Currently I'm considering 2 firms, one is a huge corporate and the other is also big, but not as huge as the first one. I need to be on H-1 visa, so I want secure job. The bigger one has nicer design quality. I wonder how it affects my future career. As an entry level architect, I want to learn how to deal with materials and details to actualize design. Do you guys think it really matters to work on good quality design? I mean, based on experiences, I found working in a firm is not like working in studio at school. Almost all projects in the real world is just 'practical'. I feel all firms are same in terms of 'design process', of course I could have different chance to learn about how to use materials etc.
Another thing I'm concerned about is name value. One is big name corporate and nobody knows about the other one. But I feel more comfortable and secure in the latter. I was told that in the big name corporate firm, I have to work like a machine all day and there is no interaction between staffs. The smaller one has more comfortable environment.
Also I'm wondering about what it's like to move from small firm to bigger one. Some say it's difficult to move from small firm to big one. Some say the opposite. I don't know what is true in reality.
What would be your choice? I know this is very difficult question, thanks for your 2cents. Please don't blame me for indecision.
The recognizable name of a big firm makes little to no difference, in my opinion - it might be different if it was a recognizable boutique firm.
A smaller firm that will expose you to more of the incredibly varied aspects of the profession would be more valuable to you. Baptism by fire - beiong thrown into challenges and learning by doing them - is the best way to learn a lot, quickly.
The challenges of moving from a small to a big firm or vice versa differs from every person's experience. But if the smaller firm gives you a more well-rounded experience, that makes you more attractive to a future employer regardless of the name of the firm you came from.
So I say go for the smaller firm that you feel better about the experience in, and you'll learn enough of the nuts and bolts to help you to develop your own "nicer design quality" later.
This is a tough dilema. If the working environments were equal, it would seem to be a no-brainer to work at the firm that produces better designs. It can be demoralizing to work on a project that is poorly designed, especially if you had no input in the design process. For example, I would rather figure out how to detail metal panel within a wall section of a chic storefront than Fypon in a window detail of a cookie cutter builder's home.
Either job will probably teach you how to detail; would you rather detail something mundane or something cool? Ultimately you will probably want to include some of your professional work in your portfolio; consider the impression your future projects will make on potential employers.
On the other hand, no matter how cool the projects are, if you are unhappy in the work environment, you probably won't last long there - life is too short.
I guess I can't be as certain as liberty bell. These are just some things to consider...
I completely agree with LB – although coming from a different background (software engineering) I think the principles and the dynamics are the same - smaller corporations give you a better-rounded experience; you will get lost in the shuffle with larger firms. I say go for the smaller firm. Good luck to you!
a lot of times the 'big' corporate has mentorship programs, lunch presentations, etc. that can offer a lot of learning opportunities that you won't get in a smaller 'big' firm, and you'll have more opportunities to engage senior staff on projects. in my experience, the small 'big' firm pigeonholes you more than the large corporate, because they are understaffed and you tend to be the one doing what you're good at over and over again.
go big. my 2 cents.
established steven holl architects in new york in 1976.
honor graduate at the university of washington architecture
school in bellevue.
he studied architecture in rome, italy in 1970,
and did post-graduate work at the architectural association
in london in 1976.
--------->
I was looking at Steven Holl's resume, it seems that he established his own office in NYC without any job experience. I don't know what he did in AA, but sure it's not about bolts and nuts. I can't understand how he started his firm without any experience with construction documentation etc. Any thought?
Don't always think that what people put on their own resume is reality or even truth. Many architects highlight their strengths and de-emphasize or deny the mundane realities. Holl worked for people when he was younger, he just doesn't have to mention it anymore.
whiteandsand...did both firms agree to sponsor you for h1b? if so, you are quite lucky, my man! How did you go about this?!
anyway, personally, I would go for the smaller firm because I want to be able to learn more and eventually put up my own firm. I think it is true that the "smaller" firm will offer more exposure to various aspects or architecture, design and construction. The "bigger" firm will, on the other hand, expose you to more varied project types.
Either way, it will work - - it really depends on your career goals.
thanks archinectors!! Tricky thing is that the 'smaller' firm is not really small (they have small size studios thogh)and their design is not good. It seems that they want to hire people who are good at design and grow them. I'm not sure it's gonna be really like this, but chances are I could really actualize my design in a few months. This could be an excellent chance to exhibit my design ability or could affect my job career in the future in negative way. again difficult choice... I'm thinking over and over with no answer yet... any adivice?
I don't think there is a definite answer for this. I worked in smaller offices before. It's great I got to do designs, and documents, marketing, CA, everything. I think its helps me to grow faster. Now I like to work for a bigger office where they are doing higher quality of designs. It depends on your goal. Do you want to be a well round architects knowing every piece of puzzles, or do you want to just focus on design, and become a designer, who may not know all the pieces? But I think you need both experiences to get more experiences. So at this point for you, you just follow your heart, choose what feel right. And if it is not working the way you were envisioned, you can always choose another path. And I think we learn from our mistakes too.
Sep 29, 06 6:22 pm ·
·
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.
Help for job decision!
Currently I'm considering 2 firms, one is a huge corporate and the other is also big, but not as huge as the first one. I need to be on H-1 visa, so I want secure job. The bigger one has nicer design quality. I wonder how it affects my future career. As an entry level architect, I want to learn how to deal with materials and details to actualize design. Do you guys think it really matters to work on good quality design? I mean, based on experiences, I found working in a firm is not like working in studio at school. Almost all projects in the real world is just 'practical'. I feel all firms are same in terms of 'design process', of course I could have different chance to learn about how to use materials etc.
Another thing I'm concerned about is name value. One is big name corporate and nobody knows about the other one. But I feel more comfortable and secure in the latter. I was told that in the big name corporate firm, I have to work like a machine all day and there is no interaction between staffs. The smaller one has more comfortable environment.
Also I'm wondering about what it's like to move from small firm to bigger one. Some say it's difficult to move from small firm to big one. Some say the opposite. I don't know what is true in reality.
What would be your choice? I know this is very difficult question, thanks for your 2cents. Please don't blame me for indecision.
The recognizable name of a big firm makes little to no difference, in my opinion - it might be different if it was a recognizable boutique firm.
A smaller firm that will expose you to more of the incredibly varied aspects of the profession would be more valuable to you. Baptism by fire - beiong thrown into challenges and learning by doing them - is the best way to learn a lot, quickly.
The challenges of moving from a small to a big firm or vice versa differs from every person's experience. But if the smaller firm gives you a more well-rounded experience, that makes you more attractive to a future employer regardless of the name of the firm you came from.
So I say go for the smaller firm that you feel better about the experience in, and you'll learn enough of the nuts and bolts to help you to develop your own "nicer design quality" later.
This is a tough dilema. If the working environments were equal, it would seem to be a no-brainer to work at the firm that produces better designs. It can be demoralizing to work on a project that is poorly designed, especially if you had no input in the design process. For example, I would rather figure out how to detail metal panel within a wall section of a chic storefront than Fypon in a window detail of a cookie cutter builder's home.
Either job will probably teach you how to detail; would you rather detail something mundane or something cool? Ultimately you will probably want to include some of your professional work in your portfolio; consider the impression your future projects will make on potential employers.
On the other hand, no matter how cool the projects are, if you are unhappy in the work environment, you probably won't last long there - life is too short.
I guess I can't be as certain as liberty bell. These are just some things to consider...
I completely agree with LB – although coming from a different background (software engineering) I think the principles and the dynamics are the same - smaller corporations give you a better-rounded experience; you will get lost in the shuffle with larger firms. I say go for the smaller firm. Good luck to you!
me three, or four.
being comfortable doing the architecture job is important, because it is tough enough already without adding on ennui.
What if the big coporate is SOM?
a lot of times the 'big' corporate has mentorship programs, lunch presentations, etc. that can offer a lot of learning opportunities that you won't get in a smaller 'big' firm, and you'll have more opportunities to engage senior staff on projects. in my experience, the small 'big' firm pigeonholes you more than the large corporate, because they are understaffed and you tend to be the one doing what you're good at over and over again.
go big. my 2 cents.
Darn, I don't know how to edit my posting. I didn't mention specific corporation here. LOL
established steven holl architects in new york in 1976.
honor graduate at the university of washington architecture
school in bellevue.
he studied architecture in rome, italy in 1970,
and did post-graduate work at the architectural association
in london in 1976.
--------->
I was looking at Steven Holl's resume, it seems that he established his own office in NYC without any job experience. I don't know what he did in AA, but sure it's not about bolts and nuts. I can't understand how he started his firm without any experience with construction documentation etc. Any thought?
Don't always think that what people put on their own resume is reality or even truth. Many architects highlight their strengths and de-emphasize or deny the mundane realities. Holl worked for people when he was younger, he just doesn't have to mention it anymore.
Oh yeah, reality is...
do you know who he worked for?
whiteandsand...did both firms agree to sponsor you for h1b? if so, you are quite lucky, my man! How did you go about this?!
anyway, personally, I would go for the smaller firm because I want to be able to learn more and eventually put up my own firm. I think it is true that the "smaller" firm will offer more exposure to various aspects or architecture, design and construction. The "bigger" firm will, on the other hand, expose you to more varied project types.
Either way, it will work - - it really depends on your career goals.
thanks archinectors!! Tricky thing is that the 'smaller' firm is not really small (they have small size studios thogh)and their design is not good. It seems that they want to hire people who are good at design and grow them. I'm not sure it's gonna be really like this, but chances are I could really actualize my design in a few months. This could be an excellent chance to exhibit my design ability or could affect my job career in the future in negative way. again difficult choice... I'm thinking over and over with no answer yet... any adivice?
I don't think there is a definite answer for this. I worked in smaller offices before. It's great I got to do designs, and documents, marketing, CA, everything. I think its helps me to grow faster. Now I like to work for a bigger office where they are doing higher quality of designs. It depends on your goal. Do you want to be a well round architects knowing every piece of puzzles, or do you want to just focus on design, and become a designer, who may not know all the pieces? But I think you need both experiences to get more experiences. So at this point for you, you just follow your heart, choose what feel right. And if it is not working the way you were envisioned, you can always choose another path. And I think we learn from our mistakes too.
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.