On finding new revenue streams...good point! how is it good for architects to both ignore small jobs like custom homes and interior architecture and vernacular architecture (anything that doesn't need a STAMP, which is somehow now the definition of architecture) AND deny that anyone else dare work on these jobs? That stuff can just fall off the face of the earth that doesn't need a stamp? Turn off the software and go outside sometime, ok? There is a lot of "architecture" that doesn't get stamped, that stuff that architects won't touch cause they won't get out of bed for less than $10k in fees. The profession leaves big gaps in serving the needs of people and then want to legislate that no one fill that gap because of the need to protect egos? How is that for protecting the "welfare" of the people.
Is it really only architecture if it is stamped? I think not. There certainly are some unrigorous thinkers (drones) here.
^ And then people sit around and wonder why the public doesn't think architects are awesome and why the public thinks architects are out of touch and egotistical? Apparently, it is the law. lol
Aug 28, 14 11:45 am ·
·
Volunteer,
Your problem with AIA is between you and AIA not me. I am not AIA. Don't confuse me with someone who gives a sh_t about your petty problem(s) with AIA.
Aug 28, 14 11:46 am ·
·
Volunteer,
NCARB is the council of architectural licensing boards of the United States. We used to and still have with states reciprocity agreements between states. NCARB established a model law and the ARE and so forth so that there was a universal licensing requirements. As for NCARB cert., it would expedite your reciprocity. Otherwise, you would have to organize your file at least as good as NCARB would. Anyway, without NCARB, you would have to essentially take a state Architectural Review Exam (like it was before the NCARB's ARE replaced state administered Architectural Review Exam) every time you go from one state to another unless the exam was equivalent and covered which would require agreement between each state which is not simple and also were difficult because reciprocity would require that the licensing requirement was equal or equivalent. If one state was more relaxed on the requirement and another state was very rigid, it would be hard if not impossible to get reciprocity in the strict and rigid state when coming from meeting the requirement of the relaxed and easy-going state. This was problematic in mobility. You would be denied reciprocity.
NCARB helped to minimize this issue.
Otherwise, each state may have vastly different requirements and that would make hell for reciprocity.
Tint, that's exactly the point. You nailed it. The restriction of words is not restricting the work from being done but instead just changing the name of it. This is important because when someone designs a small courtyard fountain for mrs smith, and she is very happy with the outcome, and she refers you to mr brown as her artist/designer, then that very personal and quaint form of public relations is not being connected to the arch profession. What is a fountain? It is not a building, but historically we can make a strong case that a fountain is architectural. IMO this type of promotion, an immersion in small things, is what's needed in the field because most people have never worked with an architect/ architectural designer and see them as elitists. There is a huge disconnect between the public and architecture field. Protecting words like architectural is consequently creating different fields and wekening the profession rather than side/specialty fields under the same commonly understood umbrella term. We should be broadening the field not narrowing it. This is a problem that I feel should be addressed.
Jla-x, you and I like to use our education tosee things instead of hide things. In that case, I'm glad I don't fit in with the others if that is what they want to do.
Do you recall Carrera and I talking about an architect who does house call consults for $250? This was an idea I had myself and I could do and I am interested in doing, the architecture without a stamp (not interested in being a corporate stamper), but I'm doing other things where is lower hanging fruit where I don't have to fit an old-man ego-based requirement first. No thanks.
It is hard to watch an entire group of lemmings (that I care about) step off a cliff.
Aug 28, 14 12:27 pm ·
·
tint,
Consider NCBDC certification. You'll have a stamp that you can use and the title "Certified Professional Building Designer" or CPBD after your name. Short hand, you can say Building Designer or say..... I design houses and light commercial (in connection with clients / prospective client projects where the project is located in a state where you may perform light commercial work such as small restaurants and other such projects.
It can help you work through some local authorities, homeowner associations, etc. where they would want someone with a license or similar certifications that would demonstrate that you aren't just some fly by night.
Just one such project where you can get through the 'red tape' they my put up on those with no license or certification, will probably pay for certification dues.
We should be broadening the field not narrowing it. This is a problem that I feel should be addressed.
This problem IS being addressed. In my comments and others' on the articles below, and on many other similar threads here on Archinect since at least January, I and others have been pointing out the many changes that are coming as NCARB seeks to broaden entry into the field.
Richard, I have work and if I get more or get work I can't do, I hire people, I can't do everything anyways and designer works fine for me, thanks though.
Donna, I do remember you talking about the AIA addressing this. I hope something comes out of it. I have little hope in NCARB changing anything major any time soon.
RB, do they pay you to try to get people to sign up with the NCBDC, or are you just hoping that if more people do it, it will mean something?
Aug 28, 14 7:02 pm ·
·
archanonymous,
Nope. However, more building designers should pursue certification because if we don't work for a way to ultimately eliminate or reduce the riff raff of people designing buildings when they are utterly incompetent to do so while charging fees like $20 for entire design and horribly distorting public perception and end up making it absolutely impossible to make a living equal to or above federal minimum wage.... licensed architect will be responsible for removing exemption to architectural licensing in ALL of the states in the next 25-50 years while requiring everyone who wants to practice architecture to have a masters of architecture.
Regulations are going to get more tougher and licensed architects will be writing bills to make designing without being licensed as an architect.... impossible. Every state will be like Illinois and there will be no exceptions/exemptions and the path to become licensed will be longer, more expensive and more difficult in the long run.
I'm trying to find a way for those of us who can't afford to get a $250,000 student loan to get licensed as an architect.
The benefit as far as I am concern is you still having a career without having an architect license but in the process, we need to do some serious house cleaning because there are too many in this field who has no knowledge or skill to be designing any building unsupervised.
I read Donna’s suggested links to past discussions and found them well written and insightful…give them a read.
I think the title of the NCARB release is intriguing but its face will not fly. I hang my hat on Donna’s statement there:
“I …..was hoping the changes at NCARB etc. would focus more on the use of the title rather than the registration, at least as a first step. I had hoped that use of the term Architect would be granted to accredited-degree holders, with the term Registered Architect, and the stamping capabilities, reserved for those who take the exam. This would fall in line with most municipalities' code laws, which allow smaller projects to be unstamped.”
It is obvious that the current path is abhorred and in need of reform. Spending 15 years to be called anything is ridiculous. The idea of shortening the IDP path is what I think will result and that is a great thing. I am sorry to bring this back up but the word Paraprofessional should be employed. It should be:
Donna Sink , Architect – Paraprofessional
Or
Donna Sink, Architect
Being a Paraprofessional should be a licensed event offered after graduation. There is a myriad of work for those. I don’t believe that you need to be fully licensed to do almost 40% of the work out there…housing, strip malls, build-outs and such. And who is going to do all the small stuff that exists like designing beams for builders, pulling permits for beauty shops and helping the public with the small things? Licensed architects in my area shun such work and I’ve had to help many pro-bono out of shame for my profession.
Going for your license should not be restricted to time…if you pass you’re-in. As said, the market will decide who does what. Just remember that it was licensed guys who sealed the bridge at Hyatt, this idea of health and welfare is relative and should not be a barrier to doing work.
I think there is change in the wind, be patient and it will come, regulations are stiffening and they need capacity to fulfill the increasing need and NCARB’s notion is a signal that it is coming.
Aug 28, 14 11:22 pm ·
·
Just to be clear above, I am not saying all architects will be involved in removing exemptions. It will be a minority just as it was in the beginning and every amendment to the licensing laws for architecture because the process is architect driven not the general public because they simply don't care because the majority of the public doesn't even know architectural licensing laws exists let alone even think about it.
This is because nearly no one is alive from when they were adopted.
I feel, if building designers are to exists in 50 years, it will have to be in the form of certified building designers being recognized as possibly licensed building designers. After all, it was the certified building designer program of AIBD/NCBDC that established the registered building designer license tier in California that once used to exist and removed by architects on the California Architect board. However, if we would be recognized and established as another licensed/registered field like Licensed/Registered Interior Designers, we would want to recognize programs like NCBDC certification because A) it is a NATIONAL certification and B) it would establish a uniform baseline qualification requirement and C) it isn't that hard.
The only reason building designers that haven't considered NCBDC certification is because they don't feel the need to be certified unless it is required. Then what is the point of going through LEED accreditation when it isn't required and that it doesn't demonstrate any competence to design buildings at all. Why not support the only certification of building designers in the United States other than the licensing requirement for becoming an architect which will become tougher and harder to become licensed in the long term. Sure, we have cycles of increasing and decreasing requirements like what NCARB is doing but lets look at the matters in the long run across a 50 year and 100 year perspective.
In the past 35 years, we have reduced paths to licensure. Increased time to complete licensure with IDP. We have made going to college/universities the only path to licensure therefore mandating students to have student loans because there is no way to go to college in 2014 without getting student loans unless you are independently wealthy. Our payrate has been flatline since the 1970s all the while inflation devalues the U.S. dollar and cost of everything goes up and cost to attend college gone up at rates of multiple times the rate of inflation.
In other words, we pushed for options that is unrealistic and senseless. For altruism? Nope. Doubt that. You really believe the people who proposed these changes in the past are angelic altruistic people? I doubt that. I believe they could foreseen their multi-prong approach to make the path longer and slower and more costly as a ploy to stifle licensing of new architects by the minority that are most vocal and takes the leadership.
The majority doesn't do anything on these regards... sadly.
However, unlicensed designers who undergoes NCBDC certifications takes that step as a symbol to indicate to the public that they subscribe to a code of ethics and conduct, they demonstrate verifiably by peer review that they possess a certain level of competence.
Sure, your work must speak for itself but people don't always see that or understand how to view the work. The ignorant prospective clients (ie. public) doesn't know how to judge the quality of a person's work. After all, they don't know what is good or bad work. The uncertified only can rely on his/her work and ability to convince the client to contract for his/her services. The ignorant client only has his/her word. The con man only needs to convince the sucker that he is good. Oh, he is good.... at being a con artist. However, still produce crud.
Sure, certification isn't perfect nor is licensing. At least, the certification is a means to set you apart from the con artists and riff raff designers who doesn't belong designing buildings of any kind.
Richard, I have heard you say more than once that you and others need “…certification (as) a means to set you apart from the con artist and riff raff designers who doesn’t belong designing buildings of any kind.” Who are these undesirables and where are they designing buildings? Are you suggesting that there is a population of people who are non-graduate & unlicensed doing work? What kind of work, besides houses?
Con artists like making quick money, why the fongul would they choose design as their scam of choice which is not quick and which generates little- no money.
I know plenty of licensed architects who make con artist seem like an honorable profession. Being licensed doesn't make them more honest or better designers - to the contrary, it is a false certification.
I'm not saying that having a degree or not. There are con artists but the issue isn't with just con artists. The point is there are a population of people designing buildings that shouldn't be due to lack of knowledge and skill. I don't care if they get the knowledge & skill through a college program or through an experience path of learning such as apprenticing.
The people degrading the value of our services are people who buys a $20 software off the shelf of a store and plays with it for a weekend thinking they can go out designing buildings for their friends, family and their friends and so on. Charging ridiculous fees.
There is also another problem with architectural design professional (employed and unemployed...... licensed and unlicensed) doing a moonlighting commission with a client charging ridiculously low fees because they treat it as a gig not as a real business as it should be. These combined only serves to lower the price ceiling of the market to a point where it can become impossible to function as a business making a profit.
If you are unlicensed, you only have houses or if you are lucky, small commercial projects and farm buildings. You don't have the schools, the healthcare market and so forth. You don't have those markets as an unlicensed designer. There is a supply vs. demand problem as well as poor business sense in our field with people.
Then there are a population of architects that wants to remove the exemption with total disregard of the unlicensed designers because they simply don't care. They feel, if the unlicensed designer wants to continue practice that they just have to get licensed which may mean that they have to shut down their business, go to college for several years, then spend between 5 to 10 or more years to complete IDP and take the ARE.
I don't agree the one path to licensure concept as the only means for someone to be competent. There are those who have achieved it through experience.
NCBDC certification will accept experience based. The key is demonstration of knowledge and skill. Ideally, people at least spend some years apprenticing/interning or whatever... getting experience and knowledge under the tutelage of an architect, engineer, or certified building designer that encourages self-directed learning so the person can become competent to begin working on their own and they continue the life long learning to become better at the art, craft and science of designing buildings and maybe even constructing buildings.
As the unlicensed, we have no minimum standard of competence except that which would be demonstrated through certification and there is the very vocal group of architect seeking to put us out of business by legislating us out of business by removing exemptions for us to practice. All it takes is an afternoon to draft up a legislative bill and then getting it to the legislators of a state and then getting it passed while keeping a low key about it because a lot of things get passed because we don't know about it until after it has already been ruled upon. The states don't do a good job of publicizing the bills and so forth.
Then we would be criminals if we try to continue practice. I think it is important for us to find a solution to the matter strengthen the organizations that are out there helping to keep our occupation as designers alive. AIBD and its NCBDC has been doing that since the 1950s.
My argument isn't against all architects. There are many architects who aren't out against building designers. There is enough vocal ones that are and they tend to be the type that gets themselves into positions of power & influence and only needs the few to achieve their goals.
To answer the question specifically where are the riff raffs, in every city & town in every state where there is exemptions and possibly in all the states entirely. We have this problem, everywhere. The con artists contigent is a smaller percentage of the riff raff. There is a lot of undesireable, incompetent people taking work away from us competent, costing 'clients' money for these services incompetently rendered. There is alot of them out there who comes through the backdoor channels to the clients. They maybe the client's cousin who says, they can do it for $20. How hard can it be? They maybe a buddy, a cousin or what not who will undermine us professionals from getting the pay we are worth.
Heck, with what they charge, they couldn't afford advertising in a phone book. They might charge enough for burger and fries and case of beer.
I understand the architect licensure path is narrow and rigorous. I don't believe a path to begin designing houses, light commercial and other such projects necessarily needs to be quite as rigorous as a licensed architect.
NCBDC certification is one national-wide certification not state by state certification (or license - which is a state or federal government issued certifiation).
Things will likely never be like it was before architectural licensing.
As for the incompetent, I am not out for them to end their career in this field but maybe require them to get some tutelage under someone who is competent and gain competency before going out and practice on your own.
We as design professionals (licensed or not) have an obligation to build into our legal system to protect the consumer/client from incompetency because it is a public harm to their health, safety and welfare.... physically, mentally and financially.
Aug 29, 14 1:32 pm ·
·
jla-x,
Rationale doesn't always make sense but they do. The point is more than con artists. Follow through the long post I made jut above and you'll get at the picture of what I am talking about that is beating down the price ceiling and putting us literally out of business because we can't possibly make a remotely a profit doing competent work.
Who is going to pay us $5K to $35K for an modest custom designed home when clients think what it costs is $20-$100 that their cousin, buddy or who knows what says they would be able to design the house for. (Obviously.... the incompetent)
There is several issues. Noted, the issue with moonlighters treating things as a gig, isn't helpful and they should be charging fees s a complete and true business.
You'd be investing the same amount of hours. It is going to cost you in paper because you are suppose to moonlight entirely on your own costs in your own place with complete separation of your moonlighting venture and employer so there is a separation of liability.
You aren't suppose to use the employer's computers and software. Only your own equipment, software, place of business, and materials. None of it to come from or at your employer's place of business.
That is another issue but we need to clean house these problems so we can have a reasonable career in this field and be able to charge enough for a sustainable business for the scope of services that we offer. We need to be more professional and more business savvy while we are at it.... EVEN for the moonlighting work.
Who is going to pay us $5K to $35K for an modest custom designed home when clients think what it costs is $20-$100 that their cousin, buddy or who knows what says they would be able to design the house for. (Obviously.... the incompetent
Is there some crack den somewhere where fiends are selling house plans for 20$ rocks?
"Yo son I got these house plans!...I need that crack!"
The $20 is figuratively used but the amount may vary but there are people who will sketch a drawing in 5 to 10 minutes and thinks its okay. But it costs the client more than that because it cost the client time which in turn means the client is paying more to get what they were wanting but time wasted means by the time they get started the price of things went up.
It also cost them more if you really think about the issue.
Ya, there's a guy that sells napkin sketches for 20$ on the corner. He's killing the architects and certified BDs out here. It's ironic really. He's a junkie that supports his habit by selling napkin sketches...by doing so...he put all the building designers out of business and now they are all homeless too. Some of them sell more than sketches if you know what I mean.... Basically, if we don't require everyone to become certified the terrorists win...or something like that.
"Uncertified building designers may carry the Ebola virus"
technically it's not a lie...
Aug 29, 14 5:14 pm ·
·
jla-x,
I know you are being facetious but the cost to professionally render competent building design services over the project duration are often well over several thousand dollars and the price ceiling in residential sector in recent years had been pressed to sub-$1000 level so how do we break even the cost? Have you thought that far?
Lets take the issue a little more serious and think about the issue. You can't offer to perform services at a price level the clients aren't willing to pay. If they aren't willing to pay more than $1000 for someone to design their home then how are we going to address that. You need to capitalize your financial loss in rendering design services so how do we address that. Not all of us has a corporate firm paying us a salary so that we can do a moonlight gig for dental floss and a willy nelson 'concert' ticket.
There are those of us that depends on designing homes and other buildings so we can hve food on the table and a roof over our heads. I do take threats on my occupation as a building designer seriously.
Some years ago, there was this guy in the state just to the north of me... Seattle area that was offering such services (actually architecture) for 5 cents. 5 cent architecture. You can easily see how that made a serious wreck on our ability to price services at even a break even point. Sorry but we can't live on lincoln coins.
Who is going to pay us $5K to $35K for an modest custom designed home when clients think what it costs is $20-$100 that their cousin, buddy or who knows what says they would be able to design the house for. (Obviously.... the incompetent)
Price is no guarantee of competence. Neither is a license.
From my perspective, the people degrading the value of the services which Licensed Architects provide are people trying to convince a client that being a certified registered professional building designer is just as good, or in any way comparable.
Or the contractors who tell the clients that they can build them a 3-unit residential building to lease out without involving an architect, because that is just going to add costs.
Or how about the building departments that give worksheets to homeowners, let them mix and match pre-drawn details, and the permit a new garage or home addition without it ever being looked at?
I am not against unlicensed professionals practicing architecture, but the system already in place - requiring explicit disclosure to the client and limiting the services to things that a licensed architect would not provide seems to work pretty well, at least in my direct experiences.
Do we really want to license people with the same abandon that is exercised with contractors? As Miles says, even now neither price nor licensure are guarantees of competence. Making more license categories and granting them to more people and with lower restrictions is not going to help whatsoever.
Aug 29, 14 7:37 pm ·
·
Archanonymous,
Then every licensed/registered architect better be absolutely more competent than every certified professional building designer if they want to see themselves as truly better.
A CPBD with 20-30 years experience is probably just as good at residential design as an architect with 20-30 years experience in residential design. The point is, knowledge and skill is never the piece of paper you have.
However, being a CPBD is enough to demonstrate competence in residential design.
Are you better than John Yeon? Show me. Are you better than Jim Lucia?
Are you better than ANY CPBD in residential design work? Show me. Show us all as a licensed architect.
The problem with the current path to licensure is that there is now only one path to licensure which requires everyone to go to univerisites which is now unrealistically too expensive. The loans are not able to be paid off at the pay rate of internship.
If I continue architectural licensing under the current rules, I would lose my home and everything because of the student loans. I would never make enough money.
Why would I do that to myself ????
NCARB doesn't have an experience path. BEA as it is would be practically a two decades long journey to get licensed in Oregon by requiring me to get initial licensed in another state that may have an experience based alternative path and then I would have to practice in that state for 10 years FULL-TIME just to get reciprocity where I live. It's ridiculous. Doesn't recognize other valid ways to getting the actual knowledge and skills one needs to be a competent architect.
NCARB has a long way to make it right.
That is just from my personal experience. It's f---ed up. Cost of attending college is outragiously expensive and a big part of it is the student housing part of the cost.
I been through that for 3 years at a public university in my own state where I would get in-state tuition not the even more expensive out-of-state tuition. I don't need $150,000 student loan debt on top of my ~$50,000 student loan debt.
If I can get business revenues back up, I can pay the debt off in about 5 years. However, it would take 20-30 years at the $31K pay level.
As for my AIBD membership and what the cost would be for NCBDC certification.... that's a small price to pay for in support of the organization that has so far been instrumental in keeping the exemptions in architectural licensing law therefore allowing me to earn an income designing buildings. It's been rough during the recession. What I can say is we need those not choosing to continue architectural licensure to consider NCBDC certification and strengthening the defense and protection of our occupation as unlicensed designers designing buildings while it needs to toughen up on keeping more of the most incompetent from designing buildings and also we need to cut down on treating moonlighting as gigs at ridiculously low pay.
Here is why.... if they can afford to build a $250,000 to over $500,000 home, don't you think the client can afford to pay you a fair amount. It might require some sort of payment plan with some clients. We need people charging what they are worth not "I'll just do this for a case of beer and a McDonald's meal." We need to be using written and signed contracts no more verbal contracts. Professional lawyers aren't going to go by verbal contracts.... why should we.
Aug 29, 14 8:39 pm ·
·
Miles,
There is no guarantee but higher probability of competent work is going to be performed because less cutting corners would happen. Lets think about it, builders paid at sub-standard level is going to have higher probability of cutting corners by sustituting components with substandard components than a builder who is paid properly at the standard level for the given scope of work.
Similar happens with us designers.
We don't do our best and most competent work for peanuts.
Fees are often maximized by cutting corners (and a variety of other techniques) whether they are high or low.
On the other side, people who care about their work do the very best they can despite the fee. If money is the primary goal, everything else will suffer.
Aug 29, 14 9:22 pm ·
·
Miles,
Money is the incentive we have to do our best. Human nature isn't that way that we will do our best and use up the pay they get to doing their best.
When we barely get paid enough for 10 to 20 hours at minimum wage... yet the client will demand 100-200 or more hours out of us.... why in the world did we go to college? If we are lucky, we get enough pay for 50 hours time but why did we go to college if we aren't getting better than minimum wage. If would be better off flipping burgers or being the receptionist than being the design professional?
People just not going to do their best work for 75 cents an hour. Not unless rent is reduced to 1/20th of what is now as well as food and everything else we pay money for. Sorry Miles, I didn't drink the b.s. Kool-Aid that money doesn't matter. I'm not a charity. I work for a living. Pay me good, I'll provide you a good service. Pay me crap, I won't do it for all the peanut shells you have in your pocket.
Quality of services comes with proper compensation. It's a two way road.
Otherwise, the prospective client like the employer who wants me to work for free can suck the bunghole. I will only do pro bono work or substantially pro bono work for non-profits and for those who have extraordinary circumstances like lost their business office and equipment to a fire. Unusual circumstances like that.... yes. Otherwise... no unless you are a non-profit.
Aug 29, 14 9:38 pm ·
·
However, cutting corners that I am talking about due to accepting or charging ridiculously low fees is blatant criminal negligence. People WILL die or have serious injuries because of such wanton disregard of any safety standards let or total ignorance of any law and leading to projects being built without permits.
This stuff is real and this stuff is what lowers the price ceiling of the market.
Homeowners shouldn't even design their own home without a design professional unless they are one because often they are stupidus ignoramus maximus.
Why should that be allowed. It harms others. We also need to protect people from themselves.
I can understand Richards’s frustration. It’s a dog-eat-dog world especially for the unlicensed. I still don’t understand who these scoundrels are. In my community there have been unlicensed guys going too far but with pressure to conform they all have become licensed and the problem seems to have gone away. Richard, worrying over guys working out of a spare bedroom for relatives and friends shouldn’t be a concern; they can never compete with you on volume and can’t provide the continuum of service necessary for anything significant. The problem as you highlight is that the prices these guys charge get to be the expected norm. I know that work in Astoria has to be lean but you just have to educate potential clients on the scope of services that you feel necessary and ask that they at least compare apples-to-apples before they decide. I think that in your case that strong marketing is the best defense against these guys. Just remember that moonlighters can’t come out of their closet and keeping an ad in your local paper is the best defense. I left this link elsewhere and it’s a good defense, use it to get face-to-face with people and once you do you won’t be having these problems.
Miles, I once had an old sage tell me that once you get under contact with an agreed fee, you put it in a drawer and just get the job done whatever the outcome. Being a business fanatic I just couldn’t get it under my skin but over time I learned that he was right. There is a lot than can be done to modulate expenses but it does not have to sacrifice the outcome.
Aug 29, 14 10:41 pm ·
·
Carrera,
Exactly good points there, Carrera. I know I can still do things luckily enough. Other areas can get pretty bad and I speak of how these issues crop up and places pressure on the price.
The key point to the dialogue is we have to be able to price so the services needed to be delivered can be delivered without rendering oneself into unrealistic prices.
I'll have a look through the link a bit. Moonlighters are the lesser of my problems where I am at.... luckily.... being outside the big metro area of Portland, Oregon by a couple hours drive. Which would minimize issues with Portland based interns/architectural staff moonlighting in my area being there is nearly zero architectural firms in the area.
In my particular case, it is a little different. Design-builders places some pressure but getting some cheap drafting student can be a bit problematic on one end. Other areas have more concentrated issues of people with no education whatsoever in this field picking up a $20 home design program and then doing the stuff for ridiculously low fees causing clients to view these prices as the norm and uses these guys as the sticks to beat us with. Saying, "I got this guy who will do this for a quarter of the price" or something like that to beat our prices down.
Definitely look forward to reading through the link given to look at strategies useful at dealing with these issues.
Miles,
Money is an incentive to deliver competent otherwise incompetent delivery is the outcome which we don't want. When prices get below any possibility to deliver services competently at the price level or you'll end up working for far less than minimum wage.
Cost of living isn't going to get less because I charge less. I have to reach a certain level. My point isn't about being "Bill Gates" rich. I'm talking about "well to do" income level commensurate of years of college education.
Reading about costs, I'm curious to know how much all of your typical fees are on here, and i'd like to see what Architects cost and what Building Designers cost.
Aug 30, 14 1:01 am ·
·
clairev,
Each of us costs varies as each of us charges a variable amount. Ideally, you want to make sure that your "direct labor" does not exceed 20% of your billed price if you want to have a contribution margin that will become a profit. In other words, you don't take all the profits to feed your face. You need to bill so you have a certain amount of profit that will be set aside as savings to support your business during lean times. The typical 2.5 to 3x multiplier of direct labor just doesn't provide you a proft margin that would be saved to grow your business.
Most people price themselves like a non-profit and therefore they don't make a profit because they don't charge enough because they don't charge as much for profit as their direct labor + overhead expenses & contributing operational costs during the project duration. Then they must reserve about 50% of income for IRS taxes and State taxes. You need to account for 0 deduction on taxes until you are actually preparing the taxes when you know what deductions you may make. You will likely end up with 35-45% of your income going to taxes.
The total lack of thinking about profit, taxes, etc. Most don't think about money to be put aside for the business in addition to paying themself.
Richard, for residential design, lets say a home costs my client 350,000 to build, after review, i decide i'll charge 2.5%-3% of the total, sometimes i'll come in with a fixed price per sq.ft. at around $1.50-$3.00, just on design alone. When it's a remodel or something of that sort, I go by the hour and costs range from $100-$150 per hour, usually i'll cap it. On commercial buildings my costs will be 4-5% of costs for design alone. now fyi, none of this is including structural engineering, civil engineering, soils testing, or administration, that would all be aside. I'll also throw in renderings which usually takes me 2-3 days normal 8-5 working hours at $40 an hour. Unfortunately, Sometimes i feel like i'm breaking even...
Those are my typical costs, they will vary though.
Let's see numbers guys.
Aug 30, 14 4:09 am ·
·
Even if I use a % of construction cost, I calculate number of hours estimated to do the word x direct labor cost and multiply by 5-7x. That becomes the estimated benchmark price. I then find a % of construction cost equal to or greater than the benchmark price.
I may also have a $ per sq.ft. but also priced to fit the price. The key is not price things as if you are some sort of non-profit.
Clairev, I may be mistaken but I think your pants just fell down. You defended yourself numerous times on here saying you were not licensed and did not do commercial work, yet you just said “On commercial buildings my costs will be 4-5% of costs for the design alone”? Hey Richard, I think I just found one of those scoundrels you’ve been taking about…..”came across her on a roan goin’ south….”
You must be really really really good to command that kind of premium.
Aug 30, 14 10:24 am ·
·
Carrera,
I wouldn't always say the person is a scoundrel but on the other hand the low ball fee may or may not be the direct fault but the product of a market place where the prices are driven down by the race to the bottom on fee pricing.
People giving away services for next to nothing or at overly discounted levels is harmful to the profession but for clairev's sake.... the redeeming grace is willingness to learn and figure out how to get the most you can get for the services from the client ethically... of course.
He/She could be an unfortunate that got caught up in the race to the bottom beginning practice already after fees had been driven low in the market place. The problem of the scoundrels alone is nothing but it becomes a problems if we try to undercut each other just to get the client.
What would happen in such a market is a shake out (in most cases) but the thing with sole-proprietors are they somehow can stay in business just because their heart is still beating while in other fields with corporations would be closing their doors.
Cairev, I suggest you read and listen to Enoch Sear's Business of Architecture and Mark LePage's EntrepreneurArchitect and try to look at how you can apply the good information to your practice.
The goal isn't to be the cheapest but give the quality of value. It doesn't matter if you are licensed or not.
In my state, I can do both residential and small commercial projects. Sure, I compete with architects on projects when they happen. It just is.
However, I am still operating within the confines of the law where I am at. My goal and point isn't, I am going to be cheaper than an architect just because I don't have a license. Not having a license doesn't mean I can't deliver the same quality of work. Of course to deliver the quality of work and also function as a business, I need to break even on costs because there is economic realities that I have to take into account or I get seriously screwed over.
It matters.
Therefore, if we do move away from a race to the bottom in pricing our services, we will be able to deliver better work and change expectations of the norm.
We all know our grocery store prices for milk is up compared to it was in the 1980s. The higher prices is the new norm. Just like the cost of gasoline. It's the new norm. Sure, it fluctuates some and that is market dynamics. So the marketplace will fluctuate in our occupation but it generally shouldn't. In addition, we should only price fixed fees / percentages of construction cost or $ per sq.ft. fees based based on the figures after performing estimation of the scope of work, costs (both non-direct labot project costs and contributing operational costs) with float/contingency, direct labor cost with float/contingency, contribution margin and taxes. Contributing operational costs would be like rent, utilities, etc. that is distributed across all concurrent projects. The contributing amount being for each project would take into account concurrent projects and periods of non-concurrent projects over project timeline. You price at the beginning on an estimate.
If you come under estimation by getting things done faster than schedule, so be it. More profit.
Sometimes you can do a Billed Hourly rate model. Instead of estimating exactly how much time (unless you specify a "not to exceed" Guaranteed Maximum Price), you just multiply direct labor by a multiplier to cover costs, taxes and factor for contigency so that you will be able to build capital. That is what the business of architecture/building design is about so you have money to soften the blow of lean times. It is cyclical and if you don't have capital (nest egg or "rainy day funds"), you'll be hurting in the next lean time.
It is not a matter of if but a matter of when the next recession that impacts architecture/building design. They may not always be as severe as the one we experienced but it ma still hurt you as a business.
Aug 30, 14 10:46 am ·
·
Miles,
2-3% of the total or construction cost isn't that much. In fact, some of you guys get the pricing backwards. You charge a higher percentage in ratio to the construction cost for a smaller project like a residential dwelling then you do for a bigger project like a school builidng. 2-3% of construction cost for a 100,000 sq.ft. school building is a big chunk of change considering you could design a 100,000 sq.ft. school building for maybe 1.5 to 2 times the number of hours that it takes to design a 5,000-7,500 sq.ft. high end custom home.
Yet, you make several times as much money.
Yes, you would charge a lower percentage of construction cost for a modest design then a high end design. Of course. It isn't unusual for high end custom of a 2,500 sq.ft. home to be in the 15% of construction cost range.
The cost for you to render services does not linearly increase with the size of the project.
The Word "Architectural"?
"Hi everybody!" "Hi Dr. Nick"
I will start calling myself a doctor from here on out...
On finding new revenue streams...good point! how is it good for architects to both ignore small jobs like custom homes and interior architecture and vernacular architecture (anything that doesn't need a STAMP, which is somehow now the definition of architecture) AND deny that anyone else dare work on these jobs? That stuff can just fall off the face of the earth that doesn't need a stamp? Turn off the software and go outside sometime, ok? There is a lot of "architecture" that doesn't get stamped, that stuff that architects won't touch cause they won't get out of bed for less than $10k in fees. The profession leaves big gaps in serving the needs of people and then want to legislate that no one fill that gap because of the need to protect egos? How is that for protecting the "welfare" of the people.
Is it really only architecture if it is stamped? I think not. There certainly are some unrigorous thinkers (drones) here.
^ And then people sit around and wonder why the public doesn't think architects are awesome and why the public thinks architects are out of touch and egotistical? Apparently, it is the law. lol
Volunteer,
Your problem with AIA is between you and AIA not me. I am not AIA. Don't confuse me with someone who gives a sh_t about your petty problem(s) with AIA.
Volunteer,
NCARB is the council of architectural licensing boards of the United States. We used to and still have with states reciprocity agreements between states. NCARB established a model law and the ARE and so forth so that there was a universal licensing requirements. As for NCARB cert., it would expedite your reciprocity. Otherwise, you would have to organize your file at least as good as NCARB would. Anyway, without NCARB, you would have to essentially take a state Architectural Review Exam (like it was before the NCARB's ARE replaced state administered Architectural Review Exam) every time you go from one state to another unless the exam was equivalent and covered which would require agreement between each state which is not simple and also were difficult because reciprocity would require that the licensing requirement was equal or equivalent. If one state was more relaxed on the requirement and another state was very rigid, it would be hard if not impossible to get reciprocity in the strict and rigid state when coming from meeting the requirement of the relaxed and easy-going state. This was problematic in mobility. You would be denied reciprocity.
NCARB helped to minimize this issue.
Otherwise, each state may have vastly different requirements and that would make hell for reciprocity.
Tint, that's exactly the point. You nailed it. The restriction of words is not restricting the work from being done but instead just changing the name of it. This is important because when someone designs a small courtyard fountain for mrs smith, and she is very happy with the outcome, and she refers you to mr brown as her artist/designer, then that very personal and quaint form of public relations is not being connected to the arch profession. What is a fountain? It is not a building, but historically we can make a strong case that a fountain is architectural. IMO this type of promotion, an immersion in small things, is what's needed in the field because most people have never worked with an architect/ architectural designer and see them as elitists. There is a huge disconnect between the public and architecture field. Protecting words like architectural is consequently creating different fields and wekening the profession rather than side/specialty fields under the same commonly understood umbrella term. We should be broadening the field not narrowing it. This is a problem that I feel should be addressed.
^ high biodiversity ecosystems are more resilient/stable.
Jla-x, you and I like to use our education to see things instead of hide things. In that case, I'm glad I don't fit in with the others if that is what they want to do.
Do you recall Carrera and I talking about an architect who does house call consults for $250? This was an idea I had myself and I could do and I am interested in doing, the architecture without a stamp (not interested in being a corporate stamper), but I'm doing other things where is lower hanging fruit where I don't have to fit an old-man ego-based requirement first. No thanks.
It is hard to watch an entire group of lemmings (that I care about) step off a cliff.
tint,
Consider NCBDC certification. You'll have a stamp that you can use and the title "Certified Professional Building Designer" or CPBD after your name. Short hand, you can say Building Designer or say..... I design houses and light commercial (in connection with clients / prospective client projects where the project is located in a state where you may perform light commercial work such as small restaurants and other such projects.
It can help you work through some local authorities, homeowner associations, etc. where they would want someone with a license or similar certifications that would demonstrate that you aren't just some fly by night.
Just one such project where you can get through the 'red tape' they my put up on those with no license or certification, will probably pay for certification dues.
We should be broadening the field not narrowing it. This is a problem that I feel should be addressed.
This problem IS being addressed. In my comments and others' on the articles below, and on many other similar threads here on Archinect since at least January, I and others have been pointing out the many changes that are coming as NCARB seeks to broaden entry into the field.
NCARB Announces Program for Licensure Upon Graduation
NCARB Announcement Rubs Archinectors Both Ways
NCARB Reveals Major Reinventions for the IDP and ARE
Lemmings? Maybe lemmings are those who refuse to listen when presented with factual information that goes against their personal biases?
Thank you Donna, it IS being addressed. You are right. Thank you.
Richard, I have work and if I get more or get work I can't do, I hire people, I can't do everything anyways and designer works fine for me, thanks though.
Donna, I do remember you talking about the AIA addressing this. I hope something comes out of it. I have little hope in NCARB changing anything major any time soon.
RB, do they pay you to try to get people to sign up with the NCBDC, or are you just hoping that if more people do it, it will mean something?
archanonymous,
Nope. However, more building designers should pursue certification because if we don't work for a way to ultimately eliminate or reduce the riff raff of people designing buildings when they are utterly incompetent to do so while charging fees like $20 for entire design and horribly distorting public perception and end up making it absolutely impossible to make a living equal to or above federal minimum wage.... licensed architect will be responsible for removing exemption to architectural licensing in ALL of the states in the next 25-50 years while requiring everyone who wants to practice architecture to have a masters of architecture.
Regulations are going to get more tougher and licensed architects will be writing bills to make designing without being licensed as an architect.... impossible. Every state will be like Illinois and there will be no exceptions/exemptions and the path to become licensed will be longer, more expensive and more difficult in the long run.
I'm trying to find a way for those of us who can't afford to get a $250,000 student loan to get licensed as an architect.
The benefit as far as I am concern is you still having a career without having an architect license but in the process, we need to do some serious house cleaning because there are too many in this field who has no knowledge or skill to be designing any building unsupervised.
Our career future depends on it.
I read Donna’s suggested links to past discussions and found them well written and insightful…give them a read.
I think the title of the NCARB release is intriguing but its face will not fly. I hang my hat on Donna’s statement there:
“I …..was hoping the changes at NCARB etc. would focus more on the use of the title rather than the registration, at least as a first step. I had hoped that use of the term Architect would be granted to accredited-degree holders, with the term Registered Architect, and the stamping capabilities, reserved for those who take the exam. This would fall in line with most municipalities' code laws, which allow smaller projects to be unstamped.”
It is obvious that the current path is abhorred and in need of reform. Spending 15 years to be called anything is ridiculous. The idea of shortening the IDP path is what I think will result and that is a great thing. I am sorry to bring this back up but the word Paraprofessional should be employed. It should be:
Donna Sink , Architect – Paraprofessional
Or
Donna Sink, Architect
Being a Paraprofessional should be a licensed event offered after graduation. There is a myriad of work for those. I don’t believe that you need to be fully licensed to do almost 40% of the work out there…housing, strip malls, build-outs and such. And who is going to do all the small stuff that exists like designing beams for builders, pulling permits for beauty shops and helping the public with the small things? Licensed architects in my area shun such work and I’ve had to help many pro-bono out of shame for my profession.
Going for your license should not be restricted to time…if you pass you’re-in. As said, the market will decide who does what. Just remember that it was licensed guys who sealed the bridge at Hyatt, this idea of health and welfare is relative and should not be a barrier to doing work.
I think there is change in the wind, be patient and it will come, regulations are stiffening and they need capacity to fulfill the increasing need and NCARB’s notion is a signal that it is coming.
Just to be clear above, I am not saying all architects will be involved in removing exemptions. It will be a minority just as it was in the beginning and every amendment to the licensing laws for architecture because the process is architect driven not the general public because they simply don't care because the majority of the public doesn't even know architectural licensing laws exists let alone even think about it.
This is because nearly no one is alive from when they were adopted.
I feel, if building designers are to exists in 50 years, it will have to be in the form of certified building designers being recognized as possibly licensed building designers. After all, it was the certified building designer program of AIBD/NCBDC that established the registered building designer license tier in California that once used to exist and removed by architects on the California Architect board. However, if we would be recognized and established as another licensed/registered field like Licensed/Registered Interior Designers, we would want to recognize programs like NCBDC certification because A) it is a NATIONAL certification and B) it would establish a uniform baseline qualification requirement and C) it isn't that hard.
The only reason building designers that haven't considered NCBDC certification is because they don't feel the need to be certified unless it is required. Then what is the point of going through LEED accreditation when it isn't required and that it doesn't demonstrate any competence to design buildings at all. Why not support the only certification of building designers in the United States other than the licensing requirement for becoming an architect which will become tougher and harder to become licensed in the long term. Sure, we have cycles of increasing and decreasing requirements like what NCARB is doing but lets look at the matters in the long run across a 50 year and 100 year perspective.
In the past 35 years, we have reduced paths to licensure. Increased time to complete licensure with IDP. We have made going to college/universities the only path to licensure therefore mandating students to have student loans because there is no way to go to college in 2014 without getting student loans unless you are independently wealthy. Our payrate has been flatline since the 1970s all the while inflation devalues the U.S. dollar and cost of everything goes up and cost to attend college gone up at rates of multiple times the rate of inflation.
In other words, we pushed for options that is unrealistic and senseless. For altruism? Nope. Doubt that. You really believe the people who proposed these changes in the past are angelic altruistic people? I doubt that. I believe they could foreseen their multi-prong approach to make the path longer and slower and more costly as a ploy to stifle licensing of new architects by the minority that are most vocal and takes the leadership.
The majority doesn't do anything on these regards... sadly.
However, unlicensed designers who undergoes NCBDC certifications takes that step as a symbol to indicate to the public that they subscribe to a code of ethics and conduct, they demonstrate verifiably by peer review that they possess a certain level of competence.
Sure, your work must speak for itself but people don't always see that or understand how to view the work. The ignorant prospective clients (ie. public) doesn't know how to judge the quality of a person's work. After all, they don't know what is good or bad work. The uncertified only can rely on his/her work and ability to convince the client to contract for his/her services. The ignorant client only has his/her word. The con man only needs to convince the sucker that he is good. Oh, he is good.... at being a con artist. However, still produce crud.
Sure, certification isn't perfect nor is licensing. At least, the certification is a means to set you apart from the con artists and riff raff designers who doesn't belong designing buildings of any kind.
Richard, I have heard you say more than once that you and others need “…certification (as) a means to set you apart from the con artist and riff raff designers who doesn’t belong designing buildings of any kind.” Who are these undesirables and where are they designing buildings? Are you suggesting that there is a population of people who are non-graduate & unlicensed doing work? What kind of work, besides houses?
Con artists like making quick money, why the fongul would they choose design as their scam of choice which is not quick and which generates little- no money.
I know plenty of licensed architects who make con artist seem like an honorable profession. Being licensed doesn't make them more honest or better designers - to the contrary, it is a false certification.
number 2 isn't licensed ?!?
Carrera,
I'm not saying that having a degree or not. There are con artists but the issue isn't with just con artists. The point is there are a population of people designing buildings that shouldn't be due to lack of knowledge and skill. I don't care if they get the knowledge & skill through a college program or through an experience path of learning such as apprenticing.
The people degrading the value of our services are people who buys a $20 software off the shelf of a store and plays with it for a weekend thinking they can go out designing buildings for their friends, family and their friends and so on. Charging ridiculous fees.
There is also another problem with architectural design professional (employed and unemployed...... licensed and unlicensed) doing a moonlighting commission with a client charging ridiculously low fees because they treat it as a gig not as a real business as it should be. These combined only serves to lower the price ceiling of the market to a point where it can become impossible to function as a business making a profit.
If you are unlicensed, you only have houses or if you are lucky, small commercial projects and farm buildings. You don't have the schools, the healthcare market and so forth. You don't have those markets as an unlicensed designer. There is a supply vs. demand problem as well as poor business sense in our field with people.
Then there are a population of architects that wants to remove the exemption with total disregard of the unlicensed designers because they simply don't care. They feel, if the unlicensed designer wants to continue practice that they just have to get licensed which may mean that they have to shut down their business, go to college for several years, then spend between 5 to 10 or more years to complete IDP and take the ARE.
I don't agree the one path to licensure concept as the only means for someone to be competent. There are those who have achieved it through experience.
NCBDC certification will accept experience based. The key is demonstration of knowledge and skill. Ideally, people at least spend some years apprenticing/interning or whatever... getting experience and knowledge under the tutelage of an architect, engineer, or certified building designer that encourages self-directed learning so the person can become competent to begin working on their own and they continue the life long learning to become better at the art, craft and science of designing buildings and maybe even constructing buildings.
As the unlicensed, we have no minimum standard of competence except that which would be demonstrated through certification and there is the very vocal group of architect seeking to put us out of business by legislating us out of business by removing exemptions for us to practice. All it takes is an afternoon to draft up a legislative bill and then getting it to the legislators of a state and then getting it passed while keeping a low key about it because a lot of things get passed because we don't know about it until after it has already been ruled upon. The states don't do a good job of publicizing the bills and so forth.
Then we would be criminals if we try to continue practice. I think it is important for us to find a solution to the matter strengthen the organizations that are out there helping to keep our occupation as designers alive. AIBD and its NCBDC has been doing that since the 1950s.
My argument isn't against all architects. There are many architects who aren't out against building designers. There is enough vocal ones that are and they tend to be the type that gets themselves into positions of power & influence and only needs the few to achieve their goals.
To answer the question specifically where are the riff raffs, in every city & town in every state where there is exemptions and possibly in all the states entirely. We have this problem, everywhere. The con artists contigent is a smaller percentage of the riff raff. There is a lot of undesireable, incompetent people taking work away from us competent, costing 'clients' money for these services incompetently rendered. There is alot of them out there who comes through the backdoor channels to the clients. They maybe the client's cousin who says, they can do it for $20. How hard can it be? They maybe a buddy, a cousin or what not who will undermine us professionals from getting the pay we are worth.
Heck, with what they charge, they couldn't afford advertising in a phone book. They might charge enough for burger and fries and case of beer.
I understand the architect licensure path is narrow and rigorous. I don't believe a path to begin designing houses, light commercial and other such projects necessarily needs to be quite as rigorous as a licensed architect.
NCBDC certification is one national-wide certification not state by state certification (or license - which is a state or federal government issued certifiation).
Things will likely never be like it was before architectural licensing.
As for the incompetent, I am not out for them to end their career in this field but maybe require them to get some tutelage under someone who is competent and gain competency before going out and practice on your own.
We as design professionals (licensed or not) have an obligation to build into our legal system to protect the consumer/client from incompetency because it is a public harm to their health, safety and welfare.... physically, mentally and financially.
jla-x,
Rationale doesn't always make sense but they do. The point is more than con artists. Follow through the long post I made jut above and you'll get at the picture of what I am talking about that is beating down the price ceiling and putting us literally out of business because we can't possibly make a remotely a profit doing competent work.
Who is going to pay us $5K to $35K for an modest custom designed home when clients think what it costs is $20-$100 that their cousin, buddy or who knows what says they would be able to design the house for. (Obviously.... the incompetent)
There is several issues. Noted, the issue with moonlighters treating things as a gig, isn't helpful and they should be charging fees s a complete and true business.
You'd be investing the same amount of hours. It is going to cost you in paper because you are suppose to moonlight entirely on your own costs in your own place with complete separation of your moonlighting venture and employer so there is a separation of liability.
You aren't suppose to use the employer's computers and software. Only your own equipment, software, place of business, and materials. None of it to come from or at your employer's place of business.
That is another issue but we need to clean house these problems so we can have a reasonable career in this field and be able to charge enough for a sustainable business for the scope of services that we offer. We need to be more professional and more business savvy while we are at it.... EVEN for the moonlighting work.
Who is going to pay us $5K to $35K for an modest custom designed home when clients think what it costs is $20-$100 that their cousin, buddy or who knows what says they would be able to design the house for. (Obviously.... the incompetent
Is there some crack den somewhere where fiends are selling house plans for 20$ rocks?
"Yo son I got these house plans!...I need that crack!"
The $20 is figuratively used but the amount may vary but there are people who will sketch a drawing in 5 to 10 minutes and thinks its okay. But it costs the client more than that because it cost the client time which in turn means the client is paying more to get what they were wanting but time wasted means by the time they get started the price of things went up.
It also cost them more if you really think about the issue.
Ya, there's a guy that sells napkin sketches for 20$ on the corner. He's killing the architects and certified BDs out here. It's ironic really. He's a junkie that supports his habit by selling napkin sketches...by doing so...he put all the building designers out of business and now they are all homeless too. Some of them sell more than sketches if you know what I mean.... Basically, if we don't require everyone to become certified the terrorists win...or something like that.
Certify building designers or the terrorists win!
That's a good slogan...you can use it if you would like.
Hey here's another catchy slogan for you...
"Uncertified designers kill more people than AIDS"
"Uncertified building designers may carry the Ebola virus"
technically it's not a lie...
jla-x,
I know you are being facetious but the cost to professionally render competent building design services over the project duration are often well over several thousand dollars and the price ceiling in residential sector in recent years had been pressed to sub-$1000 level so how do we break even the cost? Have you thought that far?
Lets take the issue a little more serious and think about the issue. You can't offer to perform services at a price level the clients aren't willing to pay. If they aren't willing to pay more than $1000 for someone to design their home then how are we going to address that. You need to capitalize your financial loss in rendering design services so how do we address that. Not all of us has a corporate firm paying us a salary so that we can do a moonlight gig for dental floss and a willy nelson 'concert' ticket.
There are those of us that depends on designing homes and other buildings so we can hve food on the table and a roof over our heads. I do take threats on my occupation as a building designer seriously.
Some years ago, there was this guy in the state just to the north of me... Seattle area that was offering such services (actually architecture) for 5 cents. 5 cent architecture. You can easily see how that made a serious wreck on our ability to price services at even a break even point. Sorry but we can't live on lincoln coins.
License?
Who is going to pay us $5K to $35K for an modest custom designed home when clients think what it costs is $20-$100 that their cousin, buddy or who knows what says they would be able to design the house for. (Obviously.... the incompetent)
Price is no guarantee of competence. Neither is a license.
RB, (can I call you Dick?)
From my perspective, the people degrading the value of the services which Licensed Architects provide are people trying to convince a client that being a certified registered professional building designer is just as good, or in any way comparable.
Or the contractors who tell the clients that they can build them a 3-unit residential building to lease out without involving an architect, because that is just going to add costs.
Or how about the building departments that give worksheets to homeowners, let them mix and match pre-drawn details, and the permit a new garage or home addition without it ever being looked at?
I am not against unlicensed professionals practicing architecture, but the system already in place - requiring explicit disclosure to the client and limiting the services to things that a licensed architect would not provide seems to work pretty well, at least in my direct experiences.
Do we really want to license people with the same abandon that is exercised with contractors? As Miles says, even now neither price nor licensure are guarantees of competence. Making more license categories and granting them to more people and with lower restrictions is not going to help whatsoever.
Archanonymous,
Then every licensed/registered architect better be absolutely more competent than every certified professional building designer if they want to see themselves as truly better.
A CPBD with 20-30 years experience is probably just as good at residential design as an architect with 20-30 years experience in residential design. The point is, knowledge and skill is never the piece of paper you have.
However, being a CPBD is enough to demonstrate competence in residential design.
Are you better than John Yeon? Show me. Are you better than Jim Lucia?
Are you better than ANY CPBD in residential design work? Show me. Show us all as a licensed architect.
The problem with the current path to licensure is that there is now only one path to licensure which requires everyone to go to univerisites which is now unrealistically too expensive. The loans are not able to be paid off at the pay rate of internship.
If I continue architectural licensing under the current rules, I would lose my home and everything because of the student loans. I would never make enough money.
Why would I do that to myself ????
NCARB doesn't have an experience path. BEA as it is would be practically a two decades long journey to get licensed in Oregon by requiring me to get initial licensed in another state that may have an experience based alternative path and then I would have to practice in that state for 10 years FULL-TIME just to get reciprocity where I live. It's ridiculous. Doesn't recognize other valid ways to getting the actual knowledge and skills one needs to be a competent architect.
NCARB has a long way to make it right.
That is just from my personal experience. It's f---ed up. Cost of attending college is outragiously expensive and a big part of it is the student housing part of the cost.
I been through that for 3 years at a public university in my own state where I would get in-state tuition not the even more expensive out-of-state tuition. I don't need $150,000 student loan debt on top of my ~$50,000 student loan debt.
If I can get business revenues back up, I can pay the debt off in about 5 years. However, it would take 20-30 years at the $31K pay level.
As for my AIBD membership and what the cost would be for NCBDC certification.... that's a small price to pay for in support of the organization that has so far been instrumental in keeping the exemptions in architectural licensing law therefore allowing me to earn an income designing buildings. It's been rough during the recession. What I can say is we need those not choosing to continue architectural licensure to consider NCBDC certification and strengthening the defense and protection of our occupation as unlicensed designers designing buildings while it needs to toughen up on keeping more of the most incompetent from designing buildings and also we need to cut down on treating moonlighting as gigs at ridiculously low pay.
Here is why.... if they can afford to build a $250,000 to over $500,000 home, don't you think the client can afford to pay you a fair amount. It might require some sort of payment plan with some clients. We need people charging what they are worth not "I'll just do this for a case of beer and a McDonald's meal." We need to be using written and signed contracts no more verbal contracts. Professional lawyers aren't going to go by verbal contracts.... why should we.
Miles,
There is no guarantee but higher probability of competent work is going to be performed because less cutting corners would happen. Lets think about it, builders paid at sub-standard level is going to have higher probability of cutting corners by sustituting components with substandard components than a builder who is paid properly at the standard level for the given scope of work.
Similar happens with us designers.
We don't do our best and most competent work for peanuts.
Fees are often maximized by cutting corners (and a variety of other techniques) whether they are high or low.
On the other side, people who care about their work do the very best they can despite the fee. If money is the primary goal, everything else will suffer.
Miles,
Money is the incentive we have to do our best. Human nature isn't that way that we will do our best and use up the pay they get to doing their best.
When we barely get paid enough for 10 to 20 hours at minimum wage... yet the client will demand 100-200 or more hours out of us.... why in the world did we go to college? If we are lucky, we get enough pay for 50 hours time but why did we go to college if we aren't getting better than minimum wage. If would be better off flipping burgers or being the receptionist than being the design professional?
People just not going to do their best work for 75 cents an hour. Not unless rent is reduced to 1/20th of what is now as well as food and everything else we pay money for. Sorry Miles, I didn't drink the b.s. Kool-Aid that money doesn't matter. I'm not a charity. I work for a living. Pay me good, I'll provide you a good service. Pay me crap, I won't do it for all the peanut shells you have in your pocket.
Quality of services comes with proper compensation. It's a two way road.
Otherwise, the prospective client like the employer who wants me to work for free can suck the bunghole. I will only do pro bono work or substantially pro bono work for non-profits and for those who have extraordinary circumstances like lost their business office and equipment to a fire. Unusual circumstances like that.... yes. Otherwise... no unless you are a non-profit.
However, cutting corners that I am talking about due to accepting or charging ridiculously low fees is blatant criminal negligence. People WILL die or have serious injuries because of such wanton disregard of any safety standards let or total ignorance of any law and leading to projects being built without permits.
This stuff is real and this stuff is what lowers the price ceiling of the market.
Homeowners shouldn't even design their own home without a design professional unless they are one because often they are stupidus ignoramus maximus.
Why should that be allowed. It harms others. We also need to protect people from themselves.
I have heard that certified building designers come in your house and steal your cats. It's a real problem.
Money is the incentive we have to do our best.
Money is the incentive you have to do your best.
I can understand Richards’s frustration. It’s a dog-eat-dog world especially for the unlicensed. I still don’t understand who these scoundrels are. In my community there have been unlicensed guys going too far but with pressure to conform they all have become licensed and the problem seems to have gone away. Richard, worrying over guys working out of a spare bedroom for relatives and friends shouldn’t be a concern; they can never compete with you on volume and can’t provide the continuum of service necessary for anything significant. The problem as you highlight is that the prices these guys charge get to be the expected norm. I know that work in Astoria has to be lean but you just have to educate potential clients on the scope of services that you feel necessary and ask that they at least compare apples-to-apples before they decide. I think that in your case that strong marketing is the best defense against these guys. Just remember that moonlighters can’t come out of their closet and keeping an ad in your local paper is the best defense. I left this link elsewhere and it’s a good defense, use it to get face-to-face with people and once you do you won’t be having these problems.
http://swinburnearchitect.com/wordpress/?page_id=1184
Miles, I once had an old sage tell me that once you get under contact with an agreed fee, you put it in a drawer and just get the job done whatever the outcome. Being a business fanatic I just couldn’t get it under my skin but over time I learned that he was right. There is a lot than can be done to modulate expenses but it does not have to sacrifice the outcome.
Carrera,
Exactly good points there, Carrera. I know I can still do things luckily enough. Other areas can get pretty bad and I speak of how these issues crop up and places pressure on the price.
The key point to the dialogue is we have to be able to price so the services needed to be delivered can be delivered without rendering oneself into unrealistic prices.
I'll have a look through the link a bit. Moonlighters are the lesser of my problems where I am at.... luckily.... being outside the big metro area of Portland, Oregon by a couple hours drive. Which would minimize issues with Portland based interns/architectural staff moonlighting in my area being there is nearly zero architectural firms in the area.
In my particular case, it is a little different. Design-builders places some pressure but getting some cheap drafting student can be a bit problematic on one end. Other areas have more concentrated issues of people with no education whatsoever in this field picking up a $20 home design program and then doing the stuff for ridiculously low fees causing clients to view these prices as the norm and uses these guys as the sticks to beat us with. Saying, "I got this guy who will do this for a quarter of the price" or something like that to beat our prices down.
Definitely look forward to reading through the link given to look at strategies useful at dealing with these issues.
Miles,
Money is an incentive to deliver competent otherwise incompetent delivery is the outcome which we don't want. When prices get below any possibility to deliver services competently at the price level or you'll end up working for far less than minimum wage.
Cost of living isn't going to get less because I charge less. I have to reach a certain level. My point isn't about being "Bill Gates" rich. I'm talking about "well to do" income level commensurate of years of college education.
Reading about costs, I'm curious to know how much all of your typical fees are on here, and i'd like to see what Architects cost and what Building Designers cost.
clairev,
Each of us costs varies as each of us charges a variable amount. Ideally, you want to make sure that your "direct labor" does not exceed 20% of your billed price if you want to have a contribution margin that will become a profit. In other words, you don't take all the profits to feed your face. You need to bill so you have a certain amount of profit that will be set aside as savings to support your business during lean times. The typical 2.5 to 3x multiplier of direct labor just doesn't provide you a proft margin that would be saved to grow your business.
Most people price themselves like a non-profit and therefore they don't make a profit because they don't charge enough because they don't charge as much for profit as their direct labor + overhead expenses & contributing operational costs during the project duration. Then they must reserve about 50% of income for IRS taxes and State taxes. You need to account for 0 deduction on taxes until you are actually preparing the taxes when you know what deductions you may make. You will likely end up with 35-45% of your income going to taxes.
The total lack of thinking about profit, taxes, etc. Most don't think about money to be put aside for the business in addition to paying themself.
Richard, for residential design, lets say a home costs my client 350,000 to build, after review, i decide i'll charge 2.5%-3% of the total, sometimes i'll come in with a fixed price per sq.ft. at around $1.50-$3.00, just on design alone. When it's a remodel or something of that sort, I go by the hour and costs range from $100-$150 per hour, usually i'll cap it. On commercial buildings my costs will be 4-5% of costs for design alone. now fyi, none of this is including structural engineering, civil engineering, soils testing, or administration, that would all be aside. I'll also throw in renderings which usually takes me 2-3 days normal 8-5 working hours at $40 an hour. Unfortunately, Sometimes i feel like i'm breaking even...
Those are my typical costs, they will vary though.
Let's see numbers guys.
Even if I use a % of construction cost, I calculate number of hours estimated to do the word x direct labor cost and multiply by 5-7x. That becomes the estimated benchmark price. I then find a % of construction cost equal to or greater than the benchmark price.
I may also have a $ per sq.ft. but also priced to fit the price. The key is not price things as if you are some sort of non-profit.
Clairev, I may be mistaken but I think your pants just fell down. You defended yourself numerous times on here saying you were not licensed and did not do commercial work, yet you just said “On commercial buildings my costs will be 4-5% of costs for the design alone”? Hey Richard, I think I just found one of those scoundrels you’ve been taking about…..”came across her on a roan goin’ south….”
i'll charge 2.5%-3% of the total
You must be really really really good to command that kind of premium.
Carrera,
I wouldn't always say the person is a scoundrel but on the other hand the low ball fee may or may not be the direct fault but the product of a market place where the prices are driven down by the race to the bottom on fee pricing.
People giving away services for next to nothing or at overly discounted levels is harmful to the profession but for clairev's sake.... the redeeming grace is willingness to learn and figure out how to get the most you can get for the services from the client ethically... of course.
He/She could be an unfortunate that got caught up in the race to the bottom beginning practice already after fees had been driven low in the market place. The problem of the scoundrels alone is nothing but it becomes a problems if we try to undercut each other just to get the client.
What would happen in such a market is a shake out (in most cases) but the thing with sole-proprietors are they somehow can stay in business just because their heart is still beating while in other fields with corporations would be closing their doors.
Cairev, I suggest you read and listen to Enoch Sear's Business of Architecture and Mark LePage's EntrepreneurArchitect and try to look at how you can apply the good information to your practice.
The goal isn't to be the cheapest but give the quality of value. It doesn't matter if you are licensed or not.
In my state, I can do both residential and small commercial projects. Sure, I compete with architects on projects when they happen. It just is.
However, I am still operating within the confines of the law where I am at. My goal and point isn't, I am going to be cheaper than an architect just because I don't have a license. Not having a license doesn't mean I can't deliver the same quality of work. Of course to deliver the quality of work and also function as a business, I need to break even on costs because there is economic realities that I have to take into account or I get seriously screwed over.
It matters.
Therefore, if we do move away from a race to the bottom in pricing our services, we will be able to deliver better work and change expectations of the norm.
We all know our grocery store prices for milk is up compared to it was in the 1980s. The higher prices is the new norm. Just like the cost of gasoline. It's the new norm. Sure, it fluctuates some and that is market dynamics. So the marketplace will fluctuate in our occupation but it generally shouldn't. In addition, we should only price fixed fees / percentages of construction cost or $ per sq.ft. fees based based on the figures after performing estimation of the scope of work, costs (both non-direct labot project costs and contributing operational costs) with float/contingency, direct labor cost with float/contingency, contribution margin and taxes. Contributing operational costs would be like rent, utilities, etc. that is distributed across all concurrent projects. The contributing amount being for each project would take into account concurrent projects and periods of non-concurrent projects over project timeline. You price at the beginning on an estimate.
If you come under estimation by getting things done faster than schedule, so be it. More profit.
Sometimes you can do a Billed Hourly rate model. Instead of estimating exactly how much time (unless you specify a "not to exceed" Guaranteed Maximum Price), you just multiply direct labor by a multiplier to cover costs, taxes and factor for contigency so that you will be able to build capital. That is what the business of architecture/building design is about so you have money to soften the blow of lean times. It is cyclical and if you don't have capital (nest egg or "rainy day funds"), you'll be hurting in the next lean time.
It is not a matter of if but a matter of when the next recession that impacts architecture/building design. They may not always be as severe as the one we experienced but it ma still hurt you as a business.
Miles,
2-3% of the total or construction cost isn't that much. In fact, some of you guys get the pricing backwards. You charge a higher percentage in ratio to the construction cost for a smaller project like a residential dwelling then you do for a bigger project like a school builidng. 2-3% of construction cost for a 100,000 sq.ft. school building is a big chunk of change considering you could design a 100,000 sq.ft. school building for maybe 1.5 to 2 times the number of hours that it takes to design a 5,000-7,500 sq.ft. high end custom home.
Yet, you make several times as much money.
Yes, you would charge a lower percentage of construction cost for a modest design then a high end design. Of course. It isn't unusual for high end custom of a 2,500 sq.ft. home to be in the 15% of construction cost range.
The cost for you to render services does not linearly increase with the size of the project.
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.