an architects fee is based on solid work. i always amazes me that a few potential clients feel that this work is of lesser value than the service provided by the sales agent. clients seem not to "haggle" prices with an agent, however feel it imperative, no matter what fee was provided, to minimise their costs but still maximise the design service... lets compare some figures.
an agent invariably asks for 2.5% of the TOTAL MARKET VALUE as commision, with you footing the bill for marketting. essentially, once they have contacted a few people on their non-exhaustive database, you are paying for them to wait for someone to show further interest the architect (as a full service) may also charge 2.5% of the estimated construction cost of project... exclusive of site cost... exclusive of market value... exclusive of sales promises.
on a full service fee, the architects hours spent on the design service can easily equate to a few months work. as a sales agent, running a 2 month campaign, sharing time among other sellers, may equate to 1 or 2 weeks in hours spent.
an architect works for you, and you pay them for the service tailored for you. the agent gets paid by you, however they generally seem to work for the buyer in getting them the best deal on your property.
bear in mind, whilst i may seem harsh in the comparison above, the intent is not to belittle the need or relevance of the real estate agent... there is a professional need, however the point being made is the disparity between service and cost that seems often to be missed by quite a few.. a design service is a value added service worthy of a fair fee, a selling service is a convenience service also worthy of a fee.
remember, a less than optimum design, generally produced due to service fee gouging, produces a lesser desirable product than a full service fee neighbour might achieve, which in turn may provide a lesser profit to you, however, at 2.5% commission for the agent, there is a negligible difference to the agent profit.