Does anybody have access to a basic autocad test that can be taken after an interview? I don;t have the time to make one, and find that although we have never done it in the past, we see numerous hires having absolutely zero knowledge of making basic plans/sections etc. and even lesser of autocad!
Now i know this might infuriate some who consider taking a test after an interview below their dignity, but consider the time and effort lost in training people who claim to have a few years of experience but can't even make a simple drawing! There are people out there (with masters degrees et all) who can't cut a section.
Anyone, have an autocad test i could use?
p.s: what do you feel about autocad tests after an interview?
Just give them a dimensioned printout, make sure it's not something tricky-hard, and have them recreate it in a new file. See how far they get in a set amount of time. Maybe do the same thing with a few of your current employees in advance so that you have a scale to judge by.
This method may not be extremely precise, but it will definitely weed out outright liars. I've done this before for a previous employer- one guy sat there for two minutes (it was a 15 minute test), and then asked, "where should I start?". Needless to say, he was not hired.
CAD tests are standard in the busiests and most prominent firms where I live (outside the US). I have taken quite a few - - ranging from drafting a simple house to making a section of a given plan. Tests normally run for about 2 hours. I believe this is a good basis for speed, more than accuracy or proficiency. For one thing - - diffrerent companies have different standards in terms of drafting. One company may plot using 1:1m the other can use millemeters. Other companies use the paper space layout - - others dont. Layering is another thing. I guess you get my drift. Besides, ones CAD skills are improved and honed by constantly working on it.
Since sectioning is perhaps the most challenging of all drawings (especially if you're dealing with high-rise structures) - - I suggest you give the applicant a plan to section. Use any current or past project.
AutoCAD tests are silly and insulting. You need people with coping skills more than software skills. Hire them provisionally and give them a week or two. Throw them in and see it they can swim, maybe they are such good fakers that they can fake it until they learn it. You’ve got to do this any way. What if they know CAD perfectly and just suck? What if they don’t but are worth teaching? What if you hire some stupid CAD monkey and Catia comes out with a $300 lite version and everyone switches to that next year? Quick on the uptake is where it’s at. Didn’t you learn CAD by lying to some silly boss character at some point?
When did this forum get taken over by bitter, old hacks.
On the other side, what about designers higher of the food chain have no idea what they are doing?
im tired of cleaning up shitty drawings and having someone telling me the 'best' way to do something
CAD is important but what about basic computer skills?
A Cad test for 2 hours?!?! you have got to be F%$@ing kidding! What a total insult. I can't even imagine how much it would suck to work at a place that would administer a 2 hour cad test. Who are the morons doing these interviews- do they assume that people's portfolio work is all plagiarized? If you are going to hire someone based on their autocad skill - a skill that could be learned at any old community college in a matter of weeks- you have to be kidding me...
good points raised strawbeary, rationalist and others. Thanks.
newstreamlinedmodel and cosmoe32, i'm gonna add your posts to my list of architecture student cliche's. :)
have worked in/with 5 offices in the past 15 years, and in the beginning cad was not even an issue...
BUT, NONE of the offices asked me to draft anything as part of the interview process; not in canada, not in london and not here in japan. what a strange thing to want to test.
as mentioned above it is much more important if someone can do proper drawgs than if they know software X. I mean how long does it take to learn CAD? if you know how to set up a dwg it shouldn't take more than a day or two to get going half decently, much less if you are already proficient in other software (vectorworks took me about 2 hours to get a hang of). sloppiness on the other hand drives me nuts, und that has zip to do with cad proficiency.
but anyway if someone says they can do something and can't why not just fire their ass when it turns out they suck hind teet?
we used them once in an office i worked at because we really needed ppl that could draw and draw quick, and we had had some bad experiences with ppl not living up to their cad claims. for sure the tests are a bit degrading, but i can see the point of them sometimes.
where i work now we do 2 month trials and most ppl dont get keep on after 2 months, its like a 2 month long interview!
ret, i will add you to my list of employers not to work for, you patronizing little thing. unless you're foster, and i am signing 2 years of my life away to be a cad monkey and have your name on my cv...which you are not.
I can somewhat understand the reasoning for a test IF a firm is trying to hire people purely for rote production tasks and if they have an extreme need to put people on a project immediately.
But if the firm is looking for someone with wider duties than just CAD, and if they can afford a few days or weeks of training, then it seems to me that a person with a strong portfolio and skill with ANY CAD software should be of interest to the firm, and that they should be able to determine through dialogue with the applicant and by examing his previous projects and level of responsibilities whether he can draw a section....
It seems like only firms that use AutoCAD do CAD tests. Firms using practically any other software typically expect that new hires will need to be trained. I've worked in firms using VectorWorks, ArchiCAD, MicroStation, DataCAD, etc. and the usual procedure has been to give new people 2 or 3 days to work through some software tutorials, then put them on a project and let them learn on the job. Many firms have a 3- or 4-week trial.
It's only been in AutoCAD firms that I ever encountered a CAD test, and in those firms I politely explained that since I'd been working with other software in my most recent job I felt out of practice in AutoCAD and therefore would rather not take the test. This occasionally resulted in a huffy attitude from a firm's CAD manager, but CAD managers are very rarely the final word in who gets hired, and the other people interviewing me (principals or management) have always been fine with that, and I was offered the jobs anyway.
The place where I ended up administering a CAD test was at a single-proprietor office, where the person who was eventually hired would be the only other staff member, and the boss didn't know CAD. I won't lie and say that this was a great situation, but the guy had been really screwed over in the past by people who said they were 'proficient' on their resumes, and ended up not being self-sufficient, much less proficient. Because of the degree that he was relying on them, this guy really needed to verify how good someone was.
I understand why CAD testing is not the norm in larger offices- they can afford to take a person's word for it. But candidates need to understand that there are situations where it is appropriate and necessary for them to take a test, even if they feel insulted by it. It is probably because the employer has been burned badly before by damned liars, so take it as an insult to them, not to you.
It was a simple question/concern and look at you guys go!
Well i'm sure you have enough reasons to be so touchy/ aggressive about the topic, and thats fine. Its the damn diatribe that i don't much care for.
I'm not getting into a pissing contest with any of you skunks. I don't have the time or the inclination to do that.
I did have to say my bit though....human nature i presume.
Now i'll stop.
why don't you just ask people to bring some drawings they did?
you know, they teach cd classes in most schools by now, so even if they don't have experience they could just bring stuff from school.
besides, you can't expect them to be 100% productive from day one because every office has their own way of organizing drawings so that would take some training anyway.
you can't expect to say rather offensive things, and when you get a reaction, go all "i didn't mean to do that". that's a bit childish now, isn't it? hope the monkey come flying your way.
I had almost no cad experiance except messing with r14 in the school's lab, which we werent allowed to use for school projects since prof's concidered the computer "silly" in 96. I specifically avoided a miriad of great downtown firms for fear of my lack of cpu skills and found a small 1 man shop. At that interview he told me you'll be better on this machine in 3 weeks than any of your more experianced friends downtown outlining existing buildings with plines and shading them for developer meetings.
He was right. Anyone who has an instinctive and practiced talent for drawing can learn to do it in any medium with proper support and encouragement. Im amazed that the previous generation has expected new hires to be masters of CAD in all forms, lightwave, v-ray, max, etc...where do they think this knoweledge comes from except from unpayed hours at home using pirate software?
I hope the education of architects has improved since the 90's. The lack of practical applicability being proffessed versus the market driven needs of the work place demand employers find canidates that can be taught, and peple willing to learn. This widening gap is pushing down wages and driving up costs for employers who barely keep their doors open despite in most markets a red hot residential design sector.
My advice - at first glimpse of the CAD test, ask the boomer handing it to you what they would score? Or do they need to dust off their rapidograph set first?
i used to think that cad tests were derogatory before i came to the US, but i dont know if its my misfortune or the method of education that so many of the interns whom i worked with knew nothing more than drawing a simple plan in a whole days worth...
sure architecture is not about cad but if if the advertised position needs cad and one applies for it, they bloody well know how to do it. I might also add that i feel some of the people here bitching about cad tests dont know cad very well.
and ckl, ive actually met people who'd show whole CDs as part of their interview but would not be able to say, draw a section the day after they are hired. I believe it was not being intimidated, just incompetence.
aw cmon now doc, i ain't no cad monkey but can do a set of CD's on my lonesome (in Japanese even!) without breaking a sweat. mere draughting is seriously not that big a deal. UNDERSTANDING what i am putting down in the docs, now THAT is not so easy. it still gives me a headache.
thing is a CAD test won't really catch much of that sort of comprehension. If I am gonna hire someone i want them to be able to think for themselves, know enough to call the manufacturer to get specs and co-ordinate with whoever needs to be co-ordinated with, so i don't have to come back to the office and face a tray full of questions about how to organise things. That would so suck, and a cad test really wouldn't prevent it.
but if i wanted someone to simply work as a draughting moron i am pretty sure i could teach them enough in 2 days to a week that it wouldn't matter much what their experience is to begin with. Practice in the real world is an amazing educator. and if they couldn't learn that fast then i REALLY wouldn't want them to work for me anyway.
it isn't that a cad test is degrading, just silly. like an iq test it ain't measuring anything important.
jump most of your points are valid, but one needs to understand that some offices are really fast paced, some are not. To my experience, most smaller offices are faster paced (i may be wrong though).
Ours is such a fast paced office and its not really in the interest of the office, or the actual work to be babysitting kids who cant draw worth a damn. A simple cad test is a good excercise and avoids uncomfortable situations later.
i hae always worked in small offices, from 6 to 15 people, and now just 2 or 3 of us doing all the work, so can understand how annoying it would be to hire someone who couldn't do the work as advertised.
i have been lucky in not being burned i think, and to be honest i don't mind training staff to do the work when it comes to it (as long as they don't expect to be paid as much as someone i don't have to teach).
generally though i work with people who i know or who have been introduced to me by people i trust, and i tend to go by personality more than anything...so far so good.
I too walked out of the one interview which asked me to take a AutoCad test..."what's the problem?" It's a F*cking insult!
My current firm does not test anyone...you either have the goods or you don't. And if you don't, you are out of here faster than you can say but...but... This rarely happens...
And even those who don't know AutoCad very well, there is a place for them...if they are talented enough. The firm...any firm should be willing to invest in talent.
They tested me even after i had shown them my portfolio with tons of CAD drawings in it. I didnt find it insulting, but very unnecessary. This particular firm were looking to see how fast i could draft, but i was kinda nervous and didnt finish.
I once worked in a large firm that used to do a day-long "in box" test on intern-level applicants. They would be put at a workstation and given a list of tasks (what they might find in their "in box" in a typical day.) In addition to some CAD tasks there were also various organizational chores, one or two tasks that would require word and excel, a rough pencil sketch, some things that would require finding reference materials and/or asking appropriate questions, etc.
That firm got the idea from one of the partners who had an MBA in addition to his M.Arch and said this was common in fields like banking and data processing.
They didn't ask me to take this test because I had enough experience that I was exempt apparently. But people didn't seem to complain about this test. The firm paid them for the day. I'm not sure I would have agreed to do it. On the one hand it seemed less stressful than having someone watch over your shoulder while you try to do "speed-CAD" to impress them. But it seems a little weird - not to mention a waste of a day if you failed to measure up.
I recently took a CAD test and a personal assessment. Insulted? No. A company has every right to make sure you no what your doing. I smoked both tests, even finished early on the CAD test, and have been determined to be a perfect fit. However, It is somewhat unnecessary if I've handed them a professional and academic portfolio filled with CAD work.
This particular firm uses it to determine if I'm worth the price I'm asking, but they're not high on my list.
well, i think lying or embelishing on resumes is a problem in this country (e.g. George O'Leary or the congressman that said he played pro baseball.) I've seen it at my workplace, even at the principal level, and admit to doing it a bit myself.
I think giving a CAD test is perfectly fair if the candidate states that he is proficient at it because it would create a bad relationship from the start if he/she proved not to be.
aluminate has said pretty much the only illuminating thing in this post
if you're asked to take a CAD test and this upsets you - why? well, maybe because you're going to be doing CAD all day and that's what they're hiring you for ... so if this really upsets you, then maybe you need to reconsider what you're doing with your life.
If you think you can become proficient in AutoCAD in a few weeks at a community college, then your the reason CAD tests exist. People that think they "know" AutoCAD because they took a semester in Community College will be weeded out.
hmmmmm....I’m not too sure if I should get back into this mess, but what the hell. When I went to school, they didn't teach Autocad- everything was Mac platform- Form Z for the most part. So when I got out and went looking for a job, I spent a month at a community college at night taking Autocad- that's how I learned. So what's the big deal? When did Autocad become rocket science or an act of creative endeavor? Please. The very first job interview that I went to the person that I interviewed with, the principal of a medium sized office, liked my portfolio, we had an interesting discussion about architecture, and then came the “autocad†test- 15 minutes redrawing something or other. I was a little “slowâ€. So, and he told me this, he would hire me but would pay me less money- uh huh. I thought about it for a bit, at the time I thought it would have been an interesting office to work for, they cared about design (at least I thought they did), so I thought maybe less money is worth it. But then I realized, as knock has pointed out, maybe all they want is a cad bitch- maybe that’s what they think training an architect should be about. So I didn’t think that I would end up learning to much at that office, and I am glad I didn’t take the job. I took the very next job that I was offered, no test, a significant pay increase, and I became one of the fastest go to cad production people in the office. I ended up working at far more interesting jobs that the one that gave me the cad test- none of these other offices asked for a cad test, but they were interested in what I was like as a designer, what type of construction knowledge I had, if I could manage teams, etc. Along the way I have picked up Rhino, Microstation and Max. What I have discovered is that every office has different wants and needs, and every office that I have worked for has a different system. Being very skilled only in Autocad seems like a dead end. I know that one day I may be in the position of hiring someone; I don’t think that I will be giving them an Autocad test…
I don't know the case in the U.S - - but , where I am, if you work at corporate firms, newly grads, unlicensed ones usually end up being CAD slaves...It's actually a long and frustrating process to move up.
Personally, I'm against CAD tests (though I'm used to it) because, there's more to an architect than CAD.
i think this thread is getting a bit silly. since when was CAD such a dirty word? From my observation, most managers don't have a clue about using CAD, so they often mischedule a project bc of that misunderstanding. I think it benefits this generation for ALL of us to know CAD, and taking a silly test during your interview does not determine whether you will be a CAD Monkey for the rest of your career. It is up to you to choose your career path. Learning CAD is just a very insignificant right of passage for everyone in this profession, so what's all the fuss?
May 20, 06 2:46 pm ·
·
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.
Autocad test
Does anybody have access to a basic autocad test that can be taken after an interview? I don;t have the time to make one, and find that although we have never done it in the past, we see numerous hires having absolutely zero knowledge of making basic plans/sections etc. and even lesser of autocad!
Now i know this might infuriate some who consider taking a test after an interview below their dignity, but consider the time and effort lost in training people who claim to have a few years of experience but can't even make a simple drawing! There are people out there (with masters degrees et all) who can't cut a section.
Anyone, have an autocad test i could use?
p.s: what do you feel about autocad tests after an interview?
can't you use the candidate's references, and ask them?
my boss brought his laptop into the interview and had me open up autocad and draw on command....
Just give them a dimensioned printout, make sure it's not something tricky-hard, and have them recreate it in a new file. See how far they get in a set amount of time. Maybe do the same thing with a few of your current employees in advance so that you have a scale to judge by.
This method may not be extremely precise, but it will definitely weed out outright liars. I've done this before for a previous employer- one guy sat there for two minutes (it was a 15 minute test), and then asked, "where should I start?". Needless to say, he was not hired.
knowing how to make simple plans and sections are totally different than knowing autocad or not... dont you think?
CAD tests are standard in the busiests and most prominent firms where I live (outside the US). I have taken quite a few - - ranging from drafting a simple house to making a section of a given plan. Tests normally run for about 2 hours. I believe this is a good basis for speed, more than accuracy or proficiency. For one thing - - diffrerent companies have different standards in terms of drafting. One company may plot using 1:1m the other can use millemeters. Other companies use the paper space layout - - others dont. Layering is another thing. I guess you get my drift. Besides, ones CAD skills are improved and honed by constantly working on it.
Since sectioning is perhaps the most challenging of all drawings (especially if you're dealing with high-rise structures) - - I suggest you give the applicant a plan to section. Use any current or past project.
AutoCAD tests are silly and insulting. You need people with coping skills more than software skills. Hire them provisionally and give them a week or two. Throw them in and see it they can swim, maybe they are such good fakers that they can fake it until they learn it. You’ve got to do this any way. What if they know CAD perfectly and just suck? What if they don’t but are worth teaching? What if you hire some stupid CAD monkey and Catia comes out with a $300 lite version and everyone switches to that next year? Quick on the uptake is where it’s at. Didn’t you learn CAD by lying to some silly boss character at some point?
When did this forum get taken over by bitter, old hacks.
On the other side, what about designers higher of the food chain have no idea what they are doing?
im tired of cleaning up shitty drawings and having someone telling me the 'best' way to do something
CAD is important but what about basic computer skills?
yo mamma was a cad monkey
A Cad test for 2 hours?!?! you have got to be F%$@ing kidding! What a total insult. I can't even imagine how much it would suck to work at a place that would administer a 2 hour cad test. Who are the morons doing these interviews- do they assume that people's portfolio work is all plagiarized? If you are going to hire someone based on their autocad skill - a skill that could be learned at any old community college in a matter of weeks- you have to be kidding me...
newstreamlinedmodel is right- nuff said!
good points raised strawbeary, rationalist and others. Thanks.
newstreamlinedmodel and cosmoe32, i'm gonna add your posts to my list of architecture student cliche's. :)
funny post.
have worked in/with 5 offices in the past 15 years, and in the beginning cad was not even an issue...
BUT, NONE of the offices asked me to draft anything as part of the interview process; not in canada, not in london and not here in japan. what a strange thing to want to test.
as mentioned above it is much more important if someone can do proper drawgs than if they know software X. I mean how long does it take to learn CAD? if you know how to set up a dwg it shouldn't take more than a day or two to get going half decently, much less if you are already proficient in other software (vectorworks took me about 2 hours to get a hang of). sloppiness on the other hand drives me nuts, und that has zip to do with cad proficiency.
but anyway if someone says they can do something and can't why not just fire their ass when it turns out they suck hind teet?
I'm against Autocad tests.
The first few firms that asked me to sit for an Autocad test, I walked out of there. Was enough proof of unprofesionalism.
If you really think the guy is faking it.. give him a chance and tell him that he will be on a trial period for a month or so ... I dont know .
we used them once in an office i worked at because we really needed ppl that could draw and draw quick, and we had had some bad experiences with ppl not living up to their cad claims. for sure the tests are a bit degrading, but i can see the point of them sometimes.
where i work now we do 2 month trials and most ppl dont get keep on after 2 months, its like a 2 month long interview!
Hey Ret- I am not an architecture student. I am an architect with 6 years of experience- so... F-off!
try doing a cad test and an IQ TEST! now that's insulting and it happened to me ......
ret, i will add you to my list of employers not to work for, you patronizing little thing. unless you're foster, and i am signing 2 years of my life away to be a cad monkey and have your name on my cv...which you are not.
how good are YOU on cad?
I can somewhat understand the reasoning for a test IF a firm is trying to hire people purely for rote production tasks and if they have an extreme need to put people on a project immediately.
But if the firm is looking for someone with wider duties than just CAD, and if they can afford a few days or weeks of training, then it seems to me that a person with a strong portfolio and skill with ANY CAD software should be of interest to the firm, and that they should be able to determine through dialogue with the applicant and by examing his previous projects and level of responsibilities whether he can draw a section....
It seems like only firms that use AutoCAD do CAD tests. Firms using practically any other software typically expect that new hires will need to be trained. I've worked in firms using VectorWorks, ArchiCAD, MicroStation, DataCAD, etc. and the usual procedure has been to give new people 2 or 3 days to work through some software tutorials, then put them on a project and let them learn on the job. Many firms have a 3- or 4-week trial.
It's only been in AutoCAD firms that I ever encountered a CAD test, and in those firms I politely explained that since I'd been working with other software in my most recent job I felt out of practice in AutoCAD and therefore would rather not take the test. This occasionally resulted in a huffy attitude from a firm's CAD manager, but CAD managers are very rarely the final word in who gets hired, and the other people interviewing me (principals or management) have always been fine with that, and I was offered the jobs anyway.
The place where I ended up administering a CAD test was at a single-proprietor office, where the person who was eventually hired would be the only other staff member, and the boss didn't know CAD. I won't lie and say that this was a great situation, but the guy had been really screwed over in the past by people who said they were 'proficient' on their resumes, and ended up not being self-sufficient, much less proficient. Because of the degree that he was relying on them, this guy really needed to verify how good someone was.
I understand why CAD testing is not the norm in larger offices- they can afford to take a person's word for it. But candidates need to understand that there are situations where it is appropriate and necessary for them to take a test, even if they feel insulted by it. It is probably because the employer has been burned badly before by damned liars, so take it as an insult to them, not to you.
It was a simple question/concern and look at you guys go!
Well i'm sure you have enough reasons to be so touchy/ aggressive about the topic, and thats fine. Its the damn diatribe that i don't much care for.
I'm not getting into a pissing contest with any of you skunks. I don't have the time or the inclination to do that.
I did have to say my bit though....human nature i presume.
Now i'll stop.
why don't you just ask people to bring some drawings they did?
you know, they teach cd classes in most schools by now, so even if they don't have experience they could just bring stuff from school.
besides, you can't expect them to be 100% productive from day one because every office has their own way of organizing drawings so that would take some training anyway.
you can't expect to say rather offensive things, and when you get a reaction, go all "i didn't mean to do that". that's a bit childish now, isn't it? hope the monkey come flying your way.
I vote no to the cad test.
I had almost no cad experiance except messing with r14 in the school's lab, which we werent allowed to use for school projects since prof's concidered the computer "silly" in 96. I specifically avoided a miriad of great downtown firms for fear of my lack of cpu skills and found a small 1 man shop. At that interview he told me you'll be better on this machine in 3 weeks than any of your more experianced friends downtown outlining existing buildings with plines and shading them for developer meetings.
He was right. Anyone who has an instinctive and practiced talent for drawing can learn to do it in any medium with proper support and encouragement. Im amazed that the previous generation has expected new hires to be masters of CAD in all forms, lightwave, v-ray, max, etc...where do they think this knoweledge comes from except from unpayed hours at home using pirate software?
I hope the education of architects has improved since the 90's. The lack of practical applicability being proffessed versus the market driven needs of the work place demand employers find canidates that can be taught, and peple willing to learn. This widening gap is pushing down wages and driving up costs for employers who barely keep their doors open despite in most markets a red hot residential design sector.
My advice - at first glimpse of the CAD test, ask the boomer handing it to you what they would score? Or do they need to dust off their rapidograph set first?
i used to think that cad tests were derogatory before i came to the US, but i dont know if its my misfortune or the method of education that so many of the interns whom i worked with knew nothing more than drawing a simple plan in a whole days worth...
sure architecture is not about cad but if if the advertised position needs cad and one applies for it, they bloody well know how to do it. I might also add that i feel some of the people here bitching about cad tests dont know cad very well.
and ckl, ive actually met people who'd show whole CDs as part of their interview but would not be able to say, draw a section the day after they are hired. I believe it was not being intimidated, just incompetence.
aw cmon now doc, i ain't no cad monkey but can do a set of CD's on my lonesome (in Japanese even!) without breaking a sweat. mere draughting is seriously not that big a deal. UNDERSTANDING what i am putting down in the docs, now THAT is not so easy. it still gives me a headache.
thing is a CAD test won't really catch much of that sort of comprehension. If I am gonna hire someone i want them to be able to think for themselves, know enough to call the manufacturer to get specs and co-ordinate with whoever needs to be co-ordinated with, so i don't have to come back to the office and face a tray full of questions about how to organise things. That would so suck, and a cad test really wouldn't prevent it.
but if i wanted someone to simply work as a draughting moron i am pretty sure i could teach them enough in 2 days to a week that it wouldn't matter much what their experience is to begin with. Practice in the real world is an amazing educator. and if they couldn't learn that fast then i REALLY wouldn't want them to work for me anyway.
it isn't that a cad test is degrading, just silly. like an iq test it ain't measuring anything important.
jump most of your points are valid, but one needs to understand that some offices are really fast paced, some are not. To my experience, most smaller offices are faster paced (i may be wrong though).
Ours is such a fast paced office and its not really in the interest of the office, or the actual work to be babysitting kids who cant draw worth a damn. A simple cad test is a good excercise and avoids uncomfortable situations later.
yeh, i get ya.
i hae always worked in small offices, from 6 to 15 people, and now just 2 or 3 of us doing all the work, so can understand how annoying it would be to hire someone who couldn't do the work as advertised.
i have been lucky in not being burned i think, and to be honest i don't mind training staff to do the work when it comes to it (as long as they don't expect to be paid as much as someone i don't have to teach).
generally though i work with people who i know or who have been introduced to me by people i trust, and i tend to go by personality more than anything...so far so good.
I too walked out of the one interview which asked me to take a AutoCad test..."what's the problem?" It's a F*cking insult!
My current firm does not test anyone...you either have the goods or you don't. And if you don't, you are out of here faster than you can say but...but... This rarely happens...
And even those who don't know AutoCad very well, there is a place for them...if they are talented enough. The firm...any firm should be willing to invest in talent.
They tested me even after i had shown them my portfolio with tons of CAD drawings in it. I didnt find it insulting, but very unnecessary. This particular firm were looking to see how fast i could draft, but i was kinda nervous and didnt finish.
I once worked in a large firm that used to do a day-long "in box" test on intern-level applicants. They would be put at a workstation and given a list of tasks (what they might find in their "in box" in a typical day.) In addition to some CAD tasks there were also various organizational chores, one or two tasks that would require word and excel, a rough pencil sketch, some things that would require finding reference materials and/or asking appropriate questions, etc.
That firm got the idea from one of the partners who had an MBA in addition to his M.Arch and said this was common in fields like banking and data processing.
They didn't ask me to take this test because I had enough experience that I was exempt apparently. But people didn't seem to complain about this test. The firm paid them for the day. I'm not sure I would have agreed to do it. On the one hand it seemed less stressful than having someone watch over your shoulder while you try to do "speed-CAD" to impress them. But it seems a little weird - not to mention a waste of a day if you failed to measure up.
I recently took a CAD test and a personal assessment. Insulted? No. A company has every right to make sure you no what your doing. I smoked both tests, even finished early on the CAD test, and have been determined to be a perfect fit. However, It is somewhat unnecessary if I've handed them a professional and academic portfolio filled with CAD work.
This particular firm uses it to determine if I'm worth the price I'm asking, but they're not high on my list.
well, i think lying or embelishing on resumes is a problem in this country (e.g. George O'Leary or the congressman that said he played pro baseball.) I've seen it at my workplace, even at the principal level, and admit to doing it a bit myself.
I think giving a CAD test is perfectly fair if the candidate states that he is proficient at it because it would create a bad relationship from the start if he/she proved not to be.
aluminate has said pretty much the only illuminating thing in this post
if you're asked to take a CAD test and this upsets you - why? well, maybe because you're going to be doing CAD all day and that's what they're hiring you for ... so if this really upsets you, then maybe you need to reconsider what you're doing with your life.
If you think you can become proficient in AutoCAD in a few weeks at a community college, then your the reason CAD tests exist. People that think they "know" AutoCAD because they took a semester in Community College will be weeded out.
hmmmmm....I’m not too sure if I should get back into this mess, but what the hell. When I went to school, they didn't teach Autocad- everything was Mac platform- Form Z for the most part. So when I got out and went looking for a job, I spent a month at a community college at night taking Autocad- that's how I learned. So what's the big deal? When did Autocad become rocket science or an act of creative endeavor? Please. The very first job interview that I went to the person that I interviewed with, the principal of a medium sized office, liked my portfolio, we had an interesting discussion about architecture, and then came the “autocad†test- 15 minutes redrawing something or other. I was a little “slowâ€. So, and he told me this, he would hire me but would pay me less money- uh huh. I thought about it for a bit, at the time I thought it would have been an interesting office to work for, they cared about design (at least I thought they did), so I thought maybe less money is worth it. But then I realized, as knock has pointed out, maybe all they want is a cad bitch- maybe that’s what they think training an architect should be about. So I didn’t think that I would end up learning to much at that office, and I am glad I didn’t take the job. I took the very next job that I was offered, no test, a significant pay increase, and I became one of the fastest go to cad production people in the office. I ended up working at far more interesting jobs that the one that gave me the cad test- none of these other offices asked for a cad test, but they were interested in what I was like as a designer, what type of construction knowledge I had, if I could manage teams, etc. Along the way I have picked up Rhino, Microstation and Max. What I have discovered is that every office has different wants and needs, and every office that I have worked for has a different system. Being very skilled only in Autocad seems like a dead end. I know that one day I may be in the position of hiring someone; I don’t think that I will be giving them an Autocad test…
I don't know the case in the U.S - - but , where I am, if you work at corporate firms, newly grads, unlicensed ones usually end up being CAD slaves...It's actually a long and frustrating process to move up.
Personally, I'm against CAD tests (though I'm used to it) because, there's more to an architect than CAD.
i think this thread is getting a bit silly. since when was CAD such a dirty word? From my observation, most managers don't have a clue about using CAD, so they often mischedule a project bc of that misunderstanding. I think it benefits this generation for ALL of us to know CAD, and taking a silly test during your interview does not determine whether you will be a CAD Monkey for the rest of your career. It is up to you to choose your career path. Learning CAD is just a very insignificant right of passage for everyone in this profession, so what's all the fuss?
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.