trying to decide wether or not to continue working in architecture offices anymore... really want to branch out and work for a GC... any words of wisdom archinectors?
hmm ... maybe the most typically asked question of all general posts on this forum - why? do you want to be a GC? is this for the money, or are you just tired of all the archi-BS?
builders build. architects make lines-lines of specs, lines on drawings, lines in computer models. that's it. sometimes an otherwise architect builds somethign, but during that time they are a builder, not an architect. building helps you make better lines, though.
my office is a design-build firm. we have licensed contractors and architects, and a steel fabrication shop. it can be good, although it can be a headache as well. the best part about it is that there are architects who are building in the field and making architectural decisions as the building commences. i spend a lot of my time in the field. there's a lot of variety, actually, between cost estimating, drawing and modeling, design, construction management, and physical construction.
well the main reason i want to try to work for a GC, is bc i want to be in the field. I worked for a 'starchitect' and it was my first job.. however, i can tell by working there, that the position of an architect will almost allways be completly behind a desk staring at a computer screen. I feel that if im out on the field, gettign my hands dirty and gettign sweaty, it will enable me to gain a great understading of construction, ah hem, isnt that architecture? Also , knok, to answer your question about the $$$, when u do a lil salary research on what GC's make vs. archictects, its sort of applealing to want to try and be a GC.. and lastly, any advice on how to research job openings for GC's, i woudl preferably like to work for someone who builds high end modern residntial, or historic renovations..thanks all...
Spyder - I say go for it. If you have already taken the time to write all of this down it's more than your subconscious talking to you. Switters is dead on. If your primary goal is to get your designs built you would be a fool not to learn construction. And I don't mean memorizing Allen. Don't follow the traditional path if you think it wreaks of bullshit.
working for a GC can be behind a desk...all day. (esp if it is a big one) and you are pricing, bidding, organizing, etc.
working for an arch can be in the field all day...doing Construction Administration...site work etc.
i love working in a design/build type of environment...it truly allows you to understand the fluidity between the two. (contruction and line drawing) --as well as business and art, money and need, etc.
Some larger architecture firms in which I've worked have had fulltime construction administrators. Those guys spend almost no time behind a desk - in fact one place I worked had three of them and they all shared one workstation because they were almost never there. Maybe that would be a good fit for you, if you decide to stay in - or return to - an architecture firm setting.
But those positions are usually only open to people with many years of experience (most of those guys were in their 50s and had gone through the ranks in firms as project managers and spec writers for years). Having at least a little construction experience can actually be a big help in getting that job too.
i kind of agree with raj ... i work for a design-build firm right now, and have little to do with the build side (mostly a little construction management), but mostly because it is a small firm, i have gotten out of the office a relatively decent amount ... i'm not sure how much getting your hands dirty and getting sweaty you'll do unless you have the experience doing construction, then maybe you should consider doing this for a while instead of working for a GC (my firm's construction crew has one architect grad on it and doesn't work on the architecture for the firm)
and yes, as a GC, you will be making a quite bit more $, but I don't think you'll be getting your hands dirty doing this either ... but nonetheless, working for one you will learn a lot.
i think they exclusive. i only do design build projects. but you have to keep in clear-when i figure something out in the field (drawing on a 2x4) then I am an architect. when cut, eld, or whatever i am building. i think the difference counts. very different types of thinking and doing that are intimately realted but distinct (otherwise we quickly digress into 'everything is architecture-architecture studetns who become web designers or developers or whatever are not architects). the two types of knoweldge leverage each other very well-plenty of agreement here.
good GC's were always good builders first. if you want to be a good GC and know what your doing, start on a construction crew, learn where nails should go, learn what blocking is and why it goes where it does, learn from the subs when they're pulling wire or roughing in the plumbing, learn from the guy digging the holes and shooting grade.
GC'ing is about knowing construction more than anything, and you can't get that unless you've literally worked in the trenches.
my suggestion is to work for a 'builder' before you go to a GC. there is a difference. builders really know how to put buildings together, GC's are really good at organizing, meeting and scheduling.
do it though, i did (had to, dad was a contractor) from an early age and the experience was incredibly valuable later in life (now).
All architects should build something of significance at least once, helps them to be more aware of what it takes to be a good GC.... and therefore a better Architect too!
All architects should build something of significance at least once, helps them to be more aware of what it takes to be a good GC.... and therefore a better Architect too!
i like to concider myself an architectural designer/builder. i started out framing high-end res. for 3 years or so, then went to arch school for 6 years while working for a few architects and 2 builders. let me tell you that its a long climb up the todem pole to become a GC. Just havign a little experience with construction has helped me tremendously get out from behind the desk(in an architectural office) and out into the field with that same office. if ur arch. boss can see that you can know how a building goes together then you would be the 1st to go into the field and tell the GC what an ass he is for not knowing how to read a set of plans. I think u have a couple of options
-construction mngmt
-design/build firm
-hop on a construction crew and hump some 2 x 12 to the roof
(cause thats what ull be doing for the first 6mth - 1 yr)
-or do what i just did in the past 8-9 yrs
-GOOD LUCK-
I must agree that the best place to start in construction is GC. There you learn and deal with everyones problem, from finance, land, design and working with all the trades. After a few years and jobs in that environment you can tackle everything that comes you way.
I can tell you if you want to 'get your hands dirty' as a gc, you'll want to apply for the bottom of the hierarchy of gc management, like the super or a project engineer. You could also try to be a skilled trade, but I think that would limit your exposure to your particular trade; working as a super or pe will allow you the chance to see more aspects of the job (although more responsibility comes from that). All the project managers (from my experience) only come on site a few times a week only to see the progress and spend most of their time either in the office doing paperwork (specs, submittals, etc), on the phone with architects, owners, subs, or at meetings. I'm kind of going in the opposite direction, attempting to transition from the construction aspect to the architecture side. I agree with those posts that say that having both architectural and construction experiences will make you better at both.
i do not think that you have to haul 2X4's to learn about construction,although any experience is a plus. if you are not prone to do that, you could always look up your local csi chapter, join up and get yourself some construction spec certification. this will look really good on a resume and you will meet a wide network of peoples.
Spyder - I would suggest doing one of two things either work with a Interior Designer/Architect to refresh your views of working relationships or work with a design-build practice. I think the latter would mix it up a bit.
thanks all.. so i have my first interview with a builder/GC tomorrow morning.. its a cool place, they seem to build most work by the 'starchitects' around town..any words of wisdom?
do architects build?
trying to decide wether or not to continue working in architecture offices anymore... really want to branch out and work for a GC... any words of wisdom archinectors?
working with a GC, you will see hows shit works and why there's issues between designers/contractors/lines/materials
b
hmm ... maybe the most typically asked question of all general posts on this forum - why? do you want to be a GC? is this for the money, or are you just tired of all the archi-BS?
i would hardly call this branching out. branching off, maybe...
builders build. architects make lines-lines of specs, lines on drawings, lines in computer models. that's it. sometimes an otherwise architect builds somethign, but during that time they are a builder, not an architect. building helps you make better lines, though.
i believe switters is 100% accurate
my office is a design-build firm. we have licensed contractors and architects, and a steel fabrication shop. it can be good, although it can be a headache as well. the best part about it is that there are architects who are building in the field and making architectural decisions as the building commences. i spend a lot of my time in the field. there's a lot of variety, actually, between cost estimating, drawing and modeling, design, construction management, and physical construction.
well the main reason i want to try to work for a GC, is bc i want to be in the field. I worked for a 'starchitect' and it was my first job.. however, i can tell by working there, that the position of an architect will almost allways be completly behind a desk staring at a computer screen. I feel that if im out on the field, gettign my hands dirty and gettign sweaty, it will enable me to gain a great understading of construction, ah hem, isnt that architecture? Also , knok, to answer your question about the $$$, when u do a lil salary research on what GC's make vs. archictects, its sort of applealing to want to try and be a GC.. and lastly, any advice on how to research job openings for GC's, i woudl preferably like to work for someone who builds high end modern residntial, or historic renovations..thanks all...
Spyder - I say go for it. If you have already taken the time to write all of this down it's more than your subconscious talking to you. Switters is dead on. If your primary goal is to get your designs built you would be a fool not to learn construction. And I don't mean memorizing Allen. Don't follow the traditional path if you think it wreaks of bullshit.
depending on what you want...
working for a GC can be behind a desk...all day. (esp if it is a big one) and you are pricing, bidding, organizing, etc.
working for an arch can be in the field all day...doing Construction Administration...site work etc.
i love working in a design/build type of environment...it truly allows you to understand the fluidity between the two. (contruction and line drawing) --as well as business and art, money and need, etc.
good luck on your REAL grad school.
Some larger architecture firms in which I've worked have had fulltime construction administrators. Those guys spend almost no time behind a desk - in fact one place I worked had three of them and they all shared one workstation because they were almost never there. Maybe that would be a good fit for you, if you decide to stay in - or return to - an architecture firm setting.
But those positions are usually only open to people with many years of experience (most of those guys were in their 50s and had gone through the ranks in firms as project managers and spec writers for years). Having at least a little construction experience can actually be a big help in getting that job too.
i kind of agree with raj ... i work for a design-build firm right now, and have little to do with the build side (mostly a little construction management), but mostly because it is a small firm, i have gotten out of the office a relatively decent amount ... i'm not sure how much getting your hands dirty and getting sweaty you'll do unless you have the experience doing construction, then maybe you should consider doing this for a while instead of working for a GC (my firm's construction crew has one architect grad on it and doesn't work on the architecture for the firm)
and yes, as a GC, you will be making a quite bit more $, but I don't think you'll be getting your hands dirty doing this either ... but nonetheless, working for one you will learn a lot.
le bossman
do you work for Marmol??
J - eres un pendejo
free translation
i think they exclusive. i only do design build projects. but you have to keep in clear-when i figure something out in the field (drawing on a 2x4) then I am an architect. when cut, eld, or whatever i am building. i think the difference counts. very different types of thinking and doing that are intimately realted but distinct (otherwise we quickly digress into 'everything is architecture-architecture studetns who become web designers or developers or whatever are not architects). the two types of knoweldge leverage each other very well-plenty of agreement here.
the more time u get to be on the building sites will directly constribute to your future designs
good GC's were always good builders first. if you want to be a good GC and know what your doing, start on a construction crew, learn where nails should go, learn what blocking is and why it goes where it does, learn from the subs when they're pulling wire or roughing in the plumbing, learn from the guy digging the holes and shooting grade.
GC'ing is about knowing construction more than anything, and you can't get that unless you've literally worked in the trenches.
my suggestion is to work for a 'builder' before you go to a GC. there is a difference. builders really know how to put buildings together, GC's are really good at organizing, meeting and scheduling.
do it though, i did (had to, dad was a contractor) from an early age and the experience was incredibly valuable later in life (now).
good luck,
i 100% agree with the junky! ha. great comments!
All architects should build something of significance at least once, helps them to be more aware of what it takes to be a good GC.... and therefore a better Architect too!
All architects should build something of significance at least once, helps them to be more aware of what it takes to be a good GC.... and therefore a better Architect too!
i like to concider myself an architectural designer/builder. i started out framing high-end res. for 3 years or so, then went to arch school for 6 years while working for a few architects and 2 builders. let me tell you that its a long climb up the todem pole to become a GC. Just havign a little experience with construction has helped me tremendously get out from behind the desk(in an architectural office) and out into the field with that same office. if ur arch. boss can see that you can know how a building goes together then you would be the 1st to go into the field and tell the GC what an ass he is for not knowing how to read a set of plans. I think u have a couple of options
-construction mngmt
-design/build firm
-hop on a construction crew and hump some 2 x 12 to the roof
(cause thats what ull be doing for the first 6mth - 1 yr)
-or do what i just did in the past 8-9 yrs
-GOOD LUCK-
no i work for a firm in montana. marmol radziner is one firm i might apply to when i leave though.
I must agree that the best place to start in construction is GC. There you learn and deal with everyones problem, from finance, land, design and working with all the trades. After a few years and jobs in that environment you can tackle everything that comes you way.
I can tell you if you want to 'get your hands dirty' as a gc, you'll want to apply for the bottom of the hierarchy of gc management, like the super or a project engineer. You could also try to be a skilled trade, but I think that would limit your exposure to your particular trade; working as a super or pe will allow you the chance to see more aspects of the job (although more responsibility comes from that). All the project managers (from my experience) only come on site a few times a week only to see the progress and spend most of their time either in the office doing paperwork (specs, submittals, etc), on the phone with architects, owners, subs, or at meetings. I'm kind of going in the opposite direction, attempting to transition from the construction aspect to the architecture side. I agree with those posts that say that having both architectural and construction experiences will make you better at both.
also figure what scale you want to be in as of project size....... that would decypher your options
i do not think that you have to haul 2X4's to learn about construction,although any experience is a plus. if you are not prone to do that, you could always look up your local csi chapter, join up and get yourself some construction spec certification. this will look really good on a resume and you will meet a wide network of peoples.
Spyder - I would suggest doing one of two things either work with a Interior Designer/Architect to refresh your views of working relationships or work with a design-build practice. I think the latter would mix it up a bit.
thanks all.. so i have my first interview with a builder/GC tomorrow morning.. its a cool place, they seem to build most work by the 'starchitects' around town..any words of wisdom?
so is le bossman in michiganistan or montanaland? I'm confused.
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.