With major obstacles melting away, the second 100 Giants have found their footing again
by Judith Davidsen and Wing Leung
Interior Design · July 1, 2004
It's mostly good news for the second 100 Interior Design Giants. As a group, they earned $262,944,327 in 2003—a decline of 3 percent from 2002 but nowhere near the disastrous 24 percent drop of the previous reporting period. And an increase of 13 percent is forecast for 2004.
Among this year's second 100 Giants, 35 experienced growth that ranged from 1 percent all the way up to an outstanding 76 percent, and five racked up gains of over 50 percent. (During the previous reporting period, the few increases topping 25 percent were a cause for celebration.) The number of second 100 Giants reporting income decreases was six fewer than the top 100 Giants reporting decreases, and the greatest drop was 4 percent less than that experienced by the top 100. Furthermore, 28 percent fewer earned less than the second 100 Giants' number the previous year, and even the most serious individual drops were at least 39 percent smaller.
The second 100 Giants installed 116,064,671 square feet, down almost 9 percent from 2002 but not down nearly so far as the 16 percent reported between 2001 and 2002. The value of these installations came in at $6.4 billion, down 1.56 percent—compared to a 5 percent drop last time around. Hospitality, office, financial, government, educational, and residential jobs accounted for a larger portion of the second 100 Giants' income than the same categories did in 2002. These Giants were also more reliant on hospitality, office, residential, and "other" than the top 100 were.
When it came to billing, the second 100 Giants generally charged a higher percentage of project cost than the top 100 Giants—except in health care, transportation, technology, and "other"—as well as a higher dollar amount per square foot in all areas but health care and technology. When billing on an hourly basis, however, the second 100 Giants charged more than the top 100 for only offices, hotels, restaurants, cultural and entertainment spaces, and the ever intriguing "other." Average billing rates rose 3.1 percent for principals and partners, 4.55 percent for project managers and job captains, 5.74 percent for designers, and 4.05 percent for CAD operators, while average salaries increased 6.73 percent, 4.3 percent, 4.09 percent, and 4.8 percent, respectively.
The average employee at second 100 Giants firms earned fees of $147,979, a rise of .4 percent from the previous year. The high was $450,981, up 3 percent, and the low was $37,255, up an amazing 47 percent. Compared to the top 100 Giants, pay rates at the second 100 rose faster in all job categories, with average principal-partner compensation growing 4.43 times faster than for the same rank among the top 100.
By definition, the second 100 Giants' earnings have never been as high as those of the top 100, but the former group's lean-and-hungry rate of growth has usually far outstripped the bigger guys. That generalization temporarily lost its currency in 2002, which hit the second 100 much harder. Now, it looks as though the runners-up are ready to close the gap.
% of Fees by Type of Work: 2003 Actual
Actual Fees
Average % of Work
Office
105,055,888
39.95
Hospitality
58,223,939
22.14
Retail
20,455,387
7.78
Residential
15,897,709
6.05
Health Care
14,492,515
5.51
Bank, Financial Institution
14,237,287
5.41
Government
11,762,256
4.47
Education
10,432,734
3.97
Technology
5,484,033
2.09
Museum, Gallery
4,255,319
1.62
Transportation
58,000
0.02
Other
2,589,260
0.98
Total
$262,944,327
100%
% of Fees by Type of Work: 2004 Forecast
Forecast Fees
Average % of Work
Office
111,284,028
39.11
Hospitality
66,443,906
23.35
Retail
21,385,522
7.52
Residential
17,277,011
6.07
Health Care
15,299,436
5.38
Bank, Financial Institution
14,659,870
5.15
Government
13,064,959
4.59
Education
11,191,201
3.93
Technology
6,833,672
2.40
Museum, Gallery
4,346,350
1.53
Transportation
525,000
0.18
Other
2,218,420
0.78
Total
$284,529,376
100%
Annual Salary
Median
Principal, Partner
$120,000
Project Manager
$70,000
Designer
$50,000
CAD Operator
$42,000
Other ID Staff
$35,000
34 firms did not respond
Hourly Rate
Median
Principal, Partner
$150
Project Manager
$110
Designer
$90
CAD Operator
$78
Other ID staff
$65
6 firms did not respond
Giants 200
Rank
Firms, headquarters
ID Fees*
Work installed
Employees
Rank
2004
Total
$ value*
Sq. ft.*
2003
101
Huntsman Architectural Group San Francisco huntsmanag.com
From top: ACB Financial Centre in Antigua, West Indies, by OBM International. Austin Ventures in Austin, Texas, by Susman Tisdale Gayle. RNL Design's Cable Center in Denver.
From top: Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt in Alexandria, Virginia, by SKB Architecture and Design. JPC Architects's SS+K in Bellevue, Washington.
From top: GBD Architects's offices in Portland, Oregon. W.D. Idea Span's Stribling Heart Clinic in Gainesville, Georgia.
The second installment of the three-part annual business survey of Interior Design Giants comprises the second 100 largest firms ranked by interior design fees for the 12-month period ending December 31, 2003. The first 100 firm ranking was published in January; the final installment listing the top 50 Hospitality Giants will be published in October.
Interior design fees include fees attributed to:
1. All types of interiors work, including commercial office, hospitality, retail, medical, and residential.
2. All aspects of a firm's interior design practice, from strategic planning and programming to design and project management.
3. Fees paid to a firm for work performed by employees and independent contractors who are "full-time staff equivalent."
Interior design fees do not include revenues paid to a firm and remitted to subcontractors that are not considered full-time staff equivalent. For example, certain firms attract work that is subcontracted to a local firm. The originating firm may collect all the fees and retain a management or generation fee, paying the remainder to the performing firm. The amounts paid to the latter are not included in the fees of the collecting firm in determining its ranking.
The data was compiled and analyzed by the Interior Design market research staff in New York: Laura Girmscheid, tabulation supervisor, and Wing Leung, research manager. Judith Davidsen is an Interior Design contributing editor.
