If there’s ever been an issue that ignites passion in the design community, it is Spec Work, its repackaged cousin Design Contests, and its cousin-in-disguise, Crowdsourcing. There are two sides to the issue, and neither seems willing, or able, to give the other much sway. As with most passionate debates, a lot of the oxygen is sucked up by hyperbole, from both sides (guilty as charged), and there’s very little attention focused on the true benefits (it there are any) and the true pitfalls (if there are any). Some people behind crowdsourcing sites will state that “businesses are ignoring the debate” and that’s very true. They are. It’s boiled down to a “more for less” proposition that’s a terribly effective marketing gimmick. Designers aren’t “ignoring” the debate, because they’re the ones who ostensibly have the most to lose and are the ones most affected.

So what’s the real deal? Seems time to look at both sides of the equations, warts and all, and take a somber, sober and partially impartial look at spec work, design contests and design crowdsourcing. From all angles. While I’m fundamentally opposed to spec work and design contests – my old lefty leanings, hammered into my psyche by my union advocating father – I think I’m well enough versed in the issue to tackle the issue pragmatically and without railing against the practice as is usual with my scribblings. We’re going to take a look at things from the client’s point of view first. Then follow up with a look at how these things work for designers later in the week.

Design contests and crowdsourcing – setting a price

Most crowdsourcing and design contest sites will let you set your own budget. This is one of the main issues that has a good chunk of the design community up in arms. Understandably so. It can amount to hundreds of design concepts for a few hundred bucks, something that on the surface anyway, most small firms (including mine) and freelance designers can’t compete against. Many design contest sites take an almost dual-personality disorder approach to how you should set your price. On one hand, they tell you that their service offers $200 (minimum) design services. On the other hand, they’ll also tell you that setting a high price will attract a higher level of designer. They’ll charge you extra to host a private contest, where the results and designs are hidden from view (often at a price that’s higher than small design companies would charge in the first place). All of this seems to be at odds with their entire ‘democratizing of design’ meme, but no mind.

Here’s something to keep in mind though – surprisingly, many designers avoid so-called ‘private contests’ like the plague. The reason? As the contest is private, and as they can’t use the designs they submit in their portfolios (thanks to a rather restrictive NDA they have to agree to in order to participate) there’s no real benefit for them to enter unless they win. Most designers with any experience know that’s unlikely (based on sheer volume) and participating on crowdsourcing sites has been sold to them as a way to build a portfolio. Private contests are at odds with that core belief, so many designers simply pass. While I understand the advantage of a private contest (the theory is your competitors don’t get to find out what you’re up to, or your client’s don’t get to find out you’ve outsourced their gig to a design contest), it doesn’t attract the so-called ‘quality’ designers the host sites tell you it will.

In terms of pricing, and realistically speaking, there really isn’t much rhyme or reason to the number of entries you’ll get, regardless of what budget you set. I’ve seen $200 logo design contests with over 300 submissions. I’ve seen $1000 contests only receive several dozen. While contest site owners will tell you that the higher the prize, the better the designers attracted, this may, or may not, be true, but a higher prize would logically attract more designers of all skill levels.

Some sites have what they refer to as “guaranteed” contests – you “promise” to pay a designer or the company that hosts the contest will select one for you. Here’s a dirty secret that most design contest sites don’t want you to know. Even in “guaranteed” contests, buyers end up filing a dispute with their credit card company if they’re not happy with the outcome, regardless of how many entries they’ve received. Don’t think credit card companies are really sure what the deal is with contest sites, so most unhappy buyers are successful in their challenge. I’m not sure credit card companies are comfortable with design contest sites picking an entry for their customers (as claimed in most “guaranteed” contests) either. Having said that, charging back a credit card for a service you’ve agreed to is pretty shady, so this isn’t to be taken as an endorsement of the practice, just an acknowledgment that it happens. In fact, I’d advise against it as, once again, it’s often the participating designers who get it in the throat. On some sites a designer will still get their design selected by committee and paid for their efforts. On others it’s approached as “hey, can’t pay anyone, the client charged back their card”.

Work that’s ‘inspired’ by others

Here’s a rather large caveat about design contests and so-called ‘crowdsourcing’. The numbers of plagiarized design work as well as improperly licensed stock art (most stock can’t be used for logos or trademarks) submitted into logo design contests is astonishing. Sometimes it’s not the entire logo, but bits and pieces cobbled together from multiple sources. If you’re after an illustrative logo, many of the submissions will be traced from photographs found on the internet, some of which are rights managed, or subject to copyright claims that may or may not be apparent. Whether these logos are “derivative” works or not is anyone’s guess and depends a great deal on the original creator’s tenacity. Realistically speaking, you probably won’t get found out. On the other hand, your logo may be a ticking time bomb. Does this happen with every design contest? No. But enough times to make it a concern.

Now, design contest and crowdsourcing sites will tell you that this happens in ‘traditional’ design avenues as well, and to a certain degree they’re correct. It does. The risk of business and reputation meltdown in the traditional arena makes it less likely, while the anonymity of design contests and the legal waivers that contest sites present to you on sign-up make it more so. There’s no real statistics either way, but a ripped off logo in the ‘real world’ is huge news in the media (witness the recent Kelowna City logo flap), whereas a pinched design being entered into a design contest is a regular occurrence and barely makes any news outside a post on Twitter. Usually by the designer who’s work has been abused.

In many instances, other designers will “catch” the knock-offs and tell you or the host site (they want the copycat turfed out – more ‘chance of them winning’), but often they either won’t have knowledge of the original logo, or the gallery of designs has become six pages deep and they don’t have the time to rummage through the various designs looking for knock-offs. Don’t look to the companies that hold these contests for monitoring of submissions – most design “crowdsourced” contests aren’t managed very well, if at all, and their sites generally play out like a free-for-all. Not that this should be surprising. If you work out the portion of the “take” for the site owners, there’s not much budget for monitoring each and every contest running in their forums. Managing a “community” with tens of thousands of members is a challenge (ask anyone who’s ever set up even a modest sized forum or bulletin board) and companies that run design contest sites generally feature small teams of salaried employees. Most design crowdsourcing sites don’t even have graphic designers on staff (most are “customer service” personnel and developers tasked with keeping the sites up-and-running, a formidable task considering the system resources these sites burn) so you’re a little at the mercy of the goodwill, and keen eyes, of the people participating in your contest.

Also, keep in mind that even when designers are “caught” passing off other designers work as their own, they’re seldom “banned” from participating in future contests unless they’ve been particularly egregious. One major site “suspends” designers for two weeks. Another has something that verges on “three strikes you’re out” policy (though they claim that they don’t “officially” have a “three strikes you’re out” policy). In any case, there’s no guarantee that an unrepentant copycat, busted in an earlier contest, isn’t submitting work to yours.

The client as art director

In terms of setting up the contest, you’ll be expected to supply a pretty in-depth ‘creative brief’. As the back-and-forth between buyer and designer is somewhat muted (most design contest sites don’t want – for obvious reasons – designers and buyers talking off the ‘reservation’) that’s the entry point for most of the designs that will be presented. The details contained need to be pretty expansive, though you can change direction later if needs be. Traditional design avenues (designer, firm, agency) will usually see the creative department taking conceptual lead on your project. With design contest and crowdsourcing sites, you’re almost expected to play ‘art director’. Now, that’s not to say every designer will take a ‘just tell me what you want’ position – some will suggest funky design options and worthwhile directions. But a large percentage of contestants are of the “hired hands with a copy of Illustrator” variety. That’s not bad if you’re comfortable with art direction. A little intimidating if you’re not. Might be worth remembering that many designers on crowdsourcing sites are inexperienced, and wary of offering up suggestions that are at odds with your original brief, lest they be branded ‘uncooperative’.

Expected comments and star ‘rating’

Keep in mind that you’re expected to comment on most of the designs submitted, even the ones that you don’t like, a task that can become quite challenging as the numbers of submitted ideas rises. Most sites also feature a star rating system that seems to placate most entrants if you opt not to submit a comment for their work. Pretty cynical attempt to keep designers cranking out work, but it does seem to work. Also keep in mind that asking one designer to incorporate an idea from another designer’s submission is a big no-no on contest sites. Sure, the designer you’ve asked to do it will probably comply with your request, but the frankensteined design will probably be yanked and the designer reprimanded. Despite the “community” vibe that’s advertised, designers are not working together, but rather against each other, so asking one entrant to incorporate another’s work is understandably taboo though many buyers, believing they’re working in a collaborative environment, often find this concept difficult to grasp. In terms of revisions, most design contest entrants are only too willing to submit revision after revision, so there’s no cap to the amount of work that you can ask for, an arguably big advantage over a traditional firm or designer. Here’s something to keep in mind though – if you focus on one design concept, and request multiple revisions, many of the designers will interpret that as the direction you want to head and incorporate these ideas into their future work.

The number of submissions

This is the main advantage of the design contest or ‘crowdsourcing’ model. And it’s true, you should receive a lot of concepts to choose from. Most design contest sites feature a “get x number of submissions or your money back guarantee” but most contests will go over that number by a wide margin. If it’s close – say the guarantee is 25 and you’ve received 28 – unless there’s something there you really like, it appears that many buyers get the refund anyway. There’s generally a few similar entries, say color changes and what have you, that it’s always arguable whether you received 28 submissions or 21 with a few variations that don’t count enough as unique. Again, I don’t think this is fair to the designers that participated (I might go as far to say that guaranteeing a number of designs, from people who aren’t getting paid for those submissions verges on asshattery, but we’re trying to be somber here, so I’ll leave that for the designer portion of this feature). And here’s another aspect of crowdsourcing sites that as a designer I’d be horrified, but as a buyer, I’d think is just lovely. The usual way these things work is that your “contest” or “project” runs for a certain amount of time. The designers have been told that once the time frame is up, and as long as the minimum number of entries has been submitted, you have a finite amount of time to select a winner. If, after that time frame (usually a week), you haven’t selected a winner, the host site will pick one for you. Designers like these sort of promises, as someone is guaranteed to win. Here’s the dirty little secret. Most design contest sites hate picking a winner for you, especially if you’ve paid with a credit card and if you ask them, they’ll simply re-open the contest for more work. It’s terribly unfair to the designers who originally entered in good faith, but it is what it is. Also, even after you’ve selected a winner, feel free to ask for further revisions on the final entry. Turns out that most design contest sites don’t even expect you to take your selection ‘as is’. Some even suggest that there’s no limit to the amount of post-contest revisions you’re ‘allowed’ to request before accepting the design as final.

The end result

At the end of the day, you’ll probably end up with a serviceable logo, brochure or website. I’d positively love to tell you that you won’t – these things are an anathema to my profession – but I’d be lying. Will you receive stellar work? Slimmer chance, but yes you just might. The main concern you should have with any design contest is originality (in terms of logos) and the rights managed images (brochure, web site, etc) featured in your work. The problem here lies in the issue of what designers rights the designers agree to give these sites upon submitting work. The designer ticks off a little check box, indicating that they own the rights (or adequate rights) to the work they’re uploading. The number of blatant knock-offs that are found on design contest sites tend to show that a fairly large percentage of participants don’t put any credence into those check boxes at all. The designer usually has to agree to transfer a non-revocable license to the host site (supposedly, so that the host site can show the artwork in their galleries). One little hitch. All stock image sites strictly prohibit the transfer of any of THEIR rights or license (for obvious reasons – it weakens their control over products). Bottom line – how can a participating designer give the design contest site a license for stock art or photography, when the original licensor strictly forbids them from doing so? I’m not a lawyer, but it seems to me that this little bugaboo is a wrinkle that’s going to bite someone in the ass at some point.

Conclusion

Are design contests and crowdsourcing an effective way to get design work done? Yes. No. Maybe. In terms of the amount of concepts you’ll get pitched at you, there’s no comparison between working with a design firm or a freelancer. They simply can’t match the output if output is your thing. And that number is going up. Some outfit even suggests that you’ll get up to 900 concepts for a few hundred bucks. Soon it will crack 1000, so if you wait a few months, I’m sure some site, now in BETA, will offer that. Crowdsourcing sites don’t technically pay their ‘workers’ (my main quibble), so there’s no practical limit on the number of revisions and ideas you’ll get. Are they all good ideas? No. A majority of the ideas you’ll get pitched are sub-par (to be charitable) and as we’ve discussed earlier, run a rather high risk of being work that’s pinched from somewhere else. Realistically speaking though, there should be a few pearls in the pile to ultimately choose from. As I mentioned in the beginning of this article, I don’t think that’s a particularly efficient, or effective, way to design anything. But if raw numbers, for an often paltry price, is your thing, a design contest might be the Doctor’s prescription.

What does all this mean for people participating? We’ll look at that in detail when we take a look at crowdsourcing from a designer’s perspective.

Do this for free and I’ve got lots of work coming your way

In any case, requests for free and spec work come quite often in the design profession. Trouble is, working for free isn’t doing yourself any favors, even if carried out with the purest intentions. Or in response to the “just do this, and I’ve got lots of future work coming your way” request. If I had a nickle for every time I had heard the “future work” pitch, I’d have an awful lot of nickels. I generally don’t take these potential clients up on the ever-so-generous offer. Not because I’m some arty-farty prima donna. No, I usually give people my blanket “the promise of future work has no bearing on how we deal with this project” statement for one simple reason. When people promise a ton of work, if only you’ll complete one task for free, they’re seldom genuine. Working a limited time for free doesn’t lead to additional paid work sometime in the future. It’s so consistent, that it’s pretty well a rule. In fact, let’s make it a rule.

Even with active clients, and active projects, performing free work can be problematic and might have the opposite result to the one you intend. Gonna tell you about a recent incident at the shop, where “throwing in” some work for free not only didn’t help, but eventually cost me a decent client. Not going to use real names here (for obvious reasons) but it illustrates, in very real terms, the practical downside of working for free.

The ‘Designer’ & the ‘Tech Guy’

The gig, for Bob’s Money Mart let’s say, was a fairly simple web design project. Bob was a wonderful client, a little pushy on the delivery times perhaps, but a client that was good to work for. He prepared his web content on time (a stumbling block on many web projects), listened to suggestions, and knew mostly what he wanted. The build went off without a hitch. As did creating the Flash animation that would make up a lot of the site interface. Because Bob was so reasonable, I didn’t mind working over a weekend (scuttling some personal plans) to get his site launched in just under a week. I pitched him concepts and revisions within hours. I gave him my personal cell phone so he could call me at night (sometimes a risky proposition – I have an office and an assistant for a reason). I even brought in a paid colleague to help speed things up. All things considered, the project went smoother than a typical web design gig. I didn’t even have to install the files on Bob’s server. He had some ‘tech guy’ (“costs me a fortune”) that did that and at project close I simply ZIPPED the files and send them into the ether. The client was a happy camper and loved his new site. In terms of business, the project had ended up being marginally profitable. Win, win.

The danger of freebies

Once the site was launched, Bob wanted some contact forms. His “cost a fortune” tech guy supposedly didn’t know how to set one up (in retrospect, I think he knew all too well), so I offered to help. I had a .php form script that I had a web developer create for me a few years back. I didn’t want Bob to get bombarded with spam, so I gave him a custom CAPCHA script that I had paid someone to create for an earlier site. According to our original agreement, since this additional work was being done after finalization of the project, and after the site was ‘live’, I should have charged Bob above and beyond the original budget. But I didn’t. My thinking went something like this:

1) Bob’s been a great client,
2) I already have the finished scripts
3) the project went down fairly easy so there was a few hours left on the budget and
4) if I made Bob happy by helping him out it would lead to future work.

Yeah, that old chestnut. I sent the scripts to Bob’s tech guy and he uploaded the files. Trouble is, he couldn’t make them work (once again, I think he could have) and was now telling Bob that the script dysfunction wasn’t his fault. Had to be the stupid designer’s wonky script. Bob starts to use the cell phone number I gave him earlier. He’s not terribly happy because his ‘tech guy’ charges him a fortune and fixing the form/CAPCHA system was going to be “horribly expensive”. Once again, I offered to help. I knew the scripts worked just fine on my servers. Probably needed some tweaking to make it work on his. And I did get it to work. Trouble is, a ‘favor’, using a script that I had paid for, had now eaten up 5 more hours on a Saturday morning with the back-and-forth, checking this, checking that, uploading files, etc, etc. Now the project HAD gone over time budget. Not a big deal, but by doing a free favor, I had managed to turn a profitable project into one that’s not so profitable. Ah well, at the end of the day, I had shown Bob that I was a decent guy and I had built up some client good-will. All I had to do was wait for the additional work to roll in.

Not quite.

About a month later, I received an e-mail from Bob. Someone at his office had come up with a wonderful idea – some movie thing that they wanted to add to the site. They needed to add the page and add it to the menu system. Not a big deal, but it was going to take some time to retool the layout. I took a look at what Bob wanted and figured it would take 3 – 4 hours. I told Bob that I’d only charge him two. Well, even that wasn’t on. Bob questioned the fact that I’d bill him at all. After all, I had “added that form thing after the web site was launched” so why was this request any different? Have you ever tried to explain to a client how one portion of a project was done as a favor while you expect to get paid for another? It’s not an easy discussion. Bob demanded that I make the change, without billing him. He reminded me that he had “tons of work coming our way” and if we only performed this one change, it would be all ours. I put my foot down. If Bob wanted me to make the changes, he’d have to pay me to perform them. The inevitable “send the photoshop files to our tech guy” e-mail came hours later. I suspect that Bob’s “cost me a fortune” tech guy performed the changes. And billed handsomely for it. I don’t expect to hear from Bob again.

How to earn respect for your time? Bill for it.

See, here’s the thing. When it came to the ‘tech guy” Bob KNEW that he “cost a fortune”. Bob NEVER wasted the ‘tech guy’s” time because he knew he’d have to pay for it. I screwed it up by performing free work as a favor. Bob respected ‘tech guy’s time even though it still pained him to pay for it. I had given Bob reason not to respect mine. When it came to installing Bob’s contact form, the important factor was that I was solving a problem. A very big problem. Bob would have been glad to pay for having that problem solved. Yet I thought I needed to go the extra step and solve Bob’s problem for free. At that point I had changed the business relationship forever. Bob now KNEW that I’d perform ‘no-charge’ revisions. All he had to do was figure out to ‘motivate’ me to do so. Which turned into a glorified game of “chicken”. And as anyone knows, when playing “chicken”, you have to be prepared to go all the way. In this instance, going all the way lost me a decent, well-paying client.

So next time a client requests that you perform work for free, keep this little tale in mind. And think long and hard before offering to perform design work without billing for it. In the long term, it won’t accomplish what you think it will, and may end up turning a good designer/client relationship into a bad one.

I know that after 30 years in this business, I may have finally learned my lesson. Maybe.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that per se, but it’s not terribly business-like. Might even be described as unprofessional. Accordingly, I decided that I’d start using the Steve Douglas domain for things a little more personal and maybe even a tad more provocative. It wasn’t a one-of decision, but rather part of a large rebranding, repurposing and refocusing project for The Logo Factory itself (you can read more about the entire thought process behind this move here). Firing up this website properly would allow me to let my hair down (what hair I have left in any case) and feature material that wasn’t restrained by being connected, in one way or another, to my day gig.

All of this “personalizing” meant coming up with a ‘Steve Douglas’ avatar (as opposed to the corporate version I used for The Logo Factory). Rather than using a current mug shot, figured I’d use a portion of the photograph you see above. It’s a pic of me and my dad, when I was but a toothy-grinned youngster in Northern Ireland. It’s one of my all time favorites, and if I remember correctly, the photograph was taken at one of those instant photo-booths, at a holiday resort town called Portrush. The image is indicative of a simpler time in my life, especially when it comes to my relationship with my father. Those that know some of the current events surrounding that relationship (it’s complicated) may question the inclusion of the photograph at all. Perhaps they have a point. But to me, it represents an era where things were innocent, full of wonder, and I had an unclouded and optimistic view of the world. Like most sons, my father was the most powerful, intelligent and wonderous person on the planet. Not bad times those.

And that, in a very abridged nutshell, explains the avatar that you’ll be seeing around this blog and Twitter. Goofy, and maybe a bit mad I know, but well in keeping with the theme of this website.