Drainage assessment extends beyond the plot boundary
A site's drainage performance depends on levels, catchments, receiving systems and possible downstream effects. Establish reliable site information and obtain competent assessment of disposal arrangements. Do not assume that directing water off the plot solves the problem, or that an apparent connection has capacity or permission for the proposal.
Worked example: A sloping plot drains toward neighbouring property. The team investigates a suitable receiving system and downstream effects rather than simply orienting the landscape falls toward the boundary.
Mistake to avoid: Treating removal of water from the site as proof of acceptable drainage.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
40. Whole-life comparison includes operating consequences
Compare design options across the relevant period, including acquisition, maintenance, operation and replacement. State assumptions and distinguish simple totals from discounted financial analysis. A lower initial cost can create higher later expenditure, but the conclusion depends on credible service-life and operating assumptions rather than a sustainability label.
Worked example: Option A costs KES 1.2 million plus KES 180,000 yearly; B costs KES 1.5 million plus KES 100,000 yearly. Over five years, undiscounted totals are KES 2.1 million and KES 2 million.
Mistake to avoid: Calling an undiscounted cost comparison a complete investment appraisal.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
Project management and site administration
41. A work breakdown structure defines manageable outputs
Break a project into identifiable outputs or work packages so that scope, responsibility and progress can be tracked. A work breakdown structure describes what must be delivered; a programme adds timing and dependencies. Packages should cover the agreed scope without hiding necessary coordination work between them.
Worked example: A refurbishment is divided into surveys, coordinated design, procurement information and construction administration. Each package has an owner and output before its activities are placed on the programme.
Mistake to avoid: Using a list of dates as a substitute for a defined scope breakdown.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
42. The critical path follows dependencies
The critical path is the sequence controlling the earliest completion date in the programme model. Durations alone do not identify it; dependencies and available float matter. Reassess the path as progress changes, and distinguish a scheduling result from a contractual conclusion about responsibility or entitlement.
Worked example: Survey takes four days, followed by six days of design and three days of approval: thirteen days. An independent eight-day task has five days of float if both start together.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming the longest individual activity must be critical.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
43. A risk register separates uncertain events from current issues
A risk is an uncertain event that could affect objectives; an issue has already occurred and needs action. Describe the event, cause and consequence, then assign an owner and response. Review probability and impact using a consistent method without treating a qualitative score as a precise prediction.
Worked example: Possible delay in survey access is recorded as a risk with an access-confirmation action. Once access is refused, it becomes an issue requiring a revised survey plan.
Mistake to avoid: Leaving an event in the risk register after it has become an active problem.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
44. Contingency covers uncertainty rather than an expanded brief
A project budget should distinguish defined scope, allowances and contingency. Contingency responds to identified uncertainty under agreed control; it is not evidence that every new client request is affordable. Record what each allowance covers and assess whether changes consume uncertainty provision or add scope requiring a revised budget.
Worked example: A KES 20 million base estimate includes a separately stated KES 1 million contingency, giving KES 21 million. Adding a new wing still requires a scope and funding decision.
Mistake to avoid: Using contingency to conceal an unapproved increase in project scope.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
45. Coordination reviews must test functional compatibility
A clash-free model or drawing is not necessarily a workable design. Coordination should also test access, maintenance, installation sequence and performance at interfaces. Record the relevant specialists' decisions and distinguish a geometric review from their technical verification of the systems they design.
Worked example: A ceiling layout has no geometric clashes, but a service valve cannot be reached for maintenance. The team revises access provision and obtains the relevant designer's confirmation.
Mistake to avoid: Declaring coordination complete solely because objects do not overlap.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
46. Inspection provides evidence within its stated limits
An inspection records what was observed at a particular time and location within the observer's role. Sampling does not establish that every concealed or unobserved element is satisfactory. Plan reviews around relevant risks and stages, and record access limitations, outstanding evidence and matters requiring specialist assessment.
Worked example: An architect reviews finishes in three rooms and records those locations. The report does not extend the conclusion to concealed waterproofing or rooms that were inaccessible.
Mistake to avoid: Turning a limited observation into an unsupported statement about all work.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
47. Defect records need a requirement and a closure criterion
A defect record should identify the location, observed condition, relevant requirement and evidence needed for closure. Distinguish a defect from an unfinished item or a requested change. A replacement can address the visible symptom without resolving its cause, so reassessment should match the nature of the problem.
Worked example: A stained ceiling tile is replaced, but the record remains open until the responsible team investigates the water source and provides suitable evidence that the underlying problem has been addressed.
Mistake to avoid: Closing a defect solely because its visible symptom has disappeared.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
48. Variation valuation must include additions and omissions
Assess a changed item against the original contractual scope and the applicable valuation rules. Separate added work, omitted work and any justified consequential effects. Avoid double counting work already priced elsewhere. Agreement on an amount does not by itself resolve instruction authority, time consequences or other contractual requirements.
Worked example: An instructed substitution adds KES 180,000 of new work and omits KES 120,000 of original work. Before other justified effects, the net change is KES 60,000.
Mistake to avoid: Adding the replacement's full price without deducting the omitted work.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
49. Progress payment calculations must distinguish cumulative and current amounts
A progress assessment may calculate cumulative entitlement before deducting prior payments and other applicable adjustments. Follow the actual contract's treatment of retention, materials, taxes and recoveries. In a simplified exercise, calculate each stage explicitly so that previously paid work is not paid again.
Worked example: Assume eligible cumulative work of KES 8 million and 5% retention on that amount. Net cumulative entitlement is KES 7.6 million; deducting KES 6 million previously paid leaves KES 1.6 million.
Mistake to avoid: Paying the cumulative entitlement without deducting previous payments.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
50. Completion and handover require distinct evidence
Completion is determined under the applicable contract, while handover involves transferring the information and arrangements needed for use and maintenance. Review required testing evidence, operating information, outstanding items and responsibilities. Neither physical occupation nor delivery of keys automatically resolves every contractual completion requirement.
Worked example: A building appears finished, but required operating manuals and test records are missing. The team assesses the contractual completion criteria and records the separate handover information still outstanding.
Mistake to avoid: Treating possession of keys as proof that all completion obligations are satisfied.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
Liability, evidence and dispute resolution
51. Contractual duties and other duties need separate analysis
A contractual claim asks what the parties promised and whether that promise was breached. Other potential duties may arise under applicable law and require a different analysis. Identify the claimant, defendant, alleged duty and factual conduct before reaching a conclusion; project involvement alone does not establish liability.
Worked example: A client alleges a missing appointed service, while a neighbour alleges damage from project activities. The team examines the appointment for the first issue and seeks appropriate legal assessment of the second.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming one contractual clause resolves every possible claim.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
52. Reasonable skill and care is assessed against circumstances
Professional negligence analysis commonly examines the applicable duty and whether conduct fell below the relevant standard. A poor outcome alone does not establish a breach, and a favourable outcome does not prove proper conduct. Actual contractual promises and applicable law matter, particularly where an obligation goes beyond reasonable skill and care.
Worked example: Unexpected ground conditions increase cost. The assessment asks what information was available and whether reasonable investigation and advice were provided, rather than inferring negligence from the overrun alone.
Mistake to avoid: Using the final outcome as the sole measure of professional conduct.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
53. Causation connects an alleged breach to the claimed loss
Separate evidence of an alleged breach from evidence that it caused a particular loss. Compare the actual outcome with a carefully supported alternative in which the alleged breach did not occur. Applicable legal tests may be more complex, but this distinction helps identify missing facts and avoid unsupported claims.
Worked example: A drawing correction costs KES 80,000, but unrelated market inflation adds KES 300,000. The inflation amount cannot simply be attributed to the drawing error without causal evidence.
Mistake to avoid: Assigning every project overrun to the first identified error.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
54. Delay impact and contractual entitlement are separate
First establish what an event did to the programme, then assess responsibility and remedies under the contract. Overlapping causes, available float and reasonable mitigation can affect the analysis. A delay's duration is not automatically the resulting extension or compensation; those conclusions require the relevant terms and evidence.
Worked example: A late drawing arrives during a period when unrelated access restrictions already prevent the affected work. The assessment examines overlap and critical impact before attributing the full period to the drawing.
Mistake to avoid: Equating the length of a late submission with compensable project delay.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
55. Claim records and notice procedures perform different functions
Records establish what happened and its consequences; notices communicate a claim or event through a prescribed procedure. Keep both. Check the actual contract for recipients, form and timing, and obtain advice where interpretation is uncertain. A detailed diary does not automatically satisfy a separate notice requirement.
Worked example: A site diary documents restricted access each day. The responsible party also checks and follows the contract's notice procedure rather than assuming the diary alone preserves any entitlement.
Mistake to avoid: Confusing evidence of an event with compliance with claim procedures.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
56. Insurance suitability depends on the policy wording
Professional insurance should be assessed against the services, potential claims and policy conditions. Examine insured parties, limits, exclusions, relevant dates and notification requirements with competent insurance advice. Some policies link cover to when claims are made or notified, so project completion does not automatically settle the coverage question.
Worked example: A practice adds a specialist service and asks its broker to confirm whether the policy covers it. The existence of a policy certificate alone does not answer that scope question.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming every professional service is covered by any professional insurance policy.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
57. Copyright ownership and permission to use are different
Ownership of drawings and permission to use them should be assessed separately. The 2016 BORAQS competition guidance refers copyright ownership to Kenyan copyright law. Review applicable law and appointment terms for permitted uses, modifications and transfers; payment or possession of a file does not alone resolve every rights question.
Worked example: A client receives drawings for one site and wants to reuse them elsewhere. The parties examine the agreed licence and obtain any necessary permission before treating reuse as authorised.
Mistake to avoid: Assuming possession of a drawing file gives unrestricted reuse rights.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
58. Complaint investigation should separate facts from conclusions
A useful complaint response identifies the allegation, preserves records, checks immediate concerns and establishes who should investigate or be notified. Distinguish observations from admissions and unsupported denials. Explain what is known and what remains under review, while following applicable contractual, professional and insurance procedures.
Worked example: A client reports recurring leakage. The practice acknowledges the reported problem, preserves relevant records and arranges appropriate investigation without asserting an unverified cause.
Mistake to avoid: Making a definitive admission or denial before checking the relevant facts.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
59. Dispute processes differ in who determines the outcome
Negotiation seeks agreement directly; mediation uses a facilitator to help parties agree; arbitration generally involves a tribunal determining a dispute under an applicable framework. Court proceedings provide another route. Selection and sequencing depend on the contract and law, and enforceability or confidentiality should not be assumed universally.
Worked example: Two parties agree to mediation over a fee dispute. The mediator helps explore settlement, but cannot be assumed to impose a binding decision merely because discussions reach an impasse.
Mistake to avoid: Treating every independent dispute participant as a decision maker.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
60. Settlement needs authority and clearly defined terms
Before relying on a settlement, confirm that representatives have authority and that its terms identify obligations, timing and the issues being resolved. Consider unresolved claims and obtain appropriate legal advice on releases and enforceability. Agreement on a headline figure can leave substantial uncertainty about performance and remaining rights.
Worked example: Parties agree on KES 500,000 but have not specified the payment date or claims covered. They clarify those matters and signing authority before recording the final settlement.
Mistake to avoid: Treating an agreed amount as a complete settlement without defining its effect.
Reference: The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
References
Reference check:
- The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)
- The Board of Registration of Architects and Quantity Surveyors (BORAQs)