好色先生TV

As someone who set up his own practice in his twenties with no business experience whatsoever, weathered the nineties recession and sailed across the Atlantic, you might have thought that John Assael was no stranger to rough waters. But when, in 2008, he was faced with making 17 staff redundant in one day, the mild-mannered architect was distraught. 鈥淭hey cried; I cried,鈥� he recalls. 鈥淚t was absolutely awful.鈥�

The decision to take so deep a cut so early in what turned out to be a five-year recession may seem surprising, particularly given Assael鈥檚 clear affection for his then 75-strong workforce. But Assael believed it was necessary for his practice鈥檚 survival - and he made this absolutely clear to those who stayed. 鈥淚 said: 鈥楪uys, we鈥檙e in a lifeboat, we鈥檙e in a hurricane. And our little practice - the survivors - are in this boat, but some people had to get out to let us survive.鈥欌�� He pauses. 鈥淚 wanted all the staff left to respect those colleagues who we had to make redundant enormously, as without them getting out, we would all go.鈥�

Six years on, the fortunes of Assael鈥檚 eponymous practice - like many in the sector - have improved remarkably. The firm has just reported its strongest financial year on record and has grown back to its former size, even rehiring some of those made redundant. To Assael, the fact these people were willing to return is evidence that not just his approach to business, but also to staff welfare, works: 鈥淲e were clear it was our fault, not theirs, and we鈥檝e got them back.鈥�

So what sets the practice - which was judged top of 好色先生TV鈥檚 Good Employer Guide in October - apart from others when it comes to staff loyalty? And how is Assael capitalising on this as he prepares his practice for further growth?

The beginnings

Meeting Assael in his practice鈥檚 studio - an open-plan, cavernous structure near Wandsworth in south London - it is immediately clear that he does not fit the stereotype of the slightly chaotic architectural practice owner. The business side of his firm is run with forensic precision; at several points, Assael breaks off our discussion to fetch complex charts modelling everything from historical staffing patterns to projected fee levels for different teams.

鈥淲e track everything,鈥� he says. 鈥淲e鈥檙e not like some of our colleagues, who are a bit 鈥︹�� - he breaks off, searching for a polite term - 鈥溾��floppy in the management stakes.鈥�

This business-like approach, however, was alien to Assael when he first set up his firm. After studying for two postgraduate courses on top of his architectural degree, Assael worked for short periods at several London practices, before being approached by a friend who wanted to set up an architectural office in Bahrain. His friend needed to establish a UK base to meet legal requirements.

As a result, aged 28, Assael founded his practice. He freely admits he knew nothing about business: 鈥淚 was useless.鈥� He made just two non-negotiable decisions early on: that the practice would not carry out domestic work, and that he would always operate from an office rather than home.

He admits he 鈥渕ade lots of mistakes,鈥� and that 鈥渙ccasionally the practice would run out of work鈥�, but 35 years on and Assael Architecture, as it is now, is testament to his dedication. Assael says his eventual business success is largely due to the influence of his identical twin brother - a City lawyer. 鈥淗e鈥檚 operated all his time in a business-like environment. He gave me tons of advice.鈥�

This influence is still heavily apparent in the way that Assael runs his firm. 鈥淲e know we do things here which some architects think are very corporate, like inductions and so on, but we think that鈥檚 just normal. Occasionally I have said to partners in this firm, 鈥渨e want to be more like lawyers. Why can鈥檛 we charge more fees, pay ourselves more? What about exit interviews?鈥�

Interlinked goals

This business-like approach has contributed to a strong focus on Assael Architecture鈥檚 financial health, which has seen it emerge from the recession with no bank debt and impressive financial growth. In 2013/14, the practice鈥檚 turnover was 拢6.3m, up from 拢4.4m the previous year, with a 105% growth in profit from 拢435,000 to 拢890,500. This is a dramatic leap from the darker days of 2010/11, when the business contracted to a 拢2.5m turnover with a profit of just 拢10,000.

But for Assael, financial success is only one of three interlinked goals for the practice. 鈥淥ne is to get design awards; two, to be recognised as a great employer, and three, to be financially sound.鈥� He says it is 鈥渙ften difficult鈥� for a firm to do all three. 鈥淪ometimes if you鈥檙e trying to be financially sound, you don鈥檛 care about the awards, you just need the work - or you end up employing people cheaply or on unpaid internships.鈥�

At the moment, however, Assael Architecture is performing on all fronts - winning a Sunday Times housing design award on top of its financial success and good employer recognition. 鈥淲e鈥檝e managed, just at the moment, to get all three aligned, and that benefits everybody here. We鈥檙e more stable, so there are no redundancies, and we can pay overtime and bonuses. If we reward staff more, we get better staff, so we鈥檙e more likely to get design awards. It鈥檚 self-fulfilling.鈥�

In fact, overtime and bonuses are just two of many forms of recognition Assael offers staff. An eye-catching package of investments includes company-funded architectural city breaks for everyone in the practice, free meals for those working late, and sector-leading maternity and paternity benefits. John Assael consults all staff in the practice on which benefits to offer, suggesting ideas in a weekly presentation and asking for emailed feedback. 鈥淭here鈥檚 no point having benefits for staff if they don鈥檛 like them,鈥� he says bluntly.

I don鈥檛 understand why most companies, who say 鈥榦ur biggest asset is our staff鈥� - particularly firms who trade off brain power rather than making something - don鈥檛 have a programme that genuinely cares for them

He also believes it is better to trust staff to make the right decisions about when to take advantage of benefits and spend money than to police them too thoroughly. 鈥淚f you put too many mechanisms in, checks on staff and sign offs and all the rest, the cost of doing it doesn鈥檛 pay for itself. My view is that once or twice you might be taken advantage of, but it鈥檚 better to trust people.鈥�

He adds that in his experience, when they know they are trusted, most staff try to 鈥渉elp to make the business more stable, rather than taking out of it what they can鈥�. He gives the example of an offer he made to fund taxis home for all staff working past 9pm: the staff came back and said it was too extravagant. 鈥淏ut if it鈥檚 9.30 and it鈥檚 a young woman and she wants to - it鈥檚 fine. They don鈥檛 need to ask, just do it.鈥�

This is one respect in which Assael Architecture feels different to many large corporate entities, with their myriad sign-off systems and a sense that only senior staff are trusted with spending. But in Assael鈥檚 view, not only is it perfectly possible for larger firms to adopt this approach, their bottom line would benefit if they did.

鈥淵ou have to break down the control from big organisations, to departments, to teams. Otherwise you鈥檙e not going to succeed. Even here, we operate in teams - each team leader has a budget to go out and celebrate, for example.鈥� Crucially, he says, these teams can鈥檛 be too big. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a bit like the army. You don鈥檛 fight for your country, you don鈥檛 even fight for your regiment. You fight for your platoon. That鈥檚 12 people - it鈥檚 a magic figure, because above that loyalties start to get compromised.鈥�

Assael seems genuinely at a loss as to why more firms don鈥檛 offer a similar level of trust and reward to their staff. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 understand why most companies, who say 鈥榦ur biggest asset is our staff鈥� - particularly firms who trade off brain power rather than making something - don鈥檛 have a programme that genuinely cares for them. Because when you lose staff, you lose a little bit of an organisation鈥檚 brain - retained memory, skills and relationships. Every time you lose somebody there鈥檚 a little bit of damage.鈥�

He believes that poor staff retention is the biggest barrier to success not just in individual firms, but across the construction industry as a whole. 鈥淲e have great people who leave in recessions and don鈥檛 come back. They鈥檝e gone somewhere else. Why would they want to stand around in the rain, on a site with a poor health and safety record, and argue about bonuses, when they can go and sell suits in Harvey Nichols? It鈥檚 a big problem.鈥�

Assael says that the number of tradespeople that have left construction this recession is now actually affecting the design of buildings, saying some clients are specifying that his practice does not use bricks in designs because of the shortage of supplies and labour. 鈥淥ur designs have been modified due to skills available and products out there, which I鈥檝e not been aware of in the past.鈥�

Recruitment

Finding the right staff is now a pressing issue for Assael. He wants to grow his practice from its current level of 75 staff to 100 by the end of next year, to service a turnover which he projects will grow to 拢7m in 2014/15 and 拢8m in 2015/16. The practice鈥檚 work is dominated by urban, housing-led regeneration work - largely in London - which offers the benefit both of being a sector at the heart of recovery and one with long order books, which are conducive to forming relatively stable plans for growth. The company, which tends to work directly for clients, including Grainger, Barratt and Lend Lease, is also taking a keen interest in the private rented sector (PRS), a market Assael believes has the potential to be 鈥渆normous鈥�.

When it comes to recruiting architects, Assael identifies diversity as a major problem. He says that although Assael Architecture does not discriminate positively or negatively on the basis of gender, he is aware of 鈥渓ots of examples鈥� where women in the profession are getting paid less than men, adding: 鈥淚 wish more people would report those organisations which don鈥檛 comply with the spirit and the letter of the law.鈥� 

But his biggest overarching concern is that the profession is becoming increasingly middle class. 鈥淪ome really talented architects aren鈥檛 going to make it as a result,鈥� he says. He points to the prevalence of unpaid internships in the sector, which favour those with wealthier backgrounds, as a major cause. 鈥淲e get around 50 letters a day from students and young qualified architects who want to come and work for us, and quite a lot start the letter 鈥業 am prepared to work for nothing鈥�. Those go straight in the bin.鈥�

Apart from those doing a single week鈥檚 work  experience, Assael pays even people who have not yet started university a minimum of 拢10 an hour. The practice also offers loans for people who need a deposit for accommodation, or who want to do further study. But he says it is 鈥渇rustrating鈥� that many competitors take on people for 鈥渟ix months to a year鈥� on unpaid internships. 鈥淲e鈥檙e going to become like barristers in the old days, where you could only get into the profession if you had private means.鈥�

More sinisterly, he says he is also aware of chartered firms breaking RIBA rules to sign log books for Part 3 students despite not paying them the minimum wage - a RIBA requirement. 鈥淭he RIBA should get hold of these people and expose them,鈥� he says. 鈥淚 know students that have worked for these firms, and they will not report them because they are worried about the damage it will do to their own reputation. I鈥檝e even offered to pay legal fees for students to do this, but they are afraid to speak out.鈥�

It is short cuts to resourcing like these that Assael, keen though he is for the practice to grow, refuses to take. 鈥淲e鈥檙e not growing as fast as some architects,鈥� he says, 鈥渂ut we don鈥檛 want to. It has to be modest. It鈥檚 not doubling in size in a year, because how can you do that and still have this culture?鈥�