I just began to read the post about whether a stigma was attached to being from a second-tier vs. a first tier grad school.
As he's worried about his entry into the field, as this economy has rocked architecture, I'm interested in the exit. While this guy's gearing up for grad school, to "learn like hell" as someone advised him...what is he supposed to learn? My real question is, who are/were the last people standing at your firms? What skills/knowledge did they have that made them more valuable than the people let go?
I'll start with my bias. I think the last ones to go were either the "master builders" (those who know how a building goes together) or the "hustlers" (see Glen Small thread; the marketing guys who can potentially go out and get more work). Put another way, I think the first ones to go were classically-trained, graduate-educated designers (concept, concept, marketing, flash). And if that's the case, I take the next step and argue about the misdirection our schools are taking in teaching us...
But first, I need your help. Prove me wrong, prove me right; find the holes in my view. Expand my world.
And if I may nip it (no pun intended, but it works) in the bud now, I've read consistently in these threads the case of women being kept for their other virtues. And obviously despotism occurs. I'm not interested in the political reasons. What I'm really interested in is at the end of the day, who had the shit that the firm simply couldn't survive without, and were those skills/knowledge/traits.
I'd have to say my experience is a little different. I work for a large office in a large city and for us, the first to go were the less experienced support staff, pretty much everyone except for a chosen few with under 2yrs, and the middle-high people that were experienced enough, but not pulling their weight in terms of productivity to justify the higher salary. We were left with a lot of ambitious (read as positive and negative) mid to high level people and the ones at the top. Basically cut off the legs and trimmed the belly fat.
We kept a lot of the flashy producers because marketing became that much more important when the jobs got scarce. Which I know is a whole discussion in itself. I'd also have to say that most are from either top tier undergrad schools with experience or the Ivy grad schools.
I think the strategy was/is to trim the excess and keep those around that, given a few years through the downturn, could grow within the firm and lead it when things get better. Most of the middle guys are now getting registered and either moving on or moving up.
That being said, a lot of it also seemed political. Those who "cultivated" relationships with the partners, PM, etc seemed to stick around. Most of them yes-men, but a few truely talented. The nice guys didn't last. The personally ambitious ones did.
I once worked at a top big office in San Francisco, I came from 3rd tier (accredited, with ex Cal Poly and Harvard profs at least) school, and was working in a field of ivy and other big 8 types. I was able to hold my own - due to my 3D design and BIM background - but I was not a pedigree - and a coworker told me that as soon as they get what they want from me, I am out the door. I was a "nice guy" taught all of my favourite BIM tricks to people - should have said - "go look it up in "Mastering Revit 2010" - I got laid off, and it took a year to get another job. - I was told that I only had a 2% chance of ever getting another architecture job.
I was at an AIA meeting 4 months ago - Career discussion session we were told that with so many good people out there, only the Ivy's would get jobs and we should all consider other lines of employment.
After that, I decided to create my own reality - too many pessimists looking for excuses to give up - "I don't like temp jobs at firms because it misses with my EDD"
Now I have a good job with a small firm, where I do multiple roles of design, 3D modeling, and details.
The lesson here, is this: we get our chance - 2% usually gets it. The rest of us some how decides to opt for what is comfortable and pays the ultimate price for it - There are many people who upon reaching age 60, look back with deep regrets.
If only I had studied my ass off in high school got straigt As, and 2400 on the SAT and got accepted to MIT or Harvard.
If only I had better social skills
If only
if only
if only I did not crave comfort
The path of least resistance leads to unemployment
One more word, stay away from pessimists, they are human black holes that just want to pull you down.
i think dsal is closer to it than the op. the first to go were low- to mid-level people who just didn't fit culturally into the firm. the next cut were sort of your journeyman project architects. there wasn't enough building work going on to keep these people employed, and they tended to have higher salaries. next cut was project managers and principals who were not bringing in enough work. what's left are the flashy low- to mid-level designers who can do marketing, pms and principals who are actively bringing in work, and "doers," a small core group of multi-talented people that just know how to get things done. (you would be surprised how rare this is.)
hmm, rethinkit, how far out of school were you when you were told that only the Ivy's would get jobs? I'm pretty much appalled those at the AIA said only Ivy Leaguers would be getting jobs ...
i'm calling b.s. on any official aia rep saying that only ivy league grads would be getting jobs. maybe some blowhard that they invited but not an aia official. either way, that's pure 100% genuine crap. and i'm a long documented gsd grad saying it.
i will second won and steven - multi-talented will carry more weight than just about anything else right now. and dsal's description is pretty much what my colleagues (fellow principals) at larger firms are telling me as well.
the area that i see just getting hammered is the p.m/p.a. types who were serviceable in the job, weren't quite partner material, but who you stuck with when the work was more flush. that level got tossed more frequently than you'd think - really, it makes some sense. if you have more ambitious, potential partner types who weren't getting the chances when so much work was in the office, what better time to clear a path for them and get them that experience now?
Thanks for the insights, guys. It took a different (read: more realistic) turn than I expected - much appreciated.
Perhaps I should have stated my level - that of an older student 3 years out from his undergrad. So I appreciate all of the higher level views that aren't always "visible" or shared.
So to put the original question another way: what advice to you give young people now to hedge their bets when the next recession comes? Hell, what advice do give the PMs/PAs that were let go (a position I aspire to)?
I read from above already that one answer is simply being multi-talented. Anyone care to elaborate on the particular talents they find desirable?
Perhaps this is for another thread, but to loosely tie it back to the original situation. A prospective grad student is trying to figure out which school had more weight on the resume. Some responded regardless, learn like hell. My experience has been that there is a 25% connection between what is taught in school and the real world - real BUSINESS - of architecture.
I'm simply struggling with the melding of this "idealistic" culture that university promotes, with the economic realities of architecture. Especially now in this recession. I'm struggling with the promotion of these altruisms. It seems schools are trying to graduate world-changers via design, without providing any economic reference to how to achieve that. It is so...naïve, and I can't understand its continuous propagation. It's as if it is an unwritten code, that architects are to rise above the economic restraints (otherwise known as budgets) that bind us, to never invoke their presence. IT'S A BUSINESS! You can't simply ignore and overlook some rules and facts, as we did in college. We should know, operate, and embrace all of the rules and factors we have thrown at us. Not consider some issues to be taboo. I just didn't and can't drink the kool-aid.
I joined architecture to be a professional: someone who knows all aspects of the business, and operates by those restraints to provide the best service possible under real world circumstances to the client. As logical as that may sound to me, I feel I'm the exception to the cultural norm - why is that?
Sometimes I wonder why there aren't more business-savy types in architecture. I suppose the majority of those with any business-savy have moved themselves into more profitable fields rather than trying to make the non-profitable field of architecture profitable.
Hello. Longtime lurker and infrequent poster here...
I've seen so many endless discussions on these boards about the importance of school/program reputation and the influence it has on finding and maintaining a job in this profession, especially in difficult times. We see ridiculous statements like the one posted above about "only Ivies getting the jobs" or people questioning $100k+ student loans in order to get the brand name degree.
I graduated over five years ago with an M.Arch from a state university (with cheap in-state tuition, a small handful of moderate financial awards and manageable student loans). I will state that I was fortunate enough to graduate during a time when the profession was doing quite well and many offices were hiring. With a strong portfolio, a couple of very good recommendations and the fortunate TIMING of interviewing with an office that was currently looking for someone with my level of experience, I landed a job with a small but very well respected firm in NYC. After an initial "trial" period of one month I was offered a full-time job with decent pay and full benefits.
Even though I didn't have an Ivy or "top-tier" degree I was still able to get my foot in the door and prove my worth through hard work, a willingness to be flexible and a dedication to always improving and broadening my skills. Multi-talented indeed rules! In addition, the office was a good fit for me and I was a good fit for the office. I was considered a VALUABLE EMPLOYEE in the office. This, I believe, is the most important aspect in maintaining a good job.
Do I believe that having a degree from a top-tier program gives graduates from these programs an edge in the profession? Yes, and perhaps even more so during competitive times. I was the only person in my office without an Ivy League degree, and I found there to be much discussion both within the office and within the NYC architecture scene about school reputation and quality of graduates from these programs - a sort of "branding" if you will. It does indeed carry some weight, perhaps more so for opening up better networking opportunities rather than valuable training for the profession. The students from these programs are typically hard working, talented designers. But it must also be stated that having a degree from a top-tier school is not a make or break situation!! The longer you are in the profession the more you will realize that dedication, hard-work and the ability to get things done far outweigh any academic credentials.
As an additional note... I have spent the past three years living in Germany (moved here with my wife) working for a well known, internationally respected firm. I work with a group of very talented and hard working architects - mostly German architects trained at universities that would be considered more pragmatic and practice based relative to US schools. The most refreshing thing about working in my office is that no one ever discusses their educational backgrounds. I have no idea where my colleagues studied, nor have they ever asked me. It's just not considered important. (I'm not sure if this is specific to my own office or also common throughout Germany/Europe??)
Every so often our office hires one or two summer/semester interns from the US. I always find it amusing that within the first one or two minutes of conversation with these interns there is always the question "where did you study?" or the statement "I'm a student at..." I never have this discussion with German interns. A few months ago we had a new intern from the US arrive in our office and asked her on her first day "where do you come from?", expecting to hear the name of a city or a state. Her answer: "I'm from Yale" Geeeeeeeeezzzz....
"i think dsal is closer to it than the op. the first to go were low- to mid-level people who just didn't fit culturally into the firm. the next cut were sort of your journeyman project architects. there wasn't enough building work going on to keep these people employed, and they tended to have higher salaries. next cut was project managers and principals who were not bringing in enough work. what's left are the flashy low- to mid-level designers who can do marketing, pms and principals who are actively bringing in work, and "doers," a small core group of multi-talented people that just know how to get things done. (you would be surprised how rare this is." -Won Williams quote
you got most of it right Won, The only part that is totally off is that "firms have kept a small core group of multi talented people that just know how to get things done." total opposite, firms kept people that will get the job done despite it not being 100% or even close to being done. They have basically kept people that look good on a website or a brochure, who wants to see an architect that has a crew cut wears black trousers, a white pressed shirt, with sleeves rolled up, glasses, and a look that says "I dont do small talk, piss off" ?
doers," a small core group of multi-talented people that just know how to get things done. (you would be surprised how rare this is." -Won Williams quote
you would be surprised how rare this is." - 2% to be exact - no matter the profession, it is always the top 2% that knows how to get things done - why - because they are not compromised by bad habits and they do what it takes and not what is comfortable or convenient - and they never make excuses.
i don't know where the hell displaced works but most professional firms trying to weather the current storm don't have time to worry about keeping websites current or what their employees look like. at a lot of firms projects are getting more 'done' than ever before, just because they're trying to keep people busy well past the point that documents would normally have been set loose. (not saying this makes those documents better...)
you've got a chip on your shoulder about architects that seems to be based on a particular (and small) group of architect-types that i don't believe represent the profession at large. in fact we're a bunch of people who just work hard to make the best projects we can make. are you just watching the rock star architects or something? or maybe the middle management of a corporate firm? 'cause neither is representative of the whole...
who wants to see an architect that has a crew cut wears black trousers, a white pressed shirt, with sleeves rolled up, glasses, and a look that says "I dont do small talk, piss off" ?
Nobody gets to keep their job just because they are good looking.The key to keeping one's job is to improve or contribute to the company's bottom line,bring in work.Heck,even if somebody effs her/his boss poop will hit the fan soon and she/he will be replaced with a qualified person.Office romance never lasts.
I think DA just can't handle the fact that a good looking woman or a female of any sort can actually produce better work than him while at the same time do a better job communicating with other people (aka not floating around "military" attitude) via reasoning,diplomacy and common sense.I know truth hurts. My advice to you Displaced,forget about what happened,look back objectively,see how you can improve yourself (you can start with improving your communication skills) instead of spewing your bitter poison around clogging the threads here.
i was not talking explicitly about women, but nice try, talk about someone spewing bitter poison here comes ms paradox the lady that hates immigrants all immigrants, i think there are quite a few threads discussing your favorite group of people you hate what are you doing here ?
Not that i care but since ms paradoxx said "Office romance never lasts."
You say office romance does not last? tell that to the couples that I have worked with at my past firms, not only did it last , they are married too, Nice people got along with them just fine too.
I could tell you are pretty new to architecture so ill let you off easy with the rest of your naive comments. Now run along I think that veggie dinner you just at is going to your hipps, and you're about to miss yoga class.
"Nobody gets to keep their job just because they are good looking.The key to keeping one's job is to improve or contribute to the company's bottom line,bring in work.Heck,even if somebody effs her/his boss poop will hit the fan soon and she/he will be replaced with a qualified person"
Paradoxx quote.
you put a lot of words into my mouth there young lady, i never said anything about people as you say effing her/his boss? or anything about poop hitting fans? what kind of person are you always thinking about sex and poop.
You would also see that good looking people are good marketing material, and hence they are good advertisement for an office presenting a particular kind of image. There are also other factors as to why someone more qualified gets let go, read Won Williams up above. Ok lessons over, that one is free, if you insist on agitating me and there by causing me to explain things to you, then you should pay me.
Last Man Standing?
I just began to read the post about whether a stigma was attached to being from a second-tier vs. a first tier grad school.
As he's worried about his entry into the field, as this economy has rocked architecture, I'm interested in the exit. While this guy's gearing up for grad school, to "learn like hell" as someone advised him...what is he supposed to learn? My real question is, who are/were the last people standing at your firms? What skills/knowledge did they have that made them more valuable than the people let go?
I'll start with my bias. I think the last ones to go were either the "master builders" (those who know how a building goes together) or the "hustlers" (see Glen Small thread; the marketing guys who can potentially go out and get more work). Put another way, I think the first ones to go were classically-trained, graduate-educated designers (concept, concept, marketing, flash). And if that's the case, I take the next step and argue about the misdirection our schools are taking in teaching us...
But first, I need your help. Prove me wrong, prove me right; find the holes in my view. Expand my world.
And if I may nip it (no pun intended, but it works) in the bud now, I've read consistently in these threads the case of women being kept for their other virtues. And obviously despotism occurs. I'm not interested in the political reasons. What I'm really interested in is at the end of the day, who had the shit that the firm simply couldn't survive without, and were those skills/knowledge/traits.
Based on what I've seen and heard from friends, it varied firm to firm, depending on who they had that could cover multiple roles.
it did seem like in many cases they wiped out all the middle tiers, leaving just the studio heads and low level support staff (drafters).
I'd have to say my experience is a little different. I work for a large office in a large city and for us, the first to go were the less experienced support staff, pretty much everyone except for a chosen few with under 2yrs, and the middle-high people that were experienced enough, but not pulling their weight in terms of productivity to justify the higher salary. We were left with a lot of ambitious (read as positive and negative) mid to high level people and the ones at the top. Basically cut off the legs and trimmed the belly fat.
We kept a lot of the flashy producers because marketing became that much more important when the jobs got scarce. Which I know is a whole discussion in itself. I'd also have to say that most are from either top tier undergrad schools with experience or the Ivy grad schools.
I think the strategy was/is to trim the excess and keep those around that, given a few years through the downturn, could grow within the firm and lead it when things get better. Most of the middle guys are now getting registered and either moving on or moving up.
That being said, a lot of it also seemed political. Those who "cultivated" relationships with the partners, PM, etc seemed to stick around. Most of them yes-men, but a few truely talented. The nice guys didn't last. The personally ambitious ones did.
Just my filtered observations.
Easy. If you bring in work, nobody is going to lay you off.
I once worked at a top big office in San Francisco, I came from 3rd tier (accredited, with ex Cal Poly and Harvard profs at least) school, and was working in a field of ivy and other big 8 types. I was able to hold my own - due to my 3D design and BIM background - but I was not a pedigree - and a coworker told me that as soon as they get what they want from me, I am out the door. I was a "nice guy" taught all of my favourite BIM tricks to people - should have said - "go look it up in "Mastering Revit 2010" - I got laid off, and it took a year to get another job. - I was told that I only had a 2% chance of ever getting another architecture job.
I was at an AIA meeting 4 months ago - Career discussion session we were told that with so many good people out there, only the Ivy's would get jobs and we should all consider other lines of employment.
After that, I decided to create my own reality - too many pessimists looking for excuses to give up - "I don't like temp jobs at firms because it misses with my EDD"
Now I have a good job with a small firm, where I do multiple roles of design, 3D modeling, and details.
The lesson here, is this: we get our chance - 2% usually gets it. The rest of us some how decides to opt for what is comfortable and pays the ultimate price for it - There are many people who upon reaching age 60, look back with deep regrets.
If only I had studied my ass off in high school got straigt As, and 2400 on the SAT and got accepted to MIT or Harvard.
If only I had better social skills
If only
if only
if only I did not crave comfort
The path of least resistance leads to unemployment
One more word, stay away from pessimists, they are human black holes that just want to pull you down.
i think dsal is closer to it than the op. the first to go were low- to mid-level people who just didn't fit culturally into the firm. the next cut were sort of your journeyman project architects. there wasn't enough building work going on to keep these people employed, and they tended to have higher salaries. next cut was project managers and principals who were not bringing in enough work. what's left are the flashy low- to mid-level designers who can do marketing, pms and principals who are actively bringing in work, and "doers," a small core group of multi-talented people that just know how to get things done. (you would be surprised how rare this is.)
the last man/woman standing...is the one who can do it all -
^ you mean a hermaphrodite?
It's kind of an easy question to answer isn't it?
Of course, the last 'men' standing were the principals and partners.
Ask yourself what they know.
hmm, rethinkit, how far out of school were you when you were told that only the Ivy's would get jobs? I'm pretty much appalled those at the AIA said only Ivy Leaguers would be getting jobs ...
@won williams: ...a small core group of multi-talented people that just know how to get things done...
always.
i'm calling b.s. on any official aia rep saying that only ivy league grads would be getting jobs. maybe some blowhard that they invited but not an aia official. either way, that's pure 100% genuine crap. and i'm a long documented gsd grad saying it.
i will second won and steven - multi-talented will carry more weight than just about anything else right now. and dsal's description is pretty much what my colleagues (fellow principals) at larger firms are telling me as well.
the area that i see just getting hammered is the p.m/p.a. types who were serviceable in the job, weren't quite partner material, but who you stuck with when the work was more flush. that level got tossed more frequently than you'd think - really, it makes some sense. if you have more ambitious, potential partner types who weren't getting the chances when so much work was in the office, what better time to clear a path for them and get them that experience now?
Thanks for the insights, guys. It took a different (read: more realistic) turn than I expected - much appreciated.
Perhaps I should have stated my level - that of an older student 3 years out from his undergrad. So I appreciate all of the higher level views that aren't always "visible" or shared.
So to put the original question another way: what advice to you give young people now to hedge their bets when the next recession comes? Hell, what advice do give the PMs/PAs that were let go (a position I aspire to)?
I read from above already that one answer is simply being multi-talented. Anyone care to elaborate on the particular talents they find desirable?
Perhaps this is for another thread, but to loosely tie it back to the original situation. A prospective grad student is trying to figure out which school had more weight on the resume. Some responded regardless, learn like hell. My experience has been that there is a 25% connection between what is taught in school and the real world - real BUSINESS - of architecture.
I'm simply struggling with the melding of this "idealistic" culture that university promotes, with the economic realities of architecture. Especially now in this recession. I'm struggling with the promotion of these altruisms. It seems schools are trying to graduate world-changers via design, without providing any economic reference to how to achieve that. It is so...naïve, and I can't understand its continuous propagation. It's as if it is an unwritten code, that architects are to rise above the economic restraints (otherwise known as budgets) that bind us, to never invoke their presence. IT'S A BUSINESS! You can't simply ignore and overlook some rules and facts, as we did in college. We should know, operate, and embrace all of the rules and factors we have thrown at us. Not consider some issues to be taboo. I just didn't and can't drink the kool-aid.
I joined architecture to be a professional: someone who knows all aspects of the business, and operates by those restraints to provide the best service possible under real world circumstances to the client. As logical as that may sound to me, I feel I'm the exception to the cultural norm - why is that?
Sometimes I wonder why there aren't more business-savy types in architecture. I suppose the majority of those with any business-savy have moved themselves into more profitable fields rather than trying to make the non-profitable field of architecture profitable.
Hello. Longtime lurker and infrequent poster here...
I've seen so many endless discussions on these boards about the importance of school/program reputation and the influence it has on finding and maintaining a job in this profession, especially in difficult times. We see ridiculous statements like the one posted above about "only Ivies getting the jobs" or people questioning $100k+ student loans in order to get the brand name degree.
I graduated over five years ago with an M.Arch from a state university (with cheap in-state tuition, a small handful of moderate financial awards and manageable student loans). I will state that I was fortunate enough to graduate during a time when the profession was doing quite well and many offices were hiring. With a strong portfolio, a couple of very good recommendations and the fortunate TIMING of interviewing with an office that was currently looking for someone with my level of experience, I landed a job with a small but very well respected firm in NYC. After an initial "trial" period of one month I was offered a full-time job with decent pay and full benefits.
Even though I didn't have an Ivy or "top-tier" degree I was still able to get my foot in the door and prove my worth through hard work, a willingness to be flexible and a dedication to always improving and broadening my skills. Multi-talented indeed rules! In addition, the office was a good fit for me and I was a good fit for the office. I was considered a VALUABLE EMPLOYEE in the office. This, I believe, is the most important aspect in maintaining a good job.
Do I believe that having a degree from a top-tier program gives graduates from these programs an edge in the profession? Yes, and perhaps even more so during competitive times. I was the only person in my office without an Ivy League degree, and I found there to be much discussion both within the office and within the NYC architecture scene about school reputation and quality of graduates from these programs - a sort of "branding" if you will. It does indeed carry some weight, perhaps more so for opening up better networking opportunities rather than valuable training for the profession. The students from these programs are typically hard working, talented designers. But it must also be stated that having a degree from a top-tier school is not a make or break situation!! The longer you are in the profession the more you will realize that dedication, hard-work and the ability to get things done far outweigh any academic credentials.
As an additional note... I have spent the past three years living in Germany (moved here with my wife) working for a well known, internationally respected firm. I work with a group of very talented and hard working architects - mostly German architects trained at universities that would be considered more pragmatic and practice based relative to US schools. The most refreshing thing about working in my office is that no one ever discusses their educational backgrounds. I have no idea where my colleagues studied, nor have they ever asked me. It's just not considered important. (I'm not sure if this is specific to my own office or also common throughout Germany/Europe??)
Every so often our office hires one or two summer/semester interns from the US. I always find it amusing that within the first one or two minutes of conversation with these interns there is always the question "where did you study?" or the statement "I'm a student at..." I never have this discussion with German interns. A few months ago we had a new intern from the US arrive in our office and asked her on her first day "where do you come from?", expecting to hear the name of a city or a state. Her answer: "I'm from Yale" Geeeeeeeeezzzz....
"i think dsal is closer to it than the op. the first to go were low- to mid-level people who just didn't fit culturally into the firm. the next cut were sort of your journeyman project architects. there wasn't enough building work going on to keep these people employed, and they tended to have higher salaries. next cut was project managers and principals who were not bringing in enough work. what's left are the flashy low- to mid-level designers who can do marketing, pms and principals who are actively bringing in work, and "doers," a small core group of multi-talented people that just know how to get things done. (you would be surprised how rare this is." -Won Williams quote
you got most of it right Won, The only part that is totally off is that "firms have kept a small core group of multi talented people that just know how to get things done." total opposite, firms kept people that will get the job done despite it not being 100% or even close to being done. They have basically kept people that look good on a website or a brochure, who wants to see an architect that has a crew cut wears black trousers, a white pressed shirt, with sleeves rolled up, glasses, and a look that says "I dont do small talk, piss off" ?
Displaced
So true
doers," a small core group of multi-talented people that just know how to get things done. (you would be surprised how rare this is." -Won Williams quote
you would be surprised how rare this is." - 2% to be exact - no matter the profession, it is always the top 2% that knows how to get things done - why - because they are not compromised by bad habits and they do what it takes and not what is comfortable or convenient - and they never make excuses.
i don't know where the hell displaced works but most professional firms trying to weather the current storm don't have time to worry about keeping websites current or what their employees look like. at a lot of firms projects are getting more 'done' than ever before, just because they're trying to keep people busy well past the point that documents would normally have been set loose. (not saying this makes those documents better...)
you've got a chip on your shoulder about architects that seems to be based on a particular (and small) group of architect-types that i don't believe represent the profession at large. in fact we're a bunch of people who just work hard to make the best projects we can make. are you just watching the rock star architects or something? or maybe the middle management of a corporate firm? 'cause neither is representative of the whole...
No Ward, there are no Chips on my shoulders, Truth hurts doesn't it?
i'm livin' the truth, DA, and you're not describing it...
Nobody gets to keep their job just because they are good looking.The key to keeping one's job is to improve or contribute to the company's bottom line,bring in work.Heck,even if somebody effs her/his boss poop will hit the fan soon and she/he will be replaced with a qualified person.Office romance never lasts.
I think DA just can't handle the fact that a good looking woman or a female of any sort can actually produce better work than him while at the same time do a better job communicating with other people (aka not floating around "military" attitude) via reasoning,diplomacy and common sense.I know truth hurts. My advice to you Displaced,forget about what happened,look back objectively,see how you can improve yourself (you can start with improving your communication skills) instead of spewing your bitter poison around clogging the threads here.
paradoxx or should i say ms michaels?
i was not talking explicitly about women, but nice try, talk about someone spewing bitter poison here comes ms paradox the lady that hates immigrants all immigrants, i think there are quite a few threads discussing your favorite group of people you hate what are you doing here ?
Not that i care but since ms paradoxx said "Office romance never lasts."
You say office romance does not last? tell that to the couples that I have worked with at my past firms, not only did it last , they are married too, Nice people got along with them just fine too.
I could tell you are pretty new to architecture so ill let you off easy with the rest of your naive comments. Now run along I think that veggie dinner you just at is going to your hipps, and you're about to miss yoga class.
good day.
Yes I meant to say "ate", I know you archinectors love to spell check. thanks
"Nobody gets to keep their job just because they are good looking.The key to keeping one's job is to improve or contribute to the company's bottom line,bring in work.Heck,even if somebody effs her/his boss poop will hit the fan soon and she/he will be replaced with a qualified person"
Paradoxx quote.
you put a lot of words into my mouth there young lady, i never said anything about people as you say effing her/his boss? or anything about poop hitting fans? what kind of person are you always thinking about sex and poop.
You would also see that good looking people are good marketing material, and hence they are good advertisement for an office presenting a particular kind of image. There are also other factors as to why someone more qualified gets let go, read Won Williams up above. Ok lessons over, that one is free, if you insist on agitating me and there by causing me to explain things to you, then you should pay me.
Correction : Ms paradoxx only hates Illegal immigrants and Native Americans.
Which I don't understand since she is from Turkey.
ms paradox, im sorry, can i tag along to your next yoga class?
Have you answered back to yourself yet DA?
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.