12 Steps to Fellowship: Episode #2

Welcome, again, to the Twelve Steps to American Institute of Architects Fellowship podcast. Today, Michael and I are talking through the next phases of Michael's Twelve Steps to AIA Fellowship diagram, which is in our book Architect + Action = Result.

Michael, you and I have two very different experiences related to the AIA Fellowship process. I only work by referrals, so someone who is already an “F” has typically vetted that person and their work as Fellows-worthy. My role then becomes to help uncover and articulate the basis for their case. I also ensure that all the material gathered supports that case, which is sometimes more of a challenge than one might imagine. And, as you might also imagine, I do a lot of coaching on the process because people get a little lost along the way. I'd love to hear about the process from you as a Fellow and former chair of an AIA State Chapter Fellows Committee of what it's like to get a potential nominee to square one in the AIA Fellowship process. 

MICHAEL: You stated the difference in our two worlds well because I've only operated in the other two areas of involvement. The ones you work with are committed, have jumped into the pool fully, and are prepared to swim the distance with your expert help. 

In my experience, Id categorize as mainly the two kinds of nominees. 

The first being people for whom Fellowship was not top of mind. Aspirational, maybe. Or a distant awareness and someday being interested in exploring what Fellowship is all about, but they don’t have a timeline. For example, the Georgia AIA group notified me as a person of interest. I said I might consider it, and I did.

The first stage, which I branded it as Awareness, was, what is Fellowship all about? What privileges and responsibilities does it bring with it? Number one. Number two moves from the AWARENESS of the process to the pursuit itself. And then, three is self-awareness. Do I feel I have the stuff? Am I committed and motivated enough to pursue that? We dealt with many people who are in that category. They’d been tapped on the shoulder, didn't know what this world or this game was about. And we helped get them aware of all those issues I just shared and get them over that first hurdle. 

The second type of nominee was someone who’d been nominated and had some knowledge of Fellowship and the process but were somewhere in the middle. They still needed our help and support as you’ve provided over the years, but they just weren't all in yet. So that's a middle group. 

A rare third type we’d get, people who are maybe like all the ones you deal with, they know what Fellowship is. A strong sponsor has grabbed them by the elbows and ushered them into the room. They're committed. They believe they've got the stuff, they're ready to go, and they need the help of you or reading something like the book that we've put together.

So, those are the three types. Most of our work was in the first two, the uninformed, uninitiated, unaware. 

I wonder if you typically had a vision for a potential nominee’s Object before approaching them about submitting, or is that something that evolved as you or the committee talk about a nominee? 

MICHAEL: There's probably always some reason our committee would have put somebody on the watch list. And it could just be a generic sense of reputation or quality of their work, or they've been around a long time and somehow deemed to be in the upper crust of those that have contributed or made a difference. There's always something that gets our attention. But in no case did we ever tap somebody on the shoulder and say, we think you're a candidate, and here's your Object. We always presented it as a very general opportunity threshold of respect and accommodation, and we would always frame it to them: Here’s what this entails. Here are the avenues to pursue. What do you think? 

So, it would always emanate from them, from who they are. And of course, never did we shape anybody or fabricate a case. Who they were and what they’d done. It had to be real. It had to be driven by them. But there is always the steering. Let's say someone had a stellar reputation in architectural design. Won more design awards—you could wallpaper your house with them. However, they were strong in educational facilities. That person has at least a couple of options they could consider for their Object. And maybe more. Maybe they were someone who revolutionized practice with new processes and procedures, or were a technological leader, or simultaneously led the AIA or other organizations. So, we never dictated or pushed. We’d make suggestions and help evaluate the pros and cons. 

I think that’s important because I feel Fellowship—the entire process—has so much integrity to it. 

MICHAEL: And the fact that it's blind. The reference letters are blind. It’s reviewed by a seven-person jury with national geographic representation. This is not something entered lightly or with any false realities. 

You can’t fake your way to this award. Not that you can others, but this one especially requires a lot of evidence. Everyone who supports a nominee expects to see that evidence from the Fellows committee to a sponsor, the nominator and through to the jury itself. So an important aspect is that nothing is fabricated or made up. These are real advancements that individuals have made in the profession that exceed the standards of practice. And I’ve had people drop out of the process who had gotten my name.

When I explained what was involved, they said, “Oh, no, that's too much work. I thought they just gave me the award. I just put together a portfolio, and it's like…”

I’d say, “No, it doesn't quite work that way.”

So I've had very successful people turn the whole thing down, even after being nominated, because the work was not worth it to them; they didn’t feel a need for “F-ness”. They also didn't want to put the effort into explaining their work in the capacity and how you must for a jury.

MICHAEL: That's part of AWARENESS, the awareness of how much work it entails and how many hours and what the time is and the steps and all the machinations you have to go through to get through all those checks and balances and weeding out. The things that have built in the process's integrity. So, yeah, it's interesting to hear, but not surprising. 

In your diagram, you list across all the stages, aside from key activities and the products that each activity has, you list RESOURCES. A nominee’s sources are AIA resources, whether the national AIA online resources or a local chapter, their peers, other Fellows, colleagues who know about the process or can speak objectively about the things they’ve done. 

MICHAEL: It takes a village. And that is just so invaluable as you're again, raising that awareness, getting the perspectives of others, and shifting from that AWARENESS phase—all the aspects of AWARENESS—into the decision making or DELIBERATION phase.  

And I will note for our listeners that your Twelve Steps diagram begins in December, though many Fellows committees are just getting in touch with people. But it’s never too early to begin.

Your next phase is of the Twelve Steps diagram is DELIBERATION. I'm sometimes part of these discussions, but I often come in as an outsider, someone who doesn't know the nominee and their practice or their work. I wonder if you have any thoughts about the DELIBERATION phase and who might be involved and who might be a resource or where you get input. 

MICHAEL: The diagram resource set is similar. This phase, which we call DELIBERATION, comes after you’re aware of or made yourself aware of the responsibilities, the duties, the process and your assessment of where you are. You've collected data, let's say in the AWARENESS phase. And now in the DELIBERATION phase, it's time to process that deliberation and decide: Do you want to be a Fellow? Can you commit to the time and energy required to submit? Do you believe you stack up against your peers? Because if the answer to any of those is, “no,” then you should save yourself and everybody else a lot of trouble. It reminds me of when you're on the Exit row on an airplane. If you can't give a verbal “yes” to all these things, you need to move. And such is the case with this. If you've collected all the information about Fellowship; you've looked at what others have, and you can't convince yourself, stop. Because you have to do that first. Commit to the time, the effort, the scheduling, the development of a strategy that presents your case in the best way. 

I broke DELIBERATION out as a phase is because people have to say, “I've sat in the first committee meeting, and I've checked the AIA's website. I’ve been through the AWARENESS phase. I just need some time to think about this. So, thank you for your help. I'm going to go back to the office and think about this for a year or more.” This phase can take weeks, months, a year or more, for some people. Or maybe their DELIBERATION says, “I'm not ready yet. I'm too young. I haven't formulated my point of view enough.”

So, DELIBERATION is a thing in this process, and it takes time. It is significant because we don't want anybody going at this half-baked. 

One part of the diagram that's important to talk about is the nomination process. Submitting for Fellowship requires a formal nomination. There are a few different ways to do that. The best way is to be nominated by your state or your local chapter. But a candidate can also get five Fellows to sign a document or TEN AIA members to sign a nomination. All of this is available on the AIA Honors & Award webpage dedicated to Fellowship. But you need a nomination. 

MICHAEL: Back to our support committee, if somebody came to us and said they're interested or a friend suggested they come, we’d support them. We might speak some truth. But we’d never tell them, “Don't bother, pal.” The process was always supportive. We might speak the truth and say, honestly, you've got a challenging case here, but if you want to go for it, that's your prerogative. Though, in the end, all our candidates had nominations by the chapter President. 

Most people I work with have that as well. I mentioned before that there are people who’ve approached their state committees, who turned them down. And, in my mind, for all the wrong reasons. A lot of that is a thing of the past. But we could have some equity discussions about the older nomination process. Having done this for 15 years, I've unfortunately heard some stories, but I think we are past that in states that have a supportive network, whether a formal committee or a bunch of Fellows who feel like an individual deserves Fellowship, that kicks the ball off. And those are the people who help establish a nomination. 

Sometimes I come to a Fellows candidate as an outsider and am unaware, like you might be, of an individual's work. You might have discussions with other people about a nominee’s career or service if you haven't observed it yourself. I always find that it's interesting to bring different perspectives on. Before I came to architecture, I was in technical R&D, and we always showed ideas to people unassociated with a particular product or technology to get that outside perspective. Sometimes, for Fellowship, I bring in a copy editor, a graphic designer. It's good to have a fresh set of eyes, but they have a limited understanding of the individual or their case. The candidate and I always get interesting insight from these people. I wonder if you've had any experience with outsiders taking part in the process and what they might bring. 

MICHAEL: I will flat out admit we welcomed multiple perspectives, but they were always insiders—Fellows and AIA architects. I will plead guilty. As a profession, we are one of the most closed cultured groups I've ever seen. I don't have much perspective on bringing in outsiders, because I've been inside that box in one form or another my entire career. But other businesses and industries are more client or customer focused and have long valued getting different perspectives. 

I admit I’m a late bloomer in this regard, whether it be for project work, for a business development pursuit, or whatever. We bring in somebody who was not a project mainstream person, an IT person, or somebody from business development who knew nothing, and it was always invaluable. They'd catch us using too much jargon or missing the forest for the trees. So multiple perspectives, yes. But I throw our entire clan of colleagues under the huge bus because we don't look outside often enough. 

Well, I appreciate your honesty. So, the last thing. Maybe as someone closes out the idea of DELIBERATION, before they show up on my theoretical doorstep, because mostly I never meet people until a conference or at an Investiture. I'm all about them getting organized. I'm strict about formatting a CV, or timeline, of their work and achievements. We map that out in the book; you’ve mapped it in this diagram. And there are great resources available from the AIA Honors & Award web pages. But I'm sure our listeners would also love to hear thoughts you have on organization in these early phases. You had to do this, right? Are you an organized person? So, this wasn't a problem, or did you have to dig and sort and reorder and relabel things to fit the very defined format of a Fellow submission? 

MICHAEL: It’s going to be interesting to reflect when we get done with this series, on the number of true confessions or dirty laundry that comes out. 

I probably started on the left side of the spectrum, but I must have some DNA or through the school of hard knocks, I’ve gradually morphed into being what most would see as an organized person, particularly my 20 years working in a national construction management firm. So, yes, even for Fellowship, I had budgets, hours estimate, schedules. 

The end date is clear. Anybody who passed Project Management 101 should be able to work backwards. We’ve laid the steps out on a single diagram. It's the reason we wrote a book about it. Or if someone is a seasoned AIA architect applying to be Fellows, they ought to be able to look at the end date, see the goal and work backward. However, it is almost laughable how many people—I’d say most people—come to this effort without a plan, without a schedule, without a true understanding of where they're going and the timeline.

I shared last time that I talked to somebody who called three weeks before the deadline and said, “Hey, I think I might do this.” 

“No,” I said, “I don't think you have enough time. Let me explain the steps.”

Others understand it takes time but are just incapable of setting an interim milestone. You’d do a schedule if you were building a house, if you were designing a project, if you were running a business. This is a major project. You should have a schedule. And that schedule should have time built in at the end for coordination, polishing, refinement, following up on all the letters. 

I wanted the lion's share of the thing done before the midpoint. So, I just brought the submission in for a smooth landing, not panicking and grabbing major chunks of content. And that's the way I’d recommend anybody do it. 

I've been very fortunate to have people who start right after the previous Fellows season closes in October. And I've had people who start even 18 months in advance because they’re still trying to figure out the AWARENESS and DELIBERATION phases. The more time you give yourself, the better. 

Well, I appreciate your time today, Michael, again, and we'll talk again soon about the ANALYSIS of what folks gather and the next steps that come with that. 

MICHAEL: Great. Enjoyed being with you again, too, and look forward to it. Okay, bye. 

Architect + Action = Result presents one of the best architecture books on the AIA award of Fellowship. Fellowship requires architects have AIA certification as members for ten cumulative years.