is an additional incentive for the prime firm to do so (i.e. the DBE offers local presence, specific project experience, unique service offering, etc.). Beyond the program’s initial intentions, are there any long-term benefits to being a DBE? Any unforeseen disadvantages? Advantages: Expectations are low, therefore, when one is able to perform and deliver, then one can enjoy the benefits of having a good reputation and being sought out to participate and/or be a team member. Disadvantages: I’m not sure that it allows for a true level playing field. As a prime, when a DBE firm is finally able to get a foot in the door, it is required to meet the same participation goals as a majority firm. Depending on the project type, size, etc., the firm may have to give away a portion of the work to a competing firm because the participation goals may not be met through services of other consultants. Therefore, it sometimes hinders and limits the opportunities for the DBEs as well, and may even put them at greater financial risk. There is also a perception that “set-asides” go to small, less qualified firms that benefit from the financial gain without having the skill to do the work. Women and minorities are significantly under-represented among architects. Is achieving racial and gender parity essential to long-term sustainability of the architectural profession? If so, is the favoring of DBEs for tax-funded projects critical to this goal? Would you favor other solutions?
favoring of DBEs—I want this fact to be made very clear. From my own experience, we must compete even after we have won or earned the commission, and even then, if the powers that be so decide, you may find yourself thrown out of the game even before the kickoff. Other possible options would be to provide incentives to firms (i.e. additional points on scoring of submittals) for contractual commitments to mentor young interns and to provide them with a clear professional path. Another incentive could be to provide inhouse development programs for management/leadership roles across the board with specific success goal requirements. Your career testifies to your commitment of designing projects on behalf of the underprivileged. Is it more important to achieve social equity within our own professional ranks or for the public to whom our designs are accountable? As architects, we can reach so many more people and make a difference in the quality of their lives when we are committed to creating thoughtful and beautiful environments for those who are less fortunate. Dignity, inspiration, and hope change lives. In my opinion achieving social equity within our ranks is secondary, though an important second. Whether we acknowledge it or not, architects serve as role models for other professionals. We should embrace this role and expand our influence. Achieving equity will benefit our profession, allowing architects with various backgrounds and/or cultural experiences to enrich and infuse architecture authentically. Julien Meyrat, AIA is a senior designer at Gensler
The profession faces many challenges. I believe that racial and gender equality can only be accomplished through access to quality education programs and early mentoring. There is no
Achieving equity will benefit our profession, allowing architects with various backgrounds and/or cultural experiences to enrich and infuse architecture authentically.
Photo illustration: Frances Yllana
COLUMNS // aiadallas.org
57