I'm an "older" architect, principal in a firm. I just spent hours and hours with employees on annual reviews. It seems to me that the "younger" generation (under 35?) just is not very motivated. Maybe there is a generational difference, or am I just suffering from premature Alzheimers?
Young architects go on about wanting more responsibility, they want to be involved in every decision, etc, but they don't seem motivated to TAKE responsibility. They won't work one minute overtime. They want the more experienced architects to pretty much map out the entire project for them. They want every detail worked out for them. An example: I take a young intern to a client meeting. I scribble notes furiously during the meeting. The intern sits there. We get back to the office. I ask the intern if they want to take a shot at some preliminary design sketches. They come back much later with a half assed plan that misses three of the things the client wanted. They had my notes but didn't read them. They forgot to look at the zoning code before doing the layout, even though on the last project we did was very similar, and they were taught how to look stuff up in the zoning code. They won't stay late to get the drawings done by the deadline, so I come in over the weekend and redo the sketches.
What motivates people to take responsibility? It doesn't seem to be financial. Am I expecting too much? In "the day" I would have spent all kinds of extra time and effort to make sure I had covered all the bases, do the design, etc. The profession just seems like a job to younger people. Only one out of every 5 interns seems to get registered within 5 years of getting out of school. Everyone complains about being just a cad monkey, but then when given an opportunity to take charge, they don't. What's up with that?
I'd guess it was pay, primarily. With the proliferation of information these days, via Archinect and other sites, everyone knows how the pay/responsibility is pretty poor in architecture.
10 years ago it was hard to know this stuff.
The other reason could be that it's usually crap that gets built, so why care too much? (I am certainly not implying that's the case with your example - it's just a broad generalization)
This is due to clients, lack of money, politics, poor vision, or whatever, but it is the norm.
Honestly, I would be surprised if the talent in architecture grads did not continue to decline as the ambitious and talented seek out other opportunities in other fields before entering the profession of architecture.
archie, that's cause you are in the early stages my friend....haha I kid, I kid.
Frankly I don't know what to say. What I can offer is my opinion and my opinion only. That is, that one must be instilled with or born with an insatiable thirst for wanting "it". Responsibility is a lesson many people my age group have a hard time understanding (I am one of those under - just barely - 35). That is to say that not ALL are like this, but there are many. It stems from one's background, how, where, and under what circumstances they were raised; what troubles/trials they were having to engage in, with life, that brings about this sort of 'understanding' and sense of self and responsibility. Mind you, you don't have to have something traumatic, nor grow up under the poorest of conditions to understand, yet those who have, seem to seek out, and achieve what you speak of.
Having said that, I am one who understands also that, whilst I enjoy the profession, it will not be the end of me, nor will I sacrifice "life" because of it. There must be a balance. So, you do put in time, late hours to complete your "job" for deadlines, and also because you enjoy what you are doing. But by no means does this mean you give up your "life" for it, and by this i mean, life away from the profession....as a person, a human. In addition, one issue that I find a bit of trouble with is the idea of getting registered. Mind you I have taken several of the exams, yet I feel that it may only trully serve certain aspects for me in my professional career path. Hence, I am not sure if I will finish it (registration) or not. Maybe just to say that I have, but never to actually "use" it, if you will.
I don't know how to get people motivated to take responsibility, because I don't know if it's learned or inherent in the individual.
With all due respect, just my opinion, not sure if it helps to give insight.
I've been thinking about this a lot recently and I firmly belive that high levels of motivation are inherent in the individual, whether it comes from some genetic makeup or environmental factors during their growth. As someone who is currently looking to hire employees this is the thing that puzzles me and interests me the most about potential hires. Instead of hiring someone and trying to coax performance out of them I've decided to hold off for the right person that has the appropriate level or motivation and desire to exceed for reasons other than what I as an employer can provide. My not very good advice to you is: get rid of those you can't motivate and deal with the consequences whether it's taking on less work or doing more of it yourself. It's probably not good advice but it's my plan.
I tend to agree that some people are just motivated and others aren't. That has certainly been my experience.
Only one comment, archie: you say your interns aren't motivated to take responsibility. Have you just handed it to them? Why not walk into the meeting and say to your intern "You are responsible for taking notes and writing up the minutes - I'll review them the day after the meeting before you send them out."
My best experiences have been baptism by fire. Maybe some people just can't handle that, but it makes others bloom.
I think that tlm has hit on a big part of it. It can be hard to tell who is in this as a career and who is in it as a job. I think another portion of it is what the task is and what the person's goals/strengths are. If you're trying to motivate a person by giving them a design assignment, it'll do no good if that person is really in this profession for the project management / construction observation side of it, and visa versa. So in your annual review, try to get this stuff out of them - what aspect of the profession attracted them? What sort of projects would they really like to work on? Then whenever you get an opportunity (may not be right away, that's ok), throw a little of that work at them.
It'll also do no good if the person is convinced that nothing they do will please you and has the remotest chance of actually being used. My boss can be like this, and eventually everyone gives up because no matter what you show him, he'll go, "well, we're not going to be doing that. Try this". And then he'll show us what he wanted all along but didn't bother to tell anybody. I guess this part is a warning - it'll only work if you are actually open to the input you get from them and are willing to use the good bits.
Lots of good points, thanks for the insights. I agree that some indivicuals have a desire for reponsibility naturally. I guess I just see so few in this generation who seem to want responsiblity. Liberty bell, I am guilty of "giving " people responsibilty. I guess I don't understand when someone does not want it. We had an unregistered architect, 8 years of experience leave to go to a large firm where all he would do is specs and detail curtain walls. He said he did not want the responsiblity of having to coordinate a whole job, deal with engineers, etc. He got the same pay, didn't work overtime here, so I guess it was just the responsiblity.
I worry that in 15 years when us old farts are gone, there won't be anyone who really CARES about the work. I mean both design and getting it built. I find myself actually 'pushing' younger staff to think more creatively in the design process. Then during the CD phase, its like pulling teeth to get them to do a decent complete set of drawings. I get the sense they think stuff should "just happen". Is it cause they grew up in an era where everyone who showed up on the soccer field got a trophy? Do they look at their parents and think we wasted our lives on work and should have spent more time snowboarding?
Squirelly, you sound so sane. Go get your license. You don't ever need to use it, but it is a goal that you should achieve. I interviewed a 56 year old architect who never got licensed and now was stuck with few options. He could not work on his own, and people saw the lack of license as a lack of motivation. So do it!
mdler: I offer to pay for overtime, give really good (20% of pay) bonuses to those who do step up, but still it does not seem to motivate. I asked if anyone wanted to do a little moonlight project (small simple residential addition) on their own time, but still with office back up- thru our office officially so they are covered by liabiltiy insurance, and have an older architect review the drawings, I would stamp, but no takers. No one wanted to spend the time. Maybe I am overpaying?
As a under 35er who has been on both the employer side and the employee side of this issue, I would definitely say motivation is a fundamental personality trait, and not a matter of what the employer does or doesn't do. I think it's possible for an employer to de-motivate motivated employees, but I think it's extremely difficult to motivate someone who just doesn't have it in them.
As an employer, I asked myself over and over how certain employees could be so outrageously and explicity uninspired and unmotivated, when they were repeatedly presented with opportunities to succeed. Over a 4 year period, our company employed about 12-14 people and only 2 of them were self motivated. Two or three others did their jobs well and were generally productive and happy because it was a good working environment and they had ownership and responsibility. The rest pretty much phoned it in for a majority of the time... We tried several different methods to try to get these people to be more interested, including positive reinforcement, like performance bonuses, and negative reinforcement, like threats of firing, and none of it made much difference...
As an employee, I would consider myself to be extremely motivated and willing to take on as much responsibility as I can possibly handle - but I have to admit that I can be demotivated rather quickly and dramatically - and it can happen from something as simple as a disrespectful remark or a condescending tone of voice. My feeling is that if I'm going to be busting my ass and staying late so my boss can bill $100/hour for my work, and the value of my salary is depreciating with every extra hour I stay in the office, I better get some serious appreciation in return. If I feel like I'm being slighted and undervalued in a way that I haven't already agreed to, I'm apt to spend more time on archinect and less time worrying about deadlines...
In the big picture, I think the problem is that most people tend to be lazy and not hard working and if given the option they won't choose to excel but would rather just slide by. Unfortunately, it's harder than it seems like it should be to differentiate between truly motivated people and the rest of the people out there... and it takes so damn long to search through all the resumes and do all the interviews... and at some point you just end up settling for the best that you can get and it's often months before you can really understand someone's character...
But then again, with a limited number of truly motivated people out there, it's only fair if every firm has a mix of the self motivated and the slackers...
Hi there archie, I am a student studying in London, to be honest I think you should fire the intern tell him he is not doing enough to keep the company alive. (politely of course as not to ruin the reputation of your company) and then i think you should just get some good young people in the company. When it comes to money and deadlines dont take any shit for it. mmm, I'm only a student I would no way do that! If my boss had a deadline I would do my best to help him.
Unfortunately, some tutors think they are running a practice within their respective schools of architecture and forget to teach us.
I can totally understand with the motivation, but tell them to "bit the shit sandwich" cos thats what architects probably have to go through to get things done, am i wrong?
is it possible for you to identify any common background characteristics in the people you've hired? for example, are you hiring people who have really strong conceptual design skills, but not people who have succeeded in project management roles? have they come from similar family/community/educational/financial backgrounds? also, where are you located? do you think the city you're in has any impact on the type of people you're hiring?
Liberty, I agree with you with one exception. If the kid can design let him bring things to the table. If you have someone who can produce renderings let them do it. If you have someone who can produce construction documents, let them do it. If you have someone who can do construction observation, let them do it. The main thing is to
bring them along as a Mentor. I do firmly believe opportunities have to be provided for people to grow in an office and if it doesn't then your going to have a bunch of cad-monkeys dancing around the office tossing banana peels just to watch the other monkey slip and fall.
on my way, you make some great points. I was actually thinking of doing some "testing" during the interview phase to see if people had self motivation qualities. I understand from friends in the HR industry that you there are business oriented personality tests that can be insightful into that sort of thing. I always emphasis in job ads and during interviews that we want someone motivated, thriving on responsibility, etc. and they always say they want responsiblity, but then some of them do not embrace it.
I don't mean to imply I work with a bunch of losers. We have some outstanding people here and do what I think is way above average work. Its just a trend I have noticed with the younger people. Having kids that age, I tend to worry about the generation a bit.
seems like there are some 'they' and there are some he or she (s).
i feel, it is elders responsibility and interest to keep the younger people motivated as well as finding the motivated ones and give them the opportunity.
i don't believe keeping someone for a long time with whom you have to use a wrench to get something out. fire them's ass and maybe they'll be motivated next time.
i agree that it's all about who you're hiring, and probably not a generational thing. i don't think any fancy testing or anything will help, though. also, putting things like "we want motivated people who want to take responsibility" etc into your want ads won't help either.
your intern is operating in school mode. chances are, they are fresh out of school or within two years of it. maybe they haven't had another architectural job.
s/he didn't take notes and missed the client's wishes -- because in school, the kids who ignored the program but pumped the 3D or built the kick-ass model were the kids who got the best grades and prizes.
s/he didn't look at the zoning code -- because in school, there was no zoning code, or the prof said ignore it, we have to challenge the status quo.
s/he didn't look at your notes -- because they were yours, and you might be the principal, but they know what's best, because that's what 3-5 years in architecture school taught him/her.
s/he won't stay late -- because the only thing worth working overtime for, is themselves.
i feel for you, but: you need to really do a good job of explaining EXACTLY what you want when you interview. you need to be very, very deliberate and selective when hiring. and emphasizing motivation, responsibility, etc in your ads smacks of corporatism, and the kind of person who'd make a good HR clerk is not the kind of person who'd make a good architect. that kind of language is pretty cliched...i mean, the want ads will tell you that working at burger king is "fast-paced" and you really do have to be motivated to even show up to mcdonald's. because the jobs suck.
and frankly, if someone is coming out of school without any work experience (so that they have a feel for at least what is EXPECTED after graduation), then let someone else hire and fire them. if more people took out the trash their first day in architecture (while they were still in school), they'd realize what is expected of an architect.
Happiness is crucial. I am a strong advocate of letting people, or making them, do what they are good at. Well rounded knowledge is important, but not everyone is a designer, not everyone is a marketer, etc.
Give your employees the responsibilities that they want. 'General' responsibilities are boring and stressful - no one wants that. What responsilibities an individual will enjoy is entirely up to that individual and should be obvious in the interview (if not, ask them "hey, what motivates you?")
As a student I was extremely motivated, working tirelessly day after day in studio with major extra curricular responsibilities on top of it all. I poured my life into it almost completely, basically giving up a social life or any recreational activites. I loved every minute of it too. Now that I'm in the professional world, I sit back and slide by as a cad monkey collecting my pay.
Don't be so hard on us interns for being unmotivated. I didn't ask to feel this way and I wish every day I knew how to make it stop.
Unfortounately Archie for many architects and aspiring architects "it" has become just a "job". I believe this starts in school where essentially recent students are conditioned to think of the everyday nuts and bolts built reality as a bad place to end up. I can recall professers telling us that reason they concentrated so hard on theoretical topics was they didnt want their alumni to be wasted. Theyre ignorant assholes, and thats exactly what their now producing.
I truely believe the wrong people are being filtered out in the university fashion shows - my advice....
1. Ignore name schools - some of the hungriest, naturaly talented people whith a knack for understanding the real world complexities are prob at your local state U.
2. Be firm in letting them know their place on the totem pole. Young people today need to be slapped around a little before they'll respect you - if you dont they'll step all over you.
3. Be honest with yourself - are you trying to get blood out of turnip? Are you trying to get a licensed architect's billings out of a 24 year old kid? You probly are, and if thats the case you probably created this mess yourself.
4. Think back to when you were there age - unlike then, its a fight to even know how to use the computer, the programs, how to even draft properly while also learning how a building gets built - on top of the bizzare schedules, fast track blah blah blah that exists now. Its mind boggling.
5. Hire kids who come from families with their own businesses or the trades. They tend to have the "it" your looking for, or at least understand what "it" is from watching their folks do it.
architecture has always been the profession of rich parents' kids, and still is. maybe in the past, the drafting floor weeded people out better.
oldfogey's portrait rings true of most of the people with whom i went to arch.school and it describes many of the people my age (>30) with whom i have worked since graduation.
frankly, the problem is that the pay and status of an entry-level architect precludes the more motivated, dedicated children of the working class from entry.
hell, i'm real smart and dedicated to boot. if i wanted to reliably do better than my dad did, i should have gotten a law degree or an engineering degree or an MBA. the only reason i HAVE done better is because my dad was painting houses at my age -- and because i have worked my ASS off.
I think things have been good enough in the profession lately, that the people you are looking for; self-starters, motivated, positive, etc... are all starting their own companies because they don't HAVE to work for you, or anyone else. I started my own business while working for people who kept giving me raises, sweet bonuses etc. The relationships in the office are the real problem. It is generational, to a point, but in my experience it has been two way. The over 35 crowd are not motivated to learn the software, keep up with material technology or share their last monopoly of useful knowledge. Most of us under 35 folk, can't relate to the over 35 folk in a way that leads to good collaboration. Maybe its the way their eyes glaze over when I turn on the computer, or my eyes glaze over when they grab that red pen. I don't work well in an office that relies heavily on architects that are no longer able to produce drawings, but constantly complain about mine. It sound like you are different, but I have yet to work for an architect that could get a line drawn on the computer and print it out, yet they want to get finicky about whether the line should be drawn .035 or .030. Most of the offices I have worked for are two headed beasts that can't survive without each other, but are unable to produce really productive individuals. If the kids in your office have a monopoly on CAD, at least it is something. Becoming a project manager puts them back on the bottom of the totem pole, from being near the top of the production totem pole.
So where have all the good young architects gone...coming soon to a phone book near you. Just my opinion.
j
It will be interesting in a downturn economy if attitudes change. Thinking back to the downturns I have lived thru and none of them were anything like what my parents or grandparents went thru. Motivation might be directly tied to economy.
its hard to be motivated by a profession which wont even let you call yourself an 'architect' ... while at the same time the media uses the term to describe terroists (architects of terror)
Let me tell old dogs can learn new tricks if they are hungry, Motivation is something for those who are older and have survived thru the rough times becomes instinct. Remember youngsters, they didn't walk in the door yesterday, computers might seem a little alien, but hey they do know how to learn, they have proven that a long time ago. The computer is just another skill in my book.
Ive found people who are in there 40's to be the computer savy - they understand the evolution of the computers use as relates to the profesion better than anyone as well as how all these programs got this way!
3d though a little lacking in that age group but really - spending 3 hours to get a material library to look right is not the best use of their time.
I am actually absolutely disgusted by the way architecture is practised in the US. Principals seems to not think deeply enough from the "top-down" sense ( Meaning, that they get too worried about the details too quickly, without developing an overall strategy to the project ). This means you would be developing advanced window detail systems without first actually making sure that you should build a window first ( just an example) As the junior architect, I would be the one developing the details, assuming of course that we have established where we wanted the windows...and the realize that all previous assumptions were wrong....Ironically I actually think that younger, less experienced, architects are actually better at top down strategy, because we will tend to approach them from a more basic level, with no baggage of previous experiences. What motivates me as a young architect is the ability to think in a nonlinear way in a profession where we must also prove our organizational skills, and "fake it till you make it" .
This thread is somewhat depressing. I'm 36 and didn't get my professional accreditation 'till quite recently. I was something of a high-flier through most of architecture school and ran conferences as well, so I suppose you could put me into the well-motivated class. I still am, if I'm put in charge of something (and I have been, so thank you, if any of my past or present employers read this and know who I am.) My problem, for many years after graduating, was that my very, very high ambitions began to seem quite split apart from reality, but I was very loathe to let go of them. What happened was that I felt crushed and like 'kid junior' in work and let my dreams fly elsewhere... into some sort of glorious delusional zone. And of course I slowly cracked up. It is only now that I find myself with good, real opportunities in front of me and, having slaved away in the background trying to get to grips with my rather complex personality: getting to grips with it such that I can put it accross in a format that both serves the genuine objectives of others whilst not at the same time selling myself out. I wrote in my journal the other week that finally, finally, my childhood self and my working self are back on the same wavelength; re-united and this makes me very happy and content and optimistic indeed. Thing is, it's taken a hell of a long and painful time to come. Some employers (the first of them) were stoic to this process; others weren't; others didn't care. I thank the one and can hardly blame the others.
So... I really feel for the difficulty of someone trying to get to grips with the HR perspective. It's not something I have any experience of so I'm not qualified to comment.
But I would say this. And I'm sure we all want it because to suggest we've got a 'lost generation' amongst us would be to admit our failing too. It's entirely laudible that you're asking this question of motivation Archie. You're coming across as sincere. Yet I have a hunch we're not getting the whole picture. Sometimes it's not enough just to expect or hope of others that they act like we did. It's a reasonable enough approach to start off with, but if it's not getting the results you're looking for then there must be a 'plan B' we can put into effect. 'Firing people' as suggested above seams a dismal way out. Fact is, these young people you talk of are human too and what seems to be missing is a genuine mutual understanding. Time and time again we've heard older generations bemoaning the sorry state of younger ones. And yet time and time again, life goes on.
My solution? More information. From you to them and from them to you. The more mutual understanding you generate as a boss, the more respect you'll get. I'm not saying you don't have any at the moment; I couldn't possibly know of course except for the general hunch that you're one of the good guys. All I'm saying is that if something doesn't seem right, forget about the generational theories and generalisations and look more closely into the human individuals. Only that way will you get real answers.
'I am not my i-Pod' hehe ;-)
mdler, I wholeheartedly agree with the comment about our title (or are we still just being referred to - that guy).
Archie, I truly wish I had a boss like you....one who listens, and is willing to "teach". Much as in the way of the 'old system' where there was masters and the apprentices....and you could learn from someone who took you under their wing, so to speak!
our technology has completely revolutionized the way we produce architecture, and our firms have changed kinda halfway...but school hasn't changed at all, at least not in the US. if you think about it, we still learn the way that the gentlemen learned 100 years ago, except instead of being forced to learn watercolor and inkwash, we're forced to learn maya and rhino.
in the past, there were always the draftsmen and the contractors who would fill in the blanks between the pretty pictures. nowadays that's not the case, but we still crank out people who are better at drawing than designing. and by design, i mean solving a problem in a way that is greater than the sum of the solution's parts.
if we were forced to take meaty, substantial courses in structures, systems, and management in professional school -- and if we were forced to leave the (very crucial, but very advanced) questions about theory and philosophy for the post-graduate work -- then perhaps we as young architects might do better for ourselves, our employers, and ultimately for society.
Maybe grad programmes should insist on applicants having full accreditation *before* enrolling. I was in grad school designing a real international airport masterplan; talking on-the-level with heads of construction companies and waxing lyrical about advance theory before... becoming office junior with a small stipend of a salary. That's the wrong way around. My fault of course but, huh, I was only a kid.
And it's not enough to have all these technical courses: structural, legal, constructional on the side if the overwhelming prevailing ethos lies elsewhere in the school.
I disagree. I think architecture should be available to anyone who is willing to take the risk personally to practice it.
Architecture is undefinable and the architect is unknowable - school is the limiting factor to who gets in. Some school absolutely nessessary however the exam in my opinion should be open to anyone with construction, engineering or architectural experiance in addition to the bachelors. We are cutting out tremendous brain power from access to the proffesion, and some of those brains just may have some alternate ways of thinking. Since when is variation a bad thing? By variation I dont mean Blobs from Columbia versus Sci-Arc techno Cum Shots.
I think we might as well do the same for Law and Medicine....what the heck! It is not like a doctor can kill hundreds of people at one time Like and Architect....and you know I have never heard of a Lawyer Killing anyone! Seems like neither on of them really is on the outlook for the health and welfare of the general public on the level of an Architect.
I'd like to reply to what the initial post was asking. I would say THE reason for motivation is how exciting the project at hand is.
1. How interesting or exciting the project is, I've had multiple friends of mine complain about how it is very boring to do typical renovations of offices.
2. The restraints of the project, every project can be exciting however some projects are not very because of clients and what they want.
3. How open minded the ultimate decision maker is, that would be you. If you give an intern a shot and preliminary design and they KNOW you already have something in mind, then they feel as though there is no point.
4. The pay is sometimes an issue, sometimes people just don't feel that is it worth it to stay later and kill themselves for a measly couple bucks more or at all if you don't pay overtime.
5. Maybe you should just re-evaluate what type of interns you hire, it could be that you just had bad luck and hired people who just go through the motions, which is kind of sad.
6. Let me tell you though, there are young architects out there that are willing to go above and beyond, so don't generalize us all like that. Some of us really do care and.
Just to let you know, your place sounds like it gives interns quite a good amount of opportunities, so I'd definantly keep that up, you won't be sorry if you hire the right person.
i would have to politely disagree with that last paragraph ochona. i don't feel as though it would be a good idea to separate out the substantial structures, systems and management from theory and philosophy. personally, i think having a good mix of them all from beginning to end of bachelors and masters is the way to go (but that is just my personal preference).
having watched some come from really technically oriented schools with no introduction to theory, then be asked to go all out theory, they inevitably seem to fall back on what they already know, not knowing how to integrate the previous knowledge with the new.
we are supposed to be a profession of very well rounded individuals, and i think by separating things out early you lose some of the ability to fold in new knowledge later.
what motivates you youngin's
I'm an "older" architect, principal in a firm. I just spent hours and hours with employees on annual reviews. It seems to me that the "younger" generation (under 35?) just is not very motivated. Maybe there is a generational difference, or am I just suffering from premature Alzheimers?
Young architects go on about wanting more responsibility, they want to be involved in every decision, etc, but they don't seem motivated to TAKE responsibility. They won't work one minute overtime. They want the more experienced architects to pretty much map out the entire project for them. They want every detail worked out for them. An example: I take a young intern to a client meeting. I scribble notes furiously during the meeting. The intern sits there. We get back to the office. I ask the intern if they want to take a shot at some preliminary design sketches. They come back much later with a half assed plan that misses three of the things the client wanted. They had my notes but didn't read them. They forgot to look at the zoning code before doing the layout, even though on the last project we did was very similar, and they were taught how to look stuff up in the zoning code. They won't stay late to get the drawings done by the deadline, so I come in over the weekend and redo the sketches.
What motivates people to take responsibility? It doesn't seem to be financial. Am I expecting too much? In "the day" I would have spent all kinds of extra time and effort to make sure I had covered all the bases, do the design, etc. The profession just seems like a job to younger people. Only one out of every 5 interns seems to get registered within 5 years of getting out of school. Everyone complains about being just a cad monkey, but then when given an opportunity to take charge, they don't. What's up with that?
Enlighten me, oh youthful soul!
I'd guess it was pay, primarily. With the proliferation of information these days, via Archinect and other sites, everyone knows how the pay/responsibility is pretty poor in architecture.
10 years ago it was hard to know this stuff.
The other reason could be that it's usually crap that gets built, so why care too much? (I am certainly not implying that's the case with your example - it's just a broad generalization)
This is due to clients, lack of money, politics, poor vision, or whatever, but it is the norm.
Honestly, I would be surprised if the talent in architecture grads did not continue to decline as the ambitious and talented seek out other opportunities in other fields before entering the profession of architecture.
archie, that's cause you are in the early stages my friend....haha I kid, I kid.
Frankly I don't know what to say. What I can offer is my opinion and my opinion only. That is, that one must be instilled with or born with an insatiable thirst for wanting "it". Responsibility is a lesson many people my age group have a hard time understanding (I am one of those under - just barely - 35). That is to say that not ALL are like this, but there are many. It stems from one's background, how, where, and under what circumstances they were raised; what troubles/trials they were having to engage in, with life, that brings about this sort of 'understanding' and sense of self and responsibility. Mind you, you don't have to have something traumatic, nor grow up under the poorest of conditions to understand, yet those who have, seem to seek out, and achieve what you speak of.
Having said that, I am one who understands also that, whilst I enjoy the profession, it will not be the end of me, nor will I sacrifice "life" because of it. There must be a balance. So, you do put in time, late hours to complete your "job" for deadlines, and also because you enjoy what you are doing. But by no means does this mean you give up your "life" for it, and by this i mean, life away from the profession....as a person, a human. In addition, one issue that I find a bit of trouble with is the idea of getting registered. Mind you I have taken several of the exams, yet I feel that it may only trully serve certain aspects for me in my professional career path. Hence, I am not sure if I will finish it (registration) or not. Maybe just to say that I have, but never to actually "use" it, if you will.
I don't know how to get people motivated to take responsibility, because I don't know if it's learned or inherent in the individual.
With all due respect, just my opinion, not sure if it helps to give insight.
I've been thinking about this a lot recently and I firmly belive that high levels of motivation are inherent in the individual, whether it comes from some genetic makeup or environmental factors during their growth. As someone who is currently looking to hire employees this is the thing that puzzles me and interests me the most about potential hires. Instead of hiring someone and trying to coax performance out of them I've decided to hold off for the right person that has the appropriate level or motivation and desire to exceed for reasons other than what I as an employer can provide. My not very good advice to you is: get rid of those you can't motivate and deal with the consequences whether it's taking on less work or doing more of it yourself. It's probably not good advice but it's my plan.
I tend to agree that some people are just motivated and others aren't. That has certainly been my experience.
Only one comment, archie: you say your interns aren't motivated to take responsibility. Have you just handed it to them? Why not walk into the meeting and say to your intern "You are responsible for taking notes and writing up the minutes - I'll review them the day after the meeting before you send them out."
My best experiences have been baptism by fire. Maybe some people just can't handle that, but it makes others bloom.
I think that tlm has hit on a big part of it. It can be hard to tell who is in this as a career and who is in it as a job. I think another portion of it is what the task is and what the person's goals/strengths are. If you're trying to motivate a person by giving them a design assignment, it'll do no good if that person is really in this profession for the project management / construction observation side of it, and visa versa. So in your annual review, try to get this stuff out of them - what aspect of the profession attracted them? What sort of projects would they really like to work on? Then whenever you get an opportunity (may not be right away, that's ok), throw a little of that work at them.
It'll also do no good if the person is convinced that nothing they do will please you and has the remotest chance of actually being used. My boss can be like this, and eventually everyone gives up because no matter what you show him, he'll go, "well, we're not going to be doing that. Try this". And then he'll show us what he wanted all along but didn't bother to tell anybody. I guess this part is a warning - it'll only work if you are actually open to the input you get from them and are willing to use the good bits.
Oh and if a fresh young architect doesn't want to write up meeting minutes because they think they should be "designing", fire them.
$$$$$$$$$$$$
Lots of good points, thanks for the insights. I agree that some indivicuals have a desire for reponsibility naturally. I guess I just see so few in this generation who seem to want responsiblity. Liberty bell, I am guilty of "giving " people responsibilty. I guess I don't understand when someone does not want it. We had an unregistered architect, 8 years of experience leave to go to a large firm where all he would do is specs and detail curtain walls. He said he did not want the responsiblity of having to coordinate a whole job, deal with engineers, etc. He got the same pay, didn't work overtime here, so I guess it was just the responsiblity.
I worry that in 15 years when us old farts are gone, there won't be anyone who really CARES about the work. I mean both design and getting it built. I find myself actually 'pushing' younger staff to think more creatively in the design process. Then during the CD phase, its like pulling teeth to get them to do a decent complete set of drawings. I get the sense they think stuff should "just happen". Is it cause they grew up in an era where everyone who showed up on the soccer field got a trophy? Do they look at their parents and think we wasted our lives on work and should have spent more time snowboarding?
Squirelly, you sound so sane. Go get your license. You don't ever need to use it, but it is a goal that you should achieve. I interviewed a 56 year old architect who never got licensed and now was stuck with few options. He could not work on his own, and people saw the lack of license as a lack of motivation. So do it!
mdler: I offer to pay for overtime, give really good (20% of pay) bonuses to those who do step up, but still it does not seem to motivate. I asked if anyone wanted to do a little moonlight project (small simple residential addition) on their own time, but still with office back up- thru our office officially so they are covered by liabiltiy insurance, and have an older architect review the drawings, I would stamp, but no takers. No one wanted to spend the time. Maybe I am overpaying?
As a under 35er who has been on both the employer side and the employee side of this issue, I would definitely say motivation is a fundamental personality trait, and not a matter of what the employer does or doesn't do. I think it's possible for an employer to de-motivate motivated employees, but I think it's extremely difficult to motivate someone who just doesn't have it in them.
As an employer, I asked myself over and over how certain employees could be so outrageously and explicity uninspired and unmotivated, when they were repeatedly presented with opportunities to succeed. Over a 4 year period, our company employed about 12-14 people and only 2 of them were self motivated. Two or three others did their jobs well and were generally productive and happy because it was a good working environment and they had ownership and responsibility. The rest pretty much phoned it in for a majority of the time... We tried several different methods to try to get these people to be more interested, including positive reinforcement, like performance bonuses, and negative reinforcement, like threats of firing, and none of it made much difference...
As an employee, I would consider myself to be extremely motivated and willing to take on as much responsibility as I can possibly handle - but I have to admit that I can be demotivated rather quickly and dramatically - and it can happen from something as simple as a disrespectful remark or a condescending tone of voice. My feeling is that if I'm going to be busting my ass and staying late so my boss can bill $100/hour for my work, and the value of my salary is depreciating with every extra hour I stay in the office, I better get some serious appreciation in return. If I feel like I'm being slighted and undervalued in a way that I haven't already agreed to, I'm apt to spend more time on archinect and less time worrying about deadlines...
In the big picture, I think the problem is that most people tend to be lazy and not hard working and if given the option they won't choose to excel but would rather just slide by. Unfortunately, it's harder than it seems like it should be to differentiate between truly motivated people and the rest of the people out there... and it takes so damn long to search through all the resumes and do all the interviews... and at some point you just end up settling for the best that you can get and it's often months before you can really understand someone's character...
But then again, with a limited number of truly motivated people out there, it's only fair if every firm has a mix of the self motivated and the slackers...
Hi there archie, I am a student studying in London, to be honest I think you should fire the intern tell him he is not doing enough to keep the company alive. (politely of course as not to ruin the reputation of your company) and then i think you should just get some good young people in the company. When it comes to money and deadlines dont take any shit for it. mmm, I'm only a student I would no way do that! If my boss had a deadline I would do my best to help him.
Unfortunately, some tutors think they are running a practice within their respective schools of architecture and forget to teach us.
I can totally understand with the motivation, but tell them to "bit the shit sandwich" cos thats what architects probably have to go through to get things done, am i wrong?
archie:
is it possible for you to identify any common background characteristics in the people you've hired? for example, are you hiring people who have really strong conceptual design skills, but not people who have succeeded in project management roles? have they come from similar family/community/educational/financial backgrounds? also, where are you located? do you think the city you're in has any impact on the type of people you're hiring?
Liberty, I agree with you with one exception. If the kid can design let him bring things to the table. If you have someone who can produce renderings let them do it. If you have someone who can produce construction documents, let them do it. If you have someone who can do construction observation, let them do it. The main thing is to
bring them along as a Mentor. I do firmly believe opportunities have to be provided for people to grow in an office and if it doesn't then your going to have a bunch of cad-monkeys dancing around the office tossing banana peels just to watch the other monkey slip and fall.
on my way, you make some great points. I was actually thinking of doing some "testing" during the interview phase to see if people had self motivation qualities. I understand from friends in the HR industry that you there are business oriented personality tests that can be insightful into that sort of thing. I always emphasis in job ads and during interviews that we want someone motivated, thriving on responsibility, etc. and they always say they want responsiblity, but then some of them do not embrace it.
I don't mean to imply I work with a bunch of losers. We have some outstanding people here and do what I think is way above average work. Its just a trend I have noticed with the younger people. Having kids that age, I tend to worry about the generation a bit.
seems like there are some 'they' and there are some he or she (s).
i feel, it is elders responsibility and interest to keep the younger people motivated as well as finding the motivated ones and give them the opportunity.
i don't believe keeping someone for a long time with whom you have to use a wrench to get something out. fire them's ass and maybe they'll be motivated next time.
2 cents worth.
archie
when kids my age are making 4x the amount of $$$ sitting in front of a computer designing video games instead of ugly buildings, it is frustrating...
mdler's got bills to pay...
i agree that it's all about who you're hiring, and probably not a generational thing. i don't think any fancy testing or anything will help, though. also, putting things like "we want motivated people who want to take responsibility" etc into your want ads won't help either.
your intern is operating in school mode. chances are, they are fresh out of school or within two years of it. maybe they haven't had another architectural job.
s/he didn't take notes and missed the client's wishes -- because in school, the kids who ignored the program but pumped the 3D or built the kick-ass model were the kids who got the best grades and prizes.
s/he didn't look at the zoning code -- because in school, there was no zoning code, or the prof said ignore it, we have to challenge the status quo.
s/he didn't look at your notes -- because they were yours, and you might be the principal, but they know what's best, because that's what 3-5 years in architecture school taught him/her.
s/he won't stay late -- because the only thing worth working overtime for, is themselves.
i feel for you, but: you need to really do a good job of explaining EXACTLY what you want when you interview. you need to be very, very deliberate and selective when hiring. and emphasizing motivation, responsibility, etc in your ads smacks of corporatism, and the kind of person who'd make a good HR clerk is not the kind of person who'd make a good architect. that kind of language is pretty cliched...i mean, the want ads will tell you that working at burger king is "fast-paced" and you really do have to be motivated to even show up to mcdonald's. because the jobs suck.
and frankly, if someone is coming out of school without any work experience (so that they have a feel for at least what is EXPECTED after graduation), then let someone else hire and fire them. if more people took out the trash their first day in architecture (while they were still in school), they'd realize what is expected of an architect.
Happiness is crucial. I am a strong advocate of letting people, or making them, do what they are good at. Well rounded knowledge is important, but not everyone is a designer, not everyone is a marketer, etc.
Give your employees the responsibilities that they want. 'General' responsibilities are boring and stressful - no one wants that. What responsilibities an individual will enjoy is entirely up to that individual and should be obvious in the interview (if not, ask them "hey, what motivates you?")
As a student I was extremely motivated, working tirelessly day after day in studio with major extra curricular responsibilities on top of it all. I poured my life into it almost completely, basically giving up a social life or any recreational activites. I loved every minute of it too. Now that I'm in the professional world, I sit back and slide by as a cad monkey collecting my pay.
Don't be so hard on us interns for being unmotivated. I didn't ask to feel this way and I wish every day I knew how to make it stop.
Unfortounately Archie for many architects and aspiring architects "it" has become just a "job". I believe this starts in school where essentially recent students are conditioned to think of the everyday nuts and bolts built reality as a bad place to end up. I can recall professers telling us that reason they concentrated so hard on theoretical topics was they didnt want their alumni to be wasted. Theyre ignorant assholes, and thats exactly what their now producing.
I truely believe the wrong people are being filtered out in the university fashion shows - my advice....
1. Ignore name schools - some of the hungriest, naturaly talented people whith a knack for understanding the real world complexities are prob at your local state U.
2. Be firm in letting them know their place on the totem pole. Young people today need to be slapped around a little before they'll respect you - if you dont they'll step all over you.
3. Be honest with yourself - are you trying to get blood out of turnip? Are you trying to get a licensed architect's billings out of a 24 year old kid? You probly are, and if thats the case you probably created this mess yourself.
4. Think back to when you were there age - unlike then, its a fight to even know how to use the computer, the programs, how to even draft properly while also learning how a building gets built - on top of the bizzare schedules, fast track blah blah blah that exists now. Its mind boggling.
5. Hire kids who come from families with their own businesses or the trades. They tend to have the "it" your looking for, or at least understand what "it" is from watching their folks do it.
this thread is like watching an andy rooney segment. thats not a compliment.
architecture has always been the profession of rich parents' kids, and still is. maybe in the past, the drafting floor weeded people out better.
oldfogey's portrait rings true of most of the people with whom i went to arch.school and it describes many of the people my age (>30) with whom i have worked since graduation.
frankly, the problem is that the pay and status of an entry-level architect precludes the more motivated, dedicated children of the working class from entry.
hell, i'm real smart and dedicated to boot. if i wanted to reliably do better than my dad did, i should have gotten a law degree or an engineering degree or an MBA. the only reason i HAVE done better is because my dad was painting houses at my age -- and because i have worked my ASS off.
I think things have been good enough in the profession lately, that the people you are looking for; self-starters, motivated, positive, etc... are all starting their own companies because they don't HAVE to work for you, or anyone else. I started my own business while working for people who kept giving me raises, sweet bonuses etc. The relationships in the office are the real problem. It is generational, to a point, but in my experience it has been two way. The over 35 crowd are not motivated to learn the software, keep up with material technology or share their last monopoly of useful knowledge. Most of us under 35 folk, can't relate to the over 35 folk in a way that leads to good collaboration. Maybe its the way their eyes glaze over when I turn on the computer, or my eyes glaze over when they grab that red pen. I don't work well in an office that relies heavily on architects that are no longer able to produce drawings, but constantly complain about mine. It sound like you are different, but I have yet to work for an architect that could get a line drawn on the computer and print it out, yet they want to get finicky about whether the line should be drawn .035 or .030. Most of the offices I have worked for are two headed beasts that can't survive without each other, but are unable to produce really productive individuals. If the kids in your office have a monopoly on CAD, at least it is something. Becoming a project manager puts them back on the bottom of the totem pole, from being near the top of the production totem pole.
So where have all the good young architects gone...coming soon to a phone book near you. Just my opinion.
j
It will be interesting in a downturn economy if attitudes change. Thinking back to the downturns I have lived thru and none of them were anything like what my parents or grandparents went thru. Motivation might be directly tied to economy.
its hard to be motivated by a profession which wont even let you call yourself an 'architect' ... while at the same time the media uses the term to describe terroists (architects of terror)
Let me tell old dogs can learn new tricks if they are hungry, Motivation is something for those who are older and have survived thru the rough times becomes instinct. Remember youngsters, they didn't walk in the door yesterday, computers might seem a little alien, but hey they do know how to learn, they have proven that a long time ago. The computer is just another skill in my book.
boobies
Ive found people who are in there 40's to be the computer savy - they understand the evolution of the computers use as relates to the profesion better than anyone as well as how all these programs got this way!
3d though a little lacking in that age group but really - spending 3 hours to get a material library to look right is not the best use of their time.
I am actually absolutely disgusted by the way architecture is practised in the US. Principals seems to not think deeply enough from the "top-down" sense ( Meaning, that they get too worried about the details too quickly, without developing an overall strategy to the project ). This means you would be developing advanced window detail systems without first actually making sure that you should build a window first ( just an example) As the junior architect, I would be the one developing the details, assuming of course that we have established where we wanted the windows...and the realize that all previous assumptions were wrong....Ironically I actually think that younger, less experienced, architects are actually better at top down strategy, because we will tend to approach them from a more basic level, with no baggage of previous experiences. What motivates me as a young architect is the ability to think in a nonlinear way in a profession where we must also prove our organizational skills, and "fake it till you make it" .
I love unmotivated slackers.
We are all rats on a sinking ship and every lazy, unmotivated, whiney, slacker is merely another rat I can step on to survive.
I love my fellow "kids" They make me look so good.
This thread is somewhat depressing. I'm 36 and didn't get my professional accreditation 'till quite recently. I was something of a high-flier through most of architecture school and ran conferences as well, so I suppose you could put me into the well-motivated class. I still am, if I'm put in charge of something (and I have been, so thank you, if any of my past or present employers read this and know who I am.) My problem, for many years after graduating, was that my very, very high ambitions began to seem quite split apart from reality, but I was very loathe to let go of them. What happened was that I felt crushed and like 'kid junior' in work and let my dreams fly elsewhere... into some sort of glorious delusional zone. And of course I slowly cracked up. It is only now that I find myself with good, real opportunities in front of me and, having slaved away in the background trying to get to grips with my rather complex personality: getting to grips with it such that I can put it accross in a format that both serves the genuine objectives of others whilst not at the same time selling myself out. I wrote in my journal the other week that finally, finally, my childhood self and my working self are back on the same wavelength; re-united and this makes me very happy and content and optimistic indeed. Thing is, it's taken a hell of a long and painful time to come. Some employers (the first of them) were stoic to this process; others weren't; others didn't care. I thank the one and can hardly blame the others.
So... I really feel for the difficulty of someone trying to get to grips with the HR perspective. It's not something I have any experience of so I'm not qualified to comment.
But I would say this. And I'm sure we all want it because to suggest we've got a 'lost generation' amongst us would be to admit our failing too. It's entirely laudible that you're asking this question of motivation Archie. You're coming across as sincere. Yet I have a hunch we're not getting the whole picture. Sometimes it's not enough just to expect or hope of others that they act like we did. It's a reasonable enough approach to start off with, but if it's not getting the results you're looking for then there must be a 'plan B' we can put into effect. 'Firing people' as suggested above seams a dismal way out. Fact is, these young people you talk of are human too and what seems to be missing is a genuine mutual understanding. Time and time again we've heard older generations bemoaning the sorry state of younger ones. And yet time and time again, life goes on.
My solution? More information. From you to them and from them to you. The more mutual understanding you generate as a boss, the more respect you'll get. I'm not saying you don't have any at the moment; I couldn't possibly know of course except for the general hunch that you're one of the good guys. All I'm saying is that if something doesn't seem right, forget about the generational theories and generalisations and look more closely into the human individuals. Only that way will you get real answers.
'I am not my i-Pod' hehe ;-)
I think mdler's got it all figured out.
on my way good points!
mdler, I wholeheartedly agree with the comment about our title (or are we still just being referred to - that guy).
Archie, I truly wish I had a boss like you....one who listens, and is willing to "teach". Much as in the way of the 'old system' where there was masters and the apprentices....and you could learn from someone who took you under their wing, so to speak!
i think trace is brilliant
btw Archie: Thanks....and yes, I think I will, but just so that I can say I have it, nothing more.
mdler, trace is one sharp cookie!
"the youngins only want god.....oh no i mean good design"
Mr. Koolhaas just so DOES have the right look.
our technology has completely revolutionized the way we produce architecture, and our firms have changed kinda halfway...but school hasn't changed at all, at least not in the US. if you think about it, we still learn the way that the gentlemen learned 100 years ago, except instead of being forced to learn watercolor and inkwash, we're forced to learn maya and rhino.
in the past, there were always the draftsmen and the contractors who would fill in the blanks between the pretty pictures. nowadays that's not the case, but we still crank out people who are better at drawing than designing. and by design, i mean solving a problem in a way that is greater than the sum of the solution's parts.
if we were forced to take meaty, substantial courses in structures, systems, and management in professional school -- and if we were forced to leave the (very crucial, but very advanced) questions about theory and philosophy for the post-graduate work -- then perhaps we as young architects might do better for ourselves, our employers, and ultimately for society.
That works for me.....just call, "you guys" Architects.....the rest of us registered buggers....we will call, "Architects of Architecture"
Maybe grad programmes should insist on applicants having full accreditation *before* enrolling. I was in grad school designing a real international airport masterplan; talking on-the-level with heads of construction companies and waxing lyrical about advance theory before... becoming office junior with a small stipend of a salary. That's the wrong way around. My fault of course but, huh, I was only a kid.
And it's not enough to have all these technical courses: structural, legal, constructional on the side if the overwhelming prevailing ethos lies elsewhere in the school.
I disagree. I think architecture should be available to anyone who is willing to take the risk personally to practice it.
Architecture is undefinable and the architect is unknowable - school is the limiting factor to who gets in. Some school absolutely nessessary however the exam in my opinion should be open to anyone with construction, engineering or architectural experiance in addition to the bachelors. We are cutting out tremendous brain power from access to the proffesion, and some of those brains just may have some alternate ways of thinking. Since when is variation a bad thing? By variation I dont mean Blobs from Columbia versus Sci-Arc techno Cum Shots.
I think we might as well do the same for Law and Medicine....what the heck! It is not like a doctor can kill hundreds of people at one time Like and Architect....and you know I have never heard of a Lawyer Killing anyone! Seems like neither on of them really is on the outlook for the health and welfare of the general public on the level of an Architect.
SCI-Arc techno Cum Shots...
wow.
besides hearing that people putting balls/testicles on their big trucks in Florida, thats the best thing I've heard so far this year.
uh-oh....possible hijacking of thread in progress.......
quick!! call the architects of terror.
I'd like to reply to what the initial post was asking. I would say THE reason for motivation is how exciting the project at hand is.
1. How interesting or exciting the project is, I've had multiple friends of mine complain about how it is very boring to do typical renovations of offices.
2. The restraints of the project, every project can be exciting however some projects are not very because of clients and what they want.
3. How open minded the ultimate decision maker is, that would be you. If you give an intern a shot and preliminary design and they KNOW you already have something in mind, then they feel as though there is no point.
4. The pay is sometimes an issue, sometimes people just don't feel that is it worth it to stay later and kill themselves for a measly couple bucks more or at all if you don't pay overtime.
5. Maybe you should just re-evaluate what type of interns you hire, it could be that you just had bad luck and hired people who just go through the motions, which is kind of sad.
6. Let me tell you though, there are young architects out there that are willing to go above and beyond, so don't generalize us all like that. Some of us really do care and.
Just to let you know, your place sounds like it gives interns quite a good amount of opportunities, so I'd definantly keep that up, you won't be sorry if you hire the right person.
[should we tell archie that his employees are regulars on archinect and he has just basically told the world that there losers!]
i would have to politely disagree with that last paragraph ochona. i don't feel as though it would be a good idea to separate out the substantial structures, systems and management from theory and philosophy. personally, i think having a good mix of them all from beginning to end of bachelors and masters is the way to go (but that is just my personal preference).
having watched some come from really technically oriented schools with no introduction to theory, then be asked to go all out theory, they inevitably seem to fall back on what they already know, not knowing how to integrate the previous knowledge with the new.
we are supposed to be a profession of very well rounded individuals, and i think by separating things out early you lose some of the ability to fold in new knowledge later.
- William J. H. Boetcker
betadinesutures posted this on the resolutions thread - I like how it fits in here, too.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.