Last week, we wrote about uShip, where customers post shipments online and shipping companies bid for their business. A similar approach is being taken by another venture we recently spotted. This time, it's all about design. SitePoint, an Australian media company that targets web professionals, lets companies hold design contests and gain access to the creative talents of the global design community.
How it works? A business owner looking for a new design, be it a logo, website or stationery, describes exactly what she's looking for: what the desired colour scheme and file format are, what the design is for, and which elements to incorporate (for example: “We would like to have the initials PCM and 'Panama City Models' below the initials with a smaller font. But might consider a different approach”). After a prize amount and an end-date have been set, designers start submitting their work for all to see. Once the contest holder sees a design she likes, she can award the prize to buy the design. Alternatively, she can first suggest minor tweaks or request changes.
Designers retain all rights to their submitted work until they’ve been awarded the prize on offer and have been paid in full. On receipt of payment, all rights to the winning design transfer from the designer to the contest holder. To protect themselves, designers are advised to check the contest holder's previous posts to determine their standing in the community, and to ask the contest holder questions about the terms of payment, etc.
While many established designers protest that this type of 'spec' work is devaluing their profession, crowdsourcing is a valid and cost-effective option for small businesses or organisations who can't (yet) afford to hire a traditional branding agency or graphic design firm. Gaining access to thousands of aspiring designers means that a small town pub or a summer computer camp can buy a logo or t-shirt design for USD 100-200. Meanwhile, designers from across the world can tap into a much larger market for their services, while building their portfolio, honing their skills and presenting to real clients.
Both clients and designers seem to like the concept: SitePoint's design contests boast over 2,000 designers who submit on average 420 designs a day, and over USD 80,000 is offered as prize money each month. Businesses pay SitePoint a USD 20 listing fee and set their own prizes, which must be higher than the minimum dollar amount specified by SitePoint for each design category. Since graphic design and briefings are often tied to language and culture, this is definitely one to start in your own neck of the woods. Alternatively, study SitePoint, Threadless, iStockPhoto and other creative crowdsourcing communities, and carve your own niche.
Website: www.sitepoint.com/contests
Contact: www.sitepoint.com/contact
Spotted by: Shayne Tilley
Email to friendPrevious: Garbage into gold, via worm poop «
Next: Gyms for kids use gaming to keep them hooked »
Original or not, I'm more concerned about this ending up targeting the lowest common denominator when designing. Crowdsourcing in itself is a novel concept. but it doesn't apply equally to all markets. :-)
From what I've seen at designoutpost.com and similar sites, the clients seem incredibly pleased with the work and the quality of the work is rather impressive
And the creative industry finds yet another source to source low-ball design and cheapen the industry even more. Personally i cant wait until the same thing happens with the medical industry - get your hip replacement from the lowest bidder online, regardless of their skills or qualifications.
I love this site - but this "great idea" is nothing but a huge kick in the pants for any serious creative professional!
Scotia, you couldn´t be seriously comparing creative design with medical skills...
Sorry bout that - no i wasn't trying to say by any means that creatives are "life savers" - merely pointing out the great future of the creative industry faces by the promotion of competition based websites and spec work sites. (One could easily argue that $150 for a logo amounts to spec work)
Yes - small businesses will benefit in the short term, i'm more concerned by the larger companies will jump onto this bandwagon to save a few $$$
What next - marketing consultancy for $50 a pop?
So ... apologies to any doctors out there ;)
You got the same concept in France called www.wilogo.com
spend your time on this project and maybe you will get paid, or maybe not. thanks, no.
design that looks good isn't that same what good design is. that's what you paying for in design agancy, design+quality+exprience. good designer have to earn decent money i you want less crap around.
i am very creative.but i dont have any good clients at hand.ludovic can u help me out.
I agree with Scotia-B.
As a design professional and the owner of a design house, I can say that this type of spec work is devaluing our field to the point that true professionals can barely make a living. We have signed the NO!SPEC petition and urge others to do the same.
The professional design world has to now compete between IT programmers who think they know how to build a website, stay-at-home mom's who think because they have Microsoft Paint they can design logos for $50 and clip-art wizards who think Publisher is an okay layout program.
Perhaps we can let a couple Boy Scouts with a CPR class under their belt handle some surgery next week?
adforum.net is another player in this field, but opening it up to idea creation. Not sure how well it works though, as I haven't seen any big advertiser putting up a brief, and the rewards seem to be quite low. Also, they've been around since 2002 or something, and haven't much seen from them up until now. Anybody knows?
Creative services are not a commodity, like coffee. And yeah, I'd like to see that hip replacement for the price of an effen cup of Starbucks. Or real estate agents working for what they are truly worth. I too have signed on with NoSpec! In the meantime, I sell the value of what I produce for my clients and they pay full boat happily... because it's about results and response. And that's something they take to the bank.
That's called "spec work" and it's precisely what the AIGA crusades against. They even have a preformatted form for designers to send out under their own letterhead when they're confronted with such a system.
totally agree with the sentiments posted here. this de-values design and makes it a commodity. i can't think of another profession where you would have the cheek to even suggest this concept - hence no doubt the comments about the medical profession. would draughtspeople (draftspeople), architects etc consider this? i seriously doubt it! so why did designers even agree to be part of this concept - which by the way isn't a 'new' at all - as mentioned by others. bloody demeaning i reckon...
so is the issue here about the valuation of the creative mind and crowdsourcing lowering the financial comp for a creative professional, or is it about something else? What would you all see as a reasonable fee for service on say, the following four items for argument's sake:
Print
Web
Radio (script)
TV
I was just thinking earlier about crowdsourcing and what criteria or situations might lead to it's successful application in other industries.
You can find the article here
http://blog.beaufortes.com/2007/06/making_crowdsou.html
I hope that you'll stop by!
Cheers,
Jason
Jason Bates
'Project Leadership Evangelist'
Beaufortes Ltd.
Pricing will always vary by market.
ndejesus - The matter is completely focused on devaluing a process that to the layperson seems fairly direct. Developing an identity for a business or organization takes a lot more than sitting at a computer and making "pretty pictures".
What if you told your accountant that their job was only worth $50 because all they do is "fill in some numbers on a tax return"?
Speaking for my own company, we have a whole Q&A process, market research and psychology behind our work. We strive to provide and SUPPORT creative branding services that are successful because of our added effort.
The $99 internet logo or "sister-in-law" who designed something in Word doesn't even come close to the level of professionalism and thought put into a developed identity. By bargain-shopping on a website you get a WAL-MART quality product that probably won't print, won't scale and won't be worth anything when applied to the spectrum of materials a business needs.
I'd like to start seeing other industries working for free and HOPING they get the job. Ever asked your Dr. to put on a cast and then ask another one to put on their cast to see who you like best? Whoever you do, you like best? How about your mechanic. They just hook up a computer and it tells them what's wrong with it anymore. So they're just using a computer like a creative professional. Ask the mechanic to fix your car and then let them know if you like the work well enough to pay for it.
This is yet another idiotic idea and certainly should not be supported by any creative worth their salt.
Very sad - and, unfortunately, when the customer gets EXACTLY what they pay for, it reflects very poorly on the entire community of professional designers.
- J.
I am a small business owner and these "contests" as business practices hurt my business and many other's who have worked very hard over the years to build their expertise and professionalism in this Industry. THIS is NOT "professional"..this cheapens the business of graphic design and will NOT help designers right out of school learn the right way to do business and will hurt them in the long run (how much time wasted "working for free"..how sad). This will also hurt unknowing customers because they will not get a quality well-researched product which is very poor marketing.
I also support No!Spec:
http://www.no-spec.com/
-K.
This is patently ridiculous. Anyone who says they don't have the budget for a design professional either has not properly prepared to be in business, or is too lazy to do their homework. There are professionals who work at all different levels and price scales. The internet is a great tool for those willing to look. Plenty of sites exist that list professional designers - the AIGA directory (http://www.aiga.org) and Creative Latitude (http://www.creativelatitude.com) are two of them.
Design is important - it communicates a company's brand and personality to their customers and their potential customers. The thing that "designers" willing to work on spec and clients don't understand is how truly harmful this practice is to BOTH sides. Clients don't get a real solution or the benefit of working with a professional who is invested in the project, and designers are stuck working for people who simply want the cheapest thing possible.
There is an initiative going to help educate designers and clients about the dangers of spec work. NO!SPEC (http://www.no-spec) has plenty of information about the dangers of spec work and why true professionals do not participate in it.
When a buyer of design chooses spec work as an avenue to get as many submissions as possible the buyer doesn’t realize that important steps in the development of strategic design is compromised. Contributing Spec Designers are busy mass producing designs and because of this they don’t analyze and research the buyer’s company, the buyer’s competitors and the best strategic plan of collateral presence for the buyer's business.
Strategic design is extremely important. It enhances market positioning as well as providing a competitive advantage in the marketplace. Without strategic design the message is lost and so is the competitive advantage.
When a designer chooses to do Spec work for experience the designer disregards important steps in the development of strategic design. Instead the designer in a rush to meet multiple deadlines submits mediocre designs that fail to meet real-world business and organization’s challenges. This type of experience is often unpaid (with promises of fame or fortune in the future) or with very little real compensation to the designer whose design was chosen and for those whose submissions that were rejected there is no compensation at all for their time and expense.
Spec work is a risk to both the buyer of design and the designer because it under-values and ignores the strategic steps that effectively meet and successfully provide real-world solutions.
Speculative (Spec) work isn’t practiced in the majority of industries for good reasons. It's risky.
In addition to being a small-business owner in a highly competitive area, I'm a wife and mother. My income helps me to provide for my family. "Contest" and "crowdsourcing" sites like these not only devalue the design industry, they also take money from me and my family.
Those of you utilizing these resources - will YOU provide your product or service to US for free, on the chance that we'll like it enough to pay you SOMETHING - even if it's far less than what the product or service is really worth?
If not, why would you expect an entire industry to do the same? Are we, as designers, not worthy of earning a living? I just cannot fathom the thinking behind this.
We have a marketable skill. Those in need of design service hire us BECAUSE we have this skill. Bottom line - we deserve to get paid for our skill, talent and experience.
And that's why I support the NO!SPEC (http://www.no-spec.com) initiative.
Another good resource is http://www.crowdsourcingdirectory.com
I wouldn't expect professional graphics designers to even entertain the idea of being a crowdsourcing provider... eroding your business by doing 'speculative' work is not generally a good idea for most professionals... (unless you are really-really good, and want to build relationships with new clients by proving that fact, before they pay you... risky, but possible)
More generally, there are people out there, 'amateurs' in the traditional sense of the word, who love entering contests, love using and creating with the pro-grade ubiquitous toolsets that are available now... and like to earn a little money on the side, This is what crowdsourcing is about.
the scary thing is that there are some really good amateurs out there!
It's going to make the market for low-end design services more competitive, and I think that professional designers will be squeezed, but hey, thats the deal... I don't think that crowdsourcing will go away. So how will you deal with the changing conditions?
It's not been called the C-generation for nothing.
Journalists vs. bloggers
Professional designers vs. crowdsourcers
Small software firms vs. open source projects
Professional photographers vs. istockphoto et. al.
People are creating for fun, and there are a whole host of battles between 'traditional professionals' vs. 'talented amateurs' and the landscape is changing because of it.
How can you move up the value chain, and differentiate yourself as a true professional to your customers?
Interesting times.
...actually maybe Springwise could use
"the Pro-am wars"
as the name of a new trend?
;o)
JB>
I'm a young designer, just starting out! I've lost six of these competitions, spent hours on my concepts without earning anything for it, but I feel I'm due to win one soon! Would love to chat, but I'm off to my night job!
Dear Springwise,
I'd like to run 3 banner ads on your site. I'd like to utilize both the vertical and horizontal ads spaces near the top and the lowest banner ad space on your home page.
I'd like to run the ads on spec. In other words, you'll post them for free, if I like the results I'll pay $150 to have them posted for a month.
I recently had my house painted blue. I didn't like the shade so I told the painter I decided to go in a different direction and unfortunately I couldn't pay him as I wasn't going to use his work. I had several companies paint my house different shades until I had a color I was happy with. All of the companies were more than willing to paint my house for free and not charge me for the paint because it was a "slow time of year" or they were "young, hungry, up and coming" painters. I paid the final painter $50 because that's all I had in my budget.
It doesn't matter if a designer is young or an agency is slow. NO designer has no overhead. Design cannot be done without design tools whether it's a pencil and paper or a Mac and Photoshop. That costs money. Guess what? Art school costs money too. So, unless a business wants someone with no art school or computer programming education slapping together a design with stolen software you should NOT be asking for spec.
As a matter of fact, this movement toward spec (which by the way is not the idea of a designer but probably a talentless and immoral former project manager) is probably why bootleg and shared software is increasing.
So entrepreneurs, by taking advantage of virtual slave labor sites like SitePoint, you're hurting software agencies AND designers. Not to mention that no one is going to put the requisite time into consumer and competitive research to deliver a well thought out solution.
p.s. Miguel, you'll stay at that night job if you keep entering these contests. You're hurting yourself and the rest of us by supporting them.
You know, it was the designers themselves who started Design Contests in the SitePoint Community Forums, not SitePoint.
I'm really not sure why so many professional designers are running scared. SitePoint Design Contests addresses a market that none of you care to service (i.e. designers who can't get jobs with your firms because they don't have enough experience or they live remotely, and clients who only have a few hundred dollars to spend on a logo). There's still plenty of room in the middle and top end of the market for professional design firms to prosper.
The great thing about Design Contests is that they give up-and-coming designers a chance to gain invaluable experience dealing with real clients. It allows them to build a folio of "real work". And for some it provides a source of leads and a potential income stream to tap between projects. Then there's the hobbiests - many contributors work day jobs in other areas and just dabble in design for fun - they really don't care what prize is at stake.
Look, if you're really concerned that Design Contests has the potential threaten your well being, start working now to refine your own offerings - this is not going to go away just because you don't like it. Even if SitePoint shut it down the designers who started it will resurface somewhere else. Get over it, move on!
It seems like the people who are against this idea have never heard this sentence:
You get what you pay for.
In the same way you would get a better paint job for your house if you were to pay professionals, you get better design if you pay the price... in theory. The people that are scared by that concept are people that overcharge. I run a print shop that's been consistently undercut by big-box chains (Staples and such), yet my clients keep coming back because we offer higher quality and better service. I say to clients to choose two out of these three things: low cost, quick turnaround and quality. They get it.
Hi All-
Thought you might be interested in a Crowdsourcing event at Stanford on May 20th, 2008 sponsored by VLAB. Jeff Howe from Wired who coined the term crowdsourcing will be moderating a panel with VCs and crowdsourcing companies like Cambrian House.
Great post. Based on your article, we recently used SitePoint for an internal project at our printer toner business http://www.concordsupplies.com. Absolutely amazing results. Keep up the great work Springwise.
blimey, what a bunch of whiners.
the influx of low-cost labour has impacted many, many industries. why should graphic design be so precious?
being devils advocate, perhaps such websites increase the size of the design market by serving small business owners that otherwise would have prepared 'design work' in MS Word or equivalent.
perhaps some hopeful but poor quality amateur designers will waste their own time creating designs that never get bought - so what. it's no worse than people writing blogs that never get read.
quality businesses will always appreciate good graphic design, so long as they are focussed on serving clients rather than being distracted by pointless lobby initiatives. but expensive, mediocre designers beware.
i agree completely with jason bates commentary above.
for the record, i have no affiliation whatsoever with the apparently offending websites.
here's another idea: all the designs that we, professionals, have created but have never been retained, can be all smacked into one large pit; companies that actually use crowdsourcing normally pick a logo they fancy... the designer will change the name of the company/product or what so-ever, and the client will pay for it - even if it is the mere 150 bucks, it might be worth it because the work's done already... every single designer can do this with her/his work individually and on her/his own website too. this way good ideas do not end up in the trash, can be recycled without scrupples (hm, not sure this is creative nor professional...), and make the cheapskate companies happy...
charly
what's all the fuss?! It's a LOGO not a complex campaign strategy or branding exercise. I got my first jobs through things like this, Ok it was word of mouth but they gave me the confidence to continue into the industry. I've now been working in UK design for over 15 years. It doesn't scare me or frighten me, there's no personal service or consultancy offered with the work done here, so the fee's reflect that. Bidding or pitching for work or services is common place. The only difference is it's open to everyone now, the bar has been raised.
I agree with comments above, there's some good amateurs producing some fantastic work, perhaps that's the real reason for concern!
I build the same website in France. I called it www.creads.org
you should check out a website called Denook. Crowdsourcing for designers and musicians. At
www.denook.com
This is not so much a new concept, but one that has been around for a long time (in the U.S. at least). One of the first pioneers in this space is designoutpost.com which I've been using for years.
Kevin Z. | May 24, 2007 8:38 PM