Most architecture firms do not have a technology problem in the studio. Revit, Rhino and Bluebeam work. The trouble sits around the design work: fee proposals rebuilt from old Word files, invoices that wait on a principal's markup, consultant coordination held together by email, and a project management system that only the office manager fully trusts.
InTheory acts as your fractional AI and technology lead. We pick one expensive recurring workflow, such as fee proposals or monthly billing, measure how it runs today and lead a scoped improvement with tools you already own where possible. Your principals keep approving fees, scope and anything that carries a stamp. We handle the choosing, building and getting your team to actually use it.
Every RFQ or direct request means a principal or senior PM rebuilding scope, phase fees and staffing from the last similar job. Hours spent assembling SF330 sections or AIA-based proposals are unbillable, and turnaround slips when the person who knows the numbers is in client meetings or on site for construction administration.
Hours sit in Deltek Ajera or BQE CORE, drawings in Revit and a shared server, markups in Bluebeam, decisions in Outlook and meeting minutes in a Word folder. When a client asks why additional services were billed, someone spends an afternoon reconstructing the history from four systems and two people's memories.
Monthly invoices depend on PMs confirming percent complete by phase, then a principal reviewing every draft. If the PM is buried in construction documents, invoices go out late, work in progress grows and receivables stretch. The firm is doing the work but carrying the cost of it for weeks longer than needed.
Designers try image generators for concept boards and project architects paste spec sections into ChatGPT. Nobody has decided what client information can go where, who owns AI-assisted imagery, or how that fits your professional liability coverage. Banning it rarely works, so firms need clear, written rules people will follow.
We fix one at a time, starting with the one that costs you most. Each page shows the steps, the tools, what stays human and what we would measure.
Build fee proposals from a structured scope, phase breakdown and past project data, so a principal reviews a solid draft instead of starting from last year's Word file at nine at night.
See the workflow →Send owners and consultants regular, accurate updates on design phase, open decisions and upcoming deadlines without a PM writing each email from scratch every Friday afternoon.
See the workflow →Let staff search your own standards, details, spec sections and lessons learned in plain language, with answers linked to the source document so people can check them before relying on them.
See the workflow →Pull key information out of RFPs, consultant proposals, code review comments and submittals into a structured log, so nobody retypes the same details into three different systems.
See the workflow →Prepare monthly invoices from hours and percent complete by phase, route them for quick PM and principal approval, then follow up on overdue balances politely and on a consistent schedule.
See the workflow →Connect your project accounting, CRM, file storage and Microsoft 365 so a new project is set up once and its numbers, folders and contacts stay consistent everywhere.
See the workflow →See utilization, backlog, fee burn by phase and aging receivables in one weekly view, instead of a principal exporting reports from Ajera or CORE into Excel every Monday.
See the workflow →Write practical rules for which AI tools staff can use for renderings, specs and client communication, covering confidentiality, image rights and how AI output gets checked before it leaves the studio.
See the workflow →How we deliver this: AI automation for small business or fractional CTO leadership, scoped in writing and run over 90 days. See pricing or the sample scope.
We start with what you already pay for. New tools have to earn their place.
Architecture firms hold client floor plans, security layouts for some building types, and owner financial details. Contracts such as AIA B101 often include confidentiality and ownership-of-instruments-of-service terms, so AI tools must not train on or retain project files without permission. Some public and federal clients add their own data handling rules. We would also check AI-assisted work against your professional liability policy and keep licensed architects responsible for anything sealed. This is practical guidance, not legal advice.
General information, not legal advice.
Defaults are illustrative for architecture firms (new projects won per month). Change them to your numbers.
a month in staff time, before any lost sales
Illustration only, not a forecast or guarantee. Recovered staff time becomes a cash saving only if spending actually declines or the time goes into paid work. Tool costs are an assumption; we replace every number here with yours before recommending a scope.
We would not start there. Design judgment, code interpretation and sealed documents belong to your licensed staff. The better early returns usually come from the work around design: proposals, billing, meeting minutes, submittal logs and finding past details. Those tasks are repetitive, measurable and lower risk, and they free senior people to spend more hours on billable design.
Usually not. Ajera, Vantagepoint and BQE CORE all hold the data most improvements need: hours, phases, fees and invoices. A typical first step is to clean up how projects and phases are set up, then connect or report on what is already there. Switching project accounting systems is expensive and disruptive, so we would only suggest it with a clear reason.
A 12-person studio often has the principal doing proposals, billing and IT, so the first win is usually freeing their evenings. An 80-person firm has more process but more handoffs between marketing, PMs and accounting. The 90-day structure is the same: diagnose one workflow, deliver a scoped improvement, then measure whether people use it.
Not without your decision. Part of the work is choosing tools with business data terms, setting what information each tool can see and writing it down for staff. Many useful improvements, such as billing reminders or project setup, never need drawing files at all. Where a tool does read documents, we would keep it inside your Microsoft 365 or approved environment.
We offer three monthly plans for the first 90 days: Advisory at $2,500, Lead + delivery at $5,000 and Embedded at $7,000, each with a written scope agreed before kickoff. Software licenses and any large custom build are priced on top. Most architecture firms would start with Lead + delivery at $5,000 per month to improve one workflow end to end, such as fee proposals or monthly invoicing.
In 30 minutes we look at one recurring workflow, what it costs you today and whether there is a credible case to improve it. If there is not, we will say so.
30 minutes with Phil or Martin. No technical brief, no pitch deck. Phil or Martin replies personally, usually within one business day.