You spent an entire tuition on a degree that doesn’t make more than $115 and sit on forums insulting people and I’m clueless?

You’re the one who thinks 115k is a normal minimum to expect in a profession you know nothing about. It’s nice to think about it that way, but there is not as much bullshit money in arch as there is in CS no matter how much you siens on your degree.

I’m not here to insult or argue. 115k is not an unreasonable salary today for a profession. I’m sorry if you find this unreasonable.

https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#00-0000

It is quite unreasonable

Sure, everyone wants to get more dough, but that’s not the reality of this profession. Plenty of folks, myself included, are above the average for their location, but’s that because of other factors besides just the degree. The reality is, there are many who have a romantic idea of architecture and therefore the market is saturated with disappointed idealists who can’t even put together a few simple wall sections.

These idealists are the ones asking for « doctor and lawyer money » just because they did not drop out of an expensive art school.

Ok thx

Hi Non Sequitur, I know a few idealist architects that have spent a long time honing their skills and I've got a lot of respect for them, I just hope design in general can be respected again after social media? It's a pertinent aspect of the profession (design in general) moving on from the old guard.

I’m just disappointed by the fact that it appears architects don’t have salaries on par with other professions such as doctors, engineers and lawyers. I certainly have equivalent, if not more, respect for architecture professionals. Why is it that the salaries are so low?

Because the cost, and length, of an architect’s education is grossly unecesairy so it creates a false sense of worth. So, no, we don’t compare to doctors or lawyers. Most of us draw and conceive of average buildings with the occasional interesting one. Even fewer become senior enough to lead projects and add design flair. A decent chunk will get stuck in a tech position.

competition. People want my job and my life. People don't want to be you. You don't want to be you.

@Non Seq I know a lot of general practitioners and lawyers doing those "glamorous" jobs on wages commensurate with those "average" jobs you are referencing, they get paid. AA part *whatever* drags everyone's wages down.

Plenty of independently wealthy people are architects for the perks other than pay, skewing the entire field. Creates a race to the bottom biz model. They don't need the money, just want the prestige.

@curtram are you are doing 100+ weeks for a starchitect for yourself or themselves?

And academia gives students next to zero actual skills. It takes a lot of time and effort to crawl out of the deep hole they put you in.

I do not work for a starchitect. Also, I'm old. I work at a fairly large company.

any fairly large company is subsidised by the education business model. do you want to keep it the same?

Bullshit Money in CS? Non Sequitur, wtf

^Yes. I know almost as many CS folks as arch folks. The amount of capital that gets burned through big CS projects is insane compared to the frugality of the architecture world. Plus talent is retained with high salaries knowing it's likely many will jump ship when the next shiny new gig comes up. High turn-over, high competition, high burn-rates, NDA high-flyer projects,non-existent schedules... hence bullshit money.

This is a weird debate because on one hand, $115k is outrageously above the average for entry level architects. But, on the other hand, maybe it shouldn't be above average for competent PA/PMs? I certainly have as much impact on the life-expectancy of the average building inhabitant as any doctor... my incompetence could kill people, so maybe we should be compensated for that competence?

Tduds... although we're no where near as responsible for public life/safety as medical professional, your point does apply to the PA (or senior staff) making code and construction detail decisions... not to the lonely M.arch grad pushing and pulling shapes from a sketchup model or modifying existing typical details. It is then up to you to convince your client to pay you those additional fees.

If the Architect had all of the engineering expertise AND design expertise (as is the common perception), then the fees would be higher. There's no way to justify a high fee for predominantly coordination of other trades and drafting. I would say that the Architect is similar to a waiter taking a client's order and making sure that everything the client orders ends up in front of the client just the way the client imagined it. Architects have become master coordinators and draftsmen than anything else.While we are legally allowed to perform engineering services (structural and MEP design) we outsource those services to specialized consultants, which eats away at the big fee pie.

i work in a large AE firm. My team includes structural and mep engineers and we sit in the same room. It still takes 10-15 people to design a project - not all simultaneously. The firm's net fee is obviously higher, but the per capita share is comparable to pure architecture firms. All of us work full time, so I'm not sure how me taking on the engineering work would help me earn more; I'd have to hire someone else to do my design work. It's also tough for management to balance the workloads which means there is probably less utilization for the engineers than a pure engineering office.

also while i read and understand the engineers reports, they draw conclusions i simply couldn't make, because i'm not the one who spent 40 hours a week for 10 years observing what techniques and systems work best for given project conditions. specialization has more to do with the imprint of experience than theoretical skills. and it would take another few years of schooling for me to know how to do the analyses for dynamic loading, vibration modes, or even statically indeterminate structures. and i'm not keen to learn to use etabs or staad. to some extent the reason we are don't do engineering is because we aren't interested in the work itself, even while we understand the principles and value the profession.

You're thinking big commercial jobs. I'm talking townhouse scale residential jobs, or hust single family detached homes.

oh, there i agree with you then

Plumbing is easy... Electrical is a lot of "knowing your code" but the panel schedules and feeders calculate themselves now (at our office). I swear mechanical uses rules of thumb until CDs and then send out to Trane (our brand of choice) to do the calcs for them. Structural really is a skill set I couldn't pick up in 6 months.

Yes sorry, I didn’t mean 115k year one. But within a reasonable timeframe (approx. 5 years). I’m confident I will be extremely successful given my passion, talent, drive and prior professional experience leading multi-million dollar projects. I appreciate your advice, thank you.

More like 10-15 years and unless your the owner, you’ll need more than idéals to make it there.

10-15 years to make 115k? Wow, that’s unfortunate.

If you’re lucky and good. Millions in construction is a different game than millions in CS. It’s far more difficult, but no where as lucrative, unfortunately.

Thank you.

You don’t make that kind of coin drawing up building elevations and what not. That level is for either ownership or the most senior partners in large and profitable firms. You can’t walk into such a role without a few decades of experience.

I would argue that most owners don't even make that money to be fair.

^you would likely win that argument.

Even at that salary, he won’t be able to afford me or my office... I don’t d’able in weekend warrior flip projects. 8-)

There is specialized work outside of the chain restaurant clients. You just need to find a location with a strong niche in preservation and offer something to the offices already working in that space. You’ll still start at $20/hr tho.

You could ask a starchitect if you are worthy to donate your labour for free and subsidise their projects and clients? Unfortunately, this is a business model that precludes you making enough money to support other people you care for.

$20 an hour with a masters degree? Dang, makes zero financial sense :/

Yeah, then you marry a teacher and you both can live in a trailer and eat rice and crackers together with your Master's degrees and professional licenses. :)

@ tintt all of which need money to produce, and therefore preclude me telling kids from Hackney it's a viable career option. To the detriment of the profession. I've literally shed tears about kids with more ideas than MA students but no money to study.

Whiskey, the one thing you have correct here is that paying full price for a MArch (is USA) makes zero financial sense. Yet plenty do thinking that they will désigna grand building that will cure cancer. You’re drinking from the same cup.

With tuition assistance, etc. I wouldn’t end up paying that much to learn about something I love. But the point is to getting
my foot in the door. Nobody is going to hire an IT professional into Architecture without the degree.

^ well, that's obvious. There are also a few accredited online March paths too. Value is questionable, but its a means to an end. Just know that the real work starts after graduation since you need quite a long and varied list of experience + exams before getting that "prestigious" architect title. 

So what is it that you love? Sketching spaces? Detailing construction? making that grand design gesture?

Non Seq summed it up. Have money, make money, otherwise make drawings and increase his/her profits.

@Non Seq - MA /MArch are interchangeable in terms of comparison to clearly gifted kids with no money.

Also if you if you have been working in the UK for many years please *always* refer to the Bank of England inflation calculator as it will help determine your expected salary (ignore recruitment agents always):
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/inflation/inflation-calculator

It's really simple - just put in your salaries and calculate what it is last year :)

I have actually shadowed an architect, taken advanced CAD classes and worked for a home builder company with blueprints. None of which particularly fascinated me the way buildings and historic architecture do, which is why I’m asking the question.

Whiskey, I'd ignore Bloopox, him/her/it is probably worried about your salary expectations, I do not find unreasonable. Unless the business model required underpaying and overworking the staff to deliver the projects.

Nabru... I don't get the feeling that you've followed the discussion here.

I think I have, there's a Computer Science graduate interested in studying architecture for love whilst also expecting a consummate salary with their skills and architects have responded with diffusion and obstruction to what constitutes a fair wage as a professional. I'd say a lot of the responses are from architects whose business models require cheap young blood and an imaginary equity share?

No, he/she got real responses from real architects working in the real world.

Thank you! I would live to be in preservation...

This extremely helpful, thank you

It's also worth noting that many people with salaries north of 100k aren't doing architecture but are managing clients and staff.

Keep in mind GB's comment highly depends on where you live.

Also, he/she is a fellow Canadian if I recall correctly.

i'm just going to point out design principals or design directors make in this range, and their primary work consists of making the design. organizing a team to produce a design is the essence of design work for most firms beyond a sole practitioner. agree this is a mid-career position though.

Agreed. Point being is that the expectation to earn a 6 figure salary after Masters with no prior or related architectural office experience to secure a mid-career position is HIGHLY improbable.

I agree, right out of school you're a newb.

I didn’t intend to imply six figures immediately, I meant steady state after experience

Yes, after 10+ years of real world experience + license, 6 figures is possible in many markets, but not everyone gets to take a linear path like that.

I manage clients, attend meetings, oversee interns and consultants, draw, design, ect and I don't make over $100k a year.

Chad, do you draw and coordinate plans too? (edit: duh me, you already said you do.)

Uhh okay, congratulations Chad? What is your point?

I think he was just reinforcing the "no drawing part" If he can just figure out how to drop that habit, surely he'll automatically get the raise to 6 figures.

My point bubbles is that just because you involved in management doesn't mean you'll make over $100k a year

You're right joseffischer, only if I could stop drawing, rendering, and designing I'd be making the big bucks!

I learned to sketch upside down instead of render for this very reason.

I learned to draw upside down for clients in my first year. Writing upside down still gives me issues though.

What's the probability that I can make over $100k not managing clients, not managing staff, trying to get out of as many meetings as possible, and interacting with consultants only enough to coordinate my work with them ... oh and no production drawing, no rendering, only sketching a right-side-up detail on a roll of trace every now and then?

I think that tops out at about $60k.

EA, those jobs pay $300k plus. You also get a personal assistant and don't ever have to show up at the office. 

My handwriting is better upside down than right side up.

My job consists of mentoring junior staff, sketching stuff for junior staff to Revitize, writing specs, QC/redlining drawings, research, and only occasionally meeting clients or managing staff. I make over 100K, but I am in a high cost-of-living area (Los Angeles).

@ Chad - again what is your point? No one is disputing that management staff get paid 6 figures.

Bubbles, I just disputed that. . .

Chad, don't tell that to my bosses, I've been making over that for quite some time now. 

tintt, I like the way you think. There's room for me to grow. 

atelier nobody, I think you get the picture ... although is mentoring considered management? I hadn't thought of it that way. 

GB, I think Chad's point is that he is "management staff," but that he does not "get paid 6 figures."

Yea sure, but there was never any dispute that management staff had to be paid 6 figures. You can be paid below 6 figures and manage/ draw - that is pretty obvious. The original point was that majority of companies don't pay employees 6 figures to draw. They primarily pay them the big bucks to manage client relationship, procure projects, and win new business. None of our senior level associates or principals making over $100k ever touch Revit, Rhino or any drawing programs even for a design oriented firm. We're talking about generalization not personal anecdotes. Hence what I said previously, only partners, lead designers, or senior associates of the firm get to be paid 6 figures to "draw" be it computer, sketching, drafting or what have you. But as OP implied that they would like to be paid 6 figures to draw after graduating Masters without the leg work of experience and licence? No way - not going to happen in my life time even with COL and inflation.

"[...] there was never any dispute that management staff had to be paid 6 figures." I think that was exactly what Chad was disputing. If your statement was true, Chad would have to be earning 6 figures ... unfortunately, he is not. I think what you are trying to say is that to be making 6 figures, you are usually in some type of management position (note this is not absolute). 

I do agree, as I think most on this thread do, that the OP is crazy to think they'd be making 6 figures soon after graduating. No dispute there.

Chad is saying that he doesn't get paid 6 figure in management but that was never the original point of the discussion. Chad is raising a counter argument when there never a disagreement to begin with. Like I said in the original post, 6 figure income to draw is highly unlikely except for the few anecdotes we saw in the thread.

A fresh grad will never be paid six figures.

Someone involved in management will make at least six figures and not draw . . . maybe.  It's unlikely in large firms, yes. In small to medium firms my experience is that everyone pitches in during crunch time. Well except for the really old timers. I myself draw quite a bit but about half of it is in the conceptual / schematic phases. After that it's redlines and detailing. The detailing I typically do in BIM since it's faster.

Oh and I said I am involved in management. I'd say I'm a cross between PA and PM where I do the design work of a PM but all the coordination of a PA.  Small firm life, have to love it! 

Hmmm, I thought PA's did design work and PM's did spreadsheet work.

I'm going to start measuring my success in how many times a day I get asked to do free work. That's when you know you are good. I think.

tintt, I think it depends on the office. I was doing conceptual and schematic design work while still an intern at one firm, another firm only PM's designed. Yet another was a team effort.

I did mostly conceptual and schematic design when I was an intern. I skipped the pm phase at firms. Financial information was not for anyone but owners so nobody knew anything about fees and money where I was. Now I'm a one person shop so do it all.

My situation was similar to yours except I work at a small office and still don't know anything about fees and money. . .

They don't want you to know. They don't want you to know that they bill you out at $150 and pay you $25 or whatever. My first job with zero experience I was billed out at $80 and was paid $13 an hour.

I don’t understand why this should be shocking, or why it should be something to hide. As an employee, I know that I get billed out at a higher rate to cover the costs of running the business; it shouldn’t be news to anyone that had a semi-decent pro practice course. From an employer standpoint, why should this be hidden? Unless there is some serious mismanagement of form finances that they are trying to hide, I don’t get the reasoning behind it.

I'm confident that every firm I've worked in was seriously mismanaged. They teach in pro practice courses that the magic multiplier is around 3. Not 6. And then the firm would buy employees lunch once a month, but nothing over $5 per person. I got to organize that. Pizza every time. We couldn't even afford sandwiches. Once I got us BBQ and was lectured on it.

I know how much I'm billed out at and it lines up the 3x rule. On a related note do you recommend any professional practice courses?

I just looked mine up and did the math. At my salary, it looks like the firm shoots for about 3.4x ... that does not take into account vacation, sick leave, or non-billable time. Once you add that into the mix, I'm less than 3x by a fair bit. Hard to say for sure because I don't know, for these purposes, if my vacation and sick leave is counted as non-billable time, or if it just doesn't factor into the utilization ratio equation at all. My guess is the former in which case I'm closer to an expected actual multiplier of about 2.7 based on some rough calculations.

I'm pretty sure we can afford sandwiches too.

You can afford sandwiches! Are you hiring?

I was taught to calculate billable rate in 2 steps - first add all benefits, payroll tax, and workers comp to the person's pay rate to get the actual full compensation rate, then multiply that by 2.5 for overhead and profit. It had to be done this way because benefits were not a consistent percentage of base pay (e.g. health insurance might be $600/mo for both a person making $25/hr and a person making $100K/yr - 13.8% & 7.2%, respectively). If you then back-calculated the total mark-up from base pay, it varied from about 3.25X to 3.75X.

I once got in a big fight with management over the $5 lunch limit for a lunch & learn - I happened to know an Indian place that brought boatloads of food, so we could have safely ordered for about half the number we were actually expecting, but the office manager was apparently math impaired and kept insisting I was trying to spend $10/person...sigh.

my last office had an overhead multiplier of 4.2 - this was open information provided to all management for calculating fees. if an office has a consistently high overhead it either figured out how to underpay most staff, or charge high fees to clients. neither of these is symptomatic of poor management. there's a bad misperception that overhead is waste. overhead helped us pay lawyers for cya, marketing teams for finding work, and unbillable time for a very generous pto policy. these are good things to have!

He posted about 20 comments in this thread

He did stick around long enough to reply to a few of bitch-slaperoons.

DeTwan you've been around long enough to know architecture is mostly about talking to other architects no matter what ;P

Non seq got slapped about proper, the account had no game to respond with, I'd imagine they're actually not very good at architecture.(Non Seq for any doubt)

Nabru, that is an incorrect assumption.

Nabru, I think that's the architect version of thinking he bitch slapped someone

Dude asks if he could remotely be close to his earning power, posters laugh at him for even thinking of such a thing. He decides its lame that people are willing to work for pennies, others offer advice how he could just become architects bosses. Yeah he really got slap

Whiskey is the one laughing all the way to the bank... I don't want to be consistently be cynical or pessimistic about the profession but the reality is that the market generally doesn't reward the design/ architecture professional services - from a monetary point of view. Like archiwutm8 said, many people pursue architecture knowing it doesn't make financial sense, because of the interest in the subject and passion for architecture in general. However, priorities and values change once you begin working. Mortgages, loans, vacations, debt etc. those things add up and sinking $60-100k + in education costs (undergrad + grad) that pays crap wages doesn't seem to make any sense at all. Unless you're a lawyer or doctor, then the first initial investment may be worth it. Architecture in general have to re-think how we convey our value, services, and more importantly, stop undercutting each other in fees!

Bubbles, you're a fool if you thought 60-100k is an investment in arch tho... There is very little of that cost that can be converted to value for most clients. Cynicism is for the idealist who was foolish enough to think that their design would cure cancer. The rest of us are doing fine putting together the best projects under the constraints imposed by our paying clients.

"Inside every architect is a disappointed idealist." - my sessional prof once said that. When you graduate high school you don't really know enough about the working world nor are you equipped to determine what you will be doing for the rest of your life. Foolish, perhaps, but I would say more naive. But fortunately I didn't have to go down that route with 2/3 of my tuition paid off via scholarships, grants, bursaries etc. On the other hand, I have peers with $100k in debt taking yearly week long vacation across the planet living the instagram/ influencer life. I guess its a matter of perspective and what you want out of life and this career.

You're still paying off student loans? How long have you been out of college?

No loans

How long have you been out of college then?