Another friend has crossed over to the dark side to be an "owner's rep" for a developer... Now, I can't imagine that this job is much fun, so the pay and hours must be a lot higher than what you'd make in a practice. Is this the case? If so, how much more would you expect to make if you're a licensed architect?
joshuacarrell
Jun 21, 07 12:38 am
I was offered a job where I would make almost twice as much as an owners rep than what I make as a project manager. And the benefits were better. Didn't take it though, I still want to be the architect at this point.
Oh yeah numbers, the position was advertised at $85,000 to $95,000 per year in the North Bay Area, Cali.
j
A Center for Ants?
Jun 21, 07 12:47 am
short answer:
yes. more money.
punky_brewster
Jun 21, 07 2:19 am
yes, much more money, plus huge bonus if you get the architect to do the masters bidding quicker and cheaper.
vado retro
Jun 21, 07 8:23 am
yes plus you call the architect everytime you need a copy of that drawing that the architect already sent you five times.
OM..
Aug 5, 24 12:46 pm
that's a good one! never saving or archiving anything that's shared with you is a key requirement. are YOU qualified to just leave everything in the inbox???
Chad Miller
Aug 5, 24 1:04 pm
You resurrected a 17+ year old thread to say this?
OM..
Aug 5, 24 4:23 pm
it wasn't exactly me, but I'll claim that as my contribution to archinect.
Chad Miller
Aug 5, 24 4:50 pm
HA!
Phillip Crosby
Jun 21, 07 9:08 am
short answer, yes, you'll make a lot more money...
i'm not exactly an owner's rep... but my job is very similar... except that i work for a municipal government... definitely not my dream job by any stretch of the imagination... but it pays very well and i've gained a ton of invaluable experience... i've been able to work on a broad range of public sector projects at every scale... and i spend a lot of time on construction sites which i think is very important for the training of architects... i started here with the intention of staying for about 3 years to get experience and then leave to go back to private practice... i'm pretty much sticking to that schedule (except i'm gonna go back to school rather than practice)...
regarding the pay, when i started here, i got a bump in pay of around $15K over what i was making as an intern architect/job captain... now after two years+ i'm making an addition $11K over that initial salary...
good experience... good money... but not for much more than 3 years... i want to get back to doing architecture...
one more thing... the hours are good too... which has allowed me to work on competitions to keep my design juices flowing...
vado retro
Jun 21, 07 10:21 am
my experience with owner's reps is that they wouldnt know a codebook if it bit them in the ass.
BluecornGroup
Aug 26, 24 10:53 pm
Isn't that the architects & consulting engineers job? - they just go by the CD's ...
brian buchalski
Jun 21, 07 10:40 am
is there more money? of course, there's more money in pretty much everything other than architecture and we all know that...which is why if money is important to you then don't be an architect. it's also why we, as architects, tend to get annoyed when people keep asking about money. one, it's no be secret that the pay is low and two, we've all accepted this and still decided to become architects anyways because we value more than just dollar signs.
even the question gives it away, rather than asking "is it rewarding to be an owner's rep?" or "what sort of intangible benefits come from the experience of working on the ownership/developer side?" the question cuts straight to money.
Lookout Kid
Jun 21, 07 11:12 am
It "cut straight to money" because I was curious about what was motivating people to make this jump. I've seen several people do it lately, and I can't imagine that this is a fun job. I was merely speculating that it must pay better and have better hours, and was asking if this is true. If you don't like the question, don't fricken' post an answer!
biggz
Jun 21, 07 1:25 pm
puddles, thats a pretty defeatist attitude. assuming from the get go that you have to be in ANY other field to make $.
why not be an architect AND make money ,admittedly its more difficult but possible. " we value more than just dollar signs" but we have to value $ signs as a start to establish our worth.
brian buchalski
Jun 21, 07 2:04 pm
hmmm...if you don't like the answer, then maybe don't post the question?
also, i wouldn't call it defeatist, it's reality. anybody that wants to make money should go into banking, finance, wall street, etc. that's what they do and their damn good at it. they dynamics of money and the profession of architecture simply don't lend themselves to excessive personal financial gain.
dml955i
Jun 21, 07 2:11 pm
I don't understand the appeal of the whole "starving artist" thing and why you would label an architect as a sell-out if they want to make more money, live more comfortably, or provide more for their families? Maybe they've gotten tired of the daily grind of being an architect and are looking for a change?
vado retro
Jun 21, 07 2:20 pm
i may be grooming masself in this direction.
mightylittle™
Jun 21, 07 2:28 pm
if money is important to you then don't be an architect
may be true, but like it or not...you can't send your presentation drawings to the bank. money is important to everybody, even architects.
no matter what your field is (hedge-fund managers aside) you will no doubt have to make some personal sacrifices or ethical compromises in order to make MORE money than would typically be thrown at you.
want better paying projects? you may have to pull back a bit on the design. want to push forward on the design? you may have to pull back a bit on the fees.
either way, even if you're a teacher, a fireman, or a librarian (none of which are architects) you won't be really in the riches. not ALL arch programs require $150k in debt though, so that argument doesn't really hold water. if you NEED to go to an expensive school, well then, don't complain about debt later.
puddles, i think you're statement rings true in many ways, but certainly not all.
here's a piece of anecdotal info:
i'm involved in a pretty large scale project up here in northern california, involving hotel/condo/restaurants and spa that's all backed by a large financial institution whom we've all heard of.
there are routinely owner's reps as well as operator's reps as well as developer's reps at the larger team meetings. i have often been struck at how INVALUABLE these people can be when they are knowledgeable and engaged. if they are simply glorified bean-counters, well then, fuck 'em. but these guys have brought a great deal of knowledge and prior project experience to the table.
none of them (on this job anyways) are architects or designers, but they are all educated to some degree about the important issues. they understand the pros/cons of a split HVAC system and they're concerned with the operating costs, not just the capital investment, and they're also deeply committed to a quality, thoughtful aesthetic.
and yes - they probably make more money than most of the designers in the room, but i've thought more than once that there job looks like fun.
truth be told, they're as involved in the design process as i am...they just look the macro and don't have to worry about detailing millwork or specifying ceiling panels.
just a thought.
vado retro
Jun 21, 07 2:34 pm
you're just an errand boy sent by grocery clerks to collect a bill.
Lookout Kid
Jun 21, 07 2:48 pm
For many architects, the concern is not with money when they are in school or first starting out. But priorities can change over time, especially as a family becomes part of the equation and you can't afford to live in the city any more in anything larger than a 2-BR apartment. For the friends of mine who became "owner's reps" or went into some other more lucrative aspect of the field, I believe that this was the case. People change over time, and what you decide when you're 23 may not be suitable for you when you're 45.
So, is it really "selling out" when you decide your family is more important than your work? I consider "selling out" to be compromising your ideals for money, but you really can't call it "selling out" when your ideals have changed. Most architects are sell-outs under this definition, by the way.
That said, I have no interest in becoming and owner's rep any time soon. I was just curious to know what the benefit was.
Keith Carlson
Jun 23, 07 10:42 am
I've shifted over to the owner's rep side first for the federal government and now for a private developer. I'm getting paid more, the hours are more reasonable, and I get to be more integrated on the projects in a much broader fashion.
I have also had the opportunity to work w/ some great Architects collaboratively, and some serious projects I might not had a chance to become familiar w/.
When, (and if) I decide to go back to private practice I will have a much more rounded professional set of skills and experience. I also know how to better interface and communicate w/ my clients, and have some really great professional contacts I can call on.
The best part is I have a very real say in promoting innovative design and actually helping the Architects realizing their project (which they appreciate.)
So, Owner's Rep, YES, but still be the inside Architect.
greenlander1
Jul 20, 24 1:08 am
Depends. If you have a title of 'PM' then maybe a slight increase over architecture. If one is more involved in the development process a bigger bump.
In the end, everyone in a development office is a owner's rep of sort top to bottom where they have to answer to the equity holders.
bowling_ball
Jul 20, 24 9:52 pm
Resurrecting a 17 year old thread must be close to a record
greenlander1
Jul 20, 24 11:21 pm
I feel old, thats roughly when I started doing this
BulgarBlogger
Aug 5, 24 7:36 pm
I think Architects would be scared if they ever found me on the Owner's side. I practically know every trick in the trade and I'm not afraid to call bullshit. Using the plan check process instead of a proper internal QA/QC of your own work? You owe me for a delay! I can live with an enforcer wanting to see application numbers and other information that is germane to the administrative processes of the Authority Having Jurisdiction, but if a plan checker has to tell you that your shit isn't code-compliant and you have to fix your work, then why do I have to pay you for that?
bowling_ball
Aug 5, 24 8:09 pm
Because the plans examiner isn't always correct (I responded to your other thread in more detail)
BulgarBlogger
Aug 5, 24 8:12 pm
Not always, but I assume that these types of cases are more the exception than the rule.
Chad Miller
Aug 7, 24 1:42 pm
They are not the exception. Most AHJ and inspectors are not required to mark / review everything. They are also not allowed to tell you how to fix anything that is incorrect.
greenlander1
Aug 13, 24 3:02 pm
thats why architects make great owners reps if they go that route. a lot of owners reps are paper pushers and dont have much technical skill.
Non Sequitur
Aug 13, 24 3:26 pm
I've acted as owner's rep when it comes to tenant fit-ups in buildings we designed. Works wonders for our client because their tenant always cheap out on professionals so there are loads for us to pick-up.
bowling_ball
Aug 13, 24 8:47 pm
Look, everybody makes more than the architects.
Engineers make more. Owners reps make more. Contractors make more. Vendors make more than architects. Hell, the site supervisors I work with typically make more than than me, and I have 25 employees.
Anyway my neighbour just gave me a giant bottle of gin. It's time for a diiiirrrtttyyy martini.
poop876
Aug 14, 24 10:48 am
If you have 25 employees and make less than a site supervisor then you are definitely doing something wrong.
Chad Miller
Aug 14, 24 10:56 am
How much do you make poop?
poop876
Aug 14, 24 11:42 am
Never enough!
Chad Miller
Aug 14, 24 12:15 pm
So not more than an engineer, owners rep, or site supervisors. I'd guess you're in the $80k range.
poop876
Aug 14, 24 12:41 pm
It has been a very profitable decade for my staff of 7 and I'd like to keep it that cozy.
Chad Miller
Aug 14, 24 12:55 pm
That wasn't an answer but OK.
poop876
Aug 14, 24 1:13 pm
It wasn't a question either.
Chad Miller
Aug 14, 24 1:14 pm
It was but OK. Here: Do you make more than an engineer, owners rep, or site supervisor? I'm guessing you make around $80k a year, am I correct?
poop876
Aug 14, 24 1:19 pm
From the engineers and site supervisors that I know I make way more than them not even counting the profit at end of the year. No, you are not correct, I do make way more than 80k a year.
Chad Miller
Aug 14, 24 1:26 pm
See, was that so difficult to answer?
poop876
Aug 14, 24 1:32 pm
I just assumed you would know that an owner of a firm with staff of 7 would make more than 80k. Crazy me for assuming that!
Chad Miller
Aug 14, 24 1:37 pm
Oh I knew that.
I just know a lot of engineers, owners reps, and site supervisors that make around $150k. I also know owners of firms your size that make under $80k a year.
Never assume anything.
Wilma Buttfit
Aug 15, 24 2:17 pm
I figure I make about $4 an hour.
smaarch
Aug 13, 24 10:59 pm
These questions always make me laugh. Of course you'll make more. You'll be the water boy for a a development team. Architecture? Not at any level but code examination.
'
bowling_ball
Aug 13, 24 11:04 pm
The last owner's rep I worked with, made the equivalent of 60% of our architectural fee, which means by my estimation he made about $75k per meeting. He also made a thinly veiled threat on my life and was previously beaten with a baseball bat in his own company parking lot. Fully mobbed up.
Chad Miller
Aug 14, 24 9:52 am
Wait so you made $125,000 per meeting?! What fee were you charging and is your firm hiring? ;)
As for the threat on your life - have the GC drop a pallet of brick on 'em.
Josh Mings
Aug 14, 24 3:18 pm
I do some owner's rep work for a client I really like/have a long relationship with (they were the first to call when I went out on my own, too). Our contract is definitely not 60% of any arch fee. Guess I need to join the mob.
bowling_ball
Aug 15, 24 9:29 am
What I meant is that their fee was equivalent to 60% of ours, but they only showed up to a handful of meetings and from what I could tell, offered nothing of value. It's maddening.
Josh Mings
Aug 15, 24 10:28 am
Same answer applies. Who do I contact to join the mob?
bowling_ball
Aug 15, 24 1:58 pm
Well if you don't want to end up at the business end of a baseball bat like he did, I suggest not walking alone at night
Chad Miller
Aug 15, 24 2:23 pm
I never go out at night anyways - sign me up!
Josh Mings
Aug 15, 24 4:10 pm
The night is for young kids, not my aching knees
Chad Miller
Aug 15, 24 4:45 pm
I'm basically a reverse vampire. Sunlight only. Night time is sleepy time.
smaarch
Aug 27, 24 12:54 am
Bowling Ball I'm not sure how to respond but I'm a life long New Yorker and think I get it
Another friend has crossed over to the dark side to be an "owner's rep" for a developer... Now, I can't imagine that this job is much fun, so the pay and hours must be a lot higher than what you'd make in a practice. Is this the case? If so, how much more would you expect to make if you're a licensed architect?
I was offered a job where I would make almost twice as much as an owners rep than what I make as a project manager. And the benefits were better. Didn't take it though, I still want to be the architect at this point.
Oh yeah numbers, the position was advertised at $85,000 to $95,000 per year in the North Bay Area, Cali.
j
short answer:
yes. more money.
yes, much more money, plus huge bonus if you get the architect to do the masters bidding quicker and cheaper.
yes plus you call the architect everytime you need a copy of that drawing that the architect already sent you five times.
that's a good one! never saving or archiving anything that's shared with you is a key requirement. are YOU qualified to just leave everything in the inbox???
You resurrected a 17+ year old thread to say this?
it wasn't exactly me, but I'll claim that as my contribution to archinect.
HA!
short answer, yes, you'll make a lot more money...
i'm not exactly an owner's rep... but my job is very similar... except that i work for a municipal government... definitely not my dream job by any stretch of the imagination... but it pays very well and i've gained a ton of invaluable experience... i've been able to work on a broad range of public sector projects at every scale... and i spend a lot of time on construction sites which i think is very important for the training of architects... i started here with the intention of staying for about 3 years to get experience and then leave to go back to private practice... i'm pretty much sticking to that schedule (except i'm gonna go back to school rather than practice)...
regarding the pay, when i started here, i got a bump in pay of around $15K over what i was making as an intern architect/job captain... now after two years+ i'm making an addition $11K over that initial salary...
good experience... good money... but not for much more than 3 years... i want to get back to doing architecture...
one more thing... the hours are good too... which has allowed me to work on competitions to keep my design juices flowing...
my experience with owner's reps is that they wouldnt know a codebook if it bit them in the ass.
Isn't that the architects & consulting engineers job? - they just go by the CD's ...
is there more money? of course, there's more money in pretty much everything other than architecture and we all know that...which is why if money is important to you then don't be an architect. it's also why we, as architects, tend to get annoyed when people keep asking about money. one, it's no be secret that the pay is low and two, we've all accepted this and still decided to become architects anyways because we value more than just dollar signs.
even the question gives it away, rather than asking "is it rewarding to be an owner's rep?" or "what sort of intangible benefits come from the experience of working on the ownership/developer side?" the question cuts straight to money.
It "cut straight to money" because I was curious about what was motivating people to make this jump. I've seen several people do it lately, and I can't imagine that this is a fun job. I was merely speculating that it must pay better and have better hours, and was asking if this is true. If you don't like the question, don't fricken' post an answer!
puddles, thats a pretty defeatist attitude. assuming from the get go that you have to be in ANY other field to make $.
why not be an architect AND make money ,admittedly its more difficult but possible. " we value more than just dollar signs" but we have to value $ signs as a start to establish our worth.
hmmm...if you don't like the answer, then maybe don't post the question?
also, i wouldn't call it defeatist, it's reality. anybody that wants to make money should go into banking, finance, wall street, etc. that's what they do and their damn good at it. they dynamics of money and the profession of architecture simply don't lend themselves to excessive personal financial gain.
I don't understand the appeal of the whole "starving artist" thing and why you would label an architect as a sell-out if they want to make more money, live more comfortably, or provide more for their families? Maybe they've gotten tired of the daily grind of being an architect and are looking for a change?
i may be grooming masself in this direction.
may be true, but like it or not...you can't send your presentation drawings to the bank. money is important to everybody, even architects.
no matter what your field is (hedge-fund managers aside) you will no doubt have to make some personal sacrifices or ethical compromises in order to make MORE money than would typically be thrown at you.
want better paying projects? you may have to pull back a bit on the design. want to push forward on the design? you may have to pull back a bit on the fees.
either way, even if you're a teacher, a fireman, or a librarian (none of which are architects) you won't be really in the riches. not ALL arch programs require $150k in debt though, so that argument doesn't really hold water. if you NEED to go to an expensive school, well then, don't complain about debt later.
puddles, i think you're statement rings true in many ways, but certainly not all.
here's a piece of anecdotal info:
i'm involved in a pretty large scale project up here in northern california, involving hotel/condo/restaurants and spa that's all backed by a large financial institution whom we've all heard of.
there are routinely owner's reps as well as operator's reps as well as developer's reps at the larger team meetings. i have often been struck at how INVALUABLE these people can be when they are knowledgeable and engaged. if they are simply glorified bean-counters, well then, fuck 'em. but these guys have brought a great deal of knowledge and prior project experience to the table.
none of them (on this job anyways) are architects or designers, but they are all educated to some degree about the important issues. they understand the pros/cons of a split HVAC system and they're concerned with the operating costs, not just the capital investment, and they're also deeply committed to a quality, thoughtful aesthetic.
and yes - they probably make more money than most of the designers in the room, but i've thought more than once that there job looks like fun.
truth be told, they're as involved in the design process as i am...they just look the macro and don't have to worry about detailing millwork or specifying ceiling panels.
just a thought.
you're just an errand boy sent by grocery clerks to collect a bill.
For many architects, the concern is not with money when they are in school or first starting out. But priorities can change over time, especially as a family becomes part of the equation and you can't afford to live in the city any more in anything larger than a 2-BR apartment. For the friends of mine who became "owner's reps" or went into some other more lucrative aspect of the field, I believe that this was the case. People change over time, and what you decide when you're 23 may not be suitable for you when you're 45.
So, is it really "selling out" when you decide your family is more important than your work? I consider "selling out" to be compromising your ideals for money, but you really can't call it "selling out" when your ideals have changed. Most architects are sell-outs under this definition, by the way.
That said, I have no interest in becoming and owner's rep any time soon. I was just curious to know what the benefit was.
I've shifted over to the owner's rep side first for the federal government and now for a private developer. I'm getting paid more, the hours are more reasonable, and I get to be more integrated on the projects in a much broader fashion.
I have also had the opportunity to work w/ some great Architects collaboratively, and some serious projects I might not had a chance to become familiar w/.
When, (and if) I decide to go back to private practice I will have a much more rounded professional set of skills and experience. I also know how to better interface and communicate w/ my clients, and have some really great professional contacts I can call on.
The best part is I have a very real say in promoting innovative design and actually helping the Architects realizing their project (which they appreciate.)
So, Owner's Rep, YES, but still be the inside Architect.
Depends. If you have a title of 'PM' then maybe a slight increase over architecture. If one is more involved in the development process a bigger bump.
In the end, everyone in a development office is a owner's rep of sort top to bottom where they have to answer to the equity holders.
Resurrecting a 17 year old thread must be close to a record
I feel old, thats roughly when I started doing this
I think Architects would be scared if they ever found me on the Owner's side. I practically know every trick in the trade and I'm not afraid to call bullshit. Using the plan check process instead of a proper internal QA/QC of your own work? You owe me for a delay! I can live with an enforcer wanting to see application numbers and other information that is germane to the administrative processes of the Authority Having Jurisdiction, but if a plan checker has to tell you that your shit isn't code-compliant and you have to fix your work, then why do I have to pay you for that?
Because the plans examiner isn't always correct (I responded to your other thread in more detail)
Not always, but I assume that these types of cases are more the exception than the rule.
They are not the exception. Most AHJ and inspectors are not required to mark / review everything. They are also not allowed to tell you how to fix anything that is incorrect.
thats why architects make great owners reps if they go that route. a lot of owners reps are paper pushers and dont have much technical skill.
I've acted as owner's rep when it comes to tenant fit-ups in buildings we designed. Works wonders for our client because their tenant always cheap out on professionals so there are loads for us to pick-up.
Look, everybody makes more than the architects.
Engineers make more. Owners reps make more. Contractors make more. Vendors make more than architects. Hell, the site supervisors I work with typically make more than than me, and I have 25 employees.
Anyway my neighbour just gave me a giant bottle of gin. It's time for a diiiirrrtttyyy martini.
If you have 25 employees and make less than a site supervisor then you are definitely doing something wrong.
How much do you make poop?
Never enough!
So not more than an engineer, owners rep, or site supervisors. I'd guess you're in the $80k range.
It has been a very profitable decade for my staff of 7 and I'd like to keep it that cozy.
That wasn't an answer but OK.
It wasn't a question either.
It was but OK. Here: Do you make more than an engineer, owners rep, or site supervisor? I'm guessing you make around $80k a year, am I correct?
From the engineers and site supervisors that I know I make way more than them not even counting the profit at end of the year. No, you are not correct, I do make way more than 80k a year.
See, was that so difficult to answer?
I just assumed you would know that an owner of a firm with staff of 7 would make more than 80k. Crazy me for assuming that!
Oh I knew that.
I just know a lot of engineers, owners reps, and site supervisors that make around $150k. I also know owners of firms your size that make under $80k a year.
Never assume anything.
I figure I make about $4 an hour.
These questions always make me laugh.
Of course you'll make more. You'll be the water boy for a a development team. Architecture? Not at any level but code examination.
'
The last owner's rep I worked with, made the equivalent of 60% of our architectural fee, which means by my estimation he made about $75k per meeting. He also made a thinly veiled threat on my life and was previously beaten with a baseball bat in his own company parking lot. Fully mobbed up.
Wait so you made $125,000 per meeting?! What fee were you charging and is your firm hiring? ;)
As for the threat on your life - have the GC drop a pallet of brick on 'em.
I do some owner's rep work for a client I really like/have a long relationship with (they were the first to call when I went out on my own, too). Our contract is definitely not 60% of any arch fee. Guess I need to join the mob.
What I meant is that their fee was equivalent to 60% of ours, but they only showed up to a handful of meetings and from what I could tell, offered nothing of value. It's maddening.
Same answer applies. Who do I contact to join the mob?
Well if you don't want to end up at the business end of a baseball bat like he did, I suggest not walking alone at night
I never go out at night anyways - sign me up!
The night is for young kids, not my aching knees
I'm basically a reverse vampire. Sunlight only. Night time is sleepy time.
Bowling Ball I'm not sure how to respond but I'm a life long New Yorker and think I get it