Why Architects Shouldn’t Be Generalists

8 01 2012

I’m prepared to catch a lot of flak from my fellow architects for this article, and look forward to the dialogue.  It is my opinion that architects should be specialists in only a couple types of projects.  Many of us, especially sole proprietors or those at small firms, feel that architects are problem-solvers that can design any type of project by undergoing the same linear process of design regardless of the project type.  But just because we can doesn’t mean we should.

My opinion is informed by my professional background.  I grew up working in my father’s 30-person architectural firm from a very young age.  Before starting my own firm, I was trained at some hugely successful and large companies, including Gensler, and have worked full-time in the industry for over 20 years.

Large firms understand that in order to be successful, specialty niches are necessary.  This doesn’t mean that large firms don’t design many different types of projects.  They do, but they have “practice areas” or smaller groups within their larger organization that specialize.  And it is not very easy for employees to shift from one practice area to another.  The best firms only want employees with expertise in the type of projects they’re working on unless they are entry-level employees who don’t yet have any expertise.

While working at Gensler, on occasion although rarely, architects from a different practice area tried to pinch hit on my commercial interiors projects when their practice area was slow and mine was understaffed and desperate for help.  This often resulted in projects going over budget and over schedule.  Yet these were very bright and talented architects, some of whom worked on airports and high rises.  They were simply not specialists in commercial interiors.  Extreme efficiency is a necessity in order to be really successful in our industry.  As large firms grow even larger and buy up or put many of the medium-sized firms out of business, it’s hard to deny this fact.

When merging my firm with my father’s firm, we expanded the number of our practice areas to three:  office space renovations, retail bank renovations, and custom homes.  My areas of expertise are offices and banks, while my father specializes in banks too, in addition to custom homes.  Although we often assist each other, I won’t take the lead on a custom house project even though I’ve designed a handful of houses.  In recruiting, we hire senior employees who have completed hundreds of projects, not just a handful, within a practice area.

Having a couple niches  – especially those that are counter-cyclical – is a good idea so that when one practice area is slow, the other often is not.  Moreover, architecture has become so complex that it is impossible to keep up with the technology, products, building codes, and programming knowledge for more than a couple different project types.  When an architect takes on a project type in which they have little or no expertise, a great deal of research is required, every detail has to be conceived and drawn from scratch, and significantly more time is spent.  Therefore, they either lose money on the project, or need to charge significantly more for something that, as a general rule, an expert could do better and for a lower cost.

Historically, architects have been generalists, even master builders, and many still like to see themselves in that vein.  But architecture gets more and more complicated.  Some might argue that many successful doctors are generalists, but the human body is not changing that fast, not yet anyway.  Most attorneys, on the other hand, do specialize in one or two areas of law, even believing that it is unscrupulous to take on case types in which they do not have significant experience.  And isn’t good architecture more important than good legal services?  Of course it is (now I’ve pissed off the attorneys too, including my significant other)!  With this approach, attorneys get much of their work referred by other attorneys which makes marketing a whole lot easier for them.  Wouldn’t it be nice if architects did the same instead of being so competitive with each other?  Even if we didn’t refer work to each other, having one or two specialty niches makes marketing to a specific clientele, such as bankers or attorneys, much easier than marketing to anyone and everyone who could possibly need an architect.  But more importantly, why be a jack of all trade and a master of none?





“Repositioning”: Giving a Multi-Tenant Office Building a New Lease on Life

5 01 2012

While most prospective tenants are looking for good deals, selecting a home for their business does not boil solely down to money.  Tenants want to work in a building that they can be proud of, that attracts both customers and high-quality employees, and is a pleasure to arrive at each day.

Competition to attract tenants can be tough.  Repositioning is a strategic decision that adds value to a property’s worth with the goal of increasing existing lease rates at renewal time, and attracting new tenants at higher rates immediately, sometimes with the goal of selling the building.  A repositioned building is able to compete equally with newer properties in the same usage category.

Over the years, I’ve assessed hundreds of multi-tenant office buildings for owners, and provided recommendations on aesthetic upgrades, with prioritizations, a proposed schedule, and cost estimates.  Areas that often need improvement are:  Landscaping and exterior hardscape, signage, storefront and main entry, the main building lobby, elevator lobbies and cabs, corridors, and restrooms.  First impressions are the most important, so the main entry storefront, the surrounding landscaping, and main lobby are usually at the top of the priority list.

If a building was built or remodeled before 1990, the building’s image and amenities are probably outdated.  Moreover, many tenants desire state-of-the-art infrastructure and green design elements including lobby lounges that facilitate meetings and interaction with access to Wi-Fi, television, and even built-in iPads, interior glass for daylighting, highly efficient light fixtures and HVAC systems, and healty, non-toxic finishes.  It’s important to consider the type of tenants an owner wants to attract in determining the strategy.

Most often, repositioning is not an all or nothing approach, and involves upgrading only key elements of a building where it’s most needed or where the biggest impact can be made.  With preliminary cost estimates for the various recommendations, the return on the investment can be calculated based on the estimated increased lease rates.  Often, simply adding an area rug, plants, artwork, and new furniture in the main lobby can add the splash that is needed in the short-term when the funds are not available to do more.  On the higher end of the scale, a new building skin, fitness center or restaurant can be added to attract a certain type of tenant.

 





Reduce Real Estate Costs and Increase Productivity by Consolidating Office Space

3 01 2012

Companies with a lot of office space usually also have a ton of wasted space which they may not be aware of.  Once the extra space is identified, it can be determined if it can be subleased, or if a “restack” of one or more buildings allows for giving back some space that is up for lease renewal in the near future.

The most simple type of consolidation is when a single location is partially empty or underutilized due to employee or technology contraction.  These days, many employees are mobile and not everyone needs a designated office or large workstation anymore.  “Hoteling” offices or smaller workstations have become common.  A layout can be reconfigured in order to create space that can be subleased.  Not only is this an opportunity to design a more efficient layout that responds to the company’s current needs thus increasing productivity, it’s an opportunity to bring in additional revenue.

Of course, there are some upfront expenses to creating a separate sublease space.  A demising wall must be constructed, the electrical and mechanical systems must be separated, and the required exits must be added.  A permit must be obtained.  Even for the smallest of projects, the minimum cost to accomplish this is about $10,000.  Keep in mind that these costs can be depreciated.  Spending the money to create a separate suite is a risk.  A subtenant may not be found for many months after construction is complete.  Why not wait until a subtenant is found before the costs are incurred?  This is possible, however, many tenants, especially subtenants, are looking for space that is immediately available and the time frame to permit and demise the space can take anywhere from one to three months depending on the city.

It is also possible to sublease space without creating a separate suite if security is not an issue and tenants are willing to work within the same suite.  However, this drastically reduces the possible rental rate and the number of prospective tenants.  It’s important to check your lease to determine if a subtenant is allowed, and what the limitations are.

A more complex scenario is a company that occupies multiple locations or a very large building.  Instead of assessing each location separately, it’s important to look at the system as a whole.  If 15 out of 50 locations each have a little bit of wasted space, groups can be rearranged and consolidated to create one or two large sublease or give-back opportunities.  But it’s important to understand how each group works, what their needs are, and who and what they should be adjacent to.  Productivity must be evaluated along with real estate opportunities.

There are many factors that affect productivity.  The time it takes for groups to travel between collaborating groups’ locations should be calculated to determine if any additional time spent traveling will cost more than what is being saved in real estate.    Some employees might leave the company if their office is moved and their commute increases.  Moreover, some clients may be lost due to an office relocation.  Often, having a “vanity address” is important for a company’s brand.  Also, it is common for a company to own some of their locations, and lease other locations, and this becomes a factor in deciding which spaces or buildings to dispose of.  It’s typically desirable to give back the leased space and consolidate into the owned properties.  However, we have also helped some companies free up their owned properties that were in high-rent neighborhoods in order to lease out the owned properties and maximize revenues.

The larger the portfolio, the more complex and time consuming the assessment is.  The assessment phase of a one million square foot restack we managed  for Bank of America took about 6 months.  Department heads must be interviewed to not only determine their known needs, but to fully understand their work process and determine possible improvements they may not have considered.  It’s our job as professionals to vet out the hidden potential.  There are always ways to improve a company or individual department’s productivity through rearranging space.





Office Tenant Improvement Allowance Basics

3 01 2012

Most office landlords offer prospective tenants a “Tenant Improvement (TI) Allowance,” a certain amount of money per square foot that can be utilized to improve the space per the tenant’s specific requirements.  In major California cities, TI allowances typically range anywhere from $10 per square foot for something as minor as new carpet and paint to $45 per square foot for a complete build-out of existing shell space.  Many landlords will offer a “turnkey” deal in a soft market, meaning they’ll build out the space per the tenant’s requirements without limiting the tenant to a specific dollar amount.  In a turnkey deal, the tenant’s requirements, usually by a proposed space plan, are referenced in the lease.  Even in this scenario, however, the project costs are usually no more than about $45 per square foot.  Typically, a landlord only allows the use of TI dollars to fund items that are part of the landlord’s building, and not furniture or cabling.

The TI allowance offered is not free money, but is essentially a loan that is ammortized over the life of the lease via rent payments.  A higher TI allowance usually translates to higher rent.  Taking a space “as is” will usually translate to a lower rent payment.  The overall deal, both the rent payment and TI allowance, are determined by the vacancy rate of the city and building itself, the tenant’s credit, and the length of the lease.  The shorter the lease, the higher the rent and lower the TI allowance.

The tenant may hire it’s own architect and contractor and take on the responsibility of managing the design and construction of the office space.  If this is the case, the tenant should hire an architect or project manager who is an expert in office tenant improvements to assist them with the process.  A project manager is a professional that oversees the entire project including the architect and the contractor.  Garcia Architects & Advisors provides expertise in both design and project management.  This is important so that tenants unfamiliar with timeframes and costs  do not end up wasting money in rent before their office space is ready to move into, or end up paying for items that landlords would typically cover.  Design and construction of a new office space is a complex process for tenants unfamiliar with it.  It is very timeconsuming for a tenant, and can be a full-time job for one of the tenant’s employees for several months.   Changes made during or after construction can be very expensive.  A project manager can be hired to assist a tenant, and their fees are offset by saving the tenant thousands of dollars in both project costs as well as the tenant’s productivity costs.

Often large landlords take responsibility for the entire project process, and have their own architect, contractor, and project manager.  A landlord’s team will typically complete the process more quickly than a tenant’s team, because the landlord’s team is highly motivated for the rent to start as soon as possible, and this cannot happen until the space is ready for the tenant to move into it.  This approach is less risky for the tenant.  On the other hand, when the landlord  runs the process, the tenant has less control over design and construction, and the landlord’s architect and contractor are representing the landlord’s interests, not the tenants.  Just because a landlord has a pre-established team does not mean the tenant cannot negotiate to utilize their own team.  If the tenant hires an architect or project manager who understands how to negotiate with large landlords, the tenant can get the best of both worlds.  And in either scenario, the landlord will usually contribute the same amount of dollars to the project, whether or not the tenant hires their own team or the landlord does.  All the tenant has to do is ask.

Landlords will not typically proceed with signing a lease that is contingent upon a build-out until they understand the cost of the project.  The tenant should do the same if they plan to take responsibility for the design and construction.  It’s important to know what the cost of the project and the construction timeframe will be before a lease is signed and the rent commencement date is determined.





8 Must-know Trends in Office Fitouts, By Peter Fabris

5 11 2011
This is a terrific article published in the October 2011 issue of Building Design + Construction.  The firm quoted numerous times, Gensler, is where I worked and was trained before starting my firm.
                   
Each cluster of open workstations at Russell Investment Headquarters,
Seattle, is located near an “innovation hub” that offers privacy rooms,
project team rooms, and informal collaboration spaces—all equipped with
whiteboard surfaces and state-of-the-art technology. Design firm NBBJ
located privacy rooms throughout the office, giving associates a
dedicated place for focused work or tasks that require privacy or
confidentiality.
Enabled by wireless technology, laptop and handheld computing
devices, and high-tech tools like Skype, GoTo Meeting, and WebEx,
today’s knowledge workers can work from anywhere, anytime. On any given
day in a typical office environment, many workers are off site, their
office workstations lying empty. Employers are capitalizing on this
trend to trim office square footage and real estate costs.

Ken Patrick, president of Boston-based Environments At Work, a
provider/installer of office furniture and interior features, relates
his firm’s experience relocating a local client. “We recently moved a
biopharma company from Cambridge to [suburban] Waltham, and they will
save $200 million in rent over five years,” he recalls. While that
atypically high savings is due largely to moving to a more favorable
rental market, a significant reduction in gross square footage also
contributed to the savings.

Even though technology makes it easy for office workers to stay in
touch with colleagues virtually, face-to-face interaction in the work
setting is still prized. Many innovative ideas are born and refined not
only during scheduled meetings but also at impromptu gatherings. So,
while workstations are being slimmed down in number and size, space for
meetings and informal interaction is growing. New office fitouts provide
attractively designed spaces of various sizes for in-person
collaboration, including conference rooms for small, medium, and large
groups. Small cafés, lounges, and nooks with comfortable chairs
encourage informal interactions.

The weak economy is responsible for a modest bump in office retrofit
work for design and construction companies, as employers look for real
estate bargains. Vacancy rates are high, and landlords are doing what
they can to keep occupancies up. “Tenants are able to negotiate good
rates with good concessions,” says Neil Schneider, executive vice
president and principal with McCall & Almy, a Boston-based
commercial brokerage firm and real estate consultancy. As leases expire,
tenants are jumping to higher-quality space, or negotiating with their
landlords to revamp their current spaces. Either way, the new office
usually differs drastically from the old one.

1. Make way for the incredible shrinking workstation.

Individual workstation square footage is being slashed dramatically—in
some cases, to less than half the traditional size—in part to allow
organizations to devote more space for meetings and informal
interaction. “You need to get the workplace denser to afford more
conference and meeting space,” points out Gervais Tompkin, AIA, LEED AP,
Gensler’s head of workplace consulting.

“The workstation used to be eight feet by eight feet, or eight by 10,
but it has shrunk to six by six,” says Nick Haritos, a regional vice
president for office furniture and interiors manufacturer Haworth.

Technology miniaturization has been a factor in this change, says
Haritos. Laptops with built-in flat screens take up way less space than
bulky desktop computers. Desktop phones are rapidly being replaced by
cell phones. With digitization of many documents, techno-savvy
organizations have been able to reduce, if not completely eliminate,
paper files, catalogs, and other printed material.

2. Say goodbye to high partitions—hello, open office.

Workstations are not only shrinking, they are becoming more open.
Partitions are either being junked completely, or their height is being
lowered to foster greater employee interaction. Some organizations are
even getting rid of private offices, or at least reducing their number
significantly. Exceptions to this trend: workspaces for accounting and
human resources personnel who have to deal with confidential matters.

If your client wants to remove private offices, you should discuss
the potential impact on executive morale with them. Mark van Summern,
AIA, a principal with New York-based Perkins Eastman, cautions clients
that want to move employees from closed offices to open spaces to
consider the office-as-status-symbol factor. “You may end up with
increased turnover from more senior people who are accustomed to having
their own offices,” van Summern warns.

To blunt executive grumbling, senior managers at the client firm
should take the lead in promoting the open office. As part of an office
rehab in New London, Conn., Pfizer business unit managers gave up their
private offices. “Some of them were the biggest advocates of the
change,” says Terri L. Frink, IIDA, a principal and the interior
architecture studio leader with the S/L/A/M Collaborative, headquartered
in Glastonbury, Conn.

When private offices are included in a new fitout, they are now being
enclosed with glass partitions rather than drywall. This serves two
goals: maximizing daylighting throughout the office, and allowing
everybody to see who is present. “Young people want to see their
managers,” notes Marie Fitzgerald, IIDA, a senior vice president with
architects Symmes Maini & McKee Associates, Cambridge, Mass. “You
are more likely to have conversations and share information when you can
make eye contact more often.”

In some cases, translucent panels are a necessary substitute for
glass. In a recent office fitout for a law firm, Goettsch Partners used
frosted glass to partition off paralegals’ workstations. Law is
one profession that still uses a lot of paper documents, explains Jim
Prendergast, AIA, LEED AP, a partner with the design firm. Frosted glass
hides unattractive stacks of paper while allowing sunlight to pass
through.

3. Manage noise and privacy—and not just through design.

An open office environment has one major drawback: lack of acoustical
privacy. With office workers sitting together more snugly, and smaller
partitions (or none at all) separating them, noise levels can rise,
sometimes making it harder to concentrate.

Many new fitouts are providing quiet and privacy via small, enclosed
spaces that are available for any employee to use. With mobile phones
taking the place of landlines in some offices, employees who take a
sensitive or lengthy phone call can head to a private, acoustically
isolated “phone booth” or “enclave” without having to hang up and call
back from another room.

“People like to work differently, and we don’t all do the same job,”
says SMMA’s Fitzgerald. A recent fitout at Blue Cross and Blue Shield in
Providence, R.I., provided unassigned quiet spaces. “If you need a full
day of privacy, you can sign out a small enclave.”

Pfizer’s New London rehab set aside 6% of total space for “focus
booths,” each a 36-sf dog-bone-shaped, acoustically isolated space that
accommodates two. These spaces are sometimes used by individuals to
access online teleconferences.

Other strategies for quieting the office include using
sound-absorptive desk-level products, ceiling tiles, and flooring.
Breaking up areas to limit the number of workstations connected to each
other can help, too.

Sound-masking technology can be used to reduce distracting noise in
some office environments. Sound masking can supplement or replace
ambient noise by broadcasting a fan-like “white noise” over speakers so
that speech is somewhat diminished. Ironically, quieter HVAC technology
such as underfloor air displacement and chilled beam cooling—popular
options for sustainability—make for a quieter space when vacant, but
when people are present, speech is more discernible over longer
distances.

“Office space is often designed for acoustical standards without
people present,” says Niklas Moeller, vice president of Logison Acoustic
Networks, a sound-masking provider and acoustic consulting firm in
Burlington, Ont. The result is distracted workers. “Noise and lack of
privacy are near the top of complaints, along with thermal comfort, in
new office projects,” he says.

One noise-reduction solution is decidedly low-tech: asking employees
to keep their voices down. Pfizer’s office rehab project included
etiquette training focused on being considerate about noise. And because
all workstations were unassigned, that kind of courtesy extended to
asking employees to leave the workspace clean at the end of the day,
says the S/L/A/M Collaborative’s Frink.

4. Program in more team rooms, not necessarily more conference rooms.

“Most companies don’t have the right types of conference rooms,” van
Summern says. “They are oversized, and you have three or four people
meeting in 10- or 12-seat rooms.” That wasted space is money not well
spent. Better to offer team rooms of varying capacity for groups of
different size.

Pfizer’s project provided four sizes of meeting rooms: “huddle
spaces” for four, “living rooms” with a capacity of six, and two sizes
of conference rooms, one for up to 12, another for up to 24.

5. Allow for an appropriate amount of flexible space.

The pace of change that many organizations face has accelerated to
hyperspeed in recent years. Many traditional procedures and tasks are
becoming obsolete; new high-tech operations have to be generated from
scratch. As work groups grow and shrink in response, the workspace may
need to be adjusted accordingly.

“It’s not a uniform trend across the board, but some companies need a
more agile interior,” says Angie Lee, workplace corporate practice
leader with A/E firm SmithGroup. Demountable partitions, sliding doors,
movable walls, raised flooring, and standardized furniture and fixtures
make reconfiguring office space easier and cheaper.

6. Design common areas to serve your client’s organizational goals.

Determining optimal placement and size of common areas is important for
workplace efficiency. In the Blue Cross & Blue Shield project in
Rhode Island, employees were encouraged to use fewer paper documents by
limiting the new space to just one multifunction printer/copier/fax
machine per floor. “This reduces the footprint and printing costs,”
Fitzgerald says.

Common area design is also scrutinized in some cases to better
support company values and goals. When Nissan North America moved its
headquarters from Los Angeles to Smyrna, Tenn., it wanted to promote
cross-functional collaboration through the new design. The old
headquarters was scattered over multiple buildings. The new
single-structure, multi-story design featured a large floor plate with a
“town center” on every floor containing meeting rooms and break areas;
support functions such as printers were purposely located near elevators
to generate “forced congregating,” according to Jack Weber, principal
with Nashville-based Gresham, Smith and Partners, which designed the
Nissan HQ.

7. Use the fitout to embellish the client’s branding.

Fitouts can address a client’s key marketing function: “How are we
communicating to extend our brand message?” asks Goettsch Partners’
Prendergast. That means doing more than just slapping logos on the wall
behind the reception desk. “If you have an environmental law practice,
for example, sustainability is particularly important,” he notes.
Clients and recruits want to see a commitment to the environmental
ethos. One recent Goettsch fitout for a law firm reused furniture as
much as possible, bought new materials with recycled content, made
extensive use of daylight harvesting, and provided light sensors in
every private office—all to reach LEED Silver status.

Multi-location organizations often want to foster aesthetic
continuity across job sites with uniform standards for color, material
choices, lighting, and other features readily visible to employees and
the public. Other clients may choose to go in exactly the opposite
direction, looking for distinctive touches related to the local area.
For example, to add a touch of local color to its corporate look, Google
fitted out its Zurich, Switzerland, office with some ski gondolas that
are used as small huddle spaces.

With the increasingly mobile work force, iconic spaces and imagery
are more and more important, says Gensler’s Tompkin. “These are
grounding elements,” he says. “They relate to the cognition of
wayfinding and help to establish an emotional connection to a place over
great distance.”

8. Help clients ‘manage presence’ to avoid ‘office future shock.’

If the trend toward employee mobility continues at the pace it has show
in the last few years—and who’s to say it won’t?—there could be
profound implications for corporate real estate managers and designers
of workspaces, says Tompkin. The work-from-anywhere-anytime lifestyle
has taken hold at many companies, especially among high-tech and life
sciences companies.

“We are seeing radically more virtual interactions, and the number of
in-person meeting participants is nose-diving at some companies,” says
Tompkin. He wonders if this might not foretell an office model where
meeting space will be severely limited, or a scenario where corporate
management might try to reverse the trend and require more employees to
be present at the office. “Everything is pushing people to work
individually, virtually,” he says. “Who wants to battle rush hour
traffic to attend a status meeting in person when you can do it from
home?”

Many organizations have yet to fully consider the implications of
extreme mobility, says Tompkin. “Companies need to actively manage
presence,” he says. “We may be headed for a model where office space
will support more organizational-critical tasks but not support
individual work.” That could mean the office of the 2020s could be
radically different from today’s most up-to-date workspace.





Design/Build: The Answer to Design Fee Woes?

16 10 2011

The business start-up experts say that it’s much more profitable to sell a product than to sell your time.  Even if your company is truly a consulting business, it’s better to figure out a way to package your services as a product, as Oracle did. 

Even the architectural experts say architects must start charging based on the value we bring to a project, and not our time.  How do we accomplish this when it is difficult for clients to value the service we offer?  It’s common for prospective clients to scoff at an architectural proposal of $100k for a new house with a $1.5 million budget.  They’re willing to spend all of this money on the construction of the house itself, but they don’t want to spend even 5% of it on the architectural services.  This problem seems to be getting worse, as fees have become more and more competitive with outsourcing and desperation, and architectural services have become commoditized.  Architects are making less and less money, and taking shortcuts to do the work in less time, thus increasing their chances for a lawsuit.  This downward trend can’t continue much longer.  Many architects don’t earn enough to make the stress and liability worthwhile. 

Why do so many clients see architects as a kind of drafting service to do the minimum possible to get a permit?  The answer is that many prospective clients don’t understand or value what architects produce. 

Design is subjective.  A potential client with no design sense has a hard time appreciating design, and one with design sense may think they can do it themselves, or more likely, they value design but cannot justify the cost.  Design is creative and fun, and it’s expected that many of us would do it for free or almost free, therefore, many architects do.  Clients are, in fact, often impressed and appreciative when you offer creative solutions to their problems, and even help them identify what their problems are.  Unfortunately, good designers come up with solutions so quickly and easily, clients still may not appreciate that it took years of experience to be able to be good at what we do.  Therefore, if we’re getting paid for our time, as most of us do, the better we are, the less we get paid.  Many clients will select an architect based on who has the lowest hourly billing rate, assuming all architects provide the same value.  But a very experienced architect may charge $150 an hour, and an inexperienced architect may charge $50 an hour and take 5 times longer to get the same results as the experienced architect, or may not be able to offer the same quality of service at all.   

At least clients have some level of understanding as to what design is.  Even more difficult for non-architects to understand is what goes into the drawings that architects produce.  Although BIM (Building Information Modeling) software has recently started to become more commonly used, most architects still use the same process for producing drawings that have been used for over 100 years.  CAD software essentially mimics the hand-drafting process, and did not gain us much efficiency.  Every project is a one-off design.  The amount of building code and product research, problem-solving, coordination, and drafting time is immense, and incomprehensive to those not in the industry.  When I’ve told friends that it takes about 200 hours (5 weeks of full-time work) to complete a set of construction drawings for a small house, they have been blown away.  And that doesn’t even include the design or the construction phase time.  And what deliverable can you give the client after spending all of this time and money?  A bunch of paper that they don’t understand.  No wonder they don’t value what we do.

Yet every product, whether it is a building, a piece of furniture, or a widget, requires design and drafting.  And clients do value design when it is evident in the end product as in Michael Graves’ very cool and successful product line at Target.  The difference is that most products are mass-produced and the design cost ends up being such a small proportion of the cost of one copy of the item.  With architecture, the design cost cannot be spread over numerous copies unless the building is either a tract home or an off-the-shelf design for a prefabricated building.  Prefab buildings make a lot of sense to me for this reason, yet due to transportation and sitework costs, they are still not as inexpensive as one might hope.  But even though mass-produced products have a proportionally low design cost attached to them, there’s also the psychological affect of not having to pay for the design separately when purchasing a product, even though the design cost is indeed incorporated.  Every business incorporates their overhead costs into their product or service.  How would you like it if your mechanic charged you separately for the time it took him to produce your invoice and answer phone calls?  You would think him or her absurd.  Yet, we know that the time for those tasks is indeed incorporated into the price we pay for a tune-up.

If the architectural fees could be invisible to clients, and rolled into the cost of the building, as with most products, it would be much easier for architects to land projects.  More good architects would be hired, and for a decent wage, and the quality of our built environment would be improved.  This requires a design/build approach.  The total cost for a building or building remodel, including the architectural services, can be quoted to a prospective client.  This approach is not new, and is indeed becoming more common.  However, our concern with this approach is that, in most cases, although not in all, a general contractor wins a project and then hires the architect.  The general contractor directs the architect as the architect’s client.  When this is the case, the architect is usually not able to provide great design, and instead acts as a drafting service again.  The architect does not even have the opportunity to meet with the client in some cases.  A general contractor might take a client’s wish list at face value, provide the lowest quote possible, win the job, and direct the architect to draft permit drawings per the client’s wish list.  An architect, however, doesn’t take a client’s wish list at face value.  Like a good psychologist, an architect knows that lay people don’t always understand what they want or need.  A good architect listens carefully then asks the right questions to help the client identify the problems that need to be solved and the opportunities for improvement.  A good architect digs deep to fully understand the way a client’s business works or the way they live their life, and proposes ideas that may improve upon the status quo, then balancing those concepts with the client’s construction budget.  Therefore, a collaboration between architect and contractor is in the client’s best interest.

Even when an architect is hired for design in the traditional design-bid-build approach, the contractor, not having been involved in the design process, often convinces the client to cut out important parts of the design in order to reduce the construction cost and win the project.  Architects need to gain more control over the entire process.  One challenge is that most architects are not willing to take the financial risk of partnering or joint-venturing with a contractor; therefore, many architects end up simply working for contractors under the design/build scenario.  The other challenge is that contractors may not have much incentive to partner with architects.  They can pitch a design/build approach, and land a project without an architect then simply hire one.  But it is possible to find contractors that have realized that a contractor-architect team has a better chance of winning projects together than separately, and of providing the best possible project through this collaborative approach.  If we want to stop being commoditized, we architects must offer a tangible product that clients value.





Architectural Design Fees for Office Tenant Improvements (aka Interior Office Remodels or Renovations)

4 10 2011

Architectural fees are generally proportional to construction costs.   A higher construction cost represents more complex details and finishes.  More complex details and finishes require more time-consuming design services.  Thus, a higher-end space requires higher design fees.

These days, many of us tenant improvement architects are designing spaces that are more budget-conscious than image-conscious.  Yet even the most cost-conscious clients must spend a minimum of about $50 per square foot for an interior office remodel, especially for a smaller space with less economy of scale.  Let’s use a 5,000 square foot space as an example.  At $50 per square foot, $250,000 is a very bare-bones budget.  If a space is in “shell” condition, $250,000 is not enough to build out even the most simple of spaces due to the needed HVAC and electrical infrastructure.  However, if an office is “second-generation” space, meaning it’s an existing office that simply requires some re-work, $250,000 would be enough to make a few functional and aesthetic upgrades.

On a simple $50 per square foot project, basic architectural design fees might range anywhere from $2.00 per square foot to $4.00 per square foot, or $10,000 to $20,000 for the 5,000 square foot example.  These basic services would most likely include:  programming (about 5% of the fee), schematic design (about 10% of the fee), design development (about 20% of the fee), permit, bid, and construction drawings (about 45% of the fee), and construction administration (about 20% of the fee).  Not included are mechanical and electrical engineering costs which might be an additional $1.50 to $2.00 per square foot, or $7,500 to $10,000.  On small projects, the mechanical and electrical work are often design/build and not engineered. Structural engineering is typically not required for most office tenant improvements, however if it is needed, the cost would vary depending on the reason, but would most likely be in the $2,000 to $5,000 range for a small project.  Furniture and decorating services might be an additional $1.00 to $1.50 per square foot.   The above basic fee range also assumes that a CAD file of the existing floor plan and existing handicapped accessibility drawings for the building are provided by the landlord to the architect.  Given everything just said, the total fees for a small tenant improvement project might be as high as $8 per square foot if some of these extra services are provided.

A good benchmark for fees on a small remodel project is about 10% of the construction cost without engineering, or about 15% of the construction cost with engineering.  But since the construction cost is not determined until the architectural drawings are complete and bid, this benchmark is not very useful unless a solid construction budget is established before the start of the project.  If so, the architect should design to that budget if it is realistic.  A client should not give an architect an unreasonably low construction budget in order to keep the architectural fees as low as possible.  The architect will let the client know if the budget is not feasible. Moreover, if a low budget is established, and the contracted architectural fees are thus proportionally low, the architect can only provide services relative to the construction budget and their fees.  If the client drives a higher-end design, the architect will need to request additional fees, because a higher-end design requires the architect to spend more time on the project.  An architect will tie their fees to the construction budget in their contract for this reason.

Sometimes, a client does not want to commit to the entire project until they have an idea of what the construction cost will be, and will retain the architect for programming through design development, or just enough to obtain a construction estimate from a contractor.  If an architect is working without a construction budget in mind, and designing per the client’s direction without boundaries, the architect will most likely be compensated on an hourly basis, instead of a lump sum basis, at least through the design development phase, when the scope of the project is defined.

The above fee ranges apply to interior office tenant improvements, and assume that no work to the building core or shell is required.  Banking, retail, restaurant, and other project types typically have higher fees.





Taking a Small Architectural Firm to the Next Level

19 07 2011

My experience running my own architectural firm as well as my years at large well-known firms provided an education on what it takes for a small firm to get to the next level.  Here are just a few of the lessons learned.

Determine Goals:

Goals should be determined by the company president (and other partners as the firm grows).  What are the goals?   To work on fun projects? To innovate? To grow an office that will survive you?  To grow people?  To get published and become well known?  To change the shape of the built environment?  Everyone in the office should know what the goal is, and contribute to the goal.  The goal will determine many of the strategies.

Firm Culture:

It all comes down to the employees.  Getting to the next level depends upon attracting and retaining great employees.  A great culture is the way to do so.  Having autonomy, a sense of purpose in life (creativity and contribution), and learning opportunities are the three most significant factors in employee satisfaction.  Spreading the design projects around so everyone has the chance to work on at least one interesting (design) project at any given time provides employees opportunities to learn.  Allowing all staff members at least small ways to contribute to design provides them creative stimulation and pride.  Providing employees the freedom to achieve the stated goals in the way that they see fit allows them to feel that they are respected as individuals.

Good employees will exceed expectations when the culture supports these basic needs.  Employees who don’t meet expectations should be asked to leave so that their sub-par performance does not affect their teammates and office morale.

Monthly Staff Meetings:

Monthly lunch-time staff meetings should be held to:

-Share information about the firm’s successes and objectives

-Share lessons learned

-Share knowledge amongst employees

-Present and charrette design-oriented projects so that everyone feels involved with design

Employees can rotate chairing the meetings.

Organizational Structure:

Each employee should choose one discipline in which to become an expert.  This approach, common at large firms, acknowledges that different types of people excel at different roles.  Although one person might be fairly good at two or even all three disciplines – project management, design, or technical – no one is great at all three.  And everyone should be great, not a jack of all trades and a master of none.  As the firm grows larger, a leader within each discipline should be assigned to spearhead best practices within their discipline.

The least expensive, more junior employees should do as much of the work as possible in order to maximize profits, and keep the more experienced employees focused on more challenging and interesting tasks.  Senior employees should delegate and “coach” as much as possible, leveraging themselves to focus on the work that requires their advanced skills and talents.

The typical ratio of junior-to-senior employees at most large firms is as follows:

8-10 total employees for every 1 Owner/Principal (who can serve in the below roles as well).

1 Administrative employee (HR, finance, marketing, secretarial) for every 8-10 employees.

Each Studio or Practice Leader Director oversees about 3-5 Project Managers & Project Architects (PM’s & PA’s are equals).

Each Project Manager or Project Architect oversees about 3 Job Captains.

Each Job Captain oversees about 1-3 junior drafters.

Number of Designers is dependent on amount of design projects firm does.

An efficient 20-person firm should have a structure that looks something like this:

2 Owners/Principals

1-2 Sr. Designers

2 Project Managers

1-2 Project Architects

4 Job Captains

8 Junior Drafters/Designers

2 Administrative employees

It may be necessary to shift some employees into new roles to capitalize on their strengths.  In doing so, it needs to be made clear that PM’s and PA’s are equal.  Becoming a Project Manager should not be everyone’s goal.

As many opportunities as possible for leadership and increased responsibility should be provided, and entrepreneurialism encouraged.  A leadership TEAM is preferable to one or two leaders.  Some possible leadership assignments are:

-Technical discipline leader/Sr. Project Architect:  Has general oversight of the code and constructability aspects of all projects in the office, performs QA reviews of all preliminary plans and CD’s before they are issued, establishes best practices for, and coach the JC’s and drafters.

-Project Management discipline leader:  Has general oversight of all projects’ financial performance, establishes best practices for, and coaches the other PM’s, as well as all staff in regards to contracts and budgets.

-Residential practice leader:  Has general oversight of all residential projects, establishes best practices for, and coaches others in residential issues.

-Commercial practice leader:  Has general oversight of all residential projects, establishes best practices for, and coaches others in commercial issues.

-IT champion:  Is a resource to others in regards to computer hardware and software.

-Revit champion:  Provides training to others in Revit and develop standards, libraries, and best practices.

-CAD champion:  Provides training to others in CAD and develop standards, libraries, and best practices.libraries, and best practices.

-Professional development & community service champion:  Spearheads group educational & community service opportunities for the staff.  Team-building would be a natural by-product of such activities.

-Marketing champion:  Attends networking events, seeks out project opportunities, and prepares qualifications packages and proposals.

Professional Development:

The company should offer a clear path to advancement and, ideally, partnership in order to provide incentive to employees.  Each Employee would be assigned one or two “coaches.”  One coach would be the employee’s direct supervisor and the second, another senior employee of the
employee’s choosing, perhaps an expert in the discipline they aspire to.  The employees meet once a quarter with their coaches to talk about their professional goals, and their coaches provide feedback on their job performance and if they are on track in achieving their goals.  The objective is to help employees get onto a path that maximizes their strengths, thus leading to growth.

Practice Areas & Marketing: 

The types of projects we want to design should be determined so that we can speak at conferences, join industry organizations, and write
articles where we’d attract those clients.  Most large firm owners recommend focusing on two or three practice areas in order to provide the highest quality design and services, be more efficient (profitable), and to streamline marketing efforts.  They should also be on opposite economic cycles (such as rental units vs. high-end homes).  Again, the jack of all trades is obsolete.





Today’s Offices Must Foster Collaboration and Socialization To Compete

14 06 2011

Despite our culture’s inclination towards texting, emailing, and mobility, we still desire interaction with others.  People are social animals.  Moreover, today’s complex issues necessitate collaboration.  Studies show that our happiness is dependent upon our bond with others.  Starbucks are packed with people working on their laptops, people that could otherwise work in solitude at home, but feel the need to be amongst their fellow human beings.

Many companies are renovating their offices to offer more collaborative work environments.  Even small, one-person companies are coming together in shared spaces to take advantage of knowledge-sharing.  With India and Asia taking over much of our numbers-oriented work, creativity and innovation are becoming the new currency of our society.  Because of a more team-focused approach in today’s workplace, socializing is now encouraged as a way to transfer knowledge and create innovation.  One survey indicates that top-performing companies socialize 16% more than average companies.

The design of an office shapes the level of collaboration and interaction, and fosters creativity.  Workers need spaces where they can come together to brainstorm, go somewhere private to focus, then come back together and combine knowledge and skills to solve problems.  Today’s workstations are smaller than those of a decade ago, but are more open and accessible.  Starbucks-like lounges with connectivity for laptops offer more casual places for people to work, for colleagues from different worlds to share ideas, and inspiration and creativity can flow.





My TV interview about prefab housing & green design

16 05 2011

Here’s a link to my TV interview with my father on pre-fabs and green design. I love the corny ‘70’s feel of this program.

http://sb-justbetweenus.com/archives/Post/gil-elisa-garcia-garcia-architects-prefab-housing-green-design