Toasteroven, I think the data in the Excel and PDF will be helpful and the numbers are staggering
14,707 full time 1938 part time 5 year Bachelor of Architecture students in 55 programs
3,465 full time 220 part time 5-year Master of Architecture students in 18 programs
2,953 full time 305 part time M arch students in 54 programs (Proceeded by a B Arch or related field)
2,559 full time 199 part time M arch students in 48 programs (Proceeded by a degree not related to architecture)
218 full time 45 part time PHD of Architecture students at the University of Hawaii
So people pursuing a degree that is NAAB accredited in 2007 (this does not include Bachelors of Science in architecture which is not NAAB accredited)
26,609 full and part time students in the system as of 2007
That is a lot of people entering the work force in the next 4 years. How many mega firms do we need to absorb that many people?
nope - it's right ... since they are missing the numbers for a lot of programs, I'm going to pick on MIT (notorious for their grads leaving the profession after graduation). their target rate for people with pre-prof degrees is 15 (170 applied, 59 accepted), their target for people without is 29 (168 applied, 32 accepted). Those target rates seem backwards to me, but considering people I know who went there it does seem to skew that way.
anyway - from that data it seems a several of the "top" grad programs tend towards accepting people without arch backgrounds... whether or not this means anything in terms of the state of our profession or the quality of our graduates... i don't really know... but it's fun to speculate.
One thing we can presume is that the students entering an M Arch degree program from a non architectural background often need an additional year so it will be a 3 year ordeal not a two year ordeal. From my personal experience this is the path that people who are changing careers later in life take since they often have a bachelors and possibly a masters in some other field.
I can imagine that the diverse points of view these particular students bring can be useful in the profession, often we get too isolated in our real or imaginary ivory towers we call the architecture schools. By the time architecture students reach their 3rd year in undergrad they are cloister way too much.
I'd level out the valleys by reducing the ranks of freshly minted architecture grads. Regulate the supply at the source and let demand pay more or just wait when the next boom happens.
Let me clarify...I wouldn't ask the colleges to reduce the number admitted, I want to reduce the number of programs across the board.
I've used this example before as a college professor of mine used it a lot. He said, Architects should compare themselves to Pharmicists, not doctors or lawyers. Pharmicists with Pharm D degrees enter the work force with often times salaries near six figures or over. Why? Because every pharmacy needs someone with a Pharm D to legally dispense drugs. Why do they get paid so much? Because there are only about 3 dozen Pharm D programs in the whole country. Massive shortage given all the CVS and Walgreen's on every corner.
He said the US should have probably no more than 40 NAAB accredited programs. Trade colleges could churn out Architectural Techs much like Pharm Techs. These techs are probably better equipped to draft up CD's and write specs than college grads. Architecture colleges would graduate those that would go on to licensure, signing drawings, oversee design, etc., but not spend years being CAD monkeys.
Problem is that Architecture is a glamorous degree and one that tens of thousands want to get and colleges have been more than willing to accomodate that demand. That oversupply has flooded the markets to the point where college grads are competing with drafting grads of ITT for the same job. It's crazy. Pharmacy isn't so glamorous, but the pay is there and one of their major marketing points to new students. They enter the work force with already a high level of respect behind them and the degree carries significan weight. Something architecture does not.
You really cannot compare the two professions. After coming out of Pharmacy school, a person is completely qualified to dispense drugs. The knowledge base that is needed is very narrow and limited. Mostly the just check a computer for drug interactions, dispense limited advice, need to follow regs for dispensing of narcotics, etc. For every 150 or so "Pharmacists" who work at a Target or Walmart, there is 1 REAL pharmacist, who can do custom drug mixing, compounding of drugs, etc. They usually work in a very large hospital or have a very successful private pharmacy practice (and do not sell things like deodorant and beef sticks....)
In architecture, you graduate, and can do virtually nothing professionally. Firstly, the base of knowledge required is much more vast, and less able to be quantified in a computer program. Secondly the schools are not set up to give you the knowledge you need to actually practice architecture. The knowledge of codes is superficial, the knowledge of building practices is nil, the knowledge of how to detail to keep water out of a building is non-existent, and "design" skill is all about theory, and not anything that can actually solve a useful problem. The idea of a bunch of grad architects getting big bucks to "oversee design and sign drawings" makes me laugh out loud. Maybe after 5 to 10 years of experience, but not before. For those years, the CAD monkey years, they should be learning all the stuff they did not learn in school.
Oh my God Aqua that is so wrong it's disturbing. So your saying the architect, is above the menial tasks of the labor involved in creating their product, and that design should be limited to a select few? The lowly techs will "write the specs" that presumably protect the health welfare and safety of the public which is why we are licensed to begin with? Why not just have a GC exam, problem solved. Archie said it best:
"In architecture, you graduate, and can do virtually nothing professionally. Firstly, the base of knowledge required is much more vast, and less able to be quantified in a computer program. Secondly the schools are not set up to give you the knowledge you need to actually practice architecture."
Archie, I think the B arch 5 year degree programs are taking the technical side as serious as a seizure. Most of these programs are not bogged down in the minutia of philosophical and historical arguments over style and theory. Think of the Rural Studio and the Kansas State program that is rebuilding Greensburg.
If you graduate architecture school and you have not built anything, or completed a set or construction documents for Steel, Masonry, wood frame and concrete construction, you should ask for your money back, because you wasted your time and tuition dollars. This is why the 5 Year B arch programs are on the rise and might erode the M arch program in resources and prestige.
NAAB has also placed a moratorium on accrediting any new B Arch 5 year degree programs, so the expansion is stymied due to the pressure the M arch programs placed on NAAB. Southern Illinois Carbondale was the last one to get in under the deadline.
I guess this could be the beginning of a new thread and debate over Architectural education. Should architectural education be a vocational, philosophical, or some combination of the two?
I agree with what cad has to say about some of the 20-100 firms. I see these ones getting beat up on the most. I can also see a greater shift toward the consolidation of engineering and architecture firms as someone else mentioned before.
I'm not going to post about this anymore, but CM now you are just being an ass. and I really don't see how you are being any better than the evil person you've painted me to be. Since you are refering to my comments a year ago, I was refering to a group of young people (mostly engineers and an architect) who were being extremely hostile towards me and it puzzled me since I never worked with them or had any dealings with them previously. After dealing with it for a while (acting totally cool about it), I drew the last straw when I came into work one morning to see that my computer's screen saver (which previously said GO CAVALIERS) had been changed to spell out a derogatory racist word for Indian-Americans (which is what I am). As I looked at it (obviously shocked) I saw people around smirking and giggling. This was REALLY bad but I managaged to ignore it and didn't even report this. I just changed it back and carried on with my day. All along, the issue was race...
I handed in my letter of resignation three days later (already had a job lined up). I peaced out on a good note. The management and principals at that firm are incredible and outstanding people. Had I told them about what transpired, they would have been extremely sympathetic and would have gotten to the bottom of it and taken action. I just didn't want to take that route. I thought that it would have been better just to slip out without a peep since another door was wide open. I'm still friends with many of the people there actually.
But CM, if these are types of people you identify with, that's your problem. Two of the people (including a female architect) were fired about a month later for apparently asking one of the admin people a racially charged and incensitive question.
I think this deserves another thread, but anyway...
re PJN26 One thing we can presume is that the students entering an M Arch degree program from a non architectural background often need an additional year so it will be a 3 year ordeal not a two year ordeal. From my personal experience this is the path that people who are changing careers later in life take since they often have a bachelors and possibly a masters in some other field.
I can imagine that the diverse points of view these particular students bring can be useful in the profession, often we get too isolated in our real or imaginary ivory towers we call the architecture schools. By the time architecture students reach their 3rd year in undergrad they are cloister way too much.
I do agree that these students bring in much needed alternative perspectives into programs, but I really wonder how many of these people actually stay with architecture or head back into their previous field?
I also don't agree with this vague idea of diversity in student body as the primary way to keep architecture students from becoming too isolated (I know this isn't exactly what you are saying) - If that is a program's main solution, then they are being lazy.
anyway - I think only a fraction of the people in undergrad programs actually end up in architecture or even finish the degree. people in masters programs tend to stick it out a bit longer, but there's still a percentage who don't complete that degree either. The number of people who are actually entering the field isn't as high as that spreadsheet suggests... but it's still a substantial amount.
In architecture, you graduate, and can do virtually nothing professionally.
Isn't that statement alone an admittance that collegiate level Architecture education is seriously lacking? I have huge concerns about how poorly equipped Architecture grads are. That said, I never expect a fresh grad to enter a firm and oversee design and sign drawings from day 1.
My argument is that for most grads their "apprenticeship" is long hours in the trenches detailing water closets with limited mentorship. Granted this is not always the case, but largely it is. IDP is not taken seriously and not doing any services for the profession.
Flooding the market with Architecture grads only means many will end up life long construction document technicians with very expensive degrees that were largely not necessary. If your goal in life is to be a CDT, there are better equipped schools than NAAB accredited colleges, plain and simple.
Of course the ARE needs to remain and would keep any fresh grad from "running the show," but I would prefer if "architectural interns" were hired for purposes other than 100% production work. I see a flooded market of architecture degrees only devaluing the degree.
“...Trade colleges could churn out Architectural Techs much like Pharm Techs. These techs are probably better equipped to draft up CD's and write specs than college grads…”
It’s this type of arrogant thinking that has contributed to the demise of the architecture profession since the beginning of time. Reason why architects get no respect is we don’t respect our own and where we came from. Doctors, lawyers, even pharmacists - nurture their young…many architects (not all, mind you – but very many) are self centered and think they’re a god just because they made a decision to skew a wall and happened to be wearing black that day.
Appear to have learned well and are on the right path to becoming another somebody which nobody gives a shit about.
OK! So can we please get back to actual layoffs! I am tired of people complaing about this and that. Yes I do ignore most of it. I thought that this was supposed to be about who was laying off and how many. Please set up another blog for complaining and opinions. Can we just get stats here?
DLR Group has laid of its whole office in Philly short of closing its doors. About 20 laid off, with only 1-2 people in office to take care of projects that it is currently running.
Please note the example of my contribution. Just the facts! Not opinons and complaints. Please save the speculation for another BLOG. Thank you!
The firm I was at has laid off 5 more people, this is the fifth or sixth round of layoffs there. This was in SoHo, NYC. Total employees laid off is around 50 out of 85 since July 2008
work is slow. really slow. as in, some people in my studio are working in other studios. we have a new project- but it hasn't officially started yet and we're waiting around for a contract. which, in this market, could be never. basically we have no projects.
so any day now i'm sure there will be another layoff.
+i, I feel your pain as I'm in a similar situation. We've had so much suffling of staff that if we ever did ramp up to 2007-early 2008 levels we'd never be able to get our old project teams back together.
We've already been socked with a pay cut. Now we are looking at more layoffs and/or reduced hours. The financial strain on everyone is overwhelming. I have been having extremely sharp and vivid dreams. Got so bad I went to see the Dr. They think it's stress and said that many people are coming in with similar conditions.
thanks for notes of concern, aqua + outed. i had an amazingly great yearly review in April... i hope out of the small numbers of us left i am a keeper. it's funny because i've been talking to my dad about this a lot- it's one way i keep from going crazy. he's not an architect, but he owns 5 businesses + has been in corporate america a good part of his life. he basically told me to sit back and think as if i were the VP and how i would base my financial and layoff decisions. he gave me a few ideas as to how VP's make these decisions and to keep that in mind. when i did what he suggested + thought about the broader firm strategy, every single person i thought about who i would layoff (all for various reasons), have all been laid off. what is weird to me is that, of those of us left, a few people have a pretty firm belief that "we are so lean, they can't possibly lay anymore of us off"... yet when i go back to the advice my dad has given me, i can still think of a few more people... which has me worried.
i hope things get better for you aqua. i'm afraid there are too many people literally worrying themselves sick out there right now... and for good reason, sadly.
+i and aquapura, thanks for sharing your current situation. Its especially helpful to receive patient encouragement and advice from friends and family who have weathered extreme stress. And believe it or not, I have been inspired by the passion and tenacity that shows through these posts.
So far, our workload in a large A/E company has been steady, for which I am thankful every day. Several friends and former associates are out of work and have been looking for several months. I found out that another friend and one of his coworkers were let go friday noon from a firm of a dozen. He is married with kids and has a mortgage here, and still has an unsold house where they relocated from a year ago. I know that we have a hard enough time with ONE mortgage; I can't imagine having two and now facing unemployment. To his credit, he is resourceful, flexible and has a healthy family.
+i, Interesting how when you "put yourself in the VP's shoes" you would have approached the downturn in a similar fashion. When I do the exact same where I'm at there are many things I would've done differently. Our first round of cuts last year were pure fat trimming. People that should've been fired during the good times. Since then things haven't matched my business thinking. Several of the "best and brightest" were let go only because they were slow. I would think that you'd always keep your most productive and talented employees...let go of the lesser (even if they are busy) and move the better talent onto those projects. Granted there are things to consider when changing up a project team, but I still would think keeping top talent should be #1 priority.
Martini...pre 4/2/09 the rumor was 130 to be laid off at HKS. From what I heard from the Empire through my sources is that it was a 100 in the latest layoffs. Admins, interns, staff and associates on 4/2/09...then they've been laying off VPs and up every few days since. In the past 6 months or so they've laid off hundreds of staff (two hundred? three hundred? I think it's more than that) worldwide.
aqua- i don't want to get into a debate about what firm laid off who and why. and, well, i know not every VP is the same, nor every firm, so that being said, i have to say the VP's at my particular firm are being very sensitive and they are thinking of the broader picture. they are very level-headed and logical.
this is not to say that those let go already weren't good. many of them were. but for various reasons i can see how some might not fit into the broader future. some were very stubborn + didn't care much for critique or follow through, refused to work as a team or constantly disagreed with everyone without willingness to see another view. if you've been in a firm you know that the first go around usually isn't perfect. others just couldn't get past the pen + paper, unwilling to grasp new concepts, take opportunities or seek challenges, or step up to be a leader on any number of things. seeing a "bigger picture" not only for design, but also for the firm, seems to be a big theme.
Sorry to hear some of the sad stories, it's rough.
There is no "job security", just temporary jobs...unless you play the game.
Become a stake holder, bring in the work, fraternizing with the right people, etc...then again, I know some folks who've been with the same firm over 20 years just to be released because there's nothing to work on, and probably pissed off the wrong person some time ago.
Plan on the worst - so that when it happens you're prepared for the next opportunity.
When "the worst" does NOT happen, be thankful you're still in the game and think about what you can do to stay in it (if you still wanna play).
Architecture is one of the most unstable and chaotic professions, don't understand why we put up with it.
I agree with you. If you bring in the clients, they won't get rid of you. You'd have to do something very stupid and unethical to get canned...even then I've heard of firms that bring such jerks back.
Talent? Sad to say but it can go so far. Schmoozing? Yes, for some of you young, idealistic ones on this blog, playing the game is how you keep your job. I never could do it like the ones that would eat their own to stay alive. Believe in kharma. Those that somehow have "survived" so far may not be lucky the rest of their career in architecture. I'm talking about the leeches of the profession.
Worry about yourselves and your families. But be positive. This will pass...someday. Find a way to make your future better, it starts with the first step.
you're right - the only things that matter are your friends and your family - they're the only ones who will be there for you. treat them well, always - especially your mom's.
the people that matter in your life will not be interested in the titanium plated treehouse you detailed for that starchitect...they'll just ask, "why?", and "who?". and "what the hell is a starchitect? how much does he make?...is that all? ok...whatever."
heard that "Morrison Seefert Murphey" in TX let 20 people go a couple months ago (80% cut). the only people left are the partners and a couple of techs.
also heard that "Rees" in dallas - layed off 15 persons last week...right before end of the month which sucks because their insurance ended and they'll have to scramble for cobra or something else.
tangent. ah man. too bad cobra only works for like ten percent of the people who need and can afford extending their benefits. having my insurance fully paid by my old employer was a perk I didn't fully understand until I realized how much they were paying every month. wow.
ok sorry, carry on.
round four - april 09 (spanning a few weeks, 4/2/09 was main day for hunting, then VP and up were picked off one by one over the following couple of weeks)
RTKL is a quarterly layoff- as it is with most large corporate firms. Usually they have shareholders or a board to appease. RTKL's quarters are based on the Netherlands system because they are owned / traded by ARCADIS. Which is why RTKL's layoffs happens at a different time than the SOM's or HKS's or SmithGroups... which I would also venture all of those are on the quarterly layoff systems as well. Same with ARUP... and they're traded on another international market- so their quarters are different also. So it seems staggered, but it really isn't- it's actually sort of predictable.
RTKL still has about 150+ people in the DC office. Maybe more. SmithGroup still has a good amount as well. It's not like these firms are going to go to 20 overnight or shut their doors.
Be realistic. If you were a CEO, you would have to answer your investors/shareholders/board as well... and the best way to make the company look strong is to act proactively right before the quarter ends.
... as a caveat let me say... there is also the possibility- if you underperformed- that the firm will find a way to fire you instead of pay into your unemployment. In that case, it's not all that logical- it's vindictive. But I would venture you could already guess that from who you work for...
While it's interesting to hear how many the HOK's, SOM's, RTKL's, etc. are shedding, the real numbers out there are the thousands of smaller practices shedding 1-2 people here and there.
Most people I know in this business work in firms of about 20-30 people...which are now at maybe 15 people at best. Multiply that across a major metro area and you're looking at numbers that dwarf what any corporate firm is doing.
+i - not to get on a real tangent here, but i'm 99% sure we're (as the owners) paying unemployment insurance from the moment we hire you. at least in georgia, if you are 'unwillingly' laid off, you can file for unemployment. we don't pay for the person after they've been let go (which is how i'm reading your comment). point being, i don't have any control over what or how much a laid off employee claims - all that is run through the state.
now, if you mean that someone could force you to 'resign' instead of being fired, to avoid the hit against their unemployment insurance rates, then, yes, that would be really vindictive and probably illegal (if it was coerced.)
to further clarify outed's point above, in most states firms pay montly into an unemployment fund. we make payments based on our total payroll and not every firm pays into the fund at the same rate.
the rates each firm pays depend on each firm's "hire and fire" history -- i.e. during a given period of time, those firms that experience a larger number of involuntary terminations will pay a higher percentage of their ongoing payroll into the unemployment fund than will firms that rarely, if ever, experience an involuntary termination.
the idea behind this scheme is to have those firms with less stable employment histories make a greater contribution to the unemployment fund than is made by firms with more stable employment histories.
From today's Blair Kamin blog at the Chicago Tribune:
"One of Chicago's largest architectural firms, OWP/P, is merging with Cannon Design"
"John Syvertsen, OWP/P's president, acknowledged that the recent construction downtown has forced his firm, like many in Chicago, to lay off architects. But he denied that the merger is recession-related and said it would not lead to a fresh round of layoffs in the Chicago office."
There are almost always some layoffs when large firms merge; hopefully in this case, there won't be too many redundancies...
Agree about the aia website for posting resumes...fail.
Anyone else frustrated by the online job search engines/services that for every ten"hits" for "architect", nine come back as a position in the IT field?!?!?!
In TX the TBAE goes after individuals that bill themselves as an "architect" - wish they could stop the IT "world" from calling themselves this...then again i wish i was not having to use these damn search engines!
I think it unwise to become too cynical about posting resumes at the AIA website. firms will start hiring again in unpredictable fits and spurts. it doesn't cost you anything to post your credentials there and it's better to be visible when firms start looking again than it is to be invisible. while it's not a panacea, it is a useful arrow in your quiver
however, just don't have unrealistic expectations -- when firms don't have any work, they just can make new jobs happen out of thin air. but, when the work starts coming back, you want them to have access to your resume.
Texas is awesome for going after those fraudulently passing themselves off as architects. Love the newsletter which names those people and the fines they were given. Busted!
Ahhh yes, that list is like a train wreck. You whince at the cojnes some people have....the other list o' shame for TAS violations is nit-picky. I've known several architects who got put on because the RAS was a total prick. Plans a day late? Due to a courier that's an imbecile? Nail the architect who improperly designs something that does not meet the required accessibilty standards, not for having a set a day late for review? Bogus.
Yes, i change my tune a little on the aia website. One day those that have been letting the architects, designers, interns, etc. go will be in a pinch that can't be fixed by working their skeleton crews 24/7. Prepare for that firestorm, get out your resumes!!!!
Layoffs....layoffs......
Toasteroven, I think the data in the Excel and PDF will be helpful and the numbers are staggering
14,707 full time 1938 part time 5 year Bachelor of Architecture students in 55 programs
3,465 full time 220 part time 5-year Master of Architecture students in 18 programs
2,953 full time 305 part time M arch students in 54 programs (Proceeded by a B Arch or related field)
2,559 full time 199 part time M arch students in 48 programs (Proceeded by a degree not related to architecture)
218 full time 45 part time PHD of Architecture students at the University of Hawaii
So people pursuing a degree that is NAAB accredited in 2007 (this does not include Bachelors of Science in architecture which is not NAAB accredited)
26,609 full and part time students in the system as of 2007
That is a lot of people entering the work force in the next 4 years. How many mega firms do we need to absorb that many people?
pjn26 - it looks like half and half in MArch (first professional degree) programs...
I'm curious as what percentage of applicants to Masters programs are pre-professional.
also - I wonder what percentage of each of these camps are still working in architecture.
oops - I didn't scroll to the back...
across the board:
50% acceptance rate for people with pre-prof
38% acceptance rate for people without pre-prof
with pre-prof % of entering class = 61% (target 66%)
without pre-prof = 39% (target 34%)
I don't know enough about statistics to know if 5% difference in targets skewing towards people with non-arch backgrounds is significant.
and I wonder if these numbers reflect people applying to more than one program or total # of applications.
ok - I might have goofed - is that right?
last post, I promise, then back to layoffs...
nope - it's right ... since they are missing the numbers for a lot of programs, I'm going to pick on MIT (notorious for their grads leaving the profession after graduation). their target rate for people with pre-prof degrees is 15 (170 applied, 59 accepted), their target for people without is 29 (168 applied, 32 accepted). Those target rates seem backwards to me, but considering people I know who went there it does seem to skew that way.
anyway - from that data it seems a several of the "top" grad programs tend towards accepting people without arch backgrounds... whether or not this means anything in terms of the state of our profession or the quality of our graduates... i don't really know... but it's fun to speculate.
One thing we can presume is that the students entering an M Arch degree program from a non architectural background often need an additional year so it will be a 3 year ordeal not a two year ordeal. From my personal experience this is the path that people who are changing careers later in life take since they often have a bachelors and possibly a masters in some other field.
I can imagine that the diverse points of view these particular students bring can be useful in the profession, often we get too isolated in our real or imaginary ivory towers we call the architecture schools. By the time architecture students reach their 3rd year in undergrad they are cloister way too much.
Let me clarify...I wouldn't ask the colleges to reduce the number admitted, I want to reduce the number of programs across the board.
I've used this example before as a college professor of mine used it a lot. He said, Architects should compare themselves to Pharmicists, not doctors or lawyers. Pharmicists with Pharm D degrees enter the work force with often times salaries near six figures or over. Why? Because every pharmacy needs someone with a Pharm D to legally dispense drugs. Why do they get paid so much? Because there are only about 3 dozen Pharm D programs in the whole country. Massive shortage given all the CVS and Walgreen's on every corner.
He said the US should have probably no more than 40 NAAB accredited programs. Trade colleges could churn out Architectural Techs much like Pharm Techs. These techs are probably better equipped to draft up CD's and write specs than college grads. Architecture colleges would graduate those that would go on to licensure, signing drawings, oversee design, etc., but not spend years being CAD monkeys.
Problem is that Architecture is a glamorous degree and one that tens of thousands want to get and colleges have been more than willing to accomodate that demand. That oversupply has flooded the markets to the point where college grads are competing with drafting grads of ITT for the same job. It's crazy. Pharmacy isn't so glamorous, but the pay is there and one of their major marketing points to new students. They enter the work force with already a high level of respect behind them and the degree carries significan weight. Something architecture does not.
Nice post, aqua, I like the comparison to Pharm, especially the drafting techs to pharm techs.
My pharmacist is quite glamorous and a fox.
You really cannot compare the two professions. After coming out of Pharmacy school, a person is completely qualified to dispense drugs. The knowledge base that is needed is very narrow and limited. Mostly the just check a computer for drug interactions, dispense limited advice, need to follow regs for dispensing of narcotics, etc. For every 150 or so "Pharmacists" who work at a Target or Walmart, there is 1 REAL pharmacist, who can do custom drug mixing, compounding of drugs, etc. They usually work in a very large hospital or have a very successful private pharmacy practice (and do not sell things like deodorant and beef sticks....)
In architecture, you graduate, and can do virtually nothing professionally. Firstly, the base of knowledge required is much more vast, and less able to be quantified in a computer program. Secondly the schools are not set up to give you the knowledge you need to actually practice architecture. The knowledge of codes is superficial, the knowledge of building practices is nil, the knowledge of how to detail to keep water out of a building is non-existent, and "design" skill is all about theory, and not anything that can actually solve a useful problem. The idea of a bunch of grad architects getting big bucks to "oversee design and sign drawings" makes me laugh out loud. Maybe after 5 to 10 years of experience, but not before. For those years, the CAD monkey years, they should be learning all the stuff they did not learn in school.
Oh my God Aqua that is so wrong it's disturbing. So your saying the architect, is above the menial tasks of the labor involved in creating their product, and that design should be limited to a select few? The lowly techs will "write the specs" that presumably protect the health welfare and safety of the public which is why we are licensed to begin with? Why not just have a GC exam, problem solved. Archie said it best:
"In architecture, you graduate, and can do virtually nothing professionally. Firstly, the base of knowledge required is much more vast, and less able to be quantified in a computer program. Secondly the schools are not set up to give you the knowledge you need to actually practice architecture."
Archie, I think the B arch 5 year degree programs are taking the technical side as serious as a seizure. Most of these programs are not bogged down in the minutia of philosophical and historical arguments over style and theory. Think of the Rural Studio and the Kansas State program that is rebuilding Greensburg.
If you graduate architecture school and you have not built anything, or completed a set or construction documents for Steel, Masonry, wood frame and concrete construction, you should ask for your money back, because you wasted your time and tuition dollars. This is why the 5 Year B arch programs are on the rise and might erode the M arch program in resources and prestige.
NAAB has also placed a moratorium on accrediting any new B Arch 5 year degree programs, so the expansion is stymied due to the pressure the M arch programs placed on NAAB. Southern Illinois Carbondale was the last one to get in under the deadline.
I guess this could be the beginning of a new thread and debate over Architectural education. Should architectural education be a vocational, philosophical, or some combination of the two?
I agree with what cad has to say about some of the 20-100 firms. I see these ones getting beat up on the most. I can also see a greater shift toward the consolidation of engineering and architecture firms as someone else mentioned before.
I'm not going to post about this anymore, but CM now you are just being an ass. and I really don't see how you are being any better than the evil person you've painted me to be. Since you are refering to my comments a year ago, I was refering to a group of young people (mostly engineers and an architect) who were being extremely hostile towards me and it puzzled me since I never worked with them or had any dealings with them previously. After dealing with it for a while (acting totally cool about it), I drew the last straw when I came into work one morning to see that my computer's screen saver (which previously said GO CAVALIERS) had been changed to spell out a derogatory racist word for Indian-Americans (which is what I am). As I looked at it (obviously shocked) I saw people around smirking and giggling. This was REALLY bad but I managaged to ignore it and didn't even report this. I just changed it back and carried on with my day. All along, the issue was race...
I handed in my letter of resignation three days later (already had a job lined up). I peaced out on a good note. The management and principals at that firm are incredible and outstanding people. Had I told them about what transpired, they would have been extremely sympathetic and would have gotten to the bottom of it and taken action. I just didn't want to take that route. I thought that it would have been better just to slip out without a peep since another door was wide open. I'm still friends with many of the people there actually.
But CM, if these are types of people you identify with, that's your problem. Two of the people (including a female architect) were fired about a month later for apparently asking one of the admin people a racially charged and incensitive question.
I think this deserves another thread, but anyway...
re PJN26 One thing we can presume is that the students entering an M Arch degree program from a non architectural background often need an additional year so it will be a 3 year ordeal not a two year ordeal. From my personal experience this is the path that people who are changing careers later in life take since they often have a bachelors and possibly a masters in some other field.
I can imagine that the diverse points of view these particular students bring can be useful in the profession, often we get too isolated in our real or imaginary ivory towers we call the architecture schools. By the time architecture students reach their 3rd year in undergrad they are cloister way too much.
I do agree that these students bring in much needed alternative perspectives into programs, but I really wonder how many of these people actually stay with architecture or head back into their previous field?
I also don't agree with this vague idea of diversity in student body as the primary way to keep architecture students from becoming too isolated (I know this isn't exactly what you are saying) - If that is a program's main solution, then they are being lazy.
anyway - I think only a fraction of the people in undergrad programs actually end up in architecture or even finish the degree. people in masters programs tend to stick it out a bit longer, but there's still a percentage who don't complete that degree either. The number of people who are actually entering the field isn't as high as that spreadsheet suggests... but it's still a substantial amount.
Isn't that statement alone an admittance that collegiate level Architecture education is seriously lacking? I have huge concerns about how poorly equipped Architecture grads are. That said, I never expect a fresh grad to enter a firm and oversee design and sign drawings from day 1.
My argument is that for most grads their "apprenticeship" is long hours in the trenches detailing water closets with limited mentorship. Granted this is not always the case, but largely it is. IDP is not taken seriously and not doing any services for the profession.
Flooding the market with Architecture grads only means many will end up life long construction document technicians with very expensive degrees that were largely not necessary. If your goal in life is to be a CDT, there are better equipped schools than NAAB accredited colleges, plain and simple.
Of course the ARE needs to remain and would keep any fresh grad from "running the show," but I would prefer if "architectural interns" were hired for purposes other than 100% production work. I see a flooded market of architecture degrees only devaluing the degree.
“...Trade colleges could churn out Architectural Techs much like Pharm Techs. These techs are probably better equipped to draft up CD's and write specs than college grads…”
It’s this type of arrogant thinking that has contributed to the demise of the architecture profession since the beginning of time. Reason why architects get no respect is we don’t respect our own and where we came from. Doctors, lawyers, even pharmacists - nurture their young…many architects (not all, mind you – but very many) are self centered and think they’re a god just because they made a decision to skew a wall and happened to be wearing black that day.
Appear to have learned well and are on the right path to becoming another somebody which nobody gives a shit about.
OK! So can we please get back to actual layoffs! I am tired of people complaing about this and that. Yes I do ignore most of it. I thought that this was supposed to be about who was laying off and how many. Please set up another blog for complaining and opinions. Can we just get stats here?
DLR Group has laid of its whole office in Philly short of closing its doors. About 20 laid off, with only 1-2 people in office to take care of projects that it is currently running.
Please note the example of my contribution. Just the facts! Not opinons and complaints. Please save the speculation for another BLOG. Thank you!
The firm I was at has laid off 5 more people, this is the fifth or sixth round of layoffs there. This was in SoHo, NYC. Total employees laid off is around 50 out of 85 since July 2008
work is slow. really slow. as in, some people in my studio are working in other studios. we have a new project- but it hasn't officially started yet and we're waiting around for a contract. which, in this market, could be never. basically we have no projects.
so any day now i'm sure there will be another layoff.
We laid off 6/12 since January. Cant name names.
wow. sorry to hear that +i.
+i, I feel your pain as I'm in a similar situation. We've had so much suffling of staff that if we ever did ramp up to 2007-early 2008 levels we'd never be able to get our old project teams back together.
We've already been socked with a pay cut. Now we are looking at more layoffs and/or reduced hours. The financial strain on everyone is overwhelming. I have been having extremely sharp and vivid dreams. Got so bad I went to see the Dr. They think it's stress and said that many people are coming in with similar conditions.
thanks for notes of concern, aqua + outed. i had an amazingly great yearly review in April... i hope out of the small numbers of us left i am a keeper. it's funny because i've been talking to my dad about this a lot- it's one way i keep from going crazy. he's not an architect, but he owns 5 businesses + has been in corporate america a good part of his life. he basically told me to sit back and think as if i were the VP and how i would base my financial and layoff decisions. he gave me a few ideas as to how VP's make these decisions and to keep that in mind. when i did what he suggested + thought about the broader firm strategy, every single person i thought about who i would layoff (all for various reasons), have all been laid off. what is weird to me is that, of those of us left, a few people have a pretty firm belief that "we are so lean, they can't possibly lay anymore of us off"... yet when i go back to the advice my dad has given me, i can still think of a few more people... which has me worried.
i hope things get better for you aqua. i'm afraid there are too many people literally worrying themselves sick out there right now... and for good reason, sadly.
+i and aquapura, thanks for sharing your current situation. Its especially helpful to receive patient encouragement and advice from friends and family who have weathered extreme stress. And believe it or not, I have been inspired by the passion and tenacity that shows through these posts.
So far, our workload in a large A/E company has been steady, for which I am thankful every day. Several friends and former associates are out of work and have been looking for several months. I found out that another friend and one of his coworkers were let go friday noon from a firm of a dozen. He is married with kids and has a mortgage here, and still has an unsold house where they relocated from a year ago. I know that we have a hard enough time with ONE mortgage; I can't imagine having two and now facing unemployment. To his credit, he is resourceful, flexible and has a healthy family.
+i, Interesting how when you "put yourself in the VP's shoes" you would have approached the downturn in a similar fashion. When I do the exact same where I'm at there are many things I would've done differently. Our first round of cuts last year were pure fat trimming. People that should've been fired during the good times. Since then things haven't matched my business thinking. Several of the "best and brightest" were let go only because they were slow. I would think that you'd always keep your most productive and talented employees...let go of the lesser (even if they are busy) and move the better talent onto those projects. Granted there are things to consider when changing up a project team, but I still would think keeping top talent should be #1 priority.
Martini...pre 4/2/09 the rumor was 130 to be laid off at HKS. From what I heard from the Empire through my sources is that it was a 100 in the latest layoffs. Admins, interns, staff and associates on 4/2/09...then they've been laying off VPs and up every few days since. In the past 6 months or so they've laid off hundreds of staff (two hundred? three hundred? I think it's more than that) worldwide.
aqua- i don't want to get into a debate about what firm laid off who and why. and, well, i know not every VP is the same, nor every firm, so that being said, i have to say the VP's at my particular firm are being very sensitive and they are thinking of the broader picture. they are very level-headed and logical.
this is not to say that those let go already weren't good. many of them were. but for various reasons i can see how some might not fit into the broader future. some were very stubborn + didn't care much for critique or follow through, refused to work as a team or constantly disagreed with everyone without willingness to see another view. if you've been in a firm you know that the first go around usually isn't perfect. others just couldn't get past the pen + paper, unwilling to grasp new concepts, take opportunities or seek challenges, or step up to be a leader on any number of things. seeing a "bigger picture" not only for design, but also for the firm, seems to be a big theme.
Sorry to hear some of the sad stories, it's rough.
There is no "job security", just temporary jobs...unless you play the game.
Become a stake holder, bring in the work, fraternizing with the right people, etc...then again, I know some folks who've been with the same firm over 20 years just to be released because there's nothing to work on, and probably pissed off the wrong person some time ago.
Plan on the worst - so that when it happens you're prepared for the next opportunity.
When "the worst" does NOT happen, be thankful you're still in the game and think about what you can do to stay in it (if you still wanna play).
Architecture is one of the most unstable and chaotic professions, don't understand why we put up with it.
xaia:
I agree with you. If you bring in the clients, they won't get rid of you. You'd have to do something very stupid and unethical to get canned...even then I've heard of firms that bring such jerks back.
Talent? Sad to say but it can go so far. Schmoozing? Yes, for some of you young, idealistic ones on this blog, playing the game is how you keep your job. I never could do it like the ones that would eat their own to stay alive. Believe in kharma. Those that somehow have "survived" so far may not be lucky the rest of their career in architecture. I'm talking about the leeches of the profession.
Worry about yourselves and your families. But be positive. This will pass...someday. Find a way to make your future better, it starts with the first step.
you're right - the only things that matter are your friends and your family - they're the only ones who will be there for you. treat them well, always - especially your mom's.
the people that matter in your life will not be interested in the titanium plated treehouse you detailed for that starchitect...they'll just ask, "why?", and "who?". and "what the hell is a starchitect? how much does he make?...is that all? ok...whatever."
some architects love that stuff. get over it.
heard that "Morrison Seefert Murphey" in TX let 20 people go a couple months ago (80% cut). the only people left are the partners and a couple of techs.
also heard that "Rees" in dallas - layed off 15 persons last week...right before end of the month which sucks because their insurance ended and they'll have to scramble for cobra or something else.
tangent. ah man. too bad cobra only works for like ten percent of the people who need and can afford extending their benefits. having my insurance fully paid by my old employer was a perk I didn't fully understand until I realized how much they were paying every month. wow.
ok sorry, carry on.
today...
RTKL DC - 7
RTKL in the US - 15
RTKL Europe - many, many
+i, how many are you guys down to?
BTW, HOK DC had another round about three weeks ago. They've shedded 35 all in all.
It seems like RTKL laid off people every 2 months...
thats what HKS had been doing.
layoffs every two months.
hks layoffs:
round one - october 08
round two - november 08
round three - january 09
round four - april 09 (spanning a few weeks, 4/2/09 was main day for hunting, then VP and up were picked off one by one over the following couple of weeks)
round five - ??????
brutal.
RTKL is a quarterly layoff- as it is with most large corporate firms. Usually they have shareholders or a board to appease. RTKL's quarters are based on the Netherlands system because they are owned / traded by ARCADIS. Which is why RTKL's layoffs happens at a different time than the SOM's or HKS's or SmithGroups... which I would also venture all of those are on the quarterly layoff systems as well. Same with ARUP... and they're traded on another international market- so their quarters are different also. So it seems staggered, but it really isn't- it's actually sort of predictable.
RTKL still has about 150+ people in the DC office. Maybe more. SmithGroup still has a good amount as well. It's not like these firms are going to go to 20 overnight or shut their doors.
Be realistic. If you were a CEO, you would have to answer your investors/shareholders/board as well... and the best way to make the company look strong is to act proactively right before the quarter ends.
... as a caveat let me say... there is also the possibility- if you underperformed- that the firm will find a way to fire you instead of pay into your unemployment. In that case, it's not all that logical- it's vindictive. But I would venture you could already guess that from who you work for...
While it's interesting to hear how many the HOK's, SOM's, RTKL's, etc. are shedding, the real numbers out there are the thousands of smaller practices shedding 1-2 people here and there.
Most people I know in this business work in firms of about 20-30 people...which are now at maybe 15 people at best. Multiply that across a major metro area and you're looking at numbers that dwarf what any corporate firm is doing.
I read in the paper that april's layoffs are the lowest since 10/08? Wow, doesn't feel like that to me....a member of HKS Layoff Round #4.1
+i - not to get on a real tangent here, but i'm 99% sure we're (as the owners) paying unemployment insurance from the moment we hire you. at least in georgia, if you are 'unwillingly' laid off, you can file for unemployment. we don't pay for the person after they've been let go (which is how i'm reading your comment). point being, i don't have any control over what or how much a laid off employee claims - all that is run through the state.
now, if you mean that someone could force you to 'resign' instead of being fired, to avoid the hit against their unemployment insurance rates, then, yes, that would be really vindictive and probably illegal (if it was coerced.)
and having resumes on AIA will not get you called.
is this information publicly available?
Jacobs layoffs were round 3 maybe already round 4
to further clarify outed's point above, in most states firms pay montly into an unemployment fund. we make payments based on our total payroll and not every firm pays into the fund at the same rate.
the rates each firm pays depend on each firm's "hire and fire" history -- i.e. during a given period of time, those firms that experience a larger number of involuntary terminations will pay a higher percentage of their ongoing payroll into the unemployment fund than will firms that rarely, if ever, experience an involuntary termination.
the idea behind this scheme is to have those firms with less stable employment histories make a greater contribution to the unemployment fund than is made by firms with more stable employment histories.
More layoffs?
From today's Blair Kamin blog at the Chicago Tribune:
"One of Chicago's largest architectural firms, OWP/P, is merging with Cannon Design"
"John Syvertsen, OWP/P's president, acknowledged that the recent construction downtown has forced his firm, like many in Chicago, to lay off architects. But he denied that the merger is recession-related and said it would not lead to a fresh round of layoffs in the Chicago office."
There are almost always some layoffs when large firms merge; hopefully in this case, there won't be too many redundancies...
Agree about the aia website for posting resumes...fail.
Anyone else frustrated by the online job search engines/services that for every ten"hits" for "architect", nine come back as a position in the IT field?!?!?!
In TX the TBAE goes after individuals that bill themselves as an "architect" - wish they could stop the IT "world" from calling themselves this...then again i wish i was not having to use these damn search engines!
I think it unwise to become too cynical about posting resumes at the AIA website. firms will start hiring again in unpredictable fits and spurts. it doesn't cost you anything to post your credentials there and it's better to be visible when firms start looking again than it is to be invisible. while it's not a panacea, it is a useful arrow in your quiver
however, just don't have unrealistic expectations -- when firms don't have any work, they just can make new jobs happen out of thin air. but, when the work starts coming back, you want them to have access to your resume.
Texas is awesome for going after those fraudulently passing themselves off as architects. Love the newsletter which names those people and the fines they were given. Busted!
Ahhh yes, that list is like a train wreck. You whince at the cojnes some people have....the other list o' shame for TAS violations is nit-picky. I've known several architects who got put on because the RAS was a total prick. Plans a day late? Due to a courier that's an imbecile? Nail the architect who improperly designs something that does not meet the required accessibilty standards, not for having a set a day late for review? Bogus.
Yes, i change my tune a little on the aia website. One day those that have been letting the architects, designers, interns, etc. go will be in a pinch that can't be fixed by working their skeleton crews 24/7. Prepare for that firestorm, get out your resumes!!!!
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.