This rule applies only when the architect is acting as the interpreter of building contract documents and the judge of contract performance. As citizens and as members of a profession acutely concerned with environmental change, they doubtless have an obligation to be heard on such questions. Many architects may, however, be representing the interests of potential developers when making statements on such issues. It is consistent with the probity which the public expects from members of the architectural profession that they not be allowed under the circumstances described in the rule to disguise the fact that they are not speaking on the particular issue as an independent professional but as a professional engaged to act on behalf of a client. An architect shall accurately represent to a prospective or existing client or employer his or her qualifications and the scope of his or her responsibility in connection with work for which he or she is claiming credit.
Many important projects require a team of architects to do the work.
Regrettably, there has been some conflict in recent years when individual members of that team have claimed greater credit for the project than was appropriate to their work done. On the other hand, the public must be protected from believing that the younger architect's role was greater than was the fact. In the circumstances described, the architect is compelled to report the matter to a public official even though to do so may substantially harm the architect's client. Note that the circumstances are a violation of building laws which adversely affect the safety to the public of the finished project. The rule specifically intends to exclude safety problems during the course of construction which are traditionally the obligation of the contractor.