International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research (IJSETR) Volume 8, Issue 5, May 2019, ISSN: 2278 -7798 All Rights Reserved © 2019 IJSETR 133 PARAMETERS FOR VIABLE ARCHITECTURAL PRACTICE EREKPITAN O. OLA-ADISA Department of Architecture University of Jos, Jos, Nigeria BOGDA PRUCNAL-OGUNSOTE Department of Architecture University of Jos, Jos, Nigeria Abstract The image of the ‘global architect’ is a pointer to a deeper restructuring in the system of architectural production. Architecture is a vital vehicle of urban restructuring. Ironically, the scope of action for architects and by implication architectural firm viability is increasingly limited by profit ratio, risk- minimising strategies, diversified forms of governance and regulation. The aim of this study was to identify factors or indices that affect viability in architecture practice. Using a sample derived from firms in the Architects Registration Council of Nigeria (ARCON) Register and purposively selecting cities where architectural firms were most concentrated in North Central Nigeria, the principal survey instrument was a structured questionnaire, and a total of one hundred and two (102) questionnaires were collated and analysed. Data from the questionnaires were also analysed using Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficient, and regression analysis. Results of the study revealed five indices that affect viability in architecture practice. Key words: business viability, firm market value, firm profitability, organisational strategies, practice ideology 1. Architecture Practice as a Business Architecture as defined by Schwennsen (1999) is a producer-service business catering to clients in ‘the volatile construction industry’. Due to the growing sophistication of clientele, organisational and marketing aspects are as important as creativity in the business of architecture practice (Winch & Schneider, 1993). In the face of what Porter (2008), calls the five (external) competitive forces, organisational strategies are vital in any architecture business. Winch & Schneider (1993) suggest that internal influences would include perceptions of architects in conceiving practices as businesses rather than mainly creative ventures. Several architects often perceive financial success and marketing strategies as anti- creativity. Cohen, Wilkinson, Arnold &Finn in their 2005 study suggest that for firms to achieve and sustain the viability, they ‘absorb creativity within’ that aim. In other words, architects assert that creativity alone does not guarantee profitability and thereby viability of the architecture firm. The strength of the business objective however differs from one company to the other. As a result, the modern day individualism and eclectic trends have removed architecture from the root stem of the historic tree where the architect played the role of sole expresser of the vision to the clients. In an era of assertive consumerism, the role of the architect has