Let me start by saying who's writing this. I'm a senior project manager at a mid-sized commercial developer. For the last six years, I've been the person who hires—and occasionally fires—architecture and interior design firms. I've personally made and documented nine significant mistakes, totaling roughly $180,000 in wasted budget. Now I maintain our team's pre-contract checklist. This article is part of that checklist, because 'should we hire a global firm or a smaller studio?' is the question that gets asked too often after the contract is signed, not before.
This article compares two options. Option A is a large, global architecture and design firm—Gensler is the obvious example. Option B is a smaller interior design studio or regional architecture firm. I'm not going to tell you one is universally better. I'm going to help you choose based on how they actually behave on a project. The question is especially loud when Gensler interior design is on the table, because the company's size is part of their public identity.
Here are the four dimensions I use:
- Who actually does the work – firm vs. team vs. principal
- Documentation quality – specs, details, and the boring stuff
- What the fee really buys – including hidden sourcing legwork
- Life after handover – maintenance and the details that show up later
Why company size is the real issue
The Gensler company size question gets mentioned a lot. As of early 2025, Gensler's public profile lists more than 10,000 people across 50+ offices. That scale changes the project. It doesn't automatically make the work better, but it does mean the firm has infrastructure: BIM standards, QA/QC procedures, a materials library, and people whose job is to catch errors before they reach you.
I don't have hard data on how many smaller firms have the same infrastructure. What I can say anecdotally is that it's less consistent. Some small studios are insanely organized. Some are brilliant and chaotic. The first time I compared a global firm proposal and a small studio proposal side by side—same scope, same building type—I finally understood why the fees were so different. The global firm's fee was higher because the documentation was deeper. Page after page of compatibility notes, maintenance schedules, fixture schedules. That isn't glamorous. It's what stops a project from burning money.
Dimension 1: Who actually does the work
With a large firm, you might assume you'll get a famous architect on every call. Actually, no. You'll get a senior project architect, a project manager, an interior designer, and a lot of technical specialists. That can feel like a lot of meetings. But it also means you're not bottlenecked on one person.
With a small studio, the principal is often doing the design, the billing, and the coffee order. You get direct communication, which is genuinely good. The downside is that when that person is on vacation or buried in another project, your work slows down.
My conclusion: For a project with heavy coordination—say, an office-to-residential conversion with existing MEP systems—you want a firm where the internal layers are doing real work, not just forwarding emails. For a smaller, design-led interior where the vision is personal, the small studio wins.
Dimension 2: Documentation and the boring details
This is the dimension that hurts. Everyone in my office said the bigger firm's spec review was worth the time. I didn't listen. The smaller studio's drawing set looked great and missed the shower head with hose in an accessible bathroom. It looked fine in renderings. The contractor caught it at rough-in and asked what to do. That was a $1,100 change order and a two-week delay while we played telephone between architect, owner, and contractor.
Large firms like Gensler have specification writers. Their drawings include notes about hangers, blocking, valves, and all the things you don't render. It's annoying to review. But those pages are exactly what prevents the 'that wasn't in the drawings' conversations.
Before I write this off as a big-firm thing, I should add: I've seen small studios produce specs that were just as rigorous. But it's not automatic. With a global firm, the process is part of the brand. With a small studio, you have to ask for it. And if you don't know what to ask for, that's a risk.
My conclusion: If you don't have an internal person who can red-line a spec, choose the firm with a larger process. 'Creative' is nice, but missing one shower valve is not a creative success.
Dimension 3: What the fee actually buys
A global firm's fee is higher. That's not a surprise. What surprised me was that the more expensive firm often ended up being cheaper in total project cost. Why? Because sourcing and coordination were part of their standard toolkit. They didn't just specify a beautiful material—they had a list of approved suppliers. The question 'where to buy salt and stone' was already answered in their materials library, with lead times and backup vendors.
With a smaller studio, the fee may be lower, but the 'small stuff' can land on your desk. I've sat through procurement calls where the design team gave us a gorgeous palette and we spent days trying to figure out where to buy salt and stone in the right finish, lot, and quantity. That's not a fun Friday.
But then again, some smaller firms are better at finding unique pieces and working with local fabricators. If your project is custom-heavy, that's valuable. The key is knowing what's included before you sign.
My conclusion: Compare the full cost, not the fee percentage. Ask the smaller studio, literally, 'Will you provide a sourcing plan for all specified materials that aren't in stock?' If the answer is vague, budget for it yourself.
Dimension 4: Life after handover
This is the one people overlook, and honestly, it's where my opinion gets strong. Designers love renderings. No rendering ever shows someone cleaning the glass shower enclosure. The real question is what happens after turnover.
In a residential conversion, the management team will quickly discover that certain design choices are a nightmare to maintain. For example, a textured stone floor in a bathroom may look amazing, but if the sealer wasn't specified correctly, it will etch with standard bathroom cleaners. And the glass cleaner you use on the shower enclosure is a maintenance decision, not just a cleaning decision. If the spec says 'clear glass with no coating,' expect daily water spots. If it specifies an anti-lime coating, the housekeeping team has a manageable job.
I'm not sure why we keep treating these things as afterthoughts. My best guess is that the industry rewards beautiful imagery, not easy maintenance. Large firms have post-occupancy reviews and material performance data; they are more likely to know how a material ages because someone has tracked it. Smaller firms may not have that institutional memory, although a principal with 30 years of experience is often better than any database.
My conclusion: Put a line in the contract that says the designer must provide a maintenance and cleaning guide for all materials. If the firm already does that, it's a sign of maturity.
So which one should you choose?
Here's the practical answer.
Choose a global firm like Gensler when:
- The project is an office-to-residential conversion with complex mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work.
- You need multiple disciplines—architecture, interior design, construction management—in one contract.
- You value process consistency over being able to call the principal directly.
- You want the Gensler company size credibility in your procurement file because your lender or investor expects a firm of that scale.
Choose a smaller studio when:
- The scope is clearly defined and doesn't need a lot of technical interfaces.
- You have strong internal project management and can fill the process gaps.
- The project is driven by a personal design aesthetic more than by complex code and coordination.
- You have enough experience to know exactly what you're buying.
I don't think the answer is 'small is more careful' or 'big is always safer.' I think it's this: match the firm's process depth to the complexity of your project. Efficiency is a competitive advantage. The most efficient firm isn't necessarily the fastest or the cheapest; it's the one that doesn't make you redo things. After my nine mistakes, I'll pay for that every time.
Oh, and one more thing: keep a checklist. Mine has 34 items now, including 'fixture schedules include accessibility items like a shower head with hose,' 'glass enclosures specify maintenance coatings,' and 'material sourcing plan answered before you sign.' It's not exciting. But it's saved me more than once.
