Since January 1991, the National Legislative Coalition for Interior Design (NLCID) has been the collective body representing the interior design profession in matters of interior design registration, certification and licensure. NLCID has provided a venue for discussion among the American Society of Interior Designers (ASID), the Foundation for Interior Design Education Research (FIDER), the Interior Design Educator's Council (IDEC), the Institute of Store Planners (ISP), the National Council for Interior Design Qualification (NCIDQ) as well as the Institute of Business Designers (IBD), the Council of Federal Interior Designers (CFID) and the International Society of Interior Designers (ISID) prior to those three organizations' merger into the International Interior Design Association (IIDA) in July 1994. The NLCID has been viewed by many as a demonstration of the viability of unification of the profession based on its success in bringing all elements of the profession together to discuss issues affecting the governmental and regulatory restrictions placed on interior designers. NLCID has been our information center, gathering and disseminating facts to interest parties.

NLCID needs to maintain the repository of collective legislative information. Reciprocity of licensure among states is an issue that will require coordination of language and concepts among states in the not-too-distant future. Emerging states should not waste time and money to reinvent the wheel or to risk divergence from the norms already accepted.

Concurrently, many of the professional associations have been supporting legislative activity through financial aid to chapters and coalitions on a state-by-state basis.

What we now must ask is, "Is it enough?" Or should the individual interior designer be actively participating in advancing the profession and protecting its future?

In December 1989, an agreement was signed by the American Institute of Architects (AIA), ASID, IBD and ISID (and legally inherited by IIDA upon the merger of IBD and ISID). This document, known as the "Accord," put an end to open hostility between architects and interior designers, and set up guidelines for future interior design licensing activities. Primary was the agreement that interior designers would pursue only registration of the title "interior designers" and not restrict the practice of interior design to licensed individuals.

In May, at the AIA conference, the voting members in attendance considered a proposal to rescind the Accord. The documentation distributed in support of the withdrawal challenged the behavior of ASID, IBD and ISID in fulfilling their responsible leadership and oversight to assure conformance with the Accord by their members. Additionally, claims were made that the Accord is being used by the interior design signatories in pursuit of practice legislation. The Accord has been challenged several times within the AIA since its signing; this may be due to a lack of historic perspective of what was achieved by the Accord, and the existence of only a short-term memory among some of the AIA members.

The AIA members voted not to withdraw, but the decision appeared to be based primarily on the protection of their image, not contentment with the current status quo.

This scenario suggests that the Accord has lost its effectiveness as a "living" document, and is in need of reactivated discussions among the parties who signed it. For the past three years, ASID and IIDA have together requested the AIA to enter into regular "Accord maintenance" discussions, but to no avail. The NLCID has initiated requests for discussions, and they have fallen on deaf ears. The efforts to open discussions will continue.

At this time, the engineers, with whom the AIA also signed an agreement, are challenging architects based on restraint of trade. The collaboration hoped for among professions is not working.

When an architect joins the AIA, dues are assessed at the chapter, state and national level. Each of these components had individual responsibilities to the member, and charges are allocated accordingly. The state dues are the source of significant revenues being used to introduce and pursue restrictive legislation and rules for interior designers. The design community hasn't reached the same maturity as architecture in recognizing the necessity of financial support for legislative activities.

California interior designers have developed a legislative model worth examining. In 1983, the California Legislative Conference on Interior Design (CLCID) was formed as a coalition. Practicing interior designers at chapter levels of ASID, IBD and ISID (IIDA) and the National Home Furnishings League (now the International Furnishings and Design Association) agreed to approve a yearly assessment to provide financial support on a per-member basis, thus providing a solid commitment to sustain and protect the profession.

This early model represented a dedication and self-imposed responsibility by the interior design profession to bring legal recognition to fruition. In July 1990, the California bill was signed; in January 1991, a public/private partnership was established when an independent certification board structure was formed as the second component to this legislative process.

Faced with burgeoning challenges, it is clear the interior design community must consider an expanded strategy in protecting the right of interior designers to practice their profession. We must look to a level of financial commitment not previously made by the majority of interior designers.

The next regulatory horizon where the right to practice will be affected is the evolving building codes. The interior design community must take a proactive role in development of these codes. Who better understands the health, safety and welfare needs of the individuals inhabiting interior space? No one.

Through unification to form IIDA, members of the former IBD, ISID and CFID have experienced the empowerment and strength found in collective effort. This effort has demonstrated clearly the success that can be found through shared responsibility and individual leadership.

At the IIDA board of directors meeting in June 1995, a motion was passed enabling individual chapters to assess a dues increase in support of legislative activities.

IIDA has always recognized the state-by-state request; however, this forward-thinking motion empowers chapters to assume the financial responsibility to protect members' right to practice. This is clearly leading by example. The primary focus of this new association is to advance the profession, and this action demonstrates the level of commitment implied. The primary responsibility of every practicing interior designer must be to advance their own body of knowledge and become their own advocate. NLCID and the professional associations will not desert you, but as interior design is coming of age, individual practitioners are in an increasingly influential position to affect the future. We must use our abilities to further our cause, and that of our profession.

Judith Hastings, FIIDA, is the 1995-1996 president of the International Interior Design Association (IIDA). Hastings also is principal of HID Hastings Interior Design, Newport Beach, CA.