Blog
Architecture & SIA

Do architecture firms even have this need?

Yes, the folder. Not the engineers’ proposal hours. The same job is document, edition, page.

Terence La
Terence LaVerifiziert
Head of AI @ Flughafen Zürich · Gründer Leistera
2026-08-16·100% nDSG
KEY TAKEAWAY AT A GLANCE

Architects do not need chatbot gimmicks, but structured SIA 102 design narratives and exact credential matching for public design competitions.

Table of contents:
  • §1What architecture firms actually search
  • §2What the home page does not claim

Short answer: the folder, yes. The engineers’ proposal hours, no. Pack both into one sentence and you sell the wrong product.

What architecture firms actually search

Before the building application sits the same stack as for the engineer, different covers. SIA 118. SIA 102. VKF 2015. Cantonal building law. Design plan. Sound, energy, accessibility. The colleague who knows which edition applies is in the meeting with the client. Cite the consultation draft and you correct it in the conditions.

  • Competition and preliminary design: brief against the requirement, not against memory.
  • Fire and energy: which guideline, which canton, which page.
  • Fees under SIA: that is a different path from the civil-engineering proposal.

What the home page does not claim

The hours on the home page come from one engineering office. An architecture firm has other numbers. SharePoint stays the archive. Document, edition, page: the same job once the sources sit in the tenant. The home page speaks first to the person who signs civil-engineering proposals.

If a firm has the need: fifty of their own questions, eight weeks, one discipline. Fire or building law, not everything at once.

HANDS-ON TRIAL

Test Leistera on an active RFP from your firm

Bring an active solicitation. In 30 minutes, we demonstrate how Leistera extracts requirements, resolves governing codes, and drafts grounded proposal sections.

Do architecture firms even have this need? · Leistera | Leistera