Summary: AIA members Tracy D. Anderson, AIA; Daniel G. Knight, AIA; and Tracy L. Reynolds, AIA, have been censured by the National Ethics Council (“Council”) for violating Rule 4.201 and Rule 5.201 of the Institute’s 1997 Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (“Code of Ethics”). Rule 4.201 states that “Members shall not make misleading, deceptive, or false statements or claims about their professional qualifications, experience, or performance and shall accurately state the scope and nature of their responsibilities in connection with work for which they are claiming credit.” Rule 5.201 (renumbered 5.301 in the 2004 Code of Ethics) states that “Members shall recognize and respect the professional contributions of their employees, employers, professional colleagues, and business associates.”

The censured members had each worked for the complainant’s firm for more than a dozen years. Each left that firm willingly and with permission to take copies of certain photographs of the firm’s projects on which they had worked, subject to the understanding that proper credit would be given to the firm. Following their departure, Messrs. Anderson, Knight, and Reynolds formed a new firm, Reynolds Knight Anderson.

Reynolds Knight Anderson subsequently placed an advertisement in a business directory published by a local Chamber of Commerce in Kansas. The advertisement included photographs of four projects. The architect of record of each of those projects was the complainant’s firm, but the advertisement did not credit the projects to the complainant’s firm. Messrs. Anderson, Knight, and Reynolds have admitted that they failed to provide appropriate credit.

The National Ethics Council ruled that this conduct was a violation of both Rule 4.201 and Rule 5.201 (now 5.301). The Council found that Messrs. Anderson, Knight, and Reynolds had made visually misleading claims regarding which firm produced the projects. The Council noted that, without distinct proper credit, the public has the right to assume that the firm whose advertisement displays the photos is the firm responsible for the design of the project. The Council also noted that accurate attribution of credit is essential to the way architects market their services and that, without appropriate credit, a firm’s expertise is not recognized and securing future projects of similar nature may be compromised.

The Council determined that the violations are a serious breach of the profession’s integrity and critical to the authorship and expertise of the Complainant’s firm. The Council therefore has imposed the penalty of censure on Messrs. Anderson, Knight, and Reynolds.