I need a little career advice. I am 40 years old, I am licensed, I have two Ivy league degrees. I currently work as a Senior Architect at a mid sized multi-family residential firm in NYC. Even though I'm a "designer/strategist" at heart, my work is mostly in CDs, CA-- project management, technical troubleshooting, client relations, regulatory compliance. I make 125k per year. I don't have kids but I have a longtime partner and we have a mortgage on a modest weekend house in the Hudson Valley. Life is good, but not great, and money is always a little tight. Thankfully I have some well performing investments on the side. In some ways, I've felt pretty stagnant since 2019 in my career trajectory, more of the same, no big leaps.
I'd like to be making 200k by the time I'm in my late 40s. My friends in tech or big law are easily making much more than this now. This is the salary I've concluded I need to make to feel comfortable living in NYC with a large margin of error, and without needing to penny pinch or cut corners like I do now. Some of my M.Arch classmates who weren't even particularly talented transitioned to companies like Rivian, Tesla, Shutterstock and Meta doing non architectural roles (albeit NOT in NYC). There's also the shame of feeling downwardly mobile relative to my parents simply as a function of the industry I have chosen to work in. At least I didn't go into journalism like many of my friends from undergrad!
Whats the easiest path to achieve this goal by repositioning the skills and experience I already have? I just still have this nagging feeling that even at 125k, by staying in architecture, I'm being shortchanged for the true value of the skills, insight and educational background I bring to the table.
My sense is that if you don't make partner at a corporate architecture firm, you plateau at around 170k in your mid 50s, which only gives you about a decade of solid earnings. Am I right about this?
The only parameters for my "transition plan" are that I have to stay in the NYC area ( no Bay Area for me), I don't want to work more than 40-50 hours a week, and I'd like to have a hybrid WFH work option (that leaves out CM or construction adjacent jobs that require being in a field trailer constantly). I could do an evening certificate program but I don't want to get another masters degree.
Here are my ideas:
-claw my way up the ladder at my current firm through brown nosing, in-firm networking, taking on even more client facing interaction
-network and brown nose like crazy at the AIANY, switch firms every two years demanding a big title and pay increase each time, focus exclusively on large corporate firms with more than 300 employees and high profit margins, make partner
-start my own single family residential firm
-start my own stamp for hire firm (commercial RE tenant fitouts, facade inspections, coop board submissions)
-work for an owners rep as a senior PM on cultural/institutional projects
-work in house for boutique residential developer as design director
-partner with a high end contractor to build out a design-build arm of their company
-work in house as design director for a large residential developer like Extell, Related
-work for a large commercial real estate firm (or brokerage/advisory firm) on their "office to residential conversion" strategy--RXR, Durst, JLL, CBRE
-something else tech related I'm not thinking of?
-move into design strategy consulting, start at Gensler then transition to Ideo, Bain, McKinsey
-similar Big consulting path to above but be an "industry expert" in architecture, construction, building technology, real estate development, housing policy
-"new development" consultant for large residential brokerage like Corcoran, Compass, advising developers on proper layouts, amenities and finish selections
-product manager at tech start up in construction or property tech spaces, i.e. 3D printed houses, modular housing, building systems?
-facilities/real estate design manager for FANG tech company designing corporate campuses or brick n mortar service or retail facilities.
-Move to large engineering conglomerate like Aecom or Stantec. Senior PM on design build public capital projects..line my pockets with public dollars!
-Work for the MTA or Port Authority as a design/construction PM on capital projects. what can say, I like trains!
Without digging into things more I think you're underpaid.
I'm a bit older than you, have been practicing for 20 plus years, and make about 20% less than you. The thing is I live in western Colorado where the cost of living is 75% less than NYC.
I don't bring this up to make you feel bad. I bring this up because I think you could reach your salary goal by moving firms - even moving cities.
Finally - don't compare architecture to tech industries or law. They are completely different fields and as such the pay is different.
Thanks Chad--but per your last sentence, this post is really more about me transitioning into tech/consulting as seamlessly as possible--in a specialty that is still related to the "built environment". Very curious if anyone has ideas about that. I'm not loving the minutae of my day-to-day much either, so that's another motivator.
Ah - sorry about that! I know people who are involved in tech and consulting in the built environment. According to them, the minutiae is surprisingly similar to architecture. Also, expect to work 50 hours a week. :(
Aug 23, 24 11:18 am ·
·
gwharton
SC, if you are looking to transition into tech or consulting, the big question is: what skills and value-add can you offer that translates over to what they do? Are you just looking to do architecture in an organization that is not a traditional architecture firm? That's one thing. But if you are looking at actually being a consultant for Deloitte or PwC or JLL or something like that, then you need to bring something to the table other than just "architect."
Yes, this is also what I'm getting at--is bridging this gap into consulting simply a matter of spinning the experiences I already have running $200M construction projects for large NYC developers (from the Architectural side) into a very persuasive pitch, or should I be pursuing some kind of certificate program in the evenings? If I worked in consulting I would most certainly not be doing architecture, but presumably advisory on any sort of business or investment decision a government, large institutional RE investor was looking to undertake in areas related to urban redevelopment, housing, construction or building science.
I think in my initial post I actually made the distinction between "doing architecture for a tech company, i.e. corporate campus planning, retail concepts, service and operations centers" and "Consulting/product management". I'm open to either, sort of curious about which path might be easier and more fruitful.
Aug 23, 24 4:51 pm ·
·
gwharton
Let me flip that back on you: what do you want to DO?
Are they making 200K though? When you make that kind of money, you can pay for someone else to do you laundry, mow your lawn and cook your dinner, and still come out ahead so that extra 10 hours a week isn't really a "net loss" of work life balance
At $200 k a year you can't pay for people to do that and not live like you make $125k a year. Also you'll typically 'live to work'. If that's your choice that's fine. It's not for me though.
there is always a salary “cap” when you’re an employee. Just the way it is. Either become a partner or start your own thing. That’s the way you’ll make over $200k, and frankly it’s entirely possible. My salary in nyc is $160k and have my own projects. Last year alone, I made $260k between everything I’m doing.
I'd have to agree. I just had a mutually respectful relationship with the firms I worked for when I was moonlighting. Heck - my past firms would send clients my way for projects that they weren't interested in (single family residential).
As long as you're not using any of your employers implements of service and aren't competing with them they can't do much about it. If you are then they can be held liable for your work and , well that's not good. Some really 'nasty' firms will have a no moonlighting and noncompete clause in their staff contracts.
Yep, but not only am I a respected valuable member of my firm, I never compete and don't use my firm's time and resources. No need for anyone to know what I do on my own time.
I live in Seattle, am 43, licensed and make just over 200K a year (salary and bonus) working for a General Contractor in preconstruction. It is very similar work to CD's and CA. I feel like I am well compensated, but not over-paid for my experience and position. For reference, we are paying new graduates from a 4 year program in either construction management or civil engineering to be on site project engineers at about 75K/ year base salary. Unless you want to go into tech or some other industry... I would say look at construction... easier to translate your current experience into a value add.
Nice! This is pretty much the answer I was looking for. As you touched upon, in other industries, paying mid level professionals 200K is not a big deal. Its just sort of expected.
Is your day to day still very architectural, or have you bracnhed out into project finance+accounting, procurement, labor relations, etc? What project types
Aug 23, 24 1:25 pm ·
·
betonbrut
It really depends on the day... I am focused on publicly funded work that is delivered either as CM at Risk (CM/GC) or some form of design-build... so I end up participating in the pursuit phase (business development). Once we land one, I end up managing the design process leading to a GMP and the start of construction. I end up handing the job off day to day to the on-site staff, but stay involved to answer questions and be a resource to the field team. It also allows me to stay in contact with the owner and A/E team to continue building that relationship for future jobs! We are beginning to see more public/private partnerships (P3) and other creative ways to finance major capital projects. So, in terms of finance and accounting... it is two fold... understanding how projects are funded at a macro level and then internally, setting up projects for financial success. I work very closely with our estimating department on that internal step!
Aug 23, 24 1:38 pm ·
·
Strange Cascades
Sorry. the second half of my first reply was cut off.... Is your firm a boutique operation or a multi-billion dollar juggernaut?
Was making the transition a huge effort where you had to upskill and network furiously, or did you simply show up the interview and they hired you for the skills you already had?
How are the hours? Do you work mostly in a nice office or a smelly construction trailer? Get a lot of frantic 7am calls when the concrete sub puts the wrong rebar in the formwork before the pour, or is it pretty contained hours?
Are you a superstar executive within the firm, or simply one of a few mid-level technical specialists?
Aug 23, 24 1:42 pm ·
·
betonbrut
Lots of questions! I started at a smaller local GC that was making the transition from predominantly hard bid public works to the more integrated CM/GC and design-build. For them, transitioning from construction as a product (low price) to a service (being selected partially on the basis of value add during preconstruction) I was a natural fit. I stayed there for a few years and then moved to a larger (by volume) general contractor with more opportunities. I was initially hired because I worked with that smaller GC doing CA... so we knew we could communicate and they liked my attitude on site. The work hours aren't bad... less than what I was doing in traditional architecture. We start earlier in the day and end earlier. I consider myself to be between a superstar and mid-level... While we are very large corporately, I feel like our office functioned like a well funded start-up when I joined 7 years ago. All that to say, there was room for upward growth within the corporate structure.
Op, I feel you. My partner is in tech and makes over 200k working less than 40 hrs. That compelled me to pivot, just a little. I took the second to the last options you've listed. I was working at a traditional architecture firm and making 100k as a PM. I was running at 100% and yet felt like I was getting left behind. Switched jobs to an engineering focused firm, but still doing the same work. I'm in my mid 30s, NYC, and will land around 160k w OT. I'd look for firms that focus on public projects
The most feasible way to make $200k as an architect is to share in the percentage of the company profits. As a partner/owner or even as a non-equity partner with a profit share.
I am 45 yo in NYC and recently made a jump from $125k + 20k bonus to just over $200k including the profit share. As a PM I always worked hard to make sure my projects were profitable. I was lucky to negotiate this deal as the firm was vulnerable if I were to leave when I was recruited from larger, better known firm.
I'm also in NYC and I've never earned 200K - Glad to see folks looking at this. This year and going forward look to be exceptions and I should hit over 200K. Interesting because I left the corporate world 2 years ago - I'm simply not made for it - and struck out on my own once again. Funny problem because I'm also semi retired and finding myself busier then ever before and beginning to have a back log of projects. For whatever it is worth: I recall a conversation with a good friend some 40 years ago. Chris is a high flying attorney and we were out to dinner one night. He asked me how my practice was going and I expressed some frustration about billing and asked him how law firms do this. His answer was brilliant and I understood it instantly. He said every attorney in the firm is responsible for billing 2000 hours annually. That is brilliant.40 hour x 50 weeks equals 2 weeks of vacation. Architects need to learn this.
Smaarch - that can be interpreted a few different ways, did the friend express any specific way the firm saw that? (IE no overtime? Manage your own hours? Flexibility on project requirements? Just curious...)
Aug 26, 24 8:41 am ·
·
smaarch
As simple as I stated it - in a law firm You are responsible for bringing in 2000 hours of billable a year - then you get your 2 week vacation and maybe bonus. The math is super simple
Math is simple but factor in all the overhead has to occur outside those 2000 hours. Training, filing, etc. - which routinely means 10-20 extra hours a week (another 500-1000 hours). And there is overhead time. Don't kid yourself otherwise.
I have several lawyer friends. They are required to have so many billable hours each year. Those hours are when they directly work on the case or meet with the client. Everything else is overhead and isn't counted. Each of my lawyer friends works at least 50 hours a week.
Aug 27, 24 5:52 pm ·
·
lacalr
I was talking to a lawyer friend and they mentioned that before they go to the bathroom to "drop some friends off at the pool", they like to think of a really hard question they are working on just so they can bill the time to a project when they're on the toilet.
The way that their firm structure was set up was pretty poor and if they did not meet their 2000 billable hours threshold they were docked their bonus. Which was still more then I make in a year but hey....
Aug 28, 24 10:09 am ·
·
betonbrut
Ignoring the difference between lawyers and architects for a moment (though I think comparing the two is silly), the main difference is that most lawyers (not all...) bill their clients hourly. Most architects (again, not all...) bill their clients in lump sums based on either the overall scope of work, or by phase of design. On a fixed fee schedule, the faster or less hours you take to complete the task, the more money you make.
I have a theory that I have not researched, but… I blame the AIA for the low wages of architects. I think 100 + years ago, the AIA wanted to shift the architecture profession away from the master builder and more towards a white-collar profession and really made an effort to divide those that design from those that build. If more people were willing to pay architects hourly, then I think the comparison to modern day law firms is a good one. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case, broadly speaking.
If you can stomach self-employed single-family residential work, I don't think it should be hard to make $200K. I'm a residential designer in rural Maine with 20+ years experience (plus 10 years as a builder) and my current billing rate is $195/hr. I have older projects at lower rates and I rarely get far over 1,000 billable hours a year, so I haven't made it to $200K yet, but it's definitely possible (and I should get there next year). Working from home, my overhead is around $20-25K/yr.
I compete solely with architects, have the same insurance, etc.. My licensed architect friends with employees, doing similar work--moderately high end, but high-performance/low embodied carbon--or those doing higher-end work ($5M-100M residential) bill out anywhere from $150-350/hr, depending on who's doing the work.
Hop up to a new firm and get a decent pay bump that way. You'll have to work harder to establish your self there compared to your comfortable/ familiar responsibilities where you're at.
Otherwise, I think you answered your own question in a way: switch to tech or consulting. I know many people that have gone to work for a big bank to be their in-house space planner, or project manager. You could try places like Deloitte or PWC. People in other fields are blown away by the skills we have.
Im a bit out of the loop on NYC architect compensation but I think youre underpaid, Im guessing its due to the size/ profitability of your office.
This is just me but the most sustainable way to make good money is to be someone with a rare/ less common skill set in a field wheres there a lot of money.
Or start your own biz.
Aug 29, 24 4:21 pm ·
·
greenlander1
rare/ less common skill set could be being by far the one with most expertise in your company/ field OR you have 2-3 disparate skills that are usually not contained in one person. anyways feel free to DM me. I am familiar with probs 3/4 of the positions on your list and have considering a lot of them at one pt in my career.
Aug 29, 24 4:24 pm ·
·
greenlander1
the classic combo is the super technical person who is also very good at being persuasive with clients/ great communicator. Clients love having the capacity to have a single point of contact who understands all of their concerns.
dont know if Tokyo is similar to NY, but a lot of my classmates from U of Tokyo quit architecture to go into real estate. Others earned better by shifting country after working on large projects for massive offices. The common denominator is to move, regardless of whether that includes shifting profession or not.
Yes know of a few people that moved onto the "dark side" but I feel the pressure there can be even more than architecture, especially when the $ is much better.
1 - The architecture profession, as a whole, is underpaid. It makes it worse when you compare to other industries (professional or non-professional) that require less education and/or licensure. Case in point, my architecture friends who transitioned to UI/UX or AR/VR sector by taking a 4-6 month intensive courses were making $145k - $200K within 2 years (living in SF, Chicago, and NYC).
2 - You can make $200K or close to $200K working in architecture under a firm. But it will be in limited positions. For example, A - Partner or Principal position in a major AEC Firm. B - Working in major non-architecture Companies (Govt, Tech, Retail, etc.) working either as Design Director, Space Planner, Facilities Manager.
Another of my architecture friends transitioned to working as a facility manager at a transportation tech startup In SF. Unlicensed. 7 years of experience. His starting salary was $165K + Stock benifits. He only does program drawings and updates existing floor plans if they want to change some office spaces. No construction documents. No CA. Incredibly boring work. But his priority is/was salary.
About starting your own practice:
3 - If you want NET PROFIT $200K / year as a firm owner you need to think about all of your expenses and if you can find a client base willing to take your rate. The likelihood of you getting multiple projects in the first year, although not impossible, is difficult. So you may not be netting $200K until you establish a consistent client base.
For example if you land 2 ground up 3000 SF residential projects per 1.5 years, and you want to net $200K, and let's say you're doing cost/sf rate and you're doing all the drawings by yourself. You would need to charge them about $45/SF ($135,000 per project, $270,000 for both projects) to tackle overhead costs, taxes, consultant fees (unless you want owner to take consultants).
The reality of you doing 2 ground up projects at the same time, with no staff or contracted draft work is a recipe for overwork, so you will most likely need to hire or contract at least one person to help during CD, then you need to increase your fee. So then you need to see if a client is willing to pay a new startup $135,000 in Design + Consultant Fees (excluding construction cost, land acquisition cost) for a 3000 SF residential project. If you contract temporary help just for CD, add another ~$35K. And believe it or not, after you establish a rapport with clients and depending on the aesthetics of your project and its "marketability", you can hit even higher design fees. I know some architects who make $150,000 per interior residential renovation 2000 sf project. It's doable, it just takes time.
Sep 1, 24 5:23 pm ·
·
mtdew
Unless your are an established architect, $135k fee for a 3000 SF house would be difficult.
I'd like to know more about the architects that make fees like that. Unless it's a boutique firm in a major metro area with a wealthy client you're not going to be making that much on such a small residential project. Assuming 10% arch fee, Depending on your area that would be around a $1.7 million, 3,000 sf home.
For a highly talented, sought-after architect, I can see fees like that being possible. I'm only marginally talented and not an architect, living in a rural area, and I am $60K-$90K for a 3,000 sq.ft. house. For a current 3200sf new home and 3-car garage I'm around $100K, but it's quite detailed and I'm also doing interior design and cabinet detailing.
Josh - I would also assume that WG's fees include doing CD's and CA. Professional Student is saying to charge $135k just for design fees. CD's would add another $35k.
I'm not sure where Professional Student is getting these numbers from.
That's $170k in just architectural fees on a 3,000 sf house. :o
$13-16k for all including engineering (no interior design or cabinet design) and people think I'm super expensive. I need that space planner job.
Sep 5, 24 4:06 pm ·
·
Non Sequitur
we were billing one client over 20k per month in design fees for their custom cottage. Sure, it cost north of 10 million communist loonies, but the client paid for every hour spent in the 5+ years it took to finish. Construction is just wrapping up on this one.
Impressive. A client with a lot of money who wants to spend it!
How many of your single family residential clients are like that?
How many single family residential projects do you work on in a year?
Sep 5, 24 4:18 pm ·
·
Non Sequitur
^2 in the 10mil range. Currently balls deep in low-rise (6 unit) high-end vacation condo projects where units are expected to sell for 2-4mil each. Got 5 of those on the board right now. Other res projects are more modest 500k to 2mil. Also worth noting that my office does not do residential... Only 2 of us here (me and the firm president) touch this space.
Single family residential is difficult to make a profit on unless it's in the $5 million range. When I've done single family homes in the past they've been a 'favor' to clients. We typically didn't make any money on them.
At my current firm we don't do any single or multi family housing. Not enough fee and too much liability.
Chad, who said we're making a profit on those 20k monthly invoices?
Sep 5, 24 8:48 pm ·
·
JLC-1
Let's stop calling sfr and call it what it is, the third vacation home in a highly sought after resort community. We do exclusively this type of project and while I personally am not in the 200k point, my boss and only other member of the firm do get that and more. In the last 6 years we completed 3 houses over 6000 sq ft and 5-8 mil construction cost, and another 5 or 6 gut to the studs remodels in the 3-5 mil range. Can't complain not getting 200k because the perks of living here are great, I don't see more than 10 people a day, no traffic riddled commute, and all the outdoors you can need, great summer weather and plenty of snow in winter.
Sep 5, 24 9:28 pm ·
·
Wood Guy
Josh, no consultants are under me. There is a structural engineer involved but he bills our client directly, and I did a majority of the structural engineering. There is also a mechanical engineer, landscape architect and civil engineer as well, all billing the client directly. This project started a few years ago and I didn't have it in my contract that I could increase my billing rate annually, so I'm charging 66% of my current rate. Over 750 hours of design, from schematics through CDs and also including at least a couple hundred hours for interior design and cabinet detailing. They are unusual clients who I've designed for in the past.
Like most of my projects, this one is a primary residence "forever home." I do have one now that's a vacation home, around $1.8M construction, and I usually have one in the works, but it's maybe 10-15% of my projects. None are in resort areas, but people do like the coast of Maine where most of my projects are.
Not only are some firms making 135K in 3000 SF residential, some are making much more.
The firms that I see billing at these rates are 2 fold - Interiors for ultra-wealthy clients and Firms that do mainly "neo-classical" or "traditional aesthetics" that typically cater to more of a "conservative" client base willing to pay high design fees. These high fees are exclusive of location even though location definitely plays a part.
Also, if you go on reddit, with a grain of salt, you will see lots of architects and designers billing at these rates higher, but also MUCH lower.
Ironically, if you want to see true architect fees, go on reddit and see people post "is this a fair architect fee" - you will see the diverse array of fees based on project location, sf, and residential types.
Chad - I am including Consultants, CD and CA in those fees. The 35K extra is if you need to HIRE another person to help with CD if you are doing 2 projects at once.
Even with consultant fees that $135K fee for a 3,000 sf home with a construction cost of $2 million is a bit high. That's about 7% of construction cost. Most single family projects are in the 5-6%. I assumed you must be basing your numbers on some very wealthy clients and boutique firms.
Also - you can't charge the client more because you're understaffed. I mean you can try but good luck.
Finally - I'm not going to use Redit to see true architectural fees. I looked at that link and most of it is BS.
Don't take this personally, but 5%-6% of construction fee for single family residential (if including consultants and CD+CA) is why architects will never get out of the under-paid and over-worked loop-hole.
Any client wanting a custom design single family residential home from an architect, or a client wanting a custom interior renovation from an ID or architect, already signifies that the client has the resources. They are not your average middle-class American. Your average, actually not average, the majority of Americans work hourly-rate jobs (55% to be exact). These are wealthy clients. Elon Musk-Wealthy? No. Wanting-a-custom-designed-house- in the wealthiest country in the world - wealthy? Yes.
If your client wants to go to a cheaper architect or ID because your fees are too high, that's their choice. I do understand at the outset that you might have slightly lower fees, but if you're still charging 5%-6% as your rate with many years of custom single family residential experience, you're ripping yourself off.
Even spec builders are making more with boiler-plate floor plans and shitty details, if they even have details.
My old practice was charging 7% on low end - and 9% fees on high end. Why? The firm was in demand for "modern" custom residential. The clients liked our aesthetic. Our work was published on Archdaily. I don't know what you consider "boutique" in this day and age, but if you are an architect designing a custom single family residential, regardless of aesthetics, and you have a healthy construction document set with custom details and/or quality materials, that kind of effort must be fairly compensated and 5% at 1 million or even 2 million aint it.
5% fee for a 1 million dollar residential project is literal a rip-off, even if it's in a rural area. That means your services for designing, drawing, coordinating, and administrating a 1 million dollar house is roughly 30,000 dollars: after taxes, after possible payroll for staff or contract help, after consultant fees. I don't care if the project is in Kansas City or New York City, that's a rip-off and why architects will keep getting ripped off if we think these rates are fine.
Also, the reddit link is a great resource because these are the actual clients stating what they paid vs what architects billed. But to each their own, and yes, definitely with a grain of salt.
Clients aren't willing to pay the required minimum fee of 15% to make the job profitable for an architect. This is regardless of the amount of 'resources' they have.
On a related note: % of construction fee structure only works on jobs over $5 million in construction cost. Anything lower than that and you need to find a different metric to help determine your
fee.
That's why most architects don't do custom single family homes unless they are for the super wealthy. You'll see some professionals here like Wood Guy who will do custom single family homes with lower budgets and still is profitable. I believe WG is a design build outfit though.
One last question. How long have your been practicing in the single family residential market? What are your average construction costs and fees?
Landscape Architecture, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, MEP Engineering, and Fire Protection Engineering? While you're at it, you can also become an expert Facade and Waterproofing consultant, Green Building Specialist, Specifications Writer, Energy/Thermal Modeler, Certified Interior Designer, Lighting Designer, FFE specialist, Construction Administrator, Code Expert, Zoning Expert, Entitlement Expediter, and Accessibility specialist. You can quit hiring others and hire yourself as your in-house consultant and make A TONE of $$$ (a lot more than $200k!)
Part of why Architects don't make a lot of money is because too many RA's are generalists. Next time you seek to earn $200k, ask yourself what a GP at an Urgent Care makes as opposed to a neurosurgeon at Mt. Sinai.
Money demands specialization. What would you want to specialize in?
I'll add one thing to BB's excellent point. You also don't need to 'super' specialize right away. Focusing in on a general project type or two will make you more marketable without being too limited. Emergency Services (fire stations and such), Clinical, Hospital, Multi Family, ect are just a few examples.
Once you get established in a 'general' specialty you can decide to really get 'super' specialized. For example: in the clinical setting specializing in emergency medical design, or cancer treatment facilities.
Architects are multi-specialists. We can do all of the above on many projects and coordinate among the specialists when needed. Have you ever seen the specialists try to coordinate with each other? AND make it look good? They don't, they can't, they won't.
Sep 6, 24 11:30 am ·
·
curtkram
we specialize in leading the team of specialized people.
The Quest for 200K and leaving architecture to do so
I need a little career advice. I am 40 years old, I am licensed, I have two Ivy league degrees. I currently work as a Senior Architect at a mid sized multi-family residential firm in NYC. Even though I'm a "designer/strategist" at heart, my work is mostly in CDs, CA-- project management, technical troubleshooting, client relations, regulatory compliance. I make 125k per year. I don't have kids but I have a longtime partner and we have a mortgage on a modest weekend house in the Hudson Valley. Life is good, but not great, and money is always a little tight. Thankfully I have some well performing investments on the side. In some ways, I've felt pretty stagnant since 2019 in my career trajectory, more of the same, no big leaps.
I'd like to be making 200k by the time I'm in my late 40s. My friends in tech or big law are easily making much more than this now. This is the salary I've concluded I need to make to feel comfortable living in NYC with a large margin of error, and without needing to penny pinch or cut corners like I do now. Some of my M.Arch classmates who weren't even particularly talented transitioned to companies like Rivian, Tesla, Shutterstock and Meta doing non architectural roles (albeit NOT in NYC). There's also the shame of feeling downwardly mobile relative to my parents simply as a function of the industry I have chosen to work in. At least I didn't go into journalism like many of my friends from undergrad!
Whats the easiest path to achieve this goal by repositioning the skills and experience I already have? I just still have this nagging feeling that even at 125k, by staying in architecture, I'm being shortchanged for the true value of the skills, insight and educational background I bring to the table.
My sense is that if you don't make partner at a corporate architecture firm, you plateau at around 170k in your mid 50s, which only gives you about a decade of solid earnings. Am I right about this?
The only parameters for my "transition plan" are that I have to stay in the NYC area ( no Bay Area for me), I don't want to work more than 40-50 hours a week, and I'd like to have a hybrid WFH work option (that leaves out CM or construction adjacent jobs that require being in a field trailer constantly). I could do an evening certificate program but I don't want to get another masters degree.
Here are my ideas:
-claw my way up the ladder at my current firm through brown nosing, in-firm networking, taking on even more client facing interaction
-network and brown nose like crazy at the AIANY, switch firms every two years demanding a big title and pay increase each time, focus exclusively on large corporate firms with more than 300 employees and high profit margins, make partner
-start my own single family residential firm
-start my own stamp for hire firm (commercial RE tenant fitouts, facade inspections, coop board submissions)
-work for an owners rep as a senior PM on cultural/institutional projects
-work in house for boutique residential developer as design director
-partner with a high end contractor to build out a design-build arm of their company
-work in house as design director for a large residential developer like Extell, Related
-work for a large commercial real estate firm (or brokerage/advisory firm) on their "office to residential conversion" strategy--RXR, Durst, JLL, CBRE
-something else tech related I'm not thinking of?
-move into design strategy consulting, start at Gensler then transition to Ideo, Bain, McKinsey
-similar Big consulting path to above but be an "industry expert" in architecture, construction, building technology, real estate development, housing policy
-"new development" consultant for large residential brokerage like Corcoran, Compass, advising developers on proper layouts, amenities and finish selections
-product manager at tech start up in construction or property tech spaces, i.e. 3D printed houses, modular housing, building systems?
-facilities/real estate design manager for FANG tech company designing corporate campuses or brick n mortar service or retail facilities.
-Move to large engineering conglomerate like Aecom or Stantec. Senior PM on design build public capital projects..line my pockets with public dollars!
-Work for the MTA or Port Authority as a design/construction PM on capital projects. what can say, I like trains!
Without digging into things more I think you're underpaid.
I'm a bit older than you, have been practicing for 20 plus years, and make about 20% less than you. The thing is I live in western Colorado where the cost of living is 75% less than NYC.
I don't bring this up to make you feel bad. I bring this up because I think you could reach your salary goal by moving firms - even moving cities.
Finally - don't compare architecture to tech industries or law. They are completely different fields and as such the pay is different.
Thanks Chad--but per your last sentence, this post is really more about me transitioning into tech/consulting as seamlessly as possible--in a specialty that is still related to the "built environment". Very curious if anyone has ideas about that. I'm not loving the minutae of my day-to-day much either, so that's another motivator.
Ah - sorry about that! I know people who are involved in tech and consulting in the built environment. According to them, the minutiae is surprisingly similar to architecture. Also, expect to work 50 hours a week. :(
SC, if you are looking to transition into tech or consulting, the big question is: what skills and value-add can you offer that translates over to what they do? Are you just looking to do architecture in an organization that is not a traditional architecture firm? That's one thing. But if you are looking at actually being a consultant for Deloitte or PwC or JLL or something like that, then you need to bring something to the table other than just "architect."
Yes, this is also what I'm getting at--is bridging this gap into consulting simply a matter of spinning the experiences I already have running $200M construction projects for large NYC developers (from the Architectural side) into a very persuasive pitch, or should I be pursuing some kind of certificate program in the evenings? If I worked in consulting I would most certainly not be doing architecture, but presumably advisory on any sort of business or investment decision a government, large institutional RE investor was looking to undertake in areas related to urban redevelopment, housing, construction or building science.
I think in my initial post I actually made the distinction between "doing architecture for a tech company, i.e. corporate campus planning, retail concepts, service and operations centers" and "Consulting/product management". I'm open to either, sort of curious about which path might be easier and more fruitful.
Let me flip that back on you: what do you want to DO?
Are they making 200K though? When you make that kind of money, you can pay for someone else to do you laundry, mow your lawn and cook your dinner, and still come out ahead so that extra 10 hours a week isn't really a "net loss" of work life balance
At $200 k a year you can't pay for people to do that and not live like you make $125k a year. Also you'll typically 'live to work'. If that's your choice that's fine. It's not for me though.
I only do about 80 -100 hours of overtime a year.
there is always a salary “cap” when you’re an employee. Just the way it is. Either become a partner or start your own thing. That’s the way you’ll make over $200k, and frankly it’s entirely possible. My salary in nyc is $160k and have my own projects. Last year alone, I made $260k between everything I’m doing.
BulgarBlogger - If I may ask, what else are you doing besides working at your firm? No problem if you want to keep that private. I'm just curious.
Luxury residential in nyc
How do you squeeze that in without jeopardizing your day job? And how do you field calls during normal business hours?
Just honest with my clients. I communicate with my consultants when I can and work with someone to help me produce.
As long as your clients and employer are OK with it I say good for you BulgarBlogger!
In my early career I did moonlighting - I didn't like how much it ate into my personal life.
Screw this idea if “employer is okay with it” lol. It’s no one’s business what I do outside of work on my free time. Period.
I'd have to agree. I just had a mutually respectful relationship with the firms I worked for when I was moonlighting. Heck - my past firms would send clients my way for projects that they weren't interested in (single family residential).
As long as you're not using any of your employers implements of service and aren't competing with them they can't do much about it. If you are then they can be held liable for your work and , well that's not good. Some really 'nasty' firms will have a no moonlighting and noncompete clause in their staff contracts.
Yep, but not only am I a respected valuable member of my firm, I never compete and don't use my firm's time and resources. No need for anyone to know what I do on my own time.
Very true in that situation.
I live in Seattle, am 43, licensed and make just over 200K a year (salary and bonus) working for a General Contractor in preconstruction. It is very similar work to CD's and CA. I feel like I am well compensated, but not over-paid for my experience and position. For reference, we are paying new graduates from a 4 year program in either construction management or civil engineering to be on site project engineers at about 75K/ year base salary. Unless you want to go into tech or some other industry... I would say look at construction... easier to translate your current experience into a value add.
Nice! This is pretty much the answer I was looking for. As you touched upon, in other industries, paying mid level professionals 200K is not a big deal. Its just sort of expected. Is your day to day still very architectural, or have you bracnhed out into project finance+accounting, procurement, labor relations, etc? What project types
It really depends on the day... I am focused on publicly funded work that is delivered either as CM at Risk (CM/GC) or some form of design-build... so I end up participating in the pursuit phase (business development). Once we land one, I end up managing the design process leading to a GMP and the start of construction. I end up handing the job off day to day to the on-site staff, but stay involved to answer questions and be a resource to the field team. It also allows me to stay in contact with the owner and A/E team to continue building that relationship for future jobs! We are beginning to see more public/private partnerships (P3) and other creative ways to finance major capital projects. So, in terms of finance and accounting... it is two fold... understanding how projects are funded at a macro level and then internally, setting up projects for financial success. I work very closely with our estimating department on that internal step!
Sorry. the second half of my first reply was cut off.... Is your firm a boutique operation or a multi-billion dollar juggernaut? Was making the transition a huge effort where you had to upskill and network furiously, or did you simply show up the interview and they hired you for the skills you already had? How are the hours? Do you work mostly in a nice office or a smelly construction trailer? Get a lot of frantic 7am calls when the concrete sub puts the wrong rebar in the formwork before the pour, or is it pretty contained hours? Are you a superstar executive within the firm, or simply one of a few mid-level technical specialists?
Lots of questions! I started at a smaller local GC that was making the transition from predominantly hard bid public works to the more integrated CM/GC and design-build. For them, transitioning from construction as a product (low price) to a service (being selected partially on the basis of value add during preconstruction) I was a natural fit. I stayed there for a few years and then moved to a larger (by volume) general contractor with more opportunities. I was initially hired because I worked with that smaller GC doing CA... so we knew we could communicate and they liked my attitude on site. The work hours aren't bad... less than what I was doing in traditional architecture. We start earlier in the day and end earlier. I consider myself to be between a superstar and mid-level... While we are very large corporately, I feel like our office functioned like a well funded start-up when I joined 7 years ago. All that to say, there was room for upward growth within the corporate structure.
Nice to see that one can make 200k when less than 45yrs. old. Mine's around 160k at 47, need to move up...
I'm 46 and make right 'around' $100k. I've also in a lower cost of living area that is less urban.
Op, I feel you. My partner is in tech and makes over 200k working less than 40 hrs. That compelled me to pivot, just a little. I took the second to the last options you've listed. I was working at a traditional architecture firm and making 100k as a PM. I was running at 100% and yet felt like I was getting left behind. Switched jobs to an engineering focused firm, but still doing the same work. I'm in my mid 30s, NYC, and will land around 160k w OT. I'd look for firms that focus on public projects
The most feasible way to make $200k as an architect is to share in the percentage of the company profits. As a partner/owner or even as a non-equity partner with a profit share.
I am 45 yo in NYC and recently made a jump from $125k + 20k bonus to just over $200k including the profit share. As a PM I always worked hard to make sure my projects were profitable. I was lucky to negotiate this deal as the firm was vulnerable if I were to leave when I was recruited from larger, better known firm.
I'm also in NYC and I've never earned 200K - Glad to see folks looking at this. This year and going forward look to be exceptions and I should hit over 200K. Interesting because I left the corporate world 2 years ago - I'm simply not made for it - and struck out on my own once again. Funny problem because I'm also semi retired and finding myself busier then ever before and beginning to have a back log of projects.
For whatever it is worth: I recall a conversation with a good friend some 40 years ago. Chris is a high flying attorney and we were out to dinner one night. He asked me how my practice was going and I expressed some frustration about billing and asked him how law firms do this. His answer was brilliant and I understood it instantly. He said every attorney in the firm is responsible for billing 2000 hours annually. That is brilliant.40 hour x 50 weeks equals 2 weeks of vacation. Architects need to learn this.
Smaarch - that can be interpreted a few different ways, did the friend express any specific way the firm saw that? (IE no overtime? Manage your own hours? Flexibility on project requirements? Just curious...)
As simple as I stated it - in a law firm You are responsible for bringing in 2000 hours of billable a year - then you get your 2 week vacation and maybe bonus. The math is super simple
Math is simple but factor in all the overhead has to occur outside those 2000 hours. Training, filing, etc. - which routinely means 10-20 extra hours a week (another 500-1000 hours). And there is overhead time. Don't kid yourself otherwise.
Correct Gregory.
I have several lawyer friends. They are required to have so many billable hours each year. Those hours are when they directly work on the case or meet with the client. Everything else is overhead and isn't counted. Each of my lawyer friends works at least 50 hours a week.
I was talking to a lawyer friend and they mentioned that before they go to the bathroom to "drop some friends off at the pool", they like to think of a really hard question they are working on just so they can bill the time to a project when they're on the toilet. The way that their firm structure was set up was pretty poor and if they did not meet their 2000 billable hours threshold they were docked their bonus. Which was still more then I make in a year but hey....
Ignoring the difference between lawyers and architects for a moment (though I think comparing the two is silly), the main difference is that most lawyers (not all...) bill their clients hourly. Most architects (again, not all...) bill their clients in lump sums based on either the overall scope of work, or by phase of design. On a fixed fee schedule, the faster or less hours you take to complete the task, the more money you make. I have a theory that I have not researched, but… I blame the AIA for the low wages of architects. I think 100 + years ago, the AIA wanted to shift the architecture profession away from the master builder and more towards a white-collar profession and really made an effort to divide those that design from those that build. If more people were willing to pay architects hourly, then I think the comparison to modern day law firms is a good one. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case, broadly speaking.
If you can stomach self-employed single-family residential work, I don't think it should be hard to make $200K. I'm a residential designer in rural Maine with 20+ years experience (plus 10 years as a builder) and my current billing rate is $195/hr. I have older projects at lower rates and I rarely get far over 1,000 billable hours a year, so I haven't made it to $200K yet, but it's definitely possible (and I should get there next year). Working from home, my overhead is around $20-25K/yr.
I compete solely with architects, have the same insurance, etc.. My licensed architect friends with employees, doing similar work--moderately high end, but high-performance/low embodied carbon--or those doing higher-end work ($5M-100M residential) bill out anywhere from $150-350/hr, depending on who's doing the work.
Do I know you?
Also, where in the Hudson Valley?
I'm into development. Buy land. Design. Build. Sell. Definitely able to average $200k per year.
who are you asking please
Strange Cascades
Hop up to a new firm and get a decent pay bump that way. You'll have to work harder to establish your self there compared to your comfortable/ familiar responsibilities where you're at.
Otherwise, I think you answered your own question in a way: switch to tech or consulting. I know many people that have gone to work for a big bank to be their in-house space planner, or project manager. You could try places like Deloitte or PWC. People in other fields are blown away by the skills we have.
Im always shocked how much space planners make. They are basically playing Tetris with desks.
Im a bit out of the loop on NYC architect compensation but I think youre underpaid, Im guessing its due to the size/ profitability of your office.
This is just me but the most sustainable way to make good money is to be someone with a rare/ less common skill set in a field wheres there a lot of money.
Or start your own biz.
rare/ less common skill set could be being by far the one with most expertise in your company/ field OR you have 2-3 disparate skills that are usually not contained in one person. anyways feel free to DM me. I am familiar with probs 3/4 of the positions on your list and have considering a lot of them at one pt in my career.
the classic combo is the super technical person who is also very good at being persuasive with clients/ great communicator. Clients love having the capacity to have a single point of contact who understands all of their concerns.
dont know if Tokyo is similar to NY, but a lot of my classmates from U of Tokyo quit architecture to go into real estate. Others earned better by shifting country after working on large projects for massive offices. The common denominator is to move, regardless of whether that includes shifting profession or not.
Yes know of a few people that moved onto the "dark side" but I feel the pressure there can be even more than architecture, especially when the $ is much better.
1 - The architecture profession, as a whole, is underpaid. It makes it worse when you compare to other industries (professional or non-professional) that require less education and/or licensure. Case in point, my architecture friends who transitioned to UI/UX or AR/VR sector by taking a 4-6 month intensive courses were making $145k - $200K within 2 years (living in SF, Chicago, and NYC).
2 - You can make $200K or close to $200K working in architecture under a firm. But it will be in limited positions. For example, A - Partner or Principal position in a major AEC Firm. B - Working in major non-architecture Companies (Govt, Tech, Retail, etc.) working either as Design Director, Space Planner, Facilities Manager.
Another of my architecture friends transitioned to working as a facility manager at a transportation tech startup In SF. Unlicensed. 7 years of experience. His starting salary was $165K + Stock benifits. He only does program drawings and updates existing floor plans if they want to change some office spaces. No construction documents. No CA. Incredibly boring work. But his priority is/was salary.
About starting your own practice:
3 - If you want NET PROFIT $200K / year as a firm owner you need to think about all of your expenses and if you can find a client base willing to take your rate. The likelihood of you getting multiple projects in the first year, although not impossible, is difficult. So you may not be netting $200K until you establish a consistent client base.
For example if you land 2 ground up 3000 SF residential projects per 1.5 years, and you want to net $200K, and let's say you're doing cost/sf rate and you're doing all the drawings by yourself. You would need to charge them about $45/SF ($135,000 per project, $270,000 for both projects) to tackle overhead costs, taxes, consultant fees (unless you want owner to take consultants).
The reality of you doing 2 ground up projects at the same time, with no staff or contracted draft work is a recipe for overwork, so you will most likely need to hire or contract at least one person to help during CD, then you need to increase your fee. So then you need to see if a client is willing to pay a new startup $135,000 in Design + Consultant Fees (excluding construction cost, land acquisition cost) for a 3000 SF residential project. If you contract temporary help just for CD, add another ~$35K. And believe it or not, after you establish a rapport with clients and depending on the aesthetics of your project and its "marketability", you can hit even higher design fees. I know some architects who make $150,000 per interior residential renovation 2000 sf project. It's doable, it just takes time.
Unless your are an established architect, $135k fee for a 3000 SF house would be difficult.
I'd like to know more about the architects that make fees like that. Unless it's a boutique firm in a major metro area with a wealthy client you're not going to be making that much on such a small residential project. Assuming 10% arch fee, Depending on your area that would be around a $1.7 million, 3,000 sf home.
For a highly talented, sought-after architect, I can see fees like that being possible. I'm only marginally talented and not an architect, living in a rural area, and I am $60K-$90K for a 3,000 sq.ft. house. For a current 3200sf new home and 3-car garage I'm around $100K, but it's quite detailed and I'm also doing interior design and cabinet detailing.
Wood Guy - I assume you're also carrying consultants within that 100k too, right?
Josh - I would also assume that WG's fees include doing CD's and CA. Professional Student is saying to charge $135k just for design fees. CD's would add another $35k.
I'm not sure where Professional Student is getting these numbers from.
That's $170k in just architectural fees on a 3,000 sf house. :o
I would love that to just design. That would be a damn good house after a year of design.
$13-16k for all including engineering (no interior design or cabinet design) and people think I'm super expensive. I need that space planner job.
we were billing one client over 20k per month in design fees for their custom cottage. Sure, it cost north of 10 million communist loonies, but the client paid for every hour spent in the 5+ years it took to finish. Construction is just wrapping up on this one.
Non -
Impressive. A client with a lot of money who wants to spend it!
How many of your single family residential clients are like that?
How many single family residential projects do you work on in a year?
^2 in the 10mil range. Currently balls deep in low-rise (6 unit) high-end vacation condo projects where units are expected to sell for 2-4mil each. Got 5 of those on the board right now. Other res projects are more modest 500k to 2mil. Also worth noting that my office does not do residential... Only 2 of us here (me and the firm president) touch this space.
I hear 'ya Non.
Single family residential is difficult to make a profit on unless it's in the $5 million range. When I've done single family homes in the past they've been a 'favor' to clients. We typically didn't make any money on them.
At my current firm we don't do any single or multi family housing. Not enough fee and too much liability.
That's like $4 right?
Chad, who said we're making a profit on those 20k monthly invoices?
Let's stop calling sfr and call it what it is, the third vacation home in a highly sought after resort community. We do exclusively this type of project and while I personally am not in the 200k point, my boss and only other member of the firm do get that and more. In the last 6 years we completed 3 houses over 6000 sq ft and 5-8 mil construction cost, and another 5 or 6 gut to the studs remodels in the 3-5 mil range. Can't complain not getting 200k because the perks of living here are great, I don't see more than 10 people a day, no traffic riddled commute, and all the outdoors you can need, great summer weather and plenty of snow in winter.
Josh, no consultants are under me. There is a structural engineer involved but he bills our client directly, and I did a majority of the structural engineering. There is also a mechanical engineer, landscape architect and civil engineer as well, all billing the client directly. This project started a few years ago and I didn't have it in my contract that I could increase my billing rate annually, so I'm charging 66% of my current rate. Over 750 hours of design, from schematics through CDs and also including at least a couple hundred hours for interior design and cabinet detailing. They are unusual clients who I've designed for in the past.
Like most of my projects, this one is a primary residence "forever home." I do have one now that's a vacation home, around $1.8M construction, and I usually have one in the works, but it's maybe 10-15% of my projects. None are in resort areas, but people do like the coast of Maine where most of my projects are.
I mean, Maine is awesome.
Not only are some firms making 135K in 3000 SF residential, some are making much more. The firms that I see billing at these rates are 2 fold - Interiors for ultra-wealthy clients and Firms that do mainly "neo-classical" or "traditional aesthetics" that typically cater to more of a "conservative" client base willing to pay high design fees. These high fees are exclusive of location even though location definitely plays a part.
Also, if you go on reddit, with a grain of salt, you will see lots of architects and designers billing at these rates higher, but also MUCH lower.
Ironically, if you want to see true architect fees, go on reddit and see people post "is this a fair architect fee" - you will see the diverse array of fees based on project location, sf, and residential types.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Homebuilding/search/?q=architect+fee&type=link&cId=ff03d835-9157-4d13-a9a8-7817dc2aac2e&iId=ccbf10ac-b996-49b6-bc7b-46bd2fa84e2d
Chad - I am including Consultants, CD and CA in those fees. The 35K extra is if you need to HIRE another person to help with CD if you are doing 2 projects at once.
Even with consultant fees that $135K fee for a 3,000 sf home with a construction cost of $2 million is a bit high. That's about 7% of construction cost. Most single family projects are in the 5-6%. I assumed you must be basing your numbers on some very wealthy clients and boutique firms.
Also - you can't charge the client more because you're understaffed. I mean you can try but good luck.
Finally - I'm not going to use Redit to see true architectural fees. I looked at that link and most of it is BS.
Don't take this personally, but 5%-6% of construction fee for single family residential (if including consultants and CD+CA) is why architects will never get out of the under-paid and over-worked loop-hole.
Any client wanting a custom design single family residential home from an architect, or a client wanting a custom interior renovation from an ID or architect, already signifies that the client has the resources. They are not your average middle-class American. Your average, actually not average, the majority of Americans work hourly-rate jobs (55% to be exact). These are wealthy clients. Elon Musk-Wealthy? No. Wanting-a-custom-designed-house- in the wealthiest country in the world - wealthy? Yes.
If your client wants to go to a cheaper architect or ID because your fees are too high, that's their choice. I do understand at the outset that you might have slightly lower fees, but if you're still charging 5%-6% as your rate with many years of custom single family residential experience, you're ripping yourself off. Even spec builders are making more with boiler-plate floor plans and shitty details, if they even have details.
My old practice was charging 7% on low end - and 9% fees on high end. Why? The firm was in demand for "modern" custom residential. The clients liked our aesthetic. Our work was published on Archdaily. I don't know what you consider "boutique" in this day and age, but if you are an architect designing a custom single family residential, regardless of aesthetics, and you have a healthy construction document set with custom details and/or quality materials, that kind of effort must be fairly compensated and 5% at 1 million or even 2 million aint it.
5% fee for a 1 million dollar residential project is literal a rip-off, even if it's in a rural area. That means your services for designing, drawing, coordinating, and administrating a 1 million dollar house is roughly 30,000 dollars: after taxes, after possible payroll for staff or contract help, after consultant fees. I don't care if the project is in Kansas City or New York City, that's a rip-off and why architects will keep getting ripped off if we think these rates are fine.
Also, the reddit link is a great resource because these are the actual clients stating what they paid vs what architects billed. But to each their own, and yes, definitely with a grain of salt.
Professional Student -
Kind of.
Clients aren't willing to pay the required minimum fee of 15% to make the job profitable for an architect. This is regardless of the amount of 'resources' they have.
On a related note: % of construction fee structure only works on jobs over $5 million in construction cost. Anything lower than that and you need to find a different metric to help determine your fee.
That's why most architects don't do custom single family homes unless they are for the super wealthy. You'll see some professionals here like Wood Guy who will do custom single family homes with lower budgets and still is profitable. I believe WG is a design build outfit though.
One last question. How long have your been practicing in the single family residential market? What are your average construction costs and fees?
.
Hey - I have an idea:
Why don't you get a license for:
Landscape Architecture, Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, MEP Engineering, and Fire Protection Engineering? While you're at it, you can also become an expert Facade and Waterproofing consultant, Green Building Specialist, Specifications Writer, Energy/Thermal Modeler, Certified Interior Designer, Lighting Designer, FFE specialist, Construction Administrator, Code Expert, Zoning Expert, Entitlement Expediter, and Accessibility specialist. You can quit hiring others and hire yourself as your in-house consultant and make A TONE of $$$ (a lot more than $200k!)
Part of why Architects don't make a lot of money is because too many RA's are generalists. Next time you seek to earn $200k, ask yourself what a GP at an Urgent Care makes as opposed to a neurosurgeon at Mt. Sinai.
Money demands specialization. What would you want to specialize in?
I'll add one thing to BB's excellent point. You also don't need to 'super' specialize right away. Focusing in on a general project type or two will make you more marketable without being too limited. Emergency Services (fire stations and such), Clinical, Hospital, Multi Family, ect are just a few examples.
Once you get established in a 'general' specialty you can decide to really get 'super' specialized. For example: in the clinical setting specializing in emergency medical design, or cancer treatment facilities.
Architects are multi-specialists. We can do all of the above on many projects and coordinate among the specialists when needed. Have you ever seen the specialists try to coordinate with each other? AND make it look good? They don't, they can't, they won't.
we specialize in leading the team of specialized people.
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.