Specializing and generalizing, Part 2 of 2

I wrote last week about looking for places to excel in the architecture profession and going after those tasks and skills. I advocate this path in architecture for a couple of reasons.  One is that this is bound to be a long and arduous career for many of us, and getting good at the parts you enjoy can make the trip a little more pleasant.  If you're good at something you also happen to enjoy, you may actually be (*gasp!*) paid to do something  you really like to do for a living, which is about as close to nirvana as many of us will ever get.  


The other reason I advocate for this is due to trends I see in our profession: it's as if we're finally acknowledging that all architects are not all things to all people.  It's not because we're bad architects or bad professionals--it's just that it's not human (or often possible) to be really good at everything.  And in a professional and economic climate where so much is at stake, a firm cannot afford to have anything less than the best on each aspect of the project.  You don't want the space planner trying to figure out where the vapor barrier goes in the exterior wall, and you don't want the specs guru trying to figure out the best arrangement of the materials and parti for the building. That being said, we're all architects. We care about the way the building looks and how it works inside and if it's affordable to build and efficient to operate.  We all still deserve and need a say in each of these aspects.  But the conversation needs to be led or at least started by someone who really knows what they're doing.


And yet, I've seen the architectural specialist take a hit in the past five years.  Architects who were CA experts, spec experts, or building envelope experts, are the ones I saw get laid off the most.  First off, if there's no work to get and do, then there's no specs to write or CA to perform, so there's nothing for these souls to work on.  But second and almost more importantly, these specialists were often too specialized; their skills could not or would not translate over to another aspect of architecture.  The best example I've seen of this was a senior architect who was a whiz at exterior building detailing and CA, but he was so cantankerous that he couldn't be brought to a schematic design or space planning meeting.  As soon as someone proposed rethinking or redoing everything they had been thinking and sketching on for the past twenty minutes, the architect dug in his heels and refused to revisit a concept or site location or whatever was up for debate.  The strictness that dictated his primary skill set (and ensured success in that arena) foiled any success at any part of architecture that required nonstructured thinking and flexibility.  He was laid off less than a year after the recession started.


I advocate specialization, but I don't advocate utter and complete specialization.  To paraphrase the saying about closed-mind thinking: if all you have is a hammer, then you can only deal with nails--pounding them in and pulling them out.  If you have one of those neato rechargeable drills, you can drill screws with various head types, or you can attach or remove nuts and bolts with various heads and sizes by interchanging the heads.  No, you can't pound anything into a surface like a hammer, but you're definitely more useful.  To take this analogy further, if you have a shovel, you can mostly use it to dig into the dirt and move dirt around, but you can also use it to cut roots and hack at weeds and smooth out a dirt surface and even whomp something on the head with it.  You know how to use a tool--and your skills--successfully for something other than the intended purpose.


Last week, I mentioned the skills at which I have excelled, am okay, or am not so good.  It's the okay-skills that I feel best about, oddly enough.  I'm really good at designing how healthcare departments should be laid out and can work best, but I also am decent enough at Revit that I can go into a model, put in walls and doors, and move things around to get the plan just how it needs to be.  I'm glad to rely on others who are faster and better for this work, but I can do the work myself if need be.  I'm excellent at healthcare codes and guidelines, but I also know enough about regular ol' building codes to know that there might be something in there that will throw a wrench in the amazing floor plan I'm trying to achieve. Being really good at one thing at the expense of all others isn't talent--it's being a savant, and a savant isn't nearly as helpful as someone who is really good at one thing and pretty good at a few others.

Specializing and generalizing, Part 1 of 2

I recently celebrated the 12-year anniversary of being at the same architecture firm, where I started as an intern fresh out of grad school in June of 2000. Well, "celebrate" is a strong word--I mostly remarked on it to a few colleagues and my husband.  In that time, I've gone from super-green intern to healthcare planner and project architect.  I started as someone whose job it was to do whatever's needed on a project, and twelve short years later, I've become someone with a more specific set of skills to be employed in certain ways and at certain times.  Some of my skills have increased, some have plateaued, and some have waned.  Examples:


Things I've gotten really good at in 12 years:

• User group meetings: asking the right questions, settling arguments between users, keeping the discussion on track
• Space planning and schematic design in healthcare projects
• Healthcare code/guideline requirements
• MEP/acoustical requirements and pitfalls in healthcare facilities
• Writing, producing, and editing marketing materials and interview presentations

Things I've gotten okay/sufficient at in 12 years:

• Revit (drawing, modeling, building families, drawings details, scheduling...I can do my own CA, but I'm not a fast drafter/modeler like I was when I used CAD for 8+ hours a day)
• Building code requirements (I have 0% of that book memorized, except that dead-end corridors in a hospital can be no longer than 20 feet)
• Construction administration (I can do it, but man, do I get impatient and irritated)

Things I haven't gotten good at in 12 years:

• Exterior detailing
• Specs (I should be a lot better at this, but I wrote specs on a project recently for the first time in almost four years, and I realized how bad/out of practice I am at it)
• PhotoShop/Illustrator/Sketchup/InDesign

I really am embarrassed at how bad I am at some of these items.  I've always had the impression--perhaps from school, maybe clients, maybe work--that I should know a lot about everything and good at every aspect of my job and career.  When I get that feeling, I remember the combined words of author Malcolm Gladwell and sports commentator Colin Cowherd.  Gladwell describes (in his book Outliers) the 10,000-hour rule, in which you have to practice something for at least 10,000 hours before you get good at it.  Cowherd uses an analogy of Michael Jordan versus Bill Gates: "Bill Gates will never make a dunk, and Michael Jordan will never program a computer. In order to get really good at one thing, you have to give up something else." 

In order to be the go-to guy or gal for Adobe CreativeSuite stuff...or rendering...or code research and knowledge...or space planning...or exterior detailing...or exterior and site design...or whatever, you need to spend a lot of time working on that thing.  You also have to accept that if you make the choice to excel at some aspect(s) of design or construction, then you're not going to excel at one or more other things.  I've become one of the few go-to people in my office for healthcare space planning and design knowledge, but my phone isn't ringing off the hook with people wanting to know where to put the vapor barrier in an exterior wall.  There are people in my office that know where to put the vapor barrier--they dig that sort of thing, and they know the right questions to ask me about that wall before they give me an answer.

IDP requires that you do a full range of tasks so that you know what it takes to get a project done and what you're required to do and know as an architect.  A side benefit of doing all that IDP requires is that you find out what you really want to do--design, space plan, code research, detailing, marketing, CA, etc.  Do the work, and then decide what you really enjoy and what really fits your skills, and then seek ways to further develop those aspects of your practice.

How Chris Rock can make your resume sharper

My sister and I were chatting recently when we both began quoting part of Chris Rock's standup act to each other and laughing our asses off in the process. My sister is an English professor who mostly teaches freshmen (1101 and 1102), and the start of every fall semester brings that moment when she dashes the hopes of the students who think they're just in 13th grade.  They assert that by meeting the criteria and basic requirements on the syllabus, they "deserve" an A.  My sister must then remind them that when you meet the minimum requirements, you get a C; you earn (not "deserve") an A when you do high-quality work.  We began relating this to a rather controversial bit that Chris Rock did back in the 1990s.  At one point in the bit, he describes how he hates it when men with children brag, "I take care of my kids!"  Rock counters: "You're supposed to take care of your kids!  Whaddya want, a cookie?!"  My sister feels like yelling something similar at the students that want credit for doing something they're supposed to do: "You're supposed to attend class every day and do all the homework!  You don't get a trophy for it!"


Sometimes I see intern resumes that list attributes that they believe would help a firm: Strong digital and hand-rendering skills, Experience with contracts and on-site CA, and so on.  Mixed in with these attributes are more personal ones: Attention to detail, Excellent communication and teamwork skills, Able to work alone or on a team, etc.  Here's the thing: after 4-6 years in college, an intern better be able to pay attention to detail, be organized and punctual, and work alone or with a group.  Well-meaning interns include these traits as a way to help firms see that they'll be a great fit and that they can be relied upon.  But these traits are givens in the work world: regardless of your profession, you have to have certain baseline traits to work, and listing them on your resume makes it look like you want credit for doing something that you're supposed to do already.


If you want to emphasize one of these traits, find a way to tie it back to a job or organization or activity.  For example, if you want to emphasize how organized you are, link it to your catering manager job where you juggled several events simultaneously.  If you want to emphasize your writing skills, link it to the time you spent editing the school's online or print journal or college newspaper.  Without explicit examples, it just looks like you're asking for an A for meeting the C requirements.

Lulu's Mailbag: Are internet portfolios a good idea?

G. sent in the following question:


I would really like to have your opinion on the idea of internet portfolios. I created one years ago, and along with my physical portfolio, it was a great help. So many companies just seem to want work samples and that makes me think of a few well- chosen PDFs of projects that I have done. Of course the physical is a no-brainer, but is the digital one needed as well? 




G., I give a 100% thumbs up to internet portfolios, especially to those starting out in architecture.  It's a great way to get your foot in the door without wasting money on expensive printing and mailing.  A hiring manager or architect can click a link and see what kind of work you (can) do, and it tells them quickly if you're what they're looking for. Seeing a recent online portfolio made me want to bring in a recent interviewee, whom we ended up hiring.


If firms are asking for hard copies of your work, then it makes sense to think about what best describes your work.  Bring your two or three best projects in a format no larger than 11" x 17" (or A3 sheets for my international readers), and if you've worked in an actual firm, then I advise bringing a half-size set of a project you worked on or even renderings or photos of some built projects.


The physical examples are good to have for the actual interview, but the digital portfolio can help you get the foot in the door that you need in a tough market.


If you have a question or topic for me, feel free to leave it in the comments or via my email in the sidebar.  Thanks!

How to make your emails more effective

I would wager that most if not all interns are accustomed to using email as a primary form of communication.  I remember getting my very first email account in 1994 when I started college.  (Yes, in a time before the iPod, cue the dramatic music....)  Many of you have likely had your own email accounts since you were preteens or even had a single-digit age.  However, being comfortable with a medium of communication does not necessarily equate to effective use.  Email in the business world--and the architectural world--can be a powerful tool if used effectively.


As always, the first rule is to remember that your work email is for just that: work.  Any and every email you send out of and receive into your work email address belongs to your employer, and any of those emails can be evidence in a court of law.  Less drastic but just as important is that your emails, when well-written, can resolve disputes and clear up misunderstandings quickly during a project.  A clear, respectful email can be used to settle he-said-she-said-we-said problems in short order...or even prevent them in the first place.


The second rule of email is a corollary to the first: use email appropriately. Never write anything in an email that you wouldn't want read out at an office-wide meeting or printed on a billboard. If you even remotely think there could be an issue (or a possible ugly interaction) with what you're about to email out, make a phone call first, then use the email to recap the phone conversation as a confirmation of next steps.


The third rule of email is lesser-known but still very important: construct your emails precisely and appropriately.  Let's say you need to email the structural engineer about column locations in the main lobby of the Westview Hospital project.  You're going to ask the engineer if it's possible to offset a section of structure along a gridline, and you're including a PDF of a plan showing what you want to do.  


Here's what not to do:


To: Alex T. Engineer
From: Amy F. Intern
Subject: Westview Hospital
Attachment: WestviewPlan.pdf
Hay Alex, 
we want to move a section of grid line G so we can get more room in the lobby and get those columns away from the front door? take a look at this and let me know.
Thanks,
Amy


First of all, the subject line needs to be more precise than just the project name.  Why? Because this engineer probably gets a dozen or more emails from you per day and then a couple dozen per day from other consultants about the Westview Hospital project.  When they need to search their inbox or their email files to find the one about moving a column in the lobby, how can they do so effectively when they have literally over 100 emails titled "Westview Hospital"?  


The same goes for the attachment name.  When you or they save this PDF somewhere, it needs to be easily searchable and identifiable.  Naming it more precisely and putting a date on it (the date it was emailed out or created for review) allows you or them to find it easily in a month when they need to refer to it again.


Finally, the email reads like a run on question from a teenager, with no sense of capitalization.  The fact that you're asking an engineer if you can move his/her columns make it clear that you need a response, so you can delete the "let me know" part of the email. You have a college degree--write like it!  


Here's a better email:

To: Alex T. Engineer
From: Amy F. Intern
Subject: Westview Hospital - Move gridline G in lobby?
Attachment: Westview Lobby Plan w_gridline G - 2012-05-23.pdf
Hi Alex, 
In order to comply with some egress code issues, we need more clearance at the front door in the lobby.  What is the best way to move a section of grid line G in order to get the columns at G/3 and G/4 away from the front door? I've attached a PDF showing how we would ideally relocate those columns.
Thanks,
Amy

Vacations: timing isn't everything

This week's post is late because I've been working towards a deadline next week and forgot to post anything.  The deadline next week is doubly important with the impending Memorial Day weekend holiday.  If we don't make our deadline next week, then we almost might as well wait two more weeks to finish CDs because some of us on the project team, including yours truly, will be taking part of Memorial Day week off.  But we can't take the extra time because it will mess up the schedule and put the project behind.

I booked my Memorial Day trip a few months ago, thinking that there's no way there would be a deadline around a holiday.  You would think I'd know better after almost twelve years of doing this for a living, but alas.  I never once thought of canceling my vacay, though.  My take on vacations and time off is echoed by some of the wisest words I've ever heard an intern say.  Recently, an intern my office said, "There's never a good time to take your vacation, so you might as well take it when you want to."  It's good advice.

So take your vacation.  Leave town.  Don't leave town and don't answer the phone or email.  Take the break, enjoy the downtime, and use your vacation.  You've earned it.

What to do with that pesky tax refund

Many if not all of you reading this received tax refunds this year.  This is the case for most architectural interns--filling out a fairly simple tax refund and maybe only deducting for your student loan interest puts you in the running for a decent refund and the ensuing feeling of "yeah, I hit the jackpot, yo!" when you get that refund check in your hand.  It's tempting to go out and spend it, though some of the more disciplined among you might decide to pay down (or pay off) some credit card debt with it.  But I have a third option to suggest: invest it in a Roth IRA.


In an article in the Wall Street Journal section of the Sunday 4/29/12 Denver Post, readers were reminded that some recent reports from the entities in charge of Medicare and Social Security funds state that these funds are currently slated to run dry in 2033 (barring any action between now and then to stem this tide).  This  means that anyone who is under the age of 41 right now in 2012 should expect to only receive 70% to 75% of what he or she is "supposed to" receive.  While this sounds like it's a million miles away and may very well be a Doomsday prediction, it's a vital reminder that there's never a bad time to start planning for retirement.  Time is on your side when it comes to retirement planning--even a few bucks socked away when you're 25 and then left alone will make a huge difference in 30 years when you suddenly need it. (Here's a good chart that breaks down how time is on your side when it comes to investing.)


A Roth IRA is easy enough to set up at a bank, credit union, or online investment entity, like TD Ameritrade, E-Trade, Charles Schwab, etc.  Look for one that has minimal to no fees (i.e., they won't charge you management fees as long as you only make three transactions on the account per month, etc.)  You can only put up to $5,000 into it each year, and it's after-tax income (unlike your 401(k), which is pretax income and can also help you at tax time by lowering your taxable income), but when you take out the Roth IRA money in 30+ years, the government can't tax it.  Boo-yah.  Now that's hitting the jackpot.