VLK Persona Research Report

Background

During my first few months at the firm, I proposed the idea of creating personas to help understand the unique roles, and help me learn the organization and industry. The C-suite wanted to know where opportunities for improvement were, and I believed personas would help bridge some of the knowledge gaps across disciplines.
I provided resources from the Nielsen Norman Group that explained what personas are, along with a brief explanation of how they might be utilized. After that, my direct manager gave the go-ahead to begin.

​

Method & Approach

The three roles that the CIO believed should be prioritized were Project Architect (PA), Emerging Professional (EPPL), and Construction Administrator (CA). Following this recommendation, I planned to conduct 3-5 interviews to gather qualitative data that would inform a survey. By using the interviews to inform the survey, my goal was to reduce the amount of manual entry required from participants and provide quantitative data to complement the qualitative.

Tools
Microsoft Teams, Figma, FigJam boards, audio recording devices, Microsoft Excel, handwritten notes, transcription tools, NNG persona definitions, and learning resources.

​​

Findings

PA: 5 Interviews (4 virtual, 1 in person)
Key Insights

• 4 out of 5 PAs believed that a key aspect of their role was to help mentor and guide their teams, similar to how they received guidance from previous PAs.

• 4 out of 5 PAs had a Master’s degree

• Women were more motivated to obtain their license quickly, doing so within 3-4 years of completing their degree, versus the men who averaged between 5-10 years to obtain their license after graduating.

• Women cited the pressure of gaining respect as professionals, which the license afforded them, as motivation. They wanted to put ‘Architect’ beside their name after working so hard to get to where they were.

• Women chose architecture as their career earlier in life than men.

• Their most used tools varied depending on the project phase; however, Revit, Enscape, and Adobe Creative Cloud were the top used tools during early project phases

Pain Points

• Too many responsibilities: most were managing multiple large projects with multiple team members with varying tenure.

• Team members spread too thin: almost every team member, especially their Emerging Professionals, were assigned to multiple projects as well.

• Tool and software license restrictions slowed project work: the organization shared Adobe and Revit software licenses, which required some team members to request a license before they could access a model. The process of requesting a license and receiving it varied in terms of how long it took, meaning that the team member might not gain access until the following day or later.

• Not enough time for mentoring junior team members: while most expressed a desire to mentor their teams, their heavy workload made it difficult, or impossible for some, to properly dedicate time to doing so.

​​

​EPPL: 3-person focus group style interview (in person)
Key Insights

• All three planned to obtain their license

• Their most used tools were Revit, Enscape, and Bluebeam

• 2 out of 3 cited that VLK was their first professional role, having interned before graduating with their degrees

Pain Points

• Lack of proper onboarding or training: there were organizational standards for tools or models that they were expected to know without being told.

• Too many projects, too quickly: most were thrown into multiple projects with little to no guidance.

• Lack of communication: they weren’t informed of or invited to meetings that discussed work they were expected to do.

• Project Leads' availability: knowing their PAs were overworked prevented them from asking for advice or help because they didn’t want to bother them.

• Imposter syndrome: there were some things they felt they should already know, which also prevented them from asking for help.

​

CA: No direct interviews conducted, initial findings based on observations or conversations when assisting with other projects
Key Insights

• While leadership believed that the best CAs came from an architecture background, the most tenured, respected, and best performers came from construction backgrounds.

• The role relied heavily on relationship building between general contractors and the client.

• Those with construction backgrounds, as well as some who didn’t, believed that their knowledge of the field made it easier to form strong professional relationships with general contractors than those from the architecture side of things.

• Most used tools: email, Bluebeam, and their phone or company iPad camera for documenting site visits.

Pain Points

• Lack of proper onboarding: for the CAs with a construction background, they were sometimes expected to have architectural knowledge.

• Too many tools needed to complete simple tasks: a minimum of 3-4 tools were required to complete a simple report, making it time-consuming and tedious.

• Lack of a set/consistent approach: most CAs had workarounds for the tools that didn’t work correctly, leading to discrepancies in approach across different offices.​​​

​

Outcomes

Personas for the PA and CA were created and reviewed. The CA persona received positive feedback from CAs, and aided in highlighting the pain points CAs faced. The primary reason the CA persona was prioritized was because they were already in the process of replacing one of the tools (Newforma to ACC) CAs were required to use, which would ideally reduce the number of tools they needed to use for a site visit from 5-6 down to 2-3.

When reviewing the persona, a senior CAs stated, “[He] seems legit to me. I’d believe he’s real.” 

I also utilized the CA persona in creating a journey map exploring the process of a site visit.

As personas are living documents, further research and data collection was planned to refine them. These initial personas displayed the value of user research and opened conversation for future personas, including Principal Architect, Interior Designer, and a late career Project Architect.

Takeaways
One of the key lessons I took away was the importance of establishing shared definitions and expectations early on. While I had a clear internal vision for the use of personas, I realized the importance of aligning that understanding with my stakeholders to ensure clarity and buy-in across the team.
In reflecting on the project, I recognized that my natural strength in seeing big-picture opportunities can sometimes become a challenge when not balanced with a focused, actionable scope. I’ve also grown more attuned to the need for self-advocacy, ensuring I communicate capacity limitations and confidence in my expertise to maintain forward momentum and avoid unnecessary delays.

 

Appendix

Interview Script
The rough interview script included the following questions:

• professional background before VLK

  • was VLK their first firm?

  • what were previous firms like in comparison

  • why VLK?

• education (Until recently, a minimum of a Master’s degree was required to obtain an Architectural License.)

  • where they went to school

  • when they graduated

  • why they chose architecture

• hobbies - what they liked to do in their free time

• how their role fit within the organization

• what the role’s purpose was (in their own words)

• their typical workday

  • what tools they used most

  • who/what roles they interacted with most

  • what their biggest challenge was

• where they saw themselves professionally in five years

• if they could change/fix one thing with a snap of their fingers in that instant, what would it be

• one thing they wished people in other roles knew about their work

​

Script Variations:
The Project Architect script asked the following regarding their Architecture License:

• when they obtained it

• what motivated them to do so

• what advice they’d give to someone working towards obtaining theirs

​

The Emerging Professional script asked about their desire to obtain their Architecture License and what influenced their desire, or lack thereof.

​

The Construction Administrator script asked whether they came from architecture or another field. If another field, what got them into architecture