We’ve learned a lot in this process. And we are clear that we did not go about this in the right way.

As an active member of the “No Spec” movement, Gap’s announcement tonight is truly a wonderful one, and professional designers (other than the ones on sites like crowdspring) around the world will surely be delighted with this outcome.

Well done to everyone that spoke out against Gap’s decision to crowd source the further development of their identity. Chalk this one up as a major win for the No Spec movement.

This one is particularly interesting as it raises some important questions about the CrowdSpring business model, and their dictatorial style. Please take a few moments to read Kathleen’s story below.

I entered the world of crowd sourcing at crowdSPRING (cS) on July 13, 2010, with high hopes of a creative challenge participating in writing projects on a global playing field. I left it feeling used, cynical and disheartened after my account there was deactivated on September 2, 2010—the second time in just 52 days–for the heinous crime of questioning staff on project award anomalies and curious website glitches.

About halfway through this first sourcing stint of mine, I was selected for a project award on August 4th. Interestingly enough this boon occurred only a day after my first deactivation (I’d complained about several ignored e-mail queries, still never adequately answered). The timing was auspicious, but it served its purpose in nudging me to participate again once they chose to reactivate me. This time, however, I worked only on nonprofit or higher award projects.

It wasn’t long, though, before project completions and award methods continued to send up red flags and suspicions of fraudulent behavior on the part of the cS staff, the buyers or both. Writing projects—mainly naming companies/products, creating taglines—are sealed in such privacy at cS that fake projects, fake awardees (ringer accounts set up only as project awardees) and outright intellectual property theft can be easily executed. More than once I suggested to cS staff that greater transparency would be a better business model for them as it would help retain savvy and talented “creatives” [their term for worker bees] over longer periods if they can see what’s truly going on.

Before my final deactivation, I’d wisely gathered data on the projects I participated in. Out of my 13 projects that closed within those 52 days of activity, more than half were not awarded by project buyers but by staff itself creating a serious in-house bias issue. More than half of the 12 people actually awarded on these had joined cS less than two weeks before their respective projects ended, including myself. One winner had joined on July 25th while his/her project ended July 26th and then hasn’t participated again since.

I also gathered data on another five projects I worked on but that had not yet closed when my account was yanked—aggravating because I was confident I had a really good chance at an award on at least two of them but was not allowed to log in for any updates on status. I’d had the good sense to keep a record of each submission and relevant data to help me track and investigate any use of my entries and changes in domain ownerships. This proved fortuitous as, indeed, the buyer on a high-ticket company-/ domain-naming project selected my work for an award. So a month after King Bee autocrat and co-founder, Mike Samson, branded me an “inactive droid,” this worker bee collected one of the larger awards given on any comparable project.

What makes my “How Curiosity Killed the Kat at crowdSPRING” cautionary tale more compelling is the e-mail trail of exchanges between myself and staff revealing the cS personalities involved and showing how questions are either ignored or non-responsively answered and, ultimately, not tolerated. Two among those sent by Samson himself outright threatened to deny my recent award selection, and only pressure by the Chicago buyer on my behalf allowed an honest project completion. I was vigilant enough to protect myself with information and careful research, but clearly many, if not most, involved in crowd sourcing are taken advantage of and never see a penny for their efforts.

I correspond with another participant who was ripped off by cS, and I imagine there are dozens of similar stories from creative sourcing sites. I can’t speak to design projects at cS or to these other sites, but the heavy cloak of secrecy combined with a dictatorial business model that simply removes anyone who dares to question it, creates an ideal recipe for fraud at crowdSPRING.

**UPDATE – June 19th – I have closed comments on this post now as I feel that all sides of the argument have been voiced, and it seems the right time to close the discussion on this particular post. I look forward to the continuing debate on other sites/blogs from all of you. Thank you very much for all of your comments here, the retweets and the re-posting.**

For those of you who have not read or heard about the recent Forbes Magazine article by Christopher Steiner, here is a snippet from David Airey’s site explaining what the article is about:

The high-profile business magazine recently published this article: The Creativity of Crowds , which opens with the following subtitle:

“CrowdSpring aims to slash the cost of graphic design work — and democratize a snooty business .”

Now I’m all for competition, and indeed welcome it, but when there’s such a one-sided article about the validity of spec work , it’s appropriate to mention the other side of the story.

For the unaware, CrowdSpring is a design contest website, where people submit (mainly) logo designs in the hope of winning a prize. Prizes are (not always) awarded by the companies who join and host a contest.

You can read David’s full post here . David puts forward excellent thoughts and opinions on the “Design Contest Websites” and due to a huge following, the inevitable debate is often an important read.

Michael Samson, one of the owners and creators of CrowdSpring, is quoted in the article as saying,

The beauty of our site is that it doesn’t matter if you have a degree from the Rhode Island School of Design or if you’re a grandma in Tennessee with a bunch of free time and Adobe Illustrator,” says Samson. “If the client likes the grandma’s work better, then she’s going to get the job.

Dear Mr. Samson,

“A grandma in Tennessee with a bunch of free time and Adobe Illustrator”?! – in the words of the new “Saturday Night Live” feature; Samson…..REALLY?!

A grandma in Tennessee should not be designing a company’s identity, logo, website, print advertising or anything if she doesn’t have design experience, skill, knowledge, etc. Anyone can get their hands on a copy of Adobe Illustrator and call themselves a designer. I am actually quite shocked that you didn’t use “MS Paint” in place of Adobe Illustrator with your apparent knowledge of the graphic design industry.

Hey, I have a hammer and some wood, anyone need a house built? I have never built a house before but how hard can it be. I’m sure I could put something together that SOMEONE will think looks good. And if they think it looks good, then guess what, I guess I am a builder! Sweet! (just don’t come complaining to me when your house collapses after the first bit of wind.)

Mr Samson, or can I call you Michael? Ok, Michael it is, I feel like we have built up a relationship now that I can call you Michael…..or maybe Mike? Mikey….No? Ok, Michael it is.

Michael, your comment highlights everything that is wrong in the graphic design industry.

Some clients do not know what looks good and what will be successful for them

Of course the grandma in Tennessee can scribble a few things together, and someone out there may love it, but that does not mean for one second that it will be successful for that client, or that it comes anywhere close to meeting their real needs as an integral piece of their company’s identity.

As an experienced designer, clients often ask me to “do this” or “do that”, and often what they want is not what they need . They need skilled designers and marketers to help them to see what they need. Designers and marketers research their clients’ audience, and come up with an educated solution. Some clients love an animated gif of a leopard running in place to be on their website, but you and I know (well, maybe not YOU…) that this is not a good addition to their website. The client is not to blame for this, that’s why they hired the professional .

And that is where your website comes in. If you don’t want to hire a professional who values their work, does not research your company, your market, your clients’ needs, and simply knows how to draw pretty things that are meaningless, then head on over to Michael and his website.

An excellent comment on the Forbes article comes from Eric Hillerns explaining this perfectly.

A CAD program does not make me an architect and a copy of QuickBooks does not make me an accountant… And the Forbes writer? You know, the one who penned this article’s ludicrously silly subhead, was likely this year’s lucky winner of Mrs. Winters’ sixth grade journalism competition. Because why would we pay an experienced writer when anyone with Microsoft Word and e-mail can submit a story?

Congratulations, Forbes. You got exactly what you paid for. Sludge. But then again, maybe that was your point.
Eric Hillerns

Mr. Swanson, there is something extremely odd about the article that was written by this Christopher guy. I’m no journalist, but I do understand some aspects of journalism and integrity. When one writes an article about a subject matter that obviously has a strong opposition to it, to merely throw in one single quote from the contrasting side is not only displaying a gross lack of judgment, but also shows that you are an extremely amateur writer, and quite possibly Mrs. Winters’ best student in her 6th grade class. Forbes must have had to lay off the highly paid journo’s and in their place, Westbrook Catholic School got their chance.

I wonder what got rejected…….

Sincerely,

Designers that respect their work, their fellow designers, and their industry

The first contest I entered was for a juicing distribution company, planning on opening up juice bars and printing their brand on all products and packaging. They created the contest to get a new logo for their company. So, I read the brief:

“We would like to see something that would fit our distribution aspect of the business and our retail aspect of the business.We need something smart and unique and something that would fit our distribution side of the business where we distribute juicing machines, and our retail side of the business where we open juice bars that sell freshly squeezed juices such as pomegranate, orange, kiwi, pineapple and many others including vegetable juice and wheat grass.

Our logo can be trendy, and fun, with a hint of sophistication and business like manner.”

 

This project seemed to me to be a fun first entry into the logo contest experience on this website, so I entered a logo after coming up with a creative, professional concept. They liked it right away and immediately I received 4/5 stars for my entry. There was also one other designer that received 4/5 stars, and I liked his entry also. Here are a few of the better entries for this specific contest.

Out of over 120 entries, my logo was chosen to be the best match for the client. The client had a few nice words to say and privately emailed me with this:

“Hi Brian, thanks a lot for all your designs, you are our favorite designer. You are very talented.”

Here is my winning logo, and a few variations of it, to present the possibilities for other media:

So, for designers, my question is this; Do you agree with logo design competitions like this? Have you ever entered a contest on logo design contest site like this? What was your experience?

I am slightly torn on this subject. On the one hand, these contests sort of cheapen the work of the designers (most logo design contests only have a prize of $100), they also remove the development process and close interaction between the client and the designer (this is often an extremely valuable process for creating a powerful logo for the client). On the other hand, it is a fun way for the designer to build up his or her portfolio along with the opportunity to make a bit of cash along the way.

I imagine that some designers make a living from almost solely spending their time on these design contests, but I am unsure whether or not this is a good thing for our market, as logo designers.

What do you think?