After finishing undergrad school, I worked for 2 years at two large firms. From this experience, I have identified that architects are divided into either designers or technical architects.
Myself, I have studied at 2 schools so far, (a design school and a technical school) and I am now close to completing my MArch.
At both schools I attended, I was one of the strongest students in every design studio. My professors, as well as people who reviewed my portfolio in interviews at several well known firms, have suggested that I am talented in architectural design.
Other than design however, I must confess that I also really enjoy the technical part of projects, from energy performance, to coordination, to facade detailing, to BIM, to seeing buildings realised on site.
In short, I love every part of the architect's job as long as the process is of high quality.
When thinking of my future direction in terms of the professional dichotomy (design vs technical) I can't help but be doubtful.
Is it not possible for someone to remain a generalist, working in all project phases as a professional architect?
Thank you for reading my post. I would really appreciate all relevant opinions.
x-jla
Mar 18, 21 3:43 pm
it’s possible to be a generalist at small scale projects
proto
Mar 18, 21 3:43 pm
it's good to know what you want
if you intend to work for others, ask for balanced tasks or exposure to multiple roles over time
better yet, work for yourself
Kinsbergen
Mar 21, 21 5:51 pm
Would you ask for this (exposure to multiple roles) in the interview? Do you thing it could cause people not to hire you if they are looking for someone to work on particular project aspects? Or would it best to settle in the office first before making your intentions more specific?
Everyday Architect
Mar 18, 21 3:58 pm
Completely possible and usually necessary at small offices. You've worked at two large firms. Get a job with a small firm and see how it works for you.
Kinsbergen
Mar 20, 21 6:54 pm
Working for a smaller firm is appealing. My understanding is though that small firms usually do small projects which I am not particularly interested in. I am also worried as to whether I will be able to transition back to large firms later on, in case I settle and grow within a smaller firm. Perhaps a design led medium sized office would be a better option.
senjohnblutarsky
Mar 18, 21 4:25 pm
In my office of 20 people, I have generalists and specialists. This is on projects ranging from $10,000 to 100,000,000.
Get into practice and do your thing. It'll all come out in the wash.
Kinsbergen
Mar 20, 21 6:56 pm
What kind of work do the generalists usually do in your office? Also, are the generalists mostly found at junior or senior level?
senjohnblutarsky
Mar 22, 21 4:46 pm
I'm a generalist, but also one of the main PM's in the office. Most of the people in the office work in some sort of generalist capacity unless they've really gotten themselves pigeonholed. Pigeonholing happens because of a lack of skill, or high level of skill at one thing. The only other reason it would happen is because of a want for the pigeonholing. I have licensed architects that only want to do drawings; they don't want to do specs or CA. I have unlicensed people that do all the above. It's really just about bringing a skillset to the table, or a desire to the table, and finding a way to contribute.
mightyaa
Mar 22, 21 7:19 pm
Agreed; I've seen some that only want to do CA and pigeonhole themselves. Others that maybe dive deep in the technology like Revit or just marketing. Basically though, you work in teams and learn from each other... leads to a lot of cross-training and war stories which creates generalist.
Jay1122
Mar 18, 21 5:06 pm
You just have to find the right firm. Usually a medium size firm with studio organization. You get decent size projects and small teams. You will get to participate the project from start to finish. Although unlikely you will do every single task, you are still in the loop to learn.
"suggested that I am talented in architectural design". I am actually interested in what does that mean in this industry when people say you are talented in design. Making iconic forms? Making beautiful diagrams? Nice renderings? What is design really? And how is one being good at it? Is Ghery good? What about the recent Pritzker winner? It is funny how magazine site viewers can't see any thing "cool" in their project. And feel they don't deserve the prize.
I personally do not believe in the dichotomy of the two. Although from an organization point of view, it is very economical and efficient. I feel it hurts one's professional skill development. If you only do graphics work and no actual CD work. You will not know how the actual assemblies come together. You won't have enough knowledge to evaluate your design options. Decisions will likely based on purely aesthetic. Ignoring performance & economical aspect of design decision making. If you only do CD, you will lose creativity and go with standard box and standard assembly detail just because it is easier, safer and gets job done faster.
Kinsbergen
Mar 20, 21 7:00 pm
I have similar thoughts to what you described in your 3rd paragraph. What do you mean by 'studio organisation'?
Jay1122
Mar 22, 21 4:36 pm
Ha, you will learn all about it when you take the Pcm ARE exam. Studio organization divides the firm into each studio with teams. The team runs the full project start to end. it is usually divided by project types. Like education studio, mixed use, retail, etc. In contrast to horizontal department style in large firms. 1 group design, 2nd group CD, 3rd group CA. Or there would be hybrid. You are involved through out phases, but special tasks like zoning, rendering, spec, etc are handled by specialist. Just need to ask a little when you interview for jobs.
zonker
Mar 18, 21 6:35 pm
I've worked on large projects at small and medium sized firms. And am still more of generalist, get to do everything from entitlement/SD through CA. - that being said, once that particular firm started growing and hiring more people, then I was put in my place as in the BIM designer pigeonhole. then I would change jobs, and then the same cycle, then.....rinse and repeat
Kinsbergen
Mar 20, 21 7:03 pm
Can you give some examples of type & size of large projects that you usually got at small/medium-sized firms?
randomised
Mar 18, 21 7:13 pm
My specialty is being a generalist...
zonker
Mar 21, 21 9:32 pm
Typically, multi family housing, ranging from 50 units all the way up to 600 units. Some high rise up to 25 floors. Sometimes, a mid size firm will collaborate with one or two other firms on multiple complexes. I don't know if it was always was this way. One of the ways that this possible is via BIM360, where you have many offices and consultants working on 1 project file and linked consultant Revit files. That being said, with the right firm, you can be a generalist and with others, you can be pigeonholed. GlassDoor the firms you are interested in - The more you learn, the more versatile you are, the more control you have over what they will let you do
Kinsbergen
Mar 22, 21 1:40 pm
So would you communicate that you want to be a genaralist in the interview? And do you think that would make a positive impact?
After finishing undergrad school, I worked for 2 years at two large firms. From this experience, I have identified that architects are divided into either designers or technical architects.
Myself, I have studied at 2 schools so far, (a design school and a technical school) and I am now close to completing my MArch.
At both schools I attended, I was one of the strongest students in every design studio. My professors, as well as people who reviewed my portfolio in interviews at several well known firms, have suggested that I am talented in architectural design.
Other than design however, I must confess that I also really enjoy the technical part of projects, from energy performance, to coordination, to facade detailing, to BIM, to seeing buildings realised on site.
In short, I love every part of the architect's job as long as the process is of high quality.
When thinking of my future direction in terms of the professional dichotomy (design vs technical) I can't help but be doubtful.
Is it not possible for someone to remain a generalist, working in all project phases as a professional architect?
Thank you for reading my post. I would really appreciate all relevant opinions.
it’s possible to be a generalist at small scale projects
it's good to know what you want
if you intend to work for others, ask for balanced tasks or exposure to multiple roles over time
better yet, work for yourself
Would you ask for this (exposure to multiple roles) in the interview? Do you thing it could cause people not to hire you if they are looking for someone to work on particular project aspects? Or would it best to settle in the office first before making your intentions more specific?
Completely possible and usually necessary at small offices. You've worked at two large firms. Get a job with a small firm and see how it works for you.
Working for a smaller firm is appealing. My understanding is though that small firms usually do small projects which I am not particularly interested in. I am also worried as to whether I will be able to transition back to large firms later on, in case I settle and grow within a smaller firm. Perhaps a design led medium sized office would be a better option.
In my office of 20 people, I have generalists and specialists. This is on projects ranging from $10,000 to 100,000,000.
Get into practice and do your thing. It'll all come out in the wash.
What kind of work do the generalists usually do in your office? Also, are the generalists mostly found at junior or senior level?
I'm a generalist, but also one of the main PM's in the office. Most of the people in the office work in some sort of generalist capacity unless they've really gotten themselves pigeonholed. Pigeonholing happens because of a lack of skill, or high level of skill at one thing. The only other reason it would happen is because of a want for the pigeonholing. I have licensed architects that only want to do drawings; they don't want to do specs or CA. I have unlicensed people that do all the above. It's really just about bringing a skillset to the table, or a desire to the table, and finding a way to contribute.
Agreed; I've seen some that only want to do CA and pigeonhole themselves. Others that maybe dive deep in the technology like Revit or just marketing. Basically though, you work in teams and learn from each other... leads to a lot of cross-training and war stories which creates generalist.
You just have to find the right firm. Usually a medium size firm with studio organization. You get decent size projects and small teams. You will get to participate the project from start to finish. Although unlikely you will do every single task, you are still in the loop to learn.
"suggested that I am talented in architectural design". I am actually interested in what does that mean in this industry when people say you are talented in design. Making iconic forms? Making beautiful diagrams? Nice renderings? What is design really? And how is one being good at it? Is Ghery good? What about the recent Pritzker winner? It is funny how magazine site viewers can't see any thing "cool" in their project. And feel they don't deserve the prize.
I personally do not believe in the dichotomy of the two. Although from an organization point of view, it is very economical and efficient. I feel it hurts one's professional skill development. If you only do graphics work and no actual CD work. You will not know how the actual assemblies come together. You won't have enough knowledge to evaluate your design options. Decisions will likely based on purely aesthetic. Ignoring performance & economical aspect of design decision making. If you only do CD, you will lose creativity and go with standard box and standard assembly detail just because it is easier, safer and gets job done faster.
I have similar thoughts to what you described in your 3rd paragraph. What do you mean by 'studio organisation'?
Ha, you will learn all about it when you take the Pcm ARE exam. Studio organization divides the firm into each studio with teams. The team runs the full project start to end. it is usually divided by project types. Like education studio, mixed use, retail, etc. In contrast to horizontal department style in large firms. 1 group design, 2nd group CD, 3rd group CA. Or there would be hybrid. You are involved through out phases, but special tasks like zoning, rendering, spec, etc are handled by specialist. Just need to ask a little when you interview for jobs.
I've worked on large projects at small and medium sized firms. And am still more of generalist, get to do everything from entitlement/SD through CA. - that being said, once that particular firm started growing and hiring more people, then I was put in my place as in the BIM designer pigeonhole. then I would change jobs, and then the same cycle, then.....rinse and repeat
Can you give some examples of type & size of large projects that you usually got at small/medium-sized firms?
My specialty is being a generalist...
Typically, multi family housing, ranging from 50 units all the way up to 600 units. Some high rise up to 25 floors. Sometimes, a mid size firm will collaborate with one or two other firms on multiple complexes. I don't know if it was always was this way. One of the ways that this possible is via BIM360, where you have many offices and consultants working on 1 project file and linked consultant Revit files. That being said, with the right firm, you can be a generalist and with others, you can be pigeonholed. GlassDoor the firms you are interested in - The more you learn, the more versatile you are, the more control you have over what they will let you do
So would you communicate that you want to be a genaralist in the interview? And do you think that would make a positive impact?