Why embrace a new career in Machine Learning

Have you ever felt stuck in a career that didn't quite fit?

That's exactly how I felt after studying architectural engineering for eight years and spending the following five at some of the world's top architecture firms.

While I am aware that moving between two specialized professions like Architecture and Data Science is a luxury problem and a result of privilege, this story seems to spark interest sometimes.

I did not have the typical background to compete in a tech market, and I never thought I was particularly gifted in math or sciences so I would have to work extra hard to catch up to my peers. On top of this, I still needed to work as an architect during the switch (London is too expensive to just stop working and study full-time).

To cut it short, the transition was tough. So why switch things up?

Depending on who's asking, I have different answers to this question.
All have a truth to them.

1. Architects are evil

This is my go-to answer when I want to keep it lighthearted and brief.
Ranting against the architects does not show the full picture though.

It is true that the work culture in architecture is totally messed up, and you must be prepared to think of your job as a "mission" in order to handle the low salary, the lack of rewards, and the little work-life balance.
I know firsthand what is like to work over 100 hours in a single week like I did during my time in Beijing.
This even became a joke with my partner and my friends: whenever I see inefficiency or whim, then the "you architect" insult clicks.

At the same time, though, I am convinced that I had my own part to play in my dissatisfaction with architecture, and it took reflection and self-awareness to come to that realization.

2. Money?

This is a bit on the venal side, but I think higher pay is a respectable driver for motivation to keep growing in a field.
In most cases, architecture just falls short in that regard.

However, better pay still does not explain my decision: while a higher salary is a great incentive, I believe it is not the main ingredient for a fulfilling professional life.

Data Science has given me technical challenges and opportunities to learn and grow that I didn't find in design. And as it turns out, this is a field where gaining technical skills can increase earning potential and financial sustainability.

This made a lot of difference, and I'll be delving deeper into it in my upcoming answers.

3. Wrong expectations

As a designer, I expected to be constantly engaged in creative and impactful problem-solving; however, I found that the jobs I had in architecture and construction lacked this aspect.

There was a "cultural barrier" that made it difficult for me to connect with the values of the industry. I couldn't care less about "the vision", "the beautiful view" or the "crisp images". For me, the interesting part has always been the process itself: I need to enjoy the art and craft of what I am doing.

That's why I thought it was a good idea to focus on the digital side of the workflow, and to specialize in computational and parametric design mastering specific software (if you work in architecture you probably heard of Rhino and Grasshopper).

Scripting an energy-efficient shape rationalization or a data visualization tool always made me feel way more creative than sketching out a building for the sake of selling "nice images".
However, I quickly learned that these types of contributions were rarely valued by the business and often made me the "weirdo" in the team.

Despite this, I do not regret attempting to join design and coding, as I moved the first steps toward programming while my career in architecture unfolded.

4. Life-long learning

I believe in multipotentiality and life-long learning, and a job in Data Science forces you to stay up-to-date with cutting-edge technologies and research.
This is another aspect that I didn't find in architecture.

Since I lack a proper background in computer science, math, or statistics, I often feel the less smart in the room and I push hard to stay on track and build a valuable skillset.

This directly relates to the final point.

5 . There's no "true calling"

My favorite answer to the career switch question: the "follow your passion" advice put my job expectations completely off. I must express gratitude to Cal Newport, as his book So good they can't ignore you helped me gain clarity on this aspect.

As a teenager, you are supposed to have an answer to the question "what do you want to be when you grow up?". And here's the catch: in Italy (and I am sure many other places are similar in this respect), you don't just "do" a job, you "ARE" your job. Your profession defines you, and you are supposed to know your true calling from the early stages and pursue it throughout your life.

I want to challenge this view now: what makes a job "right for you" is not the so-called passion but rather the degree of control you have over it.
Control is a direct consequence of the number of hours spent acquiring valuable skills, so a passion for each task you are doing is a component. It is not the main ingredient that makes a career great for you though.

Believing in a true calling forces people to define their path a priori based on others' experience, with the risk of being stuck in it later in life.
I rather think that "discover your passion" is sensible advice, and it implies exploration and desire to build a career capital (I am again stealing a concept from Cal Newport).

I rarely felt as if I was learning valuable skills, enjoying my tasks, or progressing toward controlling my job as an architect.
Now, I am enjoying the journey toward control.

Conclusions

Switching career does not mean "doing the right job" for me: I rather aim to "do the job right" in order to gain valuable skills and bend my career to my needs.
I am still far from fully achieving this point, but I feel on track now.

If you're considering a similar career change, if your story is similar to mine, or if you just enjoyed this post, I would love a comment from you!