US dataswitch to UK
Architects, Except Landscape and Naval
developing final construction plans that include aesthetic representations of the structure or details for its construction, conducting periodic on-site observations of construction work to monitor compliance with plans and preparing contract documents for building contractors. If that's your week, this page is about your job.
The honest answer
AI is already taking a real slice of the routine work here: preparing information regarding design, structure specifications, materials, color, equipment, estimated costs or construction time. That is a slice of tasks, not of you.
That slice is not coming back; the core of the job, conducting periodic on-site observations of construction work to monitor compliance with plans, stays yours. The tools change hands, the accountability doesn't.
Your week, as this page understands it
Plan and design structures, such as private residences, office buildings, theaters, factories, and other structural property. The job title says “architects”, “except landscape” or “naval”: officially one job, several names. The real job is the part underneath: conducting periodic on-site observations of construction work to monitor compliance with plans. That is the thing someone has to be right about.
The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But architects, except landscape and naval is not one task. It is 24 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is conducting periodic on-site observations of construction work to monitor compliance with plans, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 21%
- changing shape
- 29%
- staying human
- 49%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 39 out of 100 (32–45 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 24 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.
How we know this
What is measured: Every published task statement for architects, except landscape and naval is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.
How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.
Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-04. Read the full method.
Your job, task by task
These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.
- 3 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
Shifting to AI
6 tasksTasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.
Preparing information regarding design, structure specifications, materials, color, equipment, estimated costs or construction time
This is reading one thing and writing another: information regarding design, structure specifications, materials, color, equipment in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Prepare information regarding design, structure specifications, materials, color, equipment, estimated costs, or construction time.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Writing up specifications, materials, costs and timings is document work software handles well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing contract documents for building contractors
This is reading one thing and writing another: contract documents in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Prepare contract documents for building contractors.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (62–70 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Building contracts follow standard forms, which is exactly the kind of drafting software does well.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing marketing materials, proposals or presentations to generate new work opportunities
This is reading one thing and writing another: materials, proposals or presentations in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Develop marketing materials, proposals, or presentations to generate new work opportunities.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Proposals, brochures and pitch decks are written material software produces quickly to a good standard.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Gathering information related to projects' environmental sustainability or operational efficiency
This is reading one thing and writing another: information in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Gather information related to projects' environmental sustainability or operational efficiency.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (68–82 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Gathering sustainability and efficiency information is research and data work software does quickly.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Changing shape
7 tasksTasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.
Preparing scale drawings or architectural designs
The software now makes the first pass at scale drawings, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Prepare scale drawings or architectural designs, using computer-aided design or other tools.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Software drafts and models quickly, though a qualified architect is expected to stand behind the drawings.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Integrating engineering elements into unified architectural designs
The software now makes the first pass at elements, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Integrate engineering elements into unified architectural designs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Design tools help combine engineering into a scheme, though a qualified architect owns the result.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning layouts of structural architectural projects
The software now makes the first pass at layouts of structural architectural projects, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Plan layouts of structural architectural projects.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Layout tools generate credible options, but a qualified architect decides and takes responsibility.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Staying human
11 tasksTasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.
Developing final construction plans that include aesthetic representations of the structure or details for its construction
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for final construction plans, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Develop final construction plans that include aesthetic representations of the structure or details for its construction.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 36 out of 100 (29–43 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Design tools produce useful drafts, but final construction plans must be prepared under a licensed architect.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Consulting with clients to determine functional or spatial requirements of structures
The value here is that a specific person handles clients and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Consult with clients to determine functional or spatial requirements of structures.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (6–20 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Working out what a client really wants comes from conversation and trust, not from documents.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Meeting with clients to review or discuss architectural drawings
The value here is that a specific person handles clients and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Meet with clients to review or discuss architectural drawings.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 13 out of 100 (6–20 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Talking a client through drawings is a face-to-face job where reactions and reassurance matter.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Show the other 14 tasks
Preparing operating and maintenance manuals
shifting to AIThis is reading one thing and writing another: maintenance manuals in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Prepare operating and maintenance manuals, studies, or reports.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 75 out of 100 (71–79 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Manuals, studies and reports are written documents, which is where software is strongest.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Calculating potential energy savings by comparing estimated energy consumption of proposed design to baseline standards
shifting to AIThis is reading one thing and writing another: potential energy savings in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Calculate potential energy savings by comparing estimated energy consumption of proposed design to baseline standards.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 66 out of 100 (59–73 allowing for uncertainty): high exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Comparing predicted energy use against a baseline is a calculation software runs reliably.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Creating three-dimensional or interactive representations of designs
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at three-dimensional, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Create three-dimensional or interactive representations of designs, using computer-assisted design software.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 58 out of 100 (51–65 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Modeling and rendering tools do a lot of this already, though the design work behind it is human.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Designing or planning construction of green building projects to minimize adverse environmental impact or conserve energy
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at construction of green building projects, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Design or plan construction of green building projects to minimize adverse environmental impact or conserve energy.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Energy-saving design guidance is well documented, though the scheme is still an architect’s responsibility.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Designing structures that incorporate environmentally friendly building practices or concepts
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at structures, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Design structures that incorporate environmentally friendly building practices or concepts, such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 43 out of 100 (36–50 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Green standards like LEED are published checklists, but the design itself sits with a qualified architect.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Administering construction contracts
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at construction contracts, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Administer construction contracts.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 42 out of 100 (35–49 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Contract administration is largely paperwork — instructions, queries and change orders — which software drafts quickly.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Performing predesign services, such as feasibility or environmental impact studies
staying humanThe ratings behind this row put predesign services well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Perform predesign services, such as feasibility or environmental impact studies.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 38 out of 100 (31–45 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Feasibility and impact studies follow documented methods, though local site facts still need gathering.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Designing environmentally sound structural upgrades to existing buildings
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for sound structural upgrades, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Design environmentally sound structural upgrades to existing buildings, such as natural lighting systems, green roofs, or rainwater collection systems.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 32 out of 100 (25–39 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Retrofit options are well documented, but existing buildings hold surprises only a visit reveals.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Monitoring the work of specialists
staying humanThe ratings behind this row put the work of specialists well outside what today's tools can do on their own.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Monitor the work of specialists, such as electrical engineers, mechanical engineers, interior designers, or sound specialists to ensure optimal form or function of designs or final structures.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 28 out of 100 (21–35 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Software can cross-check consultants’ drawings, but chasing and judging their work stays with the architect.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Planning or designing structures, residences, office buildings, theatres, factories or other structural properties in accordance with environmental, safety or other regulations
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for structures, residences, office buildings, theatres, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Plan or design structures such as residences, office buildings, theatres, factories, or other structural properties in accordance with environmental, safety, or other regulations.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Design tools give starting points only, and the finished scheme must come from a licensed architect.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Representing clients in obtaining bids or awarding construction contracts
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles clients and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Represent clients in obtaining bids or awarding construction contracts.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 23 out of 100 (16–30 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Comparing bids is document work, but representing a client through an award depends on judgement and trust.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Directing activities of technicians engaged in preparing drawings or specification documents
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles activities of technicians and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Direct activities of technicians engaged in preparing drawings or specification documents.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 15 out of 100 (8–22 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Keeping a drawing team on track depends on working alongside the people doing it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Inspecting proposed building sites to determine suitability for construction
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: proposed building sites, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Inspect proposed building sites to determine suitability for construction.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 7 out of 100 (0–14 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world.
The rating behind it: Judging whether a site suits a building means standing on it and looking around.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Conducting periodic on-site observations of construction work to monitor compliance with plans
staying humanThis work happens in the physical world: periodic, in a real place. Software cannot follow it there.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Conduct periodic on-site observations of construction work to monitor compliance with plans.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: work that happens in the physical world; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Checking that a building matches the drawings means walking the site and seeing it yourself.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 3/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- $99,280a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this
Source: bls-oews
Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
Rounding: Shown as published.
- People doing this job
- 106,770in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.
Why this is shifting
The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: information regarding design, structure specifications, materials, color, equipment in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: preparing information regarding design, structure specifications, materials, color, equipment, estimated costs or construction time and preparing contract documents for building contractors. What it cannot do is be answerable: periodic needs a named person the rules will accept, and software cannot be that person. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.
Your move
Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend
Your week is splitting in two, and which half fills it is the whole question. Preparing information regarding design, structure specifications, materials, color, equipment, estimated costs or construction time is going; conducting periodic on-site observations of construction work to monitor compliance with plans is not.
So, given all that: 21% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 29% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 49% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 24 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.
The occupation is an average and you are not, so the first job below is finding out where your own week actually sits.
This week: one thing
Print the task ledger above and put your own hours next to each row. Roughly, in pen, in one sitting. Then look at which group your hours actually pile up in. Twenty minutes, this week.
- What you end up holding
- your own week, on one page, sorted into what is shifting and what is not
- How long it takes
- about twenty minutes
If printing it isn’t practical: Read the rows off this page and write the same list on the back of an envelope. Same twenty minutes, same page, and it works just as well said out loud to someone who knows the job. The point is your hours next to the rows, not the paper it is on.
Over the next 90 days
Volunteer toward the durable end, visibly. Over the next ninety days put your hand up for the work in the bottom group (conducting periodic on-site observations of construction work to monitor compliance with plans) and let people see you doing it. Not a new project: the same job, with your mix deliberately tilted. The point is that when the rota or the reorganisation comes, the version of you people picture is the one doing the part that stays.
Over the next 12 months
Claim a specialism at the durable end and let the other end go. Over a year, deliberately become the person who handles conducting periodic on-site observations of construction work to monitor compliance with plans, and deliberately stop being the first choice for the rows in the top group. That trade costs something, because the exposed work is often the comfortable work. Decide it on purpose rather than by drift. Before you pay for anything, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.
The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them
I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.
I checked the 12 nearest US occupations to architects, except landscape and naval (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was interior designers: only about 3% of its durable work is work you already do and it pays 32.3% less. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 39/100 here, with only 21% of the task list in the top band, and “develop final construction plans that include aesthetic representations of the structure or…” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.
How that was checked: this job was compared against all 830 US occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.
3 moves I checked and rejected
These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.
Interior Designers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already conduct periodic on-site observations of construction work to monitor compliance with plans, and their equivalent is to inspect construction work on site to ensure its adherence to the design plans. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $67,190 against your $99,280, 32.3% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Construction and Building Inspectors
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already inspect proposed building sites to determine suitability for construction, and their equivalent is to inspect and monitor construction sites to ensure adherence to safety standards, building codes…. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $74,690 against your $99,280, 24.8% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Landscape Architects
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already prepare information regarding design, structure specifications, materials, color, equipment, estimated costs, or construction…, and their equivalent is to prepare site plans, specifications, or cost estimates for land development. Across both published task lists that is about 2% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 2% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $79,870 against your $99,280, 19.6% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice. And it is a narrow door: about 19,600 of those jobs against 106,770 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 18% as many seats.
What I’d stop worrying about
A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.
The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 21% of its task weight, across 24 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The whole-job doom story
Nothing on this page says this job ends. It says the mix inside it moves. Half the rows above are unchanged or changing shape, and the plan is about which half your week sits in. That is a very different problem, and a solvable one.
Panic-buying a course
Do the twenty-minute sorting exercise first. Most people who buy a course before they have done it buy the wrong one, and the free services listed below will tell you the same thing without charging for it.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.
You are reading the United States figures
The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Architects is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.
Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match
In UK official statistics this job is counted as Architects. Pay and employment stay on this page’s own group; the task list and the scores do not cross over.
Your route through this
Where to go next, and what it costs
Free, and complete
The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
Free
No Space for this job, but one for what is happening to it
Nothing Collab365 runs is built for architects / except landscape / naval, and we are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.
There is one that is not about a job title at all. The AI Authority is about being the person who directs these tools at work rather than the person they get compared to. That is worth saying here, because 21% of the work on this page is already inside what they can do.
7 days free, no card needed. Explore up to 2 Spaces before you choose a plan: you pick a plan later, not now.
The AI Authority is a general community about working with AI, not a course for architects / except landscape / naval. You do not need it to act on anything here: the moves above cost nothing and stand on their own. The data on this page is the same either way.
Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for architects / except landscape / naval launches. Nothing else.
That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.
We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.
No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.
Questions people ask about this job
- Will AI replace Architects, Except Landscape and Naval?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 24 official task statements scored for Architects, Except Landscape and Naval (United States, SOC 17-1011), 21% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 39 out of 100 (range 32–45, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
- Which tasks in “Architects, Except Landscape and Naval” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Prepare operating and maintenance manuals, studies, or reports” (75/100, high); “Gather information related to projects' environmental sustainability or operational efficiency” (75/100, high); “Develop marketing materials, proposals, or presentations to generate new work opportunities” (75/100, high). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
- Which tasks in “Architects, Except Landscape and Naval” stay human?
- About 49% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Conduct periodic on-site observations of construction work to monitor compliance with plans” (6/100, minimal); “Inspect proposed building sites to determine suitability for construction” (7/100, minimal); “Meet with clients to review or discuss architectural drawings” (13/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
- What should someone working in “Architects, Except Landscape and Naval” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 21% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 49% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
- How is the AI exposure score for Architects, Except Landscape and Naval calculated?
- Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 24 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.
Where these numbers come from
Worth knowing about these figures
- The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
- 3 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
- Task statements
- onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
- Task weights
- onet-db (im-rt)
- Scores
- Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
- Pay and employment
- bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))
Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.
The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.
The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.
Using these figures?
Cite this
Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.
Plain text
Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).
BibTeX
@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
title = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
author = {{Collab365}},
year = {2026},
url = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
note = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published . Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.