 |
||
INTERVIEWShooting oneself in the foot and other truths about designing on spec: An interview with Carmen von
Richthofen and John Furneaux of the RGD It was interesting timing when I first made contact with Catherine Morley (Cat) a couple of months back. I had submitted my site for consideration at designers-who-blog.com and received some very positive and encouraging feedback. I also became privy to her most recent project and passion: the NO!SPEC crusade. This hit very close to home. The Canadian design community was recently looking down just such a barrel when the Design Exchange in collaboration with the Department of Canadian Heritage released a speculative national competition for the redesign of the Canadian Cultural Gateway Website. A number of the more vocal outlets (including our own at Industrial Brand) immediately called foul. In fact, it was the commentary posted over at Slashdot's ideasonideas that served as the final straw for Cat and spurred her on to creating the NO!SPEC movement. And a movement is exactly what it has shaped itself into. It appears that this time around, the design community is not only circling our wagons, but we're also packing a hell of an arsenal. What it comes down to is that it is no longer acceptable for a company or organization to presume that it has the right to ask for a designer's time and talent without the guarantee of proper payment. Simple as that. I recently had the pleasure of speaking with Carmen von Richthofen, the Executive Director of Association of Registered Graphic Designers and John Furneaux, the President of the Association of Registered Graphic Designers and Managing Director of Karacters Design Group in Toronto about the issue of spec work and the damage that can be wrought by such practices. =============== Kevin: Has the RGD's policy of No Spec been with the organization from the start? Carmen: Yes, it is built into our Rules of Professional Conduct that members may not engage in spec work and that is very clear. A recently publicized issue was with VANOC and we held our ground with that one and, although we did not succeed in getting them to change the format of their competition, I think we succeeded in making a point and sticking to it. John: The message is definitely getting through. It takes time with these groups, once they are committed it is very difficult to get them to change course. But I think a lot of the work that we are doing is for the next time they find themselves in a similar situation that it will be carried out in a professional way that works for everyone. Kevin: Why do you think that spec work has been acceptable in the past? John: Part of it falls out of the advertising roots of the industry in that, up until recently, spec work was always considered an integral part of going and pitching within the advertising industry. You would often have a creative shootout among selected firms and this general practice had a spill over effect into the design industry seeing as the same people who were looking for advertising firms were also looking for designers. But the fundamental difference is that in graphic design we work on a project by project basis whereas in advertising, they are looking for a contract that may last 2 to 5 years. So the view in the past in advertising was that it was a worthwhile investment to make because of all the long term money that they could get; whereas with graphic design, if you do the spec work for the project, very fundamentally you are doing the whole assignment and there is nothing else on the other side. I mean, if you get everyone to compete for a logo and then you pick a logo, what exactly are you planning to get this agency to do after the spec competition? Kevin: It's like you’ve basically closed the chapter before before you've even opened the book. Carmen: I have to say that Catherine Morley’s No-Spec initiative has given us a tremendous boost because at times it felt like a bit of a lonely battle. It is really exciting to see that we now have an international organization that works on many different levels, educating people about spec work and how to conduct proper competitions. And it shows there is international condemnation of this harmful business practice So it gives the RGD's argument a lot more credibility when you can show that there is so much international agitation against spec work. Kevin: The birth of the No Spec campaign seemed to be the culmination of a lot of voices rising up and speaking out. What do you credit as the reason for the recent global rallying cry against spec work? John: There are a couple of issues. In the years past, you would always think, 'Well, I can do the work up front and recover it later on.' Now, with the need for added transparancy,tighter estimating and better disclosure on how much time you actually spend, there is no opportunity to make it back later on. There is budgetary pressure in that budgets are much tighter and the margins are much tighter for many firms. I think people have also seen the damage that has occured in industries such as advertising and architecture where spec work has been allowed to run rampant. It is making it very difficult for smaller and independent firms to stay afloat because they don’t have the money and the resources to be able to do that. There has always been the sense that "well you know, I'm a small guy. I need to do this to make my mark." But then realizing that as a small guy you go out and do these pitches and get nothing out of it. You can’t sustain that. You don’t have a larger mechanism to keep you afloat while you are out doing spec work. Kevin: It's not going to pay the bills. John: Right. People are starting to see past the few arguments that there were for it – and there aren't many – and see the damage that occurs in the long run to the industry. Carmen: I'd like to make one other point about the advertising industry because we got into trouble a couple of years ago when we mentioned in one of our newsletters that spec work was common practice in the advertising industry. We got a letter for the Institute of Communications and Advertising which pointed us to their policy against spec work. So as an industry, I think they are trying to fight it and change it as much as we are and they do not appreciate when people cite their industry as one that openly practices spec work. But getting back to your question, I think the internet has been a huge help in the getting the message out and communicating and sharing information. You hear about a spec work contest and ten minutes later you can fire off an email to the organizers and also alert other people at the same time. So it is really a highly effective tool.” Kevin: I've seen a number of cases where the No Spec Campaign has descended upon websites that are putting out spec requests and making the message very clear that it is not a desirable practice. John: Often it is done by groups who feel they have a low profile and in the past people wouldn’t know because it is not published in the trade papers it would be fairly small. Now it is not possible for organizations to hide and hope that nobody notices. Carmen: And sometimes they just don't know that what they are doing is wrong. John: And often when that is the case, they are willing to reconsider. Carmen: Yes that's right. In fact they apologize sometimes. [laughter] John: The internet definitely provides the ability to spread the message to the whole community and demonstrate that it is not just one person or one organization. You can bring in multiple numbers of organizations and they can all convey that this is not benificial and our members do not support these practices. Carmen: And the key is to show that they as clients are not benefitting either. Kevin: RIght. They are not going to get the best results through these methods. Carmen: Exactly. Kevin: The other side of the internet angle that I find quite interesting is an idea that I stumbled upon in one of the exchanges that was going on online about the No Spec issue in which one of the defenders of designing on spec brought up the idea of today's Open Source/Creative Commons/Community-fed culture on the internet where things are being taken and manipulated and adopted and mashed up etc. Their defense was that in this new environment, the idea of No Spec is becoming outdated. Now I'm throwing this out there as devil's advocate but what is your reaction to that and do you see there being a co-existence of these two ideas? Carmen: Well, first of all, it is totally ridiculous to use the concept of Open Source for this. Because open source refers to code or a program that anybody can use, that nobody really owns that anybody can help improve. This concept doesn’t apply to logos. What they are wanting people to do is have people post logos and in what is an absolute violation of moral rights allow someone else to take them and tinker with them and resubmit them and somehow they think that in the process they are going to get a good result. It is the worst violation of copyright and moral rights. Second, the amount that they are offering to the winner is a paltry 1000 thousand dollars and if you manage to adapt someone else’s I think you get 300 dollars. I mean, it is the most ridiculous solution to getting a logo for your product that we have ever seen. Open concept is a completely inappropriate excuse for this contest. John: It is also a bit of a utopian idea. I mean, fundamentally the business of graphic design is about developing communication solutions for the client’s need. It is done in a strategic and planned way and there is an up front agreement on the exchange of the products. It is a profession no different from any other communications profession. If you are bringing in a consultant to your office to do strategic planning, you do not bring in open source and invite everyone and anyone to contribute an idea. The business is based on partnership and exchange and knowledge, it is not about decorating. It is about fulfilling a need of an organization. That’s the part that is missing. What is important is not necessarily the end product but the process and thinking and strategy that went into making that end product. It is not a beauty contest. Which is what spec creates. Kevin: What final message would you want to pass to the general public as well as to graphic designers who are starting out in the business? Carmen: In the end, people need to understand that they shouldn't be looking at graphic designers as mere implementers but rather as strategic partners for their communication needs. So we still have a lot of work to do to present a different mindset as to what graphic design is and what it can do. Graphic designers themselves have to understand that what they do is a business. That is often an aspect that they don't want to be bothered with but it is in fact an essential part of being a graphic designer that they act and conduct their affairs in a business like fashion and that means no spec work. For more information or to get involved, visit the No-Spec site. Special thanks to both Carmen and John for taking the time to speak with me.
|
 |
 homeaboutportfolio
|
