I agree with you “Trace." Architecture should include classes related to business in their programs, because it is an elemental thing in the architecture world. In my opinion, architects should learn more about business. Therefore, I think that new generations of architects must take some business classes to do a minor in Business. That would help the architecture world a lot. Although, it is an ideology which architects must spread to important architectural organizations, such as RIBA and AIA. Those organizations are only ones that can introduce this idea of business studies in architecture to universities. Architecture programs should require business knowledge because architecture is a career which necessitates business to function.
For what it's worth, the AIA operates a 'Practice Management Knowledge Community' that is among the most popular of the AIA's Knowledge Communities. This KC works hard to respond to many of the issues raised in the previous two posts. As with all such endeavors, the old saw "You can lead a horse to water...." still applies.
Yup, but really, I look at Gehry and Mayne and Hadid and think 'wow, they've managed to create successful businesses, make a lot of money, and still do what they love, uncompromised". So love 'em or not, to me, they are very successful business people. Maybe they won't talk about that part, but they have succeeded in running/growing unique businesses.
Just one side of coin, but not one that should be overlooked.
Much to my surprise whenever I visit Penn State, one of the biggest proponents of professional practice and firm management is James Wines. And he is pretty out there.
If I may put on my tinfoil conspiracy hat for a moment, chances are that all of the starchitects that trace mentioned are brilliant business people- but they just don't want the masses to learn how to compete in an already supersaturated marketplace.
Industry has always had a major hand in academia- look at the faculty of any major school. Do you think they want to use academia to cater to the best and brightest in hopes of hiring those students to boost their firm's profits, or do you think they want to teach all students how to become successful on their own and risk going bankrupt themselves?
Teaching some business as part of a 4+2 might could work because there tends to be some redundancy that, if eliminated, could make room for business or marketing classes.
It is really disappointing to see this report, because architecture is cataloged in the lowest paid-engineering. James, I do not understand why civil engineer's salary is much higher than architecture. That is why architecture is being dulling by civil engineering.
What a great deception about architecture. I thought that there would be a better future for the career.
Hey Rodgert,
That is an idea (your idea about business) that architects have to spread to improve the career, because architecture is suffering too much. I would say that the problem is not the career but the sacrifice that you have to do studying and working in architecture to don’t get what you should. It is not easy. Therefore, architects should be more accredited for their job. This is interview with Robert A.M Stern that it really represents the truth of architecture. http://bigthink.com/ideas/2588. I said that because many architects think that they are famous people, but they are not.
get over it. architects aren't responsible for society as many think. if a bridge collapses that's a huge responsibility that civil engineers have to take. if a building has bad details and ugly proportions, no one is going to die.
you have to market yourself to be a beneficial commodity. some partners make a lot of money because without them they won't get projects for the office. we're in the creative field, think of business creatively!
i'm doing architecture because i like it. ditched bio medical engineering and business school because i know the quality of life is not dependent on getting a higher salaries. i think the problem is more so in that especially in the usa that getting licensed is a huge investment of time and money, comparable to med and law school. so architects get pissed when they think all the hard work should go towards a comparable income. too bad its a weak logic.
First off, architects do not have "more skills" than artists (a huge category). They have different skills, but not "more". In fact, I suspect an architect is an artist pretending not to be.
Now, architects aren't swimming in money for the simple fact of demand. I'm sorry, but the simple truth is, architects build very expensive things. Most people buy one building in their entire lifetime. Architects do not make less money because they aren't respected. There's just more architects than there are people who can afford buildings.
Also, consider: the fact that I'm not buying a Ferrari doesn't mean I think Ferraris are crap. It just means I can't afford one. I'm sure Ferrari doesn't take that as an insult. Neither should you when someone can't afford you.
As an aside, a lot of architects don't think about the gaming industry (I mean video games, not casinos). It's an untapped goldmine for architects. You can't make as much drawing for video games, and it may not be as glamorous as you like...but the work is easy for the amount you'd make. Look around; there's a lot of things an architect can do when waiting for that next contract.
We do NOT deserve to get paid more than we are. We can complain/bitch/moan all we want but our reality is that there are more than enough young designers willing to work for dirt as long as they're working on an interesting project or at a reputable firm. That being said, if one goes into architecture expecting to make $$ then she/he was misguided to begin with. I would even go so far as to state that if one was to enter into this fiels; they should prepare themselves for what most likely would be a life of meager wages especially if one is to pay off undergrad/grad student loans. Thats not to say that one could have a meaningful and enjoyable life given those circumstances.
A lot of architects who have little to no exposure/experience within the world outside of designing do not realize that there are professionals who have undergraduate degrees (business, engineering, economics, science, etc) who get paid just as much, often times way more than an m arch graduate. I really believe that this speaks to the larger problem. The % of the population who trully care about beauty in architectural design is very small.
99% of everyone outside of architecture could give a flying fuck about how cool a building looks, as long as that shit don't leak and keeps out the bad weather...and really, a general contractor could do both of those things w/o the headache of dealing w/ an architect who wants to experiment w/ a compound curved wall in the living room.
Simply put, there is little demand for our kind of skillset w/in the field of architecture itself; or shall I rephrase it by stating that most of us have this ability so that makes us to be not so valuable to one another, there is no real justification for a principal or upper mgmt of a design firm to pay their employess well if they know that we are all expendable.
If you look outside the bubble of architecture, one will find that the skills we learn in school make us extremely valuable in many disciplines across the board. The key is knowing how to break into those fields (construction mgmt, product design, real estate development, etc). A start would be for architects to stop hanging out w/ other architects, make friends w/ business people, get a degree in finance, take control of your own situation and stop being a slave to a system that no longer works for this generation of architects.
seriously, its time to stop this whole line of questioning of:
'why aren't we getting paid more?' its a waste of time and counterproductive, the answer is NO. you now know the answer: now go and do something about it.
Deviant, your post is far too rational and accurate for its own good. Expect someone to dissect it, blather meaninglessly for six or seven paragraphs with a lot of bold and italics for emphasis, then ask a question at the end that really doesn't further the conversation. A microcosm of the profession at large, as it were.
I disagree with the example about Ferrari, because even though not many people can buy a Ferrari. Ferrari is a rich company. Their secret is that they sell their product, after they build it. Answer me this question (I know that many people will argue about this question) how many architects do sell buildings or projects? (I am not talking about design). Not many. It is like fashion designers. Not everybody can buy fashion designer’s clothes because it is too expensive. But why are some fashion designers rich? Because they are associated more to business, and you do not find an architect as rich as Giorgio Armani. The issue is that architects do not want to stand up and talk to the world that they want more. In my opinion, Society is not going to give them more. Therefore, architects have to find a way to earn more money by themselves. Furthermore, architecture is a long career that it should have better salaries because it requires a great sacrifice. I also think that architecture as a career is almost dead, and it will be replaced by another career. Perhaps, engineering will replace architecture as architectural engineering. These words by Martin Luther King Jr. are true: “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” This all that I want to say. I know that a lot of people would disagree with me but that's what I think
Just making light of approximately half of this thread- the incessant blathering and pointless question at the end reminds me of everything I hated about studio crits.
Do architects deserve higher salaries?
I agree with you “Trace." Architecture should include classes related to business in their programs, because it is an elemental thing in the architecture world. In my opinion, architects should learn more about business. Therefore, I think that new generations of architects must take some business classes to do a minor in Business. That would help the architecture world a lot. Although, it is an ideology which architects must spread to important architectural organizations, such as RIBA and AIA. Those organizations are only ones that can introduce this idea of business studies in architecture to universities. Architecture programs should require business knowledge because architecture is a career which necessitates business to function.
For what it's worth, the AIA operates a 'Practice Management Knowledge Community' that is among the most popular of the AIA's Knowledge Communities. This KC works hard to respond to many of the issues raised in the previous two posts. As with all such endeavors, the old saw "You can lead a horse to water...." still applies.
What?!? teach BUSINESS in arch school?!? you mean teach a subject that cannot be arbitrarily berated by a panel of archispeak babbling lecturers?
Yup, but really, I look at Gehry and Mayne and Hadid and think 'wow, they've managed to create successful businesses, make a lot of money, and still do what they love, uncompromised". So love 'em or not, to me, they are very successful business people. Maybe they won't talk about that part, but they have succeeded in running/growing unique businesses.
Just one side of coin, but not one that should be overlooked.
FWIW:
Much to my surprise whenever I visit Penn State, one of the biggest proponents of professional practice and firm management is James Wines. And he is pretty out there.
If I may put on my tinfoil conspiracy hat for a moment, chances are that all of the starchitects that trace mentioned are brilliant business people- but they just don't want the masses to learn how to compete in an already supersaturated marketplace.
Industry has always had a major hand in academia- look at the faculty of any major school. Do you think they want to use academia to cater to the best and brightest in hopes of hiring those students to boost their firm's profits, or do you think they want to teach all students how to become successful on their own and risk going bankrupt themselves?
If architects want to run a profitable business they need to get there sleeves dirty:
Advertising
Brand development
Public Relations and Marketing
Salesmanship
Shameless self promotion at every possible opportunity
But for some reason these words are like vinegar in the eyes to architects. Maybe selling is below them?
Teaching some business as part of a 4+2 might could work because there tends to be some redundancy that, if eliminated, could make room for business or marketing classes.
He guys,
Look at this report :
http://archinect.com/navigate/8183827/http%253A%252F%252Fwww9.georgetown.edu%252Fgrad%252Fgppi%252Fhpi%252Fcew%252Fpdfs%252Fwhatsitworth-complete.pdf
It is really disappointing to see this report, because architecture is cataloged in the lowest paid-engineering. James, I do not understand why civil engineer's salary is much higher than architecture. That is why architecture is being dulling by civil engineering.
What a great deception about architecture. I thought that there would be a better future for the career.
Hey Rodgert,
That is an idea (your idea about business) that architects have to spread to improve the career, because architecture is suffering too much. I would say that the problem is not the career but the sacrifice that you have to do studying and working in architecture to don’t get what you should. It is not easy. Therefore, architects should be more accredited for their job. This is interview with Robert A.M Stern that it really represents the truth of architecture. http://bigthink.com/ideas/2588. I said that because many architects think that they are famous people, but they are not.
fuck you and yes.
get over it. architects aren't responsible for society as many think. if a bridge collapses that's a huge responsibility that civil engineers have to take. if a building has bad details and ugly proportions, no one is going to die.
you have to market yourself to be a beneficial commodity. some partners make a lot of money because without them they won't get projects for the office. we're in the creative field, think of business creatively!
i'm doing architecture because i like it. ditched bio medical engineering and business school because i know the quality of life is not dependent on getting a higher salaries. i think the problem is more so in that especially in the usa that getting licensed is a huge investment of time and money, comparable to med and law school. so architects get pissed when they think all the hard work should go towards a comparable income. too bad its a weak logic.
Architects like to talk, argue, and contemplate things. They're pretty good at it. They suck at taking action though.
Sanguebom - So right!
First off, architects do not have "more skills" than artists (a huge category). They have different skills, but not "more". In fact, I suspect an architect is an artist pretending not to be.
Now, architects aren't swimming in money for the simple fact of demand. I'm sorry, but the simple truth is, architects build very expensive things. Most people buy one building in their entire lifetime. Architects do not make less money because they aren't respected. There's just more architects than there are people who can afford buildings.
Also, consider: the fact that I'm not buying a Ferrari doesn't mean I think Ferraris are crap. It just means I can't afford one. I'm sure Ferrari doesn't take that as an insult. Neither should you when someone can't afford you.
As an aside, a lot of architects don't think about the gaming industry (I mean video games, not casinos). It's an untapped goldmine for architects. You can't make as much drawing for video games, and it may not be as glamorous as you like...but the work is easy for the amount you'd make. Look around; there's a lot of things an architect can do when waiting for that next contract.
We do NOT deserve to get paid more than we are. We can complain/bitch/moan all we want but our reality is that there are more than enough young designers willing to work for dirt as long as they're working on an interesting project or at a reputable firm. That being said, if one goes into architecture expecting to make $$ then she/he was misguided to begin with. I would even go so far as to state that if one was to enter into this fiels; they should prepare themselves for what most likely would be a life of meager wages especially if one is to pay off undergrad/grad student loans. Thats not to say that one could have a meaningful and enjoyable life given those circumstances.
A lot of architects who have little to no exposure/experience within the world outside of designing do not realize that there are professionals who have undergraduate degrees (business, engineering, economics, science, etc) who get paid just as much, often times way more than an m arch graduate. I really believe that this speaks to the larger problem. The % of the population who trully care about beauty in architectural design is very small.
99% of everyone outside of architecture could give a flying fuck about how cool a building looks, as long as that shit don't leak and keeps out the bad weather...and really, a general contractor could do both of those things w/o the headache of dealing w/ an architect who wants to experiment w/ a compound curved wall in the living room.
Simply put, there is little demand for our kind of skillset w/in the field of architecture itself; or shall I rephrase it by stating that most of us have this ability so that makes us to be not so valuable to one another, there is no real justification for a principal or upper mgmt of a design firm to pay their employess well if they know that we are all expendable.
If you look outside the bubble of architecture, one will find that the skills we learn in school make us extremely valuable in many disciplines across the board. The key is knowing how to break into those fields (construction mgmt, product design, real estate development, etc). A start would be for architects to stop hanging out w/ other architects, make friends w/ business people, get a degree in finance, take control of your own situation and stop being a slave to a system that no longer works for this generation of architects.
seriously, its time to stop this whole line of questioning of:
'why aren't we getting paid more?' its a waste of time and counterproductive, the answer is NO. you now know the answer: now go and do something about it.
Deviant, your post is far too rational and accurate for its own good. Expect someone to dissect it, blather meaninglessly for six or seven paragraphs with a lot of bold and italics for emphasis, then ask a question at the end that really doesn't further the conversation. A microcosm of the profession at large, as it were.
Hey now, that is precisely what I am good at doing.
But I at least put the effort into the twinned thread into making charts and graphs.
"99% of everyone outside of architecture could give a flying fuck about how cool a building looks"
Eh, it's wrong to state facts without regard for people's feelings!
Totally. Most everyone likes architecture.
I disagree with the example about Ferrari, because even though not many people can buy a Ferrari. Ferrari is a rich company. Their secret is that they sell their product, after they build it. Answer me this question (I know that many people will argue about this question) how many architects do sell buildings or projects? (I am not talking about design). Not many. It is like fashion designers. Not everybody can buy fashion designer’s clothes because it is too expensive. But why are some fashion designers rich? Because they are associated more to business, and you do not find an architect as rich as Giorgio Armani. The issue is that architects do not want to stand up and talk to the world that they want more. In my opinion, Society is not going to give them more. Therefore, architects have to find a way to earn more money by themselves. Furthermore, architecture is a long career that it should have better salaries because it requires a great sacrifice. I also think that architecture as a career is almost dead, and it will be replaced by another career. Perhaps, engineering will replace architecture as architectural engineering. These words by Martin Luther King Jr. are true: “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” This all that I want to say. I know that a lot of people would disagree with me but that's what I think
JJR- I wasn't digging at you specifically :)
Just making light of approximately half of this thread- the incessant blathering and pointless question at the end reminds me of everything I hated about studio crits.
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.