^ I can’t draw a graph on here, but in this guy’s case it looks like this ^ Barns-moonshot-barns. “Rich” might be a clue…but he has a $200 green chair for sale on his website…and lists his fax number…who owns a fax machine?
There is a piece on Meier in the News Section where he was asked about talent & ambition proposing that talent is of little use without ambition….maybe the answer is ambition because it sure isn’t talent.
^ Don’t want to sound like I’m climbing on the guy, agree that “success” is in your heart, just trying to understand the anomaly…maybe it’s the groundhog theory, he stepped outside, saw his shadow then ran back underground….”(he) coulda had class. (he) coulda been a contender. (he) coulda been somebody…..”
Huge difference between groundhog and coulda been ... gotta say I love the groundhog idea. Could also have been a good connection.
A friend got my old man the interior lobby design on a highrise, which he parlayed into design architect for the entire project, much to the chagrin of Emery Roth & Sons. A decade later the same friend set up the same deal with a different client, and once again Norman wrangled his way into the commission as design architect for the entire project (565 Fifth Avenue), again much to the chagrin of Emery Roth & Sons.
^^^ maybe another good question, how do you pull off a $130 million project with 8 people? Is possible if that's all they did for 4 years...which looks like the case, come to think of it there was a shortage of shoe stores between 1997-2001.
BTW – The number was larger than $130 Million, they also did a million square foot distribution center at the same time…maybe he’s just worn out.
Miles, not casting an aspersion on your father, but the underlying answer to my inquiry may simply be personality…Anderson obviously has connections in the rag trade…did something biggish with Levi in the Meatpacking District…he just did an in-and-out…think I have my answer, just wondered if there was something more to learn.
The website Nextdoor is a total shitshow, you guys. It's somewhat terrifying to see how blatantly ignorant a whole bunch of my neighbors are. A guy called the proposed bus rapid transit line here a "mugger mover". Lord. I may have to quit it just to keep my blood pressure safe.
i have the nextdoor ap on my phone. pretty much all lost/found dog posts. and occasionally cats.
Feb 21, 16 1:06 pm ·
·
jla-x,
Often with bigger firms, the firm's principals don't practice architecture. They practice business administration. Sure, a person may have a license and use the title but that alone does not necessarily mean a person is really practicing architecture at least to some perspectives on what practicing architecture means.
There are of course varying opinions on this. So it isn't right or wrong. Just varying legitimate perspectives.
Here we go again- the guy with no architectural experience and no Firm employment history, giving dissertation on how "it" works...
Feb 21, 16 5:17 pm ·
·
JeromeS,
I've talked to firm principals in firms like SRG and ZGF in scale and they spend more time in meetings than they do in actually architectural practice. Here's the reason why, running the business of a corporation *IS* a full-time job. In case of firms, you have full-time job position for chief executive officer (ie. managing principal), chief financial officer (whose job it is to manage the finances of the firm), chief operation officer(s) for directing the entire firm. Usually, there is so many principals at that level. They are EXECUTIVE positions. In large firms, those executive positions are entirely dedicated to business development, administration, management, marketing and corporate strategic planning, etc.
You pretty much no longer have the time to actually do designing of projects. The simple point is, there just isn't the time in a 40-60 hours a week work schedule. These people just don't do the real designing for a reason. They are in meetings ALL THE TIME from the time the start of the work day all the way to the closing. When they aren't in meetings, they are on the phone. The real work is usually done at middle-level management and down not at the executive level (principals).
This is because most firms have three general tiers: Principals, Associates (which maybe sub-divided into 2-3 tiers within it), and Technical/Professional staff or simply staff.
The principals are typically the executive level. I've talked to people who are principals of firms. I know a number of them all over the country. Their role in the day to day designing dramatically diminishes when they get into that level because they do the running the business that they don't have the time. It isn't like they can just spend 2 hours a day running the business and spend the remaining 6 hours or so doing the actual project. That's a fact of life that every principal I have talked to. You might get to do a little bit of designing but that's a fact that the principals lose the time needed to design projects because managing corporations are more complicated and more meetings oriented.
Feb 21, 16 6:11 pm ·
·
There is a reason why the executives of a large corporation are not directly involved with the creation and development and manufacturing of the products. The same thing with service oriented businesses. Even when the executives have the background and had did those things during their career but once you take on the executive hat, it's a full-time job in and of itself.
I may not work for a firm, I do know how firms operates. I operate a business and also worked for other businesses. There is certain things that are common with all businesses in their respective scale.
Remember, I was talking about corporate firms and they operate basically like any other corporation.
Feb 21, 16 6:22 pm ·
·
jla-x,
That's perfectly fine.
This is why some people run large firms and some don't.
Rick I'd be interested to hear who you talked to at SRG and ZGF who told you these things. Both firms have 15+ partners, who all have different roles. Some of them are not very involved in design, while others of them do little else but design and would certainly take issue with your generalizations.
The thing is about principals, large or small firms, is that you’re usually out front at procurement of the project…it takes skill to disengage from clients, tough not to be involved with design. The whole purpose of having partners is to spread the skillsets around. Had a fairly large practice with a total of 4 partners, none of us ever stopped designing (completely)….the advantage of being a partner is it comes with minions.
Richard is right about the “business”, but if you’re going to be successful you better accept that part…somehow it all gets done, lots of good help….it spoils the fun somewhat, but after all its infinitely more fun to drive the boat.
Feb 21, 16 10:02 pm ·
·
eeayoeeeayo,
WARNING: LONG POST & inherent repetition..... take a moment to sip coffee at the pauses or something.
Perhaps but as firms get from those firm size and larger.... the role of partners meant to be more business oriented vs. design role.
While those in SRG may not explicitly say what I said but when they are constantly in the administrative role and not so much directly in the design, that is because the roles that Principals are generally suppose to be.... executive roles. Executives are business administrative oriented roles.
SRG and ZGF would be on the smaller spectrum and more in the mid-size firm scale. Those in even larger firms, they are in the administrative level. While they oversee projects that happens in the firm, they don't do the drafting so much. They don't really have that role of the explicit designing. Their role as project architect of responsible charge is much less than it would be otherwise.
There are many shades in reality. So there is variability and there isn't a hard line of what size firms where the firm principals are no longer on the the active role directly with the projects. However, the point is as the firms becomes larger firms, the role of being directly involved in the design is greatly diminished when becoming principals of a firm.
While they maybe involved in client relations and to some extent in the programmatic dialog defining certain project specifications, you won't see them directly drawing out and designing. That is usually casted down responsibilities.
If you are a principal of one of these size firms, you'll know your direct role in the designs of projects is much less because the role is more business oriented because that is what the executive level of any corporation is about.
Since most principals aren't going to be young and desiring to be spending 80+ hours a week working, they have to spend less direct involvement and delegate and direct the human resources.
(PAUSE)
With 15 or so principals in a firm, the role is often being actively involved in project procurement, client/market sector public relations, meeting prospective clients with proposals, oversight of projects and staffing of human resource, business management/administration, strategic planning, meetings, etc.
You just don't see them that much preparing the drawings and the presentations aside from what they need to so do in terms of involvement in meetings with regard to projects.
Yes, they would be involved with projects at the oversight but they aren't necessarily as directly invested in the projects as the project architect would be or other parties.
They would never be as directly involved on projects at the level I would be as a sole-practitioner building designer or others as sole-practitioner architects. For those like me or other sole-practitioners, we don't have the human resource to delegate these roles. We have to personally be involved with each project, directly and extensively throughout if not literally do all of the work of all projects by one self. Principals of large firms do not have that level of capacity to be involved in projects. At least, rarely.
An individual principal may take a select choice of projects and spend extra time to do the work if the project really means something to that particular principal. Aside from that, they are business oriented / administrative role.
(PAUSE)
As one architect who is a principal said, the key duty and quality of a principal of a firm is the ability to delegate work to the right people in the business. They have to learn to let go of the direct reign of the projects and distribute the tasks and duties and learn to run the business and shift focus to business leadership. That is why firms have senior associates or associates that have the direct responsibility to projects. These project architects and associated project managers run the projects.
The shift to running the business vs. running the projects. When a firm reaches a certain size and scale, the role of the principals is more running the business and procuring projects and less directly doing the projects. They might at most have 2 hours a day to work on projects but clients expect full-time progress on projects not just someone spending 8-10 hours a week. This is why they have the project team.
While a principal maybe part of the project teams, they are oversight not necessarily doing the project. While a principal may oversee progress of projects and report them to the clients or the collection of fees from projects and account them in the financial reporting processes and vitality checks of the business.
(PAUSE)
Since you are an architect, while what I said is a generality because that is all ANYONE can really say because nothing written can be exact when there is a sort of fluidity in the dynamics of how each firm operates. No one firm is exactly alike. However, there is general commonality at each scale of firm sizes but each size tier is soft edges. While I can give an abstract size tier with a specified number of people and principals, reality is more complicated to make that perfect. People have said countless times and well documented on multiple architecture forums over the years that in mid to large size firms, the role of principals becomes more and more administrative vs. being directly as project architects. They just don't have the time to invest time like that and have to do their role in running the business and let the hired human resources such as senior associates run the projects and the principals role is then about running the business and oversight of project teams. As it is important to know what is going on down below you but they have to delegate more. That is what it is to be a principal of a large firm. I am not saying they don't know about the projects going on or not have any input in the projects but you have to let go of "running the projects" to "running the business" in a larger scale firm.
That is what I was getting at. You'll know deep down there is a pervasive truth to what I am getting at as the essential point I was getting at to jla-x.
I can't say all firms are exactly alike. It would be wrong to say so. I think we can agree that reality is more complicated but in a writing I have to abstract somewhat and apply some generality.
While ZGF or SRG will likely have firm principals that are more involved than an even larger firms as they are more mid-size firms. At the top end of the large firms, you have Aecom and Gensler and those firms, well... lets face it, the principals at the top level (executive) are definitely going to have a business oriented role. You probably can guess it that the top executive board / board of directors, etc. just don't do the actual projects.
Considering they are often involved in their public relation roles be it as spokespersons or keynote speakers or whatever else all over the place. At a certain level, you are involved in all these other roles being the public face of the firms, procuring projects, etc.
It is all of this stuff that makes being directly involved with doing the architectural design as THE architect of projects.... very seldom. This is something that they don't really have the time of really doing so much.
Feb 21, 16 10:11 pm ·
·
The thing is about principals, large or small firms, is that you’re usually out front at procurement of the project…it takes skill to disengage from clients, tough not to be involved with design. The whole purpose of having partners is to spread the skillsets around. Had a fairly large practice with a total of 4 partners, none of us ever stopped designing (completely)….the advantage of being a partner is it comes with minions.
Richard is right about the “business”, but if you’re going to be successful you better accept that part…somehow it all gets done, lots of good help….it spoils the fun somewhat, but after all its infinitely more fun to drive the boat.
Note: Not directed at Carrera.
Yep, exactly as Carerra said and an opportunity to put a condensed version of the TLDR version above.
The essential point is the role of being a principal of a firm, especially as the firms get larger is letting go of the reigns of "running the projects" and taking the reigns of 'running the business'. The point is delegating the direct role of being the architect of record to the project architect(s) and project managers who are usually senior associates. While a good principal will always manage oversight of project teams but they don't have the role of being the architect of projects.
I am not saying that principals stop designing just because they are a principal but the size of firms will effect how much. In small to medium size firms, the principals will still be involved in the design to some level or another but in the larger firms, this because considerably more rare.
Personally, I would almost never want to not still have involvement in designing but there is the key principle role of principals is to run the business and procure the project.
What I said in 'running the business' does include involvement in procuring work for the firm and then delegate responsibilities of the projects to project teams lead by project architects / project managers/directors or whatever that term is in the firm structure. Principals may or may not be the project architect but in larger firms, they will be less often the project architect but still involved but more limited than they would be as a small firm.
See the thing is Rick that I worked at one of the firms you're describing above, and the reality is that certain partners were the face of the business, and others were mostly in behind-the-scenes administrative roles, but there were others who were regularly 70% billable and spent most of their time on broad-brush schematic design, including quite a lot of drawings, Revit, Sketchup, etc.. Some partners fit your idea of what is typical - but others are in fact the design minds behind most if not all of the firm's projects. That's the case in many other firms too, including several in the top 100 grossing firms in the US right now. It just isn't true that this happens "very seldomly". Your vision of "how things are" doesn't fit my firm now either, where I am one of two partners. You'd know so much more about "how things are" in architecture firms if you'd work in one.
Feb 21, 16 10:38 pm ·
·
This article is relatively true. I'm sure we can nitpick little things but mostly inconsequential....
So first of all, your own link says "A principal architect develops design concepts."
More importantly: the most credible sources about what goes on in architecture firms are architects, and others who work in architecture firms.
Feb 21, 16 10:52 pm ·
·
eeayoeeayo,
I am not saying the principals at ZGF or SRG had said exactly what I said. It's not a direct quote but a culmination of multiple point of views and abstracted down to a generalized level otherwise it would be horribly long... making the long quote above look short.
I do agree that there is some variability but often when people move into principal roles (usually being the executive management/administrative roles of the business if the term principal is used in its traditional meaning) is they become much more business oriented role.
Just so you know, if I worked in 'one', I would only intimately know that 'one' firm and how that 'one' firm works.
Sheesh. Are you really saying you think wisegeek.com is a credible source? That's a content farm - it pays a herd of freelance writers to generate articles on randomly assigned topics, using particular words and phrases. The goal is to cover the broadest range of topics possible, so that it comes up in the most searches, so that traffic will be driven to its advertising. Google's algorithms usually keep it from coming up high in search results, specifically because it's considered to be low-quality info.
Feb 21, 16 11:05 pm ·
·
So first of all, your own link says "A principal architect develops design concepts."
More importantly: the most credible sources about what goes on in architecture firms are architects, and others who work in architecture firms.
My sources did come largely from architects in the first place so it comes from opinions brought about. The world is perhaps a bit more dynamic that my generalized abstraction but shouldn't the world be more dynamic that any of our perspectives?
Feb 21, 16 11:07 pm ·
·
Bloopox,
Sheesh. Are you really saying you think wisegeek.com is a credible source? That's a content farm - it pays a herd of freelance writers to generate articles on randomly assigned topics, using particular words and phrases. The goal is to cover the broadest range of topics possible, so that it comes up in the most searches, so that traffic will be driven to its advertising. Google's algorithms usually keep it from coming up high in search results, specifically because it's considered to be low-quality info.
No. However, they probably sourced from credible sources. I am simply saying the article's content has some validity in what it says. Some of the architecture forums I was on are no longer around so I can't just find their quotes. However, it's mostly a summarization of other well documented and credible sources from Architects including AIA and others.
The fact of the matter isn't necessarily the site but the freelance writer at least did a half-ass job on a simplified summarization of what you'll find in books like Design Office Management by Fred A. Stitt, and other books and various comments from architects. All they had to do is read and understand what they read.
If any of those freelance writers had office experience working for a company they can probably visually draw connections and similarities. Add to that, there are plenty of documents written on this subject.
Feb 21, 16 11:15 pm ·
·
eeayoeayo,
"You'd know so much more about "how things are" in architecture firms if you'd work in one."
Balkins I asked you to send me a resume months ago but just got 50 excuses as to why you couldn't/wouldn't do that. I could try you on a freelance assignment.
Freelance... but not free, either. We can leave the negotiations to private communication.
Senjonblutarsky,
It will return back to normal with the next topic. That's the magic of this thread. Topics changes over time. We have ran the course of this overall topic.
Before long, a new page on Thread Central will appear and you won't be scrolling through the long post above.
I have a friend, philosophy major, who was obsessed with the prospect of a future where humans don't have to work, but I could not, and still can not understand how humanity would operate, or progress, when there is nothing to be done but pure leisure activities. Not to mention the fact that still, the majority of the earth's human population would be left in the lurch, with no way of really ever catching up. Big picture, such a future would be a disaster...
Not a huge fan of the curbed re-do. It strikes me as much better for generating ad revenue, and not much else.
Just walked out of what was (hopefully) my last ARE. BDCS. Fuck that test (this was my 2nd time taking it). B-lined it to the nearest dive bar and ordered two shots and a beer and I'm still not totally wound-down from it.
Hey, Anyone more knowledgeable about lighting than me?
I've picked out a variety of edison bulb light fixtures for a brewery project, from restoration hardware....
Does anyone know of a reputable manufacturer that makes similar stuff? There has to be something in between Restoration Hardware and the etsy/pintrest/ $5 amazon lights.
Thread Central
now you're just making me feel old Carrera....ha...you're right, that was a while ago...
I've also seen that in NYC. some rich prick starts at the top and slowly tumbles to the bottom, but it's a very slow tumble.
^ I can’t draw a graph on here, but in this guy’s case it looks like this ^ Barns-moonshot-barns. “Rich” might be a clue…but he has a $200 green chair for sale on his website…and lists his fax number…who owns a fax machine?
There is a piece on Meier in the News Section where he was asked about talent & ambition proposing that talent is of little use without ambition….maybe the answer is ambition because it sure isn’t talent.
"Talk low, talk slow, don't talk too much."
and all this time archanonymous, i thought you were just stoned as hell in person.
Carrera, it depends on how you define success.
^ Don’t want to sound like I’m climbing on the guy, agree that “success” is in your heart, just trying to understand the anomaly…maybe it’s the groundhog theory, he stepped outside, saw his shadow then ran back underground….”(he) coulda had class. (he) coulda been a contender. (he) coulda been somebody…..”
Huge difference between groundhog and coulda been ... gotta say I love the groundhog idea. Could also have been a good connection.
A friend got my old man the interior lobby design on a highrise, which he parlayed into design architect for the entire project, much to the chagrin of Emery Roth & Sons. A decade later the same friend set up the same deal with a different client, and once again Norman wrangled his way into the commission as design architect for the entire project (565 Fifth Avenue), again much to the chagrin of Emery Roth & Sons.
Those two highrises are outliers.
Think he (Anderson) is the groundhog who coulda been a contender…trouble is groundhogs aren’t born contenders as you amply explain.
Not every great potter needs to go into mass production, but in many ways we would all be better off if they did.
^ but nothing since, is my question, AF was 15 years ago.
probably had a good project manager/designer who bolted for another firm.
ivory, the beauty of it is no one knows when i'm stoned or not.
Carrera, my father was no groundhog - he was very ambitious, but in his case his talent got in the way. It was talent for design, not business.
^^^ maybe another good question, how do you pull off a $130 million project with 8 people? Is possible if that's all they did for 4 years...which looks like the case, come to think of it there was a shortage of shoe stores between 1997-2001.
BTW – The number was larger than $130 Million, they also did a million square foot distribution center at the same time…maybe he’s just worn out.
Miles, not casting an aspersion on your father, but the underlying answer to my inquiry may simply be personality…Anderson obviously has connections in the rag trade…did something biggish with Levi in the Meatpacking District…he just did an in-and-out…think I have my answer, just wondered if there was something more to learn.
The website Nextdoor is a total shitshow, you guys. It's somewhat terrifying to see how blatantly ignorant a whole bunch of my neighbors are. A guy called the proposed bus rapid transit line here a "mugger mover". Lord. I may have to quit it just to keep my blood pressure safe.
maybe that was a typo and he meant 'muggle'
i have the nextdoor ap on my phone. pretty much all lost/found dog posts. and occasionally cats.
jla-x,
Often with bigger firms, the firm's principals don't practice architecture. They practice business administration. Sure, a person may have a license and use the title but that alone does not necessarily mean a person is really practicing architecture at least to some perspectives on what practicing architecture means.
There are of course varying opinions on this. So it isn't right or wrong. Just varying legitimate perspectives.
Here we go again- the guy with no architectural experience and no Firm employment history, giving dissertation on how "it" works...
JeromeS,
I've talked to firm principals in firms like SRG and ZGF in scale and they spend more time in meetings than they do in actually architectural practice. Here's the reason why, running the business of a corporation *IS* a full-time job. In case of firms, you have full-time job position for chief executive officer (ie. managing principal), chief financial officer (whose job it is to manage the finances of the firm), chief operation officer(s) for directing the entire firm. Usually, there is so many principals at that level. They are EXECUTIVE positions. In large firms, those executive positions are entirely dedicated to business development, administration, management, marketing and corporate strategic planning, etc.
You pretty much no longer have the time to actually do designing of projects. The simple point is, there just isn't the time in a 40-60 hours a week work schedule. These people just don't do the real designing for a reason. They are in meetings ALL THE TIME from the time the start of the work day all the way to the closing. When they aren't in meetings, they are on the phone. The real work is usually done at middle-level management and down not at the executive level (principals).
This is because most firms have three general tiers: Principals, Associates (which maybe sub-divided into 2-3 tiers within it), and Technical/Professional staff or simply staff.
The principals are typically the executive level. I've talked to people who are principals of firms. I know a number of them all over the country. Their role in the day to day designing dramatically diminishes when they get into that level because they do the running the business that they don't have the time. It isn't like they can just spend 2 hours a day running the business and spend the remaining 6 hours or so doing the actual project. That's a fact of life that every principal I have talked to. You might get to do a little bit of designing but that's a fact that the principals lose the time needed to design projects because managing corporations are more complicated and more meetings oriented.
There is a reason why the executives of a large corporation are not directly involved with the creation and development and manufacturing of the products. The same thing with service oriented businesses. Even when the executives have the background and had did those things during their career but once you take on the executive hat, it's a full-time job in and of itself.
I may not work for a firm, I do know how firms operates. I operate a business and also worked for other businesses. There is certain things that are common with all businesses in their respective scale.
Remember, I was talking about corporate firms and they operate basically like any other corporation.
jla-x,
That's perfectly fine.
This is why some people run large firms and some don't.
Rick I'd be interested to hear who you talked to at SRG and ZGF who told you these things. Both firms have 15+ partners, who all have different roles. Some of them are not very involved in design, while others of them do little else but design and would certainly take issue with your generalizations.
The thing is about principals, large or small firms, is that you’re usually out front at procurement of the project…it takes skill to disengage from clients, tough not to be involved with design. The whole purpose of having partners is to spread the skillsets around. Had a fairly large practice with a total of 4 partners, none of us ever stopped designing (completely)….the advantage of being a partner is it comes with minions.
Richard is right about the “business”, but if you’re going to be successful you better accept that part…somehow it all gets done, lots of good help….it spoils the fun somewhat, but after all its infinitely more fun to drive the boat.
eeayoeeeayo,
WARNING: LONG POST & inherent repetition..... take a moment to sip coffee at the pauses or something.
Perhaps but as firms get from those firm size and larger.... the role of partners meant to be more business oriented vs. design role.
While those in SRG may not explicitly say what I said but when they are constantly in the administrative role and not so much directly in the design, that is because the roles that Principals are generally suppose to be.... executive roles. Executives are business administrative oriented roles.
SRG and ZGF would be on the smaller spectrum and more in the mid-size firm scale. Those in even larger firms, they are in the administrative level. While they oversee projects that happens in the firm, they don't do the drafting so much. They don't really have that role of the explicit designing. Their role as project architect of responsible charge is much less than it would be otherwise.
There are many shades in reality. So there is variability and there isn't a hard line of what size firms where the firm principals are no longer on the the active role directly with the projects. However, the point is as the firms becomes larger firms, the role of being directly involved in the design is greatly diminished when becoming principals of a firm.
While they maybe involved in client relations and to some extent in the programmatic dialog defining certain project specifications, you won't see them directly drawing out and designing. That is usually casted down responsibilities.
If you are a principal of one of these size firms, you'll know your direct role in the designs of projects is much less because the role is more business oriented because that is what the executive level of any corporation is about.
Since most principals aren't going to be young and desiring to be spending 80+ hours a week working, they have to spend less direct involvement and delegate and direct the human resources.
(PAUSE)
With 15 or so principals in a firm, the role is often being actively involved in project procurement, client/market sector public relations, meeting prospective clients with proposals, oversight of projects and staffing of human resource, business management/administration, strategic planning, meetings, etc.
You just don't see them that much preparing the drawings and the presentations aside from what they need to so do in terms of involvement in meetings with regard to projects.
Yes, they would be involved with projects at the oversight but they aren't necessarily as directly invested in the projects as the project architect would be or other parties.
They would never be as directly involved on projects at the level I would be as a sole-practitioner building designer or others as sole-practitioner architects. For those like me or other sole-practitioners, we don't have the human resource to delegate these roles. We have to personally be involved with each project, directly and extensively throughout if not literally do all of the work of all projects by one self. Principals of large firms do not have that level of capacity to be involved in projects. At least, rarely.
An individual principal may take a select choice of projects and spend extra time to do the work if the project really means something to that particular principal. Aside from that, they are business oriented / administrative role.
(PAUSE)
As one architect who is a principal said, the key duty and quality of a principal of a firm is the ability to delegate work to the right people in the business. They have to learn to let go of the direct reign of the projects and distribute the tasks and duties and learn to run the business and shift focus to business leadership. That is why firms have senior associates or associates that have the direct responsibility to projects. These project architects and associated project managers run the projects.
The shift to running the business vs. running the projects. When a firm reaches a certain size and scale, the role of the principals is more running the business and procuring projects and less directly doing the projects. They might at most have 2 hours a day to work on projects but clients expect full-time progress on projects not just someone spending 8-10 hours a week. This is why they have the project team.
While a principal maybe part of the project teams, they are oversight not necessarily doing the project. While a principal may oversee progress of projects and report them to the clients or the collection of fees from projects and account them in the financial reporting processes and vitality checks of the business.
(PAUSE)
Since you are an architect, while what I said is a generality because that is all ANYONE can really say because nothing written can be exact when there is a sort of fluidity in the dynamics of how each firm operates. No one firm is exactly alike. However, there is general commonality at each scale of firm sizes but each size tier is soft edges. While I can give an abstract size tier with a specified number of people and principals, reality is more complicated to make that perfect. People have said countless times and well documented on multiple architecture forums over the years that in mid to large size firms, the role of principals becomes more and more administrative vs. being directly as project architects. They just don't have the time to invest time like that and have to do their role in running the business and let the hired human resources such as senior associates run the projects and the principals role is then about running the business and oversight of project teams. As it is important to know what is going on down below you but they have to delegate more. That is what it is to be a principal of a large firm. I am not saying they don't know about the projects going on or not have any input in the projects but you have to let go of "running the projects" to "running the business" in a larger scale firm.
That is what I was getting at. You'll know deep down there is a pervasive truth to what I am getting at as the essential point I was getting at to jla-x.
I can't say all firms are exactly alike. It would be wrong to say so. I think we can agree that reality is more complicated but in a writing I have to abstract somewhat and apply some generality.
While ZGF or SRG will likely have firm principals that are more involved than an even larger firms as they are more mid-size firms. At the top end of the large firms, you have Aecom and Gensler and those firms, well... lets face it, the principals at the top level (executive) are definitely going to have a business oriented role. You probably can guess it that the top executive board / board of directors, etc. just don't do the actual projects.
Considering they are often involved in their public relation roles be it as spokespersons or keynote speakers or whatever else all over the place. At a certain level, you are involved in all these other roles being the public face of the firms, procuring projects, etc.
It is all of this stuff that makes being directly involved with doing the architectural design as THE architect of projects.... very seldom. This is something that they don't really have the time of really doing so much.
The thing is about principals, large or small firms, is that you’re usually out front at procurement of the project…it takes skill to disengage from clients, tough not to be involved with design. The whole purpose of having partners is to spread the skillsets around. Had a fairly large practice with a total of 4 partners, none of us ever stopped designing (completely)….the advantage of being a partner is it comes with minions.
Richard is right about the “business”, but if you’re going to be successful you better accept that part…somehow it all gets done, lots of good help….it spoils the fun somewhat, but after all its infinitely more fun to drive the boat.
Note: Not directed at Carrera.
Yep, exactly as Carerra said and an opportunity to put a condensed version of the TLDR version above.
The essential point is the role of being a principal of a firm, especially as the firms get larger is letting go of the reigns of "running the projects" and taking the reigns of 'running the business'. The point is delegating the direct role of being the architect of record to the project architect(s) and project managers who are usually senior associates. While a good principal will always manage oversight of project teams but they don't have the role of being the architect of projects.
I am not saying that principals stop designing just because they are a principal but the size of firms will effect how much. In small to medium size firms, the principals will still be involved in the design to some level or another but in the larger firms, this because considerably more rare.
Personally, I would almost never want to not still have involvement in designing but there is the key principle role of principals is to run the business and procure the project.
What I said in 'running the business' does include involvement in procuring work for the firm and then delegate responsibilities of the projects to project teams lead by project architects / project managers/directors or whatever that term is in the firm structure. Principals may or may not be the project architect but in larger firms, they will be less often the project architect but still involved but more limited than they would be as a small firm.
If you have minions, you utilize them.
I think I just had a heart attack….
See the thing is Rick that I worked at one of the firms you're describing above, and the reality is that certain partners were the face of the business, and others were mostly in behind-the-scenes administrative roles, but there were others who were regularly 70% billable and spent most of their time on broad-brush schematic design, including quite a lot of drawings, Revit, Sketchup, etc.. Some partners fit your idea of what is typical - but others are in fact the design minds behind most if not all of the firm's projects. That's the case in many other firms too, including several in the top 100 grossing firms in the US right now. It just isn't true that this happens "very seldomly". Your vision of "how things are" doesn't fit my firm now either, where I am one of two partners. You'd know so much more about "how things are" in architecture firms if you'd work in one.
This article is relatively true. I'm sure we can nitpick little things but mostly inconsequential....
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-does-a-principal-architect-do.htm
There are other writings from credible sources that also say pretty much the same thing in general.
So first of all, your own link says "A principal architect develops design concepts."
More importantly: the most credible sources about what goes on in architecture firms are architects, and others who work in architecture firms.
eeayoeeayo,
I am not saying the principals at ZGF or SRG had said exactly what I said. It's not a direct quote but a culmination of multiple point of views and abstracted down to a generalized level otherwise it would be horribly long... making the long quote above look short.
I do agree that there is some variability but often when people move into principal roles (usually being the executive management/administrative roles of the business if the term principal is used in its traditional meaning) is they become much more business oriented role.
Just so you know, if I worked in 'one', I would only intimately know that 'one' firm and how that 'one' firm works.
I think I just had a heart attack….
Carerra,
You okay?
Sheesh. Are you really saying you think wisegeek.com is a credible source? That's a content farm - it pays a herd of freelance writers to generate articles on randomly assigned topics, using particular words and phrases. The goal is to cover the broadest range of topics possible, so that it comes up in the most searches, so that traffic will be driven to its advertising. Google's algorithms usually keep it from coming up high in search results, specifically because it's considered to be low-quality info.
So first of all, your own link says "A principal architect develops design concepts."
More importantly: the most credible sources about what goes on in architecture firms are architects, and others who work in architecture firms.
My sources did come largely from architects in the first place so it comes from opinions brought about. The world is perhaps a bit more dynamic that my generalized abstraction but shouldn't the world be more dynamic that any of our perspectives?
Bloopox,
Sheesh. Are you really saying you think wisegeek.com is a credible source? That's a content farm - it pays a herd of freelance writers to generate articles on randomly assigned topics, using particular words and phrases. The goal is to cover the broadest range of topics possible, so that it comes up in the most searches, so that traffic will be driven to its advertising. Google's algorithms usually keep it from coming up high in search results, specifically because it's considered to be low-quality info.
No. However, they probably sourced from credible sources. I am simply saying the article's content has some validity in what it says. Some of the architecture forums I was on are no longer around so I can't just find their quotes. However, it's mostly a summarization of other well documented and credible sources from Architects including AIA and others.
The fact of the matter isn't necessarily the site but the freelance writer at least did a half-ass job on a simplified summarization of what you'll find in books like Design Office Management by Fred A. Stitt, and other books and various comments from architects. All they had to do is read and understand what they read.
If any of those freelance writers had office experience working for a company they can probably visually draw connections and similarities. Add to that, there are plenty of documents written on this subject.
eeayoeayo,
"You'd know so much more about "how things are" in architecture firms if you'd work in one."
Is that a job offer? If so, when can I start? :-)
Balkins I asked you to send me a resume months ago but just got 50 excuses as to why you couldn't/wouldn't do that. I could try you on a freelance assignment.
Well, Thread Central has been ruined for me.
Rick is off his meds again.
kjdt,
Freelance... but not free, either. We can leave the negotiations to private communication.
Senjonblutarsky,
It will return back to normal with the next topic. That's the magic of this thread. Topics changes over time. We have ran the course of this overall topic.
Before long, a new page on Thread Central will appear and you won't be scrolling through the long post above.
Apparently I'm the only one who *doesn't* like the new Curbed revamp. But I love the Archemoji article!
https://vimeo.com/155534602
script on - algorithmic architecture people
chigurh, check out Episode 2 of Season 1 of Black Mirror. Very similar.
I have a friend, philosophy major, who was obsessed with the prospect of a future where humans don't have to work, but I could not, and still can not understand how humanity would operate, or progress, when there is nothing to be done but pure leisure activities. Not to mention the fact that still, the majority of the earth's human population would be left in the lurch, with no way of really ever catching up. Big picture, such a future would be a disaster...
Donna,
Not a huge fan of the curbed re-do. It strikes me as much better for generating ad revenue, and not much else.
Just walked out of what was (hopefully) my last ARE. BDCS. Fuck that test (this was my 2nd time taking it). B-lined it to the nearest dive bar and ordered two shots and a beer and I'm still not totally wound-down from it.
good luck archanonymous!
Good luck archanonymous! And agree on the ad revenue aspect.
http://www.archdaily.com/782526/debate-on-the-chicago-architecture-biennial
Another ploy for Schumacher to dominate a discussion on the Biennial? Or genuine criticism?
@Chigurh http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/05/21/408234543/will-your-job-be-done-by-a-machine
1.8% chance, i'll roll with that.
The question is, will we automate architectural forum trolls? I think we could get close.
curt, Donna, Thanks! I'm trying to stay positive. Was far and away most nervous for this one...
ivory, that sounds like a scripting problem for my students. or for joel. or joel's student's.
Hey, Anyone more knowledgeable about lighting than me?
I've picked out a variety of edison bulb light fixtures for a brewery project, from restoration hardware....
Does anyone know of a reputable manufacturer that makes similar stuff? There has to be something in between Restoration Hardware and the etsy/pintrest/ $5 amazon lights.
Pretty sure it all comes from the same factory in China.
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.