In most states you need to be licensed to start an architecture firm. You can start a construction company though.

i had two or three former professors that run architecture firms without licenses. however, they have two or three licensed architects working under them to make their studio 'legit. seems shady to me. . . in michigan.

'constructoin firm' =what?
contractors need licenses.

thats what i figured with having to be licensed. what did you mean by construction firm? i am interested in designing and actually building as well, but my nick isnt a direct relation.. :) more of my personal interest in architecture 'con_struct' i also want to be licensed....i just think that the system is ridiculous. :) if i know the stuff and can take the test and pass it, i dont need to have a certain amount of units before hand....

If you're going to call yourself an architecture firm and provide architecture services then you need to check with your state. How many of the owners must be registered architects varies from state to state - and even with the size of the firm. For instance, in some states, if there are 2 owners then at least one is required to be registered in that state, whereas if there are three owners or more then at least two thirds of the owners must be registered in that state.

As far as the unlicensed professors who have the registered underlings: this does not "keep them legit" as an architecture firm unless at least one of these registered people is an owner in the firm. What may be happening there though is that instead of calling themselves an "architecture" firm they may be calling themselves a "design" firm or some such thing. In this situation they'd have trouble obtaining errors and omissions insurance - but they may be practicing without it, or their registered employees may have it themselves - though the latter is unlikely.

Also: most states allow residential work to be completed with no architect's stamp, and a lot of states also require no stamp for small commercial, retail, and light manufacturing buildings - though the states usually defer to the local building inspectors who may have their own ideas about allowing projects to get through without an architect's or engineer's seal.

Thanks Ormolu, that helped a lot. Another question I have is something that I heard has happened...of course...it could be completely here-say (sp?) I heard that there have been some instances where people practice doing residential as you said, because it requires no stamp in most states, and then getting licensed by showing the work that they have done and proving they know what is going on around them. Does that sound remotely even possible? I'm not really trying to dodge the licensing procesdure, i just dont believe it to be all about the architect learning...it seems more like a business from the AIA...there to make money and have more control than they really need. Thanks again for your comments.

Why don't you just put in the three years or so to get the IDP time and take the test and get licensed? There is no way that ANYONE knows enough to do their own projects after less than three years in the profession. If you think you know everything and you are just starting, then you are so naive that you don't even know what you don't know, which is extremely dangerous. I've been doing this for 25 years, and there are still days when I feel like an idiot and don't know the answer. This is a complicated profession. Learn in an environment where you have a more experienced mentor to watch your back.

construct: there is some allowance in the IDP rules to count a certain amount of units from a situation in which you are the principal of your own firm. However: 1) doing so is very complicated. You have to have to get notorized papers from one or more registered architects stating that they are very familiar with your work, that you've satisfied the various IDP requirements, etc. 2) some states won't accept this experience, whether or not NCARB does 3) NCARB often rejects this experience.

There's another NCARB category called the "Broadly Experienced" architect - that's available to people who've gotten registered without going through NCARB in a state that still allows this, have worked for some years, and now are trying to get reciprocal licensing in a state that requires NCARB certification. Since almost all states now require IDP/NCARB for initial registration this is usually only an option for people who were registered some time ago - though there are some exceptions to this, usually involving people who get registered in states that don't require professional degrees (but require very long internships instead) and so can't get NCARB certification through the regular path.... Again: not all states accept this anyway.

There are still some states where you can test BEFORE you finish your internship (I think you can still do this in Texas) - or where internship is not required (a full IDP-type internship is still not required in California, though it will be very soon.)
But once again: if you take one of these routes you'll have problems getting reciprocity in many other states later.

If you want to leave the most avenues available to you in the future then just complete IDP and the whole NCARB process and take the AREA and get the NCARB certificate. If on the other hand you feel confident that you will only want to practice in one place and you've thoroughly examined that place's regulations to make sure you won't have problems now or in the foreseeable future and you find that this place allows some alternate route for avoiding IDP then go for it.

again, thank you very much ormolu, your patience is much appreciated with my questions, unlike archie, who hasnt seemed to learn patience in the '25 years' he has been working. i am not trying to find a way around this, and i plan to do IDP i just was wondering if there are other options and rare paths to obtain licensing. Doing the program obviously seems like the best way in the long run. I am very excited about this profession and have a great passion, where usually i have great patience waiting...i want to get in to this and do it now, without spending 3 years (less maybe?) tallying credits...i know there is much more to learn...but i love it. The reason i said less maybe is i am getting my graduate degree after this year and believe that takes some time from the IDP program...This also depends on it being accredited as well maybe? my masters is not, but my undergraduate (5 year) is. They are the same school, and the masters programs gave me many more benefits than just a name on a resume....

You do not need a license to start a firm, as long as you call yourself a deisgner and do not lead your clients to believe you are an architect or use the word architecture on contracts, marketing material, etc. At least that's how it is in CA and seems common most places. You also can probably do a fair amount of residential work, TI (interiors), and the like without the stamp. You will likely need an engineer's stamp for a lot of the work, but not all. Our experience has been that the license helped getting bigger projects - if you appear young and don't have a lot of experience it will add legitimacy. I know a lot of older designers however that are not licensed and don't have insurance and have been practicing for years. BUT, I would strongly recommend against going out on your own until you have a good idea of how to run the office, how to deal with the legal aspects (contracts esp.), and how to deal with clients. We are learning quickly now that we're on our own, but we have had problems with some projects because of our inexperience, and you really want to avoid getting yourself into a situation where you stand to lose a lot of money or get sued because you thought you knew what you were doing but didn't. We do design build and have a decent amount of experienece in construction, and we still miss things on every project that need to be resolved during or after construction - waterproofing, settling, cracking, etc. If you are doing ground up construction or additions there is a lot of liability and co-ordination involved. If you're not doing the construction yourself and you don't have a lot of experienece working with contractors you will get blamed for problems and it will be difficult to resolve them without having a good base of experience on your side. Also if you live somewhere that has a lot of code enforcement (like Los Angeles) it can be a real nightmare. Having your own firm can be rewarding, it's also very stressfull, in my opinion it's better to take your time if you can stand it.

Construct, you are correct, I have lost patience with people who try to shortcut. Something worth doing is worth doing correctly. That applies to getting licensed. Of course there are "options and rare paths To obtain licensing". They usually take longer because a person does not have an accredited degree, not less time. My point was, it would be a HIGHLY unusual person who was actually prepared to be a registered architect in less than three years, so you might as well do the IDP thing. It tries to ensure that you get a balance of experience, not just all drawing bathrooms, for example. Unless you grew up going to the constuction site everyday with your dad, you just don't know enough to be out on your own. If you start before you are ready, it will just make the going that more difficult, and if you would talk to the high percentage of architects who go out on their own and fail, you would realize that it is not as easy as it looks.

Rudolf...do you have a site i can check out of your firm? Archie...thanks for responding again and this time being a little more patient....i am not tryint to shortcut. That is not my intention at all, but everything i have seen so far ( i have worked 3 summers during undergrad in firms and this last summer in a design build firm) gives me a bad taste with the idp program...i knoiw i have seen only a miniscule percentage of the profession through these experiences, so i was wondering if there is a better or more rewarding way to get to licensure. I will start my own firm eventually, but it is very insightful hearing from all of you so far about the trials and problems as well having to do with licnesing and legality. If there is any more that you ahve, please type :) If anyone knows about the question above in my other post of IDP time and graduate degrees would be insightful as well....thanks

Construct - you are getting very good advice from these folks, I pretty much agree with everything that has been said.

I just looked back through my IDP paperwork (from 9 years ago!) and I DID get credit for my Master's degree, which came from an unaccreddited program after a five-year BArch degree. So it should be the same for you.

IDP is a real nag to do but that's all it is - a pain in the butt. It's not difficult or painful, just a drag. If you start early and keep track of units as you go along, it will be easier.

Also, your employer will probably require you to code your time worked by project phase - at the end of 3 years you can get a printout of your timesheets showing what phase your time was allocated to and assign it to units accordingly. This is a benefit of working on one place for the whole 3 years - easy to keep track, and only one signature to get when you're done. If the person you work for is cool, they will sign off on your papers no problem. Also, if you keep track as you go along, as you approach the last year or six months you can show your employer what areas you are deficient in and ask to be assigned to do some work in those areas. And remember, even a conversation with a coworker about how wide a stairwell needs to be counts as "code research" - it's all part of getting broad exposure to the field.

It sucks, but once it's over you'll hardly remember it - and believe me getting the damn license is so rewarding it's worth the hassle.

thank you very much liberty, very positive.....it's good to hear about the masters program, and also an honest take on the IDP. I guess i am looking forward to getting it started, cause i am so anxious to get it done :) Everyone's advice is appreciated thank you for helping me.

Prior to 2002 an M.Arch that was a second professional degree earned approximately 1 year of IDP units. Since 2002 this has been reduced to a maximum of approximately 6 months worth of IDP units. It is typical for these 2nd professional degrees to be unaccredited. Usually only the 3 or 3.5 year 1st professional M.Arch degrees are accredited by NAAB. The "post-pro" degrees don't need to be, since grads of these programs already hold B.Archs.

The state of Florida requires only a 2-year internship for anyone with ANY M.Arch degree (not just a 2nd professional degree) - but again this is one of those "alternative" routes that does not actually satisfy the NCARB rules, so may limit your future alternatives.

I would definatly recommend NOT waiting until the end of 3 years (or more) to count your IDP units. I'm speaking from experience on this. It can be a huge problem collecting all the paperwork, especially from people for which you no longer work. Besides which, there are a few states that don't allow retroactive recording. Ohio, for instance, allows nothing beyond 6 months old to be recorded, so regularly submitting paperwork is crucial.
So, I'd recommend filling out the employment records on NCARB's recommended 4-month schedule. This will help you also in identifying areas of experience that you're just not getting - which may lead to you trying to negotiate ways to get that experience with your current employer, or may suggest to you that it is time to leave that employer.

If you've already worked 3 summers then you probably have at least a few months of IDP finished. As long as these summers were AFTER your 3rd year of your B.Arch and you worked at least 10 weeks consecutively for no less than 35 hours per week these jobs will count.

construct, no website yet...

I have a question related to this thread...to anyone out there?

I'm currently working for an arch firm, but more and more I feel like just starting a firm with a buddy of mine. I'm just getting tired of doing other architect's designs.
So, how would I go about starting a firm?? Like, what sort of stuff do you need to get started? I know I'd have to be licensed (in the process of doing) and I have to get Professional Practice Insurance...how much does that cost? I guess my biggest question is: how much capital ($$) do you need to start out?

Thanks in advance.

Sorry to state the obvious, but the most important thing that you need are clients. Yes, I do mean multiple clients. Just because you open a new office and think that you are great, it is really hard in the beginning to convince a client (who doesn't necessarily think you are as great as you think you are) to trust you with their project. After all, if you had to have an operation (even minor surgery), would you hire a doctor doing it on his own for the first time, or someone that has done the surgery for years?

I don't remember what our insurances cost in the beginning, but I will tell you it is not an insignificant cost. Also add to liability insurance, health insurance, disability insurance, etc. which you no longer have an employer to pay (in full or in part). Other costs for starting up. . .lawyers fees to set up the business, help negotiate contracts, etc., accountants fees because your tax situation will become much more complex, social security tax which you will have to now pay in full, and I am sure that I am forgetting others.

Basically, how I started was to do freelance work for several years in order to build a clientelle that referred me for other work. Once my freelance work became too much to do on a part-time basis, I opened my office. That way I was able to "start" the firm with projects in multiple phases. I cannot stress how important this is. Unfortunely, cash flow is very important to a healthy business (even though we pretend it is not) and you should not risk missing your mortgage payment because your single client is late in paying (or stopping the project).

Although it is a lot of work (I feel that it takes 10 years to build an office once you start, and we are in year 6), it is worth it.

Start your company whether you're registered, or not. Don't call yourself an 'architect' & you will be fine. It may prove to be awkward for a minute, or two, but if you get work that you're entitled to get, then big deal. There are worse things. It's much more 'proper' to get a license first, but you don't have to if you follow a certain path. It might be a pain in the butt to walk a thin-line from time-to-time, However, no one can prevent you from starting a legitimate business.

That is not to say that you shouldn't be qualified to do the work that you sell. You must be, and even more, if you run your own company.

As for the whole barrier of education & IDP & exam requirements, it's mostly a way to keep the archt population down. It is also a way for older architects to protect their interests against...you, younger architects.

Why should our generation of architects be penalized for coming along after most of these requirements were put into place? If some 45+ yr old architect was able to just go to school & then get his license because he graduated in the 1970s, or earlier. Why should younger architects have to jump through many more hoops? If a woman who graduated high school, worked for 10yrs under an architect was able to get registered, why can't we do that today?

I'll buy the fact that these requirements help to raise the bar somewhat. But when your boss may have been able to get licensed essentially for showing up to the licensing board in 1976, you kinda get a bit pissed.

Also, there are too many 'can't-do' attitudes prevalent in this profession & saying that a person can't start his own company because of bureaucratic contrivances is fankly rubbish.

Construct - To be a registered design firm in certain states, and I suspect this holds true throughout the 50, 2/3's of the partners in the case of a corporation, partnership or limited liability partnership must be licensed architects. If a sole proprietership he/she must be licensed. Now if registered as adesign firm not as architecture but say engineering, then you must staff 1 licensed architect if you choose to do architecture through that firm. Your best bet is to be an equity investor in an Architecture firm - where the architects are the directors but not nessesarily the owners. Im seeing a lot of firms owned around Chicago by not Architects, but othere businesspeople who find and identify the markets and jobs. Remember - the man with the gold makes the rules.

i read this book pretty easy and sets out some basics like what you are asking...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0471234818/ref=pd_sim_b_2/104-6480974-5475145?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance

easy read but since it is AIA...understand it is written assuming you are to be an "architect"...other than that there are a couple of other books on amazon that you can read to find the info you are looking for.

construct- in regards to partnering with a licensed friend, I have worked for people who did this before. Once I found out one of the partners wasn't licensed, I lost all respect for him (well, he was a bit of a pompous ass). Just consider that if you get big enough to have employees, then you won't be seen as equal with the other partner(s) in the firm.

thanks for the responses...i have all intentions of becoming licensed, i just didnt know if it was a problem to not be in the beginning.

Evilplatypus,
I am always interested in why someone outside of the field of Architecture would wantto invest in an Architecture, or Design firm. Seems like there are better investments, unless they need a design component to augment an existing company, like a Developer.

I don't think what evil platypus said is true, or it's not completely true. I know of "design" firms that basically do architecture, where no one is registered. The work has been published nationally, and is beyond a residential scale. The firm can get away with this by working with another architecture firm, that is licensed, has registered employees, etc. The design firm still does the design work and produces documents through about DD phase, sometimes CD stuff, and does CA, but is the "designer" on the project, and the "architect" is listed as the licensed firm.

So you don't have to be registered, but the work can be hard to get, you have less liability, blah blah blah... I would agree with most of the comments above.

Pencrush,
Good point. That's exactly what a lot of retailers, especially car manufacturers/dealers are doing. I was one of 'em for a while & it's
best described as dollar-based design. I can't really describe it as profit-based, at least not for the design firms involved - it always pays more to be a supplier, or a contractor. I definitely can't describe it as Architecture-based design (if that makes sense). Doing car dealerships, you create new ways to design a box. It is the Most boring & fustrating way to use, or rather, not use, your talents.

One of my friends doing this described our work as 'parasitic', which I guess it was because you're always 'drawing' a variation of a prototype that someone like Gensler may have done 5 yrs ago . I feel better getting that offa my chest, now maybe I can rejoin normal Architecture society by helping exotic dancers program a better work-flow & find poles worthy of LEED cerification.

there's no one registered here, and they do architecture-ish work.

Lots of great advice. I agree there is no way around the process. Accredited degree, IDP while at Arch firm, take the exams. I'll be 42 in Oct and thought the same way twenty years ago about trying to find a shortcut. The reality is you need that time to grow and see if you can stay in the game. Alot of the people I finished Arch school never got licensed cause they didn't want to work for it. Many just got out of architecture because it can be very complicated. Starting my firm might be the hardest/greastest thing I've ever done

Construct, The best way to learn how to swim is to jump in the water. After recently closing my office after a three year run I can tell you that:

1) you don't need to be registered (though this does not apply in some jurisdictions and limits you to Type V and interiors).
2) this will be one of the hardest yet most mentally profitable experiences of you life.
3) you will learn faster (and maybe better) than working for other people.
4) you will become far more innovative than if you had stuck it out in an office.
5) you will figure out exactly what you are good at and what skills need sharpening.


Just follow some of the folks advice up top and use a contract, charge for ALL of your time and reasources, develop good CAD standards from day one, drink heavily, and most importantly, hire an accountant to do your billing.

Hey POMO,
Where were you 9yrs ago? That accountant thing...that's frigggin brilliant.

I'd say that's been one of my biggest challenges - accounting & cash flow.
I did however, master the drinkin' heavily, Why I might do that instead of the books tonight.

Anyway, your outline was on-target. I'll add this - when you're 'on your own', you really have no one to pass the buck to, like a regular arch job. It's all on you. One day you'll be in heaven 'cause you've just blown a client away w/ your design. Next day, some pin-head middle manager is browbeating you because some paint color isn't their corporate std. (Or, in my recent experience, nobody FRIGGIN makes grey terry cloth, dmmitt, dammitt, ...sorry).

A couple other other words of pseudo-wisdom & caution:
1) Do what POMOTRASH said - charge for EVERYTHING & get as much money as you can up front. There's absolutely nothing worse than having a client hold the prospect of la lotta work over your head while he 'forgets' to pay an invoice that's already 3months late.

2) Once you work for yourself, you will never want to work for a 'firm' again. This is good, because it motivates you. It's bad because sometimes, the work is sloooooowwwwwww, or dead. During these times, you start looking. But you quickly realize that you're gonna be better off waiting it out, even if paying the bills gets difficult.

3) Procrastination Kills (I oughta know, I invented the word).
4) If you Work out of the house - Get out of the house. You'll find too much to distract you. Those damn gutters. That car needs an oil change....

5) Keep in touch with People. It's too easy to get isolated, especially from the Arch crowd. Stay connected (not just on-line).
6) Stay in Shape - Sitting in front of CAD all day will drive you nuts & will dull your body & soul.
7) Just Find at Least 1 way to have fun with your work each day. Put a phallic symbol into the design of a bldg if a middle mgr pisses you off,
design a garden into an ignored corner of the bldg, etc, etc..
8) Finally, Don't let the economics & admin krap overwhelm who you are - You're an ARCHITECT, dammitt (registered, or not)!

architecture firm in three easy steps:

1. design education --->"design consultation firm"
2. contractor's license ---> "design build firm"
3. architect's license ---> "architecture firm"

should be easy? no?

and if you know your code (no matter if you are 1,2 or 3) the counter in los angeles should be a breeze...(except civil and mechanical...get a consultant to do that crap)

One of the premier Design Firms In Chicago is a Parnership of two great architects, one licensed, one not. You'd never know it unless I told you, which I won't. Nowadays I do think it is critical to become licensed, but may never need to if they are too busy keeping-up with an influx of work. I do hope they never spilit up, no sure what the unlicensed partner would do?

pomotrash and MysteryMan are my heroes. great advice and attitude. just do it.

Aw shucks, DB.
I just wish I could translate that advie into practice & that attitude into bucks. Muito Obrigado, AMigo.

don't we all MM, don't we all ........

Good luck db.


Another thing I forgot. Go to parties, go to bars, drop yr card in every jar, g-string, bookshelf, and coffee table you can find, because people will call you.

Mysteryman -

Architecture firms actually do make money - just not enough to trickle down to the cube farmers. I'm thinking specifically of a firm who is big into institutional work - colleges, high schools, etc. And the money man is of course, an attorney. I had interviewed there a ways back and inquired into the business side of the firm ( they have construction div. too) and was surprised that the architectural division was just that - a "division" of a larger company. I heard the same as to Perkins & will. Any Perkins people validate this?

True, Evilplatypus.
To make money in this racket, you've gotta get on top, or be good at keeping yourself rich client-rich.

Im still curious how in Illinois they can be a registered design firm if the company is not wholey in the practice of Architecture - unless they leagaly sep the entities but house them in one spot - I guess you need a lawyer to organize it all.