Thank you in advance for reading and for any input.
I am at a point in my career where I’m not sure which direction to go. I have been working in firms since I was in college. After I graduated in 2002 with a BA in Architecture I worked for several firms of various sizes working on both residential and light commercial projects. After being laid off in 2007 I decided to go on my own and focus on residential architecture. Aside from wanting to alleviate being laid off again, I felt I had been in a rut working in firms – being known mainly as a drafting and rendering pro. I felt like I needed to learn a lot more about construction and the way buildings go together and the only way to do that was to just throw myself completely in and open my own studio. For me it was a good decision and things have gone really well so far except now I’m at a point where I want to be licensed. I'm also missing the interaction of working in a firm and collaborating with others and I'm getting a little burnt out on the client end of residential design. So my question is this – is there a place for someone like me in a mid-size to larger firm who has successfully run their own studio for 7 years? I’m trying to establish where I would fit in and what position I would apply for within a larger firm. I’m very strong on the design end so an ideal position would be that of a designer…but I’m not sure how those positions work in larger firms? Can you go back to working in larger firms after you have been self-employed for so long or is it frowned upon by larger firms? I feel like my experience running my own business for so long would be an asset but I'm not sure. Any insight or advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks so much.
JeromeS
Jun 23, 15 8:55 pm
Another perspective;
You're 30 years old. You have been out of architecture for nearly 10 years. You say your strength is design, yet you've only worked on exempted buildings apparently. How successful are you really, if you are willing to go back to grunting for someone else?
I say this with the love of a parent trying to provided guidance. You can go back to architecture but you're going to start over. I think there is a thread here about whether $37,000 is good, or not...
x-jla
Jun 23, 15 9:07 pm
30 is young. most people arent licensed until late 30s. Aside from that, why the hell would you want to work for someone else? I would rather design my own residential work than someone elses commercial. Anyway, I think you will find that non-residential arch is less fun...less room for "design".
Jun 23, 15 9:08 pm
ArchQuestion,
If it is legal in the state where you are at (don't know which state so check the laws/rules and licensing board), find a couple architects willing to form a business partnership with you. They supervise you on any project requiring their stamp and you help them in preparing the work. You can't fire them and they aren't employees to you so that gets around one concern NCARB has with IDP supervisors that are employees of the intern. On the other front, you are paid for your time from the contract with the clients but you aren't paid on an hourly or monthly... or bi-weekly. You are paid as the business is paid. So you address the being paid part. Bottom line: They are in charge of architectural work.
You maybe able to do that if you know an architect or two. Maybe an architect and an engineer. Depends. Then, your pay is more or less off the proceeds for services rendered and you work as a team.
You might consider looking into that.
It is a business so you'll need to work your butts off in getting clients and everything else that goes with running and marketing a business.
x-jla
Jun 23, 15 9:11 pm
You can also consider leaving the US. if up for a change and if personal life permits it..Many countries with better arch cultures do not require licensure...
Another route is to get contractors license and expand into design/build. One landscape guy I work with pulls in over a million a year...
Jun 23, 15 9:13 pm
jla-x,
Well... maybe. Most residential clients are problem when it comes to pay. They tend to be problematic when it comes to getting paid. Can be done but the caliber of a good paying client is more rarity and most are trying to get what they want without paying for it.
midlander
Jun 24, 15 6:19 am
Your experience would be useful for a firm that does projects with similarities in construction or use - lots of local mid-sized firms doing suburban condos or small commercial could probably use someone with on-site residential experience who knows how to interact with clients. It's a bit worrisome you feel burned out dealing with clients - that's a basic requirement to advance in any kind of firm.
I'm not sure a larger commercial firm would find as much relevance in what you describe - and you'd probably be back at the beginning doing miscellaneous drafting and renderings unless you can show how your project design experience relates to what they do. Your skills are probably much more useful to a smaller firm that deals with wood-frame construction and extensive CA work.
What exactly are you looking for in going back to a larger firm? To get IDP credit and get your license doesn't require a big firm; any office run by a licensed architect would be sufficient. But will you be able to get a license with only a BA where you live?
geezertect
Jun 24, 15 6:43 am
jla-x is right. I would be very reluctant to give up my own little practice if it was at all successful. Licensure requirements are easier to get around than restarting your business from scratch.
Richard is right about residential clients being chiselers. But the same applies to most private sector clients. Numerous posts have covered this subject in detail.
Jun 24, 15 5:48 pm
Commercial clients however tend to be a little better because typically they have a little more cash revenue except for the most small mom and pop shops.
x-jla
Jun 24, 15 6:10 pm
The more money they have they cheaper they tend to be...
Beepbeep
Jun 24, 15 7:27 pm
Why don't you partner your business with a friend that is licensed? He can sign off your hours and get you the paper and you get to keep your own gig? Grow the business s. go be a slave again?
geezertect
Jun 24, 15 8:13 pm
Richard: The way they get large cash flow is by using other people's money, i.e. never paying a bill today when you can blow it off until tomorrow. I have heard too many developers laugh about how they fuck over their subs, consultants, etc. to believe that the rich are easier to work for because they don't have to screw antbody else. That's usually the way they got it. It's part of the fun of the game for all too many.
x-jla
Jun 24, 15 9:19 pm
beepbeep, dosent work that way. You have to be a full time employee of the licensed arch for the hours to count.
Jun 25, 15 1:58 am
jla-x,
Actually under the current IDP rules, you don't have to be a full-time employee of a licensed architect for the hours to count unless you are referring to state specific rules.
However, for IDP to count, the architect can't be an employee of an intern. They can be independent contractors with a clear agreement outlining where the architect is holding supervision and control over the work prepared. They can also be business partners.
For example, if I was a business partner with a few architects and an engineer. I can't hire or fire my business partners. They can't hire or fire me. They would be in charge of practice of architecture or engineering where their license is required.
This can be completely acceptable under IDP 2.0. Where problems happens is when the intern is owner of a business and hires an architect as an employee. It maybe legal in some states but it goes too far against the grain of the architect being in a supervisory rule and holding control. When partners are of equal rank, (co-partners/owners) then the issue although on the edge but the architect-partner can at least carry out the duties in a role of supervision and direct control in the essence that an intern can't hold the power to hire and fire against a supervisor. So if you were an architect and we were business partners, it would be fine because I can't hold the power of hiring and firing against you because I can't fire you. The concern is when the intern threatening to fire their architect supervisor if they don't approve the hours. When the architect is a co-owner or partner then it doesn't matter. We can threaten each other all we want but it is more a joke because there is no power for me to fire someone who has equal right and power to cancel out me firing them. I would have no incentive to do so because it is more a problem for me then the architect partner because I would need their stamp and threatening to fire them holds no weight because you can't fire a business partner. It just doesn't work that way. If the partnership is to be a registered architectural firm, it will need to have majority of the board of directors being licensed architects or engineers and by that sense, I would be one sole voice that can be over-ruled by or canceled out by the vote of other members of the firms managing principals (board of directors, etc.)
Bottom line: When we are all co-principals, we are of equal rank and power. If it is clear in bylaws to support this point, then experience is acceptable in this fashion.
NCARB ideally prefers the traditional employer-employee type relationship.
At the end, it all would work out if all the partners can't hire/fire each other from an 'employee' role unless there is a majority vote of the partners.
As long as it is clear in bylaws and constitution (or equivalent) of the business, it is perfectly fine.
If it can be shown upon a request by NCARB, then it is not a big issue. I just can't hire an architect as an employee to be my supervisor unless it is very clearly written in contract that can be shown to NCARB that doing so would be deemed null and void and would constitute a breach of contract. The thing is, it will raise concerns. It is technically possible even if the intern was the employer of the architect but that WILL be looked upon dimly and likely unacceptable unless sufficient information is furnished to support that the architect has had a supervisory role but they'll look at that with scrutiny.
Being business partners will be considered acceptable but that would draw some closer look at the experience submitted but as long as the premise is sufficient to assure the architect was in a position of supervision without undue pressure and influence of the 'intern'.
In that case, it is better to take the humble path.
SpontaneousCombustion
Jun 25, 15 10:17 am
Check your state's laws regarding acceptable structures for architecture firms - and don't just go by the info on NCARB's matrix either, as that's not always up to date nor does it cover all intricacies of states' laws.
Some allow architecture firms to be wholly owned by non-architects. Some do not allow any partners to be unlicensed. Some allow a two-person firm to have one unlicensed partner, but in any firm with 3 or more partners two thirds of the partners must be licensed (regardless of their respective shares of ownership.) Some allow a licensed engineer or landscape architect to partner with an architect, but not an unlicensed person. And so on...
Running afoul of your state's rules regarding who can be a partner in a firm that provides architectural services, or in the form of incorporation that is allowed, can run you into a lot of fines, suspensions of licenses, etc.
Jun 25, 15 11:59 am
Right, Sponty. My original response basically mentioned that but that's for reiterating that point.
I didn't get into that in my response to jla-x but thanks for following it up for the OP.
I agree, if it gets you fines, it doesn't count for IDP.
ArchQuestion
Jun 25, 15 4:53 pm
Thanks all for the input it's helpful - much appreciated. Being licensed matters to me but I have to be honest the IDP portion makes it such a hassle that I don't even know if I want to deal with it sometimes. An engineer always stamps off on anything I do that's structural so I've never felt like I had to have the stamp to work, not in California anyway.
@midlander: I had this fantasy of working in a larger firm as a designer and not having to deal with clients directly. But it sounds like dealing with clients is always going to be part of the equation. I don't mind it and I'm pretty good at it it;s just in doing residential I'm often more of a marriage counselor than a designer ;-)
@beepbeep: Partnering with someone who is licensed is a good idea, I will look into that...and you're right it's taken awhile to get this far it wouldn't make sense to start all over again from scratch just to get licensed.
Miles Jaffe
Jun 25, 15 4:57 pm
I had this fantasy of working in a larger firm as a designer and not having to deal with clients directly.
Best one-liner of the day.
Jun 25, 15 5:32 pm
You mentioned California. That gives a clue to the legal system in context. Partnering with an architect and forming a business together is generally legal as long as you follow the regulations so bear with us when so we have time to look at the California laws on this matter to have a better clarity. From what I recall, it isn't all that different than Oregon and Washington. I don't recall if the firm has to be registered with the state licensing board in addition to the firm's ordinary business licensing/registration.
As for your experience requirement, I believe you can get IDP experience approved in this manner. I don't how about the other 5 to 6 or so years of experience requirement that isn't IDP. IDP accounts for 2 to 3 of those years but the rest has to be under an architect or some credit given for education you already have. It might just be 2-4 years of experience in addition to the 5600 training hours so assume about 2000 to 2080 additional work hours for each additional year of experience in addition to the 5600 training hours but all of IDP hours has to be completed of which is worth 3 years. Total of up to 16,640 hours of experience. 5600 of them must be the 5600 training hours of IDP.
Every year of college credit is basically equivalent to 2080 hours of work. So you need to show that much experience over a minimum of 6 to 8 years. I don't know if they allow time to be reduced by working overtime aside from the IDP training hours.
If you have to document 8 years of experience, it has to be like 16,640 or more hours of work experience (full-time employment) and you have to employed for 8 years. You don't reduce 8 years to 4 years by working 80 hours a week. I believe a non-architecture bachelors degree is only going to be given 2-years. Multiple non-architecture bachelors degree is only going to be given credit.... once. You don't get credit for an associates and a bachelor's degree. Your highest degree is what will count. In addition, only one degree will be credited to experience. Having multiple degrees doesn't mean sh-t. You still need the IDP and the rest of the years of experience under the supervision of an architect.
Aside from IDP, you WILL want to talk with CAB (California Architecture Board) about your whether or not they will give you credit for the state's experience requirement if you were in a partnership with architects legally compliant with the laws of the state. They can explain what is acceptable and what isn't.
They may accept only experience under the supervision of partners of the firm with ownership stake vs. experience by an employee who is an architect. TALK with them and get their position. Also take into consideration that there is new rules by NCARB that may effect things in California so you need to keep a dialogue on this and be sure that they'll accept the experience and what experience options there maybe and also be sure you don't run afoul.
They will be willing to work with you to understand the rules.
Thank you in advance for reading and for any input.
I am at a point in my career where I’m not sure which direction to go. I have been working in firms since I was in college. After I graduated in 2002 with a BA in Architecture I worked for several firms of various sizes working on both residential and light commercial projects. After being laid off in 2007 I decided to go on my own and focus on residential architecture. Aside from wanting to alleviate being laid off again, I felt I had been in a rut working in firms – being known mainly as a drafting and rendering pro. I felt like I needed to learn a lot more about construction and the way buildings go together and the only way to do that was to just throw myself completely in and open my own studio. For me it was a good decision and things have gone really well so far except now I’m at a point where I want to be licensed. I'm also missing the interaction of working in a firm and collaborating with others and I'm getting a little burnt out on the client end of residential design. So my question is this – is there a place for someone like me in a mid-size to larger firm who has successfully run their own studio for 7 years? I’m trying to establish where I would fit in and what position I would apply for within a larger firm. I’m very strong on the design end so an ideal position would be that of a designer…but I’m not sure how those positions work in larger firms? Can you go back to working in larger firms after you have been self-employed for so long or is it frowned upon by larger firms? I feel like my experience running my own business for so long would be an asset but I'm not sure. Any insight or advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks so much.
Another perspective;
You're 30 years old. You have been out of architecture for nearly 10 years. You say your strength is design, yet you've only worked on exempted buildings apparently. How successful are you really, if you are willing to go back to grunting for someone else?
I say this with the love of a parent trying to provided guidance. You can go back to architecture but you're going to start over. I think there is a thread here about whether $37,000 is good, or not...
30 is young. most people arent licensed until late 30s. Aside from that, why the hell would you want to work for someone else? I would rather design my own residential work than someone elses commercial. Anyway, I think you will find that non-residential arch is less fun...less room for "design".
ArchQuestion,
If it is legal in the state where you are at (don't know which state so check the laws/rules and licensing board), find a couple architects willing to form a business partnership with you. They supervise you on any project requiring their stamp and you help them in preparing the work. You can't fire them and they aren't employees to you so that gets around one concern NCARB has with IDP supervisors that are employees of the intern. On the other front, you are paid for your time from the contract with the clients but you aren't paid on an hourly or monthly... or bi-weekly. You are paid as the business is paid. So you address the being paid part. Bottom line: They are in charge of architectural work.
You maybe able to do that if you know an architect or two. Maybe an architect and an engineer. Depends. Then, your pay is more or less off the proceeds for services rendered and you work as a team.
You might consider looking into that.
It is a business so you'll need to work your butts off in getting clients and everything else that goes with running and marketing a business.
You can also consider leaving the US. if up for a change and if personal life permits it..Many countries with better arch cultures do not require licensure...
Another route is to get contractors license and expand into design/build. One landscape guy I work with pulls in over a million a year...
jla-x,
Well... maybe. Most residential clients are problem when it comes to pay. They tend to be problematic when it comes to getting paid. Can be done but the caliber of a good paying client is more rarity and most are trying to get what they want without paying for it.
Your experience would be useful for a firm that does projects with similarities in construction or use - lots of local mid-sized firms doing suburban condos or small commercial could probably use someone with on-site residential experience who knows how to interact with clients. It's a bit worrisome you feel burned out dealing with clients - that's a basic requirement to advance in any kind of firm.
I'm not sure a larger commercial firm would find as much relevance in what you describe - and you'd probably be back at the beginning doing miscellaneous drafting and renderings unless you can show how your project design experience relates to what they do. Your skills are probably much more useful to a smaller firm that deals with wood-frame construction and extensive CA work.
What exactly are you looking for in going back to a larger firm? To get IDP credit and get your license doesn't require a big firm; any office run by a licensed architect would be sufficient. But will you be able to get a license with only a BA where you live?
jla-x is right. I would be very reluctant to give up my own little practice if it was at all successful. Licensure requirements are easier to get around than restarting your business from scratch.
Richard is right about residential clients being chiselers. But the same applies to most private sector clients. Numerous posts have covered this subject in detail.
Commercial clients however tend to be a little better because typically they have a little more cash revenue except for the most small mom and pop shops.
The more money they have they cheaper they tend to be...
Why don't you partner your business with a friend that is licensed? He can sign off your hours and get you the paper and you get to keep your own gig? Grow the business s. go be a slave again?
Richard: The way they get large cash flow is by using other people's money, i.e. never paying a bill today when you can blow it off until tomorrow. I have heard too many developers laugh about how they fuck over their subs, consultants, etc. to believe that the rich are easier to work for because they don't have to screw antbody else. That's usually the way they got it. It's part of the fun of the game for all too many.
beepbeep, dosent work that way. You have to be a full time employee of the licensed arch for the hours to count.
jla-x,
Actually under the current IDP rules, you don't have to be a full-time employee of a licensed architect for the hours to count unless you are referring to state specific rules.
However, for IDP to count, the architect can't be an employee of an intern. They can be independent contractors with a clear agreement outlining where the architect is holding supervision and control over the work prepared. They can also be business partners.
For example, if I was a business partner with a few architects and an engineer. I can't hire or fire my business partners. They can't hire or fire me. They would be in charge of practice of architecture or engineering where their license is required.
This can be completely acceptable under IDP 2.0. Where problems happens is when the intern is owner of a business and hires an architect as an employee. It maybe legal in some states but it goes too far against the grain of the architect being in a supervisory rule and holding control. When partners are of equal rank, (co-partners/owners) then the issue although on the edge but the architect-partner can at least carry out the duties in a role of supervision and direct control in the essence that an intern can't hold the power to hire and fire against a supervisor. So if you were an architect and we were business partners, it would be fine because I can't hold the power of hiring and firing against you because I can't fire you. The concern is when the intern threatening to fire their architect supervisor if they don't approve the hours. When the architect is a co-owner or partner then it doesn't matter. We can threaten each other all we want but it is more a joke because there is no power for me to fire someone who has equal right and power to cancel out me firing them. I would have no incentive to do so because it is more a problem for me then the architect partner because I would need their stamp and threatening to fire them holds no weight because you can't fire a business partner. It just doesn't work that way. If the partnership is to be a registered architectural firm, it will need to have majority of the board of directors being licensed architects or engineers and by that sense, I would be one sole voice that can be over-ruled by or canceled out by the vote of other members of the firms managing principals (board of directors, etc.)
Bottom line: When we are all co-principals, we are of equal rank and power. If it is clear in bylaws to support this point, then experience is acceptable in this fashion.
NCARB ideally prefers the traditional employer-employee type relationship.
At the end, it all would work out if all the partners can't hire/fire each other from an 'employee' role unless there is a majority vote of the partners.
As long as it is clear in bylaws and constitution (or equivalent) of the business, it is perfectly fine.
If it can be shown upon a request by NCARB, then it is not a big issue. I just can't hire an architect as an employee to be my supervisor unless it is very clearly written in contract that can be shown to NCARB that doing so would be deemed null and void and would constitute a breach of contract. The thing is, it will raise concerns. It is technically possible even if the intern was the employer of the architect but that WILL be looked upon dimly and likely unacceptable unless sufficient information is furnished to support that the architect has had a supervisory role but they'll look at that with scrutiny.
Being business partners will be considered acceptable but that would draw some closer look at the experience submitted but as long as the premise is sufficient to assure the architect was in a position of supervision without undue pressure and influence of the 'intern'.
In that case, it is better to take the humble path.
Check your state's laws regarding acceptable structures for architecture firms - and don't just go by the info on NCARB's matrix either, as that's not always up to date nor does it cover all intricacies of states' laws.
Some allow architecture firms to be wholly owned by non-architects. Some do not allow any partners to be unlicensed. Some allow a two-person firm to have one unlicensed partner, but in any firm with 3 or more partners two thirds of the partners must be licensed (regardless of their respective shares of ownership.) Some allow a licensed engineer or landscape architect to partner with an architect, but not an unlicensed person. And so on...
Running afoul of your state's rules regarding who can be a partner in a firm that provides architectural services, or in the form of incorporation that is allowed, can run you into a lot of fines, suspensions of licenses, etc.
Right, Sponty. My original response basically mentioned that but that's for reiterating that point.
I didn't get into that in my response to jla-x but thanks for following it up for the OP.
I agree, if it gets you fines, it doesn't count for IDP.
Thanks all for the input it's helpful - much appreciated. Being licensed matters to me but I have to be honest the IDP portion makes it such a hassle that I don't even know if I want to deal with it sometimes. An engineer always stamps off on anything I do that's structural so I've never felt like I had to have the stamp to work, not in California anyway.
@midlander: I had this fantasy of working in a larger firm as a designer and not having to deal with clients directly. But it sounds like dealing with clients is always going to be part of the equation. I don't mind it and I'm pretty good at it it;s just in doing residential I'm often more of a marriage counselor than a designer ;-)
@beepbeep: Partnering with someone who is licensed is a good idea, I will look into that...and you're right it's taken awhile to get this far it wouldn't make sense to start all over again from scratch just to get licensed.
I had this fantasy of working in a larger firm as a designer and not having to deal with clients directly.
Best one-liner of the day.
You mentioned California. That gives a clue to the legal system in context. Partnering with an architect and forming a business together is generally legal as long as you follow the regulations so bear with us when so we have time to look at the California laws on this matter to have a better clarity. From what I recall, it isn't all that different than Oregon and Washington. I don't recall if the firm has to be registered with the state licensing board in addition to the firm's ordinary business licensing/registration.
As for your experience requirement, I believe you can get IDP experience approved in this manner. I don't how about the other 5 to 6 or so years of experience requirement that isn't IDP. IDP accounts for 2 to 3 of those years but the rest has to be under an architect or some credit given for education you already have. It might just be 2-4 years of experience in addition to the 5600 training hours so assume about 2000 to 2080 additional work hours for each additional year of experience in addition to the 5600 training hours but all of IDP hours has to be completed of which is worth 3 years. Total of up to 16,640 hours of experience. 5600 of them must be the 5600 training hours of IDP.
Every year of college credit is basically equivalent to 2080 hours of work. So you need to show that much experience over a minimum of 6 to 8 years. I don't know if they allow time to be reduced by working overtime aside from the IDP training hours.
If you have to document 8 years of experience, it has to be like 16,640 or more hours of work experience (full-time employment) and you have to employed for 8 years. You don't reduce 8 years to 4 years by working 80 hours a week. I believe a non-architecture bachelors degree is only going to be given 2-years. Multiple non-architecture bachelors degree is only going to be given credit.... once. You don't get credit for an associates and a bachelor's degree. Your highest degree is what will count. In addition, only one degree will be credited to experience. Having multiple degrees doesn't mean sh-t. You still need the IDP and the rest of the years of experience under the supervision of an architect.
Aside from IDP, you WILL want to talk with CAB (California Architecture Board) about your whether or not they will give you credit for the state's experience requirement if you were in a partnership with architects legally compliant with the laws of the state. They can explain what is acceptable and what isn't.
They may accept only experience under the supervision of partners of the firm with ownership stake vs. experience by an employee who is an architect. TALK with them and get their position. Also take into consideration that there is new rules by NCARB that may effect things in California so you need to keep a dialogue on this and be sure that they'll accept the experience and what experience options there maybe and also be sure you don't run afoul.
They will be willing to work with you to understand the rules.