I have this situation at work, and I would like to hear a wise word from you, smart people of the internet.
I am about a year and a half in work after graduation. I had a somewhat specific path, my education going from civil/construction engineering, and ending up as an architectural engineer, grabbing as much work during summers as I could.
'Nuff about me... A couple of months in at this company, we have wrapped up some construction drawings from a project that came at the same time as I did. Exciting times I thought, let's get to work! After the initial brief reading, and understanding of the programme, we went on to do some massing studies.
Before continuing, the colleague was a drafter for some years, climbed up the ladders and managed to get some manager opportunities. He learned his trade that's for sure, and has a pretty solid knowledge of the technical stuff, but no official education in architecture nor engineering.
Even though I am on the technical side for sure, and tend to skip a step or two during design, I have to say I was so unprepared for what came to me... We go on to discuss our proposals, and I can see he is clearly missing structure in the way he approaches design problems. It seems like he knows where he is heading and what the end result should be since he has these kinds of things in front of him quite a lot, but he was obviously never in a position where he was the one actually getting to it. His concepts are completely missing the points in the brief. I am trying to reasonably give him hints of it, but after a while, I realize that there is no harm done in trying to teach someone something and I directly tell him that some of his arguments are completely not valid, at which point he gets extremely offended, voices were raised and some rough words got in from his side. He eventually apologized, and I managed to get some points across on how to work in a more organized and holistic manner (as it is still an early stage, no need to go into details), but I saw he more or less continued in the same direction. I also managed to create a simple Grasshopper script to do some rough energy analysis, and after asking him to send his plans to see if anything is interesting in that concern, he rejected it with "I'll try to develop this further, and then go into energy", even though it is literally ten minutes of work, and could give some pretty important insights for the further development.
I want to hear your opinions on all of this. Do you have any advice on how to deal with this? What could I do differently? I am pretty used to teamwork, I can't remember once that someone complained about me as a team member (could be because they did not tell me, fair point as well), and I know he was mostly doing stuff solo, apart from regular coordination meetings, could that be the case?
Apart from raising my voice, I honestly don't see what I did wrong here.
For me, this is a little too vague to make a real assessment.
I’m not going to assume you’re coming at this from the right side, so here are a few generic thought on alternate causes for this issue:
1) You are overlooking something beyond your scope of work/knowledge. For example, planning can be very complicated, and it may not be worth doing energy analysis at this point regardless of how easy they are as the information may just contradict other requirements of the planning process.
2) It might be that this person is tentative to show incomplete work. Often things are asked to be shown or used for something else before they are done, and can result in helpful development…. or undue criticism. Some people are cautious of the latter, sometimes for very good reasons.
3) Perhaps this person has seen into the future and is just waiting for that mega millions draw tonight.
All fair points, but he never communicated any of that. That is what led me to my conclusions. It was not just the energy stuff, that was an example. The brief says, as they do these days, we need a cost efficient, sustainable, structurally simple building that fits with the surroundings - and the floorplans he suggests are literally hexagon shaped.
Jan 27, 24 2:33 am ·
·
natematt
While off the cuff I don't love the idea of a hexagon building, I don't think it's inherently going to go against any of those goals. Lot of huff for nothing around building shape a lot of the time, especially if it's still just an extrusion.
I'll be honest, a lot of this reads as undue arrogance on your part. A year and a half out of school is not very long at all. Most architects continue their out-of-school education for twice as long as that before they get a licence to practice. This sounds like a coworker that might have significantly more experience than you, whom you're brushing off as a "drafter". Maybe you are a team player.... I don't know you. But this essay you've written definitely doesn't make you seem like it.
It's also hard to say what kind of work should be produced in response to a brief without knowing what kind of work your firm does. At my firm, our foray into structural work is incredibly basic ("We can use this walls for shear, and we'll probably want the roof out of PWT" etc.) until we get a structural engineer involved *down the line*. Certainly not for a brief where we don't have an actual contract signed. Same with energy modeling. That would never happen at the concept stage at my firm, and it doesn't make us worse for not doing that.
This is why a lot of your post reads as undue arrogance. I'd advise you'd do a lot more watching people above you, asking them earnest questions, and listening to their answers, rather than assuming you know more than them because you have a degree and they don't.
I certainly do not consider myself more or less knowledgeable, but it's just different kind of knowledge. We don't go to uni for nothing, but I value his experience a lot, and I mention that a lot, asking him quite a lot of questions during this last CD session. I really did not use the term "drafter" to look down on anyone, it was just what he was doing, but I appreciate your advice.
Jan 27, 24 9:30 am ·
·
ivanmillya
I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. I'm saying that even though you have a degree, you've only been in this field for a year and a half. I don't know how old your coworker is, but I have seen plenty of workers in firms who don't have licenses and/or didn't go to architecture school, but have been working in the profession for 30+ years. Their experience in the field is far greater than yours in just about every aspect
, even without the piece of paper. You have a lot to learn from them, not just about CDs, but also about practice, project management, field processes, and what to expect during different stages of a project. Often times, the only thing that separates these people from being architects is the license.
Hm, it was probably useful to mention that I got the job because I had the skills that would allow for a more integrated design, since I was emphasizing that from the beginning of the talks. Either way, I got the message, I guess I seemed too arrogant in my approach, and that is on me. Should I just leave him do his thing and I'll do mine until we talk to someone more senior for a coordination or?
Jan 27, 24 10:59 am ·
·
ivanmillya
I strongly recommend you humble yourself, but you do you.
Humility is important, doesn't mean OP is wrong though. The reality of the situation is hard to gauge from our perspective, but I think a good takeaway here is that, no matter if they are right or wrong, based on what little experience we have of OP there is a matter of tone that is likely aggravating the situation.
I was just trying to see what others think and how should I navigate this, and as I can see, people think the problem is with me, and that is completely fine, I'll try to improve on that. Nothing "high-school" about it if you ask me.
Jan 27, 24 10:48 am ·
·
Non Sequitur
we didn't ask you though, why would we when the obvious is obvious?
Jan 27, 24 10:56 am ·
·
identitycrisis-archineer
Well that if definitely a high school trophy l reply
Am I understanding correctly that you have a degree and the coworker has no degree, but has experience in this building type? I think my peers upthread are being too harsh.
My take would be that coworker feels a need to prove himself as knowledgeable because he's insecure about his own ability and lack of degree. So he wants to show he's a good designer - oooh, hexagons! - and is frustrated and embarrassed when you call him on holes in his approach.
If you can honestly point to examples of how the coworker is *ignoring* the functional brief of the project, thus not meeting the client's needs, you are correct to call him out. But try, in kindness, to do so in a way that won't hurt his feelings (as a woman in the construction world this is sadly a skill I've had to excel at because good lord are "tough" men fragile).
In any case, a good habit to get into is document, document, document. Make notes after every design meeting about what was proposed and agreed to, and if the client is unhappy in the future you will have documentation that you noted that items were missing from the brief and your coworker ignored your comment.
We are taught in school to interact through criticism and critique. Half of an architectural education is temperance to critique so that you can digest and it and manifest positive change in the design and the relationship with the client. IMHO Someone coming up through the profession by trade often misses that tempering. Giving input is important but so is receiving it. Now look at it the other direction. Have you identified their skills and knowledge that you do not have? Do you seek their input on your work? How do you ask for their help, and how do you highlight their contribution to your work? Building a relationship professionally is not about the work directly. Can you help them get out a day earlier? Invite them to coffee or lunch? Highlight to your superior their contributions or uplift them in someway that does not serve you, the project, or company, but them personally as a person who you genuinely care about and appreciate? Once you have a positive relationship people are much more amenable to taking in your input, ideas and helping to uplift your work commensurately.
"Half of an architectural education is temperance to critique so that you can digest and it and manifest positive change in the design and the relationship with the client. IMHO Someone coming up through the profession by trade often misses that tempering."
That has not been my experience. Quite the opposite in fact. In my experience it's typically the architects who can't handle the criticism from non architects.
What Johnathan suggests is absolutely the right thing to do, but there is no guarantee the other person will respond in a positive way. OP probably has a 50/50 chance of winning the person over. Lots of people are incapable of returning friendship in the workplace, especially when there's competition and insecurities in the mix.
Well, I was in a similar situation. I learned that it's better to just go with the flow. Don't try and shake things up like I did, you become the office pariah, the bad guy and they will find some way to get you offed in a lay off. What works is showing people stuff, suggest once, twice is being a being a nuisance. It's never worth it. You're in architecture and need to play the long game or you will end up burning out and leaving.
A lot of people came up the hard way and don't like some young fresh out of school college punk trying to show them. I still run into that today from people who are from the Autocad era where "real architects" came from - they get pissed if I show boat with Revit or Rhino - let them be
start looking for another job at an awarded office where you can learn from your coworkers and most people are good designers. If you can't get a job like this, then maybe you don't know as much as you think you do. An important key to success in a company is getting along with everyone and making them feel valued. Annoying, I know
A good designer doesn't necessarily mean a good coworker. In our profession, it's usually the opposite. There are many exceptions, though. Regarding your situation, I suggest a simple start - take your coworker out to lunch, see what makes them tick, ask why decisions were made, and approach it as a learning experience. We all deal with difficult coworkers, clients, consultants, and more in this profession. How you deal with it is key.
Nope! Awards do not guarantee a healthy workplace. The most toxic firm I ever worked for won the AIA firm award and the local "Best Places to Work" so I gotta say nope.
Ha. Awards. I was the intern at a firm that got IDP firm of the year. I had to work every holiday except Christmas, every Saturday morning and I wasn’t allowed to ask questions.
What are your roles/ what’s his ? are they overlapping. If it’s a matter of design decision who make a call ? …there should be a chain of command/hierarchy when it comes to design , which is not always a bad thing.
How to navigate a, somewhat clueless, colleague?
I have this situation at work, and I would like to hear a wise word from you, smart people of the internet.
I am about a year and a half in work after graduation. I had a somewhat specific path, my education going from civil/construction engineering, and ending up as an architectural engineer, grabbing as much work during summers as I could.
'Nuff about me... A couple of months in at this company, we have wrapped up some construction drawings from a project that came at the same time as I did. Exciting times I thought, let's get to work! After the initial brief reading, and understanding of the programme, we went on to do some massing studies.
Before continuing, the colleague was a drafter for some years, climbed up the ladders and managed to get some manager opportunities. He learned his trade that's for sure, and has a pretty solid knowledge of the technical stuff, but no official education in architecture nor engineering.
Even though I am on the technical side for sure, and tend to skip a step or two during design, I have to say I was so unprepared for what came to me... We go on to discuss our proposals, and I can see he is clearly missing structure in the way he approaches design problems. It seems like he knows where he is heading and what the end result should be since he has these kinds of things in front of him quite a lot, but he was obviously never in a position where he was the one actually getting to it. His concepts are completely missing the points in the brief. I am trying to reasonably give him hints of it, but after a while, I realize that there is no harm done in trying to teach someone something and I directly tell him that some of his arguments are completely not valid, at which point he gets extremely offended, voices were raised and some rough words got in from his side. He eventually apologized, and I managed to get some points across on how to work in a more organized and holistic manner (as it is still an early stage, no need to go into details), but I saw he more or less continued in the same direction. I also managed to create a simple Grasshopper script to do some rough energy analysis, and after asking him to send his plans to see if anything is interesting in that concern, he rejected it with "I'll try to develop this further, and then go into energy", even though it is literally ten minutes of work, and could give some pretty important insights for the further development.
I want to hear your opinions on all of this. Do you have any advice on how to deal with this? What could I do differently? I am pretty used to teamwork, I can't remember once that someone complained about me as a team member (could be because they did not tell me, fair point as well), and I know he was mostly doing stuff solo, apart from regular coordination meetings, could that be the case?
Apart from raising my voice, I honestly don't see what I did wrong here.
For me, this is a little too vague to make a real assessment. I’m not going to assume you’re coming at this from the right side, so here are a few generic thought on alternate causes for this issue:
1) You are overlooking something beyond your scope of work/knowledge. For example, planning can be very complicated, and it may not be worth doing energy analysis at this point regardless of how easy they are as the information may just contradict other requirements of the planning process.
2) It might be that this person is tentative to show incomplete work. Often things are asked to be shown or used for something else before they are done, and can result in helpful development…. or undue criticism. Some people are cautious of the latter, sometimes for very good reasons.
3) Perhaps this person has seen into the future and is just waiting for that mega millions draw tonight.
All fair points, but he never communicated any of that. That is what led me to my conclusions. It was not just the energy stuff, that was an example. The brief says, as they do these days, we need a cost efficient, sustainable, structurally simple building that fits with the surroundings - and the floorplans he suggests are literally hexagon shaped.
While off the cuff I don't love the idea of a hexagon building, I don't think it's inherently going to go against any of those goals. Lot of huff for nothing around building shape a lot of the time, especially if it's still just an extrusion.
I'll be honest, a lot of this reads as undue arrogance on your part. A year and a half out of school is not very long at all. Most architects continue their out-of-school education for twice as long as that before they get a licence to practice. This sounds like a coworker that might have significantly more experience than you, whom you're brushing off as a "drafter". Maybe you are a team player.... I don't know you. But this essay you've written definitely doesn't make you seem like it.
It's also hard to say what kind of work should be produced in response to a brief without knowing what kind of work your firm does. At my firm, our foray into structural work is incredibly basic ("We can use this walls for shear, and we'll probably want the roof out of PWT" etc.) until we get a structural engineer involved *down the line*. Certainly not for a brief where we don't have an actual contract signed. Same with energy modeling. That would never happen at the concept stage at my firm, and it doesn't make us worse for not doing that.
This is why a lot of your post reads as undue arrogance. I'd advise you'd do a lot more watching people above you, asking them earnest questions, and listening to their answers, rather than assuming you know more than them because you have a degree and they don't.
I certainly do not consider myself more or less knowledgeable, but it's just different kind of knowledge. We don't go to uni for nothing, but I value his experience a lot, and I mention that a lot, asking him quite a lot of questions during this last CD session. I really did not use the term "drafter" to look down on anyone, it was just what he was doing, but I appreciate your advice.
I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. I'm saying that even though you have a degree, you've only been in this field for a year and a half. I don't know how old your coworker is, but I have seen plenty of workers in firms who don't have licenses and/or didn't go to architecture school, but have been working in the profession for 30+ years. Their experience in the field is far greater than yours in just about every aspect , even without the piece of paper. You have a lot to learn from them, not just about CDs, but also about practice, project management, field processes, and what to expect during different stages of a project. Often times, the only thing that separates these people from being architects is the license.
Hm, it was probably useful to mention that I got the job because I had the skills that would allow for a more integrated design, since I was emphasizing that from the beginning of the talks. Either way, I got the message, I guess I seemed too arrogant in my approach, and that is on me. Should I just leave him do his thing and I'll do mine until we talk to someone more senior for a coordination or?
I strongly recommend you humble yourself, but you do you.
Humility is important, doesn't mean OP is wrong though. The reality of the situation is hard to gauge from our perspective, but I think a good takeaway here is that, no matter if they are right or wrong, based on what little experience we have of OP there is a matter of tone that is likely aggravating the situation.
this high school level angst filled essay tells me you’re not the best coworker out there.
I was just trying to see what others think and how should I navigate this, and as I can see, people think the problem is with me, and that is completely fine, I'll try to improve on that. Nothing "high-school" about it if you ask me.
we didn't ask you though, why would we when the obvious is obvious?
Well that if definitely a high school trophy l reply
Am I understanding correctly that you have a degree and the coworker has no degree, but has experience in this building type? I think my peers upthread are being too harsh.
My take would be that coworker feels a need to prove himself as knowledgeable because he's insecure about his own ability and lack of degree. So he wants to show he's a good designer - oooh, hexagons! - and is frustrated and embarrassed when you call him on holes in his approach.
If you can honestly point to examples of how the coworker is *ignoring* the functional brief of the project, thus not meeting the client's needs, you are correct to call him out. But try, in kindness, to do so in a way that won't hurt his feelings (as a woman in the construction world this is sadly a skill I've had to excel at because good lord are "tough" men fragile).
In any case, a good habit to get into is document, document, document. Make notes after every design meeting about what was proposed and agreed to, and if the client is unhappy in the future you will have documentation that you noted that items were missing from the brief and your coworker ignored your comment.
Good luck.
We are taught in school to interact through criticism and critique. Half of an architectural education is temperance to critique so that you can digest and it and manifest positive change in the design and the relationship with the client. IMHO Someone coming up through the profession by trade often misses that tempering. Giving input is important but so is receiving it. Now look at it the other direction. Have you identified their skills and knowledge that you do not have? Do you seek their input on your work? How do you ask for their help, and how do you highlight their contribution to your work? Building a relationship professionally is not about the work directly. Can you help them get out a day earlier? Invite them to coffee or lunch? Highlight to your superior their contributions or uplift them in someway that does not serve you, the project, or company, but them personally as a person who you genuinely care about and appreciate? Once you have a positive relationship people are much more amenable to taking in your input, ideas and helping to uplift your work commensurately.
JonathanLivingston wrote:
"Half of an architectural education is temperance to critique so that you can digest and it and manifest positive change in the design and the relationship with the client. IMHO Someone coming up through the profession by trade often misses that tempering."
That has not been my experience. Quite the opposite in fact. In my experience it's typically the architects who can't handle the criticism from non architects.
What Johnathan suggests is absolutely the right thing to do, but there is no guarantee the other person will respond in a positive way. OP probably has a 50/50 chance of winning the person over. Lots of people are incapable of returning friendship in the workplace, especially when there's competition and insecurities in the mix.
Well, I was in a similar situation. I learned that it's better to just go with the flow. Don't try and shake things up like I did, you become the office pariah, the bad guy and they will find some way to get you offed in a lay off. What works is showing people stuff, suggest once, twice is being a being a nuisance. It's never worth it. You're in architecture and need to play the long game or you will end up burning out and leaving.
A lot of people came up the hard way and don't like some young fresh out of school college punk trying to show them. I still run into that today from people who are from the Autocad era where "real architects" came from - they get pissed if I show boat with Revit or Rhino - let them be
start looking for another job at an awarded office where you can learn from your coworkers and most people are good designers. If you can't get a job like this, then maybe you don't know as much as you think you do. An important key to success in a company is getting along with everyone and making them feel valued. Annoying, I know
An awarded office? I would humbly recommend not using design awards as a metric to gauge if an office has a teaching culture.
A good designer doesn't necessarily mean a good coworker. In our profession, it's usually the opposite. There are many exceptions, though. Regarding your situation, I suggest a simple start - take your coworker out to lunch, see what makes them tick, ask why decisions were made, and approach it as a learning experience. We all deal with difficult coworkers, clients, consultants, and more in this profession. How you deal with it is key.
Nope! Awards do not guarantee a healthy workplace. The most toxic firm I ever worked for won the AIA firm award and the local "Best Places to Work" so I gotta say nope.
Ha. Awards. I was the intern at a firm that got IDP firm of the year. I had to work every holiday except Christmas, every Saturday morning and I wasn’t allowed to ask questions.
What are your roles/ what’s his ? are they overlapping. If it’s a matter of design decision who make a call ? …there should be a chain of command/hierarchy when it comes to design , which is not always a bad thing.
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.