Intermediate report on the second Afterlife survey
Some general information about the respondents of the AAfterlife survey is presented. Second, the match between education and industries is investigated in terms of competences. Third, topics of interest (related to predefined work packages) are discussed. Themes include education pathways, drop-out pathways, mobility, employment, life satisfaction, work-life balance, job satisfaction, perceived success, and financial security.
Where indicated, differences between occupation fields (i.e. flow 1, flow 2, flow 3, flow 4), gender, and country are investigated and discussed.
2637 participated in the survey, currently residing in 65 countries.
56% of the participants are female, 43 % are male.
Participants have an average age of 36,81 years (SD = 10,98). The distribution is graphically displayed below:
65 different countries were represented in the survey. Countries of AAfterlife partners are included in the graph below.
>75% is in a relationship (in a relationship or married).
35.5% of the respondents have children. Note that a considerate number of participants is of young age (and might not have children yet).
>80% have a paid profession.
Field of occupation
72% of those with a paid profession are currently working as an architect (62% in architecture only, 10% in combination with another field).
To know whether we are facing a sampling bias (e.g. more people reported working as an architect because we reached them through boards of architects), we compared the total of responses with responses only from people that were recruited through alumni offices (which will probably reach a more balanced variety of occupation profiles). No differences were found (for details: see below), so we can conclude that there is no sampling bias in relation to occupation fields. Hence, all responses will be included in further analysis.
The field of occupation is not different for man versus women.
However, the distribution is different for countries.
Match between education and industry
To see whether there is a (mis)match between education and industry, we compared the acquired competences during architectural education with the demands of the industry. Respondents indicated on a Likert scale (1 = Not at all, 5 = extremely well) how well they acquired a set of competences, and indicated how often they used this given set in their current job (1 = Never, 5 = Always).
We clustered the competences in the following groups: Skills and knowledge, Processing information, Personal competence, Presentation and communication, Diversity Competence, Cooperation competence, and Employability (for details, see below).
In the table below, the mean scores are displayed.
Generally, respondents reported that personal competences were the competences that they acquired the best during education. They also needed them the most in their current jobs. Also, skills and knowledge, and processing information were well acquired and often used. However, when we look at diversity competence, cooperation competence and employability, we see a possible mismatch. People reported that they use very often cooperation competences, but did not acquire them very well through education. Employability (project management skills and business management skills) was acquired the worst, while this was still quite often needed in the workplace.
How well did you acquire…
How often do you use…
Mismatches (the lower the number, the bigger the mismatch)
Note that ‘taking an artistic approach’, ‘being passionate about architecture’ and ‘theory and history’ are perceived as overstressed in the AE.
Differences between fields of occupation
How well architecture graduates acquired these sets of competences, tends to depend from current occupation. However, this is only marginally significant. (p < 0.10 but >0.05). When we look at the between-subject effects (which we are technically not allowed to do when the multivariate test is not significant), we see that this might be due to a difference in ‘employability’. Employability in flow 4 > flow 3> flow 2 > flow 1.
How often architecture graduates need these sets of competences varies according to field of occupation. Significant differences were found for skills and knowledge, processing information, personal competences, and cooperation competences.
It is not surprising that skills and knowledge that are inherent to architecture are used more often by people who are working in architecture, or are combining architecture with another field. Processing information is used often in architecture, architecture + other field, but also in related sectors. It is less relevant for the unrelated sectors. Personal competences are important in all sectors, but especially in the related sectors. Cooperation competences are most frequently used by people who are combining architecture with another field.
How well did you acquire…
How often do you use…
Below, the mismatches are presented.
Differences between gender
How often architecture graduates need these sets of competences varies according to gender. Interestingly, women reported some competences to be more frequently needed. Whether this is an actual difference, or this is a perceived difference is not clear from the data, but can be an interesting topic to explore in further research. Significant differences were found for personal competences, diversity competences, and cooperation competences.
Differences between financial security
How often architecture graduates need these sets of competences varies according to their income. The higher the income, the more they reported that given competences were needed. In the analyses, people who did not want to reveal their income, were selected out. The effect of income persisted when gender was added to the model. (However, women tend to earn less, see Financial security, while they still reported to need the frequencies more often, see Differences between gender.). Significant differences were found for all competences, except for skills and knowledge.
Interestingly, this effect was not found when we inspected ‘perceived financial security’ (see topic: Financial security).
Participants were asked about how often they dealt with several activities in their professional lives.. Professional activities were measured on a Likert scale from 1 (= never) to 5 (= always) with the item “How often do you have to deal with the following aspects in your professional life or professional activities?” Descriptives (mean scores and standard deviations) for each activity are given below.