Something that Williamson is vocally concerned about too is the rapid development of AI. In his initial statement, the new president confidently asserted that he would meet the challenge of AI ‘head on’, and in our conversion it is clear he views it as one of the defining issues of his term.

He says, ominously: ‘Everybody thought it was in the dim and distant future, but you can already see the effect that it’s having on the industry.

‘Anybody who can use a computer well might be able to be their own architect in five years’ time.’ To tackle this new problem, Williamson says that we need to be ‘more empathetic’ to the various risks that AI poses, but also its potential benefits.

Keeping one step ahead of a constantly evolving technology is a tall order, but one that Williamson does not shy away from.

He tells me: ‘I’m generally optimistic person. It’s up to us to make the most of those new technologies and make sure that they are an aid to design and will enable us to be better, but it’s really up to us.’

When asked about his support for the regulation of function in the industry, he extols the wonders of Swiss architecture. There, as among other European countries, rules stipulate that planning applications must be submitted with designs by chartered architects.

He argues: ‘It depends how much you value the environment as a society. In Switzerland just about everything has to be done by an architect, and that’s why the quality of the architecture is fantastic.

‘So there is a correlation, I guess, between who has the best architecture and who has protection of function.’

I then ask Williamson whether he thought that every building should be, in a way, a work of art?

He replies ‘no’, adding that his own tastes are actually ‘quite functional’. There is often, he says, ‘too much emphasis on the style of a building’.

Yet he also gives a rousing description of ‘the space, the light, the way the sun comes through’ in the best buildings that betray an enthusiasm for architecture that must have sustained Williamson throughout his career.

Getting back to the presidency, we turn to the forthcoming RIBA ‘rebrand’, which is set to see a refurbished HQ in Portland Place open its doors to the architectural community as the ‘House of Architecture’.

The House of Architecture is a fantastic opportunity

Williamson seems enthusiastic about the prospect of creating more of a public-facing and interactive institution.

He recalls the RIBA being the one-stop-shop for all things architecture when he was a youngster, having ‘the best lectures, the best talks, the best events, competitions, awards … it was the place you went to for professional knowledge if you had any questions’.

He continues: ‘I would like to see the RIBA collaborate more with people who are doing anything interesting on architecture; we don’t need to do it all, but we need to be that repository for all those things.

‘The House of Architecture is a fantastic opportunity because it’s not just about 66 Portland Place; it’s about all the online stuff, which can actually reach more people, and the drawings and collections, which can get people more interested in architecture and the built environment.’

Asked how far the ‘rebrand’ will go, Williamson says in his view the ‘best’ brand’ are those which ‘you identify with and like what they stand for’.

So we will not likely be seeing a radical overhaul that throws away much of the 200-year-old brand recognition.

One of Williamson’s key campaign pledges was for the RIBA to ‘establish itself as the pre-eminent administrator of architectural competitions’, which, unlike some processes, would ensure architects were getting a good deal and minimised ‘free work’, especially among young people.

The message for clients is: you’re choosing an architect, not a design – the design is an indication of what they might do

Williamson supports the competition system in principle, going so far as to say: ‘I’ve had a lot of criticism from people because I love competitions, the excitement of being able to show people what you can do as an architect; I think they’re really important.’

What he doesn’t support is when architects are made to do vast amounts of unpaid work and spend a lot of money for no discernible result when, in many cases, they stand very little chance of winning anyway. For Williamson, the RIBA should assert itself as the authority on contests, something which would allow guidance to be enforced to make sure competitions are run fairly.

How exactly this is going to be achieved isn’t spelled out. The once-busy RIBA Competitions office hasn’t launched any open contests this year.

But Williamson is clear in saying that ‘the message we’ve got to get over to clients is: you’re choosing an architect, not a design and the design is an indication of what they might do’.

In 2024, Williamson told the AJ that ‘much of the good work of the RIBA is largely unappreciated’. So how does he plan to shine a spotlight on all this good work being done in the background?

‘It’s always been a mystery to me,’ he laments, ‘that in all the time I have been involved with the RIBA, people really don’t appreciate what goes on.’

We’re not very good – architects in general – at telling people what we’re good at

Having seen the weight that the RIBA brand carries overseas, it is understandable that Williamson views the current perception of the institution here in the UK with some dismay.

He sees it as a problem of self-promotion. ‘We’re not very good – architects in general – at telling people what we’re good at. So we need to be more visible and make sure people know what we stand for and what we’re doing.’

In order to invigorate the RIBA’s domestic image, Williamson says he would work to better co-ordinate the way that projects are delivered and communicated, and puts an emphasis on the ‘urgency’ that he feels is needed to make his mark over the next two years.

That said, Williamson knows the limits of his power; in a refreshing dose of realism he concedes there will be no grand achievements to boast about by the end of his two-year term. He merely hopes to have made a strong start on the issues he feels most strongly about and to hand the baton over to the next leader having left the institution in a more positive place.

He said: ‘You’re just not going to get huge change in two years.

‘Success, to me, is knowing that it’s part of something that’s going to continue. [Even so] I’ll be really disappointed in two years’ time if nothing has changed.’

Â