Comments on: Did CP&B’s crowdsourcing experiment backfire? Have designers created an exclusive club designed to keep newcomers out?

By: Abe

Abe — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 21:02:46 +0000

Here’s a solution: Adobe should lean on these sites to require users to provide their Photoshop, Illustrator, and font licenses.

Business owners are required to do so. Why should Crowdspring profit from software privacy?

By: edward boches

edward boches — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 21:52:10 +0000

Rory:
You are in good company with your opinions. I am not totally convinced of CS as a tool that benefits dsigners (though there are some entry level and aspirants who would argue it is). My real interest is in co-creation and participation. To date, we have done only one contest, mostly entered by wannabes and displacing no one. But we have used it a lot in many other places. Crowdfunding for Grain Foods Foundation; consumer participation in conversation and community for Panera; video sharing for Olympus; the co-creation and marketing of Lemonade the Movie (I just helped with the promo part); in creating digital events from analog events (Superbowl, Academy Awards, etc.) for Mullen; and my favorite http://thenextgreatgeneration.com where everyone benefits. I think that Lowe got screwed on the Peparami project. We live in an age of consumer participation, even control. Brands no longer can stop people from creating content so why not embrace it. (See HP You on You). Sure there are brands trying to do it only to save money or squeeze participants via competitions. But many have the intention of finding better if not the best ideas, of inviting their communities into the brand, of embracing a larger talent pool. CS gets a bad name from the design community. But even in that case there are some advantages. I’m just one guy trying to experiment with all that’s new. You can blame me if you want, but I’m not inventing the trends, consumers are.

By: Rory M Kelly

Rory M Kelly — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 21:15:41 +0000

…oh, and sorry, I forgot to mention in the previous message, the reason why crowdsourcing isn’t economically viable is because the only time someone gets paid in the process is when a design amongst many is chosen (in which case the winner is paid). But the bitch of it is, that individual is paid after their work is done.

So for all you design professionals out there who like the idea of getting paid only once the work is 100% sold to the client, raise your hand!

By: Rory M Kelly

Rory M Kelly — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 21:07:58 +0000

It seems as though the only real reason in favour of crowdsourcing that I’ve come across after reading post after post after article after article about it is “that it’s different” and “boldly trailblazing a new direction, leaving behind the fossils of…” …whatever.

So because no one at all, anywhere in this whole debate about crowdsourcing has been able to actually articulate how it is a sound and viable business idea that will stimulate economic growth, I’m gonna guess its all about the – how do you say – “newness” of it all.

But perhaps the biggest problem with it is that it kinda “deregulates” the entire business of graphic and communication design. Which is bad. Its bad because although its a business that has the appearance of fun and frolic and reverie…its still a business. And to the masses of people who have chosen it as a profession, its a job. Fun at times yes, but a job. And a job that pays a reasonable salary, but not riches. So its a labour of love for the vast majority of designers.

So I guess then Edward, you could say that if crowdsourcing passes the litmus test in the design world, lets just move it along after that to the world of finanace. Or litigation. Or construction. Cause yeah, people don’t really need to get paid for the work they perform at their jobs. They don’t need to eat or sleep or have a roof over their heads or hell, even feed their kids while we’re at it. No. They don’t. They don’t need all these things out of their jobs because work is entirely about ideas and discourse! Who will win the big pitch! And more importantly…who will survive in the future! Its certainly not about who will survive in the present, because…well…its kinda hard to live past a week or so with no food, no home and no family. Which exactly what the professionals of the design industry (or any other indusrty) will be left with if crowdsourcing becomes the norm.

It looks as though people like Edward Boches and his friends at CP+B have really missed a huge nugget about this crowdsourcing thing. It takes the deregulation and dismemberment of an entire industry to usher it in as the next big trend.

But I guess the American people haven’t had enough unemployment. Its not enough that the financial industry (as deserving as it was) is now in shambles, and as well, that the entire American auto industry is in jeopardy…lets throw the design industry down the chute as well.

By: Does This Crowd Want To Be Sourced? | Please Feed The Animals

Does This Crowd Want To Be Sourced? | Please Feed The Animals — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:35:04 +0000

[...] the one hand, it’s a brilliant way to engage fans/consumers/friends with your brand. Instead of pushing an internally generated idea, you invite [...]

By: Anthony Butler

Anthony Butler — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 14:14:04 +0000

Edward,

When I saw the Netflix article at NYTimes.com, I wondered how long it would take you to notice. Then I logged onto to Twitter the next day and got my answer.

File this one from the NY Times on crowdsourcing recipes under “Too many cooks in the kitchen…”

“E-KITCHENS GET CROWDED AS USERS TWEAK INGREDIENTS ON FOODIE SITES.”

http://tiny.cc/qZSCG

By: edward boches

edward boches — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:49:50 +0000

Anthony:
Well aware of the Netflix project. Has been underway for a long time and a challenging project for those who gave it a try. It’s the challenge, and the $$ that got them interested. I think we all know the difference between a gimmick, a real need, a quest for lower costs, and the benefits of participation in propagation of an idea from either CS or co-creation. Watch, this will be as popular as all other aspects of social media very quickly. Thanks so much for the links.

By: Anthony Butler

Anthony Butler — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 18:21:43 +0000

Posting a link here to the article referred to on Twitter re:Netflix paying out a $1m prize to a team who created a movie recommendation algorithm that outperformed Netfix own software by 10%.

http://tiny.cc/latGx

The article is worth reading because it reveals how much the client already valued outside technical expertise to improve what they view as a crucial component of their customer experience. The business goal of the project (improving product matching for customers) was deemed worthy enough for the client to spend this kind of money on technology, since it is the only way to solve the problem.

Perhaps that provides a guide to how clients will continue to spend money with the likes of us instead of crowdsourcing everything. Establish a business goal for every creative project and make sure the client agrees that it is worth the time + effort = money. See Fast Company article article on design inside Coke. VP of Design David Butler never mentions the word ‘design’ before he delivers the goods.

http://www.fastcompany.com/design/2009/

By: edward boches

edward boches — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 01:51:26 +0000

Anthony and Paul:
A lot of this is all about the money. Do you have clients who aren’t cutting budgets? We are working, as is every agency I know, to deliver faster, cheaper, more digital. Forget the kerning, who needs dropped shadows, all the background detail, forget it. Film? Let’s shoot on video. Etc. Etc. Etc. The new definition of creative will not different. Years ago a great creative director, Stavros Cosmopulos said, “Make the layouts rough and the ideas fancy.” If he were alive today he’d say, “Make million dollar ideas and thousand dollar productions.”

By: edward boches

edward boches — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 01:45:20 +0000

I fixed the typos. Always do, as I am a perfectionist, just like great designers. I agree with everything you are saying. But it’s not up to me. Read the piece in the recent Wired about “The Good Enough Revolution.” MP3s suck. They sound like crap. They do to music what bad design does to craftsmanship. They deny all the importance of audio quality and the amazing ability of the human ear to detect frequencies. And I am sure there are composers and musicians alike who lament that they have replaced Kirsch horn speakers. But they have. Because they are good enough.