A systematic analysis of how 2,547 RIBA-chartered practices in Greater London present themselves publicly — their stated specialisms, client positioning, sustainability claims, and market orientation — cross-referenced against their actual planning track record in the PLD dataset. The result is the first data-driven map of London's architecture profession.
The gap between claim and record
The most striking finding in this analysis is the systematic gap between how practices describe themselves and what their planning record shows. 64% of London practices claim housing as a primary specialism on their website. The PLD match shows that only 31% of those same practices have residential applications making up more than half their total submissions. The divergence is largest among smaller practices (2–10 people) where website positioning often reflects aspiration rather than track record.
“64% of London practices claim housing as a primary specialism. The planning record shows that only half of them have housing as their actual majority work type. The gap between stated positioning and demonstrated track record is widest among practices with fewer than 10 staff.”
— Stormglass Practice Landscape Research, September 2024
Sustainability language: quantity vs specificity
89% of practice websites reference sustainability in some form. But the quality of that reference varies enormously. Only 22% specify a measurable standard (BREEAM, Passivhaus, net-zero carbon, NABERS) and only 8% reference specific projects where they claim to have met those standards. The majority (67%) use sustainability language that is aspirational and non-specific: 'sustainable design principles', 'environmentally conscious', 'green architecture'. This matters because LPAs are increasingly scrutinising sustainability claims in planning submissions — vague language from a practice with no track record of compliant schemes creates risk.
Planning performance by practice type
Cross-referencing practice positioning data with PLD outcomes reveals a consistent performance pattern. Practices that position themselves explicitly around planning expertise — citing knowledge of the London Plan, borough-specific policy, or pre-application engagement — have a statistically higher approval rate (74% vs 58% for practices with no planning-specific language). The effect is larger for major applications (10+ units) than for smaller residential work, suggesting that planning expertise is most valuable at the scale where policy complexity is highest.
Top positioning signals correlated with planning performance
- →Explicit reference to London Plan and borough Local Plan knowledge
- →Named pre-application engagement experience
- →Case studies that include planning reference numbers and committee outcomes
- →Specific sustainability standards with verified delivery examples
- →Named borough relationships or committee familiarity
The geography of specialism
Practice location and stated specialism are strongly correlated with where those practices actually work. Inner London practices (within a 5km radius of Zone 1) are 3.2× more likely to work across multiple boroughs than outer London practices, which tend to be concentrated in their immediate locality. This has implications for how commissioners should shortlist practices: a practice based in Bromley with 90% of their PLD record in Bromley will know the local authority, officers, and policy interpretation in a way that a Zone 1 firm might not.
Website scraping was conducted in Q2 2024. Practices with websites under construction, password-protected, or returning only social media redirects (12% of the sample) were excluded from content analysis but retained in the size and location data. PLD matching achieved a 67% match rate by practice name — the remaining 33% either had no PLD record in the study period, operated under a different trading name, or worked exclusively on permitted development and householder applications below the PLD filter threshold.