Is Crowdsourcing Evil? The Design Community Weighs In
blog.wired.com
blog.wired.com
First, designers seem to like to point out that you wouldn't hire an accountant just because he had QuickBooks, or an engineer because he had a CAD program. Therefore, why would you hire an amateur designer just because they had Illustrator? I can answer that question! Because if you hire bad accountant you get audited. If you hire a bad engineer you get sued. If you hire a bad design firm, most of your most important clients will not be able to tell their work apart from Wolff Olins.
Second, designers like to point out how graphic design is so much more than illustration, involving as it does detailed market surveys and studies of what will work for your business. I have two responses to that. Response one: I have never been wowed by a designer's ability to calibrate their work to any of my businesses, and I've worked with plenty of designers who didn't need to bill me $5000 to find out what style would fit us. Response two: if I pay $5000 to have you do a detailed, careful study, I shouldn't have to pay it again on every subsequent project that isn't rebranding my company.
I think one of the real issues here is that there are two "kinds" of graphic design projects: full-service and a la carte. A la carte work is cheap. Full-service work is very expensive. Companies that don't have $50MM marketing budgets probably get 95% of the value of graphic design out of an a la carte project. Most of us just need a design that doesn't mix PMN Caecilia with Futura. But a lot of not-amazing full-service consultancies will go out of business if they're stuck charging at the 80%-solution rate.
Which brings me to my next point. Which is mercifully short. It is that the best designers will charge whatever they want, and structure their work however they want, regardless of how well 99designs does. Happy Cog and Blue Flavor are still going to have wait lists, because they are proven producers.
It's the same thing with our business, and, I imagine, with every other services business in the world. There is always low-end competition. In our industry, it's Payment Card certification for websites that accept credit cards. We all have misgivings about those low-end services, just like our corporate accountant is probably not enamored of H&R Block. But only in the graphic design industry is there a moral/ethical issue over the existence of low-end competition.
Actually, that's not true. There's another industry that has profound concerns about low-end competiton. It's the interior design industry. Did you know that in many states, you need to pass a licensing exam to pick a set of throw pillows?
I have one last point to make. Designers like to crack jokes about what'd happen if other industries were forced to do contests and auditions to get work. I don't understand why they think these jokes work. Because in my industry, we're routinely called on to do detailed discovery, advisory, and consultatative work prior to starting large engagements. It can take weeks of otherwise billable times. Often, that work comes to nothing, or even directly assists our competitors. We call this "part of the sales cycle", and part of running a business that has to work in good faith in the market with other companies. In the long run, the "spec work" we've done has always paid off. I don't think we're outside the norm on this; for instance, high-end law firms have given us hours of free consult help without expecting a dime from us.
There is clearly a form of "spec work" that everyone agrees is immoral: sponsoring a design contest, collecting the submissions, and using them to complete the project in-house without paying anyone. Nobody's talking about that here. I will probably not source work from 99designs. But I can't imagine why anyone would have a problem with someone who did.
It's a well-deserved devaluing.
Is crowdsourcing evil? Not in the least.
If one thinks about the actual costs necessary to be a successful graphic designer, it's marginally close to zero. Aside from a laptop, and a wifi-connection (necessary to hook up to these contests), there's not much else needed for a person with even an iota of design skill. As such, it's not surprising that the market is forcing the prices downward, closer a natural equilibrium for a competitive market.
"Graphic Design Firms" that have prime office space, secretaries, luncheons, hobnobbing events . . . these things all add unnecessarily to the "cost" of supposed "professional" graphic design services. Firms and their employees my think that this is why their services are more "valuable" than a freelancer, or somebody who works on spec, but they're wrong. These things add zero value to the end product.
How much is a graphic design worth? Exactly as much as somebody is willing to pay for it.
I think there will be more upheaval in the coming years regarding industries where this type of work can actually lower costs for buyers.
Side note: I have an idea for a startup that crowdsources advertising (tv type ads OR print advertising); I think the agency model that most big companies or "stations" currently use is grossly overpriced. There's room for a new type of market entrant: one by and for the people. I actually almost started this idea a couple of years ago (spoofwink.com), but lacked the resources and was busy with other projects. If anybody wants to go with this idea, please let me in!
I'll fund the winner.
Of course, if you were to take this idea over to rent-a-coder or eLance, you can have it your way and have the developers fight it out to reach the lowest price. (They won't develop everything on spec, but I imagine some of the newer providers might do a small mockup for you).
The difference here is that each individual logo "concept" only takes a few minutes to mock up. If the client likes it, then you spend some more time polishing it and refining it to their tastes. The problem with all of the arguments against crowd sourcing design work is that it denies the reality of the market.
Most buyers of design work have no network that can inform them of who a great designer is. Most buyers have no way of determining when they've met a great designer, short of studying their portfolio, and taste plays a huge role, as does luck (great designers may not always have great ideas for a particular logo). Most buyers don't know what a fair price for a particular project is, but they can see what the going rates are at crowd source sites. Finally, the response of every anti-crowd sourcing proponent I've seen has been, "Find a designer you can work with, who will take time to understand your needs, etc." But that simply doesn't address the needs of most design buyers. Crowd sourcing solves all of these problems, and more, for most buyers. Just because a certain (possibly large) percentage of sellers don't like it doesn't mean it isn't good, as far as the market is concerned.
Because its graphics, developers dont mind it, because oftentimes they are on the benefiting end. But this would change if it was for app development. No developer (or graphic designer) with any regard for the future of their profession should be for it.
More than anything, I'm amazed people are willing to devalue their own time by participating in these contests.
"If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys."
However, the rest of the world isn't so invested as to loudly argue against it. I've always payed graphic design people well and been an easy customer. Find a guy I like, give him a set of adjectives describing the look and feel I want, and let him loose. Pay on time or early. You get good relationships and people will work for you on the drop of a hat if you're easy. And good graphic design people are worth it.
But that "finding a guy I like" is the trickiest part - this spec design work sounds great. Good designers ought to get lots of recurring work from it, and great designers won't need to since their schedule will be full.