Boston: The Least Sucky American City to be An Architect

  • 22 Aug 2012
  • by
  • Architecture News
. Photo via Flickr CC User Raymond Larose.

According to a new survey published in Architect Magazine, Boston is starting to show “encouraging, though not significant, signs of improvement” in its architecture industry. Well, something’s better than nothing, right?

2012 Architectural Survey, conducted by accounting firm CBIZ Tofiasv, found that profit per hour increased from 2010’s $5.54 to $6.89; and the direct labor utilization rate (aka the portion of payroll that pays for income-generating labor, not training, administration, time off, etc.) also increased from last year, which in turn was an improvement over the three previous years.

But it’s not all rosy in Beantown. First of all, the 2011–2012 increase wasn’t huge, and, what’s more, the overhead rate didn’t drop. In 2007, it was $47.27; in 2011, $59.09, reported the Boston Business Journal.

We got flurries of responses when we asked “What’s the best country to find work?” but we didn’t think to ask: “What’s the best American city to find work?”

If these small economic flutterings are anything to go by, could Boston be the answer? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Story via Architect Magazine

Cite: Quirk, Vanessa. "Boston: The Least Sucky American City to be An Architect" 22 Aug 2012. ArchDaily. Accessed 25 May 2015. <>
  • Robert Vecchione

    Let’s face it, there’s no where to hide for architects in this economy. Europe is bankrupt and the US and China are headed in that direction.

    It’s time to head for the exits.

  • Bostonian

    Boston may do well by the numbers, but it remains the most sterile, uninspiring, and corporate place on the planet to work as an architect. Quality and quantity are two very different things…

    • Hesh

      Yes true. But Im not going to spend my life making “fantastic” architecture and not getting paid properly. For the work we do, we get pennies in return. For me Id chase the money all day long. Whether your building the next grand theatre or the next ikea, your on AutoCAD for most of the day.
      I reiterate I will go where the money is. Id rather have quality of life than quality architecture

    • BosArch

      You must be speaking strictly off of your own perspective of the city. Boston had many leading design firms that have projects that have popped up on ArchDaily, or any architectural magazine on the market, and many that have won awards.

      Architecture is what you make of it; be it in your basement or on the top floor of John Hancock. Look at work by Payette, Gensler, TRO, firms that have started their life in Boston and tell me that they are uninspired by the city they are in.