so i am in the midst of doing the work that i feel is necessary to start an architectural practice of my own. i would ultimately like to have a partner in this endeavor. i have an idea of the qualities and professional experience that i would like to have in a partner, but have yet to meet someone that fits that description that has the desire or risk appetite to start their own firm.
i am interested in hearing from archinector's who are, or have been in professional partnerships. how did you meet your partner? how and when did you know that it was a good fit for both of you, or not? what worked best for you, and what didn't work?
My partner was my best bud from undergraduate school, and we knew we could work well together because we'd been friends for 20 years already.
Friends of mine who have brought on not-best-friend partners have always looked for people with different skills than themselves. Diversifying the skills and experiences, as well as the network, helps firms succeed, it seems.
Think of it like dating, you want to try it out before you get married.
I often "partner up" on projects to increase firepower or compliment my skill set without a big commitment. It's a great test of shared responsibility and professional integrity.
@Donna: "My partner was..." You're not partnered any more?
I'm doing exactly what Miles just suggested right now. Working on some side gigs with a workmate and testing the waters. We started working together because I put myself out there as someone interested in working on things outside of my day job.
I talk with friends back home frequently about opening up shop someday. I'm still figuring this out, but what Donna said makes the most sense. You either have mates from back in school that you know you can depend on and trust, or you take your time with new people and see how things pan out.
@ donna - i've heard this works well for some partnerships. i consider myself to be a well-rounded architect, and prefer the same in a partner. i am looking for a collaborative venture were we can share all of the aspects of a practice.
@ miles - i do plan on going through a couple of "test" projects prior to proposing. i have partnered up on projects before, but did not have good experiences. those experiences didn't work out because the other person did not perform their responsibilities as agreed.
" i consider myself to be a well-rounded architect"
Jack of all trades, master of none?
You would help yourself tremendously by recognizing you are better as some things than others. Otherwise you run a risk of becoming a micromanager noone likes working with.
I would strongly recommend you avoid going into business with a close friend. Everything is good when things are going well, but if you have differing opinions or there is stress, it will get ugly. With a purely business relationship, you can focus on business.
The best partnerships will be ones that there are complimentary aspects, not identical twins. People think differently, have different approaches, are good at different things, etc.
Having someone that is good at the architecture side and someone that is good at the business/accounting/marketing side would be a good start.
i was the brought partner, not the bringer. our lead partner started the firm in '97, and then from '02 to '05 brought people into the firm that he thought rounded things out - a business manager, a leader of design/production, and a marketing leader.
not that any of us do only these things, but they did become our primary roles.
after a few years of the firm evolving with this management team, he developed the partner structure for the four of us over the course of a year, giving us time to make the transition with clients, staff, and ourselves.
my business partner is very different than i am in terms of strengths and weaknesses. together we cover the bases quite well.
we met in university. i literally took his chair in lab of professor here in tokyo. he handed in dissertation for phd and then went off to start real estate business and i filled the gap. a few years later we started office together while i was finishing up my own dissertation. we share a lot of history because of that. same friends, same stories about the prof, et cetera.
we argue constantly about design but in a good way. makes the work much better. we do share ideas about how to run the office though and generally share the same vision for where the work should be going. that is important in my opinion.
against trace's suggestion we are very close friends. i don't see anyway to run an office that doesn't involve a level of closeness that is akin to family. we spend so much time and effort on our work that anything less would never work. That is just me though. i like my business to be personal. but can see how others might prefer it to be less so.
Having witnessed a fairly large number of firms form over the years -- and having also witnessed a certain proportion of those firm dissolve at some later date -- I hold a fairly firm conviction that there is no single formula that will predict whether a partnership will succeed or fail. "Different strokes for different folks" certainly is applicable here.
However, certain generalities have emerged in my thinking about this topic. What follows may seem obvious to many, but you would be surprised at the number of firms I've seen crack up on the rocks over these issues:
a. It's very important for partners to hold compatible - if not consistent - values about the practice of architecture and the 'purpose' of the firm. For example, if one is only concerned about making money (at any cost) and the other is only concerned about doing the best possible design (at any cost) then trouble is bound to emerge over both economics and design.
b. It's very important for partners to embrace similar attitudes about work / life balance - or negotiate mutually acceptable accommodations up front if they don't. For example, if one spends his/her entire waking life at the office while the other works 9-5 M-F, at some point there will be a dispute over relative contribution.
c. It's very important for partners to hold similar views about what they want the firm to become. For example, if one wants the firm to grow as large as possible (with all the organizational implications that implies) while the other really wants to deal only with an intimate 'boutique' type firm, then disputes over growth, and the related implications to how a partner spends his/her time, are inevitable.
It's important to recognize that some of these issues don't seem terribly important during the formative years of a firm. Yet, their importance tends to expand over time, especially as the firm takes hold and starts to grow. These issues also tend to become quite volatile when the firm goes through the periodic rough patches that seem inevitable in modern day practice.
It's also important for partners to anticipate revisiting -- and renegotiating, if necessary -- their respective roles and responsibilities in the firm as time passes. People do not remain static over the course of their careers -- most people's interests evolve with time. Firm's must be flexible enough to recognize, and respond to, these evolutions. Just because one partner starts as "the production guy" during the firm's early years doesn't mean he's going to be satisfied in that role for 30+ years.
I have another question. Are there potential implications with starting a practice with someone who has loads of debt (grad school student loans) that they are not on top of repaying, as they haven't had the funds in a number of years due to pursuing humanitarian work? Given that there is complete trust in this person both personally and professionally, I'm wondering if there are any potential problems with someone having ownership in a firm should a collector come knocking, could something like that financially affect the the firm?
@ tagalong: most firms eventually want to establish a line-of-credit with their bank, to help with fluctuations in cash flow. Banks typically require personal guarantees from the partners in order to extend a LOC. If your business partner is essentially insolvent, then you will be the only one the bank can look to for repayment if the LOC goes into default. That's a bad place for you to be.
Also, the early days of a design firm typically are, at best, an economic roller coaster ride. It is not uncommon for the partners to not pay themselves on a regular basis and there's often a need to infuse the firm with personal cash to meet payroll, make the rent payment, pay for office supplies, etc. You have to ask yourself are you willing to carry this economic burden yourself - and, if so, under what conditions.
At a minimum, if you have a business partner who has little financial strength to commit to the firm, then the ownership split should reflect that -- more like 75-25, 80-20, 90-10, instead of 50-50. This may seem harsh, but it reflects the actual distribution of economic risk.
Unequal financial exposure can lead to even greater resentment -- especially when creditors come calling.
Contributions to a design firm's success are not just the result of professional ability -- there are many different aspects that contribute to, or weigh down, the ability of a firm to move forward.
I've seen too many firms formed with the attitude "hey, let's start a club". What we do is a hard business and people thinking about starting such a business are well advised to think long and hard about what each individual is bringing (in a holistic sense) to the table.
The distribution of ownership interests should reflect those contributions in a fair and equitable manner. If the potential business partners cannot have a reasonable discussion about those topics, and reach reasonable and fair conclusions related thereto, as they form the business, then their future ability to tackle and resolve difficult practice related problems is doubtful.
My partner Bernie is currently in jail on investment fraud conviction, and I feel I'm the only one making any effort with our closet renovation firm. What should I do?
partnerships - how do you make them work?
so i am in the midst of doing the work that i feel is necessary to start an architectural practice of my own. i would ultimately like to have a partner in this endeavor. i have an idea of the qualities and professional experience that i would like to have in a partner, but have yet to meet someone that fits that description that has the desire or risk appetite to start their own firm.
i am interested in hearing from archinector's who are, or have been in professional partnerships. how did you meet your partner? how and when did you know that it was a good fit for both of you, or not? what worked best for you, and what didn't work?
your advice would be greatly appreciated.
My partner was my best bud from undergraduate school, and we knew we could work well together because we'd been friends for 20 years already.
Friends of mine who have brought on not-best-friend partners have always looked for people with different skills than themselves. Diversifying the skills and experiences, as well as the network, helps firms succeed, it seems.
Having a 'partner' sounds kind of gay.
I prefer 'non-romantic business companion'. You don't want to alienate you suburban jesusland market.
Think of it like dating, you want to try it out before you get married.
I often "partner up" on projects to increase firepower or compliment my skill set without a big commitment. It's a great test of shared responsibility and professional integrity.
@Donna: "My partner was..." You're not partnered any more?
I'm doing exactly what Miles just suggested right now. Working on some side gigs with a workmate and testing the waters. We started working together because I put myself out there as someone interested in working on things outside of my day job.
I talk with friends back home frequently about opening up shop someday. I'm still figuring this out, but what Donna said makes the most sense. You either have mates from back in school that you know you can depend on and trust, or you take your time with new people and see how things pan out.
@ donna - i've heard this works well for some partnerships. i consider myself to be a well-rounded architect, and prefer the same in a partner. i am looking for a collaborative venture were we can share all of the aspects of a practice.
@ miles - i do plan on going through a couple of "test" projects prior to proposing. i have partnered up on projects before, but did not have good experiences. those experiences didn't work out because the other person did not perform their responsibilities as agreed.
" i consider myself to be a well-rounded architect"
Jack of all trades, master of none?
You would help yourself tremendously by recognizing you are better as some things than others. Otherwise you run a risk of becoming a micromanager noone likes working with.
I would strongly recommend you avoid going into business with a close friend. Everything is good when things are going well, but if you have differing opinions or there is stress, it will get ugly. With a purely business relationship, you can focus on business.
The best partnerships will be ones that there are complimentary aspects, not identical twins. People think differently, have different approaches, are good at different things, etc.
Having someone that is good at the architecture side and someone that is good at the business/accounting/marketing side would be a good start.
i was the brought partner, not the bringer. our lead partner started the firm in '97, and then from '02 to '05 brought people into the firm that he thought rounded things out - a business manager, a leader of design/production, and a marketing leader.
not that any of us do only these things, but they did become our primary roles.
after a few years of the firm evolving with this management team, he developed the partner structure for the four of us over the course of a year, giving us time to make the transition with clients, staff, and ourselves.
my business partner is very different than i am in terms of strengths and weaknesses. together we cover the bases quite well.
we met in university. i literally took his chair in lab of professor here in tokyo. he handed in dissertation for phd and then went off to start real estate business and i filled the gap. a few years later we started office together while i was finishing up my own dissertation. we share a lot of history because of that. same friends, same stories about the prof, et cetera.
we argue constantly about design but in a good way. makes the work much better. we do share ideas about how to run the office though and generally share the same vision for where the work should be going. that is important in my opinion.
against trace's suggestion we are very close friends. i don't see anyway to run an office that doesn't involve a level of closeness that is akin to family. we spend so much time and effort on our work that anything less would never work. That is just me though. i like my business to be personal. but can see how others might prefer it to be less so.
jump, working with a friend has worked out for you because you may be the easiest going dude on the planet.
The rest of us have some serious issues... hey! what you lookin' at?! I'm talking here!
Having witnessed a fairly large number of firms form over the years -- and having also witnessed a certain proportion of those firm dissolve at some later date -- I hold a fairly firm conviction that there is no single formula that will predict whether a partnership will succeed or fail. "Different strokes for different folks" certainly is applicable here.
However, certain generalities have emerged in my thinking about this topic. What follows may seem obvious to many, but you would be surprised at the number of firms I've seen crack up on the rocks over these issues:
a. It's very important for partners to hold compatible - if not consistent - values about the practice of architecture and the 'purpose' of the firm. For example, if one is only concerned about making money (at any cost) and the other is only concerned about doing the best possible design (at any cost) then trouble is bound to emerge over both economics and design.
b. It's very important for partners to embrace similar attitudes about work / life balance - or negotiate mutually acceptable accommodations up front if they don't. For example, if one spends his/her entire waking life at the office while the other works 9-5 M-F, at some point there will be a dispute over relative contribution.
c. It's very important for partners to hold similar views about what they want the firm to become. For example, if one wants the firm to grow as large as possible (with all the organizational implications that implies) while the other really wants to deal only with an intimate 'boutique' type firm, then disputes over growth, and the related implications to how a partner spends his/her time, are inevitable.
It's important to recognize that some of these issues don't seem terribly important during the formative years of a firm. Yet, their importance tends to expand over time, especially as the firm takes hold and starts to grow. These issues also tend to become quite volatile when the firm goes through the periodic rough patches that seem inevitable in modern day practice.
It's also important for partners to anticipate revisiting -- and renegotiating, if necessary -- their respective roles and responsibilities in the firm as time passes. People do not remain static over the course of their careers -- most people's interests evolve with time. Firm's must be flexible enough to recognize, and respond to, these evolutions. Just because one partner starts as "the production guy" during the firm's early years doesn't mean he's going to be satisfied in that role for 30+ years.
nice points quizzical.
I have another question. Are there potential implications with starting a practice with someone who has loads of debt (grad school student loans) that they are not on top of repaying, as they haven't had the funds in a number of years due to pursuing humanitarian work? Given that there is complete trust in this person both personally and professionally, I'm wondering if there are any potential problems with someone having ownership in a firm should a collector come knocking, could something like that financially affect the the firm?
@ tagalong: most firms eventually want to establish a line-of-credit with their bank, to help with fluctuations in cash flow. Banks typically require personal guarantees from the partners in order to extend a LOC. If your business partner is essentially insolvent, then you will be the only one the bank can look to for repayment if the LOC goes into default. That's a bad place for you to be.
Also, the early days of a design firm typically are, at best, an economic roller coaster ride. It is not uncommon for the partners to not pay themselves on a regular basis and there's often a need to infuse the firm with personal cash to meet payroll, make the rent payment, pay for office supplies, etc. You have to ask yourself are you willing to carry this economic burden yourself - and, if so, under what conditions.
At a minimum, if you have a business partner who has little financial strength to commit to the firm, then the ownership split should reflect that -- more like 75-25, 80-20, 90-10, instead of 50-50. This may seem harsh, but it reflects the actual distribution of economic risk.
Unequal partnerships can lead to resentment.
I resent you for saying that.
Unequal financial exposure can lead to even greater resentment -- especially when creditors come calling.
Contributions to a design firm's success are not just the result of professional ability -- there are many different aspects that contribute to, or weigh down, the ability of a firm to move forward.
I've seen too many firms formed with the attitude "hey, let's start a club". What we do is a hard business and people thinking about starting such a business are well advised to think long and hard about what each individual is bringing (in a holistic sense) to the table.
The distribution of ownership interests should reflect those contributions in a fair and equitable manner. If the potential business partners cannot have a reasonable discussion about those topics, and reach reasonable and fair conclusions related thereto, as they form the business, then their future ability to tackle and resolve difficult practice related problems is doubtful.
@ quizzical - your posts are exactly what i needed. these types of potential issues are what's weighing on my mind.
quiz should start an advice column on here.
Dear quizzical,
My partner Bernie is currently in jail on investment fraud conviction, and I feel I'm the only one making any effort with our closet renovation firm. What should I do?
Rusty, I'd say it's time to come out of the closet.
Jeffy, I do on daily basis. But noone seems to care.
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.