I am an expat and just started a new job after my master's (in landscape architecture) graduation. I am 1 month into my job. The problem is I find my job safe and not very challenging. It is a landscape architecture office but my boss also works with urban planning and right now I am working more in the urban planning sector.
I was feeling a bit impatient, I applied to some other offices and got two job offers. Now I am wondering if I should take one of them which requires me to move to a small city. Right now I am living in a big city.
What do you guys think? At the start of a career is it important to stay in an office for at least 1 or 2 years and then change? Or should I go for it? The office that wants to take me works only with landscape and although the workload is a bit more I think I can learn more.
But I am still not sure because in this small office( read 4 people and 2 part times)I guess I can see a project (although work in some specific type of projects like streets, squares, ) from start to end.
The other office where I have an interest to go is working on more numbers and variety of projects (more big scale projects).
I hope to hear some words from you all! Would mean a lot!
Best.
reallynotmyname
Nov 7, 21 3:04 pm
You should proceed with switching jobs if you want. The first 90 days are considered a trial period by many on the employer side. Quitting after less than a year is usually considered to be not so good, but I think a lot of old expectations and perceptions have been upended in the current business environment. Lots of people are going have gaps or anomalies in their employment histories due to COVID.
Just don't make a habit of having many short employment stints. That is absolutely a red flag for potential employers. We had a former employee who quit us and other every design job they ever had after only 6-8 months. With a resume that lists five jobs at design firms in three years, nobody is willing to hire them.
pamp
Nov 8, 21 9:12 pm
Moving to a more challenging (within reason) position seems like a good reason to make the shift, though depending on where you move to (i.e. big LA firm) you might initially get less exposure to all phases of the project, which is the trade off. Bigger firms might originally pigeonhole you in drafting/rendering/SD functions, for example. Go with your gut here, it's impossible to decide for you, but as reallynotmyname says don't make it a habit to jump around.
For context, I'm also an LA and originally made a similar jump (for more structure, in my case) 3 mos into my first post MLA job. Not ideal, and in retrospect I would have also gotten good, varied experience in that first firm, but it has also paid off to get a more recognized name on my resume.
archanonymous
Nov 9, 21 4:27 pm
If something isn't working out, the sooner you quit the better. Less than 3 months someplace would not be a negative mark I think - you realized it was a bad fit and left.
I'd rather see that than someone that stayed for a year or two. You really need stretches of 3-4 years at jobs to get all aspects of the design process, so best to find some place that you can see that happening.
IDH-IBC
Nov 10, 21 1:39 pm
I think it's the nature of the profession. Many firms use the first three months as a trial period and will have no qualms showing you the door if they feel it's not working out. It's up to you to decide that trial periods work both ways.
zonker
Nov 14, 21 6:27 pm
What are red flags to determine if someone "doesn't pack the right gear" who won't make the cut?
reallynotmyname
Nov 14, 21 7:13 pm
For us, the most common causes for cutting someone after 90 days is that they overstated their computer skills and/or basic architectural knowledge in order to get hired. We have small offices and when somebody can't really do what they claimed to be capable of, it becomes apparent really quickly.
IDH-IBC
Nov 15, 21 1:06 pm
I've been on the other side of that where I've been transparent about my level of expertise as it relates to a specific type of architecture the company focused on and was promised that there would be patience and support to help me get acclimated to the role and that didn't happen. So I walked because I felt like I was being set up to fail (I also felt I was being undermined, at best, or sabotaged at worse, by another architect in the office).
whistler
Nov 12, 21 5:20 pm
Patience grasshopper!
Very common for young grads to feel that way, but I would suggest to look for things you can learn from your current office before moving on. To be fair I really don't think you get into any project in 2 months, it takes 4-6 months to see and project evolve and take shape ( whatever stage its in ). It also looks bad if you are jumping around a lot. ( bad grasshopper )
Hello all,
I am an expat and just started a new job after my master's (in landscape architecture) graduation. I am 1 month into my job. The problem is I find my job safe and not very challenging. It is a landscape architecture office but my boss also works with urban planning and right now I am working more in the urban planning sector.
I was feeling a bit impatient, I applied to some other offices and got two job offers. Now I am wondering if I should take one of them which requires me to move to a small city. Right now I am living in a big city.
What do you guys think? At the start of a career is it important to stay in an office for at least 1 or 2 years and then change? Or should I go for it? The office that wants to take me works only with landscape and although the workload is a bit more I think I can learn more.
But I am still not sure because in this small office( read 4 people and 2 part times)I guess I can see a project (although work in some specific type of projects like streets, squares, ) from start to end.
The other office where I have an interest to go is working on more numbers and variety of projects (more big scale projects).
I hope to hear some words from you all! Would mean a lot!
Best.
You should proceed with switching jobs if you want. The first 90 days are considered a trial period by many on the employer side. Quitting after less than a year is usually considered to be not so good, but I think a lot of old expectations and perceptions have been upended in the current business environment. Lots of people are going have gaps or anomalies in their employment histories due to COVID.
Just don't make a habit of having many short employment stints. That is absolutely a red flag for potential employers. We had a former employee who quit us and other every design job they ever had after only 6-8 months. With a resume that lists five jobs at design firms in three years, nobody is willing to hire them.
Moving to a more challenging (within reason) position seems like a good reason to make the shift, though depending on where you move to (i.e. big LA firm) you might initially get less exposure to all phases of the project, which is the trade off. Bigger firms might originally pigeonhole you in drafting/rendering/SD functions, for example. Go with your gut here, it's impossible to decide for you, but as reallynotmyname says don't make it a habit to jump around.
For context, I'm also an LA and originally made a similar jump (for more structure, in my case) 3 mos into my first post MLA job. Not ideal, and in retrospect I would have also gotten good, varied experience in that first firm, but it has also paid off to get a more recognized name on my resume.
If something isn't working out, the sooner you quit the better. Less than 3 months someplace would not be a negative mark I think - you realized it was a bad fit and left.
I'd rather see that than someone that stayed for a year or two. You really need stretches of 3-4 years at jobs to get all aspects of the design process, so best to find some place that you can see that happening.
I think it's the nature of the profession. Many firms use the first three months as a trial period and will have no qualms showing you the door if they feel it's not working out. It's up to you to decide that trial periods work both ways.
What are red flags to determine if someone "doesn't pack the right gear" who won't make the cut?
For us, the most common causes for cutting someone after 90 days is that they overstated their computer skills and/or basic architectural knowledge in order to get hired. We have small offices and when somebody can't really do what they claimed to be capable of, it becomes apparent really quickly.
I've been on the other side of that where I've been transparent about my level of expertise as it relates to a specific type of architecture the company focused on and was promised that there would be patience and support to help me get acclimated to the role and that didn't happen. So I walked because I felt like I was being set up to fail (I also felt I was being undermined, at best, or sabotaged at worse, by another architect in the office).
Patience grasshopper!
Very common for young grads to feel that way, but I would suggest to look for things you can learn from your current office before moving on. To be fair I really don't think you get into any project in 2 months, it takes 4-6 months to see and project evolve and take shape ( whatever stage its in ). It also looks bad if you are jumping around a lot. ( bad grasshopper )