I graduated in 2014 and been working for almost 4 years. Now, I didn't really enjoy my work so much and kept on changing my job. Lucky that the economy has been good. I have been with my 4th employer now for 14 months but I hate my job and my employer's gut and am thinking about moving on again. I probably will quit architecture and go back to grad school to find some other work in next few years, but I cannot stop working yet because I need the pay check. And I am wondering just how bad is it to employers when they see four different jobs in 4 years? To be honest, if I was running my own firm, I would think twice before hiring someone like that.
What do you think and have you seen any extreme cases like mine, changing job every year?
Peter Normand
Jan 26, 18 1:22 pm
Switching jobs a lot is not uncommon especially for people just starting out and as more firms use temp workers and we head into a gig based economy. Just have an honest story about why you left, but if Architecture is not what you want to do I would suggest moving on sooner rather than latter to something else.
Over and OUT
Peter N
jeffl
Jan 26, 18 1:30 pm
Peter. Good to know that job switching is becoming more common. I'd like to quit arch today but I need some cushion in my pocket for school and possible no income situation. Thanks for the comment.
geezertect
Jan 26, 18 2:32 pm
I'd probably leave out the part about hating your employer's guts. That might be a bit of a turnoff in a job interview.
null pointer
Jan 26, 18 1:56 pm
The more you switch the higher your salary will be.
Fuck boomers and their corporate loyalty ethos.
They fucked us in 2007/2008. They are owed nothing.
geezertect
Jan 26, 18 2:32 pm
As a boomer, I completely agree.
jeffl
Jan 26, 18 3:05 pm
Yes, my salary started from near poverty line to barely livable.
sameolddoctor
Jan 26, 18 10:50 pm
"The more you switch the higher your salary will be." - and then comes the crash and you will become unhireable. Good riddance.
chigurh
Jan 29, 18 10:40 pm
the more you move, the more varied experience you get; learning how and how not to run a practice like an asshole boomer.
mantaray
Jan 26, 18 2:29 pm
I switched 3 times in one year (totally justified; horrible jobs) but by the interviews for the 3rd, it was becoming kind of a pointed question. In all honesty, I gathered the very strong impression at that point that I should sit tight at the 3rd for awhile before going for the 4th. It definitely felt like a kind of tipping point...
FWIW, I actually knock job candidates down a peg mentally if they are, say, 5-7 years out of school and have only ever worked at 1 firm. Also a red flag...
randomised
Jan 26, 18 2:42 pm
I have 8 or 9 jobs/gigs on my CV since 2010...with jobs of like 2 years to gigs of a month and everything in-between...it was only brought up once as a possible concern, but people are mostly impressed because of the offices I worked with and the work I did.
But if you want to switch fields, don't wait, just find something you prefer doing today rather than tomorrow...
Bench
Jan 26, 18 2:47 pm
I have found that working at multiple broad, extremely differing firms throughout my 20's has been a fantastic learning experience (2 summer/co-op positions, 2 proper year-long positions, one terrible short-term stint) while completing school and as a fresh graduate. Now I'm in my first genuine long-term spot (coming up on 2 years, worked on the same project the whole time, signed up for another 3) where Im getting a serious deep-dive into the intricacies of taking a project from start to finish.
Point being - when you're younger, I dont think it's a problem if you're spending about a year at multiple firms to get an understanding of how you fit into the working world. Firms are massively different from one to the next, and its important to realize what environment allows you to produce your best work. Where you begin to have issues is if everything is sub-6-months, which raises questions about commitment, collaboration, and personality.
jeffl
Jan 26, 18 3:02 pm
Can't agree more Bench. That was my mindset switching jobs, learning different aspects of the field in different environments. I think I did gain a wider perspective doing that which is one positive thing about switching.
jeffl
Jan 29, 18 9:17 am
Thank you for the comments folks.
archinine
Jan 29, 18 12:24 pm
The one per year you've already done is fine and quite typical given the general volatility of the industry, especially for entry level staff. Any more than that and it's going to start to raise a few eyebrows. Agreed with others - great experience in diversity of methodology can be had by moving around early on. But nearing the 5 year post grad mark you're going to want to start sticking around for 2-3 years per firm at the minimum. Unless of course something completely out of your control goes down, in which case you can explain that in future interviews.
thatsthat
Jan 29, 18 5:11 pm
On the flip side, can someone clarify for me why it raises a red flag to stay at your first job for 5 years? This is my case, but it's more that I just really like where I work, the projects, and my co-workers. I have great bosses that allow even the youngest staff to experience SD all the way through end of CDs, go on site, and have direct access with clients and contractors. They're eager to train and move people up because all of the managers are at their limit with projects, so very frequently PAs are given the opportunity to manage smaller projects to get their feet wet. I've looked for other positions here and there, but I work in a niche firm so it's been hard to find other firms that take on similar projects, especially without moving across the country. Am I shooting myself in the foot by staying so long, even though the situation is still great?
mantaray
Jan 30, 18 2:43 am
I generally agree with archinine, but will add that: if you REALLY like where you are, by all means, stay! Life is short and it's really important to like your job. Most folks don't like their firms all that much. It took me 9 firms to find 2 that I really liked, and wanted to stay at. Count yourself lucky! Just know, per what archinine outlined below, that when you DO make a jump, don't necessarily expect your salary at the new place to match expectations from the place you camped out at for awhile. Also, be ready to speak specifically to this question in any interviews, once you eventually do feel like leaving. The danger in being parked for awhile is not only that you miss out on a variety of project and construction types, but also, it can give the appearance of someone who is not ambitious ENOUGH. Fine line -- firms want folks who are self-starters, motivated, wanting to stretch & improve themselves, without necessarily being OVERLY ambitious. But you also don't want to look like you were... perhaps overly complacent, if that makes sense. So maybe be ready to say something like "I know it's unusual to stay at a firm so long so early in a career, and I had fully anticipated needing to try out a few different firms before finding a good fit, but I just happened to luck out and really loved xyz firm, so as you can see from my portfolio I made it my business to make sure I managed to work on different project types and sizes while I was there to make sure I was still getting the project experience I wanted." something like that but better put...
thatsthat
Jan 30, 18 8:16 am
Thanks mantaray for the advice. Yes I love where I work which is why I haven't moved. I had planned to stay here a year then move on, to go back to school, but I really enjoy my job. I would like to move to a bigger city once I pay
down some of my school debt and can afford it.
archinine
Jan 29, 18 6:18 pm
Thats^ if I saw a candidate like yourself I'd think this person has already begun to specialize (especially since you note your firm's work is 'niche') and would have the sense they are already stuck in their ways, have only been taught a narrow methodology etc. Further I'd assume you'd want to command a high salary/position yet, you'd be so non well rounded I wouldn't be able to justify giving you that title at a firm that's more generalized or has specialities that don't overlap.
I've met quite a few like yourself and have found most of the above to be usually true. It's unfortunate but it seems to happen somewhat often. People inadvertently end up specializing in some narrow segment - like interior restaurant fitouts or something- and get to a point where they never really learn to do anything else but have achieved PM status at their teeny firm. I'm including licensed people as well. Knowing the bare minimum for the AREs is different than being hired as a PM who's expected to coordinate with 30+ consultants on a huge project. They tend to find them selves in the situation I described - able to command a fairly high salary in their original firm or within their specialization, but not outside of that, which only compels them to remain in that speciality.
A healthy mix of firms/project typologies in the first 5-10 years tends to be ideal. It's completely possible to get that sort of exposure within a single company that works on lots of types of projects. But in your case - and with a guess at what your portfolio is likely displaying - I'd be hesitant to offer you an equivalent title with what is really not equivalent work. Again I'm almost always talking small footprint interiors or worse 'art focused' installation/gallery/set design stuff then trying to leap to big, capital A, ground up / major renovation Architecture.
It may not be too late for you to become well rounded but you're likely going to have to drop in title - not necessarily pay though.
thatsthat
Jan 29, 18 6:51 pm
Knowing the bare minimum for the AREs is different than being hired as a PM who's expected to coordinate with 30+ consultants on a huge project.
archinine, 1000% agree with the above. I totally get what you mean. I guess by 'niche' I meant, we don't do ground up stuff typically, but historic restorations/renovations that range from the tiny $400k roof replacements to $200 mil, nationally listed, with 30+ consultants where we are the prime. Not a ton of firms do historic work, and if they do, it's one studio just to say they do it, or they mostly act as consultants, which can be a rough gig. Because it's historic work, we work on all typologies - residential, museums, university work, K-12, NPS, train stations, mechanical spaces, etc. so I'm not too worried in that sense. I'm not really looking to leave my specialization - just if the time comes, find another firm with a similar portfolio where I can be of use, but still get to work on great projects. I just don't want it to look too bad that I've only worked here.
thatsthat
Jan 29, 18 7:59 pm
I guess all of that to say, does it still look bad to only work one place, if that one place is a good one with a good reputation?
randomised
Jan 30, 18 8:12 am
It really depends, it might indicate you can take good projects from conception through to execution, or it means you've specialized and are only allowed to work on a single aspect of a lot of projects. It might indicate you've become an architect that runs projects all the way or it might indicate you're complacent and avoid risks.
null pointer
Jan 30, 18 9:13 am
The ARE teaches you a lot about professional liability and scoping. When I was younger, I probably saved a larger firm from a half a dozen lawsuits by simply parroting standard ARE materials at project managers that just wanted to wing shit left and right and who would consistently bend to the will of clients that wanted us to do something other than architecture, regardless of the sort of liability issues that would arise from doing just that. I had my first huge project assigned to me after going to the principal and running through a litany of fuck-ups - exposing firm to potential lawsuits- by the PM who was working Pre-SD work.
The AREs are only worthless if you forget everything you learn after you take the tests. I can honestly say that part of the reason that I got promoted so fast (when I used to work for other people) was that the AREs gave me a huge edge up in asking the right questions to principals and having a marked interest in managing rather than drawing shit details that any CAD monkey or underemployed 60 year old can figure out anyways.
accesskb
Jan 29, 18 7:59 pm
switching every year is a bad sign indeed and don't think it will help you get a higher pay. Switching every 3 years or so is normal to get more exposure to other projects and a higher salary.
archinine
Jan 29, 18 10:24 pm
That's - based on your description it sounds like you're in a solid well rounded firm. If you're happy with specializing in historic preservation why worry about leaving? That market is slightly to much less volatile depending where you are located. If the pay is right and you feel like you're still growing / learning then by all means stay put. Access makes the best point in getting variable exposure especially if the first few firm's you're at focus on only a few markets.
thatsthat
Jan 29, 18 11:03 pm
Thanks for the input, archinine!
ArchNyen
Jan 29, 18 10:54 pm
didn't your job/life/salary get better every time you switch?
null pointer
Jan 30, 18 9:22 am
In my case it did. By a lot. But the thing is: my job never felt secure and there is a lot of stress associated with that. You're always the last person to be hired and worried you'll be the first person to get axed. When it did feel secure, I had to fight any sort of tendency to slack on my work. So that's why after a decade of "touring", I just went off by myself.
jeffl
Jan 30, 18 9:28 am
For me, the salary did rise most of the times but not all the time. My salary was cut down 7k at one point when I moved from a huge corporate to a tiny hole in the wall firm. And I had to give up all corp benefits.
jeffl
Jan 30, 18 9:34 am
null, how often did you move during the past 10 years? And how much are you enjoying working for yourself compared to working for other?
null pointer
Jan 30, 18 9:37 am
Longest job was 2.5 years. Shortest was 6 months. I wouldn't trade this for the world. The variety of work that comes my way dwarfs that of any firm I worked for. It's been a couple of years of this, and it is seriously the best choice I've made in my life.
I also don't compete at the bottom of the barrel. There is no use in trying to beat out a 5k-build-out-reno-job moonlighter when you can just warn the client, offer a $250/h plan review of the other architect, and get him to come to you in a year and half for full-scope and fees after he has to resolve all of the shitstorms that moonlighters conjure up in NYC.
ArchNyen
Jan 30, 18 8:45 pm
how tough was it to start your own firm? an acquaint ask me to join him and his partner in a startup company. While my current job right now is okay, just okay...
randomised
Jan 30, 18 11:55 pm
You can always go back to something 'just okay'...
randomised
Jan 31, 18 7:59 am
But Rick, all the fun is in the starting up, modelling the firm after your preferences, deciding where you want to take it etc. If you wait until the starting up is done, it's just a regular firm if you were not part of setting the course and direction the firm is going in. True that's a lot of work but that's also where you can really have an impact, make a difference and decide how you want to spend your days working.
null pointer
Jan 31, 18 2:04 pm
Bitch please. You're being conservative. I was pulling 90 hour weeks when I finally quit my dayjob. 20-50% means you probably are going to starve.
Wilma Buttfit
Jan 30, 18 9:54 am
I can't say it's a good idea to have 4 different jobs in 4 different years, but I personally should have jumped around a lot more before now. I've had 3 positions (all contractorships) in the last 2 years and have significantly increased in both knowledge and skills by doing so. Previously, I stayed a two firms for 3.5 years each and I just about stopped growing at both some time during those stints but stayed because it was easy to stay. But I think showing that commitment and not having a dozen workplaces on my resume looks good. As usual, the answer is it depends and its probably somewhere in the middle.
Wilma Buttfit
Jan 30, 18 10:38 am
And interestingly, I loathed the two jobs I had for 3.5 years and loved the jobs I only held for a year or less but moved on from them because of better opportunities. I stayed too long on the 3.5 year jobs because of depression.
won and done williams
Jan 30, 18 12:02 pm
Surprised it hasn't been said already as this topic comes up often - the biggest disadvantage to job hopping every +/- one year is that you don't get to see your projects through to completion. Even smaller residential projects usually take at least a year to complete, often much longer. Architecture is sloooooooooooooooow.
But as others have said, I think the expectation that you will make a career at any one office is waning, and in fact, for many small firms, that sort of commitment/expectation from an employee is actually somewhat intimidating. Yes, for better or worse, we are moving towards a gig economy.
Wilma Buttfit
Jan 30, 18 1:29 pm
You can be at a firms for years and not see too many projects completed as well.
Non Sequitur
Jan 31, 18 8:42 am
I made it known many years ago that I care more to see projects from start to occupancy. Helps that most projects take many years so you know how busy you'll get months in advance.
Bench
Jan 31, 18 9:12 am
One piece of advice from my thesis advisor as a benchmark - By the time you're 30, you should aim to have worked at one firm continuously for 2 years. By the time you're 40, you should aim to have worked at one firm continuously for 5 years.
Non Sequitur
Jan 31, 18 9:47 am
What age did he recommend you be licensed by?
Bench
Jan 31, 18 9:49 am
Bit of a non-issue for both of us - we're both working internationally, so no chance of licensure for the foreseeable future
Non Sequitur
Jan 31, 18 9:59 am
Just curious if that was a thing advisors do. I set my own goal of licensed by 30 and even stated so during interviews. I was a few months past my 29th birthday when I got it all done.
Bench
Jan 31, 18 10:48 am
I think license around 30 was generally what we agreed was a good thing, however getting the international exposure felt like the better option if it presented itself (which it did). The license will always be there to pursue
, and won't be too long of a process.
archanonymous
Jan 31, 18 5:44 pm
This is excellent advice. I'm totally stealing it to give to my students! And use myself!
Bench
Jan 31, 18 9:49 am
.
JLC-1
Jan 31, 18 11:16 am
working in this field for 30 years, I've been employed in 7 firms, the shortest a shitshow of 8 months in a "throw a bunch of good people together and see what happens" experiment that ended when the director died in a car accident, the longest where I am today, 10 years. Sometimes you engage, sometimes you just go with the flow, but you can never survive going against the grain.
randomised
Jan 31, 18 12:20 pm
"but you can never survive going against the grain"
Unless you run the show and call the shots...
JLC-1
Jan 31, 18 12:21 pm
still applies, or you run your show just to against something?
poop876
Jan 31, 18 1:35 pm
I just received a resume and the applicant worked at 14 different firms since 2000. I would not waste my time and money for that applicant to potentially leave in less than a year.
kjdt
Jan 31, 18 2:48 pm
I had a lot of jobs early on - three different ones before graduation, and three more within my first four years. Nobody every asked about it. It didn't seem too unusual, especially for those trying to complete IDP. After that I stuck around for longer stints at most firms.
After a while I started leaving some of the earlier jobs off my resume. Anything that's so short that it lasts less than a year doesn't even leave a gap on a resume if you leave it off, as long as you're listing your start and stop dates as just years, with no months. Similarly the shorter ones read as if they lasted at least a year, as long as there was a January 1 during your stint (i.e. if you list "Designer - Super Snazzy Architects; 1999-2000, nobody reads that and asks you "so what month in 1999 did you start, and what month in 2000 did you leave?"
randomised
Feb 1, 18 1:00 am
Here on the archinect people profile you can't do that trick, you have to specify the month too, so be sure to coordinate the resume with all googleable versions ;)
Hi guys,
I am looking for some career advice.
I graduated in 2014 and been working for almost 4 years. Now, I didn't really enjoy my work so much and kept on changing my job. Lucky that the economy has been good. I have been with my 4th employer now for 14 months but I hate my job and my employer's gut and am thinking about moving on again. I probably will quit architecture and go back to grad school to find some other work in next few years, but I cannot stop working yet because I need the pay check. And I am wondering just how bad is it to employers when they see four different jobs in 4 years? To be honest, if I was running my own firm, I would think twice before hiring someone like that.
What do you think and have you seen any extreme cases like mine, changing job every year?
Switching jobs a lot is not uncommon especially for people just starting out and as more firms use temp workers and we head into a gig based economy. Just have an honest story about why you left, but if Architecture is not what you want to do I would suggest moving on sooner rather than latter to something else.
Over and OUT
Peter N
Peter. Good to know that job switching is becoming more common. I'd like to quit arch today but I need some cushion in my pocket for school and possible no income situation. Thanks for the comment.
I'd probably leave out the part about hating your employer's guts. That might be a bit of a turnoff in a job interview.
The more you switch the higher your salary will be.
Fuck boomers and their corporate loyalty ethos.
They fucked us in 2007/2008. They are owed nothing.
As a boomer, I completely agree.
Yes, my salary started from near poverty line to barely livable.
"The more you switch the higher your salary will be." - and then comes the crash and you will become unhireable. Good riddance.
the more you move, the more varied experience you get; learning how and how not to run a practice like an asshole boomer.
I switched 3 times in one year (totally justified; horrible jobs) but by the interviews for the 3rd, it was becoming kind of a pointed question. In all honesty, I gathered the very strong impression at that point that I should sit tight at the 3rd for awhile before going for the 4th. It definitely felt like a kind of tipping point...
FWIW, I actually knock job candidates down a peg mentally if they are, say, 5-7 years out of school and have only ever worked at 1 firm. Also a red flag...
I have 8 or 9 jobs/gigs on my CV since 2010...with jobs of like 2 years to gigs of a month and everything in-between...it was only brought up once as a possible concern, but people are mostly impressed because of the offices I worked with and the work I did.
But if you want to switch fields, don't wait, just find something you prefer doing today rather than tomorrow...
I have found that working at multiple broad, extremely differing firms throughout my 20's has been a fantastic learning experience (2 summer/co-op positions, 2 proper year-long positions, one terrible short-term stint) while completing school and as a fresh graduate. Now I'm in my first genuine long-term spot (coming up on 2 years, worked on the same project the whole time, signed up for another 3) where Im getting a serious deep-dive into the intricacies of taking a project from start to finish.
Point being - when you're younger, I dont think it's a problem if you're spending about a year at multiple firms to get an understanding of how you fit into the working world. Firms are massively different from one to the next, and its important to realize what environment allows you to produce your best work. Where you begin to have issues is if everything is sub-6-months, which raises questions about commitment, collaboration, and personality.
Can't agree more Bench. That was my mindset switching jobs, learning different aspects of the field in different environments. I think I did gain a wider perspective doing that which is one positive thing about switching.
Thank you for the comments folks.
The one per year you've already done is fine and quite typical given the general volatility of the industry, especially for entry level staff. Any more than that and it's going to start to raise a few eyebrows. Agreed with others - great experience in diversity of methodology can be had by moving around early on. But nearing the 5 year post grad mark you're going to want to start sticking around for 2-3 years per firm at the minimum. Unless of course something completely out of your control goes down, in which case you can explain that in future interviews.
On the flip side, can someone clarify for me why it raises a red flag to stay at your first job for 5 years? This is my case, but it's more that I just really like where I work, the projects, and my co-workers. I have great bosses that allow even the youngest staff to experience SD all the way through end of CDs, go on site, and have direct access with clients and contractors. They're eager to train and move people up because all of the managers are at their limit with projects, so very frequently PAs are given the opportunity to manage smaller projects to get their feet wet. I've looked for other positions here and there, but I work in a niche firm so it's been hard to find other firms that take on similar projects, especially without moving across the country. Am I shooting myself in the foot by staying so long, even though the situation is still great?
I generally agree with archinine, but will add that: if you REALLY like where you are, by all means, stay! Life is short and it's really important to like your job. Most folks don't like their firms all that much. It took me 9 firms to find 2 that I really liked, and wanted to stay at. Count yourself lucky! Just know, per what archinine outlined below, that when you DO make a jump, don't necessarily expect your salary at the new place to match expectations from the place you camped out at for awhile. Also, be ready to speak specifically to this question in any interviews, once you eventually do feel like leaving. The danger in being parked for awhile is not only that you miss out on a variety of project and construction types, but also, it can give the appearance of someone who is not ambitious ENOUGH. Fine line -- firms want folks who are self-starters, motivated, wanting to stretch & improve themselves, without necessarily being OVERLY ambitious. But you also don't want to look like you were... perhaps overly complacent, if that makes sense. So maybe be ready to say something like "I know it's unusual to stay at a firm so long so early in a career, and I had fully anticipated needing to try out a few different firms before finding a good fit, but I just happened to luck out and really loved xyz firm, so as you can see from my portfolio I made it my business to make sure I managed to work on different project types and sizes while I was there to make sure I was still getting the project experience I wanted." something like that but better put...
Thanks mantaray for the advice. Yes I love where I work which is why I haven't moved. I had planned to stay here a year then move on, to go back to school, but I really enjoy my job. I would like to move to a bigger city once I pay
down some of my school debt and can afford it.
Thats^ if I saw a candidate like yourself I'd think this person has already begun to specialize (especially since you note your firm's work is 'niche') and would have the sense they are already stuck in their ways, have only been taught a narrow methodology etc. Further I'd assume you'd want to command a high salary/position yet, you'd be so non well rounded I wouldn't be able to justify giving you that title at a firm that's more generalized or has specialities that don't overlap.
I've met quite a few like yourself and have found most of the above to be usually true. It's unfortunate but it seems to happen somewhat often. People inadvertently end up specializing in some narrow segment - like interior restaurant fitouts or something- and get to a point where they never really learn to do anything else but have achieved PM status at their teeny firm. I'm including licensed people as well. Knowing the bare minimum for the AREs is different than being hired as a PM who's expected to coordinate with 30+ consultants on a huge project. They tend to find them selves in the situation I described - able to command a fairly high salary in their original firm or within their specialization, but not outside of that, which only compels them to remain in that speciality.
A healthy mix of firms/project typologies in the first 5-10 years tends to be ideal. It's completely possible to get that sort of exposure within a single company that works on lots of types of projects. But in your case - and with a guess at what your portfolio is likely displaying - I'd be hesitant to offer you an equivalent title with what is really not equivalent work. Again I'm almost always talking small footprint interiors or worse 'art focused' installation/gallery/set design stuff then trying to leap to big, capital A, ground up / major renovation Architecture.
It may not be too late for you to become well rounded but you're likely going to have to drop in title - not necessarily pay though.
Knowing the bare minimum for the AREs is different than being hired as a PM who's expected to coordinate with 30+ consultants on a huge project.
archinine, 1000% agree with the above. I totally get what you mean. I guess by 'niche' I meant, we don't do ground up stuff typically, but historic restorations/renovations that range from the tiny $400k roof replacements to $200 mil, nationally listed, with 30+ consultants where we are the prime. Not a ton of firms do historic work, and if they do, it's one studio just to say they do it, or they mostly act as consultants, which can be a rough gig. Because it's historic work, we work on all typologies - residential, museums, university work, K-12, NPS, train stations, mechanical spaces, etc. so I'm not too worried in that sense. I'm not really looking to leave my specialization - just if the time comes, find another firm with a similar portfolio where I can be of use, but still get to work on great projects. I just don't want it to look too bad that I've only worked here.
I guess all of that to say, does it still look bad to only work one place, if that one place is a good one with a good reputation?
It really depends, it might indicate you can take good projects from conception through to execution, or it means you've specialized and are only allowed to work on a single aspect of a lot of projects. It might indicate you've become an architect that runs projects all the way or it might indicate you're complacent and avoid risks.
The ARE teaches you a lot about professional liability and scoping. When I was younger, I probably saved a larger firm from a half a dozen lawsuits by simply parroting standard ARE materials at project managers that just wanted to wing shit left and right and who would consistently bend to the will of clients that wanted us to do something other than architecture, regardless of the sort of liability issues that would arise from doing just that. I had my first huge project assigned to me after going to the principal and running through a litany of fuck-ups - exposing firm to potential lawsuits- by the PM who was working Pre-SD work.
The AREs are only worthless if you forget everything you learn after you take the tests. I can honestly say that part of the reason that I got promoted so fast (when I used to work for other people) was that the AREs gave me a huge edge up in asking the right questions to principals and having a marked interest in managing rather than drawing shit details that any CAD monkey or underemployed 60 year old can figure out anyways.
switching every year is a bad sign indeed and don't think it will help you get a higher pay. Switching every 3 years or so is normal to get more exposure to other projects and a higher salary.
That's - based on your description it sounds like you're in a solid well rounded firm. If you're happy with specializing in historic preservation why worry about leaving? That market is slightly to much less volatile depending where you are located. If the pay is right and you feel like you're still growing / learning then by all means stay put. Access makes the best point in getting variable exposure especially if the first few firm's you're at focus on only a few markets.
Thanks for the input, archinine!
didn't your job/life/salary get better every time you switch?
In my case it did. By a lot. But the thing is: my job never felt secure and there is a lot of stress associated with that. You're always the last person to be hired and worried you'll be the first person to get axed. When it did feel secure, I had to fight any sort of tendency to slack on my work. So that's why after a decade of "touring", I just went off by myself.
For me, the salary did rise most of the times but not all the time. My salary was cut down 7k at one point when I moved from a huge corporate to a tiny hole in the wall firm. And I had to give up all corp benefits.
null, how often did you move during the past 10 years? And how much are you enjoying working for yourself compared to working for other?
Longest job was 2.5 years. Shortest was 6 months. I wouldn't trade this for the world. The variety of work that comes my way dwarfs that of any firm I worked for. It's been a couple of years of this, and it is seriously the best choice I've made in my life.
I also don't compete at the bottom of the barrel. There is no use in trying to beat out a 5k-build-out-reno-job moonlighter when you can just warn the client, offer a $250/h plan review of the other architect, and get him to come to you in a year and half for full-scope and fees after he has to resolve all of the shitstorms that moonlighters conjure up in NYC.
how tough was it to start your own firm? an acquaint ask me to join him and his partner in a startup company. While my current job right now is okay, just okay...
You can always go back to something 'just okay'...
But Rick, all the fun is in the starting up, modelling the firm after your preferences, deciding where you want to take it etc. If you wait until the starting up is done, it's just a regular firm if you were not part of setting the course and direction the firm is going in. True that's a lot of work but that's also where you can really have an impact, make a difference and decide how you want to spend your days working.
Bitch please. You're being conservative. I was pulling 90 hour weeks when I finally quit my dayjob. 20-50% means you probably are going to starve.
I can't say it's a good idea to have 4 different jobs in 4 different years, but I personally should have jumped around a lot more before now. I've had 3 positions (all contractorships) in the last 2 years and have significantly increased in both knowledge and skills by doing so. Previously, I stayed a two firms for 3.5 years each and I just about stopped growing at both some time during those stints but stayed because it was easy to stay. But I think showing that commitment and not having a dozen workplaces on my resume looks good. As usual, the answer is it depends and its probably somewhere in the middle.
And interestingly, I loathed the two jobs I had for 3.5 years and loved the jobs I only held for a year or less but moved on from them because of better opportunities. I stayed too long on the 3.5 year jobs because of depression.
Surprised it hasn't been said already as this topic comes up often - the biggest disadvantage to job hopping every +/- one year is that you don't get to see your projects through to completion. Even smaller residential projects usually take at least a year to complete, often much longer. Architecture is sloooooooooooooooow.
But as others have said, I think the expectation that you will make a career at any one office is waning, and in fact, for many small firms, that sort of commitment/expectation from an employee is actually somewhat intimidating. Yes, for better or worse, we are moving towards a gig economy.
You can be at a firms for years and not see too many projects completed as well.
I made it known many years ago that I care more to see projects from start to occupancy. Helps that most projects take many years so you know how busy you'll get months in advance.
One piece of advice from my thesis advisor as a benchmark - By the time you're 30, you should aim to have worked at one firm continuously for 2 years. By the time you're 40, you should aim to have worked at one firm continuously for 5 years.
What age did he recommend you be licensed by?
Bit of a non-issue for both of us - we're both working internationally, so no chance of licensure for the foreseeable future
Just curious if that was a thing advisors do. I set my own goal of licensed by 30 and even stated so during interviews. I was a few months past my 29th birthday when I got it all done.
I think license around 30 was generally what we agreed was a good thing, however getting the international exposure felt like the better option if it presented itself (which it did). The license will always be there to pursue , and won't be too long of a process.
This is excellent advice. I'm totally stealing it to give to my students! And use myself!
.
working in this field for 30 years, I've been employed in 7 firms, the shortest a shitshow of 8 months in a "throw a bunch of good people together and see what happens" experiment that ended when the director died in a car accident, the longest where I am today, 10 years. Sometimes you engage, sometimes you just go with the flow, but you can never survive going against the grain.
"but you can never survive going against the grain"
Unless you run the show and call the shots...
still applies, or you run your show just to against something?
I just received a resume and the applicant worked at 14 different firms since 2000. I would not waste my time and money for that applicant to potentially leave in less than a year.
I had a lot of jobs early on - three different ones before graduation, and three more within my first four years. Nobody every asked about it. It didn't seem too unusual, especially for those trying to complete IDP. After that I stuck around for longer stints at most firms.
After a while I started leaving some of the earlier jobs off my resume.
Anything that's so short that it lasts less than a year doesn't even leave a gap on a resume if you leave it off, as long as you're listing your start and stop dates as just years, with no months. Similarly the shorter ones read as if they lasted at least a year, as long as there was a January 1 during your stint (i.e. if you list "Designer - Super Snazzy Architects; 1999-2000, nobody reads that and asks you "so what month in 1999 did you start, and what month in 2000 did you leave?"
Here on the archinect people profile you can't do that trick, you have to specify the month too, so be sure to coordinate the resume with all googleable versions ;)