Criteria Of Good Architects

scenario 1...
Boss 'A' says... HE is good, coz he is good in drawing... (drawing in terms of verb)

scenario 2...
Boss 'B' says... HE is good, coz he can draw 3D, uses all those graphic stuff... (wow...)

senario 3...
Boss 'C' says... HE is good, coz he is good in contract & by-laws... (woww...)

scenario 4...
Boss 'D' says... HE is good, coz he can handle the contractors... (ehemm...)

scenario 5...
Boss 'E' says... HE is good, coz he can deliver presentation very well... (wowww...)

scenario 6...
Boss 'F' says... HE is good, coz he can handle / convince the clients, including high rank people... (even woww...)

scenario 7...
Boss 'G' says... HE is good, coz he is well-versed in technical... (is a must right???...)

scenario 8...
Bboss 'H' says... HE is good, coz he is very detail... (also a must, right???...haha)

scenario 9...
Boss 'J' says... HE is good, coz he is organised & good in documentation... (also a must, right???...)

scenario 10...
self claimed... "i'm good... if i'm given another bungalow project again, i will know what to do, not only in terms of architecture, yet... every single aspect..." (huh...)

THE QUESTIONS:

Q1.
Can a person be considered as a good architect if HE falls under scenarios 1 & 2, yet he is very poor of scenario 7...?

Q2.
Can a person be considered as a good architect if HE falls under scenario 3, yet he is poor of scenarios 4, 5 & 6...?

Q3.
Can a person be considered as a good architect if HE falls under scenarios 7 & 8, yet he is poor of scenario 1...?

Q4.
OR, can a person be considered as a good architect if HE knows bits and pieces of all scenarios... (except scenario 10 laaahhh...)

Q5. Any idea on SCENARIO 10...???

p/s - the use of 'HE' as general terms only...

(previously posted on FB on 20 Feb 2009 & copyright of Azlifah Amir Sutan)