Management in architecture has been seen as an instance of management in other fields and disciplines. As evidence is gathered through architectural case studies and comparisons of data between architecture and other areas, a considerably more heterogeneous picture seems to be emerging. Depending on the specific circumstances of each practice, job, building type, client, or economic context, management practices seem to differ considerably. This study deals with the description of specific management strategies employed in the context of the goals that govern a given firm's notion of ''service quality.'' It reports on surveys of practices in nine medium to large architectural offices. Results of studies of specific projects, based on reconstructions of the design delivery process developed from in-depth interviews and a complete set of project documents including meeting notes, official and unofficial correspondence, and technical documentation, are also reported Results are organized in three categories: professional, firm, and project. A method of analysis is developed based on information processing theory and used to show the relationship between structural aspects of office organization and functions required to complete projects. In addition to these methodological issues, the findings indicate correlation between management practices and the definition of service quality by the firm as well as the individuals in each project team. Specific models of management, such as the Migration model, are shown to agree with specific structural and functional circumstances within each level of practice. Some of the findings also shed light on the role of CAD in design management and on the differences of management for quality of service that exist between the United States of America and Turkiye, where the survey was conducted.