Professional Interview: Judgement, Ethics and Evidence
What the Professional Interview domain tests
The Professional Interview domain tests whether you can speak and reason as an architect, not merely recite facts. The panel will probe your training record, project experience, understanding of your role, ethical judgment and awareness of when to seek specialist advice. Answers should be concise and structured: issue, facts, action, reason. The panel is assessing professional maturity and public protection.
Core rules and concepts
- Know your own contribution on each project: your role under the AP/RSE/RC system, what you personally supervised, what you checked, and what you would do differently.
- Separate design, statutory and contractual duties. An architect may advise on compliance, but the AP is responsible for submission; contract administration duties depend on the appointment and the building contract.
- Apply the HKIA Code of Professional Conduct: integrity, competence, confidentiality, conflict-of-interest disclosure and no misleading claims. Registration matters are governed by the Architects Registration Ordinance (Cap 408).
- Maintain records: site instructions, inspection reports, meeting minutes, variation assessments and letters. In an interview, evidence beats opinion.
- Recognise limits: geotechnical, structural, fire engineering, legal and insurance questions should be referred to the appropriate expert.
- Show continuing professional development and reflective learning, not a list of courses.
Worked example
The panel asks: 'The contractor offers your practice a discount on a subcontractor if you approve a product substitution. What do you do?' Reasoning: this is a potential conflict of interest and may affect impartiality. Disclose the offer to the client and practice; decline the discount; assess the substitution only against specification, statutory compliance, programme and whole-life cost; record the decision; if the client wants the change, issue it through the correct variation process. The key is transparency plus a technical, documented assessment.
Traps that cost marks
Giving generic 'I would communicate' answers; claiming experience you cannot explain; blaming the contractor without describing your own duty; ignoring safety or statutory approval; failing to mention written records; and pretending to know specialist areas instead of stating a referral.