I interviewed three "entry-level" employees at FCA, each fairly new to the architectural profession- John Connolly, Junko Huang, and Patrick Gauvin. While each varied in the number of years they had worked in the field (from one to four years), they all surprisingly came up with similar answers to my questions (which I have condensed into two major questions here).
How have you enjoyed working at FCA and how did the job fit your expectations about the profession upon coming out of school?
Each employee stated they
have truly enjoyed working for Fong and Chan Architects, the main reason being
the design philosophy of the firm. As David had explained to me in a previous
interview, the firm believes in teaching its employees all aspects of a building's
design, which most definitely includes construction. Chiu-Lin had even stated
in a Friday staff meeting, "You're not a designer if you don't know how
to put a building together…," which is a statement each employee
appreciates upon joining the firm. For the most part, details are often a
major focus to the designs of FCA's buildings. The placement of beams/columns/etc/
are treated as beautifully and rigorously as the overarching design. This
in turn leads to a greater and more intimate knowledge of structure in relation
to form; it supports a design process which forces one to understand the fundamentals
of a building's construction, something which each employee had stated was
seriously lacking in their architectural education. They believe their time
spent at FCA has been as valuable, if not more valuable, than their college
experience. Each had stated that the first few months of work were the most
difficult as they felt "ill-prepared" to join the profession right
out of school; School was just an "idealized abstraction of reality"
while "work is the reality." The workplace essentially became the
extension of their education, an idea which undoubtedly supports the notion
that learning is an essential and ongoing process throughout life.
Yet another reason each
employee has enjoyed working at FCA is the criteria and structure for advancement/mobility
within the firm, which seems much more readily attainable than at other, similar
firms. Promotion and greater responsibility are given through merit, perseverance,
and a commitment of time and effort, nothing more. Each individual is evaluated
separately and judged on their personal growth. As such, both Junko and Patrick
which have only worked there for 2.5 and 3 years respectively, have already
headed major projects and have subsequently learned even more about the practice
of design (cost analysis/sub-contractor negotiations/etc)- all of which assist
in understanding the requirements for starting their own firms in the future.
The gripes about FCA were minimal: 1) Time is not flexible- There are few days for vacation or sick leave. 2) Opportunity for major design work is small as the projects are primarily headed by either David or Chiu-Lin,… and FCA takes the "secondary" role in some projects, simply hired to create the construction documents for another design firm (as with the De Young). 3) Life in the firm is not enough like a school studio; there is too little interaction among the employees and the atmosphere is too rigid / businesslike. The idea of architecture and design as a collaborative art-form seem to be lost in the creation of the corporation (…which I think is an interesting idea to pursue and think about).
How did you obtain your job and what skills did you find most useful in applying for your job?
Each of the three was
actually quite confused about how they landed a job with FCA. As I have stated
earlier, they each thought they had no marketable skills coming out of college,
save for some design savvy, and drawing and model-making skills. They all
concurred that it is a chronic problem for recently graduated students to
obtain an architectural job most often requiring experience, without being
given the chance to gain the necessary experience in the first place. They
surmised that the best quality they could have potentially offered was either
prior experience in the field, or proficient knowledge of computer programs.
Luck was also brought up as a major factor. And, except for Junko, who had
a "connection" with UC Berkeley, the others applied for the job
in the standard manner- with both a resume and portfolio, and were "lucky"
enough to be seen as valuable to the firm.
As for prospective job seekers with little real-world experience, all three agreed that enthusiasm and a willingness to learn were two qualities that would offer better chances for obtaining a possible job. They each stated that these qualities were absolutely necessary in order for any firm to be willing to take a risk on an individual with minimal experience.
Architecture
Assignment #3