Starting an Architectural Firm

This information is incorrect. Architecture is a highly specialized field and you need to have an architecture license to practice architecture. It takes several years to accomplish this including going to college and finishing a 3 years internship period.

Not true Elle, you don't have to have an architecture license to practice architecture. You can be a designer and practice architecture; you’re just limited to what an architect can do. Anyone can design as long as they know the by-laws and building codes, and experience in designs, you can be successful!

Ellen is correct in stating that an architectural license is required to practice architecture. The practice of architecture is defined by the law of individual states that almost all require an education from an accredited school, professional internship, as well as passing the nine required exams. Anything short than that is just design and it is in fact unlawful to use the term "architect" or variations thereof if one does not hold the credentials and license. Architecture, like the field of law and medicine, is a "profession".

@Tylee
Not true Tylee. There is a difference between practicing the profession and doing what you want based on experience. You can be successful on both but only one allows you to do it legally.

If you are not a licensed professional you can not use the word architecture or architect. Please visit www.AIA.org and www.ncarb.org

this is bullshit, write has no idea about architecture.

Each state has different rules regarding "design" and "architecture". In all cases however, you are correct, you can not use the word "Architect, Architecture" if you are in fact not registered. I think the article was titled "how to start your own "Architectural" firm". So the article is incorrect in that "anyone" can start a firm. Actually, there is nothing relevant, accurate or of any value in this post. If it were as easy as getting a business card and a business license, everyone would be doing it. Some of the buildings look like they have been designed without Architects input. I am registered and it is not that easy!

I am not an architect but I am a business man with lots of connections in construction and design field , I can start an architectural firm and hire licensed architect and make him an officer of my corporation and bring clients in my firm and start architectural business.I don't think its wrong it is perfectly legal and professional firm.

I don't know if I'm an architect but I can stuff a #9 with a #7 at Burger King without the need for a license.

do you have a business plan in opening an architect firm that describe the start-up costs to 3-5 years financial projection? I'll love to see that. Kind Regards, Benjamin HN.

I am an Architectural/Engineer Designer who is in the process of starting my own designing firm. I am trying to get some insight on what is the correct and legal way in getting my firm started.

I think the article is misleading. After reading it and the comments, there are valid points. I am a licensed architect and has my own practice. It is true that everyone can attempt to design and some unlicensed "architect" have great ideas and skills. However, without a licensed, the designer cannot use the term "architect" legally and cannot stamp or certify any project. Without the stamp, most state inspectional services, building departments, zoning boards, or historical agencies would not grant a permit/approval for construction. I agree with Elle that architecture is a highly specialized field. Just because I can do my tax return, I would not claim myself as a CPA or start offering tax advices. I advise reader who are interested in this to visit the AIA and NCARB website to learn more about the field of architecture as ARCH has suggested. Who wrote this article?

On the otherhand, the article could be correct in some sense as well. I have worked for a good architectural firm and the startup principal was not an architect. He was a businessman who control the business aspect of the practice while the staff architects take care of the design and the technical aspects of projects. A couple of licensed architects are principals and they stamp the drawings. So, you don't need to be an architect to run an architectural firm but you do need to be an architect to practice architecture (not just design).

I am an Architectural/Engineer Designer who is in the process of starting my own designing firm. I am trying to get legal insight on starting a drafting firm.

I am also a licensed architect. I cannot believe how much bad advice is being offered in this article. The author of this is clearly unaware about what the architectural profession entails and certainly should not be misleading people on beginning a practice.

If one would like to get the facts contact the American Institue of Architects (AIA)in the U.S. or any provincial architectural association in Canada. Personally, I would not get start-up advice on a self governed and specialized profession such as is the practice of architecture from a website.

In response to another comment I read from Andrew regarding practices where the owners are not licensed professionals, I would caution that, at least in Ontario, I have heard that a licensed architect must have at least a controlling interest in the firm. This makes sense since the architect assumes the professional risk and liability.

license is must to start architectural profession but in India all start the profession with interiors and then architecture, thus any one can start the interior office any time if wanted to do so.

Well, lets focus on the word "Easy". it is not easy to start an architectural firm. It is easier to start it if you are a licensed architect and more difficult if you are not. If you are not, you will need to team with a licensed architect or call yourself a "designer" and focus on interiors or (in some states) residential. I started an architectural firm 6 years ago and it has been great.... but not easy. You need professional liability insurance, cad software, a plotter, clients ... and the list goes on. joel at schooldesigner dot com

Remember, you MAY NOT call yourself an architect (or "architectural designer" or any other clever derivative) unless you are licensed by the state you are in to practice architecture. States and NCARB pursue these matters aggressively and there are severe fines (and worse) when, not if, you get caught.

this article has a few good points and is misleading, I am an architectural designer with a degree and 6 years experience in the field. I am starting my own design firm AND I AM NOT AN ARCHITECT. I do not agree with Andrew as of the part where if you are not an architect you will not be able to pull permits and so forth, for i have quite a few projects the have been completed without an architectural stamp. As long as you have a very extensive knowledge in construction methods and are on the up and up with your code research you will be ok. Now as for needing an architectural stamp you will need one if a building is over a certain amount of S.F. if it is under you will not need a stamp but you might need an engineer to look over your calls. I agree it is better to be an architect if you are looking to build or design huge structures, but if you are like me and you are interested in residential and tenant finish a designer is all that is needed and some people prefer it for i don't come with the added cost as do architects do.

What if you were to open up your own design drafting company. You definitely do not need to have an architectural license for that. I have a degree of architecture, did a 2 year internship and I have worked in the field for almost 6 years. I have amazing knowledge in construction and structural design and even though I am technically not an Architect, most of the work I have done in the companies that I've worked for were equal to the responsibilities of a licensed Architect. With that said, I was able to work my way up to a Project Manager position as well. Now I am at a point where I would like to open up my own business, however, even though I am not a Licensed Architect, I am an Architectural and Industrial Designer. I don't call myself an Architect because I do not have a license. I believe I can utilize my skills as a designer to open up my own business. Please let me know what you think. I could use some advice on how I can go about this.

Can we get pass the legal part. I want to hear about how others have started to grow a firm. I am trying now. I have a license in ca.. I go to many networking events, some trade events, meet many people in the trade and even more outside the trade but so far (1 year) it has yielded near nothing. The economy is poor and is a major reason for that. But i will not accept that it not possible to do better. Others out there, many reading this have done it and i am interested as to how. Just so i can provide direction- i have many years of restaurant, market and retail experience but the contacts i had have moved on.

Tash, please let us know where you work so that we can see if "Architectural and Industrial Designer" passes the legal test. Why is it so hard for people to understand that if you do not have a state license to practice architecture, you may not use the letters "architect" in your job title. Yes, large firms usually have one insured principal that signs the plans, but no matter how high you rise at the firm, and no matter how much experience you gain, you will not be an Architect. Call yourself something else and good luck to you. Just don't pretend to be an Architect. Or take the tests already. This, Felipe, is what makes it so difficult for architects to get a foothold in an industry that does not respect the professional title of "Architect."

Architect w/license & 13 yr experience. Considering opening my own firm. Could anyone owning their own firm offer insight with regards to liability insurance? Thanks in advance

I will say one thing. I've seen far more progressive designs coming from non-ARCHITECTS than I do licensed architects. Eff the legalities and look at the end product. legalism sucks, but if a design is good and it passes the threshold from simply existing as a building to living and breathing as architecture, then the person who designed it is an ARCHITECT despite what the arbitrary orgainizations such as NCARB and AIA suggest. Every one of their bureaucratic rules are based on an arbitrary council system with means of making money and those of you who like those organizations should spend more time studying theory and constructivism then wasting time worrying about their pathetic hangups.

After I completed those lame ass exams which were also such a joke, I obtained my license,(which is only needed for commercial work permits) and I only pay those bastards to keep it renewed. Def not giving them my time or money for any lame AIA membership or any of that bs. 90 percent of licensed architects will never produce a single piece of architecture in their careers. Produce buildings? -yes Architecture? - seldom

Everyone should stop worrying about legalities and just produce amazing design, whether you are an ARCHITECT or not. Hell, call me whatever title you want, as long as I'm producing strong design, i'll be fine to be known as the kid in the basement. I'd rather be forgotten then remembered for giving in. eff the system... and start designing.

@metalmulitia, I agree that a lot of junk gets designed by architects. A lot of junk gets built without an architect at all and architects still take the blame. It's not fair. I agree that great design is its own reward and that overall, people should expect more of their built environment. But that's not going to happen until architects, lame as they may be, stake out a professional territory that respects itself. Part of that is respecting the term "architect." Part of it is embracing good design, no matter where it comes from, because somewhere along the line, people will come to see Architects (big A) as professionals and as part of a life that is more functional, convenient, beautiful - whatever you'd like. You don't see paralegals pretending to be lawyers; you don't see paramedics pretending to be doctors; but you do see scores of contractors, interior designers, decorators, stylists, hairdressers, whomever - calling themselves architects. It degrades the brand, you know? And no one wins. And no one need go through the pain of becoming an architect and all the headache of starting a business as one when no one cares about the value the profession brings to the table, including architects themselves.

I am a freshman in college and I am majoring in Architecture. I want to do residential drafting and after the research I have done I know that in order to be an Architect I need a masters degree but after all these comments I am a little confused about if I actually need to spend eight years in college to get my masters or not. Does anyone have any advice they can share?

Architect_major: You don't need a Master's degree in Architecture to become an Architect. At least in California - you actually don't need to go to school at all. Basically, you will have to work for a licensed architect for eight years to get your training - then you are eligible to take your licensing exams. Formal academic training (general undergraduate degrees, undergraduate architecture degrees, and Master's degrees in Architecture) cuts time off that "apprenticeship" period. I'd suspect that other states have similar rules.

Thank you for the info. I live in Texas and I'm not sure if it's the same but it most likely is similar. Right now I am working getting an associates degree concentrated on drafting.

you can start a architectural firm even you are not an a architect, just hire a license architect and designer to do a job and you be the manager.