There, Ormolu wrote one of the lengthiest comments, including:
"once you have a year or two of experience you tend to eliminate much or all student work from your portfolio and include mainly projects on which you've worked in firms. Naturally you're going to be asked what your involvement was in those projects, and unless you were working for a firm doing extremely small projects you'll probably be talking about which aspects you designed, produced, managed, etc.
At this point most of the work in the portfolio will be documents and photos from built projects and other work from firms. "
This reminds me to ask a new question (Also I ask cuz I'm sadistic):
Certainly, it makes the most sense that the minimally experienced interviewee show real work samples during interviews. But, isn't the interviewee somewhat restricted in showing samples from his/her first job, because of proprietary concerns of that first employer?
My experience has been that only if there have been contracts regarding non-disclosure either from the project owner or a blanket non-disclosure by the firm would this be an issue.
Our Owner-Architect agreement has in it a clause that projects are approved for marketing use and our employee handbook states that printed copies of project documents are available to employees at their expense for expressed use in personal portfolios.
From the other side of the table, it is good practice when interviewing people to ask them directly what role they had in the work they are showing.
The AIA has a policy on this. It requires previous employers to allow departing employees to take samples of work with them - photos and print copies only, no computer files. The choice of images is up to the employer, and the cost is born by the departing employee. Anything that you "snuck" out of the firm is technically unusable - though most employers seem to understand that employees do this all the time.
The former employee is allowed to use this work in his portfolio so long as he properly credits the firm and individuals involved and properly states his own level of involvement in the project(s).
Dave is correct that some contracts prohibit the architect from showing the work, and/or using the client's name - and this could prevent you from being allowed to use copies.
The issue is fuzzier if you're using images of work from other firms on a website, in brochures or other advertising materials. The AIA has sometimes ruled in favor of the departing employee who does this(all AIA cases and judgements are available on their website back the the mid 1980s) but "real" courts have sometimes sided with the former employer. If you're using it in those contexts you're best off getting written permission from the former employer, and - just as important - releases from photographers.
Thanks (both Dave & Ormolu) for your extractions of AIA's and (assumed ~typical) Owner-Arch agreement's policy. It seems that these policies give a former employee decent leeway to display his/her best as an applicant to hiring employer.
Briefly, to keep my reply brief...
Project Names, Conflict?
Here is a possible stubborn conflict between protecting employers proprietary info vs. showing applicant's accomplishments. Names of projects on which an applicant worked might 'impress' some interviewers. Yet, previous employer might dislike that a project name may be well-known or otherwise readily associated with owner, project management co, design co, etc. I don't think applicant should be considered "liable" if an interviewer has independent knowledge that allows interviewer to 'connect the dots' to project owner or design co names.
Dwgs:
I think Cad Monkeys should be allowed to save any customization and macro files they've developed. I saved only my "software gripes & bugs" notes from my minimal CAD work.
"Real Live" Computer Files:
In my case, I produced no drawings or specs. When I left, I copied a set of files as an example of my efficiency and error-minimization attitude/goals/accomplishments. Printouts would show little of my accomplishments.
I've mass-munged my sample's data, and revision-tracking info isn't saved, so proprietary information is gone. The munge allows me to demo features & usage that I created. The relative $$$ size of the built projects can still be inferred from un-munged quantities.
Aug 19, 04 12:44 am ·
·
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.
Proprietary conflicts regarding past work within portfolio? Non-issue?
In another thread,
instrumentOFaction suggested I read
http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=P4801_0_22_0_C
There, Ormolu wrote one of the lengthiest comments, including:
"once you have a year or two of experience you tend to eliminate much or all student work from your portfolio and include mainly projects on which you've worked in firms. Naturally you're going to be asked what your involvement was in those projects, and unless you were working for a firm doing extremely small projects you'll probably be talking about which aspects you designed, produced, managed, etc.
At this point most of the work in the portfolio will be documents and photos from built projects and other work from firms. "
This reminds me to ask a new question (Also I ask cuz I'm sadistic):
Certainly, it makes the most sense that the minimally experienced interviewee show real work samples during interviews. But, isn't the interviewee somewhat restricted in showing samples from his/her first job, because of proprietary concerns of that first employer?
Of course, this is probably an old question :-)
My experience has been that only if there have been contracts regarding non-disclosure either from the project owner or a blanket non-disclosure by the firm would this be an issue.
Our Owner-Architect agreement has in it a clause that projects are approved for marketing use and our employee handbook states that printed copies of project documents are available to employees at their expense for expressed use in personal portfolios.
From the other side of the table, it is good practice when interviewing people to ask them directly what role they had in the work they are showing.
Will try to make my comments less lengthy : )
The AIA has a policy on this. It requires previous employers to allow departing employees to take samples of work with them - photos and print copies only, no computer files. The choice of images is up to the employer, and the cost is born by the departing employee. Anything that you "snuck" out of the firm is technically unusable - though most employers seem to understand that employees do this all the time.
The former employee is allowed to use this work in his portfolio so long as he properly credits the firm and individuals involved and properly states his own level of involvement in the project(s).
Dave is correct that some contracts prohibit the architect from showing the work, and/or using the client's name - and this could prevent you from being allowed to use copies.
The issue is fuzzier if you're using images of work from other firms on a website, in brochures or other advertising materials. The AIA has sometimes ruled in favor of the departing employee who does this(all AIA cases and judgements are available on their website back the the mid 1980s) but "real" courts have sometimes sided with the former employer. If you're using it in those contexts you're best off getting written permission from the former employer, and - just as important - releases from photographers.
Thanks (both Dave & Ormolu) for your extractions of AIA's and (assumed ~typical) Owner-Arch agreement's policy. It seems that these policies give a former employee decent leeway to display his/her best as an applicant to hiring employer.
Briefly, to keep my reply brief...
Project Names, Conflict?
Here is a possible stubborn conflict between protecting employers proprietary info vs. showing applicant's accomplishments. Names of projects on which an applicant worked might 'impress' some interviewers. Yet, previous employer might dislike that a project name may be well-known or otherwise readily associated with owner, project management co, design co, etc. I don't think applicant should be considered "liable" if an interviewer has independent knowledge that allows interviewer to 'connect the dots' to project owner or design co names.
Dwgs:
I think Cad Monkeys should be allowed to save any customization and macro files they've developed. I saved only my "software gripes & bugs" notes from my minimal CAD work.
"Real Live" Computer Files:
In my case, I produced no drawings or specs. When I left, I copied a set of files as an example of my efficiency and error-minimization attitude/goals/accomplishments. Printouts would show little of my accomplishments.
I've mass-munged my sample's data, and revision-tracking info isn't saved, so proprietary information is gone. The munge allows me to demo features & usage that I created. The relative $$$ size of the built projects can still be inferred from un-munged quantities.
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.