← Back to portfolio
Published on

10 REASONS WHY ARCHITECTURE HIRING SYSTEM IN THE US IS A FAILURE.

Gone are the days when the public admired every single atom designed by the architect. People now understand good and bad architecture. Thanks to substandard hiring, the US has been facing a crisis of confidence in architecture.

The prodigy of poor hiring has been a part and parcel of the work industry in the US for years, and architecture has not been an exception. According to a Brandon-Hall research brief, a shocking 95 percent of employers surveyed confessed that recruiters are strongly engaging in poor hiring. Costing the firms a huge burn within 6 months of recruitment.

But why is this happening?

LAZY HIRING MANAGERS!

The world is producing overpopulated architecture graduates eyeing brimming salaries offered in the US. Hiring managers find it strenuous to scan every single applicant's portfolio. They opt for lazy tactics like dodging random sets of portfolios, lucky draws, random instincts and the list goes on. Most of the worthy candidates are dismissed right from the beginning.

NICE LOOKING PORTFOLIO IS GOOD ENOUGH?

Architects spend months together in filing and placing their best works in the most aesthetically appealing manner possible. But hiring a candidate based on just the beauty and composition of the portfolio is insufficient. Most of the youngsters these days get their portfolio curated by a third party specialized in the field. Also, the work projects mentioned in the portfolio doesn't reflect or justify the work quality of the applicant.

SIXTH SENSE IS THE GO!

Hiring managers get all their human gut feelings when it comes to interviews. The most common strategy is 'the first impression is the best impression'. The Interviewee could be an engaging extrovert, who compels to overshadow his mediocre skills and testimonials with his luring words. The candidate could be a nervous introvert with the captivating work accomplishments. But the recruiters seem adamant with the instinct game. Neglecting the work credentials and ending up shortlisting unsuitable candidates.

EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

The US is not new to racial and gender discrimination. This practice has been welcomed by most of the radical hiring managers. The recent survey of the field states that women account for half of the graduates from architecture programs in the US, but they make up about 20 percent of licensed architects. Also according to Equality Research and consulting ltd, there is a strong perception that ethnic minorities will face rejection at the recruitment and contracts offices of construction firms due to ingrained racism and exclusionary practices. These illusionary practices are accounting for a major downfall in the value of the architectural hiring systems.

The latest labor laws 2020 against the hiring discrimination look promising though.

NEPOTISM

This is one such malady which dominates the employment scenario on the whole. It's amazing if you look up to your parents and want to pursue the same profession. Architects' parents can pour their kids with so much access and knowledge of the profession. But getting prioritized while hiring, just because you are an architect's offspring or a close connection, with not so great work profile? According to the U.S. Census data, 22 percent of working American men whose dads were present during their teenage years, will be/are working for the same employee by the time they turn 30. For women, the statistic is 13 percent. This survey very much applies to architectural hiring systems as well.

MESSY AND MISGUIDED PROCESS UPDATES.

Most of the architecture hiring process is old-fashioned and firm. It's quite logical that the traditional methods can no longer benefit and compete with the current pacing work style. Without reconfiguring the hiring procedures, it is impossible to recruit efficiently with so many architecture graduates emerging every passing year. Recruiters are relying on subcontractors to hire foreign candidates via LinkedIn and other sites for reasonable rates. These orthodox methods will make things messier and produce mediocre architects in the market.

EXPERIENCE MATTERS MORE?

Admit this, Architecture is a great profession but a horrible business. Design is a very small part of the business. Firms prefer already promoted applicants and candidates with higher experience. Even though freshers come out with greater designing skills, they are easily overshadowed by a handful of so-called professionals. Architecture needs constant doses of fresh and raw ideas to keep the industry flourishing. But firms consider business and management skills over design, leaving behind a bunch of unexciting architects.

UNREGULATED HIRING PROCEDURES.

No active measurements are taken against poor hiring. Executives and managers admit that poor hiring is staggering the company's profit numbers. But not many firms take action in regulating the hiring systems. There is no workforce to manage and re-engineer the flawed hiring systems. Further encouraging the hiring managers to conduct their duty in a lazier and careless attitude.

OVERWHELMING APPLICATION PROCESS.

US architecture firms accept applications only from registered candidates or the members of AIA. Just to remind you, the US has the most tenacious procedure to procure an architectural license. The certification, tests and further process demotivates 70% of the deserving architect graduates. And the struggle of foreign graduates is par extremity. US recruiters further amplify the struggle by picking only a few qualified candidates. The deserving are at their homes exhausted and humdrum.

PLIGHT OF THE OVERSEAS GRADUATES!

Why do overseas graduates aim to practice architecture in the states? US showers lofty paychecks and hosts bigger projects, tempting architects from every nook and corner of the world. But the US is also the country with the most regulated and organized hiring process concerning foreign employment. But hiring managers overlook the external applicant's portfolio and prefer handing the position to an ordinary native. All the efforts, credentials, and talent is flushed down, resulting in below par recruitment.

CONCLUSION

Bad hiring suffocates talented graduates and results in poor architecture and business. These errors can definitely be rectified by re-engineering, simplifying, and standardizing the hiring system. Also measuring on-job work efficiency rates to adapt quality hiring in the future.
























Close