You can’t build anything without proper construction documentation, and that’s exactly what architectural firms provide. They carefully draft the construction documents and specifications that make everything work in harmony. Also necessary is an architect’s talent and creativity. Across the country, a galaxy of qualified architects can produce the required drawings and creativity for most small and large interior design and construction projects. The challenge is finding the firm that’s right for you.

The fact is that most Fortune 500 corporations don’t know what they need to know about architects and the various contractual programs available to them. To protect your interests, consider enlisting the services of a project manager.

Prospective clients often aren’t aware of how architects determine and earn their fees. Usually, architects either make a percentage of the total cost of a project (anywhere from 6 percent to 10 percent), or they submit a proposal based on a price per square foot (currently $2 to $4). With such arrangements, the bigger and more costly the project, the more they will earn, so they don’t benefit financially by saving their clients money. Also, in construction, a slight change in the design can significantly increase costs once the project is under way.

By engaging a professional project manager, clients can mitigate cost overruns and exposure associated with hiring an architect on either a national or local level.

Right-Sizing the Firm

Currently, eight to 10 architectural firms, including St. Louis-based Hellmuth Obata & Kassabaum, Interior Architects, based in San Francisco, and Gensler have multiple, large office locations across the United States, Canada and Europe. Hundreds of firms claim to be in this category, but most actually have only two or three people in remote locations outside of their home offices.

As with any large company, the people who work on a project sometimes reflect the project’s size and its importance to the architectural firm. In other words, if you are a small or one-time client, you might not get the premium team.

If a company is small to medium-sized without major growth projected over the next three to five years, why pay a premium by hiring a 500-person, international architectural firm on a national service agreement? As with sports teams, it’s the talented individuals teams want on their sides, which doesn’t necessarily translate into bigger is better. Many creative, talented and highly organized people who work in smaller firms are worth considering.

Hiring a consultant who has relationships with many different-sized architectural firms should be the first step. By leveraging real estate and project management firms, and through the request for proposal process, you can optimize value and realize the best prices in either the local or national market.

Most companies have more than one lease or owned location in key cities. High-growth companies have an even greater challenge in planning ahead. Dozens of design and construction projects resulting from the strategic business plan may be thousands of miles apart.

With construction prices soaring over the last two years, how can budget over-runs be controlled? Can the architect help? Remember how architects are compensated. While they are creative thinkers and problem solvers, they aren’t known for keeping a project on budget; that’s not what they are hired to do. Rather, the architect’s function is to create cool spaces that attract and retain employees and communicate those ideas in plans for competitive pricing.

The following is a list of pros and cons for enlisting a national, as opposed to local, firm to handle many simultaneous projects from a remote location:

Pros

• Large architecture firms can provide design consistency in multiple markets;

• They can apply a company’s culture, direction and guidelines in numerous projects;

• Larger firms have the bench strength to assign more people to a series of compressed time-frame projects;

• The final designs can be used as design standards in future projects; and

• Companies can sometimes leverage multiple assignments given to one firm in exchange for discounted pricing.

Cons

• Larger firms hired in local markets don’t always understand local codes and esoteric, arcane permit processes;

• They need to hire unfamiliar local engineers and communication issues become a major concern;

• While a firm in California may have drawing templates that meet the requirements of that state, if the project is in New England, careful attention is required to revise those details to conform to local codes (for example, seismic ceiling bracing costs $1 to $1.25 per square foot and is not required in most New England states);

• Local architects and engineers who are used to working with one another are less costly and communication issues are reduced; and

• Larger firms that don’t have a presence in the project city rely on others to do the legwork of field verification and construction administration and they may miss key details during the design process.

Although it may seem like it is more efficient to use one architectural firm for all of your projects across the country, many factors can cause projects to fail. Larger firms may be appropriate for high-profile projects or for developing design guidelines and they may be part of a local architect request for proposal process. But there are many local, qualified design professionals who can execute projects more efficiently, with fewer team communication issues and more cost effectiveness.

In the final analysis, consider the high stakes involved with major design and construction projects and ensure that the firm is best-suited for your unique requirements. An objective project manager can help you make the right choice, saving you many dollars and providing peace of mind.