Vicente Wolf

Well, people don’t like to talk about money! I do, however, truly appreciate these posts…Janell

OK, I hear you and completely agree with your reasoning, but I must ask this: What do you think a new designer who is trying to build a portfolio of work should charge? I keep reading so many different opinions on this, so I’d like to hear yours. What did you charge when you first started? Your years of experience and that fact that you are a published author of design books, goes a long way in supporting your fees. A client doesn’t have to look far to see what you have, and what you can, accomplish.

Vicente – This has been a hot topic for as long as I’ve been around. I think you have the right answers, but I’d like to define additional parts of the problem, so we may develop more ammunition. On reflection, I think it’s less important whether we charge a commission or fee than we understand why we get squeezed and what to do.

I believe ALL design professionals fight an uphill battle for financial respect more so than other professionals (doctors, lawyers, accountants) or fine artists. Architects aren’t asked to discount, but regularly compete for projects on the basis of fees, which is really the same thing. And we are often asked for elaborate presentations, including analysis or design as part of the competition, so some give away part of their fees to get the project. Is it because other professionals provide necessities, but we provide both necessities and intangibles that people believe the design aspect can be discounted? Are there too many amateurs working in the design professions and driving prices down?

All other types of artists at their pinnacle; whether painters, singers, or actors, seem to have greater financial reward with fewer questions asked than design professionals at the same level. Does a great painter have to justify the cost of his painting by any metric other than its value in the marketplace? Have fine artists established some intrinsic value to their work that we have not? Is it because only Bob Dylan can be Bob Dylan, but we haven’t convinced the public that we are not interchangeable? Why does the belief persist that design work is not only fun but easy and given a little more time in their lives that the clients could do it themselves?

Perhaps most significantly, studies show that there are more design professionals, in good times or bad, than there are projects. And therefore the clients are aware of their advantage in negotiations. I think in a free-market society, these problems will persist and the allure of doing design will always attract some folks who will work for less. I think our efforts are best spent finding clients who DO value design, educating them about our unique vision and irreducible skills, our worth in the market place, and our willingness to stand our ground or walk from unrewarding situations. After all, notable designers like you are not interchangeable. I think all of us should spend some time educating our clients, the public and others in the industry for our common betterment, as you do here. Light eventually conquers darkness. – Gary

I agree with the client point of view expressed above,
it is the lack of details and specifics in the contract that
usually bother me. Is it all in or not? What add ons should I expect? Also, I particularly dislike the “buddy buddy” feelings that some designers try to generate, this is a business relationship-and an expensive one at that- so the more it is kept
to a businesslike tone, the happier I think we will all be. I just finished a large renovation with a great builder – his contract is cost +18%, and I loved that system because it put us both on
the side of making the correct decision at each point, rather
than me worrying about how many hours it was taking, or feeling like someone was choosing the most expensive route since his commission was going to be added to it.

Also: if the designer has their own product lines and store, and the designer uses their own fabric, furniture, and accessories, is their commission based on the retail price of those goods? There is already a hefty markup (as with all retail) on these items.

SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT IF IT IS A 100 THOUSAND DOLLAR JOB THAT YOU GET 35% OF THAT TOTAL???
I THINK IT DOES COME DOWN TO ALL THE FACTORS OTHERS HAVE LISTED…
IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE AFFORDED YOUR SELF THE PRICE YOU HAVE PUT ALL OF YOUR SELF TOWARDS… I ALSO THINK A PERSON CAN ASK WHAT THEY WANT AND IF THE MARKET CAN TAKE IT WHY NOT???
IT DOES TAKE YEARS IN ANY PROFESSION BEFORE ONE FEELS ONES VOICE IN IT….
THIS TOO, IS SOMETHING YOU COULD MENTOR OTHER DESIGNERS ON…

XXOO
MELISSA

TO GARY: LIGHTNESS AND DARKNESS ARE JUST TOO POLES OF THE SAME THING… WE HAVE JUST FORGOTTEN THAT… EVEN DARKNESS IS DIVINE..

I, apparently, have no knowledge at all. If you buy at auction, is the commission based on the hammer price or the total price, which includes the hammer price, 8.25% sales tax, 20% buyers premium, and shipping & insurance? And, of course, the wire transfer and storage fee. Does it include the project management fee if you need to get permits for electrical work, supervise construction, or pay for a building inspector?

Can someone send me a flashlight?

and lets not forget the p.i.t.a. upcharge (pain-in-the-axx)

First of all thank you so much for being willing to discuss this challenging and always sensitive topic.

Secondly, please do a part II as there are so many good reader question here!

I charge a combinations of fees and have never had trouble laying them out, I am sure likely do to a previous career in securities and finance…successful but not happy. Now as I designer I am happy albeit far less successful financially! HA!

But, the flat % commission is something I had not considered. I charge for a consultation and then a flat fee for the design and implementation. I charge an additional fee to search for antiques or sit at auction. But sadly, this is not something that all of my clients require/have interest in/see the value in incorporating. And, of course there is that more rare, for me anyway, situation when they have beautiful pieces they alredy own. Or it’s not needed for say a bathroom project.

But now, I can’t help but wonder if there is a better way??? Especially, with regard to the antiques search/auction aspect.

Todd’s comment made me laugh! Wouldn’t we all love to charge extra for the hours of sleep lost from angst!!!

The value of interior design, 1994. (interior design as an artform) (Editorial)
Article from:Interior Design Article date:January 1, 1994 Author: Abercrombie, Stanley
Please don’t think I plan to make a habit of this, but just this once I want to take more than the usual space for an editorial statement. On this page in October, comments titled “It’s the Design” urged designers to value–and to charge for–their design expertise. Some of you agreed with my comments (for example, see Marvin Affrime’s letter in our forum section); some of you didn’t agree; and the following expansion of those thoughts will also, inevitably, be controversial. That’s fine. But I feel passionately about the danger of something important being lost if designers continue disguising their profession as just another business.

Interior design is a business, we recognize, and a demanding one; the forum instituted exactly two years ago and dedicated solely to business and professional news and opinion, demonstrates that recognition. But, for most of us, the business aspect of interior design is not its chief attraction. What drew most designers to their profession is the fact that interior design is an art.

It is not a fine art, but an applied art. It cannot luxuriate in its independence as can painting and sculpture, forming itself without regard to any but aesthetic demands. It is, instead, a hardworking art, with serious and sometimes mundane problems to solve. And just as there are a great many buildings that never achieve the status of architecture, there are a great many interiors that never achieve the level of art. But there are many that do, and, at their best, interior designers are artists. Although the artistic element is difficult to separate from interior design’s more practical elements, it must not be denied that it often exists and can add an important extra value to our work. Granted, a designer who idealistically focuses solely on art may have trouble finding any opportunity to practice the art; still, it seems undeniable that in today’s difficult economy, the art of interior design is undervalued. Talking recently with the impressively articulate principal of one of our Giant firms, I was told that the firm’s emphasis now, in its efforts to get new work, is on economic benefits for clients. Similarly, a fine designer in California told me a couple of months ago that he never mentions appearance or design in making a presentation these days, but that instead he promises to produce a more efficient plan than his competitors. And one firm that used to call itself “architects” is emphasizing its technological savvy by now calling itself “cybertects.” If the work of these firms sometimes transcends problem solving and becomes art, they’re certainly not bragging about it. One likely reason is that in interior design, the element of art is inseparable from more practical elements.

It arises, in fact, from the thoughtful accommodation of very practical needs, not from any impulse or motive that is extraneous to such accommodation. As architect W. R. Lethaby wrote in Form and Civilization, “Art is not a special sauce applied to ordinary cooking; it is the cooking itself if it is good.”

Another reason for ignoring the element of art in interior design is that the value of art is notoriously difficult to measure. The essence of art is intangible. It cannot be quantified as a number of square feet or pounds or yards; consequently, it is difficult to value in terms of dollars. It is true that the number of hours taken to achieve a work of art can be recorded, but such records rarely include the value of previous experience. Whistler, accused of excessive pricing for one of his paintings, was asked, “For two days’ labor, you ask two hundred guineas?” He replied, “No, I ask it for the knowledge of a lifetime.” Which reminds us that, if it is both an art and a business, interior design is also a craft.

Technique and experience count a lot in this field, just as they do in the finest of fine arts. Whistler had more than a painter’s vision; he also had the technical expertise to effectively manifest that vision. Such expertise is not achieved by the novice or the housewife-with-flair or the guy-who-can-get-you-a-good-deal. It is achieved through the increasingly rigorous education that our profession requires and through the subsequent practical application of that education. Like the surgeon or lawyer, the interior designer must be both educated and practiced. Like them, the designer deserves appropriate compensation.

But Whistler’s vision was his main asset. Beyond skill and competence, there remains the special but hard-to-measure value-added element of art, and only the designer’s education, practice and vision can combine to produce that element. The designer does more than plan; the designer designs. I believe it is the difficulty of determining appropriate compensation that has led to attempts by many interior designers to measure their art in inappropriate ways. Sometimes, by ignoring their art altogether, they underestimate their own value; at other times, by confusing their art with the more mundane functions of their practice from which their art arises, they overestimate that art. Art, for example, does not necessarily solve social problems.

I do not mean that interior design cannot address and sometimes solve such problems; in some cases, it must do so. But the aspect of interior design that is aesthetic does not solve them; it does something quite different.

In the early 1950s, designer George Nelson, speaking to the American Institute of Architects, expressed it this way: “…nothing is less consequential in the creation of a work of art than good intentions.”

And a couple of years later, lecturing in Vienna, Alvar Aalto made a similar point: “Form is a mystery,” he said, “which eludes definition but makes us feel good in a way quite unlike social aid.”

If art is amoral, then, and “quite unlike social aid,” what is it that art can do for us? How is it that it “makes us feel good?”

Art heightens the quality of our lives. Walter Pater, in the last paragraph of The Renaissance, his book of just more than a century ago, observed that “Art comes to you proposing frankly to give nothing, except the highest quality to your moments as they pass, and simply for those moments’ sake.” This view has been criticized as proposing “art for art’s sake,” but, at least in this passage, Pater is clearly proposing art for the sake of the quality of our lives and of our clients’ lives. It is this heightened quality that interior designers as artists can offer and that no one in related fields–not space planners, nor realtors, nor developers, nor construction cost analysts, nor facility managers–can. These people perform useful functions; interior designers can perform them too; but interior designers can bring something more to a project. It is this heightened quality, this civilizing of our living places and working places, this art that designers not only must continue to offer but also, I believe, must emphasize. Despite the difficulties in isolating, measuring and evaluating the artistic element of interior design, that element must be recognized, and even be bragged about, for it cannot be appreciated and will not be properly rewarded unless it is recognized. A question designers should ask their clients and their potential clients to ask themselves is this: What are you going to be seeing in your new space? Assuming that your newly planned environment is going to be efficient, well organized and supportive of increased productivity, is it also going to be interesting, uplifting, enriching–or even bearable–to look at and to be in day after day, year after year?

Art is worth paying for because, in these days of social discontent and random violence, in these days of homelessness, drugs, guns and plaque, when our urban environments are becoming increasingly brutalized, we increasingly need both physical and mental refuge from that brutalization. We need the solace of interiors that are not only intelligently functional but also intelligently artful. In these days more than ever, the art of interior design is worth paying for, because a heightened quality of life is worth paying for.

OK – I am a newer designer and I have 5 clients right now (which I m very happy about). I charge a 20% mark up from my net pricing, along with an hourly fee ($85).

Vincente, in your excellent opinion, what do you think of this pricing “system”? The majority of my clients do not have large budgets. But, we go room by room and they keep asking me to come back.

BTW – Thank you for your mention of Sean Low, his blog is great and very helpful. You are a gift to us newer designers – Your insight is priceless and unbelievably appreciated!

Have a wonderful weekend! xxoo

I also wanted to add that I really enjoy this blog for the content but also for the encouragement of comments and diversity of opinions. In my experience I find that many design/decorating bloggers are really only interested in having their views reinforced by their readers. They don’t generally promote discussions with differing opinions. I like that you are not afraid to put yourself and your ideas out there and then ask for and welcome all comments. I think your blog is one of the best kept secrets on the internet.

Todd, Thanks for both the articles. I agree with your notes, and those of Todd’s. I also think Mandy hit the nail on the head. Our profession is not respected because the shelter magazines, and TV shows don’t help us educate the public. And with so many calling themselves “designers” these days it is difficult for a layman to justify a fee if they think they are getting suzy decorator.

I myself have met several “suzy decorators” in my town through different functions. I had one ask me a few years ago if I could teach her how to space plan. Despite having no clue how to do it she had already attempted it on her own, costing her client thousands of dollars in mistakes. No wonder no one trusts the word “designer!” Or wants to pay for it.

We need better regulations, and better mainstream education that provides quality knowledge on what we do, and why it is worth the money.

laurel – i think the concept of a “mark-down” is flawed from the very beginning because it implies that there is room for negotiation from the get-go e.g. “let me give you a discount” which is the very essence of this conversation – but rather here is the net cost and here is the commission (design fee) that you will be charged on top of that.

to me discounting from a retail price rather than taking a mark-up on net is the equal to a perpetual “going-out-of business sale.

I agree that the “Suzy decorators” are a problem, Amanda, and it never ceases to amaze me what some of them come up with. One vendor told me about one who was upset when she was told that she couldn’t get a single hide for a sofa that was something like 12′ long, didn’t understand why, and threw a fit when told it wasn’t doable.

I don’t think that regulation is the answer, though, but certainly better educating the public is. This is what organizations such as ASID and IIDA *ought* to be doing, but they have failed miserably at that task.

We also all need to lean how to differentiate our own selves and what value we bring to the table that the prospect’s best friend or neighbor who “has a good eye” doesn’t – and be able to articulate it in a way that makes sense, connects with what people are looking for, and differentiates us from everyone else, both as designers in general vs architects, contractors, etc., but also as individuals.

Todd and Laurel – I’m going to take Laurel’s side on a couple of her points as well as Todd’s. I think it is great, Laurel, that you are serving a niche market of young people. Some of the design magazines create the misimpression that one must be able to afford Christian Liaigre contemporary furniture or museum quality antiques to have a well-designed space. I think your designs are nice and I’ll bet a big improvement on what your clients could have done by themselves. On the other hand Laurel, if by working with a contractor you mean that you are dealing with structural or code issues, then you should have a degree and be licensed to do so, unless someone else on the team provides those services. And the better design schools will expand your boundaries, though we are discussing this issue on the blog of a great self-taught designer!

EM – Obviously I’m with you about the real value of design services, though you will look in vain for consistency. Some decades ago there was Federal action against some architects (I think the AIA!) for collusion in restriction of free trade in their attempts to establish standardized fee practices! Other professions have established more consistency by codifying in law not just their degree and licensing requirements, but by making entry into their schools VERY restrictive. In other words, reducing the supply to increase the demand. But as you can see, design professionals could never agree on that much! I know there are architects and designers working for different types of clients in many capacities at many different fees. At heart we are all artists and problems solvers. So caveat emptor, but don’t despair. Most will give you far more than they will ever charge you! Look how much free time we’ve spent right here! – Gary

You don’t need a license or a special degree to do interior design work, or even architecture, for that matter. Most houses in America are drawn by draftsmen, or by the building contractor, not some specially licensed person. Most planning and building departments in this country will accept drawings from anyone, provided they have all the necessary details required to get the permit. I’ve been doing renovation and building design as a sideline for 30 years, in several states, and all I’ve got is a t-square and pencils.

The fundamental reason architects and designers are underpaid is the low barriers to entry. If architects and interior designers want a premium fee, they have the burden of proof to show that fee is justified in value added. They can’t rely on the courts to uphold licensure laws, because it raises costs for other stakeholders, such as the BIA, and tends to restraint of trade, which the courts don’t favor.

So for the foreseeable future, you have a large supply of designers, with all sorts of backgrounds, competing for a small number of jobs. It’s extreme competition, and implies you have to do some heavy duty sales and marketing, either to increase your competitiveness, or to expand your potential customer base.

Just to be clear, a political entity, such as a city, adopts one of the major codes, in whole or in part. The political entity can choose to delete parts of the code, and/or write regulations of their own, and they usually do, to some extent. Most jurisdictions don’t require an architect to do plans, even though that provision might be in the code itself. You have to check with the building and planning department where the project is located. The rules vary a lot from town to town, or state to state. You certainly don’t need a licensed professional to paint a room, hang curtains. or arrange furniture.

I did read what you wrote, and I stand by my statements.

The distinction here is three-fold: (1) interior decorating, which almost never needs a license of any kind, (2) interior design and building design, which probably doesn’t need a license, and (3) electrical, structural, and plumbing work, which may require a licensed professional plumber or electrician.

Having an architect does not prevent bad work. Frank Lloyd Wright used to say that good architecture is supposed to leak. Many architects know very little about construction– that’s not what they teach in architecture school. Some of them have never lifted a hammer. Contractors know this and often hike their budget if an architect is involved– because they expect headaches.

Architects and designers have been trying to make the ‘public safety’ argument for many decades, and their claims have been generally rejected. And the biggest stakeholders of all, namely the insurance companies, who are the biggest influence on code development, have shown no interest in this argument at all.

With residential and commercial real estate investment at historic lows, where every penny has to ‘pencil out,’ you aren’t going to see decision makers spending an extra nickel on designers if they don’t have to. And you can’t change that with legislative fiat, because it raises time and costs significantly. So if you want work, you are going to have to convince the more upscale client, with an extra margin of cash, that your services are value added. That’s just the way it is.

Scone – I agree that having a licensed architect /interior designer does not nec. mean the project will be problem free. However, I think that architects and interior designers who are qualified bring their expertise to projects that someone without the training can not.

I have seen a lot of odd-to-dangerous things done by people calling themselves interior designers without the background / license. An example: putting a large chandelier over a bathtub. This is a no-no in my province but not something that a decorator would know, having no knowledge of the building code.

I live in a house with an add on that was done by a ‘casual builder’ and it’s absolute crap structurally and aesthetically. Just because anyone in your area can build a home doesn’t mean that they should.

The fact that you and Gary are disagreeing over who should be allowed to do what work only reinforces that there needs to be recognized professional standards across the country. When you are involved in construction I don’t think you should leave the work open to anyone off the street. Scone, you may be very knowledgeable and competent and know more that an architect but the next guy may not and there is nothing to stop him from building a home in your area. That’s why there needs to be licensing and regulations – not for the people who can do the work but to stop people who cannot.

To Todd–

I was a little taken aback by your comments. One, you may not like my style which is indeed quite different from yours, which is much more conceptual and can’t be compared at all to my young family-friendly, northern Westchester clientele designs. Also, I took all of the photos myself. However, I have to say that your comments hurt my feelings and I don’t think this is the forum to trash another designer’s work. I made the comment about design school, because I went for three years and did a lot of “pretty projects” that had almost nothing to do with the real aspect of designing. I do think that for designers doing contract work, that it makes sense to get the degree, but not really for residential design, beyond basic drafting, historical styles, space planning, color, specifying and business.(and perhaps a few more) The rest I learned when I went to work for a woman who had, had NO training whatsoever who had a store in Westchester. But you have to remember that i am designing for families with young children with strollers and soccer balls, etc. Also, they have very limited budgets. My system has worked nicely for me and I was simply sharing my approach. I am not open to price negotiation, except in rare cases. I present the bottom line price and if its too high. I will look for something in their price range. I tell my clients that I am like a “walking/talking store”. When they “think store”, they feel better. It is rarely an issue for me. Quite frankly, my actual mark-up varies greatly, but is competitive with store prices of the same or similar items and is lower. And yes, most of my clients are completely clueless about design and sometimes I am working with things they already own and certain limitations in their own taste level.

To Gary: Thank you. I do not provide architectural services, but on occasion, I do have to work with architects and contractors and I either charge a flat fee for my time, or an hourly.

I did go to the NY School of Interior Design for three years (from 88-91) and did tons of pretty projects which didn’t really teach all that much on how to be a designer. Maybe its improved since my time there in the late 80s. I hope so. I did do very well there, however and even beat out 40 other students at the NY Design Center’s sponsored annual competition, I place first and was awarded a very nice scholarship.

Laurel – You’re welcome! I think everyone that wishes to participate in a design profession should be able to. I only stomp my feet and wave my architect’s license when there are issues of public safety, codes and construction quality at risk. Interior designers should be able to practice and charge any way they believe best, though there is quite a difference of opinion here about what is best for your profession as a whole. The issue is complicated because more people are practicing both architecture and interior design than ever before, and I believe the trend will increase in the future.

Design and art schools vary in quality. Some top tier universities have only adequate art and design schools, and vice versa. Sometimes private schools offer better programs than public schools, but sometimes not. The universities that have broad-based programs in architecture, urban design, interiors and fine arts like Parsons, RISD and my Washington U are probably the best, though they are expensive and don’t take all applicants, but they also have night schools for those already working. Obviously, I bristled at being told architecture schools were useless by the gentleman who never set foot in one!

Standards of professional practice and charging are obviously both objective and personal issues because they involve our livelihoods and sense of self worth. Some professional interior designers here feel their profession is lowered by “suzy decorators” who are untrained hobbyists, much as I am concerned that even well-intentioned, self-trained, unlicensed “architects” will have gaps of knowledge that lessen our profession standards. I don’t think interior designers should be pressured into a given system, but I think it is very useful when we understand how each other practices, how we can all add to our knowledge base, and ask ourselves if we can structure our practices and charges to our own benefit and that of all design professionals. I wonder if the AIA and ASID have presented such a discussion forum. If not, this was a good place to start!

And now I’ll to give it a rest for a while and let others have a turn! – Gary

I have to disagree with you sketch42. Design training teaches you how to draft, construction techniques, how to navigate the building code, architectural history and design principles. The fundamentals. Design training is exactly what separates decorators from designers. Again there is a misunderstanding about what the two specialties do. Decorators do not deal with construction while designers do.

But the point is that design training does separate the decorators from the designers – aside from issues of taste and creativity.

Decorators don’t nec. require any training but designers do. There are self taught ‘designers’ but likely they have staff who are able to read architectural drawings and produce them etc. It’s possible to get away without the training in residential design but definetly not in commercial design. But to be a designer you have to be able to understand and direct construction in either milieu.

Taste and creativity – you might be right. Maybe these things can’t be taught. But you can learn about proportion etc. I have seen the work of designers where consideration for scale would be helped by a little design education…