The Real Problem With Design Contests
Jacob Cass of Just Creative Design recently wrote an article entitled “How NOT to Design a Logo” on Web Designer’s Depot. It received a lot of attention and eventually ended up on the front page of Digg.
The article acted as a catalyst for many design related frustrations. The comments strayed from the definitions of quality, to the apparent nerve of designers who don’t do work worthy of their “thousand of dollars” price tags. Most of this debate fell around the ethics of design contests in particular.
It got me thinking. Many of the degrading comments were based on false assumptions and skewed experience. I didn’t get the sense that many actually understood a designer’s true issues with these kinds of contests.
This is in defense of the designers who would rather not be entry 134 of 400.
What the Argument Isn’t About
The world has hardened people. No matter how fair something is, there will always be someone calling shenanigans. People need the be reassured that they are not being scammed, especially when they are personally invested in the end result.
This isn’t a matter of professional designers becoming obsolete. Obsolete is continuing to build horse drawn carriage innovations after the car was invented.
The designer’s argument is not simply against the low bargain prices for businesses. It’s against how those prices get lower in the first place.
It’s about acknowledging that a difference exists between professional and amateur. It’s about defining a successful logo as more than something that “just looks good”.
Crowdsourcing vs. Outsourcing
“Why isn’t this the designer’s version of outsourcing? The rest of the working world has to worry about losing work to other people willing to do it cheaper!”
Outsourcing is a different business model from crowdsourcing. With outsourcing the jobs of people in a higher paying area are moved to lower paying countries. This brings a relatively equal level of quality with a lower pay grade. You tend to hear about this in terms of factories being shut down and moved overseas. It is an unfortunate situation, but compensation is still provided for all services rendered.
Crowdsourcing is different. Work is taken from the professional realm and thrown to a large group of people from all over the world with the hope that someone in the crowd will have the necessary qualifications or a winning idea. This cuts costs because instead of paying in advance for a possibility of success, most crowdsourcing works with a “paid on satisfaction” method. Investments are made on successes only. Sites like 99Designs run on this principle.
What’s Wrong With It?
There are some very real problems associated with this style of work. For starters, design contests are not a sustainable business model for full time designers. Time spent on work has no relation to compensation. It has to do with the personal taste of the “client”, and a certain degree of luck.
Contests remove the interaction element of design projects. Ideally, a designer would be able to meet with the client many time prior to the final project. This would allow them access to the materials and information they need, as well as give time to educate the client on logo practices. Education. This is a big one here.
Does the average person realize that there are different ways in which a logo can be built? Do they realize that the logo created in Photoshop saved as a bitmap at 72 dpi will not scale well or look as sharp printed? Do they realize that printed materials should be done in CMYK, and not RGB color?
Revision rounds are almost non-existent in the context of a contest. Sure, a contest winner could be hired again after being chosen to make a few changes, but in a true client-designer relationship this communication would be constant. The end result would be a collaboration instead of guesswork.
There were some defending logo contests because they themselves had commissioned some for their companies before. It was cheap, and they had an overall positive experience. People who think that they will have good results with this method should use it.
They should not, however, then feel qualified to inform higher brow designers that their work is overpriced and now obsolete:
“Logo design contests are great, its the only way I go. I get my pick of 5-10 designs for less then $20.
Designers these days are a dime a dozen, be happy you get the work.”
There are those in favor of contests, and those who are not. Being in favor should not be synonymous with belittling designers who choose not to take part in them.
Professional does not always mean huge prices. Part of being a professional is scalability. If a client has a budget, it is worked towards. If the client can still not afford them, they can move on. There are logo design sites out there that work just fine this idea of payment for products.
Defining a Successful Project
If you define a car as something with four wheels to get from point A to point B you will be satisfied with any car dealership. If you want a nice engine, good mileage, and increased functionality… it’ll take some extra research at for specialty dealerships. (Photo by Vlastula)
Design contests have changed the professional playing field, not destroyed it. It’s upsetting when people suggest that designer’s time should not be compensated unless they can produce something that the client likes. Consider this example from David Airey’s article on spec work:
“I went for a dental check-up yesterday. After the dentist inspected my teeth, she suggested some work to prevent further tooth decay. I told her to go ahead, and if the dental work was satisfactory, I’d be more than happy to pay. She responded that she wouldn’t be able to do that, because she normally provides a service when a fee is agreed upon up-front. I said I’d let her know after I checked in with other local dentists.”
Design work is not as tangible as dentistry. It’s easier to judge the quality of a filling than a color scheme. But designers invest the same common factor into their work as anyone else. Time. The argument should be for this. If a designer is spending time doing work for you, should they be compensated?
It’s also about sharing risk. A business that commissions a design contest is taking on very little. On 99Designs, a business could see hundreds of logos for mere pennies a revision. The difference is that those pennies are not divided evenly among the participants.
Logos are highly customized. They are not like most other products, which can be returned and resold if it isn’t satisfactory. You can’t just adapt a lumberjack logo for a knitting society.
Design is not just a Hobby
Many comments painted design work out to be worthy of “hobby status” and nothing more. Here’s an excerpt from one reader’s view on full time designers:
“…Let’s be clear: designer = often talented artist who never made the leap into the *real world, and is desperately trying to make money off a personal hobby
That’s like me trying to make a career out of rock climbing. Possible, not likely. Maybe I’d find odds and ends ways to make a (barely) living from it, sure…”
Hobbyists do not replace professionals. I can build a shed. That does not make me an architect. Nor does it give me the right to tell an architect how much their work is worth. I do not know enough to qualify me to make such an assessment.
It’s a common defense for student exposure. I’m still a student myself. I know the appeal of design contests as portfolio builders and job opportunities. It levels the playing field for the new guys with good ideas.
On the other hand, I am able to find work without resorting to design contests. It isn’t always easy, but far more worth the time. I do not work 10 hours and get compensated for a possible two.
Design contests give an illusion of work, but no consistent result. It would be too easy to devote time to project proposals that may never see the light of day. Design contests are just that; drawn out proposals. It may feel productive and gives portfolio pieces, but it also lowers your own value.
Design Contest Math Examples
Sometimes the proof is in the numbers. Let’s look at one of the popular contests currently running over at 99Designs. At the time of writing, this contest for a beauty and skin care company logo had just under 600 entries. The winner will receive $500, which is big money. But wait! Let’s look at some math to cut that number down to size.
This is a hell of a bargain for any company looking for a quick logo.
Design contests do not always have the most respectful atmosphere towards the work being done. Take these quotes from the project design brief:
“We reserve the right not to choose a winner, but we very much hope to award the best designer and receive a unique brand.”
“UPDATE: I’m extending the contest for another week. I feel that the designs submitted have only gotten better with time, and that a little more time will allow for less stress and a better end result.
Thank you all for your hard work and creativity!”
Extending time for less stress and more entries? Remaining very “hopeful” about picking a winner? With wording like that, it almost seems like the business is doing the contestants a favor.
Conclusion
Ultimately, it is up to you. As with any ethical question, there is no universal solution. You can find entire sites dedicated to the debate of spec work ethics to prove it.
There are plenty of great resources out on the internet that you can use to educate yourself more on this topic. I’ve put together a list of my own recommended reads in defense of the design community:
Discussion
January 16th, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Excellent synopsis of design contests and so-called crowdsourcing (which most of the times isn’t crowdsourcing at all). Nice to see someone taking an in-depth look at the pros and cons without the usual ranting and raving (something which I’ve been guilty of more than a few times).
January 17th, 2009 at 12:07 PM
congratulations. this is the best post i have read since months. i totally share your ideas. designing is just like every other kind of media work when it comes to a definition of goals for a customer. thats why every media project is a individual project for indvidual customers. contests work for appropriate class of customers, but they will never be able to build up a personal brand. think of apple for example when getting a lovemark over years. everything they do fits to other projects. if you wanna be successfull, i mean really successfull, you will need more than some logo, because if you grow up, i mean if, than it is getting hard to change an existing layout. you got to live with it, so think twice before starting a contest for $20 bucks. most of us spend more than this ammount for beer in a pub at weekends, but we dont want to spend more for a maybe lifetime project.
January 17th, 2009 at 8:13 PM
Excellent article. Some of the comments in Jacob Cass’ article you cited did make my blood boil a bit. The good thing about being in business for oneself is that we can reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, including jackasses.
And as was also correctly pointed out, a web designer’s going rate is no indication of his/her talent or understanding of web design usability and other functionality issues. Web design rates are all over the road here and abroad. Unless and until this is standardized in some way (which is nearly impossible) there will always be those sentiments out there. All that’s needed to change such a person’s mind is a run-in with a really bad (and possibly really expensive) “web designer.” Perhaps reading this article: http://www.blog.spoongraphics.co.uk/articles/the-5-worst-website-designs-in-the-world will help put things in perspective.
January 17th, 2009 at 8:26 PM
I could see where spec designs could be good for design students (trying to finagle a check out of a class assignment) or designers early in their careers who want to build a portfolio. But if you are going to offer even $500 for a logo on spec I’m certainly not going to put $500 worth of work into it. What struck me was how many of the designs in the contest linked above were type treatments and Illustrator effects. Nothing wrong with those, but not always the most in depth design method.
January 18th, 2009 at 11:23 PM
GREAT article! Me and my fellow partners were just discussing this and the word “education” of the clients came up quite a bit. People look at ALL artists/designers as “hobbyists” and thus think we work for little or no money. OR because we enjoy what we do, we will do it for cheap. 30% of our job is to prove our value to the client, sad but ultimately true. People are dumb until educated.
January 19th, 2009 at 1:06 PM
I’m from the copy side of the hall, so I may not qualify to comment. But in my experience, any company or client who would ‘buy’ their logo from a contest or an auction site probably would never be a suitable client for a good design firm anyway. Such companies either don’t value design all that much. Or, design is not critical to the success of their enterprise. (There are many enterprises for which design — or copy — isn’t do or die. A cement plant, let’s say.) I doubt you could ’sell’ or ‘educate’ them up. They’re non-prospects, non-clients. No loss.
There are auction sites for copy and content too, where writers scrabble for the chance to write a full-on web site for $87. There are no good clients there, either.
But then again, I just type this stuff.
January 24th, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Walt has a good point. The type of clientelle contest sites draw are those that would never pay “normal” rates a design firm or professional designer charges. If such contest sites didn’t exist, they would probably end up getting josmho who dabbles in logo design to do them a logo. Most of these clients are small time or don’t have the budget or just don’t see the value in getting a true professional to design their logo, but only know that they need “something” to portray their company.
I myself participate in the contests.At the same time I wouldnt call myself for them, nor against them. I can also understand the arguments made in this article.But for the most part, because of the clientelle I’ve witnessed as being drawn to such sites, I’m just not seeing how it is hurting such professional designers, as they wouldn’t be marketing to this type of clientelle in the first place. If you could give me actual examples of when design firms have lost potential clients to contest sites, then yes, the arguments would be much more valid. I have yet to find any articles that give such specific examples of lost business due to these contest sites. (feel free to comment and give links if you know if any, please)
I also need to state that I do not call myself a professional, nor do I design logos as a means to support myself or my family. Nor do I ever talk junk to real professionals and design firms, nor say they are overpriced.It is simply something I enjoy doing. I also do not call myself an amateur, and while I have no formal education, I have read plenty of books tutorials, blogs, articles, etc. etc,, have had enough clients, experience, and have dealt and communicated with printing companies to understand the technical aspects and fundamentals of logo design. In this way I am certain what work I create does not come up “short” as far as how it can be used.
So to me, designing logos can be just a hobby for some. So why do I participate in such contests? I work full time, I have a family. I don’t have time to go out and try to find non profits who are looking for a logo designer in order to get specific clients so that I can enjoy my hobby.And yes, I do design concepts for fun, or for a friend, etc etc with no compensation. But contest sites give specific challenges as the subject and requirements are set. It’s fun to compete. The little compensation that is awarded if my concept is actually chosen is just a bonus; the main award is the fame from the logo when the client actually puts it to use in their marketing materials, signage, and on their products/services. To me, the true current failures of such contests are that most of the clients are not knowledge on the true technical requirements a logo should meet; so you often see poor designs chosen as the winner. When I say “poor” I’m referring to usage of rasterized images within the logo, scalability issues, etc. I always wonder how many times the client then has to come back to such designers, or if they have to then hire a new designer to fix issues with the original logo in order to get it so that it can be used for any media outlet.
I apologize for my lengthy post. for those few who actually read it all, i’d love to hear, based on my reasons and particular viewpoint, if you still think I’m stealing potential work from professionals or not or if I’m still hurting the industry by my actions. Thanks.
January 30th, 2009 at 5:28 PM
Paul, I agree with you 100%. When I do make an entry into one of these contests (which is rare, I normaly have something else that can direct my attentnion) it is not really for the money. It if for the chalange of taking somone elses direction and making something of it.
The tragety is that most chosen disigns are not GOOD designs. They may look good, but its like if you asked for a house and got a house shaed lump of concrete that was painted to look like a house. You can show it to everyone, you can say “this is my house” but it cant do some of the fundamental housey things that a house should do.
February 17th, 2009 at 3:35 AM
Wow, nice article!
It all serves to booster client ignorance, and degrades the value of the design industry by emphasising the “design is a hobby” idea. That said, people who use it (on both sides) most probably deserve each other – but I do think this is badly skewed toward the ‘client’, with them expecting a lot of work from the many designers while never truly engaging or coughing up any decent remuneration.
It’s that part of the process that makes me sick.
My profession isn’t a lottery.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:50 AM
When it comes down to it, professional designers were never going to get work from someone only willing to pay $100 anyway. Even if the client was going to otherwise pay for a professional designer, cheap clients don’t make for happy designers.
I think contests are a great way to build a portfolio, but it won’t take someone long to realise that they can’t make a lot of money doing it.
April 6th, 2009 at 6:44 AM
Their is no end to bad taste when it comes to clients and their idea of that which constitutes a good logo and it is particularly evident that clientèle on a competition sites are of the visually illiterate kind (who need to see 500 options to make a choice) and then most often that choice is flawed.
As to the notion that “design is a hobby” I have run my company for over 12 years and I consider myself a professional, with normal business overheads, including hardware and software costs (which are particularly high), as well as consumables, fonts, etc. The list is endless. I often come against those whose design for “beer money” and use their employers hardware and software.
@ Paul: In my 20+ years of experience as a designer clients almost always will brag about “their” logos or “their” websites. Your notion of fame is sadly a fictitious one. Unless the logos don’t work …
I recently encountered a client who said he had the best website in his industry (I know he uses 99 Designs), but he remarked that his phone hadn’t rung once in six weeks. He had the sense to know that his designers were not up to scratch. While these designers could produce pretty pictures they where clueless when it came to branding.
April 17th, 2009 at 9:23 AM
That’s a really good article.
One other aspect which is very noticable if you hang around the crowdsourcing sites long enough is the resale. Most of the businesses who tend to use that kid of services are far from professional or experienced.
Since most of them love “something nice, but please put some more colors and glitter”, a lot ot sucessful (there) designers just peick some clipart, change the text and perhaps some angles for each project and Voila! I do not wish to be on the places if the clients who got that bergain when they realise the likeness and begin suing eachother (putting apart the far guger expences to promote a bad logo).
April 17th, 2009 at 9:46 AM
Great post here Zach, as a social experiment I actually tried a CrowdSpring project (as a client), with the intention that I would review it afterwards. To their credit, CrowdSpring was encouraging before the review came out, afterwards they didn’t really want to say anything about it…here’s what I wrote about them and the challenges with their business model:
Love ‘em or hate ‘em, I decided to rate ‘em: my first-hand experience & review with spec work, using CrowdSpring.com (from a client’s perspective): http://tinyurl.com/c54nvu
jeremy
beingastarvingartistsucks.com
Jeremy Tuber’s last blog post..The Freelancer, the Client and the Dying
June 3rd, 2009 at 1:17 PM
I am all in favor of sites like 99designs.com. I recognize the pays are low and that its the best way for a company to get cheap design, but what about the student who goes to school, then works at a coffee shop and ends up having 2 or 3 hours a day to design?. Obviously these people dont have the time nor experience to look for proffessional freelancing proyects. I believe 99designs-like allow newstarters in the business to compete with more experienced people, within a specific timeframe (just like in the real world) but with no phonecalls at 11 pm of some angry client asking why the hell the company colours dont look right in their investor’s newsletter. Definitely these sites should be used a startup, no boss looking what you are doing all the time, no phonecalls, you get to compare the quality of your work against other people, you have no asap proyects and you work in the design as much as you like. Even if you dont win, it sure is a learning experience… As for people who use this service for their steady income, i believe its a personal choice of work, definitely not mine; to be competing every time for a 150 bucks logo should get anyone tired after a while.
June 3rd, 2009 at 9:24 PM
@DieselAdv,
Sorry, I think you misunderstood what I meant by “fame”. When I say “fame”, I mean personal fame in knowing I designed it, not that others know that I did. I could care less if a client runs around calling it “their logo”. they paid for the design of the logo, they can call it their own, just like I call my mac, “my mac” even though I didn’t design the thing.
June 20th, 2009 at 12:24 AM
For goodness sake people. Work harder for clients. Charge what your worth. As long as you show benefit, design that 5k logo and be proud you’re not having to scrap. – Scraps don’t hurt our biz, just makes it more valuable. Do I spec or enter contests? NO. Those that do will learn at some point. As for the clients that bought that 50 cent logo? Well, if they have good products, chances are they’ll be spending 5k later down the road anyway. Otherwise, I don’t want them.
August 12th, 2009 at 7:43 AM
In further support of my anti design contest stance, I’ve just posted my view on Spec Work, would love to hear your thoughts.
The “Pros” and Cons of Spec Work
.-= Jacob Cass´s last blog ..The “Pros” and Cons of Spec Work =-.
August 12th, 2009 at 7:07 PM
Great post! Thanks for sharing…
A confession – I am guilty of using one contest. Even if just once, but I’ve used it as a designer. After studying design for 8 years, I am completely understand and agree with your point of view. When I did my math on 99designs I realised, I wouldn’t be able to depend on this for money – For eg. A logo contest that was on for 6.5 days was on an average worth $300. That’s approximately $5.76 per hour! I don’t know a single designer who would accept that kind of salary, even with the current financial trauma.
Being out of work for nearly a year, I was trying to use a ‘design brief’ provided to exercise my creative cells. However, your post has definitely made me stop and think if I may be encouraging these kind of sites. I know there are other ways to keep me motivated and be creative without using such design contests.
December 26th, 2009 at 8:35 AM
The best place for freelance projects is freelancing sites. Freelancing sites are the best option for part time home based business and freelance jobs. There are many types of work available at freelancing sites……
onlineuniversalwork
January 15th, 2010 at 3:37 PM
I think design contests are wonderful – as contests. Every field has competitions where the aim is winning a prize and maybe some prestige, rather than sustaining yourself.
Take the Idol TV programmes (or any of that kind) – no self respecting music professional (or any other performer) is looking to make a living by winning, but some people see it as a vehicle to greater things, or a measuring rod for their talents. The art world is full of contests – some pay nothing, some pay millions. Ultimately it’s all about having work that you think can stand up to that of others.
Perhaps it’s a bit unfortunate that some companies look to contests for their design work, but that isn’t a contest to me. That’s abusing the system.
February 18th, 2010 at 12:23 PM
I came across your article while looking at general logo design blog and websites. I have read quite a few articles like this, and I have a very good friend who is a professional freelance designer. I have heard all of the arguments against logo contest sites.
Flame me if you will, but I will explain why I chose crowdsourcing for my new startup company’s logo. Take this as a client’s view of the situation and don’t read into things too much. I see two types of logo design options:
1) i meet in person with someone local and work through the process of having one person or one firm come up with some ideas which I can refine and hopefully land on something I can use. I know I will get a scalable, versatile, professional logo (the majority of the time). From my research, the minimum I would spend to go that route would be $1500-$2000. And at that price the revisions and number of initial ideas is very, very low. Most likely I am stuck having to spend a ton of time up front to identify a designer who has a style that I like because, like architects, I’ve found it’s really hard to find someone who is really good at multiple styles (again, i’m generalizing – i know there are exceptions, but you pay for it).
2) I go online and hope for the best… for $500 I can give a contest site the same creative brief the local designer would ask me for. I get an overwhelming number of entries, most of which suck. BUT, if i get just one design that I like, I’ve just saved a ton of money and time. And this is the point where my design friends get really angry with me – if I like it, then it’s good enough. Design is subjective, except to designers (if that makes sense). Even good design rubs people the wrong way sometimes. As a startup I cannot afford to commission market studies to find which logos make customers feel warm inside. I cannot afford the design firm who will spend countless hours perfecting a lasting logo right now. My logo does not make or break my business. The biggest problem I see, as a client, is the copyright issue or blatant theft of designs. But even with a professional, it’s up to the client to make sure that’s not happening. It just has a much, much higher potential with the contests.
At first, my design friends tried to make me, as the client, feel guilty for using a contest site. But after talking through it, it became clear that they view the designers on those sites as the people in the wrong. But one could argue that those designers are there by choice… and from the looks of it, most are from somewhere other than the US. I don’t know how the design industry works in those countries but I’m going to guess that getting paid in $’s and at the amounts of most of the contests, it may actually be a viable business model for someone. Again, I have no idea, but you could always just ask those designers. In that sense, you get the outsourcing effect along with the crowdsourcing effects, good or bad.
One of the comments above hits it on the head – people who value good design and will pay for it (and can afford it!) will always go with the professionals. I know that if my startup survives the first couple of years I can then afford a rebranding effort and put more money into it. Heck, even the best brands in the world are required to rebrand once in a while. Sadly, most startup businesses see a logo as just something they need, a box to check off amongst the 1000 other boxes you check off when starting a business. I think blogs like this help to educate both clients and designers, but ultimately each client is going to decide for themselves and most clients (myself included) will look at contest sites and think “well, even though the logos in that guy’s contest suck, mine will be different”. and at $500, what is the risk? Is it my job as the client to make sure the industry is “fair”? if the dentist offered me the option of paying for satisfaction rather than up front, why wouldn’t most people take it?
Join the Conversation!
Remember: Life's not all doom and gloom, so please keep it constructive. If we've made an error or missed something big, please let us know! Learning is revisions, after all.