Practice Management Member Conversations

Whether it is Donald Trump or someone else, we should be careful to not convict someone without representation.

From my 30+ years of experience, I’d say Donald Trump’s reported actions with Mr. Teroso accurately represents many architectural clients.  Sadly, his actions may actually be more the norm, not the exception.

I have a theory, that the greater the disparity of size (numbers, dollars, political clout, etc) between a buyer and a seller; the more the larger entity gets away with.

For instance, one of our largest projects over the past 30 years was an large client that stiffed us of considerably more than Mr. Teroso claims to have lost. The project size appears to be similar to his.  Much like Mr. Tesoro, we didn’t have the resources to fight this highly public client, who threatened us with burying our company if we filed a claim against them. As Tesoro said, “I got bullied out of many thousands of dollars” and it brought our practice “to the brink of extinction”.  I too, went to meet our client face-to-face however, this one person’s “powerful position and vast team of lawyers” basically put us in a position of having to accept whatever he determined to pay; or,subject our struggling firm to months, maybe years of public wrangling.  We felt we had no choice but to accept their meager check; or go under.  Granted, it’s just my side of the story, but it’s the truth...of course.  J

Through God's grace, we are still functioning.  Also, we learned some really good lessons through this.  I’d bet almost all small practice firms who have been in business for a decade or more, have stories like this to tell.  If you don’t, consider yourself blessed.

Maybe the AIA should find a way to track various claims of client shenanigans. And maybe the AIA and its members should spend an equal or greater amount of time considering the crooked, dishonest actions of the other presidential candidate; not just Mr. Trump.  After all, stacked side-by-side, Mr. Trump’s actions pale in comparison to hers.

With all due respect Robin, your situation is all too common in our profession.  The number one focus is always on "get the job" (it's a project, not a job) and be grateful if you are awarded the project, regardless of the fee, just so you have something for your staff to work on that's chargeable time..

In my opinion, based on more than 40+ years of experience, that's a formula for failure and bankruptcy.  Most architects do not have any means (that's worth the price they may have paid for the resource - QB, Deltek, etc.) of determining their true overhead, break-even cost or how to properly calculate (it's not addition) the profit margin for a project fee.

The notion that one must accept what one can get is a flawed notion.  I would liken it to the same experience so many people have when they buy a new car.  These days, the technology has made that process a whole lot less painful and gives the customer a chance to determine the fair price to pay and still leave room for the dealer to make a reasonable profit.  And yet, with a similar level of available technology, most architects are unable to report an annual net profit of 10%, when it is my position that every project is capable of earning a 20% minimum profit, if available resources were put into play on their behalf.

We, architects and other design professionals, are NOT victims of bad clients.  We are victims of ill-advised decisions, poor choices and ignorant of proper project fee budgeting processes.  The AIA provides a wealth of available information on anything that is needed to operate a firm successfully, much of it at little or no cost. So there's no excuse for being uninformed, or as i prefer to state: "We don't know what we don't know, the knowing of which would alter our lives forever", for the better.

I offer my candid comments respectfully and welcome all responses.

Steve L. Wintner, AIA Emeritus 

Whether it is Donald Trump or someone else, we should be careful to not convict someone without representation.

From my 30+ years of experience, I’d say Donald Trump’s reported actions with Mr. Teroso accurately represents many architectural clients.  Sadly, his actions may actually be more the norm, not the exception.

I have a theory, that the greater the disparity of size (numbers, dollars, political clout, etc) between a buyer and a seller; the more the larger entity gets away with.

For instance, one of our largest projects over the past 30 years was an large client that stiffed us of considerably more than Mr. Teroso claims to have lost. The project size appears to be similar to his.  Much like Mr. Tesoro, we didn’t have the resources to fight this highly public client, who threatened us with burying our company if we filed a claim against them. As Tesoro said, “I got bullied out of many thousands of dollars” and it brought our practice “to the brink of extinction”.  I too, went to meet our client face-to-face however, this one person’s “powerful position and vast team of lawyers” basically put us in a position of having to accept whatever he determined to pay; or,subject our struggling firm to months, maybe years of public wrangling.  We felt we had no choice but to accept their meager check; or go under.  Granted, it’s just my side of the story, but it’s the truth...of course.  J

Through God's grace, we are still functioning.  Also, we learned some really good lessons through this.  I’d bet almost all small practice firms who have been in business for a decade or more, have stories like this to tell.  If you don’t, consider yourself blessed.

Maybe the AIA should find a way to track various claims of client shenanigans. And maybe the AIA and its members should spend an equal or greater amount of time considering the crooked, dishonest actions of the other presidential candidate; not just Mr. Trump.  After all, stacked side-by-side, Mr. Trump’s actions pale in comparison to hers.

With all due respect Robin, your situation is all too common in our profession.  The number one focus is always on "get the job" (it's a project, not a job) and be grateful if you are awarded the project, regardless of the fee, just so you have something for your staff to work on that's chargeable time..

In my opinion, based on more than 40+ years of experience, that's a formula for failure and bankruptcy.  Most architects do not have any means (that's worth the price they may have paid for the resource - QB, Deltek, etc.) of determining their true overhead, break-even cost or how to properly calculate (it's not addition) the profit margin for a project fee.

The notion that one must accept what one can get is a flawed notion.  I would liken it to the same experience so many people have when they buy a new car.  These days, the technology has made that process a whole lot less painful and gives the customer a chance to determine the fair price to pay and still leave room for the dealer to make a reasonable profit.  And yet, with a similar level of available technology, most architects are unable to report an annual net profit of 10%, when it is my position that every project is capable of earning a 20% minimum profit, if available resources were put into play on their behalf.

We, architects and other design professionals, are NOT victims of bad clients.  We are victims of ill-advised decisions, poor choices and ignorant of proper project fee budgeting processes.  The AIA provides a wealth of available information on anything that is needed to operate a firm successfully, much of it at little or no cost. So there's no excuse for being uninformed, or as i prefer to state: "We don't know what we don't know, the knowing of which would alter our lives forever", for the better.

I offer my candid comments respectfully and welcome all responses.

Steve L. Wintner, AIA Emeritus 

Whether it is Donald Trump or someone else, we should be careful to not convict someone without representation.

From my 30+ years of experience, I’d say Donald Trump’s reported actions with Mr. Teroso accurately represents many architectural clients.  Sadly, his actions may actually be more the norm, not the exception.

I have a theory, that the greater the disparity of size (numbers, dollars, political clout, etc) between a buyer and a seller; the more the larger entity gets away with.

For instance, one of our largest projects over the past 30 years was an large client that stiffed us of considerably more than Mr. Teroso claims to have lost. The project size appears to be similar to his.  Much like Mr. Tesoro, we didn’t have the resources to fight this highly public client, who threatened us with burying our company if we filed a claim against them. As Tesoro said, “I got bullied out of many thousands of dollars” and it brought our practice “to the brink of extinction”.  I too, went to meet our client face-to-face however, this one person’s “powerful position and vast team of lawyers” basically put us in a position of having to accept whatever he determined to pay; or,subject our struggling firm to months, maybe years of public wrangling.  We felt we had no choice but to accept their meager check; or go under.  Granted, it’s just my side of the story, but it’s the truth...of course.  J

Through God's grace, we are still functioning.  Also, we learned some really good lessons through this.  I’d bet almost all small practice firms who have been in business for a decade or more, have stories like this to tell.  If you don’t, consider yourself blessed.

Maybe the AIA should find a way to track various claims of client shenanigans. And maybe the AIA and its members should spend an equal or greater amount of time considering the crooked, dishonest actions of the other presidential candidate; not just Mr. Trump.  After all, stacked side-by-side, Mr. Trump’s actions pale in comparison to hers.

You see, it all started with an inquiry about one candidate; of course with a negative response about that one candidate.  Probably deserved.

If we are going to discuss candidates, then they should both be equally treated.

On the other hand, perhaps we could use the initial dis as a springboard to discuss what we know and can learn from bad client experiences, which was a large component of my post.  Some of you got it.  If others were offended by the political fray; well, I agree. The initial one offended me and I am sure others.  Politics should never be part of the AIA.  Too often it is, from the top down.

Whether it is Donald Trump or someone else, we should be careful to not convict someone without representation.

From my 30+ years of experience, I’d say Donald Trump’s reported actions with Mr. Teroso accurately represents many architectural clients.  Sadly, his actions may actually be more the norm, not the exception.

I have a theory, that the greater the disparity of size (numbers, dollars, political clout, etc) between a buyer and a seller; the more the larger entity gets away with.

For instance, one of our largest projects over the past 30 years was an large client that stiffed us of considerably more than Mr. Teroso claims to have lost. The project size appears to be similar to his.  Much like Mr. Tesoro, we didn’t have the resources to fight this highly public client, who threatened us with burying our company if we filed a claim against them. As Tesoro said, “I got bullied out of many thousands of dollars” and it brought our practice “to the brink of extinction”.  I too, went to meet our client face-to-face however, this one person’s “powerful position and vast team of lawyers” basically put us in a position of having to accept whatever he determined to pay; or,subject our struggling firm to months, maybe years of public wrangling.  We felt we had no choice but to accept their meager check; or go under.  Granted, it’s just my side of the story, but it’s the truth...of course.  J

Through God's grace, we are still functioning.  Also, we learned some really good lessons through this.  I’d bet almost all small practice firms who have been in business for a decade or more, have stories like this to tell.  If you don’t, consider yourself blessed.

Maybe the AIA should find a way to track various claims of client shenanigans. And maybe the AIA and its members should spend an equal or greater amount of time considering the crooked, dishonest actions of the other presidential candidate; not just Mr. Trump.  After all, stacked side-by-side, Mr. Trump’s actions pale in comparison to hers.

Whether it is Donald Trump or someone else, we should be careful to not convict someone without representation.

From my 30+ years of experience, I’d say Donald Trump’s reported actions with Mr. Teroso accurately represents many architectural clients.  Sadly, his actions may actually be more the norm, not the exception.

I have a theory, that the greater the disparity of size (numbers, dollars, political clout, etc) between a buyer and a seller; the more the larger entity gets away with.

For instance, one of our largest projects over the past 30 years was an large client that stiffed us of considerably more than Mr. Teroso claims to have lost. The project size appears to be similar to his.  Much like Mr. Tesoro, we didn’t have the resources to fight this highly public client, who threatened us with burying our company if we filed a claim against them. As Tesoro said, “I got bullied out of many thousands of dollars” and it brought our practice “to the brink of extinction”.  I too, went to meet our client face-to-face however, this one person’s “powerful position and vast team of lawyers” basically put us in a position of having to accept whatever he determined to pay; or,subject our struggling firm to months, maybe years of public wrangling.  We felt we had no choice but to accept their meager check; or go under.  Granted, it’s just my side of the story, but it’s the truth...of course.  J

Through God's grace, we are still functioning.  Also, we learned some really good lessons through this.  I’d bet almost all small practice firms who have been in business for a decade or more, have stories like this to tell.  If you don’t, consider yourself blessed.

Maybe the AIA should find a way to track various claims of client shenanigans. And maybe the AIA and its members should spend an equal or greater amount of time considering the crooked, dishonest actions of the other presidential candidate; not just Mr. Trump.  After all, stacked side-by-side, Mr. Trump’s actions pale in comparison to hers.

Whether it is Donald Trump or someone else, we should be careful to not convict someone without representation.

From my 30+ years of experience, I’d say Donald Trump’s reported actions with Mr. Teroso accurately represents many architectural clients.  Sadly, his actions may actually be more the norm, not the exception.

I have a theory, that the greater the disparity of size (numbers, dollars, political clout, etc) between a buyer and a seller; the more the larger entity gets away with.

For instance, one of our largest projects over the past 30 years was an large client that stiffed us of considerably more than Mr. Teroso claims to have lost. The project size appears to be similar to his.  Much like Mr. Tesoro, we didn’t have the resources to fight this highly public client, who threatened us with burying our company if we filed a claim against them. As Tesoro said, “I got bullied out of many thousands of dollars” and it brought our practice “to the brink of extinction”.  I too, went to meet our client face-to-face however, this one person’s “powerful position and vast team of lawyers” basically put us in a position of having to accept whatever he determined to pay; or,subject our struggling firm to months, maybe years of public wrangling.  We felt we had no choice but to accept their meager check; or go under.  Granted, it’s just my side of the story, but it’s the truth...of course.  J

Through God's grace, we are still functioning.  Also, we learned some really good lessons through this.  I’d bet almost all small practice firms who have been in business for a decade or more, have stories like this to tell.  If you don’t, consider yourself blessed.

Maybe the AIA should find a way to track various claims of client shenanigans. And maybe the AIA and its members should spend an equal or greater amount of time considering the crooked, dishonest actions of the other presidential candidate; not just Mr. Trump.  After all, stacked side-by-side, Mr. Trump’s actions pale in comparison to hers.