Just wondering how much you politics exist at your office, if you are in a corporate setting, no names, of course, unless you're brave enough.
The place I am referring to has about a good 30% of the staff a.k.a "managers" involved in mostly seeing which projects to place people on, with nothing to do with real talent or project need, but interpersonal relationships. Promotions, if any, are doled out to the ones that kiss ass and do not question the firm's direction too much. Oh, and client interaction is severely restricted to the Studio Leaders.
Other experiences of this sort? Worse or better? Just trying to judge if all corporate offices function in similar ways....
l3wis
Feb 26, 15 8:52 am
i think that's fairly common, though its a cynical way to see it. does sound about right per my experience.
Peter Normand
Feb 26, 15 10:23 am
Where I am Temping (325 days so far) The firm has several offices wit the HQ in a major southern US City. We often play blame game and we also have a lot of gate keepers who have to bless a project before it goes out
I'm in one of the branch offices well above the Mason Dixon Line on the third coast of the US. Our office is often dictated to not partnered with and disaster happens when we have to bring in help from the main office.
we also have lots of run around with standards or lack there of, we can blow the whole fee re organizing sheet sets
Fear of litigation seems to be a driving force behind design as well
Over and OUT
Peter N
fulcrum
Feb 26, 15 12:21 pm
Having "interpersonal relationship" is a talent. I don't know how those people can sleep at night after taking someone else's credit and kiss their bosses asses... THAT is also a talent, too. :D
Not all corporate practices are like that... but my previous firm was like that, about 30%. I wish them nothing but painful death.
geezertect
Feb 26, 15 8:36 pm
The larger an organization is the more political and bureaucratic it is. True not only in architecture but in every human endeavor.
Larchinect
Feb 26, 15 8:55 pm
Common in corporate la practices too.
Sooner or later you might come to the same conclusion I did--skill, talent, and creativity doesnt really matter when the world is run by management types. If you find yourself struggling to fit the mold, chances are you probably never will. Hence, you have two options: 1. make your own mold, ie start your own thing or 2. get an mba, fancier shirt, or whatever it is these corporate types value these days.
Larchinect
Feb 26, 15 8:58 pm
^^maybe not totally accurate, but it was fun to write.
Larchinect
Feb 26, 15 9:03 pm
Having 'interpersonal skills' doesnt come naturally to everyone of course, but i believe sometimes the corporate environment can stifle an individuals unique charm. Even the quiet guy who sits in the corner has a story, just may not have found his venue. Sometimes changing venues makes all the difference ??
sameolddoctor
Feb 26, 15 9:12 pm
Keep it coming guys!
shellarchitect
Feb 26, 15 10:09 pm
Large corp. Can be good too, I did basically nothing for 6 months before being laid off. I think I might have lasted longer if passing the leed ap test hadn't made me eligible for a 3k raise
natematt
Feb 26, 15 10:13 pm
Charm is more valuable than skill at most places.
That said, It makes for poor architecture.
starrchitect
Jul 7, 17 10:58 am
I worked at a top-heavy multinational office with our main office being in the Midwest (I am in NY). We were told to memorize the mantra "we are one office under different roofs". We were endlessly pestered to vote favorably on Zweig White's Best Firms to Work For and always made the annual list.
Corporate politics were the worst. Not only did we have politics on a local level, we also had it as on a national level. If anyone was to be promoted it had to be approved by the national office, which meant it was nearly impossible if you worked outside of it.
We had senior project managers that did nothing but fly around to "leadership conferences" and "management bootcamps", but did nothing productive outside of getting dressed up for client meetings. Associates got special perks that the little people were not privy to (cheaper health insurance, free monthly parking vouchers, paid AIA memberships, more vacation time, etc.).
After that ordeal, I will never work for another large corporation again.
tduds
Jul 7, 17 11:43 am
I made a decision a decade ago never to work for any company where I couldn't be on a first-name basis with the person/people who's name is on the door.
So far it's worked out great for me. Office politics are inevitable, but as others have said, they tend to balloon exponentially as the firm size increases, especially once you start working across multiple offices.
bowling_ball
Jul 7, 17 4:14 pm
Well said. I couldn't imagine not being able to walk down to the bosses office and convene when it's needed.
eeayeeayo
Jul 7, 17 12:59 pm
Some of the things mentioned here in a seemingly negative light are things that I wish more firms had more of! Examples: having lots of gatekeepers who have to bless a project before it goes out. Hallelujah! That firm's insurance company should be proud! I wish very much that many of the firms I worked for had more of that, and even that I could have that more consistently in my own firm. Also having dedicated people who spend much of their time on determining project staffing: that's so much better than the many alternatives I've seen.
archinine
Jul 7, 17 1:35 pm
I've worked at two corporate places. The first was uncannily similar to OPs description but in the worst way and with few of the benefits you'd expect of a big place. I hated it and assumed I hated corporate but wound up at another even bigger firm that is drastically different. There is definitely beurocracy but in a way that makes sense e.g. Dedicated staffing and money type management, legal teams and protocols etc. I think the reason corp no 2 works better than no 1 is that teams are divided into smaller studios, and within those, team members are assigned projects and stay on those projects start to finish. Everyone on that team from PM to draftsman is involved the entire way. Of course there is some amount of disorganization as no place is perfect, but perhaps the other important difference is a genuine sense of humor or rather humanity amongst the staff, again management all the way down. Not every corporate culture is utterly terrible.
zonker
Jul 7, 17 2:54 pm
Some firms thrive on chaos and confusion and if you cant survive and thrive in that environment - they just get rid of you - multicultural firms in the US can be problematic for people in the US
archietechie
Jul 8, 17 2:25 am
I find Xenakis' history in the discipline unsettling. It's like stockholm's syndrome.
Donna Sink
Jul 8, 17 10:37 am
I've never worked in a large corporate firm. I've worked, and work now, in medium-sized practices as well as small boutique firms.
But I worked for 5 years in the Facilities department of a large (200- employee) non-profit institution and I can say this: even the worst bureaucracy of an architecture firm is easy compared to the bureaucracy of a bunch of non-architects back-stabbing each other for their department to get more room at the table. At least in architecture practice we all have a shared experience (school) and interest and are more-or-less on the same team. Get a contemporary art curator, a children's education director, the head of security, and a cafe manager fighting over the same limited resources and good lord. Stand back!
archanonymous
Jul 8, 17 12:48 pm
From school on, I shied away from large corporate practices. Now i've been at one for a year and frankly I love it.
If you are the type to constantly compare yourself to others, obsess about things outside your control, or need external motivation and validation, it would be a tough place.
If you can set and pursue a personal agenda, there is essentially a limitless amount of resources, tools, money, and expertise at your disposal. Yes, you have to navigate corporate politics to access it, but that's not very hard - i suggest being genuinely nice to the administrative staff, executive assistants, etc... they are the gatekeepers.
citizen
Jul 8, 17 5:45 pm
Amen to that very last item. It's both practical AND the right way to behave.
sameolddoctor
Jul 8, 17 4:30 pm
I am at a smaller firm now, one that has the appearance of being "boutique" but is much worse than the corporate firm I was complaining about.
Blame game, check. Mean principles that shout at people, check. Mediocre work, check. Have a really high opinion of themselves, check. Minimum 55 hour days, check.
Good benefits, of course not. Recognition for hard work, of course not.
Chuck71
Jul 10, 17 9:58 am
The not very large firm I work for, the majority of staff have decided they are managers. This is possible by virtue of the employment of a considerable number of subconsultants.
The consequence of this though is that every time the people who are qualified and responsible for a piece of work in the firm (done effectively by the subconsultants) are asked to review it, they simply come up with an excuse to pass the buck, which inevitably ends up with myself. Lately they are even ditching the excuse, just simply passing the message on.
This is things like materials submitted for approval, shop drawings, contractors value engineering proposals....
It is very frustrating, as there is zero comeback on these people, they are very arrogant in their insistence they are not responsible for anything, and they are all it seems teflon coated as nothing sticks.
I think I put it to my boss that I have never come across so many highly qualified people who are so prepared to do so little.
I'm hoping some of them will be fired...more likely I'll quit first.
zonker
Jul 10, 17 12:36 pm
I've worked in large, medium and small firms - I never experienced politics - I've seen examples of it - I was at one firm where we had a ID dept. there was this adversarial relationship between architecture and interiors - other than that - never experiences politics
archanonymous
Jul 11, 17 12:32 am
Xen - all of your posts I've read over the years make so much sense now. The political bullshit is all around you - you must just choose not to engage in it.
bowling_ball
Jul 10, 17 11:05 pm
If you're on the good side of the equation, there are perks. But getting on the good side is often about luck as much as it is hard work, brown nosing, and honest value to a firm.
Non Sequitur
Jul 10, 17 11:50 pm
V
alue and honest are miles above luck and brown nosing.
bowling_ball
Jul 11, 17 1:21 am
NS - as virtues, absolutely. At advancing in the corporate world, that's debatable.
zonker
Jul 11, 17 1:42 pm
In large firms with large teams, there is bound to be some politics, where leadership skills are of increasing importance - being able to lead w/o being second guessed by junior members as well as respect from upper managment
Just wondering how much you politics exist at your office, if you are in a corporate setting, no names, of course, unless you're brave enough.
The place I am referring to has about a good 30% of the staff a.k.a "managers" involved in mostly seeing which projects to place people on, with nothing to do with real talent or project need, but interpersonal relationships. Promotions, if any, are doled out to the ones that kiss ass and do not question the firm's direction too much. Oh, and client interaction is severely restricted to the Studio Leaders.
Other experiences of this sort? Worse or better? Just trying to judge if all corporate offices function in similar ways....
i think that's fairly common, though its a cynical way to see it. does sound about right per my experience.
Where I am Temping (325 days so far) The firm has several offices wit the HQ in a major southern US City. We often play blame game and we also have a lot of gate keepers who have to bless a project before it goes out
I'm in one of the branch offices well above the Mason Dixon Line on the third coast of the US. Our office is often dictated to not partnered with and disaster happens when we have to bring in help from the main office.
we also have lots of run around with standards or lack there of, we can blow the whole fee re organizing sheet sets
Fear of litigation seems to be a driving force behind design as well
Over and OUT
Peter N
Having "interpersonal relationship" is a talent. I don't know how those people can sleep at night after taking someone else's credit and kiss their bosses asses... THAT is also a talent, too. :D
Not all corporate practices are like that... but my previous firm was like that, about 30%. I wish them nothing but painful death.
The larger an organization is the more political and bureaucratic it is. True not only in architecture but in every human endeavor.
Common in corporate la practices too.
Sooner or later you might come to the same conclusion I did--skill, talent, and creativity doesnt really matter when the world is run by management types. If you find yourself struggling to fit the mold, chances are you probably never will. Hence, you have two options: 1. make your own mold, ie start your own thing or 2. get an mba, fancier shirt, or whatever it is these corporate types value these days.
^^maybe not totally accurate, but it was fun to write.
Having 'interpersonal skills' doesnt come naturally to everyone of course, but i believe sometimes the corporate environment can stifle an individuals unique charm. Even the quiet guy who sits in the corner has a story, just may not have found his venue. Sometimes changing venues makes all the difference ??
Keep it coming guys!
Large corp. Can be good too, I did basically nothing for 6 months before being laid off. I think I might have lasted longer if passing the leed ap test hadn't made me eligible for a 3k raise
Charm is more valuable than skill at most places.
That said, It makes for poor architecture.
I worked at a top-heavy multinational office with our main office being in the Midwest (I am in NY). We were told to memorize the mantra "we are one office under different roofs". We were endlessly pestered to vote favorably on Zweig White's Best Firms to Work For and always made the annual list.
Corporate politics were the worst. Not only did we have politics on a local level, we also had it as on a national level. If anyone was to be promoted it had to be approved by the national office, which meant it was nearly impossible if you worked outside of it.
We had senior project managers that did nothing but fly around to "leadership conferences" and "management bootcamps", but did nothing productive outside of getting dressed up for client meetings. Associates got special perks that the little people were not privy to (cheaper health insurance, free monthly parking vouchers, paid AIA memberships, more vacation time, etc.).
After that ordeal, I will never work for another large corporation again.
I made a decision a decade ago never to work for any company where I couldn't be on a first-name basis with the person/people who's name is on the door.
So far it's worked out great for me. Office politics are inevitable, but as others have said, they tend to balloon exponentially as the firm size increases, especially once you start working across multiple offices.
Well said. I couldn't imagine not being able to walk down to the bosses office and convene when it's needed.
Some of the things mentioned here in a seemingly negative light are things that I wish more firms had more of! Examples: having lots of gatekeepers who have to bless a project before it goes out. Hallelujah! That firm's insurance company should be proud! I wish very much that many of the firms I worked for had more of that, and even that I could have that more consistently in my own firm. Also having dedicated people who spend much of their time on determining project staffing: that's so much better than the many alternatives I've seen.
I've worked at two corporate places. The first was uncannily similar to OPs description but in the worst way and with few of the benefits you'd expect of a big place. I hated it and assumed I hated corporate but wound up at another even bigger firm that is drastically different. There is definitely beurocracy but in a way that makes sense e.g. Dedicated staffing and money type management, legal teams and protocols etc. I think the reason corp no 2 works better than no 1 is that teams are divided into smaller studios, and within those, team members are assigned projects and stay on those projects start to finish. Everyone on that team from PM to draftsman is involved the entire way. Of course there is some amount of disorganization as no place is perfect, but perhaps the other important difference is a genuine sense of humor or rather humanity amongst the staff, again management all the way down. Not every corporate culture is utterly terrible.
Some firms thrive on chaos and confusion and if you cant survive and thrive in that environment - they just get rid of you - multicultural firms in the US can be problematic for people in the US
I find Xenakis' history in the discipline unsettling. It's like stockholm's syndrome.
I've never worked in a large corporate firm. I've worked, and work now, in medium-sized practices as well as small boutique firms.
But I worked for 5 years in the Facilities department of a large (200- employee) non-profit institution and I can say this: even the worst bureaucracy of an architecture firm is easy compared to the bureaucracy of a bunch of non-architects back-stabbing each other for their department to get more room at the table. At least in architecture practice we all have a shared experience (school) and interest and are more-or-less on the same team. Get a contemporary art curator, a children's education director, the head of security, and a cafe manager fighting over the same limited resources and good lord. Stand back!
From school on, I shied away from large corporate practices. Now i've been at one for a year and frankly I love it.
If you are the type to constantly compare yourself to others, obsess about things outside your control, or need external motivation and validation, it would be a tough place.
If you can set and pursue a personal agenda, there is essentially a limitless amount of resources, tools, money, and expertise at your disposal. Yes, you have to navigate corporate politics to access it, but that's not very hard - i suggest being genuinely nice to the administrative staff, executive assistants, etc... they are the gatekeepers.
Amen to that very last item. It's both practical AND the right way to behave.
I am at a smaller firm now, one that has the appearance of being "boutique" but is much worse than the corporate firm I was complaining about.
Blame game, check. Mean principles that shout at people, check. Mediocre work, check. Have a really high opinion of themselves, check. Minimum 55 hour days, check.
Good benefits, of course not. Recognition for hard work, of course not.
The not very large firm I work for, the majority of staff have decided they are managers. This is possible by virtue of the employment of a considerable number of subconsultants.
The consequence of this though is that every time the people who are qualified and responsible for a piece of work in the firm (done effectively by the subconsultants) are asked to review it, they simply come up with an excuse to pass the buck, which inevitably ends up with myself. Lately they are even ditching the excuse, just simply passing the message on.
This is things like materials submitted for approval, shop drawings, contractors value engineering proposals....
It is very frustrating, as there is zero comeback on these people, they are very arrogant in their insistence they are not responsible for anything, and they are all it seems teflon coated as nothing sticks.
I think I put it to my boss that I have never come across so many highly qualified people who are so prepared to do so little.
I'm hoping some of them will be fired...more likely I'll quit first.
I've worked in large, medium and small firms - I never experienced politics - I've seen examples of it - I was at one firm where we had a ID dept. there was this adversarial relationship between architecture and interiors - other than that - never experiences politics
Xen - all of your posts I've read over the years make so much sense now. The political bullshit is all around you - you must just choose not to engage in it.
If you're on the good side of the equation, there are perks. But getting on the good side is often about luck as much as it is hard work, brown nosing, and honest value to a firm.
V alue and honest are miles above luck and brown nosing.
NS - as virtues, absolutely. At advancing in the corporate world, that's debatable.
In large firms with large teams, there is bound to be some politics, where leadership skills are of increasing importance - being able to lead w/o being second guessed by junior members as well as respect from upper managment