Professional Practice
still has to run a business. The fairness of that business largely has to do with how that individual decides to run their business and generates a risk of the success of their work. It is not unfair or unethical to design based on cost of construction and getting a percentage of that work and thus drive up the fee of the architects work, however, that business is unlikely to succeed in the long run if it does not maintain a healthy environment with the clients and potential referred future clients. This also applies to how the individual pushes forward with their designs; if they facilitate the client more or if they push forward with their own work. Neither of those are inherently unethical practices, but not necessarily good business sense. On the subject of hiring however, the lines of fairness in who is interviewed or whose resume is given more attention is blurred from just a purely academic debate standpoint. One could argue that every resume and individual should be looked at and assessed on the same merit with each individual having an equal opportunity to be hired for the intended position. However, that is extremely difficult, time consuming and not cost effective for the business to go through each resume with the same focus. It is slightly disappointing that this practice of “getting your foot in the door” is so widely accepted, but on the other hand, it makes sense. Creating a network of connections in order to facilitate the ease of getting a job and establishing ones values and making those know to a potential employer is extremely helpful, but that also means that “equal opportunity” is not necessarily 100% equal. The real situation and influences on the matter are not purely black and white, as academics would lead one to believe, but as with the rest of life lay somewhere in the realm of varying shades of grey.
page 40 of 114