Salary has always been a contentious topic within the Arch community, and in general for most job searchers, but I've noticed a distrubing trend recently in my search for new opportunities. Firms are beginning to push very hard for the job candidate to give them a range or "expectation" up front. Sometimes, as in my case it has been after a least taking the time to meet. In other instances it is part of the requierments for submitting a resume.
I bring this up because the last two "hopefull" opportunities I have had have ended abrublty when I was gently "forced" to give a range or expectation early in the process. I believe the persuasion used was, "Please submit a number to determine if it makes sense to move forward". I was in this situation twice in the last three years and each time I submitted a range, I never heard from the office again. This, even though the range I gave was fully in line with what I make now and came with the caveat that it was fully negotiable and reluctangly provided based on their insistance.
I find this disturbing because it begins to pit prospective job seekers against one another, not in terms of who is the best fit or most qualified, but by who is willing to work for less. It is taking a page from the bid process in the sense that soon we will all be too afraid to loose the opportunity so we will begin to low ball ourselves. Perhaps I am naive, but what happened to paying what the job is worth to the firm and based on the skills of the individual (if this ever existed).
Ranges vary greatly between offices and it is often difficult to correcly project expectations for instance between a large coporate firm and a small boutique office. This then forces us to the lowest common denominator. To use salary expectation as an evaluation point, and not focus on the skills and fit of the employee sees to degrade the profession.
I'm sure that I have not been as elegant and clear in outlining this issue and that that will lead to personal reproach by some of this community, but I feel that with the trouble that faces the profession from outside, the last thing we need to begin doing is canabalizing ourselves.
Everyone is expendable in this economy. The only candidates worth keeping nowadays, are the ones willing to work for very little or no pay.
I find it horrifying how firms looking for free help are also requiring candidates to submit portfolio samples. i know submitting an online portfolio has always been part of the process, but when they start thinking that they can have their pick of the litter without pay, I begin to doubt the type of people you'd be working for.
While I appreciate your discomfort, I think this may be a natural reaction to what is happening to firms -- clients are beating our brains out over fees, because they can.
I'm not sure what you expect to happen in such circumstances. Firms are entitled -- nee, in this economy, required -- to control their own costs. Quite frankly, the sooner I know a candidate's expectations, the quicker I can make an assessment about whether we're likely to find sufficient common ground with that candidate to continue investing a lot of time.
When you write "To use salary expectation as an evaluation point, and not focus on the skills and fit of the employee seems to degrade the profession." I think you may not understand fully how the process works. Firms always have "used salary expectations as an evaluation point". Right now, that evaluation point takes on somewhat greater importance because survival may be at stake.
However, I tend to think firms really do evaluate the whole package in order to determine the overall best value among the candidates available to them. The labor market has shifted ... whether we like the cause or not, there are a huge number of qualified candidates available and it would be irrational for firms to ignore that fact.
The reverse was true as recently as the spring of 2008, when more job openings were available than qualified candidates. Many job seekers abused firms then ... rightly or wrongly, this is the flip side of that equation.
If this is the case for employers, maybe they should list what they want or expect to pay the employee before anything is submitted.
At least when a potential employee with RA status knows the employer is looking to spend no more than 20k a year for 80 hours a week sans benefits, it avoids wasting each others time and guessing games on each other's parts.
chicarchitect: we'll be happy to do that if all candidates will put their salary requirements on their resumes or in their letters of inquiry. what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I don't want to waste my time any more than you want to waste yours.
Now, having said that, I think everybody's getting all wrought up over nothing here. Outside of the standard retail environment, there's always a certain amount of jockeying for position in every economic transaction.
With the sift in the economy, the pendulum has swung from a "seller's market" to a "buyer's market" -- that's the reality. 24 months ago, employers were just as frustrated with the candidate pool as the candidate pool is now with employers.
If you're pressed for the question, you can first try to work backwards with some information from them. Ask them what what their average multiplier is and/or if they have an hourly billing rate for someone at your experience level. If you can find figure out how much the firm stands to make off of your labor, you can get an idea of what they may be willing to pay you.
I don't think this is really unusual... at least not to my recollection. Employers have always, as far as I can remember, tried to suss out fairly early on whether your expectations match with what they have to offer before they proceed further. Even when I last did a job search 4 yrs ago, pretty much everybody did this with me. The only one that didn't was SOM, and they wound up giving me an offer 40% lower than the next lower one, so I kind of wish they had asked me for a range.
"Perhaps I am naive, but what happened to paying what the job is worth to the firm and based on the skills of the individual (if this ever existed)...This then forces us to the lowest common denominator. To use salary expectation as an evaluation point, and not focus on the skills and fit of the employee sees to degrade the profession."
How is that HOPE and CHANGE working out for everybody? (cough *communism* *communism* *AIA* *union* cough cough)
And no the Republicans are probably even more culpable than democrats so I'm not going there...
"I'm sure that I have not been as elegant and clear in outlining this issue and that that will lead to personal reproach by some of this community, but I feel that with the trouble that faces the profession from outside, the last thing we need to begin doing is canabalizing ourselves."
Lets just ban those from the discussion that aren't "optimistic" or are critical of the profession...its their fault after all...not endemic problems rooted in the professional leadership itself...
Silencing critics always results in improved approaches to solving problems...
"whether we like the cause or not, there are a huge number of qualified candidates available and it would be irrational for firms to ignore that fact."
looks like somebody graduated from Arch school back when they actually offered a quality, useful education that left the dummies behind and let the more excellent succeed and drag the dummies up along with them (despite their best efforts to resist absorbing intelligence).
A previous employer once kindly advised me on this issue. When the potential employer asks what you'd like to make before you have an idea of what the range is, you ask either for that range or the avg. billable rate for someone in the position you are applying for. If a stand-off then ensues, you can decide if you really want to work for an organization that is not willing to provide basic info on compensation.
DSal, it's unfortunate that firms have to exist in survival mode these days at all, but it is the reality. At least I hope that the firms that are shifting the criteria for hiring to compensation being priority #1 are doing so for reasons of keeping the doors open rather than to take advantage of a slow economy.
I would usually have a range of what you would like to make going in to the interview, so if they do ask you flat out, you at least have an answer ready
make that part of your interview prep, so you
A. have an answer prepared and researched for a big factor in your decision of whether to work there or not (salary)
B. dont accidentally really lowball yourself by stating a salary far below what you are actually worth.
It's much easier to come down in salary during negotiations rather than shooting yourself in the foot and asking for a too-low salary to begin with.
I havent interviewed in several years, but if that is a typical question, all you need is a little research and you should be well prepared for it. I imagine there are plenty of resources that show ballpark salaries for the region you are interviewing based on # of years experience and all.
Is it reasonable to assume you are a licensed Architect?
I think my biggest frustration (and probably subconsciously the same primary frustration shared by the "seller's market") is more basic and developed long before this current unfolding economic crisis.
That is:
Arch school grads could expect 35K/ year before the arch economy broke down
Every year the schools only flood the market with hordes of flesh blood ready to take whatever they can (18,000/ year I think)
According to my numbers 1 in 32 arch school grads can expect to be practicing architecture over their lifetime as sold to them by the profession (AIA) and the schools.
Fundamentally there are MASSIVE gaps between the marketplace and potential employees that have existed long before the current market forces.
Finally things are bad enough that folks are really having to "Pay the Piper" across the board: employers, employees, academia, and the bureacracies that feed the machine like the AIA.
I am probably not going to survive in Architecture much longer. The fact is that I just got my License six months ago and was lucky to survive as long as I did at the firm I wsa in before I was laid off.
I recently applied for a position at a reputable local firm. I was considered but in the end did not get offered a position because they ended up going with the more fresh blood that they could pay half of what they probably thought I wold have expected. Even after 11 years serving this canabalistic profession I had determined that if they did talk it over with me in greater detail I would have accepted the half cut in expected pay because I had no choice and because my wife was able to get our health insurance coverage tranferred to her employer thank god.
This profession lied to me in many ways. I "served" it faithfully and followed the rules. At this point I cannot lie to myself and ignore the sins of this profession. It is degrading to my intelligence and doesn't deserve hard working intelligent honest human beings any longer.
The profession has reached the inevitable tipping point where in general the risks taken will result in lost investments.
The baby boomer architect generation can take on your little CAD monkeys and squeeze the life out of them and the profession until the day you all die (in 20 years or less I hope). At this rate nothing will be left of the profession anyways. selfish bastards.
The baby boomer generation is the first in the history of post renaissance Western Civilization to take everything out of the system to perpetuate its own survival and then let its children rot in a dipossessed living hell.
The next profession I devote myself to I WON'T be forgetting these lessons that the malicious and disingenuous thieves in architecture have taught me.
I think it's also possible to make sure you have an agreement of sorts with them about the type of work relative to the amount of pay. You can make this clear in the questions you ask. If they are courting you as an intermediate designer and the only thing they talk about is project management, all the alarm bells should go off. Most likel the pay matches what they actually want you to do, as opposed to what they say they want to hire you to do.
I had an experience like this in NYC recently. They seemed super anxious to get me in, asking how soon I could be out there. They wanted me out there for an interview that week (so drive from Ohio to the city). I go interview, they ask about salary, I tell them, then I don't hear from them for a week.
I get another e-mail that they are currently "evaluating the years projects" and will let me know in another few weeks....so when I don't hear after that I e-mail the guy and he says that as of the previous day, he is not with this firm anymore and he will have them contact me.
I understand how firms are struggling and are responsible for their employees' livelihoods but to me there is a difference between being financially conservative/reluctant to take on new employees and completely insincere and flakey. All it takes is a one sentence response. "We appreciate your time but are not in the position to hire at this time....blah blah" I appreciate when they are up front and honest.
This economic environment really brings out some of the true character of firms out there.
With the shift in the economy, the pendulum has swung from a "seller's market" to a "buyer's market" -- that's the reality.
distant, there is a danger to this. if you take advantage of your employees' willingness to work for a low salary with decreased benefits in this economy, when things do pick up, it's unlikely that you will be able to retain those that stuck it out with you. that's also reality. of those archtitects still fortunate enough to be working, there are an awful lot that are simply grinding it out, but secretly waiting for that next opportunity. a word of advice to employers, if you want to retain your best workers, it's best to be fair to your employees during all economic conditions, regardless of a "buyer's" or "seller's" market. think very carefully about what that statement means.
jafidler: I take your point and want to emphasize that, in my own practice, I've always embraced the philosophy you espouse. Regrettably, we're not doing any hiring in this economy and, to the maximum extent we can, we're doing everything possible to take care of the staff we have left. More than anything else, I was making observations about the broader situation around my community.
Nevertheless - like most things in life - there's a reciprocal "fairness" concept in play here as well. Many of the job seekers who took advantage of firms during the staff shortage period that occurred prior to this recession were among the first to be let go when belts started tightening. They just were not worth the outrageous pay packages they had been able to leverage out of firms.
As the future unfolds the profession will increase its interest in employing CAD monkeys for 1/2 the wages of otherwise qualified individuals...c'mon people did you really believe that all this godless nonsense combined with the darker sides of human nature doesn't lead to a "survival of the fittest" mentality?
Even lions with their relatively small brains know that its perfectly acceptable to eat their own young...
"This economic environment really brings out some of the true character of firms out there."
yes it does, just like every other profession out there
some bad, some good
i experienced both this year
i was part of a large firm based in another city
they were not the best business minds and grew way too fast
over a year of lavoffs cutting the number of overall employees in half then led to a holiday email saying everyone in the company was terminated due to bank problems
right after that, the principals in my city's office decided to form their own firm and keep everyone in our office on board. they gave holiday bonuses out to everyone who stayed on board out of their own pockets
health insurance was paid for by them out of their own pockets as well for the 1st quarter of 2010 while the company was formed so no one would lose coverage for their families
the point is that rather than just look out for themselves, they looked out for the office as a whole
Things like that dont get as much attention as they should when all we have is people complaining about everything under the sun and then blaming everyone else for their own problems
I agree. My uncle's has a firm and he and his partners took a huge pay cut in order to keep the staff they had.
I am simply advocating candor even if a firm has messed up. With unlimited means of communication at our fingertips, we seem to have our hands tied more often than not.
The baby boomer generation is the first in the history of post renaissance Western Civilization to take everything out of the system to perpetuate its own survival and then let its children rot in a dispossessed living hell.
I could not agree more. I have friends who are 40 in firms where the youngest principal, who is not a relative, is not less than 60.
I hope that Gen X will pull us out of this mess because only 1 in 200 Millennials have the gumption to help fix it.
dsc_arch we might very well be alone in sharing these sentiments.
I've even been banned from this forum and other architecture forum for being a "sour sally", as if silencing internal critics will somehow fix the problem...like putting fingers in each ear and chanting "I'm not listening" over and over and over again to drown out the painful truth.
seems the very thing the profession fears the most are the thing that just might save it from certain death
kind of like the patient who is being eaten alive by malignant tumors spreading through their bloodstream refuses to listen or believe the Doctor's diagnosis that resulted from a thorough investigation and 11 years of clinical experience with the particulars of the disease...
"The baby boomer generation is the first in the history of post renaissance Western Civilization to take everything out of the system to perpetuate its own survival and then let its children (those that survived all the abortions and parents that chose the pursuit of $$$ instead of having and responsibly raising children anyways) rot in a dispossessed living hell..."
Lets keep in mind that perhaps 50% of the problem in architecture and the economy rightnow is very simply a matter of the demographic BLACK hole created by the selfish bastard baby boomers who sold their souls for cankerous $$$ bills that aren't even worth the paper they are printed on anymore and will likely just keep being worht less and less thank goodness.
How can anyone seriously believe that Architects are going to save the environment and perpetuate "sustainability"...they haven't even been able to foresee the massive problems that have swallowed the profession whole and its been a result of completely unsustainable professional structuring setup by blow hards and sell outs.
Let it collapse. THe sooner the better. At least I'm healthy and will probably be so for another 40 years. Unlike the typical 65 year old washed up sell out architect who is scared shitless of death because #1 he believes there is really nothing for him after this life or #2 He realizes that its too late to "come to Jesus" and he is trying to squeeze out what he can in the last years before he will have to face up to his Maker.
Perhaps these rotten old baby boomers can kick the bucket sooner rahter than later (lets stop burning fossil fuels for energy and let the hospitals and nursing homes and staffs that run them find other more profitable work) and perhaps my children's children might have a chance at real hope and change because my generation actually gives a damn about the future when we are gone...
"The baby boomer generation is the first in the history of post renaissance Western Civilization to take everything out of the system to perpetuate its own survival and then let its children rot in a dispossessed living hell."
well... Hapsburg Spain kind of did the same thing. Of course, their empire fell and what was left reverted back to third world status for a couple of centuries.
Urbanist right now Portugal, Ireland, Greece, and Spain (PIGS) are all poised for bankruptcy and bringing down the EU.
Dare I say that I've been saying western civilization set the stage for another round of the dark ages when it determined to enter WWII? At this point whether WWIII happens or not (cough cough *jews* cough cough *Iran* cough cough *follow the money* cough cough cough) I've been saying for years that the trajectories indicate we entered another dark age at east twenty years ago and there is simply no short term fix at this point.
I'm sure that the Romans and the Spainards and every other failed empire told itself that it was merely entering a "post colonial" age when in fact it was in the throws of being actively invaded, subjegated, and colonized at the same time.
Human nature has a way of attempting to delay the onset of reality by denying the obvious...the manifestation of cognitive dissonance in psychological terms. Kind of like each one of our bodies has the ability to go into shock when something physiologically traumatic occurs.
"Vietnamese Cop Cut In Half And Calmly Talks To Bystanders"
I advise viewer caution: this is as graphic as it gets:
distant, point taken, but i would just go on to say, that now that the job cuts have subsided i would encourage employers to look at the staff they have left and figure out who they really want to stay and find ways to make it compelling for them to stay whether it be through (modest) salary increases or promotion. after the blood letting, there needs to be a new emphasis on retention, and i'm not sure that's quite sunk in yet.
Vado may be a fit facetious in the action he suggests, but his underlying logic is sound. Your worth in this industry is no more and no less than what an employer can bill you out for. minus her overhead for keeping you in software and pens. And if you have any role in project management, you should have a pretty good idea what this worth is - and hence whether or not you are under or overpaid.
I think the practice of asking for a salary range is nothing new. Same happened to me years ago. Only difference is that today you likely aren't going to get what you want. Years ago I walked away from firms that didn't want to pay what I thought was enough.
Can't say that I know of any firms that are hiring "fresh grads" for next to nothing. If anything, firms don't want to take of the expense of training someone in. The candidate with 5-10 years experience can be much more profitable and faster and probably is willing to work for less than the old norm was.
I do think the Boomer generation has had things pretty well across all professions. So much of life is timing and they had pretty good timing. Gen X/Y are set up to be the first generation in American history to live a lower standard of living than their parents. That's a sad reality, but it applies to everyone, not just Architects.
while I don't discount the problems we face in this world, I'm terribly optimistic about the longterm future of the planet, the country and the young people who are coming up today. I find the majority of you to be very bright, very well educated and generally well motivated and well qualified to be successful. in many ways, you are much better prepared, and have much greater potential, than my own generation.
the problems we face today are MUCH less challenging than those faced by my parent's generation during the Great Depression and WW2. there's absolutely no reason to think that our problems are any more insurmountable than those faced by my parent's generation.
I had a smart man tell me once that the only thing over which I have absolute control is my own attitude about myself and my life. if you wallow in self-pity and pessimism, you will experience a self-fullfilling prophecy.
damnation, people -- start looking at your assets and your possibilities. then start figuring out a way to achieve the future you want and deserve. start making good choices and you can do it.
setbacks aside, I still feel excited to have pursued what I truly love and get the opportunity to practice it.
Granted the disparity between arch school and the profession seems to be great, it is still a VERY useful degree to have if you're willing to put in the effort to find your niche after you graduate. I would say that more than half the people I talked to during school cited that they wanted to go into other related fields.
If you choose to be a ditch digger, there will always be someone telling you where to dig the ditches, how to dig the ditches and what you're going to get paid for digging the ditches.
I am fairly certain, at about 100% that I brought this up in 2008.
Yes you are now competing with everyone else. And unlike everyone else, a person with 5-10 years of experiance, a wife, 2 kids, a mortgage, car loan and daycare expenses, the newly degreed M.Arch can cut your salary down real quick.
Our industry is cyclical, but things will turn around I hope. Common have some self confidence people, let's do our best and demand what we're worth, work hard and don't freak out... I agree employers get what they pay for. A good fair employer invests in it's workforce for the long run and will be far more successful in it's growth and in the work than a company which looks to the short run seeking out cheap labor, promoting high turnover and failing to build a strong team of loyal and dedicated staff. It's their loss... Well managed companies promote growth of employees and build long term growth for their company while attracting and retaining the best people, this is a good management principle that many other industries understand, and it's something that good firms in our industry get too... It's a tough economy for everybody but there are firms out there with an eye to the future... Work is also what you bring to it so things will turn up if you work toward it. Even if you've had a bad experience, there's no need to create exaggerated doomsday generalizations about our generation or about our profession... It's not THAT bad... There are still many good firms out there that do business well, that treat people well, do good work, and are working towards building future success... And there are many hard working talented and smart people I've worked with from all generations from baby boomers through gen x through the millenials... I have a great deal of respect and confidence in my peers in this industry, I think we have great things ahead of us... Geez... Stay positive, don't let a few bad experiences get you down, there are plenty of people who have had good experiences in this industry, and it's easy in a downturn for the negativity to get out if hand... Times may be challenging now, but step up and take that challenge as an opportunity to push yourself to do better... We aren't just victims to our situation, we are participants. You make your own future. 2 cents...
If an employer doesn't want to pay a decent salary I will walk away, I'm fully ready to contribute to the success of a company I want to work for, if they want to pay me, but I am confident in the value I can contribute so if they aren't going to pay, I'm not desperate, there are other firms... The negotiation for salary is a normal thing, in any industry. You need to have the confidence to set you salary requirements and be prepared to walk away if the figure is not right. No need to be desperate or upset, this is just fair business... If it doesn't work out, it's not just your loss... Employers need good people as much as you need a job... In fact, I think a good employer isn't looking for the dirt cheap candidate, may be wary of a candidate who is lacking self esteem or doesn't value their own work... It's a funny thing: in a market price negotiation, YOU set your worth when you set your price. By pricing too low, you devalue your own work. This IMHO is true for firms going after projects and setting fee, and it's also true for job seekers negotiating salary. If a BMW priced itself too low, it actually becomes worth less in market value. Price yourself appropriately based on your fair value in this market and let the employer negotiate... Don't worry so much about undercutting, better to focus on building up experience and knowledge and skills, a body of work, that gives real value, that you can point to and show what you could offer to an employer... Get licensed also because that us objective value... Your value is not measured solely by the piece of paper, it is primarily measured by you as an individual and what you've done to get to where you are. Work hard and try to have confidence despite tough economic circumstances... Things will turn around. Stay positive.
You wrote "This profession lied to me in many ways. I "served" it faithfully and followed the rules. At this point I cannot lie to myself and ignore the sins of this profession. It is degrading to my intelligence and doesn't deserve hard working intelligent honest human beings any longer."
First I want to say that I have enjoyed a lot of your writings. I agree with a lot of it. But I just don't beleive the above when you say the profession lied to you. If you didn't get the memo about long work hours, low pay, doing it cuz of the love of it or for the gipper, I imagine that you missed a lot of classes while getting your degree. Maybe it isn't that the profession lied to you but that when you were 18, 19 or 20 you were ok with that reality which we all knew about. As you matured and realized your overall life situation, you may have become a bit jaded to your original thinking. JMHO.
yeah i imagine that working long hours doing something you love is something pretty much any 18-20 year old is completely ok with
once real life comes around 10 years later, priorities can change, which can change our expectations
there is obviously nothing wrong with that, as it is natural
But it doesnt mean the profession cheated you in any way at all
If anyone is surprised at what life as an architect is like, they clearly, as you said OTF, were not listening in many of their classes in school
It got old after like day 4 in school when every single professor would say over and over again that we will not get paid that well
there are gives and takes with this profession
One give is that our pay is not what we would like or deserve in many cases
One take is that our jobs should be pretty stimulating and not monotonous/ boring day in and day out
I'm not sure what people mean when they say we won't get paid well... It's relative. I'd say our education is heavy, but I don't think architects are *starving artists*, I think if you define your situation... It's not all about the salary, but the numbers I'm hearing on this forum seem somewhat out of whack with the reality in the market...
Piggy, graduates are not getting $18,000 a year... That's ridiculous, I don't know where you live or what the cost of living is there, but I don't know any new graduate from a masters who have had some office experience who are getting paid less than double that plus benefits... With a 4 year bachelors you should be getting paid at least 1.5 times that even if you are just a draftsperson. If you are getting offered that little for a job, you should be walking away. You are either grossly exaggerating the salaries in your market or you are living someplace with dirt cheap costs of living compared to most large cities... I don't know, maybe it is relative based on location because of differences in cost of living but... I can't imagine that somebody could live on that kind of salary...
I think though that maybe part of the problem is that young graduates without real world experience are targeting the wrong kind of firm out of school... All work gives you experience, and look for opportunities to work in the field and learn rather than looking to work for *starchitects* for low pay and without a sustainable business practice... You shouldn't primarily be targeting offices that are on the brink of survival or may or may not survive based on the next paycheck, or who supplement their cashflow with teaching IMHO... Seek out offices that have a sustainable business strategy, that have strong practices, relationships with clients in their market, and a history of successful real built work rather than offices that haven't built anything... I think sometimes new graduates have the wrong idea about what makes a firm successful in this business... If you are looking for employment from a starving artist, be prepared to get paid as a starving artist... If you are looking for work from your *starchitect* professor but he/she is not 100% committed to business, and instead treating it as a side project outside of academia, that is why he/she doesn't pay employees well or seek to build and keep a long term professional team... Maybe his/her focus is not fully on the practice side, but attention is diverted to teaching... IMHO good work is not primarily done by starving artists, firms that have good business sense are the better, more promising employers...
I think a good question to ask your potential employer at an interview is: what is your goal as a firm, where do you see yourself in 10 years? and what is your approach to marketing, building and maintaining relationships with your clients and target market?
Distrubing Trend in Job Searches
Salary has always been a contentious topic within the Arch community, and in general for most job searchers, but I've noticed a distrubing trend recently in my search for new opportunities. Firms are beginning to push very hard for the job candidate to give them a range or "expectation" up front. Sometimes, as in my case it has been after a least taking the time to meet. In other instances it is part of the requierments for submitting a resume.
I bring this up because the last two "hopefull" opportunities I have had have ended abrublty when I was gently "forced" to give a range or expectation early in the process. I believe the persuasion used was, "Please submit a number to determine if it makes sense to move forward". I was in this situation twice in the last three years and each time I submitted a range, I never heard from the office again. This, even though the range I gave was fully in line with what I make now and came with the caveat that it was fully negotiable and reluctangly provided based on their insistance.
I find this disturbing because it begins to pit prospective job seekers against one another, not in terms of who is the best fit or most qualified, but by who is willing to work for less. It is taking a page from the bid process in the sense that soon we will all be too afraid to loose the opportunity so we will begin to low ball ourselves. Perhaps I am naive, but what happened to paying what the job is worth to the firm and based on the skills of the individual (if this ever existed).
Ranges vary greatly between offices and it is often difficult to correcly project expectations for instance between a large coporate firm and a small boutique office. This then forces us to the lowest common denominator. To use salary expectation as an evaluation point, and not focus on the skills and fit of the employee sees to degrade the profession.
I'm sure that I have not been as elegant and clear in outlining this issue and that that will lead to personal reproach by some of this community, but I feel that with the trouble that faces the profession from outside, the last thing we need to begin doing is canabalizing ourselves.
Now 99.99% of new architecture job openings are "Salary negotiable".
So figure it out.
Everyone is expendable in this economy. The only candidates worth keeping nowadays, are the ones willing to work for very little or no pay.
I find it horrifying how firms looking for free help are also requiring candidates to submit portfolio samples. i know submitting an online portfolio has always been part of the process, but when they start thinking that they can have their pick of the litter without pay, I begin to doubt the type of people you'd be working for.
While I appreciate your discomfort, I think this may be a natural reaction to what is happening to firms -- clients are beating our brains out over fees, because they can.
I'm not sure what you expect to happen in such circumstances. Firms are entitled -- nee, in this economy, required -- to control their own costs. Quite frankly, the sooner I know a candidate's expectations, the quicker I can make an assessment about whether we're likely to find sufficient common ground with that candidate to continue investing a lot of time.
When you write "To use salary expectation as an evaluation point, and not focus on the skills and fit of the employee seems to degrade the profession." I think you may not understand fully how the process works. Firms always have "used salary expectations as an evaluation point". Right now, that evaluation point takes on somewhat greater importance because survival may be at stake.
However, I tend to think firms really do evaluate the whole package in order to determine the overall best value among the candidates available to them. The labor market has shifted ... whether we like the cause or not, there are a huge number of qualified candidates available and it would be irrational for firms to ignore that fact.
The reverse was true as recently as the spring of 2008, when more job openings were available than qualified candidates. Many job seekers abused firms then ... rightly or wrongly, this is the flip side of that equation.
If this is the case for employers, maybe they should list what they want or expect to pay the employee before anything is submitted.
At least when a potential employee with RA status knows the employer is looking to spend no more than 20k a year for 80 hours a week sans benefits, it avoids wasting each others time and guessing games on each other's parts.
I'm going out on a limb here, but are either of you referring to a Chicago craigslist ad that was posted yesterday for an Architect in the Loop?
chicarchitect: we'll be happy to do that if all candidates will put their salary requirements on their resumes or in their letters of inquiry. what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I don't want to waste my time any more than you want to waste yours.
Now, having said that, I think everybody's getting all wrought up over nothing here. Outside of the standard retail environment, there's always a certain amount of jockeying for position in every economic transaction.
With the sift in the economy, the pendulum has swung from a "seller's market" to a "buyer's market" -- that's the reality. 24 months ago, employers were just as frustrated with the candidate pool as the candidate pool is now with employers.
If you're pressed for the question, you can first try to work backwards with some information from them. Ask them what what their average multiplier is and/or if they have an hourly billing rate for someone at your experience level. If you can find figure out how much the firm stands to make off of your labor, you can get an idea of what they may be willing to pay you.
I don't think this is really unusual... at least not to my recollection. Employers have always, as far as I can remember, tried to suss out fairly early on whether your expectations match with what they have to offer before they proceed further. Even when I last did a job search 4 yrs ago, pretty much everybody did this with me. The only one that didn't was SOM, and they wound up giving me an offer 40% lower than the next lower one, so I kind of wish they had asked me for a range.
"Perhaps I am naive, but what happened to paying what the job is worth to the firm and based on the skills of the individual (if this ever existed)...This then forces us to the lowest common denominator. To use salary expectation as an evaluation point, and not focus on the skills and fit of the employee sees to degrade the profession."
How is that HOPE and CHANGE working out for everybody? (cough *communism* *communism* *AIA* *union* cough cough)
And no the Republicans are probably even more culpable than democrats so I'm not going there...
"I'm sure that I have not been as elegant and clear in outlining this issue and that that will lead to personal reproach by some of this community, but I feel that with the trouble that faces the profession from outside, the last thing we need to begin doing is canabalizing ourselves."
Lets just ban those from the discussion that aren't "optimistic" or are critical of the profession...its their fault after all...not endemic problems rooted in the professional leadership itself...
Silencing critics always results in improved approaches to solving problems...
"whether we like the cause or not, there are a huge number of qualified candidates available and it would be irrational for firms to ignore that fact."
looks like somebody graduated from Arch school back when they actually offered a quality, useful education that left the dummies behind and let the more excellent succeed and drag the dummies up along with them (despite their best efforts to resist absorbing intelligence).
tagalong's suggestion is a good one.
A previous employer once kindly advised me on this issue. When the potential employer asks what you'd like to make before you have an idea of what the range is, you ask either for that range or the avg. billable rate for someone in the position you are applying for. If a stand-off then ensues, you can decide if you really want to work for an organization that is not willing to provide basic info on compensation.
DSal, it's unfortunate that firms have to exist in survival mode these days at all, but it is the reality. At least I hope that the firms that are shifting the criteria for hiring to compensation being priority #1 are doing so for reasons of keeping the doors open rather than to take advantage of a slow economy.
I would usually have a range of what you would like to make going in to the interview, so if they do ask you flat out, you at least have an answer ready
make that part of your interview prep, so you
A. have an answer prepared and researched for a big factor in your decision of whether to work there or not (salary)
B. dont accidentally really lowball yourself by stating a salary far below what you are actually worth.
It's much easier to come down in salary during negotiations rather than shooting yourself in the foot and asking for a too-low salary to begin with.
I havent interviewed in several years, but if that is a typical question, all you need is a little research and you should be well prepared for it. I imagine there are plenty of resources that show ballpark salaries for the region you are interviewing based on # of years experience and all.
distant you seem to have some nuggets of wisdom.
Is it reasonable to assume you are a licensed Architect?
I think my biggest frustration (and probably subconsciously the same primary frustration shared by the "seller's market") is more basic and developed long before this current unfolding economic crisis.
That is:
Arch school grads could expect 35K/ year before the arch economy broke down
Every year the schools only flood the market with hordes of flesh blood ready to take whatever they can (18,000/ year I think)
According to my numbers 1 in 32 arch school grads can expect to be practicing architecture over their lifetime as sold to them by the profession (AIA) and the schools.
Fundamentally there are MASSIVE gaps between the marketplace and potential employees that have existed long before the current market forces.
Finally things are bad enough that folks are really having to "Pay the Piper" across the board: employers, employees, academia, and the bureacracies that feed the machine like the AIA.
I am probably not going to survive in Architecture much longer. The fact is that I just got my License six months ago and was lucky to survive as long as I did at the firm I wsa in before I was laid off.
I recently applied for a position at a reputable local firm. I was considered but in the end did not get offered a position because they ended up going with the more fresh blood that they could pay half of what they probably thought I wold have expected. Even after 11 years serving this canabalistic profession I had determined that if they did talk it over with me in greater detail I would have accepted the half cut in expected pay because I had no choice and because my wife was able to get our health insurance coverage tranferred to her employer thank god.
This profession lied to me in many ways. I "served" it faithfully and followed the rules. At this point I cannot lie to myself and ignore the sins of this profession. It is degrading to my intelligence and doesn't deserve hard working intelligent honest human beings any longer.
The profession has reached the inevitable tipping point where in general the risks taken will result in lost investments.
The baby boomer architect generation can take on your little CAD monkeys and squeeze the life out of them and the profession until the day you all die (in 20 years or less I hope). At this rate nothing will be left of the profession anyways. selfish bastards.
The baby boomer generation is the first in the history of post renaissance Western Civilization to take everything out of the system to perpetuate its own survival and then let its children rot in a dipossessed living hell.
The next profession I devote myself to I WON'T be forgetting these lessons that the malicious and disingenuous thieves in architecture have taught me.
I think it's also possible to make sure you have an agreement of sorts with them about the type of work relative to the amount of pay. You can make this clear in the questions you ask. If they are courting you as an intermediate designer and the only thing they talk about is project management, all the alarm bells should go off. Most likel the pay matches what they actually want you to do, as opposed to what they say they want to hire you to do.
yeah that is a good point urbanist
I would ask what projects in particular will you be starting off with when you start working there
That will give you an idea of what exactly they are hiring for, and how you fit into it
A lot of times, they can show you some of the project you will be starting on, and what you will be doing on it
I had an experience like this in NYC recently. They seemed super anxious to get me in, asking how soon I could be out there. They wanted me out there for an interview that week (so drive from Ohio to the city). I go interview, they ask about salary, I tell them, then I don't hear from them for a week.
I get another e-mail that they are currently "evaluating the years projects" and will let me know in another few weeks....so when I don't hear after that I e-mail the guy and he says that as of the previous day, he is not with this firm anymore and he will have them contact me.
I understand how firms are struggling and are responsible for their employees' livelihoods but to me there is a difference between being financially conservative/reluctant to take on new employees and completely insincere and flakey. All it takes is a one sentence response. "We appreciate your time but are not in the position to hire at this time....blah blah" I appreciate when they are up front and honest.
This economic environment really brings out some of the true character of firms out there.
that is pretty crappy to have had happen von
it sounds like there could have been a major overhaul at the firm though if the guy you interviewed with isnt there that quickly when they are hiring
maybe they lost a big project they thought they were going to be starting on
your case sounds more like some internal problems with the firm rather than them balking at your salary request though
it sounds like you were in the final stages of the interview process, so they really should have been able to give you a call about it
you are right, a simple email with that one line is all that is really needed, just as a courtesy
distant, there is a danger to this. if you take advantage of your employees' willingness to work for a low salary with decreased benefits in this economy, when things do pick up, it's unlikely that you will be able to retain those that stuck it out with you. that's also reality. of those archtitects still fortunate enough to be working, there are an awful lot that are simply grinding it out, but secretly waiting for that next opportunity. a word of advice to employers, if you want to retain your best workers, it's best to be fair to your employees during all economic conditions, regardless of a "buyer's" or "seller's" market. think very carefully about what that statement means.
"This economic environment really brings out some of the true character of firms out there."
Or perhaps of the profession in general...
jafidler: I take your point and want to emphasize that, in my own practice, I've always embraced the philosophy you espouse. Regrettably, we're not doing any hiring in this economy and, to the maximum extent we can, we're doing everything possible to take care of the staff we have left. More than anything else, I was making observations about the broader situation around my community.
Nevertheless - like most things in life - there's a reciprocal "fairness" concept in play here as well. Many of the job seekers who took advantage of firms during the staff shortage period that occurred prior to this recession were among the first to be let go when belts started tightening. They just were not worth the outrageous pay packages they had been able to leverage out of firms.
As the future unfolds the profession will increase its interest in employing CAD monkeys for 1/2 the wages of otherwise qualified individuals...c'mon people did you really believe that all this godless nonsense combined with the darker sides of human nature doesn't lead to a "survival of the fittest" mentality?
Even lions with their relatively small brains know that its perfectly acceptable to eat their own young...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeMgSYrNvfA
"This economic environment really brings out some of the true character of firms out there."
yes it does, just like every other profession out there
some bad, some good
i experienced both this year
i was part of a large firm based in another city
they were not the best business minds and grew way too fast
over a year of lavoffs cutting the number of overall employees in half then led to a holiday email saying everyone in the company was terminated due to bank problems
right after that, the principals in my city's office decided to form their own firm and keep everyone in our office on board. they gave holiday bonuses out to everyone who stayed on board out of their own pockets
health insurance was paid for by them out of their own pockets as well for the 1st quarter of 2010 while the company was formed so no one would lose coverage for their families
the point is that rather than just look out for themselves, they looked out for the office as a whole
Things like that dont get as much attention as they should when all we have is people complaining about everything under the sun and then blaming everyone else for their own problems
marmkid-
I agree. My uncle's has a firm and he and his partners took a huge pay cut in order to keep the staff they had.
I am simply advocating candor even if a firm has messed up. With unlimited means of communication at our fingertips, we seem to have our hands tied more often than not.
piggy,
i love the rant:
The baby boomer generation is the first in the history of post renaissance Western Civilization to take everything out of the system to perpetuate its own survival and then let its children rot in a dispossessed living hell.
I could not agree more. I have friends who are 40 in firms where the youngest principal, who is not a relative, is not less than 60.
I hope that Gen X will pull us out of this mess because only 1 in 200 Millennials have the gumption to help fix it.
dsc_arch we might very well be alone in sharing these sentiments.
I've even been banned from this forum and other architecture forum for being a "sour sally", as if silencing internal critics will somehow fix the problem...like putting fingers in each ear and chanting "I'm not listening" over and over and over again to drown out the painful truth.
seems the very thing the profession fears the most are the thing that just might save it from certain death
kind of like the patient who is being eaten alive by malignant tumors spreading through their bloodstream refuses to listen or believe the Doctor's diagnosis that resulted from a thorough investigation and 11 years of clinical experience with the particulars of the disease...
and I should add:
"The baby boomer generation is the first in the history of post renaissance Western Civilization to take everything out of the system to perpetuate its own survival and then let its children (those that survived all the abortions and parents that chose the pursuit of $$$ instead of having and responsibly raising children anyways) rot in a dispossessed living hell..."
Lets keep in mind that perhaps 50% of the problem in architecture and the economy rightnow is very simply a matter of the demographic BLACK hole created by the selfish bastard baby boomers who sold their souls for cankerous $$$ bills that aren't even worth the paper they are printed on anymore and will likely just keep being worht less and less thank goodness.
How can anyone seriously believe that Architects are going to save the environment and perpetuate "sustainability"...they haven't even been able to foresee the massive problems that have swallowed the profession whole and its been a result of completely unsustainable professional structuring setup by blow hards and sell outs.
Let it collapse. THe sooner the better. At least I'm healthy and will probably be so for another 40 years. Unlike the typical 65 year old washed up sell out architect who is scared shitless of death because #1 he believes there is really nothing for him after this life or #2 He realizes that its too late to "come to Jesus" and he is trying to squeeze out what he can in the last years before he will have to face up to his Maker.
Perhaps these rotten old baby boomers can kick the bucket sooner rahter than later (lets stop burning fossil fuels for energy and let the hospitals and nursing homes and staffs that run them find other more profitable work) and perhaps my children's children might have a chance at real hope and change because my generation actually gives a damn about the future when we are gone...
Time will tell I suppose
damn Piggy, you are one sick puppy ... you need to get some help, man.
"The baby boomer generation is the first in the history of post renaissance Western Civilization to take everything out of the system to perpetuate its own survival and then let its children rot in a dispossessed living hell."
well... Hapsburg Spain kind of did the same thing. Of course, their empire fell and what was left reverted back to third world status for a couple of centuries.
Urbanist right now Portugal, Ireland, Greece, and Spain (PIGS) are all poised for bankruptcy and bringing down the EU.
Dare I say that I've been saying western civilization set the stage for another round of the dark ages when it determined to enter WWII? At this point whether WWIII happens or not (cough cough *jews* cough cough *Iran* cough cough *follow the money* cough cough cough) I've been saying for years that the trajectories indicate we entered another dark age at east twenty years ago and there is simply no short term fix at this point.
I'm sure that the Romans and the Spainards and every other failed empire told itself that it was merely entering a "post colonial" age when in fact it was in the throws of being actively invaded, subjegated, and colonized at the same time.
Human nature has a way of attempting to delay the onset of reality by denying the obvious...the manifestation of cognitive dissonance in psychological terms. Kind of like each one of our bodies has the ability to go into shock when something physiologically traumatic occurs.
"Vietnamese Cop Cut In Half And Calmly Talks To Bystanders"
I advise viewer caution: this is as graphic as it gets:
http://www.nothingtoxic.com/media/1250807744/Vietnamese_Cop_Cut_In_Half_And_Calmly_Talks_To_Bystanders
distant, point taken, but i would just go on to say, that now that the job cuts have subsided i would encourage employers to look at the staff they have left and figure out who they really want to stay and find ways to make it compelling for them to stay whether it be through (modest) salary increases or promotion. after the blood letting, there needs to be a new emphasis on retention, and i'm not sure that's quite sunk in yet.
Well..they get what they pay for what can I say..
become self-employed
ask a potential employer what they would bill for your services and calculate what your salary should be based on that.
Vado may be a fit facetious in the action he suggests, but his underlying logic is sound. Your worth in this industry is no more and no less than what an employer can bill you out for. minus her overhead for keeping you in software and pens. And if you have any role in project management, you should have a pretty good idea what this worth is - and hence whether or not you are under or overpaid.
ah yes "the multipler". if some one is billing a client for your time, you should be bringing home 1/3 of that.
1/3rd + your profit.. don't forget about making money :)
If you work at a medium-sized firm or larger:
salary = 1/3rd
overhead = 2/3rds
profit = 5% to 20%, 'pending on the project, location, etc
I think the practice of asking for a salary range is nothing new. Same happened to me years ago. Only difference is that today you likely aren't going to get what you want. Years ago I walked away from firms that didn't want to pay what I thought was enough.
Can't say that I know of any firms that are hiring "fresh grads" for next to nothing. If anything, firms don't want to take of the expense of training someone in. The candidate with 5-10 years experience can be much more profitable and faster and probably is willing to work for less than the old norm was.
I do think the Boomer generation has had things pretty well across all professions. So much of life is timing and they had pretty good timing. Gen X/Y are set up to be the first generation in American history to live a lower standard of living than their parents. That's a sad reality, but it applies to everyone, not just Architects.
god, you people are depressing.
while I don't discount the problems we face in this world, I'm terribly optimistic about the longterm future of the planet, the country and the young people who are coming up today. I find the majority of you to be very bright, very well educated and generally well motivated and well qualified to be successful. in many ways, you are much better prepared, and have much greater potential, than my own generation.
the problems we face today are MUCH less challenging than those faced by my parent's generation during the Great Depression and WW2. there's absolutely no reason to think that our problems are any more insurmountable than those faced by my parent's generation.
I had a smart man tell me once that the only thing over which I have absolute control is my own attitude about myself and my life. if you wallow in self-pity and pessimism, you will experience a self-fullfilling prophecy.
damnation, people -- start looking at your assets and your possibilities. then start figuring out a way to achieve the future you want and deserve. start making good choices and you can do it.
totally agree.
setbacks aside, I still feel excited to have pursued what I truly love and get the opportunity to practice it.
Granted the disparity between arch school and the profession seems to be great, it is still a VERY useful degree to have if you're willing to put in the effort to find your niche after you graduate. I would say that more than half the people I talked to during school cited that they wanted to go into other related fields.
If you choose to be a ditch digger, there will always be someone telling you where to dig the ditches, how to dig the ditches and what you're going to get paid for digging the ditches.
nahh I'm good.
I am fairly certain, at about 100% that I brought this up in 2008.
Yes you are now competing with everyone else. And unlike everyone else, a person with 5-10 years of experiance, a wife, 2 kids, a mortgage, car loan and daycare expenses, the newly degreed M.Arch can cut your salary down real quick.
Good luck.
Our industry is cyclical, but things will turn around I hope. Common have some self confidence people, let's do our best and demand what we're worth, work hard and don't freak out... I agree employers get what they pay for. A good fair employer invests in it's workforce for the long run and will be far more successful in it's growth and in the work than a company which looks to the short run seeking out cheap labor, promoting high turnover and failing to build a strong team of loyal and dedicated staff. It's their loss... Well managed companies promote growth of employees and build long term growth for their company while attracting and retaining the best people, this is a good management principle that many other industries understand, and it's something that good firms in our industry get too... It's a tough economy for everybody but there are firms out there with an eye to the future... Work is also what you bring to it so things will turn up if you work toward it. Even if you've had a bad experience, there's no need to create exaggerated doomsday generalizations about our generation or about our profession... It's not THAT bad... There are still many good firms out there that do business well, that treat people well, do good work, and are working towards building future success... And there are many hard working talented and smart people I've worked with from all generations from baby boomers through gen x through the millenials... I have a great deal of respect and confidence in my peers in this industry, I think we have great things ahead of us... Geez... Stay positive, don't let a few bad experiences get you down, there are plenty of people who have had good experiences in this industry, and it's easy in a downturn for the negativity to get out if hand... Times may be challenging now, but step up and take that challenge as an opportunity to push yourself to do better... We aren't just victims to our situation, we are participants. You make your own future. 2 cents...
Typos... The iPhone is sometimes too "smart" and screws up your text...
If an employer doesn't want to pay a decent salary I will walk away, I'm fully ready to contribute to the success of a company I want to work for, if they want to pay me, but I am confident in the value I can contribute so if they aren't going to pay, I'm not desperate, there are other firms... The negotiation for salary is a normal thing, in any industry. You need to have the confidence to set you salary requirements and be prepared to walk away if the figure is not right. No need to be desperate or upset, this is just fair business... If it doesn't work out, it's not just your loss... Employers need good people as much as you need a job... In fact, I think a good employer isn't looking for the dirt cheap candidate, may be wary of a candidate who is lacking self esteem or doesn't value their own work... It's a funny thing: in a market price negotiation, YOU set your worth when you set your price. By pricing too low, you devalue your own work. This IMHO is true for firms going after projects and setting fee, and it's also true for job seekers negotiating salary. If a BMW priced itself too low, it actually becomes worth less in market value. Price yourself appropriately based on your fair value in this market and let the employer negotiate... Don't worry so much about undercutting, better to focus on building up experience and knowledge and skills, a body of work, that gives real value, that you can point to and show what you could offer to an employer... Get licensed also because that us objective value... Your value is not measured solely by the piece of paper, it is primarily measured by you as an individual and what you've done to get to where you are. Work hard and try to have confidence despite tough economic circumstances... Things will turn around. Stay positive.
Piggy,
You wrote "This profession lied to me in many ways. I "served" it faithfully and followed the rules. At this point I cannot lie to myself and ignore the sins of this profession. It is degrading to my intelligence and doesn't deserve hard working intelligent honest human beings any longer."
First I want to say that I have enjoyed a lot of your writings. I agree with a lot of it. But I just don't beleive the above when you say the profession lied to you. If you didn't get the memo about long work hours, low pay, doing it cuz of the love of it or for the gipper, I imagine that you missed a lot of classes while getting your degree. Maybe it isn't that the profession lied to you but that when you were 18, 19 or 20 you were ok with that reality which we all knew about. As you matured and realized your overall life situation, you may have become a bit jaded to your original thinking. JMHO.
And yes, we deserve better.
yeah i imagine that working long hours doing something you love is something pretty much any 18-20 year old is completely ok with
once real life comes around 10 years later, priorities can change, which can change our expectations
there is obviously nothing wrong with that, as it is natural
But it doesnt mean the profession cheated you in any way at all
If anyone is surprised at what life as an architect is like, they clearly, as you said OTF, were not listening in many of their classes in school
It got old after like day 4 in school when every single professor would say over and over again that we will not get paid that well
there are gives and takes with this profession
One give is that our pay is not what we would like or deserve in many cases
One take is that our jobs should be pretty stimulating and not monotonous/ boring day in and day out
I'm not sure what people mean when they say we won't get paid well... It's relative. I'd say our education is heavy, but I don't think architects are *starving artists*, I think if you define your situation... It's not all about the salary, but the numbers I'm hearing on this forum seem somewhat out of whack with the reality in the market...
Piggy, graduates are not getting $18,000 a year... That's ridiculous, I don't know where you live or what the cost of living is there, but I don't know any new graduate from a masters who have had some office experience who are getting paid less than double that plus benefits... With a 4 year bachelors you should be getting paid at least 1.5 times that even if you are just a draftsperson. If you are getting offered that little for a job, you should be walking away. You are either grossly exaggerating the salaries in your market or you are living someplace with dirt cheap costs of living compared to most large cities... I don't know, maybe it is relative based on location because of differences in cost of living but... I can't imagine that somebody could live on that kind of salary...
I think though that maybe part of the problem is that young graduates without real world experience are targeting the wrong kind of firm out of school... All work gives you experience, and look for opportunities to work in the field and learn rather than looking to work for *starchitects* for low pay and without a sustainable business practice... You shouldn't primarily be targeting offices that are on the brink of survival or may or may not survive based on the next paycheck, or who supplement their cashflow with teaching IMHO... Seek out offices that have a sustainable business strategy, that have strong practices, relationships with clients in their market, and a history of successful real built work rather than offices that haven't built anything... I think sometimes new graduates have the wrong idea about what makes a firm successful in this business... If you are looking for employment from a starving artist, be prepared to get paid as a starving artist... If you are looking for work from your *starchitect* professor but he/she is not 100% committed to business, and instead treating it as a side project outside of academia, that is why he/she doesn't pay employees well or seek to build and keep a long term professional team... Maybe his/her focus is not fully on the practice side, but attention is diverted to teaching... IMHO good work is not primarily done by starving artists, firms that have good business sense are the better, more promising employers...
I think a good question to ask your potential employer at an interview is: what is your goal as a firm, where do you see yourself in 10 years? and what is your approach to marketing, building and maintaining relationships with your clients and target market?
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.