Running an Architecture Practice Across Studios

What changes when a practice has several studios

A practice with several studios needs every studio to set up projects, record time and report numbers in the same way. Without that, directors cannot compare studios, share people between them or see the practice's position without rebuilding the figures by hand.

In a single studio, inconsistency is fixed over the desk. Across studios in different cities, each office develops its own habits: its own stage codes, its own rate assumptions, its own spreadsheet for fees. Each habit is reasonable locally. Together they make practice-level reporting slow and unreliable, and they make it hard to move a project architect from one studio to another for a busy Stage 4.

The aim is a short list of things that must be the same everywhere, and freedom for each studio on everything else.

Consistent project set-up and rates

Projects in every studio should use the same stage structure, the same timesheet codes and the same rate tables. These three decide whether numbers from different studios can be added together.

• ✓RIBA Plan of Work stages as the top level for every project, with the same rules for sub-stages.
• ✓One list of non-project codes: marketing and bids, training, practice administration, leave.
• ✓One grade structure with a cost rate and charge-out rate for each grade.
• ✓Studio-specific rates only where salaries genuinely differ, set centrally and reviewed together.
• ✓A rule for which studio owns a project, usually the studio of the project director.
• ✓The same approach to additional services, variations and invoicing schedules.

Rates are the most common source of drift. If one studio prices a Part 2 assistant at a different charge-out rate without a reason, fee proposals and profitability figures stop being comparable. Where salaries in one city are higher, reflect that in a studio cost rate rather than in ad hoc pricing. Our guide to architect hourly rates in the UK covers how to build rate tables.

Resourcing across studios

One of the main benefits of several studios is a larger pool of people. That benefit only exists if directors can see capacity across every studio in one view and agree how shared time is charged.

When a studio is overloaded and another has spare capacity, the obvious move is to share the work. It often does not happen because the busy studio cannot see who is free elsewhere, or because the lending studio worries its numbers will look worse. Both problems have simple fixes: a practice-wide resource plan, and an agreed rule for how hours worked for another studio are counted.

A common approach is to credit the lending studio at the person's cost rate, or cost plus a small agreed margin, while the project's fee and profit stay with the owning studio. Whatever rule you choose, write it down and apply it the same way every time.

Studio-level and practice-level reporting

Studio leaders need a studio view to run their office. The board needs a practice view to run the business. Both should come from the same data, with clear rules for anything that is split between them.

Central costs are where most disputes start. If they are allocated to studios, agree a simple basis such as headcount and keep it stable. Many practices find it cleaner to judge studios on contribution before central costs, and to look at the full allocation only at year end. Our guide to architecture project profitability covers the project-level numbers in detail.

Shared standards, reporting rhythm and software

Studios stay consistent when they share the same templates and meet on the same rhythm. Software makes that easier, but only if every studio uses it the same way.

Shared standards

Keep one set of practice templates: fee proposals, appointment documents, specification starting points, drawing standards and quality checks. Name an owner for each and review them once a year. Studios can add local detail, but the base should be the same.

A reporting rhythm

A simple rhythm works for most multi-studio practices: a weekly project review in each studio, a monthly studio report on fees, WIP, utilisation and pipeline, and a quarterly practice review of studio contribution, cash and hiring. Our guide to the weekly project review covers the first of these.

Practices with several legal entities or currencies have more complex needs, and project ERP may suit them. For most UK practices with two to four studios under one company, a single connected platform used consistently is enough.

Questions practices ask

Short answers to the questions multi-studio practices ask most often.

What software do multi-office architecture firms use?

Multi-office firms typically use practice management tools such as Total Synergy, Fresh Projects or Monograph, project ERP such as Deltek Vantagepoint, or connected platforms such as Avoice. What matters most is that every studio uses one system with the same project structure, codes and rates.

Should each studio have its own P&L?

Most practices benefit from a studio contribution figure: project contribution less the studio's own overheads. Central costs can be shown at practice level or allocated on a simple, stable basis such as headcount.

How do we charge for staff shared between studios?

Agree a rule in advance. A common approach credits the lending studio at the person's cost rate, or cost plus a small agreed margin, while the fee and project result stay with the studio that owns the project.

Should every studio use the same charge-out rates?

Use one grade structure everywhere. Where salaries genuinely differ between cities, reflect that in studio cost rates set centrally, so fee proposals and profitability stay comparable across the practice.

How often should a multi-studio practice report?

Weekly project reviews in each studio, a monthly studio report on fees, WIP, utilisation and pipeline, and a quarterly practice review of studio results, cash and hiring suit most practices.

Where Avoice fits

Avoice gives every studio the same project structure, timesheets and financials, in one platform the whole practice works in.

Projects in Avoice carry RIBA stages and fees per stage, and timesheets roll up against them the same way in every office. People and staffing shows capacity, utilisation and allocation by project across the team, and financials and cash flow show fees invoiced, WIP, margin and project profitability, synced with Xero or QuickBooks. The same projects hold specifications, drawing QA and contract administration, so shared standards live where the work happens.

To talk through how your studios would be set up, book a demo.