The AIA Chicago job board is down to one listing. I remember when I was looking in early 2007 there were several pages of listings. I guess the odds for people looking for work are worse than winning the Lotto. I remember a conversation with some professors at U of I (the original mother ship campus in Urbana) that this year they are graduating the largest class of gradates and undergrads ever. I hope every one is holding on to there money. I feel sorry for those recent grads who will have to suffer a huge ego adjustment right away.

Good news oil is going back up so the international clientele in OPEC will be, a little more, flush with cash. Who knew way back in our undergrad days that Architecture would become such a volatile global industry?

Are there folks out there who are giving up looking for work with AE firms?

Please don’t be offended by my take on Linda Richman from Kauffe tawlk.

I'm a little farklempt! About this whole economy business. Talk amongst yourselves. Here's a topic:
If you can’t get a job in the Architecture business what will you do? Discuss.

cou2, I can definitely sympathize. Coming from a design oriented school myself, I have to acknowledge that architecture in the United States, as a profession is less of a necessity, but more of an accessory to be tacked on when money is convenient. There seems to be two types of architects: the architect of personality, and the architect of service. The latter in the States is far more appreciated it seems. However, I'd also like to point out that there needs to be progress made on how architects can contribute to society and state politics. I'm not saying we should give up design--rather devise ways of which we can integrate design into a more meaningful role than say, simply for designs sake or to cater to our ego. Architecture should be just more than just a design effect, a business model, or just simply, a good way to make a buck to pay rent.

"But that came at a cost - my physical and mental health. I tend to be very meticulous and overly concerned with details. Being a perfectionist is a lot easier in engineering fields where the "right answer" is clearer and easier to get to."

Heh, you've pretty much summed it up right there. Faculty members, instructors, and professors, especially at my school tend to have this mentality that "good" architecture requires lack of sleep, frustration, and attention to details equal to none. Quite frankly, I think its utter bullshit that it has to be this way. This is amongst some, if not many other reasons why the profession is underrepresented, misunderstood, and disliked.

assuming i didn't misunderstand you, while ID and architecture do have some similarities one of the main differences is scale. maybe you can hold a toothbrush prototype in your hand, but a building can only be quality controlled by going to the site, and that means being involved in production process too. I would feel very concerned about letting other people do that work for me, especially since so much of the real important design work is done on site.

as for lack of sleep and so on...i don't know how necessary that is. it shouldn't be an all the time thing for certain. on other hand, if it is an occasional reality of our job we are in good company. most professions work that hard and harder.

ie, when my partner was buying some property he was working late on the contract with his advisor (who was a lawyer but not involved on the ground) and they sent off a document to the proper lawyer doing the deal at 3 am. The lawyer responded in about 15 minutes. My partner expected an answer the next day, but it turns out lawyers work long hours too. their fee was about 100k so i guess he felt ok about the overtime ;-) if there is a problem with architecture it is that we dont get paid anywhere near that well.

i don't know what school you go to but perhaps you are assuming more ignorance on your professors part than is reasonable. somehow i find it hard to believe they are so out of touch and enamored of bullshit. that they expect quality is something they should be praised for not complained about.

but if you prefer ID i guess you should focus on that and save time and money on education you don't enjoy and probably won't ever use. there is nothing wrong with that.

Jump, I actually thought my professor was very good. When I brought up the bullshit aspect of (the presentation of) architecture , he suggested I explore it instead of trying to fight it so much. Not saying that he agreed with it, but that he saw that it was part of field and maybe it was a different way for me to approach design from. The only fault I really found in the class was that I feel like there was a bit to much crammed into one semester.

I don't really want to do ID. I just think that architecture and construction could really learn some lessons from the rest of the manufacturing and design world. I understand that mass production makes it easier to separate the design and production in manufacturing. Increasingly buildings or parts of buildings (especially houses) are being manufactured off site. I think this could have the effect of reducing the project management aspect of architecture.

Maybe one day large numbers of architects will be employed as designers by manufactured building companies and work in teams in a similar fashion to those in automobile, airplane or ship building companies, ect. This could give architects more time to focus on design and collaborate with others during design process. It would be an interesting study to compare the ship building industry to architecture, since much of ship building is custom.

I'm in my 2nd year(March 1) and if I were you I would give it more time in grad school. I'm not certain if your opinion would change, but it will be more informed. This may help you better pinpoint some things you like about architecture, and some things you dislike regarding the field in general. It's definitely a lot crammed into the curriculum, but as you continue, you get better at time management and learn how to do your best without having as many all-nighters....but then again, as has been said above, in other fields you lose sleep too. I would just give it more time.

maybe for houses cou2, but even there i have some doubts. interesting idea though. it would be interesting to see how hat plays out. i have mentioned before that manufactured housing is the standard in japan now, but i don't think there is very high design quality with the products. functionality and production cycles are all very well integrated, but design is an afterthought. i think the process kills the point of having an architect involved to be honest. not that it would need to be that way...

but for larger buildings i am curious if it is even possible...

the last large project i got to see built was a few years back, and involved creating a structure spanning 40 meters clear and was 30 m high (was a covered practice field for baseball/soccer). the structure was all pre-fabbed at steel fabricator, naturally enough, and the team was enormous, but it was me and my office that went to the fabricator and checked every piece, and before that checked every drawing, and then we worked out problems with assembly, and after assembly. and that was only for the structure. simultaneously we had to deal with several other layers of construction and design, all of them interconnected and complicated. if we were not there for the entire process then all of the work that I did at the beginning, from first plan to making the details and all that, would have been for nothing. Maybe I am perverse but i think that is the best way to do projects of that nature still.

Hence why I have always said that the education needs to more closely match the practice. For one it would weed out people like cou2 before they spend thousands in student loans for a job that will probably never make them happy. And with the current economy it's scary that major Universities like Illinois is graduating more architecture grads than ever before. What will these people do? Surely some people will end up unemployed when fresh grads agree to work for bargain wages.

I'm not at all optimistic about the next year or two and if anyone has any second thoughts about this career I'd say leave now or else you're only going to help raise the misery level for the rest of us.

when all these people started architecture school, the industry was at it's height. I'm guessing the number of applicants and graduates of architecture programs is going to decline sharply, and will be mostly filled by people who are very serious about the profession.

if you cant find time to research your projects while in grad school, you should budget your time a little better. grad school especially, is the time when it is encouraged to research your projects. could you elaborate on how you were not able to research your projects?


when you say you really want to design, you realize that being an architect is much more than working on design, and that design is included in the entire building process, including project management and construction management. you might have unrealistic expectations as to what an architect is.

marmkind - while I do enjoy most aspects of the studio, I think I would do much better in a MS program - where research plays a central role. I would rather work at a slower pace, producing work that is more meaningful and of higher quality. Quality, not quantity. Plus, many MS students are paid to do their own research (especially in the science and engineering fields). I wanted more time for program analysis, concept development and precedent research in my project. We had very little time to do any of that - maybe a week or so. To me that is one of the most important phases of design. It provides the foundation for everything else.

I chose architecture because it allows me to be artistically creative. If there's not going to be much of a chance do that in professional practice, then why not just do a job that at least pays well - management, finance, engineering, ect. Architects often look down on engineering as an uninspiring career, but much of "real world" architecture is uninspiring anyway. At least they get paid well for it and have less headaches to deal with in the workplace.

it sounds like you are thinking this out, which is good
most students think they will be doing creative design work exclusively when they graduate, and get sorely disappointed

it all depends on what you view as being creative in your work though

all through the construction process you will have to be creative to complete a project to becoming a built building

now, artistically creative, seems to indicate a different kind of creativity, and yes, i can see maybe not getting to do that as much in the work place

"real world" architecture is uninspiring compared to design studios in school, but considering they are completely different anyway, i would say that is an unrealistic comparison.

i guess my question is, what do you want to be doing in your career? architecture-wise, or just creatively in general?

stupid question
what is an MS program? do you just mean a Masters in Science program?

could it also be that you just happen to not be at the right school for the program you are looking for? not trying to say you should definitely stay in architecture, as that is a personal decision, i am just curious
i have seen that some schools have programs where you can work on extended research type projects that can last a while
i worked on one where my studio took the research from an ongoing project and used that for our semester's project. the final research and projects were then collected for this ongoing project, so the next group can build upon that. there were some professors and students who continued on this project from the beginning and throughout, not just one semester like i did.

good luck in what you decide

ps
dont go to another field because you dont think architecture pays well
you will get paid fine as an architect