What's the difference between an architect and a building designer?
Roles compared

What's the difference between an architect and a building designer?

Regulated and protected versus an open, unregulated term.

The short answer

The key difference is regulation. "Architect" is a legally protected title — only people registered with the Architects Registration Board (ARB) can use it, after several years of formal training and examination, and most are RIBA chartered. "Building designer" (like "architectural designer") is not a protected title; there's no register or required qualification, so it covers a wide spread of experience. Both can legally design buildings and submit planning and Building Regulations applications, because the work isn't reserved to architects — only the title is. A building designer is often cheaper and can be perfectly capable, particularly on standard projects; an architect costs more but brings regulated, accountable expertise and usually deeper design input, which matters more on complex or sensitive work.

These terms sound similar and are often used to mean roughly the same thing, but legally they're worlds apart. Understanding the distinction tells you what assurances you are — and aren't — getting.

Architect vs building designer

Why 'architect' is different

"Architect" is protected under the Architects Act 1997. To use the title lawfully, a person must be on the ARB register, which requires the recognised training path — typically several years of study plus practical experience and a professional examination. Many also hold RIBA chartered status.

That regulation isn't just a badge. A registered architect:

Using the title without registration is an offence. So when someone is genuinely an architect, the title carries enforceable standards behind it.

The word choice is deliberate: if a firm calls itself "building designers" or "architectural designers" rather than "architects", it usually means they can't lawfully use the protected title. That doesn't make them bad — many are very experienced — but it's a prompt to check qualifications rather than assume registered status.

What a building designer is

"Building designer" describes a service, not a qualification, so the term covers a broad range of people:

All of them can legally design your project and handle planning and Building Regulations submissions — the design work is open, only the title "architect" is reserved. That means a building designer can be entirely capable and good value, especially for standard projects. The trade-off is that you're relying on their demonstrated experience and any qualifications they hold rather than the statutory backstop that comes with ARB registration, so checking portfolio and references matters more.

AspectArchitectBuilding designer
Protected titleYes (ARB)No
Required qualificationYesNo (varies)
Statutory accountabilityYes (ARB)No
Can submit planningYesYes
Typical fee levelHigherLower–mid

Indicative comparison for guidance only. Sources: ARB and CIAT guidance.

Which should you choose?

There's no universally right answer — it depends on the project and how much you value regulation and design depth:

Whichever you choose, verify credentials. For an architect, check the ARB register (and RIBA chartered status). For a building designer, ask about qualifications such as CIAT membership, see completed work, and take references. The honest summary: both can run a successful project, and the choice is really about regulation, training and design depth versus cost. Match it to how demanding your project is, and don't assume the title from the advert — confirm it.

Frequently asked questions

Can a building designer call themselves an architect?

No. "Architect" is protected by the ARB under the Architects Act 1997, and using it without registration is an offence. That's why unregulated professionals use terms like "building designer" or "architectural designer" instead.

Is a building designer as good as an architect?

They can be, particularly on standard projects — many building designers are experienced and capable. The difference is regulation and usually design depth: an architect is trained, registered and accountable, while a building designer is judged on demonstrated experience and any qualifications held.

How can I check someone's qualifications?

For an architect, search the ARB register and check RIBA chartered status. For a building designer, ask about qualifications such as CIAT membership, request examples of completed projects, and take references from past clients.

Sources & further reading

Figures on this page are typical UK ranges drawn from published sources and depend on your specific project. They are guidance, not a quotation.