Payscale for landscape architects
Huskys226
Thanks
PMDavis
ASLA as "A Map of the Territory" in 1997.
Billing rates for LA's under 5 years experience range as follows
<$20 hr 14%
$21-30 18%
$31-40 34%
$41-50 28%
>$50 7%
If one allows that 2/5 of the billled fee goes to office overhead expenses
(rule of thumb)... then pay for LA's with less than 5 years experience would
range from less than $12 per hour to more than $30. Mean hourly base
starting pay would be around $18-24 per hour before taxes, insurance, etc.
The average new grad doesn't have the design capability and business
experience to carry his own value in salary. He might create a net loss to
an office about $10,000 to $20,000 in the first six months to a year until
he learns the office system and how to fit into it. He should be grateful
and anything that he can get. After a year or two, he might know enough to
copy someone else's design with few enough errors that they can be corrected
without starting over completely. Perhaps then he's worth a little bit to
the office. After that he might start earning enough to pay back the
initial investment that the office has put into him in training and
orientation.
Huskys226 wrote in message <20000617103423...@ng-ff1.aol.com>...
Adam Alexander
> The average new grad doesn't have the design capability and business
> experience to carry his own value in salary. He might create a net loss to
> an office about $10,000 to $20,000 in the first six months to a year until
> he learns the office system and how to fit into it. He should be grateful
> and anything that he can get. After a year or two, he might know enough to
> copy someone else's design with few enough errors that they can be corrected
> without starting over completely. Perhaps then he's worth a little bit to
> the office. After that he might start earning enough to pay back the
> initial investment that the office has put into him in training and
> orientation.
I think this is a very interesting response. What you are saying is that rather
than being able to help revitalize an office by presenting the latest teachings,
or jump in with computer skills many older LA's might not have, a new LA is
simply a parasite, living off the work of others who might some day possess
enough sense to actually contribute something.
Shortly before his death, Jot Carpenter, FASLA, a former ASLA president,
professor of Landscape Architecture at Ohio State and former head of the
Department of Landscape Architecture at OSU completed research on the past and
future of the profession. This data was presented to the ASLA leadership and at
a conference at the University of Georgia. I don't have the information in front
of me, but some of what I remember from a lecture Jot presented at OSU on the
subject follow. He discovered are that the number of landscape architecture
graduates compared to the number of registered landscape architects is only a
little more than 50%. That the number of graduates from landscape architecture
programs is steadily diminishing and a smaller percentage of those graduates are
going on to seek registration and membership in the ASLA. If the trend does not
change within the next few years the number of retiring landscape architects
will actually exceed the number of landscape architecture graduates.
I will always remember the great advice Jot offerred me. One thought sticks out
in my mind. He once said that every year the standards in landscape architecture
programs get higher and the amount of knowledge passed on is greater. Because of
this, he advised that you always want to be hiring the people who come after you
in the profession, because you can't compete against them.
Adam Alexander
President
Ohio State University
Student Chapter-ASLA
PMDavis
profession. However, like most educators he is slightly biased toward the
recruitment of his students (as he should be). In my opinion, OSU grads are
above the norm in possessing useful work skills when compared to some other
programs. I think that there is some merit in the assertion that new grads
enter having the latest technology at hand. There does come a time in the
life of most offices (like any business) when it needs renewal... but at
some point one needs to stop making investments and enjoy the payoff of past
investment. I think that it's indisputable that a new grad today has had
better training and more intense exposure than a comparable grad in days
past.
It amazes me that there are so many new grads fancy themself to be God's
gift to design before they've "paid their dues", so to speak. Don't
underestimate the value of hard earned experience when it comes to
understanding what a client actually requires and the simplist way to
fulfill that need.
The profit line of an ongoing office is not dependant upon having the latest
technology. It is more dependant upon the ability of utilizing the
technology that it has already invested in. There are still plenty of firms
drawing by hand, and doing so profitably. I have yet to find the computer
program that automatically knows where the trees are supposed to go. A
computer still needs to have someone with a brain running it. The greatest
benefit of computer generated drawings is the capability to automate plant
counts and facilitate revisions. It can also generate a "tighter" drawing,
if that is the style that one is after. For a quick loose sketch, an
experienced practitioner can still produce one faster by hand than on a
machine. Compare the simplicity of picking up a pencil and drawing on paper
with 1. setting layer current, 2. turning ortho on, 3. typing "line", 4.
picking a point with a mouse, 5. click on start point, etc...
Adam Alexander wrote in message <394FF117...@osu.edu>...
Adam Alexander
PMDavis wrote:
> I recall meeting Jot....he has made an incomparable contribution to the
> profession. However, like most educators he is slightly biased toward the
> recruitment of his students (as he should be). In my opinion, OSU grads are
> above the norm in possessing useful work skills when compared to some other
> programs. I think that there is some merit in the assertion that new grads
> enter having the latest technology at hand. There does come a time in the
> life of most offices (like any business) when it needs renewal... but at
> some point one needs to stop making investments and enjoy the payoff of past
> investment. I think that it's indisputable that a new grad today has had
> better training and more intense exposure than a comparable grad in days
> past.
>
Thanks for the compliment concerning OSU grads...I think. And I'm glad
we at least share similar opinions of Jot.
> It amazes me that there are so many new grads fancy themself to be God's
> gift to design before they've "paid their dues", so to speak. Don't
> underestimate the value of hard earned experience when it comes to
> understanding what a client actually requires and the simplist way to
> fulfill that need.
>
I think perhaps you are to some extent confusing arrogance with the
brashness of
youth. There is something to be said for experience. But, I contend that
experience in and of itself can lead to a failure to see other than what
you
have experienced. In short, stagnation. Also, keep in mind that many LA
students
are not fresh faced 19 year olds. I, and others I attend school with,
had
successful careers in other fields before choosing to leave that behind
to
pursue a career we felt a passion, even a calling for. Many new grads
have a lot
more savvy when it comes to the bottom line than you are giving them
credit for.
Try accomplishing $12 million in sales on a 7.5% payroll, keep a staff
of 75 or
so happy, and provide the best customer service possible while turning a
profit.
It isn't easy, and I've done it.
>
> The profit line of an ongoing office is not dependant upon having the latest
> technology. It is more dependant upon the ability of utilizing the
> technology that it has already invested in. There are still plenty of firms
> drawing by hand, and doing so profitably. I have yet to find the computer
> program that automatically knows where the trees are supposed to go. A
> computer still needs to have someone with a brain running it. The greatest
> benefit of computer generated drawings is the capability to automate plant
> counts and facilitate revisions. It can also generate a "tighter" drawing,
> if that is the style that one is after. For a quick loose sketch, an
> experienced practitioner can still produce one faster by hand than on a
> machine. Compare the simplicity of picking up a pencil and drawing on paper
> with 1. setting layer current, 2. turning ortho on, 3. typing "line", 4.
> picking a point with a mouse, 5. click on start point, etc...
>
You won't find much argument with me concerning the value of hand
rendering and
sketching. Ot the ability of some firms to find success without the need
for advanced technology. I think, though, that firms that choose this
route are to an extent limiting themselves in the scale and scope of
projects they can compete for because of their lack of resources. At OSU
students are pretty much prohibited from using computer
graphics, etc. for final designs to help develop hand rendering
techniques during their first year of the program. I don't think the
ability to produce a sketch faster by hand than on a machine is limited
to the experienced practitioner. Programs like AutoCAD do have their
uses, however. While the initially it may take more time to input a
design into
a CAD program, the payoff is in the end stages of the process and the
ability to have a easily reproducable collection of design and
construction details. In some ways, I
think CAD programs can become a trap for the novice user. They think
that with
CAD, they can do anything and step away from other techniques. Often
with detrimental results. But, people must often learn those lessons for
themselves.
The use of technology I was thinking more of in my response is the use
of GIS.
One of the fortunate things about doing projects in Ohio is that the
entire
state is available for download in .dlg files. These can be easily
converted
into .dxf files and used in AutoCad, but more importantly in GIS
programs like
ARCVIEW. Using that technology it is possible to assist clients in
determining
the best site location for their particular need and greatly reduce
costly site
visits and other site identification costs. Last quarter one of the
classes I took was Terrain Analysis with Doug Way. In that class
training is provided on how to analyze the land using the latest in
satellite imagery. This is just a small example of the assistance and
VALUE a young LA can provide an office. These are valuable skills and
ones I do not think limit a recent grad to having to take "whatever they
can get."
In closing, in my last post I discussed the findings by Jot Carpenter
concerning the future of the profession . If all LA's share the same
feelings toward new
grads you appear to display, it is little wonder that many are finding
careers outside landscape architecture more to their liking.
Adam
PMDavis
are more LA's in the world. As a professional, I think that it's healthy
for the profession and I'm glad to accept them as a peer, but it's not a
critical area of concern for me. Increased numbers of LA works both ways.
Having more LA's make it easier to justify licensure, makes marketing and
client education easier, and aids social and professional identity. On the
other hand, there is some advantage to being the only option for a client,
rather than having to compete for work with other LA's. But then I'm a
cynic. :-)
I have the greatest respect for your past work experience (and that of other
second career grads). I was referring specifically to the new grads who
lack the advantage of past relevent work experience. I've worked with, and
have hired a few of them, and I still don't understand what was going
through their mind. One can expect to exist in an office for a constructive
purpose of some sort. Simply showing up and hanging around isn't enough to
justify a paycheck, in my mind.
I'm starting to look seriously at GIS. So far the hardware that I've looked
at and used isn't sufficient to drive the programs, and manipulate the data,
at a satisfactory level of speed and complexity, although it's headed in
that direction. I can't with a good consciense charge someone $95 an hour
to sit and wait for a map to regenerate.
Adam Alexander wrote in message <395167DC...@osu.edu>...
Adam Alexander
PMDavis wrote:
> Not being in education, I don't have a vested interest in seeing that there
> are more LA's in the world. As a professional, I think that it's healthy
> for the profession and I'm glad to accept them as a peer, but it's not a
> critical area of concern for me. Increased numbers of LA works both ways.
> Having more LA's make it easier to justify licensure, makes marketing and
> client education easier, and aids social and professional identity. On the
> other hand, there is some advantage to being the only option for a client,
> rather than having to compete for work with other LA's. But then I'm a
> cynic. :-)
>
I see your point concerning competition, but don't you have a concern that
without the exposure and awareness to the public greater numbers of LA's provide
someone other profession will provide another option for the client? In Ohio we
are trying to get a new licensure law that changes the current one from a title
law to a practice law. One of the biggest roadblocks is that LA's are
outnumbered by engineers by at least 30 to 1. The small numbers of LA's have
enabled larger professions to determine what it is LA's are capable of doing.
For example, engineers, by law are the only ones allowed to stamp a grading plan
in Ohio, yet no Ohio university teaches their engineers how to grade. OSU,
provides LA's with three courses on grading, overland drainage, etc. The result
is often that an LA does the work, but has to have an engineer place their stamp
on it. This really doesn't make a lot of sense.
>
> I have the greatest respect for your past work experience (and that of other
> second career grads). I was referring specifically to the new grads who
> lack the advantage of past relevent work experience. I've worked with, and
> have hired a few of them, and I still don't understand what was going
> through their mind. One can expect to exist in an office for a constructive
> purpose of some sort. Simply showing up and hanging around isn't enough to
> justify a paycheck, in my mind.
>
That sounds like a poor work ethic on the part of an individual or individuals.
You get those in any profession. Whay I've found in the past is that people like
that need a good boot in the rear to get their attention, or a good boot out the
door if the first one doesn't work. This also illustrates the importance of
internships and cooperative programs. If the new grad has some indication what
is expected in an office before they graduate, the transition from student to
employee would probably be much easier.
>
> I'm starting to look seriously at GIS. So far the hardware that I've looked
> at and used isn't sufficient to drive the programs, and manipulate the data,
> at a satisfactory level of speed and complexity, although it's headed in
> that direction. I can't with a good consciense charge someone $95 an hour
> to sit and wait for a map to regenerate.
>
The computers in our labs are PIII 500's with 256MB ram. They seem to move
things right along, but it is really dependent on how big the area is, of
course. I used to use the Eaglepoint Landcadd add-on for AutoCAD and found it to
be unreliable for creating 3d models and the like. ARCVIEW seems to be much
better and presents a better looking image. The largest scale I've used it for
is a county (roughly 450 square miles). Those machines handled that fairly well.
PMDavis
$40,000 trying to defend our practice law in the legislature. The small
number in the profession was, as you indicate, an impediment in fighting
that battle. Of course, grading plans aren't so much of an issue here as we
only have the two elevations... the swamp, and the edge of the swamp. <BG>
Seriously though, we have "home rule" which means the local governing agency
has discretion as to whether they accept a certain profession for certain
types of work. St. John's River Water Management District will accept LA
prepared wetland restoration plans, but the other five agencys are more
problematic. They do, however, accept planting plans that were prepared by
a biologist (which has no licensing requirement whatsoever). Somewhat
inconsistent.
Adam Alexander wrote in message <3954C39D...@osu.edu>...
>
[snipped]