The turning of the year brings a flurry of awards cascading through the media. At the same time, some critics accuse architectural culture of being self-congratulatory and superficial. Despite the naysayers, positive attention is warranted, for this year’s winners include admirable choices by distinguished juries representing the Aga Khan Award for Architecture and the AIA (the Pritzker and the Praemium Imperiale come later in the year). Likewise, the announcements demand a moment’s pause: While we architects may build our buildings well, if left to our own resources, we have a hard time; our own words and pictures routinely fail to tell the tale.

Few sponsors understand that fact better than the Aga Khan Award for Architecture, which bases its judgments each three years on a complex matrix of criteria. A rigorous process determines the winners, including site visits and analysis by a skilled reviewer, and final determination of the winners by a master jury. This year seven projects were chosen from around the world, having satisfied the criteria of social utility, craft, even iconic value, and design excellence. One choice among the seven, which consists of only three rooms, illustrates the complexity inherent in the selections, and why we need programs like this one.