Michael Aleo recently wrote a post that stirred up some feelings that I have about AIGA. That is that AIGA is an organization that claims to represent professional designers but doesn’t really accurately represent the current landscape of the design industry.
Michael’s post details an e-mail conversation he had with a judge from the DC AIGA50 design competition. For full disclosure I don’t know Michael (though I reached out to him with a few background questions on his post) and the fact that he was entered in the competition may lead some to consider his point of view to be biased. I did not enter the competition and I am not currently a paying member of AIGA but have been in the past. I have judged a competition for another organization and served on the board of the Art Directors Club of DC. I do not currently live in the DC area but work for an agency headquartered there. I am fully aware that his post may not represent every angle of the story. I invite other sides of this story to respond, and I would love it if someone from AIGA would comment and be more transparent about what lead to the comments made by this judge.
Michael said what a lot of professional web designers think and risked making some folks mad. He backed it up with some pretty revealing comments from an AIGA competition judge.
To illustrate his point Michael talks about how the AIGADC 50 competition judges chose to recognize wrapping paper made by a design agency (for themselves) over several website designs that included information architecture and complex goal oriented problem solving done for clients. When the AIGA judge was asked about this her comments (According to Aleo) were:
“The wrapping paper was at least a relief from some of the downright bad work that was entered.
Can’t say it was brilliant/groundbreaking/useful but at least it had something redeeming about it. The interactive web stuff you showed me was pedestrian and just plan bad design. This stuff should be smart, beautiful and content friendly. Ugh!”
In Aleo’s examples I can’t say that any of the interactive web work was groundbreaking but if you look at it from the angle of 50 pieces representing the DC area design, they are strong representation of solid well done web work done FOR CLIENTS in the DC area.
So, Why the hell do I care about what AIGA chooses to showcase as good design?
AIGA represents the professional design industry. Professional being defined by Merrium-Webster as “participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs”.
AIGA is seen by outside organizations as being the representative for those who pay their bills designing “stuff” as the judge so respectfully put it. Hey, I design interactive “stuff” for my livelihood, so AIGA claiming to represent me to the world is MY business.
AIGA’s website says:
“AIGA sets the national agenda for the role of design in economic, social, political, cultural and creative contexts.”
Whoa: that’s pretty powerful. This organization influences THE AGENDA for the role of what I do in just about every other applicable or important context of the NATION.
Most importantly it is the organization that design students look to for guidance and examples of quality standard practices within our industry. It sets the tone for future designers and how they will contribute to our industry.
Michael’s article describes AIGA as being “old” and that is an issue because it is perpetuating a cycle of setting unrealistic expectations about what the actual professional landscape of design looks like. As Michael points out: the 50 pieces of design chosen to represent the DC area only included two actual websites. The professional association of designers is telling the world and especially design instructors and students that the standards for what represents good design is mostly print in the DC area. Even though the landscape of profitable design employment is a very different ratio.
I took a look at the AIGA design jobs site and filtered available positions to show DC area design jobs (since the article was about AIGADC). Out of the 16 open positions listed that were dated between February 21 and April 4th nine listed “web design” as one of the job functions (if not THE core job function). Out of those 9 a couple even included “web development”.
To a student looking to start a career in the design industry the competition results set expectations that in order to do “award winning work” you need to do print work. Students striving to be exceptional become frustrated at the job landscape and give up on our industry. I have seen it happen with my former classmates. Call me sentimental, but I mourn the loss of great design talent to unreasonable expectations set by the leaders in our design industry. I want to see talented designers excel and elevate the quality of overall work being produced by our community.
University design programs also look to AIGA for guidance on shaping their programs. Universities are producing qualified and hirable print designers at a much higher rate than they are producing hirable-out-of-school web designers. If we want to see web education change we have to look to organizations like AIGA to help set the standards to change them.
As a former student who was determined to make my fanciful lifelong dream of supporting myself as a “Professional Designer” come true, I am greatly concerned with AIGA claiming to represent the professional design landscape as being so print oriented. They are building expectations amongst very talented young designers that making good design is mostly being a print designer.
I am also really concerned with the tone and attitude that this judge had about the work coming out of DC. That negative tone is “old”, get with the program…. the web design industry is OPEN. The new design industry is flourishing on the web through open attitudes and positive contributions. There is no place for negative elitist bullshit in the future of design.
There was a judge on the three person panel who specialized in web design at a large agency. Michael says that he reached out to him for comment with no response. Because I have had prior experience as a judge for a competition I imagine there may be more to the story and am very interested in hearing it.
I would love to see AIGA put more effort into diversifying their group of judges to include more web industry leaders and attracting a larger submission pool of quality interactive work. Lots of traditional advertising and design organizations have done a great job with this and you guys being the largest in the industry can reach out and do the same. If you are an AIGA board member here are some suggestions, take them with a grain of salt because I personally know from experience it is much easier said than done:
- Look for potential judges who are doing good work, sharing ideas and progressing the evolution of the web industry. Don’t know where to find those folks? Check the lineups at web industry conferences. http://futureinsightslive.com, http://aneventapart.com, http://valiocon.com, http://interlinkconference.com, http://convergese.com.
- Market the competition itself in a way that will encourage a lot of folks to visit the winning entry’s agency’s/designer’s sites. Wonder why so many CSS Galleries get tons of entries? Because the featured designs receive a lot of traffic. Websites are visible to the general public already, up the stakes a little bit. Work to develop relationships with high profile websites to promote the competition. Sites like: http://www.thefwa.com, http://www.smashingmagazine.com, http://www.netmagazine.com, http://unmatchedstyle.com and maybe even http://dribbble.com.
- Create value beyond prestige. What do you get for entering your site in the competition? Useful (constructive) feedback on how to be a better designer from the judges could be a way to achieve this. Get creative on the benefits of being part of a competition like this. Most web designers don’t have to pay money to get good work in front of a lot of people… think outside of the box on incentives.
- Make it worth a potential web judge’s time. You might not have a huge budget to pay out, but make sure you are at least offering them the same as your traditional design judges. A featured Interview or bio on your site to provide context of what makes them knowledgeable in their subject area is a minimum. If you can afford it, bring them in for the judging, a dinner, or to do a presentation at your chapter. Make being involved in judging a positive and worthwhile way to give back.
- Establish judging criteria and be transparent. I have judged a competition before and the lack of this can really contribute to confusion and misrepresentation of final winning results. Web and Print design are apples and oranges, acknowledge that and give your judges some context to what the winning entries should represent. Have the judges write comments about what made the winning pieces “winners”.
Before I conclude I want to make it clear that I am not criticizing the hard working volunteers who work to make AIGA run. Volunteering is no joke, it’s a lot of work to make a competition happen.Volunteering for any industry organization can be an enormous undertaking and the more industry folks who pitch in make it a lighter load for everyone. If you are reading this and never considered volunteering, now is the time! No I am not criticizing the volunteers, I am asking them to carefully consider who and what they chose to represent as the best of “Professional Design” in today’s industry landscape.
With all said, I give a shit about what AIGA does because it is a large part of my industry ecosystem, or at least markets itself to as a representative of what I do to influence other aspects of “THE NATION“. I look forward to the day when web designers feel like they are a real part of the design community that AIGA represents. Or… if that never happens… when the web design community decides to organize our collective positive powers to be the official “professional association for design”.
8 Comments
This is a great post and I know you’ve put a lot of thought into AIGA and the design industry in general over the years.
I went through the same undergrad design program that you did, and I have been able to make a career out of it as well. It was pretty shocking to me to see so many of our peers drop out of the industry so soon after graduation.
One problem I think is that design is still taught as an ivory tower type profession. I remember things like newspaper design and direct mail being really looked down on. I’ve worked in both of those fields and they taught me a ton, especially about real world deadlines, juggling multiple projects, and how to keep something fresh after you’ve done 10+ iterations of the same mail package. Direct mail is also awesome because someone has to make a schedule, and there are almost always results on the impact of the project, which you can immediately use in your next one for that client.
I’ve stuck to print as my first love, but that doesn’t mean it’s the only thing I can or will do. I prefer to leave the web design and development to the way more capable specialists I work with. However, most of my “print” projects end up as PDFs that are distributed electronically and never printed. I also have to design artwork for PowerPoints and spot graphics for the web (SharePoint included). So even as a print designer, I need to be able to bring more than one skill to the table. I’ve been approached about learning video and/or more web skills. We have one guy here that knows web, video, “print,” and is also an awesome cartoonist. Obviously someone can’t be an expert in everything, but I think to teach undergrads to expect to stick to ONE narrow type of work in the design field is doing them a huge disservice.
About twice a year, I get a major “book” project. Our clients don’t have the kind of money for fancy effects like embossing, or heat-sensitive ink, or any of the things you see time and time again in design competitions or annuals. This starts to wear on me after a while. Wouldn’t it be nice if there were design competitions for “budget” work?
I’ve recently gotten involved with interviewing candidates for our design department. The work that stands out is almost always in the poster category. This is a major pet-peeve of mine, because of course student work, or self promotional posters are going to involve so much more freedom than client work, which is often done on a much tighter timeline, and reviewed by a committee who might not necessarily agree with your artistic vision. I’d much rather see volunteer work for a real client (even if it is a relative!), than work created in a vacuum. That, to me, is the difference between graphic design and fine art. Competitions should have a totally separate category for in-house/promotional work, which to me falls into this same type of category.
— April 9, 2012
I think this post is very timely, considering all the brouhaha (sp?) going on with Paula Scher’s post on AIGA’s Justified competition (http://imprint.printmag.com/design-thinking/aiga-unjustified/?et_mid=548293&rid=47067384).
My only quibble with your (and Michael’s) post is that I don’t think it’s fair, or accurate, to assume that Caryn Goldberg, as a judge for one particular competition, represents AIGA and AIGA DC.
As a past president of the DC chapter and a national board member (I was a voting member as the president’s council chair for one year), I know for a fact that AIGA and the local chapters have been working really hard to expand outside of the *old* definitions of design and the expectations of what it means to be a designer. That of course includes interactive. Because my husband (Hobbs) is a designer at Threespot, I also know that there is a lot that goes into interactive design that an uninformed print designer would have no concept of (or respect for). I think web design can be (and often is) beautiful, but to equate navigation with a foil stamp (for example) would be erroneous. Unfortunately, someone unaware of these distinctions can only judge with faulty set of assumptions.
Going back to the case of AIGA 50, though: from my past experience, I can assure you that it has pragmatic rather than existential roots. Competitions for local chapters are, at the very bottom line, fundraisers (I know that it sounds shallow, since as entrants, we want it to be first and foremost about excellent design, but unfortunately, member dues and sponsorships simply don’t cover all programming costs). Most people look at the judge roster when determining whether to enter; the higher the judges’ profiles, the more entries you tend to get.
It is my opinion that Caryn Goldberg’s views on the DC design industry are antiquated and just plain rude. However, she represents a kind of designer that, whether we like it or not, does exist out in the world (especially in certain parts of the world). It is uncomfortable to hear, but her opinion is as valid as anyone else’s. Though I do not agree with her, I respect her for being up front about it, at the very least.
I do think it’s imperative that we get judges for future competitions that have a better understanding of web/interactive design, and that one “rogue” judge doesn’t skew the results so completely.
Incidentally, I found this article on AIGA’s site today and found it reassuring, especially because I read it after the Imprint mag article and comments:
http://www.aiga.org/a-look-inside-aigas-2011-design-competitions/
— April 9, 2012
is any of this a fair conversation without knowing what percent of designers are print vs web?
— April 9, 2012
@Carly
Thank you so much for writing this. You make a lot of great points and I agree with you, wouldn’t it be nice if there was a competition for “budget” work? Mira points out some changes to one of AIGA’s competitions that supports many of the things you point out.
@Mira
Thanks for contributing your perspective. I appreciate and respect your point of view and the work that local chapters have been doing to expand the old definitions of design. I also really appreciate you posting about the “Justified” competition, I am excited to see changes being made in AIGA competitions.
I want to point out that while I refer to the judge’s comments as a specific incident I am not saying they represent AIGADC. They represent the elitist attitudes that make a lot of web designers uncomfortable with getting involved in AIGA. I do however think the ratio of print work to web work featured in the competition is a representation of AIGADC and that the team of hard working volunteers you work with have the power to make great strides in changing that. I realize it takes a lot of time and effort and am not discounting the fact that you guys have made a lot of strides recently, the website itself is a great representation of the web work that comes out of DC.
@Steve
I have no way to know what percent of designers are print versus web but I can look at job boards to get a sense of the demand. CNN Money also just wrote an article about the demand for designers in Silicon Valley, which is not DC… but a region that National AIGA represents.
— April 9, 2012
“There is no place for negative elitist bullshit in the future of design.”
I appreciate the honesty here. I am an AIGA member- this is my 2nd year, though sometimes I don’t know why. Probably because I am primarily web-based and want to stay that way, but everything I see valued on AIGA is print or product design. Anyhow, it helps hearing people with solid experience saying they don’t need AIGA to do what they do and echo my unease about not “fitting in.”
I joined because I wanted 1) to be a part of an association that would fuel the inspire/aspire fire and 2) to find out about jobs and enter contests. I entered one contest for New England design (BoNE show) in the recent students division. My entry was a very interactive/experimental/augmented reality/art piece more so than a work of solid “design,” so it’s no wonder it didn’t win, but that’s not the issue I had. You point out offering incentives for contest entry, and truly I was hoping, more than anything, for a bit of feedback, which I did not receive. After I paid the entry fee and did all the follow through to get it entered, I did not receive any updates from AIGA to contestants. It was just a “keep checking the website” type of thing. If AIGA has a goal is to help foster emerging designers (including us digital designers!), that would be the best possible incentive they could offer.
Thanks for a great, thought-provoking post. :)
— April 16, 2012
Hello, as an AIGA Board member from Portland, I would like to add two comments. One is that AIGA as an organization has broadened its scope beyond the traditional realm of graphic design to encompass all disciplines from interactive to type to product. This change, however, has to filter down to all chapters all run by separate volunteers. So it is mostly in chapters hands to create content and programming locally that is relevant to a broader scope. I would suggest for anyone who finds themselves ever saying…”I think AIGA should be doing this…” to get involved themselves to make their visions of AIGA a reality for their community.
AIGA is rooted in deep history, but it is ever-evolving and dynamic depending on the commitment of its local leaders.
I am sorry to hear that a member from DC’s chapter cause such a stir with the off-putting commentary. But as already mentioned, one volunteer shouldn’t represent the thousands who are doing great work in their local communities to create inspiring and educational experiences.
Thanks for your thoughts, I hope you can donate some time to your local chapter and help promote leadership in AIGA to make all chapters stronger.
— April 25, 2012
I think you make a lot of good logical objective sense, but is AIGA and design about logically making sense? The stated justification for choosing the wrapping paper at first glance seems a very personal, subjective and emotional reason. Looking at the history of art and design it seems to me the major forces have been trend based and not logic based or functionality based and specifically not objectively based. I suggest there are trend setters and trend followers in designing art and “good design” is determined by the ability to position ones work to be successful in the context of a trend based emotionally determined judgement system.
Understand I am not discussing as you are about what Graphic design should be. I am dissecting to the degree possible what graphic design is and how it operates currently. The Ivory tower analogy is very apt in this system because trends are based on the idea of trend leaders having some special knowledge beyond the reach of others that is not explained, or measured or questioned. If trendy designer X says it’s the next big thing, then followers of X use that to gain influence, support their designs, and assert the value of their work. This is the role of AIGA, as you said, to set the role and agenda for the design community.
I wonder to what extent AIGA could maintain relevance without it’s ivory tower and trend defining power. Your advocacy of a more objective, inclusive, and almost scientific role for AIGA does not speak to the operating values and goals of the institution. The idea that someone who is not at the top and a recognized famous trend leader should be allowed to challenge the wisdom handed down by the judges violates the founding principles and practices of the Art establishment.
I think that the art establishment, along with any subjective field, requires that knowledge flows from the top down. There is simply no other tested and proven organizational system for subjective wisdom. The reasons for the proclamations of those at the top are not intended to be accessible to others in a subjective trend based hierarchy. What you want from AIGA is to turn it into a science. I suspect your idea of a perfect AIGA is one where everyone can agree on a value of a piece of work or debate it’s various merits and the wisdom of the institution would be the sum of the individual wisdom argued over and debated as equals by it’s practitioners. I personally lean quite strongly to the scientific objectively reasoning you advocate, but I do not confuse it with art. Art, as in American Institute of Graphic Arts.
— June 21, 2012
Addressing the smaller issue here…
This is an old problem with competitions like this. Before web design, we were complaining about the cute little designer self-promos that were being judged against complex corporate identities and annual reports. After that, it was my personal pet peeve, the gig poster, stealing all the attention and awards!
It’s so hard to accurately judge a complex web site in the short amount of time most judges have to do their job. I think the ADCMW is doing a good job by having separate judges for print and web/interactive because you really are judging apples and oranges in these competitions.
And I agree with @Mira that these competitions are first and foremost fundraisers.
On a side note, I thought Michael Aleo’s email exchange with Carin Goldberg was very immature and I loved Carin’s “I’m done Michael” final sign-off.
— July 5, 2012