Fast Forward to What?

It is very likely that your role in the design professions and in our industry will be changing rapidly. This is because there are new competitive threats from outside the traditional A/E/C industry structures and there are new technologies to navigate … not to mention all the reasons associated with the economy.

This changing context often leaves people confused about their long-term goals. Our position at Greenway Group is that the future is and will continue to be brimming with opportunities. If you are planning new goals for next year here is what I recommend:

• Develop a coherent and positive point of view. Right, it’s not easy to do today, but it is essential that you do this now. No one outperforms his or her own aspirations. Your point of view should be expansive and should get your adrenaline rushing. This is an essential choice you must make. This is your angle on the future.
• Revise your vision for the next three years. Backcast the action steps that will be needed to achieve the vision. Think non-linearly about inventing your future. Your plan should be edgy, not last year’s formula.
• Make more friends and be more likable. Build relationships with a quality network.
• Extinguish inertia. That is to say, co-opt and neutralize the anti-change forces around you. Push away negative forces.
• Create and use a posture and a vocabulary of action and motivation. This will become your personal dynamism. Don’t worry and stew over today’s molehill problems; take advantage of this time to think in new ways. Build bridges toward new opportunities that are often just outside the boundaries you’ve been operating in.

If you want to change anything major, you have to make a choice to do some things differently. Then, you will ride the ascendancy path toward some very interesting opportunities ahead. You’ll be amazed not only by what has been accomplished but also what you’ll be looking forward to.

Leaders for Today’s Challenges

Each day I get asked about — or find myself in a discussion about — executive level leadership. Both the American Institute of Architects and the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards are looking for their next chief executives. Several of the largest firms in the country are also considering transitions in their leadership brought about by economic, demographic, and opportunity shifts in their professional practices.

These search and selection processes give us pause. The stakes are high. How should these organizations determine the best leaders?

Whatever else the leader’s role in an association or professional practice, there are 10 base essentials. When these foundational characteristics are present, the organization functions with energy and competence to serve its mission. Here is what I believe is essential.

1. Leaders act as both visionary and key day-to-day resource for overcoming difficulties. They set the tone for the can-do culture of the organization.

2. They develop and conceptualize the organization’s tactical plans to accomplish strategic ambitions. They develop and keep clarity around goals. This develops strategic optimism.

3. Communications are sincere, open, and energized. The leader is not intimidating and has the wisdom of perspective, good humor, and agility to work with a diversity of situations.

4. Leaders are able to manage demanding schedules, and their agenda is always focused on what matters most.

5. They listen and then coach every situation they find themselves in.

6. Financial matters are monitored, measured, and communicated, and these leaders tend to consistently bring in the bottom line — no matter the excuses of the day.

7. There is an ambassadorial quality about them. They are sought out to problem-solve and inspire along the way while building bridges.

8. Today’s issues are never ignored, and there is a sense that the longer-term plans can be realized through today’s actions – no matter how painful.

9. Resilience is manifested in the language of the leader who is prepared for inevitable surprises.

10. Accountability is never shirked and the leader takes final responsibility for results and outcomes. This is a stand-and-be-counted attitude that becomes contagious in the life of the organization.

Leadership is demanding. Great leaders are rare. These 10 characteristics are framed by lifestyle and attitude. Leaders are not perfect, but they have an uncanny knack for applying sensible, inspired, day-to-day actions that make all the difference.

About Working Faster

“Slow” kills professional practices. It brings death to careers. It is often defended for reasons that are about protecting the quality of design process and product.

The arguments against speed are often well crafted and well intended, yet they most often stifle progress and exhibit an attitude of denial, not innovation. These defenses trend toward academic statements that address old contexts of professional practices ignoring technology and new management science.

This is changing.

Evidence points to speed as a friend. In fact, it is unfolding as a new competitive advantage. Professionals must be light on their feet and cover ground quicker. This is one reason firms are abandoning centralized bureaucratic practices.

Ours is an impatient world, and it’s accelerating. You’ve got to be lean, quick, agile, fast — and good.

Why be a drag on your firm? Put some extra quickness in your step and get your brain to imagine a duality that includes both high-quality design and faster delivery. Put some velocity in your process and watch your value grow.

The Rising Dragon: Design in China

Paul Doherty contributes the following guest blog. Paul is senior vice president of Screampoint, which provides governments, multinationals, and large real estate portfolio companies with visual solutions to manage and maintain their assets.

I am enjoying my adopted home country of the People’s Republic of China. I have settled into having a wonderful family, a growing business, and a feeling that the future is very bright. You take a keen interest in design when you make a place home. Just ask any residential designer about their clients’ interest level of every detail of their home.

I live and work in Shanghai in an area called the French Concession. Shanghai has been a city constantly shaped by its foreign trade, foreign invasions, and foreign occupation. You can see the influence of each era in the different parts of the city: the Bund, the German Concession, the English Concession, the French Concession. Thus, I live in an area that could be picked up and placed in the middle of Paris and not miss a beat.

But what makes a city is not just the vocabulary and context of its buildings. It lies in its smells, sounds and people. What makes Shanghai so wonderful is the variety of its smells, sounds, people … and its neighborhoods that make you feel as if you are in a different city by entering any one of them.

Shanghai is hosting the World’s Expo at the moment. Seventy million people have been to this city already to experience the Expo, with two more months to go. The showcasing of the world’s cultures, foods, and design are making this year’s Expo one of the best. The astonishing architecture and design of the numerous pavilions alone is worth the trip. But with the exposure to the world’s designs at the Expo — and understanding that Shanghai has a past that is shaped by outside design influences and architecture — a sensitive question is beginning to emerge in the design community of Shanghai and throughout China: What is modern Chinese design?

My personal view is that the Chinese are struggling with finding their own design vocabulary when it concerns buildings and the context of urban design. The majority of building design for large-scale development is coming from Western-based design firms. This has created a disturbing array of geometric shapes throughout cities like Shanghai that have not created a design movement, trend, or vernacular that can say to the world, This is a Chinese building.

One trend that is emerging is a movement toward historic preservation, seen in developments like Xintiandi, Tian Xi Fang, and the new Sinan Mansions. Taking its cue from the past, the rehabilitation of older Chinese structures and repositioning them for modern functions has rekindled an interest in older Chinese design forms, culture, and meaning. This combination of learning from the past to define the future could be giving rise to a new generation of Chinese designers who will define this century’s design in China.

One can only hope that in their home, a true design emerges that helps better define a city, a culture, and its people.

When “The Boss” Exemplified Civility

I love baseball, but in all honesty, I never thought much of George Steinbrenner. His leadership style was flawed. While Yogi Berra was quirky and quotable, Steinbrenner was most memorable for being pushy, tempestuous, and arrogant. I doubt that we’ll remember many leadership lessons from his tenure despite the success of the oft World Series champions.

But I do have a fond memory and a management lesson from Steinbrenner. A couple of years ago when leading a firm retreat at the Four Seasons Hotel in Philadelphia, I met “The Boss” in the hallway. We were on the same schedule leaving our rooms and heading for the elevators to the hotel lobby. He said first, “Good morning” energetically and insisted on holding the elevator door for me. When we arrived at the lobby level, I held the door and said, “After you.” He then said, “No, after you!” We exchanged once again but I succumbed first as he boldly insisted.

That day I decided I liked the man more than I thought. And I even began to like the Yankees — just a little.

Fee Trends Not Always What You Think

“Recent interviews and fee negotiations have convinced me that it is a race to the bottom on fees,” a client just told me during a phone conversation. I know this is a very real feeling among many in the design professions. The truth is that it is increasingly common for professional practices to lower their fees to get scarce work. While it is a legitimate business model used to survive the economy, it is not fun. It is often not sustainable, either.

Regrettable quality problems often follow these hastily put together fee models. There are limits to how low fees can go and still serve clients’ needs responsibly. The good news is that there are tools and attitudes to adopt when you find yourself in this situation.

One of the DesignIntelligence benchmarks in real-time productivity, for example, measures best practice revenues per full-time staff. It is currently in the $172,000 range. But some firms are getting that number today. Others are still hovering around $100,000. The difference is in categorical commodity services provided by firms that range from high to low.

Those at the lower ends are feeling more squeezed and threatened. They know that it is difficult to deliver quality results to clients without resources. Moreover, it is common for firm partners to settle on low fees before negotiating tangible benefits to clients. There is measurable value in such overt services as schedule acceleration and reduced risk of project delay, optimal construction sequencing, and reduction in errors resulting in unbudgeted change costs.

The irony here is that fee trends are not always led by clients. Too often it is the practice leaders who panic and forget the value of their services, their brand, and their long-term measurable benefit.

Think Differently About Change

Climate change comes bearing gifts. While not welcomed offerings, these changes demand a vastly different approach in the way architects and designers think about their professional practices. Something big is happening.

Moreover, architectural careers have quit working like they used to. Climate change will affect the economy and the underlying tenets of roles and responsibilities in the making of buildings – and urban environments. The challenges brought about by climate change create new puzzles to solve. We can meet these challenges. There are many approaches.

The Design Futures Council will be hosting our 9th Leadership Summit on Sustainable Design Oct. 5-7 in Atlanta. Again this year we will bring together 100 delegates to share case studies, present deep understandings and practical experiences, and chart the future. Invitations were mailed last week to members and fellows of the Design Futures Council.

To be considered for one of the delegate positions, e-mail me at jcramer@di.net or Mary Pereboom at mpereboom@di.net. We are seeking thought leadership and a diversity of talents.

All of us need to catch on to what’s happening. We need to seize the opportunities brought about by change.

Raising Our Young

There has never been a time in human history when strategic foresight was more needed. The American Institute of Architecture Students delivered a good dose of it last week. In fact, the AIAS Forum in Minneapolis was an exemplar in several ways.

The Twin Cities’ below-zero temperatures and deep snow did not cool the Forum participants’ expectations that this would be a relevant and dynamic session. More than 500 students participated, 20 of whom were vying for elected office in AIAS.

As the students energetically took over the Hyatt Regency Hotel, there was an organized and spontaneous discussion on meaningful change and overcoming difficulties. Furthermore, there was palpable passion for the future brimming with ingenuity. The emerging environmental leadership was at once sophisticated and convincing.

There is a saying that you can tell a lot about the future of a profession by studying how well that profession is taking care of its young. This meeting is one positive indication. The AIAS experience included leaders of the profession such as the presidents of AIA, ACSA, and NAAB as well as the president-elect of NCARB. All were in attendance providing programs, speaking, coaching, and listening. They were actively engaged in table-top exercises, too. And none of them seemd the least bit inconvenienced by the timing of this event over the holidays. (The meetings began Dec. 29 and ran through Jan. 1.)  They did not dominate but were jump-starting conversations on future opportunities.

George Miller, the president of AIA and a partner at Pei Cobb & Freed architects in New York, illustrated how students can transcend the current economy and get involved in the profession with examples. His was an upbeat assessment of the future of the profession. NCARB President-Elect Ken Naylor pointed out how Intern Development Program credits can be earned under newly revamped NCARB rules. (The new “Emerging Professional Companion” outlines how AIA Learning Units equal one qualifying IDP hour and how in one year online activities and exercises can be used to gain 225 training units — nearly a year’s worth of IDP experience, very helpful for those interns who are currently unemployed.)  NCARB is showing its responsiveness in this economy, and this is a good thing.

The student leaders at AIAS Forum are an impressive lot. Keeping them engaged in the profession is one of the most strategic actions that AIA, NCARB, and the rest of the profession can do. And this is real foresight for the future.

How Long from Intern to Architect?

Today’s guest blogger is Matthew Arnold, who has been examining the duration and success rates of the Intern Development Program.

How long does an architectural internship actually take?

Official estimates range between three and five years, but that didn’t seem to be the case for any of the interns I knew or for that matter, any that they knew. I couldn’t find any hard data published anywhere, so I sent an e-mail to each of the U.S. NCARB-member boards asking what they could tell me.

Three boards — New York, Nebraska, and Oregon — furnished hard data in response to my request. New York provided records for all 15,088 actively licensed architects there. Nebraska and Oregon provided data for the actively licensed architects who had taken and passed the exam in their states, 626 and 800 individuals, respectively.

I made graphs of what they sent me, which you can fine here along with explanatory notes:

http://www.stairwaytoarchitecture.com/images/NY_STATE_REPORT.pdf

http://www.stairwaytoarchitecture.com/images/Nebraska_Report.pdf

http://www.stairwaytoarchitecture.com/images/Oregon_Report.pdf

The data show that the average time elapsed between graduation and licensure for architects licensed in 2009 exceeds public estimates. In New York it was 11.06 years; in Nebraska 10.89 years; in Oregon 8.96 years.

So as best as I can determine, the answer to how long it takes to become a licensed architect is 9 to 11 years. It is a rare intern who finds this surprising.

The trends in the data are disturbing, in particular the percentages of licensed architects whose internship was 5 years or less, between 5 and 10 years, and over 10 years in New York, as shown in this graph:

In New York in 1980, about three out of four internships took less than 5 years; today this is true for less than 10 percent of aspiring architects in that state.

Before 1980 it was rare for an internship to extend a decade or more in New York, but in 2009 it has become the rule: Half of all internships last at least that long. The trends are similar in Nebraska and Oregon.

There are still some states (New York among them) that do not require an NAAB-accredited degree in order to sit for the exam. These states typically require an (ostensibly) longer period of internship in order to compensate. If the duration of average internship for those with NAAB-accredited degrees is indistinguishable from those without one, the question as to the benefit of the degree in this regard is not an unfair one to ask.

Are three states a sufficient sample to enable us to draw any conclusions?

I’m an architect, not a statistician, but I think it is. These charts depict the professional records of slightly more than 16 percent of all currently licensed architects in the United States — about 1 in 6 of us. New York, Nebraska, and Oregon are distinct in population, geography, and economic characteristics.

I welcome additional hard data on this subject and expect it to support rather than contradict what shows up in the statistics from these three states.

Most states appear to rely on NCARB to maintain these records and are unable to provide them. NCARB tells me it cannot provide any information beyond what is posted on its Web site.

Is such an attenuated internship — amounting to more than 20 percent of a typical career — in the best interests of our profession? Why the discrepancy between what is necessary and what is (apparently) sufficient? Is this system functioning as designed? If so, why isn’t it functioning as advertised? Should we make any changes? What should we change? Are we really doing our best in this regard? Can we in good conscience as a profession continue to create false expectations in students and young professionals about their careers? These are only a few of the questions that the facts compel us to ask and answer.

There are more charts and a nascent discussion on this issue at my Web site. I will be happy to provide the raw data at cost to anyone upon request, and you can perform your own analysis.

Early next year, I’ll be asking the architects who sit on our state boards to obtain an accounting on this subject from NCARB. It’s time to take the future seriously. At the very least, we owe the next generation some honesty.

What’s Unfair about Competition?

Lunch at the Hyatt Regency Dehli, New Dehli, India

A few weeks ago I was in New Delhi, India, where architectural services cost about a fourth as much as they do in North America. This low-cost option has been perceived as the driving reason for the outsourcing phenomenon of the past decade. Some view this as unfair competition.

North American firms have contracted for parts of their technology services to be accomplished overseas. This has created an around-the-clock service model. China and India have become the global leaders and the preferred choice for outsourcing services. Today, some North American and European professional practices have their own captive “insourcing” operations in India and Asia to support their other offices where labor and overhead are often much more expensive.

There are parallels in other professional practice areas. In the management consulting and technology field, U.S.-based management consultancy Accenture says that its firm in India will grow by more than 5,000 staff this year and will surpass 55,000 in India alone. And it predicts continuing growth that will not only serve the growing needs of India but significant parts of the developing world and developed world as well.

There is much more to this story than low cost/high quality talent, however. And this difference is not just about low cost. It is the high level of diligence and work ethic among professionals in India. Little waste in process, focused attention, lean overhead, very latest technology, and speed. Executives travel to client offices via coach class, even for a 15-hour flight. When they book their hotels, it is two to four people per room. They are eager to please, and their enthusiasm for the future of the design professions is contagious. This lean overhead, high work ethic culture has redefined outsourcing of architectural services. We believe it will continue to do so.

While the building information modeling skill levels in India have become legendary in just a few short years, the innovative nature of Indian professional practices is not just a story of technologically advanced practitioners in architecture and engineering.

Indian professionals have catalyzed fundamental change during the world’s recession. They have found new ways of meeting client needs, including meeting those that clients didn’t even know they had. They are eager imagineers of the future of professional practice.

Global innovators see opportunities that others are missing. They find service niches that are changing the face of the architectural and engineering business. Furthermore, they are matching their capabilities and quickly adapting to the world’s changing markets.