Young Architects Applying for Jobs - Why I have Yet to Higher Anyone

In reply to dean1484 :

Regardless of perfection, is there at least enough info on your site that people know what you do?  *Maybe* that's why you are getting cookie cutter cover letters- they just don't have a clear idea what they are applying to, other than "architect".  dunno.  

Either that, or architecture school is very broken, as I've seen far more prepared engineers than when I was in school years ago.  And, realistically, the future of the automotive industry isn't nearly the same as it was even 5 years ago- what I do isn't taught in school, but for EV's and autonomous stuff- that is.  Very much so.  The only leading edge thing that may be lost is battery technology.  

I'm working with a young engineer on a project- working with AI.  She's not done it, but she VERY much jumped into it with both feet.  While I have an anti-insentive (retiring soon), she has really figured out how to use the tools that we have available now.  Very cool, and it makes me feel good about the future of the auto industry.

dean1484 said:

Don't get me started with the AIA.  I am not a member.  I have found them to be a condescending bunch (I am sure there are some good people in there some where).

When I was a TA for lower level architecture students in college, I threw a kid out of my class on time for piping up with "You're not an architect until you have AIA after your name."

You know what "AIA" stands for, right?  Assh... uh, shiny happy persons In Action.

Shadeux said:

I graduated with a masters in architecture in 1995. In those six years I received no relevant training that actually applied to working in the field of architecture. I had to learn all of that on the job.

But did you learn how to think?  Did you learn how to problem solve?  Did you learn how to experiment with different solutions?

Give me someone reasonably smart who knows how to think, how to investigate things, and who has just a basic grasp of the technical aspects, and I'll teach them how to put a building together.

I need an intern who knows how to juggle set of 5 or 6 conflicting criteria and synthesize a solution.  Frankly I don't really care what the criteria are - it's learning how to prioritize multiple goals and organize a solution to reaching them that is the skill college should be teaching.  Give me someone who can do that and within a year I can teach them enough of the technical stuff to be productive. 

But the technical knowledge by itself is - not exactly worthless - but seriously diminished in value if it is not backed up by being able to think strategically.

Duke said:

Shadeux said:

I graduated with a masters in architecture in 1995. In those six years I received no relevant training that actually applied to working in the field of architecture. I had to learn all of that on the job.

But did you learn how to think?  Did you learn how to problem solve?  Did you learn how to experiment with different solutions?

Give me someone reasonably smart who knows how to think, how to investigate things, and who has just a basic grasp of the technical aspects, and I'll teach them how to put a building together.

I need an intern who knows how to juggle set of 5 or 6 conflicting criteria and synthesize a solution.  Frankly I don't really care what the criteria are - it's learning how to prioritize multiple goals and organize a solution to reaching them that is the skill college should be teaching.  Give me someone who can do that and within a year I can teach them enough of the technical stuff to be productive. 

But the technical knowledge by itself is - not exactly worthless - but seriously diminished in value if it is not backed up by being able to think strategically.

 

This man is spitting fire.  What your saying in my experience is true for any field.  I use VERY little of the technical knowledge I gained in school.  I have never integrated anything, nor done my own deduction of the Bernoulli equation.  BUT I have been able to be successful in lots of engineering disciplines because school taught me how to learn, and reinforced how to think.  

Duke said:

A lot of your points are valid, but I'm going to take exception to a number of them.

dean1484 said:

3. 99.9 percent send 3d cad drawings to me.  Are the design schools that out of touch with the fact that 99.9 percent of design jobs never use any 3d at all?  You may have a degree and you may be able to use 3d cad or Revit but that just makes you a glorified 3d line drawer. Can you generate a set of plans?  And we won't even get in to project specifications.  An AIA-based CSI spec.  Never once mentioned in what is sent to me.

Speaking as an architect with about 30 years of very practical experience, we do 100% of our work in 3D and 3D with 2D detail drafting overlaid.  We have for at least 10 years.

And I mean jobs like roof replacements, restroom renovations, everything, not just the fancy schmancy stuff.  100%.  We pretty much insist our consulting engineers do too, except for the simplest of small jobs..It is so much easier when you can coordinate everything in 3D and when moving a wall in plan means it also moves in section.  Whether you personally use it or not, 3D modeling is a critical skill for a young designer to demonstrate.

All the young Architects are out there crying that they don't have any work and no one will hire them.  It is sad really.  The schools are sucking these kids in with promises of granger and glory with mystical dreams of unlimited creativity with no constraints of time or budget.  Then they get spit out into the real world and we that own Design firms look at them and there is no place for them in our businesses. 

While I agree most design schools are failing students by not providing enough technical education, I disagree that the vision stuff is not important.

It's a 2-sided coin, or a double-edged sword.  A fair amount of the technical knowledge A) comes with experience, and B) varies by not only the geographical location but the principal architect(s) of the firm.  A firm needs to invest something in training their intern architects and bringing them up in the way they do things.  To be worth that effort, the intern needs a balance of vision and practicality.  I don't want technical school drafters who just know the rote details but can't see the bigger picture.  I want to bring up someone who can conribute to design collaboration and understand what the end vision could be - if they're smart and have a grasp of the basics, I can teach them how to put a building - and a set of drawings together.

asd

Part of a letter I got from an applicant:

I cherish the synthetic role of the architect (working with means of expression and representation to overcome complexity).  

Without forgetting the competitive aspect of our profession which I really appreciate. Dedicating oneself to an idea, imagining, strengthening, and enhancing it, until it becomes part of the built environment.  

I understand that the current conjuncture is complicated.

   

What is this BS?  If you are saying that the role of an architect is synthetic (fake) you have just insulted me and you have absolutely no clues as to what the job really involves.

Something else is his dream.  The real role of an architect is to realize a client's dream.  I have hated some of the things I have designed but it was exactly what my client wanted.  My dreams as a designer don't matter.  My client's dreams are what pay the bills.  Realize your client's dreams and you will do very well.

  His current conjecture is not complicated (again insulting the reader as if he is somehow superior) it is just crap

You're misunderstanding them here, because you're confusing some of the words used.

That being said, the words used are mostly pretentious twaddle, but you're not using the right meanings.

They're saying synthetic not as in "fake" but as in "synthesis"; i.e., taking different parts and fusing them into a greater whole.

Also, they're saying conjuncture, not "conjecture".

Conjuncture = a combination of events or a state of affairs.  Now if it was me, I would have just used "situation" and moved on with the sentence.  But they're not wrong.

I somewhat agree with your point about the client's dreams... but that could be the idea they are eager to dedicate themselves to.

You are completely correct. 

Re the 3d stuff we use it but not for everything.  A roof replacement just does not need it.  An owner would look at me sideways if I suggested that I put a roof replacement design in 3d.  

I don't know what to make of your assessment of what I quoted.  You are better at the game than I am?  I don't have time for all that.  Tell me what you mean in simple terms.  It works great with my clients and leads to far fewer misunderstandings. 

I am much more from the blue color side of things so I tend to not be impressed by those kinds of things.  Maybe in reality that applicant was way overqualified to work at my firm?  I had not actually thought of that before but. . . ..   Hummmm that is an interesting thing to ponder.  

Duke said:

Shadeux said:

I graduated with a masters in architecture in 1995. In those six years I received no relevant training that actually applied to working in the field of architecture. I had to learn all of that on the job.

But did you learn how to think?  Did you learn how to problem solve?  Did you learn how to experiment with different solutions?

Give me someone reasonably smart who knows how to think, how to investigate things, and who has just a basic grasp of the technical aspects, and I'll teach them how to put a building together.

I need an intern who knows how to juggle set of 5 or 6 conflicting criteria and synthesize a solution.  Frankly I don't really care what the criteria are - it's learning how to prioritize multiple goals and organize a solution to reaching them that is the skill college should be teaching.  Give me someone who can do that and within a year I can teach them enough of the technical stuff to be productive. 

But the technical knowledge by itself is - not exactly worthless - but seriously diminished in value if it is not backed up by being able to think strategically.

 

This X1000

Mocking an applicant for their writing ability while bragging about your own inability to spell is peak boomer.

Yes, education leaves massive holes in the knowledge base of most graduates, in most fields. Successful companies learn to separate the wheat from the chaff, and then have some sort of training program.

CrustyRedXpress said:

Mocking an applicant for their writing ability while bragging about your own inability to spell is peak boomer.

Yes, education leaves massive holes in the knowledge base of most graduates, in most fields. Successful companies learn to separate the wheat from the chaff, and then have some sort of training program.

 

Not really.  My errors are basic spelling and grammar.  If you check the original quote in a spell checker or grammar checker it is perfectly fine.  I never once said the quote had grammar or spelling issues. I am the last person that would do that.   It is other people that are bringing up the whole spelling thing.

It was the message and content of the written word that I was getting at and commented on.  It came across to me as condescending and so full of marketing words that whatever the point that the author was trying to make was lost. 

Don't confuse the two matters. Once again it is being inferred that because I can not spell I don't have the right to comment on that.  

EDIT: By your logic If you don't know how to fix a car you should not be commenting on how to drive a race car.  

alfadriver said:

In reply to dean1484 :

Regardless of perfection, is there at least enough info on your site that people know what you do?  *Maybe* that's why you are getting cookie cutter cover letters- they just don't have a clear idea what they are applying to, other than "architect".  dunno.  

This thread has made me keenly aware that I need to look at this or have someone look at this.  The other answer is that maybe I should put on the site that we are not accepting applications for employment? 

dean1484 said: The other answer is that maybe I should put on the site that we are not accepting applications for employment? 

Then why are you reading them?

After only one change of employment in 34 years, I've been on the potential employee side of the game twice now in the last few. I can assure you that whatever inadequacies you're seeing pale in comparison to the nonsensical behaviour I've witnessed recently from head hunters and HR professionals.

The system is seriously broken on both sides

Duke said:

travellering said:

Uhhh, son, that ain't even English what you wrote there.  It actually reads as if someone had a neural network generate a cover letter. 

No, it is correct English.

It's pretentious English that is an attempt to show off how big their thesaurus is, but it is correct English.

 

I am moderately conversant in both English and American.  In neither language does the following constitute a complete sentence: "Without forgetting the competitive aspect of our profession which I really appreciate." 

That is at best Salesspeak, a simalcrum of English devoid of clear intelligibility or informative function.

It would appear that Dean wants applicants who are more function-oriented, and this particular example was selected to show the sort of self-aggrandizement that suffices to obtain passing scores in class, but fails to offer much benefit in the operational side of the workplace.  

In short, most of the applications he receives are not targeted to the sort of work they would be doing for him, and he feels this is a waste of both his and their time.  

Clear, concise, and accurate communication is a critical skill for business.  Unfortunately it is one which is often lost by both those seeking to promote their loquaciousness, and by those so intent on proving their efficiency that they refuse to proofread their own work.  I am no professional grammarian, and definitely understand that to err is human.  A mistake here and there is no problem, but when misspellings and word substitutions become too commonplace, it gives the impression that the writer did not care enough about the reader to try to be understood.

dean1484 said:

alfadriver said:

In reply to dean1484 :

Regardless of perfection, is there at least enough info on your site that people know what you do?  *Maybe* that's why you are getting cookie cutter cover letters- they just don't have a clear idea what they are applying to, other than "architect".  dunno.  

This thread has made me keenly aware that I need to look at this or have someone look at this.  The other answer is that maybe I should put on the site that we are not accepting applications for employment? 

Hire someone out of college to do it....  :)   (hopefully, the smiley face shows up)

I find this discussion timely. I work in electrical construction sales, and have noticed that building plans have gotten worse and worse over the years. They seem to be at an all time low now. It's been great for me. Years ago I realized that the errors provided opportunities for me to help my contractors win jobs. The designs often don't meet code, or they go far over the top in the hopes that they didn't miss anything. Either way is an opportunity to fix the problem and win the project. Just today I bid a job, submitting a "per plan" bid and my "this way is less expensive, less labor, and actually meets code" bid. Guess which one they will be building? The thing that gets me is that I'm just the salesman. Some trained architect worked on this for a week, I fixed it in an hour. This isn't about training. This is about using your resources, and paying attention to and caring about your work. Understanding the purpose of the end result, not just "finishing" it to get it off your desk. The architect just threw in a few things that they thought might cover it, and added a blurb that the EC is responsible for making sure it actually meets code. They over did half of it and missed the other half. Often, I see whole sections of the plans that are cut and pasted from a previous out of date spec. Lighting selection is a real head scratcher sometimes. I often think the spec has more to do with which manufacturer held the best cocktail party than what is the most appropriate choice for the job. Like the low income housing spec'ed with $400 porch lights. Or the non profit group park renovation with a $400k lighted handrail. 
 

In short, I think this is a work ethic issue rather than a training issue. Someone with a good work ethic will do a little research to fill in the blanks that they don't know, or make sure what they are designing is relevant to the use of the building. 

In reply to dean1484 :

I had no intention of making myself look better than you. But you seemed offended by the wording, and that offense seemed to be based on a misunderstanding of what the applicant wrote. I was trying to clarify that.

As for the 3D question, of course what ever way we each do our projects is the way that suits us best.  I was merely pointing out that 3D is critical to the way we design and document projects - even totally utilitarian work.  So while it seems you find applicants showing extensive 3D ability mostly irrelevant, for us it is something valuable we would look for.

I admit I'm a bit confused by your "X1000" post. I wrote that as counterpoint to your original angry (for lack of a better word) post about schools not providing enough technical training.

I agree architecture schools should probably double or triple the amount of technical courses in the curriculum...

...but by that I mean it should go from maybe 5% to 10% or 15%.  It doesn't need to be more than that unless you are talking about a 2-year vocational degree.

Critical thinking and design process are much more important - and above all, communication.

I do have some skin in this game, so please hear me out:

When YOU graduated, did you have the skills that you are currently expecting applicants to have?

It takes years of working to learn all that is required in most technical careers that I can think of (architecture being a severe case IMO), and mentoring on the job is critical to the success of the individual, and thus the company. Architecture schools, unless they have changed dramatically, know this and don't push that in the curriculum. We have a dear friend who is a Professor, and she has never worked a day of her life as an Architect. The vast majority of her peers are the same. I'm sure you all know the saying. My wife is in the biz now, but school seriously sucked for her because she was too practical and straightforward. Her designs were not "dreamy/fantastical" enough for the turtleneck crowd. She's wowing her clients now though, with things that actually get built.

And I absolutely despise all the nonsensical doublespeak market-yourself jargon. She sees the same lack of skills in applicants that you are seeing. They did develop a test IIRC.

In reply to Mr. Peabody :

Couldn't agree more. Thanks to Duke for adding some value here. I understand the desire to vent by Dean too. 
I am in a role where I do a fair amount of hiring for a large company. The process sucks. There is always red tape, always delays, people involved that block process steps. I know the candidates see very little of it and get frustrated at the pace and lack of answers. Best case hiring someone at my place is a 3 month ordeal. 
On the other hand I have applied for jobs that I appear to be very well qualified for, never shot gunning, and if you don't have an in at the company it seems like you rarely get a call back. These are jobs that are applied for in the best of circumstances (solid qualifications, experience, advanced degree, and I have a job so it is low pressure) I can see how the frustration for the applicant could boil over quickly in a less ideal position. 
I started following a lady on LinkedIn named Robynn Storey, interesting perspective on the hiring process. 

wearymicrobe said:

I have a 19 year old intern right now, Her python skills are obscene 

Giggity

In reply to Boost_Crazy :

Ha ha ha - I worked for a Detroit based pump rep and it was usual to take a bunch of engineers and architects out on the Detroit river and Lake Erie in the one dudes boat for an afternoon/evening cruise.

The cruise where they hire a few girls to serve drinks and the accountant challenges the $500 receipt for gasoline he turned in.   

You know, take out the guys that specify and approve the products you represent and sell?

In reply to travellering :

I assumed that we were provided with random snippets, not the entire text. You are of course correct that the bit you quoted is not a complete sentence.

Mr. Peabody said:

After only one change of employment in 34 years, I've been on the potential employee side of the game twice now in the last few.

As an aside, this is also an outmoded model of work.  In general, companies don't give raises and take care of their employees anymore, the way they get a raise, professional development, and better benefits is to find a better job.  I think the statistic was 21% change jobs in one year, and only 20% last longer than 5 years.

Mr. Peabody said:

dean1484 said: The other answer is that maybe I should put on the site that we are not accepting applications for employment? 

Then why are you reading them?

You know when you have six cars in your driveway and they all work great and you like them all. They all fill a job or just make you happy and you absolutely don't needs another car?   And yet you still look at cars for sale. You look for that diamond in the rough or that really good deal that you really don't need but you can not pass up?  Ya it is kind of like that. 

In reply to Duke :

I was agreeing with you. I did not take any of your comments as bad. I am not mad at anyone here. This has been a very healthy exchange and I for one have gained a new perspective on some things. I hope maybe I have done the same for others. 

Mr_Asa said:

Mr. Peabody said:

After only one change of employment in 34 years, I've been on the potential employee side of the game twice now in the last few.

As an aside, this is also an outmoded model of work.  In general, companies don't give raises and take care of their employees anymore, the way they get a raise, professional development, and better benefits is to find a better job.  I think the statistic was 21% change jobs in one year, and only 20% last longer than 5 years.

It is, but the old model can be made to let you stop working after 30 years.  Pretty darned securely, too.

Seeing this thread makes me thankful for that.  

I guess I shouldn't mention what contractors have to say about architects. Please hire people with less vision and more common sense. 

Edit to add: Dean, I suck at spelling and grammar about as much as you do. You might consider installing the Grammarly extension on your web browser. It is significantly better than spellcheck. Like leaps and bounds better. I think it can also be used with email programs. It's worth a look. 

dean1484 said:

Slippery said:

dean1484 said:

Slippery said:

dean1484 said:

travellering said:

Higher =/=  hire

Granger =/= grandeur

 

I don't know you or your company, but if you wrote all the copy on your company site yourself, you may be throwing stones from a glass house...

 

...

...

Is the below text from your website?

"XYZ's staff has more than 60 years of experience that  has enables us to provide our clients options and design solutions from real world experience."

Honestly, I don't remember I would have to go look.  Why? 

If it is and you want to proof my site I will pay you $100.  I am far from perfect what is your point.  I guarantee there are spelling errors on my site.  ...

LOL, I read your $100 offer and stopped reading.

You seem quite touchy and thin skinned. You wrote this:

"All proofed by some one.  You really think I am that stupid?  "

You need to stop complaining about the people that send you resumes and maybe help them improve. It will serve you better at the end. 

Yes I am touchy about it it has been covered at length here in GRM by me.   The spelling grammar police on the internet need to get over them selfs.  We get that it is a skill you have.  Great for you not everyone has it.  I don't have it.  People say they can see words in their head and spelling is easy for them.  Great for you.  They left out the spelling screen from my head when it was made.  

What are you talking about with respect to me complaining?  What does this have to do with my spelling?  You are using fools logic here.  Somehow because I can not spell and I should not be complaining about the content in resumes?   Please explain to me how this works.  Seriously I want to know this as I may learn something.  

Dean,

I am sure that, even though it is not my intention, my post will offend you. Please do not take it as an insult as it is not meant in that way. I purposely waited to write it as I can better do this at home.

The main reason I took 5 minutes to find your site was to back-up the statement I quoted about "throwing stones from a glass house". You responded to that person in a not so nice way, he was trying to help you. He was correct.

Now to play a little devil's advocate, and again ... English is not my first language so hopefully this does not come through as an insult, it is not meant as one. Your website, if that is indeed your website is full of not only spelling errors, but it is also quite badly written. The grammar is not on par with a company that I would apply to work for ... Again, please hear me out and take this as constructive criticism. I would guess that most people that are potentially interested in working for you, once they see your website they do not even think of sending you their resume. Only the desperate ones and the ones that cannot find a job will give it a go. You would probably do the same. 

I would honestly invest some real money into having someone with some writing skills go over it and rewrite it. Spend $5k on a professional to go over it and you will get that money back if it brings you one good employee. Believe me.

On a side note, I am not an architect but I studied architecture for 4 years. I had a slight problem with one of the teachers and after studying all of my options I decided to switch to engineering and became an ME. With that being said, most architects usually are very much into details and that includes spelling ... I would certainly think that all the spelling errors on the website are keeping people from applying there for work. Give it some thought on having it re-written as I pointed out, not just spell checked.