Some Surprising Results: Giants 200

This is the world that was: In 2008, the second 100

Interior Design

Giants earned a grand total of $452,826,937, slicing a 6 percent increase out of an otherwise unappetizing economic pie. Each interior design employee was responsible for an average $194,112 of work, with a minimum of $25,419 and a maximum of $837,500. A total of 195,565,816 square feet of projects, encompassing $11,758,712,354 of materials installed, resulted in 2 and 15 percent increases, respectively.

However, in the months between the second 100 Giants’ completion of our annual survey and our sitting down to report the results, the world reeled from one financial crisis to another. Data for last year remains as valid as ever, of course, but that did nothing to allay our anxiety about what had been happening to designers and their clients in the interim. Fortunately, almost half the second 100 Giants—pretty evenly distributed among the rankings—volunteered to let us in on the complex, sometimes contradictory, invariably surprising goings-on.

First of all, a big sigh of relief. This group experienced postponements and cancellations of projects worth total fees of $27,978,727 but brought in projects paying $30,627,252. That’s ahead of the game by almost 10 percent. Some of the numbers are extraordinary. One firm lost $50,000 in fees while gaining close to $2 million. Although 17 firms gained less than they lost, nine suffered no losses at all. Since jobs are not measured by square footage in every interiors category, hospitality being a major example, only 28 firms were able give us an idea of space involved: 16,600,000 square feet lost but just 12,961,638 gained. Whatever else the current adversity does, it’s had the second 100 Giants, as a whole, earning 39.6 percent more per square foot than they were before.

Hospitality suffered the worst damage, with hotels bearing half the brunt. Office work came next. It may seem strange that offices were also the least hurt. In an economic crisis, however, it’s normal for interiors firms to be hired to reconfigure spaces for downsized staff, and 22 of our respondents have already engaged in this activity. It’s also normal for this extra work to be handled by reduced design staffs—reduced by 12.7 percent in the case of the second 100 Giants. We’ve been warned that six months will pass at the very least before staffing returns to civilized levels. In the meantime, firms will probably hire independent contractors rather than a salaried workforce.

Growth actually occurred in health care and government, followed by the office and sustainability categories. Almost twice as many firms thought overseas prospects better than domestic. Still, one firm declared Russia and the United Arab Emirates to be “disasters.” More than half believed that, despite the economy, opportunities for green design would continue to grow, both to save clients money down the line and to head off potential government regulation; 23 percent felt the green market would contract; 17 percent thought it would remain flat for the duration. Some expect to benefit from government stimulus involving the greening of public buildings; a smaller group was unsure. But, as one respondent put it, “While we may not directly benefit, more dollars in the market can’t hurt.” Seeing where growth might be possible is the sort of ability that will maintain our profession and ultimately help it thrive.

See the first 100 Giants

% of Fees by Project Type

10 Fastest-Growing in Second 100 (By % Change)

New to the Second 100 Giants