I am young architect working at an office in NYC. I would like to have my own practice one day and I am preparing by getting my license (4 exams down, 3 to go) and learning as much about Project Management and Construction as I can. I do consider myself a good designer and often think about how unfortunate it is that architects often have to choose between design and construction in there offices. In our industry there seems to be a false presumption that people who can't design become PAs or PMs, that design talent is more important than construction expertise. Whereas I think that detailing and managing projects is as much a talent or art-form as designing. Furthermore, schools seem to breed either one type of architect or the other. Since I am opening my own office, I want a little experience on both sides, and indeed my office has told me I have potential to go either way. I would like to hear your opinions and observations concerning this dichotomy in our industry.
Non Sequitur
Oct 14, 16 10:53 am
Design as taught in school is less than %5 of a typical project... whereas CD & CM is somewhere in the 70s.
Josh Mings
Oct 14, 16 11:09 am
If those that can't design become PAs and PMs, no one ever told my firm that. We all participate in design. Sorry if you are in one of the firms where that is the case.
Spencer Lepler
Oct 14, 16 11:45 am
A number of firms I've been at completely divorce the two sides - they have a design department and a project development department. Others treat it as an integrated practice, but divide the work up by project type.
I've found that even in combined firms, those who end up showing a management or construction facility end up sort of pigeonholed in the construction side.
mightyaa
Oct 14, 16 11:58 am
A good chunk of that has to with salary. Design, by nature, is time consuming. So those fresh out of school are efficient and typically good designers, without a lot of technical knowledge: They are also the cheapest employee’s and their skillsets are design.
Your PA’s, higher salaries, with technical experience can just critique the work and take a reasonable ‘hands on’ oversight of the design direction trying to pass along their technical experience.
The PM’s, even higher salaries, can effectively coordinate trades and have a lot of experience, so you can’t use them efficiently in design beyond a professor level critique of the design. They pass their experience along to the PA's.
Principals do accounting, marketing, contracting, team & schedule…. They will be the furthest removed from design. Not because they can’t, but because it makes more sense and they have the network to haul in work and make sure everyone gets a paycheck – it is where they are needed. But being in charge has it's perks; You can inject yourself into the design again because you are the guy with the checkbook and can make that choice to be a non-profitable employee in exchange for some fun (contracts are not fun, nor putting out fires, or beating the bushes for work).
You can’t reverse the order of things unless you are large and can have a lot of redundancy built into staff. Example; marketing directors, financial officers, HR department, drafting pool, star designers, etc. basically where you can afford to niche folks and have fee's large enough to absorb it.
awaiting_deletion
Oct 14, 16 12:37 pm
generally speaking I have no patience, so that mindset lands me usually on the PM side to any project. design can get annoying at times when you are used to just getting it done. also a lot less money in design unlesd you are a superstar.
chigurh
Oct 14, 16 12:43 pm
Any small firm or start up you have to do both/everything. The dichotomy or titles you talk about exists in large corporate structures where there are people are looking to get pigeonholed into a lifer role as "x" - you name it. In my opinion you are either an architect or you are not - meaning you address all facets of this profession. The more important question you should be asking yourself is how to secure work if you truly intend to go out on your own. You will figure out your strengths in the profession when you have to complete a project on your own. Get insurance.
I am young architect working at an office in NYC. I would like to have my own practice one day and I am preparing by getting my license (4 exams down, 3 to go) and learning as much about Project Management and Construction as I can. I do consider myself a good designer and often think about how unfortunate it is that architects often have to choose between design and construction in there offices. In our industry there seems to be a false presumption that people who can't design become PAs or PMs, that design talent is more important than construction expertise. Whereas I think that detailing and managing projects is as much a talent or art-form as designing. Furthermore, schools seem to breed either one type of architect or the other. Since I am opening my own office, I want a little experience on both sides, and indeed my office has told me I have potential to go either way. I would like to hear your opinions and observations concerning this dichotomy in our industry.
Design as taught in school is less than %5 of a typical project... whereas CD & CM is somewhere in the 70s.
If those that can't design become PAs and PMs, no one ever told my firm that. We all participate in design. Sorry if you are in one of the firms where that is the case.
A number of firms I've been at completely divorce the two sides - they have a design department and a project development department. Others treat it as an integrated practice, but divide the work up by project type.
I've found that even in combined firms, those who end up showing a management or construction facility end up sort of pigeonholed in the construction side.
A good chunk of that has to with salary. Design, by nature, is time consuming. So those fresh out of school are efficient and typically good designers, without a lot of technical knowledge: They are also the cheapest employee’s and their skillsets are design.
Your PA’s, higher salaries, with technical experience can just critique the work and take a reasonable ‘hands on’ oversight of the design direction trying to pass along their technical experience.
The PM’s, even higher salaries, can effectively coordinate trades and have a lot of experience, so you can’t use them efficiently in design beyond a professor level critique of the design. They pass their experience along to the PA's.
Principals do accounting, marketing, contracting, team & schedule…. They will be the furthest removed from design. Not because they can’t, but because it makes more sense and they have the network to haul in work and make sure everyone gets a paycheck – it is where they are needed. But being in charge has it's perks; You can inject yourself into the design again because you are the guy with the checkbook and can make that choice to be a non-profitable employee in exchange for some fun (contracts are not fun, nor putting out fires, or beating the bushes for work).
You can’t reverse the order of things unless you are large and can have a lot of redundancy built into staff. Example; marketing directors, financial officers, HR department, drafting pool, star designers, etc. basically where you can afford to niche folks and have fee's large enough to absorb it.
generally speaking I have no patience, so that mindset lands me usually on the PM side to any project. design can get annoying at times when you are used to just getting it done. also a lot less money in design unlesd you are a superstar.
Any small firm or start up you have to do both/everything. The dichotomy or titles you talk about exists in large corporate structures where there are people are looking to get pigeonholed into a lifer role as "x" - you name it. In my opinion you are either an architect or you are not - meaning you address all facets of this profession. The more important question you should be asking yourself is how to secure work if you truly intend to go out on your own. You will figure out your strengths in the profession when you have to complete a project on your own. Get insurance.