Archinect
anchor

Where to learn about the $$ side of architecture

washingtonian

I'm an intern a little ways into my career, but I never had a class in school dealing with business/legal side of the industry- types of contracts, etc. and am beginning to think that would be useful. Anyone have some good links where I can learn a bit about this myself? I'd just like to have a working knowledge of these (admittedly boring) subjects as I move forward. Thanks!

 
Oct 3, 14 12:20 am
Carrera

You are making a wise move – doing self-study on the realities of practice. I recommend reading the Blog posts of http://www.entrearchitect.com/category/podcast/ and learning about the business of architecture. Architecture is 50% architecture and 50% business and even though some listening are employees all need to understand the business to get ahead.

Oct 3, 14 12:44 am  · 
 · 
sixty7ArchitectureRd

washingtonian,

Buy copy of "The Business of Design" by Keith Granet. It's concise and explains things with graphical clarity.

Comments From a Spec Writer is a very good source. Like learning from a sage co-worker in the office.

Oct 3, 14 12:54 am  · 
 · 
geezertect

Also, get your hands on a basic business law textbook.  Even though much of it doesn't seem directly related to architectural practice, it will give you an overview of contract law, etc.

Oct 3, 14 9:28 am  · 
 · 
toosaturated

Try 'The Architecture Student's Handbook of Professional Practice' 

Oct 3, 14 9:35 am  · 
 · 
chigurh

12% cost of construction

Oct 3, 14 10:29 am  · 
 · 
3tk

take a contract law class (every accredited engineering program has one).  I got a fair amount off "Construction Contracts" by Hinze and "The Legal and E-commerce Environment Today" by Miller & Cross (my text from law class). 

Most information would probably come from an old-timer who likes to mentor and any contracts/proposals you're allowed access to (in our office we have an open books policy).  AIA chapters often have continuing ed sessions on hot topics as well.

Oct 3, 14 10:30 am  · 
 · 
subgenius

WAIT!!

.....

you are saying that there is a $$ side to architecture???

 

Oct 3, 14 10:44 am  · 
 · 

In addition to what Carrera suggested, I would suggest taking some business administration courses to learn how to do some of the business administration and management and then look at sites such as Mark LePage's Entreprenuer Architect blog/webcast. I also suggest Enoch Sear's "Business of Architecture".

Among the course I suggest is courses regarding financial accounting since that is one area that will help you as not just a professional practitioner but a business man or woman. 

After all, when you set out to engage clients of your own (not as an employee of a firm), you are setting out as a business... be it a SOLE-PROPRIETORSHIP (which is a business), partnership, company, etc. If you are not setting up a non-profit entity, you don't want to run your business as a non-profit entity. Understanding a sustainable contribution margin and other business administration & management principles are things everyone in every architecture school should be taught and I'm not talking about a single course but at least 45 term credits worth.

Oct 3, 14 11:22 am  · 
 · 
sameolddoctor

There is no $ side to architecture

Oct 3, 14 1:20 pm  · 
 · 
Alternative

Probably get a guidebook to LLCs, LLPs, and corporations law to figure out how private enterprise limits liability.  Pretty basic and crucial from a business/legal standpoint.  Also learn about the basics of partnership and agency law-- learn about how working with others can help you profit, or create liabilities. This stuff is surprisingly not boring once you start diving into the nitty gritty.

Oct 3, 14 1:32 pm  · 
 · 
CrazyHouseCat

There are 2 parts to the business of architecture:

1.  How to get project and money into the door

2.  How to spend the fee wisely so you make a profit.

Part 1 is a little far out for young people entering the profession, but good to learn early from all the sources stated above.  Start building alliances with people, especially non-architects who can become potential clients.  This is going to be a long term investment.

Part 2: ask to see the proposal and contract on the projects you are working on, pay attention to the proposed scope of service as well as exclusions, see if your team's work actually align with that.  Ask your project manager to show you your project's work plan, beg to sit through the next billing call with accounting.  Ask them to explain your firm's multiplier.  Ask to learn about "go-no-go" process to determine what project to go after and which one to pass on.  The power of being an intern is that you are obviously there to learn and you should not be met with much resistance with these types of requests.

The legal side of architecture, has a lot to do with risk management.  Familiarize yourself with the AIA contract series to familiarize yourself with what architects are, and are not held responsible for.  Many AIA chapters routinely put out lectures featuring lawyers on the subject of risk management.  Learn about professional liability insurance.

Oct 3, 14 1:34 pm  · 
 · 

...

Oct 3, 14 1:45 pm  · 
 · 
gwharton

Repeat after me:

Price on value. Manage on Cost.

All else is elaboration.

Oct 3, 14 2:05 pm  · 
 · 
gwharton

If you want some elaboration, here's a slide deck on the subject I made a few years ago. It's all still very relevant, even if the macroeconomic climate has radically changed.

http://www.slideshare.net/ertyqway/enhancing-profitability-for-architecture-firms

Oct 3, 14 2:12 pm  · 
 · 
awaiting_deletion

Your bank account will thank you in the future. The fact that you care enough to know is a sign that you will find the $, they are definitely there. There is tons of value in what an architect does and to understand how to value these items your fellow archinect peers are providing great references. If you are at a big firm or have a friend at a large firm who has has access to contracts ask for a copy and make a fake contract for a job for say your parents or friends. I learned to write contracts by copying and adapting languages from multiple contracts written by architects and lawyers. When you start to appropriate the language to a task or liability the value in want you do and how to manage the value becomes crystal clear. Then through experience you will see why and for what your boss or a developer makes a move or not and bargains a bit of your fee here or there. Even though its on paper its a timing thing often. I consider writing proposals and fee management very much a design excercise, I use my develop, present, and revise design skills to adjust my effort and time organically with the process of turning a job into a job. Much of what your bosses do may not make sense now, but when you understand a fee in architecture is always a moving target you will start to have a grasp of the $ side.

Oct 3, 14 7:00 pm  · 
 · 
washingtonian

Thanks for the great responses everyone! I know it's a very complex subject and much of one's knowledge on these subjects will come from experience, not just books. But I'll check out every one's suggestions.

 

For the people who had to post the obligatory "There's $$ in architecture?" responses, I'm glad I gave you an opportunity to get it out of your system.

Oct 4, 14 3:31 pm  · 
 · 
sameolddoctor

washingtonian, i will get something else out of my system too - "Go f yourself"

Oct 4, 14 9:46 pm  · 
 · 

sadolddoctor... sorry sameolddoctor,

I had enough of people like you poisoning this profession with your nonsense. Get out and find yourself another career if you can't find money in this profession. We know why prospective clients tries to get architects to provide services for free because they got the idea from spineless architects.

When people have asked for a reasonable thing like understanding the money side of architecture, they want a reasonable response. This is a profession. All professions has a business/enterprise component.

This comes down to making sure you get paid fairly. Sure, you don't become Bill Gates rich but the money side of this profession does exist and people can establish a livable well to do income and a good business.

In this economy, you may have to be multi-faceted and offer a suite of services. Sometimes, that suite of services may include being the GC/CM and be in responsible charge of the construction outcome by having more control over who the trades that are contracted and having more direct oversight of how the outcome is going to occur. It is important that you have the people that can and will deliver the results you are expecting and specified the criterion. This quality assurance is something you don't want to put in the hands of the client in many cases because they can't judge one contractor from another and their ability to perform.

sadolddoctor, if you don't feel you can make money in this field to be a upper middle class to upper class level then you might consider A) rethinking how you are doing business or B) find another career if you are not willing to do what it takes.

Shut up. Stop making excuses. Don't try... Do. Do what it takes. Got it?

Oct 5, 14 12:18 am  · 
 · 
sameolddoctor

Richard, Lets talk after you get your license. Hopefully, after you do, you will realize that things are pretty much still the same.

Oct 6, 14 1:11 pm  · 
 · 
chigurh

Same'ole...Two things are going to happen on that day:  

-Richard is going to remove the "Assoc." from his name.

-He is going to start making the big bucks.

That is what getting licensed is all about...collecting Benjamins! Holla!

Oct 6, 14 1:37 pm  · 
 · 

sameolddoctor,

Talk to me when you actually practice as an architect (like establishing and running an actual design business such as an architectural firm). 

The problem is many firms ran by architects runs their firms like a non-profit because they are charging too low. Moonlighters are charging their intern wage rates or a flat fee at a grossly underestimated number of hours at their intern wage hourly rate. Forgetting to account te huge chunk IRS and the state takes out of the income tax and they also not account the cost of utilities and a place to operate a business LEGALLY.

Idiots with no business running a business is rampant in architecture because 1) the academic fundamentals is not taught in school and 2) IDP does not encompass that. It is not a required knowledge and skill to get IDP training hours and 3) It is not tested in the exams.

Great job making a bureaucratic nightmare just to become a starving artist. Keep on living that nonsense way of life. At least, I am incline to make a living and build a business that brings in a reasonable living. I'm not seeking or looking at how to become the next Bill Gates. That won't happen, not even in the software/IT field... not anymore. You need to have huge in flow of starting capital just to get something kickstarted and then you need a movie studio scale software development studio to get in the big bucks..... despite the huge contribution margin that software has.

Consulting practices don't make that scale of money because the services are one off services while software is a mass production thing which with pay per download, it would be inexpensive. 

How do I know, I been in the software development field. Different kind of business but there is still money in this field and the more skin you have in the game such as in design-build, the more leverage you will have. This was why architects in the 19th century and before had the leverage to charge what they did and eventually when architects were not also the builder, the ability architects at first still had that leverage in the psyche of the client because of the times before were fresh but as the generations went on, that past no longer holds in the psyche and architects lost leverage power. If you are the Architect and the GC, you can hold market and the client won't buck so much at paying the price. The reason is, the GC is the one that will actually make the project occur while the Architect more or less just produces the stacks of paper that is likely not going to be used by the laborers on the jobsite.

While we have these challenges, it means we need to revise how we are as architect/designers and take on the responsibilities that gives us leverage.

It is not impossible. There is a money side and a way to make money and have a sustainable livable income. 

Until you run a business, you don't understand it. There is challenges. That has never been the disputed.

Oct 6, 14 3:39 pm  · 
 · 

The OP is looking for information about the money side of architecture. This means, understanding the financial side of things. This is the business end. This is something most IDP interns never learn during school nor get it during their internship. The ARE has nothing on the business of architecture.

Sure, it tests your knowledge of regulatory things but that alone is not the business end or the business financial end. The business financial end is what the OP is looking for.

Try answering that without interjecting with your own personal disallusion with the profession considering your lack of being a principal of a firm that is doing financially well.

Some of the architecture firms got hit hard and that has messed up their financial situation and effectively the principals are getting less personal living capital from the work they put in then the middle-management because of the debt they took on. Yes, it got ugly and got rammed with their pants down. This was because they weren't prepared for the boom/bust cycles we have been seeing. 

Oct 6, 14 3:51 pm  · 
 · 
sameolddoctor

What makes you think I do not run a business. I do, and have at times, made more than most architects, but I still believe that architecture as a business is not a viable business model in this day and age. Unless the client-architect role is questioned, nothing will change.

Oct 6, 14 4:07 pm  · 
 · 

sameolddoctor,

Okay, fair enough... since you run a business. Okay. Thank you for your shift in mind for a more meaningful discussion. I agree with you that the conventional model of doing client-architect role is perhaps not viable for everyone. Some it maybe. We have to provide a package of services as individual businesses. Since the business model basically is the same with building designers as it is with licensed architects, I think it is a fair discussion.

There is money but it is more challenging these days. Since you raised the question, I'd say, give us some of your thoughts. After all, we are a business and there is money just that maybe we redevelop what it is to be an "Architect". 

Further elaborate please. Before, I'll throw a few thoughts.

I do believe there is opportunity to be an architect and make money. It doesn't always mean it has to be the same old model that it popularized but lets remember that architects adapted to the market dynamics and if you know about John E. Wicks and other architects of the past even 100 years ago, architects were well involved in many aspects of our communities from running a bank serving on their board of directors, functioning as a developer, etc. Being an architect wasn't all about being a designer of buildings but in many cases taking on a multifaceted role in our communities. This also empowered architects to have a strong and solid practice. Everything you do in and out of the office is for business and living. You make your personal / outside the office life be serving to grow the business and money coming in. That is being an entrepreneur not just a practitioner. 

I feel it is detrimental to architecture profession and business to be demeaning and disallusioned. I don't have a problem question what isn't working. I feel it is important to take the outlook more optimistically in a manner like, there is 1001 ways to fail as a business, all one needs to find is 1 way to be successful as a business. That's I believe is true for us as it is for anyone.

Market dynamics changes and we can't always continue to do things the way we did things years ago.

Oct 6, 14 5:10 pm  · 
 · 

Where to learn about the $$ side of architecture

Most do it here:

Oct 6, 14 6:00 pm  · 
 · 
sameolddoctor

Okay, lets start by this discussion. I think the practice of architecture still has a business model that was followed since the days of Louis XIV. Granted, there is more of us now.

Why cant we have a business model, like, say, a silicon valley startup. You create ideas, bake them, get VC funding, hire talented people and then sell them to interested parties? Why do we always need to have a client, who can start and stop projects as her/his whim? 

The model you mention, as architects as community advisors is still around and about but its impossible to make money off it....

So, the big question is, where and how to start?

Oct 6, 14 7:07 pm  · 
 · 
quizzical

"Why cant we have a business model, like, say, a silicon valley startup. You create ideas, bake them, get VC funding, hire talented people and then sell them to interested parties? Why do we always need to have a client, who can start and stop projects as her/his whim?"

SOD: John Portman started doing exactly this sort of thing nearly 50 years ago -- early to mid-60s. Pretty much, he was just operating an otherwise run-of-the-mill architectural practice in Atlanta when he starting identifying projects he could develop himself. He conceptualized what he wanted to do, found both tenants and financing and the rest, as they say, is history.

What's stopping you ?

Oct 6, 14 7:59 pm  · 
 · 

sameolddoctor,

Let me explain the silicon valley and VCs and such in the purpose of understanding the difference between the architecture market and mass production consumer products.

VCs likes mass consumer products especially products with VERY HIGH contribution margin such as software. Software has very low cost and can be mass produced in the billions and have a contribution margin that is easily 20x the cost to produce.

You can equate the cost to render services in the same manner as cost to product and then what people can afford to pay. Considering the income basis of 98% of the population, paying $50K to 100K or more in architectural/design services and you can imagine that is not going to be cheap and easily affordable on consumer financial income when you consider that houses are often custom to small volume production.

To achieve what you are talking about would require mass production of homes of ONE design. Look at your iPad or iPhone or any other consumer gadget and each one of them looks basically the same. In mass production architecture, we called this idea cookie cutter. 

Lets step back to the VC (venture capitalist), they are in business of generating wealth.... for themselves and their backing investment partners. They want to have complete return on investment and then some in as short of time as possible. The fastest ROI is what is the holy grail and the goal to VCs. Especially VCs that have tasted the ROI time frame. 

In other words, VCs are all interested in getting rich, quick. Why would they want to take 30-50 years to make $1 Billion when they can do it in less than 5 years. How can we do that with buildings. It would be incredible if we can build that many homes, that quickly. The fact is, there would be a tota shakeout of 99.99% of the small firms and sole-practitioners and it would become very corporatized with only a few (3-4 maybe 5 megacorporations). It would literally be an oligopoly.

That is what happens in mass production market.... the consumer recognized term for this is CONSOLIDATION. That is what it would take to draw VC interest. 

The problem is, people want too much custom dynamics.

You'll be producing millions of one design because in general VCs aren't interested unless they can get an ROI in 2-3 years MAX. That is hard to do in housing and other building development because that is what you are talking about. High volume housing development is generally considered VERY LOW volume production when compared to other mass production consumer markets.

How do you mass produce houses that 10,000 or 100,000 or over a million people will want and purchase? How do you mass produce commercial buildings?

We can be developers of low volume and that isn't funded by the kind of VC capitalism as is for Silicon Valley tech.

Since you are talking development then Carrera can provide some insight on that. It is different than the high volume mass production of "software development" because I can personally produce a high volume download of software in the Billions. No problem. If it is a software people want, they'll buy it. If it's low cost, more people will buy it because more can afford it. Then I can supply it. The sustainable and smart business  thing to do is to get the most amount you can in a perfect balance of price and volume of sale to get the highest revenue yield. That's the Holy Grail of business sales when you got the best possible price/sales volume. We likely will fall short of that but the closer you get to it the better. Of course, the principle of supply & demand is at play and the effects of competitors have on your sales.

Development that we deal with in architecture is also effected by this fundamental law of business even though we don't remotely have this high volume. Lets remember, there is competitors already in the market. 

You got your local developers competing with their project. It's business and we deal with niches. Our field is not as corporately consolidated and a huge percentage of the market place is controlled by sole-proprietor to medium scale firms running small to modest volume real estate development. 

Carrera has some good insight in this aspect of "Architectural Development".

Oct 6, 14 9:15 pm  · 
 · 

SOD,

You say it is impossible to make money off community advising and becoming a community partner firm. I suppose it depends on the volume of money you are talking about. I don't know about that so much considering it is an investment in gaining marketplace and name recognition and trust and therefore gaining clients because they know you compared to an unknown.

Think about it for a bit and you'll know what I mean.

You do need to put alot in to become a trusted community advisor. That is part of getting leverage. That is how the architects making money in their communities getting the project because of a perceived value. When they are in positions of power like planning commission and other such roles, they become trusted and recognized and they get the projects becaue everyone wants a smooth flow through the regulatory bureaucracy and the person that is perceived to be able to do it best through their governmental role, gets the projects. You'll notice that those architects are usually the ones doing pretty good and getting the projects.

Oct 6, 14 9:23 pm  · 
 · 
sameolddoctor

The other question then is, why are we looking at architectural design as only developing real estate or creating homes? The more we remain stuck to these services, we will get stuck in the same rut that we are in. 

Granted, what I am thinking is taking a huge leap, much more than any current value-production modes for architectural design encompasses.

For example, all the young students graduating from architectural schools, and well-versed in software as well as digital creation of spaces - is there a parallel industry (no, lets not say gaming) that can be created? Heck, speaking of VCs, why not create software (apps/building system softwares etc) that are actually part of the architectural experience?

One thing to learn from the app economy is that one could actually create demand for something that never existed, by actually creating it and showing its efficacy...

Quizzical, yes, John Portman is a great example, but its again, restricting ourselves to real estate....

Oct 6, 14 9:23 pm  · 
 · 
quizzical

Hmmm ... I"m pretty sure John never felt "restricted" !

Oct 6, 14 9:46 pm  · 
 · 
sameolddoctor

Yes quizzical, he actually made his huge lobbies great opportunities to sell his paintings too!

Oct 6, 14 9:52 pm  · 
 · 
Carrera

Don’t want to get into the argument but there is money in architecture - you just have to reach and grab it. John Portman is a perfect example. As most know here I’m a strong advocate for architects expanding their practices into - construction, CM, PM, development, real estate, property management, products/furniture – you name it – it’s all related. Just sitting back and producing CAD drawings is too limited, okay for some but no real money in it – it’s like a barbershop – one head at a time. I did the “quintuple bubble” doing the architecture, development, construction, real estate and building management and made a killing. What’s wrong with that? If you want to make money in architecture then reach for it, it’s there for the taking.

Oct 6, 14 10:37 pm  · 
 · 

Because designing real estate as in buildings is what Architects do by definition. That is what the licensing law pertains to. If you don't design buildings then by definition, you are not an Architect as for the licensing law is concerned. 

If you want to practice a profession not pertaining to buildings then you don't need a license. Just do it.

In the software field, the terminology used such as "Software Architect", you do not qualify by knowledge and skills as they are just by knowing how to use software. Some of your skills are potentially transferable but you wouldn't be able to do software architecture because it isn't visual in the sense that you have been trained in and it is EXTREMELY technical and you better know your underlying computer science fundamentals, software programming and software engineering, as well as system wide architecture & engineering, game develop/design/etc..

I actually was a software architect, software engineer, programmer, software developer, etc. all in one before the terminology had become formal. One of the prerequisite knowledge is data structures. My knowledge and experience was equivalent to a doctorates level. 

My software development experience was predominately on older computer systems. Considering that I was creating the software. 

If you don't have the technical foundation, you would be hopeless to be able to perform the work you would be called upon to do. 

I'm being straight to the point. An architect trained in an NAAB accredited school of architecture is not trained in all the knowledge and skills required. The visual art and all those design studio courses is essentially useless and meaningless because how something looks from a visual composition standpoint is meaningless from a software architecture standpoint. Your most useful skill is diagramming but you need to have technical knowledge, vocabulary and computer science foundation to understand your builidng blocks. I understand how you can parallel abstract concepts. I can do it and do it successfully while I have the technical foundation in computer science for doing software architecture, I would argue that most architects won't have the technical foundaton in computer science. 

A software architect has the computer science foundation to not need an IT repair technician to work on their computers. Maybe an electronics engineer/technician to repair blown transistors or resistors but not repair a computer from malware. 

It is a different knowledge area and I am not sugarcoating it. You would need to go to college for about 3 to 4 years to get your CS foundation and then get into the software engineering and software architecture studies.

Oct 6, 14 11:53 pm  · 
 · 
wurdan freo

Yeah... read this... read that... all good before you make big steps, but not everything can be learned in a book. You need to practice as well.   Buy low... sell high... right?  That's business 101, but hard to really figure out. So here's an exercise for you.  Go on craigslist and find something that people value. Do some research and find out what it is really worth. Buy it for 50% of its value and then turn around and sell it for double its value. If you can do that... you are well on your way to understanding how a business works... 

Oct 7, 14 1:25 am  · 
 · 
graphite

@sixty7ArchitectureRd  

Great blog you posted.

Oct 7, 14 11:56 am  · 
 · 
sameolddoctor

Richard, the funny this is that everytime i say something, you post a rebuttal saying how difficult it is to make money using the current model of architectural practice "Because designing real estate as in buildings is what Architects do by definition. That is what the licensing law pertains to. If you don't design buildings then by definition, you are not an Architect as for the licensing law is concerned."

So, isn't it time to rethink things? I am not sure quite how, because if so, I would be doing it. As we know, most buildings in the US are built without a licensed architect, so I really do not hold that definition of architecture in any regard. And quite frankly (preparing for brickbats here), licensed architects are dime a dozen in the market.

Oct 7, 14 1:40 pm  · 
 · 

SOD,

The reason is that these other occupations (some of which has coopted the word "architect" into their title such as those IT fields), they don't require licensing whatsoever.

The point is, in general there is other titles for these other occupations and almost every occupation other than IDP internship and licensed architect occupation does not require an NAAB accredited architecture degree or even a pre-professional bachelor's degree in architecture. All the jobs for other fields requires a different degree. I never see an architecture degree required for any job outside the AEC industry. 

In the computer/software field, you will NEVER get a job because you have an B.A./BS. in Architecture or an NAAB accredited B.Arch/M.Arch. They want a bachelors degree in computer science, software engineering, etc. If you don't have it or have occupational experience such as running such a business with occupational related portfolio of work such as having a portfolio of software programs that you have created, or you have work experience in a computer or software company creating computer hardware or software. I am not talking about be a 3d world modeler or render artists or other digital graphics work which is maybe the only job an architect such as yourself would get. 

It is like thinking you can go work for a hospital in the medical field without either working your way up from the very bottom through job experience at a hospital or getting a degree. You just won't be a nurse or doctor until you meet the requirements they have for those job position.

Your easiest route in a non-licensed occupation such as software development is setting up your own software development business but you need to come up with how to make the product. Sure, you can be a business entreprenuer and invest and be on the business admistration end but you better have employees that are qualified by education and experience to create software. You won't be doing the work yourself. You won't be the "software architect" or "software engineer" but just the CEO. 

To be successful in running such a business, you might need to have an education on business administraion or at least courses that will arm you with the knowledge that you can draw on and apply because running a software development business is different than running an architecture firm. Your business administration experience is your best asset and easiest way to be mobile outside of the AEC industry. Project Management knowledge would be useful but not so much experience in architectural or construction project management.

Project Management skills will get you into jobs in Project Management as a Project Manager. You'll have to understand the project managment process models for software development. 

As you go outside what is Architecture as we are talking about.... here, it is a different career and occupation with their own title and meaning to it as well as what knowledge and skills (coming from the degrees and work experience) that they seek.

What would we be if we weren't designing buildings? We wouldn't be "Architects" such as what this occupational career is about. If you want to be on the construction end, you would be a construction contractor. If you have your license in both construction and architecture, you would be a design-builder or more specific architect-builder. Of course, you can be a design-builder without architect license if you stick to exempt buildings. If you proceed to be a land developer then you would be also called a developer.

Sure, most buildings such as houses would outnumber commercial buildings BUT commercial buildings are alot bigger and have 10 to 100 or more times the construction cost and therefore a higher commission yield not to mention you can charge more percentage of construction cost for your services than houses due to supply & demand ratios.

Houses are more price constrained. Considering where the wealth distribution is in the United States, you can see. There is money but you also need to improve your efficiency in delivering your services to maximize your profits from the commission. This may mean you don't try to overthink the design and be more decisive on your part where you can.

Oct 7, 14 2:51 pm  · 
 · 

As for rethinking, fair enough. I'm sure there is opportunity to rethink the situation we are in.

If a person is say.... crafty with their ingenuity, I am sure one can bring into any career insights from outside the occupational field and find a way to apply the transferable knowledge and skills.

You can't just read a few books and have a solid foundation in software development which requires programming.

In BASIC, how would you program a message that says "hello world" ten times then waits for a space spar to be press while prompting the user the "Press the Space Bar" and then prints a message that says "Congratulations for pressing the space bar. Pick a number from 1 to 9. Then checks which number the user presses and then prompts a unique message for each number.

If you can't do that, you're nowhere close to being software developer or software architect or software engineer or even an entry level programmer. This is very elementary.

Oct 7, 14 3:04 pm  · 
 · 

We can't whimsically redefine ourselves and our career by usurping another career and say that is what we are and do. We must be able to do that career by possessing the knowledge and skills of that occupation/career and doing it.

What is it to be an Architect? What is an Architect? What education and experience is required to be an Architect?

If we are going to redefine "Architect" then we need redefine the answer to all three of these questions.

Oct 7, 14 3:08 pm  · 
 · 

Block this user


Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

Archinect


This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.

  • ×Search in: