TZL 1299

existing shareholders to go the ESOP route. The earned interest rate on their shares was a big incentive to go forward with the ESOP. In the case of a 100 percent ESOP, the ES- OP’s purchase of shares is done with pre-tax dollars. TZL: What actions do you take to address a geographic office or specific discipline in the event of non-performance? PS: JCJ has intentionally operated as a sin- gle profit center and uses the individual proj- ect as the common denominator for project- related performance (financial and other) evaluation. We have a highly evolved system of work share among our nine offices and don’t include corporate overhead assign- ments/costs to our offices. If we see nega- tive trends in market share and/or profit- ability for a particular office and/or market sector, we initiate discussions with leader- ship and take a deeper dive on the specifics of underperformance, including what fac- tors may be causing a lack of results: Are the indicators isolated or systemic? Are these results part of larger patterns in our indus- try or our target markets? We try to strike a balance between a desire to improve results with analysis of underlying causes. Once we have further information we take action ac- cordingly. By having a full range of metrics – operational/performance goal for each of- fice that includes its potential market and our expected market share, cost of opera- tions, project profitability, client relation- ships, and opportunities for future growth – we get a holistic picture of the office’s via- bility. If negative performance on the above occurs in consecutive years, closure of that office is analyzed and an appropriate action is developed. TZL: When did you have the most fun run- ning your firm, and what were the hall- marks of that time in your professional life? PS: During most of my 38-year career, I’ve been the perpetual “growth guy.” It’s in my DNA. This has been tempered some- what recently with more focus on efficien- cies and profitability. I’ve had two “most fun” times in leading the firm. The first was when we engaged in a growth mode from 1995-2008 and went from a region- al single office firm with annual revenue of $10 million to a three-office firm generating $54 million in revenue. Much of this growth was on my shoulders (when I was 39 to 52 years old) along with a few others. We had annual growth ranging from 15 to 30 per- cent. While this growth was significant, the depth of firm leadership was relatively thin. Leadership was more reminiscent of the

single office parochial firm, $10 million rev- enue firm then of a fast-growth multi-office national practice. This would not have been sustainable in the long run. The second “most fun” time is where we are today. We’ve rebounded from the recession and are on a “medium-plus” growth trajec- tory. Over the past five years, we’ve signifi- cantly built our leadership team both from within and with strategic hires. We now have the required multi-generational bench depth to continue our future growth. It’s very gratifying to see our current leadership step forward and embrace our future. TZL: Describe the challenges you encoun- tered in building your management team over the lifetime of your leadership? Have you ever terminated or demoted long- time leaders as the firm grew? How did you handle it? PS: We’re a very culture-based enter- prise. I’ve learned along the way that “cul- ture trumps strategy.” We were able to grow largely on strategy from 1995-2008, but this time also highlighted that our cul- ture had to change in order to sustain this type of growth and the firm’s success. With such rapid growth, geographical diversifica- tion, and creation of new markets, it was in- evitable that situations of non-alignment would arise. A bit of entitlement also crept into some of our shareholders, especially after some years where we generated 30 to 40 percent profits on NSR. We took a very fair, but firm approach to this situation. The combination of going from a closely held S-corp with 10 to 14 owners to a 100 percent ESOP was a significant change resulting in a holistic “repositioning” of the firm. Some of the leadership moved and/or were moved on for various reasons. Some of these for- mer shareholders still have loans with the ESOP. Seven years into the ESOP, the firm has met its obligations to all former share- holders who are no longer with the firm. TZL: How do you promote young and new leaders as the firm grows? PS: We have a very clear and defined career “lattice of development” that is published for all employees’ consideration. We have an annual promotion/nomination process for the firm-wide designations of associ- ate, senior associate, and principal designa- tions. We actually just completed this effort and announced this year’s promotions. This effort coincides with our annual employee performance evaluation which allows such decisions to be tied to the most current per- formance evaluation. See THE GROWTH GUY, page 8

YEAR FOUNDED: 1936 HEADQUARTERS: Hartford, CT OFFICE LOCATIONS: 9 NO. OF EMPLOYEES: 133 AREAS OF EXPERTISE:

❚ ❚ Adaptive reuse ❚ ❚ Arts and culture

❚ ❚ Community, non-profit ❚ ❚ Corporate, commercial ❚ ❚ Civic ❚ ❚ Entertainment ❚ ❚ Higher education ❚ ❚ Historic preservation ❚ ❚ Hospitality ❚ ❚ Independent K-12 ❚ ❚ Mixed use ❚ ❚ Public K-12 ❚ ❚ Public safety and justice SERVICES: ❚ ❚ Pre-design feasibility and planning ❚ ❚ Architecture ❚ ❚ Interior design ❚ ❚ Project management ❚ ❚ Construction documents ❚ ❚ Construction administration ❚ ❚ Regulatory approvals ❚ ❚ Sustainable design ❚ ❚ WELL design ❚ ❚ Graphic design/ environmental branding MISSION: To provide design solutions that enhance the built environment, enrich people’s lives and help organizations to succeed.

une 3, 2019, ISSUE 1299

Made with FlippingBook Annual report