Home Site Search Contact Us Subscribe
Nuts + Bolts #19: The Challenges Firms Face when Talented Staff Decide to Leave
Talented staff resignations have become more commonplace, and the challenges of "firm building" are now more about staff retention than recruitment.
By Ralph Steinglass, FAIA, Teambuilders, Inc.
June 28, 2018
Editor’s note: This is the 19th installment of Nuts+Bolts, an exclusive ArchNewsNow series to provide A/E professionals with practical tips for a more successful, profitable practice.
The flip side of Stanley Stark’s poignant article [Nuts + Bolts #17] about how unexpected staff dismissals serve as a painful reminder of the increasingly unsettled state of employment in our profession these days is the equally unsettling departure of promising young architects.
The pressure on firms to “staff up” has exposed a diminished talent pool, and the underlying dissatisfaction of staff who feel undervalued and taken for granted, but have had nowhere to turn. This has created a fluid employment environment, which means that resignations have become more commonplace, and the challenges of “firm building” are now more about staff retention than recruitment.
But “abrupt dismissals” by firms are, in most cases, the end of a series of incomplete conversations, where honest feedback has been lacking or ambiguous, resulting in missed signals and lost opportunities on both sides. Just as the “unexpected and disappointing departures” of talented and promising staff have left holes that are difficult to fill.
Conversations initiated by staff about leaving are sometimes challenging for the employee, fearing the wrath and subsequent rejection of a respected mentor, and, in fairness, are even more difficult for the employer to hear. Such conversations typically occur after the employee has already accepted another job offer, or made decisions about a lifestyle change, or enrolled in a graduate degree program in another field. When the reasons for leaving are more personal and have been brewing for awhile, rooted in disappointment, resentment and a deep sense of under-appreciation, conversations may happen without ceremony, advance warning, and probably not over lunch.
The announced reason for leaving may disguise an underlying issue, which only a few close friends may know, but the cover story sounds believable, perfectly understandable, and yet somehow deeply discouraging and incomplete:
I’m leaving because:
· “I’ve received an offer that’s just too good to turn down!“ (really may mean, “I’m taking a job where my contributions will be more highly valued”).
· “I’m being offered a lot more money in an allied profession” (an offer that you can’t come close to matching because your business model is based on low-fee jobs, made financially possible by underpaying young, talented staff).
· “I have an opportunity to work with like-minded young people and to have a voice in growing a new firm” (instead of a top-down, often well-established firm that suffers from a culture that is dismissive and uncommunicative, and isn’t interested in engaging staff in plans for the future or in supporting their growth, creating an environment that underutilizes staff talent and pigeon holes them in roles with limited opportunities to take on new skills and develop as project managers or firm leaders).
· ”I’m taking a job where my need for a more flexible schedule is recognized, and I don’t feel diminished or marginalized for asking.”
So, as disappointing as receiving this news is, the fact is that we saw signs and often heard rumblings, but took no proactive steps to alleviate the conditions, or worse, to even acknowledge them. The resulting “talent drain” (make no mistake about it – those who leave are almost always the more entrepreneurial and motivated, in addition to being talented and very smart), and high cost of recruiting and retraining new staff disrupts a firm’s rhythm and increases the burden on the remaining staff to carry the load.
But it doesn’t have to be this way! Firm principals can become more proactive and learn to be observant, to recognize the signs of frustration and disappointment, and to initiate conversations where their role is to actively listen and try to understand. Embrace the notion that it’s a good thing to be the kind of firm where talented and ambitious staff believe that they have the opportunity to grow and be appreciated, and are encouraged and supported in learning new skills.
Sometimes, however, there are limits to a firm’s growth, if its principals want to maintain the personal contact with staff and projects that have inspired them and made the firm successful. For firms with two or three principals and 20-30 people, unless there is a culture that encourages staff to grow, but is also honest about the limitations, staff will inevitably leave after six or seven years – or sooner for millennials who may be less patient.
Some firms overcome this “seven year itch” by providing a less hierarchal structure that provides more opportunities for individuals to take on new responsibilities and flourish in a more collaborative and open creative process. But, alas, this will not satisfy those who are entrepreneurial. To hold on to these future leaders, the only option will be to promote them to higher positions and, by necessity, expand the firm. There is the risk that such growth will change the firm’s culture and make it less desirable to its founders and like-minded staff.
That said, it is also often a good thing for talented staff to feel they can leave without offending their bosses, without burning bridges. It is also healthy for firms to acknowledge and even plan for such turnover. Because without it, bottlenecks are created and internal growth is stymied.
Ralph Steinglass, FAIA, is the founding principal of Teambuilders, Inc., an organizational development consulting firm that helps architecture and design firms to clarify roles and responsibilities, and deal with strategic growth issues and succession planning. In the process, it helps principals and staff address differences by actively listening to each other and having more direct and mutually respectful conversations.
When you have a great project with equally great photography, the possibilities - and the pay-offs - can be endless.
By Brad Feinknopf
If your boss asks you to join him or her for breakfast or lunch during a period of uncertainty and there is no specific agenda, beware. Something is afoot. He or she may want to drop the boom and do the deed in a controlled setting away from the prying eyes of the office staff.
By Stanley Stark, FAIA, LEED AP
Branding can be a bit of a foreign concept to established (and even to newer) architecture firms. Here are some central takeaways from a firm rebranding itself after 40 years in practice.
By Guy Geier, FAIA, FIIDA, LEED AP / FXFOWLE
Nuts + Bolts #15: From Adversary to
Partner: Managing Relationships in Construction Projects
Nuts + Bolts #14: Start Me Up:
Taking Cultural Cues From Our Tech Sector Clients
A new way of dealing with ownership transition that can benefit some principals who face difficulties in achieving successful exits.
By Peter Piven, FAIA
Nuts + Bolts #12: Hiring Interns
for the Summer? What You Need to Know
Nuts + Bolts #11: CAPitalizing on
Nuts + Bolts #10: Charting a Course
from Career Bewilderment to Career Betterment
Focusing on your top clients can increase your confidence, stability, and profitability.
By Steve Whitehorn
Nuts + Bolts #8: Best Friends Don't
Make the Best Partners
Nuts + Bolts #7: Leveraging Your
Nuts + Bolts #6: Changing Habits:
The Secret to Successful Time Management
Nuts + Bolts #5: Why Mid-Sized
Design Firms Should Hire a Director of Operations
Nuts + Bolts #4: Spring into Growth
Mode: Organize Your Process to Maximize Your Potential
By Steve Whitehorn
Nuts + Bolts #3: Focus on the
Future: Keys to Steady Growth in a Slow Recovery
Nuts + Bolts #2: You Can't SELL If
You Can't TELL
Nuts + Bolts #1: Mission Possible:
Increase Your Value Without Lowering Your Fees
(click on pictures to enlarge)
© 2018 ArchNewsNow.com