At what point should an architect take off and start an office on their own? Is it when they have work to support them, is it once they have a stamp, or is it when they have put up with enough s*!t that they can't take it any more?
It is very difficult to have enough work before you leave your office. My only advice is that once you've had enough shit hit the road. BTW if you feel it coming just go for it.
I guess my question boils down to experience. I have had some good luck with coming up with my own work, and it is big work in my eyes,(5-10 mil per project) I do not have a liecence and have no interest in getting one, and have grown tired of working for clients after 4 years. should I just walk away from it all or take the time and learn more about our profession...?
I personally think if you have work you will gain experience. I am not of the school that belives you must work in a "normal" office to get experience. From the sound of things you have already done work for yourself so you don't sound like the type that relies on others to teach you. You must realise that no matter how long you work in an office you will never learn everything there is to know about putting a building together, and if you need help consultants, books, and friends are always there for you.
The only question that remains is a matter of finance. Do you have enough income coming in to run your own office? Do you have enough clients to keep you busy? Without a liecence can you get indemnity insurance, and can you stamp your drawings(most clients with 5-10 mil to spare will expect a certain amount of insurance from you)?
I've been thinking about becoming a police officer but have no interest in serving under some arbitrary civil authority. I also have no interest in arresting people, writing traffic tickets, and patroling the streets.
thank you londonsam for your response, this is very much in line with what I have been thinking. I will be bringing on a partner to sign the drawings. The reason I do not have interest in getting licensed is that I own several buildings and have tenants. Like having a CPR card, if you are a licensed professional you take on several risks and obligations that can put you in a bad spot if someone in your building slips, trips or falls and comes looking for someone to cash in on...
moto - are you suggesting that if an architect has any ownership in a property they would somehow be professionally negligent or more liable than a non-architect owner?
yes... Say someone falls down the stairs and the rail only extends 11.5" past the top of the stairs (12" required in the US) not only can they go after the designer of the building(the RA), and or the contractor, but because you are a licensed architect, you should know the difference and you can be at fault... I have seen it done on more then one occasion.
Moto, you should see a lawyer for advice on how to set up your businesses. You can put the buildings in a corporation or limited liability company that will help shield you if that is what you are worried about. It seems like a weak excuse not to get licenses. If you are serious about practicing architecture, then get a license. In most states, a firm cannot be formed to practice architecture unless over 51% of the owners are registered architects, so that partner who stamps the drawings would have more control than you. In some states, all owners must be licensed. IF you play around and pretend you are not practicing architecture but are, then you can get caught, get fined, and it could hurt your reputation. would you go to a doctor who said he knew everything about medicine just didn't want to get licensed because someone might sue him? If you want to start your own business, get licensed first, then go out on your own. The time is right when you have some work backlogged, and you feel you are ready. (although I get the impression you are a bit cocky, and may be a bit ahead of yourself, but thats just an impression....) Anyway, you can make money with your own company, but you are really shortchanging yourself and your company and your future options if you don't get licensed.
e is quite correct although the lack of profit thing was not my experience, I think what is key is to have "the right project" to carry you for sometime. Ie a house is great if it is large enough and has a good fee, but dont' leave based on a couple simple renos on your families homes. I had a project that had lasted six years on and off and was the key piece that has carried me through some difficult times when that was the only project. Have at least one longer term project and a couple short term it does help to spread out the billing every month, and then if one client is slow to pay one month it won't break you. ( nothing worse than an architect grovelling to get paid the day after delivering a set of drawings . I just find it upsetting if you don't trust the client enough, it also a good sense to develop with regards to who you provide services to)
not my experience with the profit aspect either whistler, but i thnk it is a good idea to plan for it especially if you don't have another income [husband or wife's] to smooth out the possible low points of income coming in.
i also balance larger projects with smaller ones to fill the gaps.
I'm a bit confused as to why you wouldn't want to get licensed. Even if you have someone else to sign the drawings wouldn't that license give you credibility as a partner/owner of your own firm? Set up your business as a LLC and you shouldn't have problems with your properties. If you are so worried have your property put into a spouses name. Personally I think that having a professional license would greatly benefit your firm.
there are many ways to cover you butt, but there are just as many to uncover it... I have several layers of LLC's but that is only a small bit of protection.
Maybe I should be asking myself what type of firm I would want, design, design/develop, develop... that would redefine all rolls and maybe resolve several of the issues.
In a sense getting registered isn't really that big a deal. I think it depends on the aspect of work you want to be involved in. If you are interested in the design aspect and have enough good cad monkies churning out your details the way you want them to look and a good project architect to make sure they comply with building regs then i wouldn't bother with getting licensed. There are a few "Designers" who do architecture out there its just the same thing. Just remember to call yourself a designer not an architect.
londonsam; part of the problem is people who think they can be designers, then have "cad monkeys churn out the details". Some would say that excellent architecture is IN the details. Perhaps this is why contractors have so little respect for the profession- 'designers' who think they can wave their arms around a bit, churn out a bunch of meaningless details that don't work out in the field, and call it a day. A license does not mean that you are a great architect, a great designer, or even technically profiecient. However it does say that you intend to take the profession seriously. If you want to really practice architecture, though, you need to pay attention to many things: design, how things are built, how things are detailed, how to put together a great set of construction documents, how to write specifications, how to market your services, how to hire great people, how to run a business, etc. Its probably OK that you don't want to bother getting registered: you probably don't want to bother with learning a craft either, so stick to 'designing', whatever that means.
And to moto, you should think about what you want to do- maybe you should go towards development instead of architecture. You have some experience in it, you seem to have the personality for development. If you do want to practice architecture, then liability issues can be dealt with by doing really good work, having liability insurance, having liability limitations in your contracts, creating good relationships with clients and contractors, and by socking away some of the money you make into a 'just in case' fund.
Some would also say that the devil is in the details.
A license is not an indication of a persons intent. Serious design or architecture are not measured in licenses, degrees, diplomas, or anything achieved by means of testing or regulation by others. If you belive that then you belive that anyone who is registered is a responsible architect.
Architecture is about passion, its about caring for more than just peices of paper or peer opinion or what they think you should be doing with your life. The business of architecture and the practice of architecture are not one and the same thing.
But as you seem to know what it is that i want then there is no point in me telling you is there?
I've been thinking about becoming a police officer but have no interest in serving under some arbitrary civil authority. I also have no interest in arresting people, writing traffic tickets, and patroling the streets.
ah, we knew the evil head of saddam would popup somewhere.
when is the time...
At what point should an architect take off and start an office on their own? Is it when they have work to support them, is it once they have a stamp, or is it when they have put up with enough s*!t that they can't take it any more?
Make sure you have a good business plan first.
It will answer many of the questions you ask.
It is very difficult to have enough work before you leave your office. My only advice is that once you've had enough shit hit the road. BTW if you feel it coming just go for it.
in 4,856.75 hours.
I guess my question boils down to experience. I have had some good luck with coming up with my own work, and it is big work in my eyes,(5-10 mil per project) I do not have a liecence and have no interest in getting one, and have grown tired of working for clients after 4 years. should I just walk away from it all or take the time and learn more about our profession...?
I'm confused now. Do you want to start your own office or start another career?
I personally think if you have work you will gain experience. I am not of the school that belives you must work in a "normal" office to get experience. From the sound of things you have already done work for yourself so you don't sound like the type that relies on others to teach you. You must realise that no matter how long you work in an office you will never learn everything there is to know about putting a building together, and if you need help consultants, books, and friends are always there for you.
The only question that remains is a matter of finance. Do you have enough income coming in to run your own office? Do you have enough clients to keep you busy? Without a liecence can you get indemnity insurance, and can you stamp your drawings(most clients with 5-10 mil to spare will expect a certain amount of insurance from you)?
I've been thinking about becoming a police officer but have no interest in serving under some arbitrary civil authority. I also have no interest in arresting people, writing traffic tickets, and patroling the streets.
who cares about civil authority, you get to carry a gun and tell people what to do, almost the same as an architect.
thank you londonsam for your response, this is very much in line with what I have been thinking. I will be bringing on a partner to sign the drawings. The reason I do not have interest in getting licensed is that I own several buildings and have tenants. Like having a CPR card, if you are a licensed professional you take on several risks and obligations that can put you in a bad spot if someone in your building slips, trips or falls and comes looking for someone to cash in on...
it gets a little complicated...
have work, have experience, have xtra money in the bank, have a business plan, plan not to turn a profit for 5 years.
moto - are you suggesting that if an architect has any ownership in a property they would somehow be professionally negligent or more liable than a non-architect owner?
yes... Say someone falls down the stairs and the rail only extends 11.5" past the top of the stairs (12" required in the US) not only can they go after the designer of the building(the RA), and or the contractor, but because you are a licensed architect, you should know the difference and you can be at fault... I have seen it done on more then one occasion.
Moto, you should see a lawyer for advice on how to set up your businesses. You can put the buildings in a corporation or limited liability company that will help shield you if that is what you are worried about. It seems like a weak excuse not to get licenses. If you are serious about practicing architecture, then get a license. In most states, a firm cannot be formed to practice architecture unless over 51% of the owners are registered architects, so that partner who stamps the drawings would have more control than you. In some states, all owners must be licensed. IF you play around and pretend you are not practicing architecture but are, then you can get caught, get fined, and it could hurt your reputation. would you go to a doctor who said he knew everything about medicine just didn't want to get licensed because someone might sue him? If you want to start your own business, get licensed first, then go out on your own. The time is right when you have some work backlogged, and you feel you are ready. (although I get the impression you are a bit cocky, and may be a bit ahead of yourself, but thats just an impression....) Anyway, you can make money with your own company, but you are really shortchanging yourself and your company and your future options if you don't get licensed.
e is quite correct although the lack of profit thing was not my experience, I think what is key is to have "the right project" to carry you for sometime. Ie a house is great if it is large enough and has a good fee, but dont' leave based on a couple simple renos on your families homes. I had a project that had lasted six years on and off and was the key piece that has carried me through some difficult times when that was the only project. Have at least one longer term project and a couple short term it does help to spread out the billing every month, and then if one client is slow to pay one month it won't break you. ( nothing worse than an architect grovelling to get paid the day after delivering a set of drawings . I just find it upsetting if you don't trust the client enough, it also a good sense to develop with regards to who you provide services to)
not my experience with the profit aspect either whistler, but i thnk it is a good idea to plan for it especially if you don't have another income [husband or wife's] to smooth out the possible low points of income coming in.
i also balance larger projects with smaller ones to fill the gaps.
I want to know too
when...when...when
I'm a bit confused as to why you wouldn't want to get licensed. Even if you have someone else to sign the drawings wouldn't that license give you credibility as a partner/owner of your own firm? Set up your business as a LLC and you shouldn't have problems with your properties. If you are so worried have your property put into a spouses name. Personally I think that having a professional license would greatly benefit your firm.
moto, i agree wiith archie. i would talk to a lawyer. there should be a way to isolate your two issues.
there are many ways to cover you butt, but there are just as many to uncover it... I have several layers of LLC's but that is only a small bit of protection.
Maybe I should be asking myself what type of firm I would want, design, design/develop, develop... that would redefine all rolls and maybe resolve several of the issues.
In a sense getting registered isn't really that big a deal. I think it depends on the aspect of work you want to be involved in. If you are interested in the design aspect and have enough good cad monkies churning out your details the way you want them to look and a good project architect to make sure they comply with building regs then i wouldn't bother with getting licensed. There are a few "Designers" who do architecture out there its just the same thing. Just remember to call yourself a designer not an architect.
londonsam; part of the problem is people who think they can be designers, then have "cad monkeys churn out the details". Some would say that excellent architecture is IN the details. Perhaps this is why contractors have so little respect for the profession- 'designers' who think they can wave their arms around a bit, churn out a bunch of meaningless details that don't work out in the field, and call it a day. A license does not mean that you are a great architect, a great designer, or even technically profiecient. However it does say that you intend to take the profession seriously. If you want to really practice architecture, though, you need to pay attention to many things: design, how things are built, how things are detailed, how to put together a great set of construction documents, how to write specifications, how to market your services, how to hire great people, how to run a business, etc. Its probably OK that you don't want to bother getting registered: you probably don't want to bother with learning a craft either, so stick to 'designing', whatever that means.
And to moto, you should think about what you want to do- maybe you should go towards development instead of architecture. You have some experience in it, you seem to have the personality for development. If you do want to practice architecture, then liability issues can be dealt with by doing really good work, having liability insurance, having liability limitations in your contracts, creating good relationships with clients and contractors, and by socking away some of the money you make into a 'just in case' fund.
Some would also say that the devil is in the details.
A license is not an indication of a persons intent. Serious design or architecture are not measured in licenses, degrees, diplomas, or anything achieved by means of testing or regulation by others. If you belive that then you belive that anyone who is registered is a responsible architect.
Architecture is about passion, its about caring for more than just peices of paper or peer opinion or what they think you should be doing with your life. The business of architecture and the practice of architecture are not one and the same thing.
But as you seem to know what it is that i want then there is no point in me telling you is there?
ah, we knew the evil head of saddam would popup somewhere.
i would talk to a lawyer. there should be a way to isolate your two issues.
marry the lawyer.
moto
SAVE MONEY - have a minimum 6 mo reserve to cover your living (& business) expenses. Then, step off the cliff and see if you can fly!
Good luck!
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.