[Michael Spencer]

Brent,

Just be sure that the new section you create doesn’t look like bull*hi*, which it kinda would. Of course I want to know if candidates have been active in anything, really, but maybe I’d prefer a simple list of dates. Is this too touchy on my part?

Look. I just find that resumés are such poor ways to summarize a person, that’s all, and anything you can do to humanize it is far better. I know that there are so-called resumé specialists out there, but I just see so many ‘canned’ resumés and it puts me off. I don’t want an abstraction. I want to know the person.

Working in a design office is special: it’s close, it’s intimate, it’s intense. The things I want to know about a candidate in terms of professional abilities require perhaps half a dozen project exhibits, no more. Enough to tell me she can do the work. I don’t think, for example, that facility with Photoshop or drafting is worthy of mentioning. It’s like a plumber saying that he can fix pipes. It is assumed. It’s also obvious in previous work.

The part I am really interested in is how you work on a team. How you react to criticism. If you have a stable home life (yes, I know, this is off limits, but still). What your expectations are in terms of the number of hours you work a week. I want to know what the kid is like. On a personal level. If there is a fit.

End of rant, I guess! It’s just that hiring and especially training are so expensive that I really try to focus. I also feel compelled to offer whatever I can to those looking for a position from the point of view of the guy on the other side of the desk.

I know I have partially hijacked the thread!

[Michael Spencer]

Phil: Very good advice; apparently you, like me, have interviewed lots of LAs over the years. And, as to the number of talented people out of work: amen, brother. It’s truly heart breaking—I can tell some stories, and I imagine others here can, too.

Your delicate characterization of my comment above as ‘in your face’ is spot on and accurate. I’m not sure why I felt so strongly about it. Of course your approach is better.

And certainly you are correct on being honest and up front. If I am interviewing, I expect candidates to be completely truthful. However, I don’t think I have ever seen an LA pad a resume or tell a fib. Professionals all.

The one thing I try to do in an interview is break through the ice and actually TALK to the candidate; easier with some than others, but once you do break through everything comes out. If you are going to be working with a person day after day in the same office and on the same team, you really need a sense of what that person is like. Her reaction to the down time would be a big part of learning that.

I look forward to hiring LAs in 2010, and I hope lots of us here do the same…I predict that at some point the really good ones (yes, they are down, too) will be sought after.

I hope this explains my comment above a little better.

http://www.msadesign.com/msadesign/Blog/Blog.html

[Michael Spencer]

Why is this anyone’s business beyond your own? As others point out, the recession is a given. But perhaps a candidate simply wanted some time off? As an employer I’m looking at the ability of the person to handle the work that I have.

Lacunae will be at least partially explained as you conduct the interview but are ultimately immaterial and nobody’s business but your own. This question is similar to asking marital status or age. Just isn’t germane and violates a person’s privacy. If a potential employer starts digging into this I’d say that it is not a good match.

[Michael Spencer]

I am guessing that figuring this out is part of the exercise, if an unseen part…I am thinking, along with Nick, that you have a LOT of space.

Try using your first board to show the entire site at a suitable scale and then show details? Isn’t this the straightforward way to do this? I wonder if the point of this exercise is to force you to consider how a central concept is applied to disparate parts of the site.

By the way you have bitten off a huge project.

[Michael Spencer]

Thanks for your response. I think that what I see is the application of sustainable practices to ‘special sites’, like the one you mentioned, and your ideas are terrific.

My question, though, goes more to ‘bread and butter’ planning here in the US. The traditional method is to simply layout the lots for private developer-clients, being, of course, as creative as you can in terms of resident safety, and life enjoyment. But as to the environment- well, here is what happens: the agencies define jurisdictional lines, and everything beyond those lines is considered a clean slate. That’s just what it is, just stating a fact.

I’d like to ratchet this up a notch, that’s all, and wondered if anyone else has a similar project.

Michael

[Author]

Posts