I received many comments on last week’s post on my blog about my recent crowdsourcing experience. There was a variety of opinions and takes on how I handled my client’s unhappy comparison between the work she got from me and the work she got from the logo mill – many were thought-provoking, a few were loopy, and none left any doubt as to where they stood on the issue.
So to keep it from becoming the World’s Longest Thread, I’ve continued the discussion as this week’s post at Laurel’s Design Deli, responding to responders. You can read that here.
But here's an excerpt further explaining my position on the solution to this problem:
I think that for designers, client education and marketing design have to be synonymous. As Marcelo Alvarez Bravo commented, “The big problem of the perceived quality and value has to do with the education of customers and also the inexperience of the designers to argue correctly.” I would add that in addition to those two aspects, it also has to do with the disinclination of many designers to bother explaining their worth. We need to get over ourselves.
Crowdsourcing has made inroads into the design profession partly because we let it. The push-back has to include the ability to explain clearly (and with no jargon) what design brings to the success of any organization. And no one is going to do that for us.
Your thoughts?
