No I’m not talking about oursourcing your job but rather tapping into a global market of designers. Launched back in May, here in Chicago, crowdSPRING becomes the conduit for buyers who need a new logo, website, marketing materials or other creative content and creatives who could be down the street or across the world.
Simply put, you the buyer post your requirements and specs. Once posted, creatives from around the world submit actual work – not bids or proposals for the buyer to review but actual work. I know I can hear you grumbling about spec work now, and I did myself when I first met Ross, Mike, Pete and the team at crowdSPRING, but keep reading.
As the submissions come in, buyers are able to review, sort, rate, provide feedback and collaborate with creatives until they find the "the one." crowdSPRING provides customized legal contracts, full project management, robust notifications, and many more. Nearly 8,000 creatives from 130+ countries work on crowdSPRING. Buyers set their own price and crowdSPRING takes a 15% commission on top of that price. crowdSPRING Freelancers get 100% of the money paid by buyers and buyers put the money in escrow with crowdSPRING at the beginning of the project, ensuring payment.
Successful? Well they’ve hosted over 1,000 projects, presented at DEMO and been recognized by a number of publications. But the proof point for me is what they are tapping into, crowdsourcing, but with a twist.
What I believe crowdSPRING really does is allow the growing creative movement –millions of people around the world – to have a voice. And by having this voice it begins to change the risk/reward model in remarkable ways.
According to Ross Kimbarovsky at crowdSPRING: “These underdogs or unknowns have a high tolerance for risk because they have few alternatives.” They develop great software that challenges conventional thinking – before a single customer agrees to pay to use that software. They do this with eyes wide open and hearts exposed. They understand the risk and embrace it. They create not just for the money, but because they have a need to create. Novelists write books before they have a publisher. Painters paint before they have gallery representation or a single commission. Musicians and bands record songs long before a label deal is in sight.” I couldn’t have set it better.
But this isn’t for agencies, right? After all we’re doing more then logos and such? Wrong. Back in September and previewed at DEMO, crowdSPRING introduced crowdSPRING Pro, which “allows companies to post creative projects on the crowdSPRING Web site without revealing proprietary details, giving major brands and creative agencies exposure to top creative talent around the world while ensuring that the resulting work remains hidden from competitors” according to Kimbarovsky.
Now the game changes a bit.
Instead of dwelling on the potential negatives I’m looking at the positives for crowdSPRING, namely the ability to tap into the global resources of creatives. For a relatively low cost I can have resources at my disposal that I may never have found were it not for crowdSPRING. As an agency we could use this as a springboard, ideation or even to add to existing work, The possibilities themselves are just beginning with this global market and talent that are there ands ready.
In writing this I’d like to acknowledge by own sourcing and give a big thanks to Ross at crowdSPRING for sharing past writings, his take on the market and some pretty good pizza.
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
| Eric S (New Hampshire) |
on 12 Aug 2009 at 11:38 am |
|
This at first glance seems like a great idea "The World Is Flat." Anything that can help companies run lean and continue to pump out great products, right??? Although I don't see this business model working well as many companies don't want to share their ideas and future plans to the public. Also, project managing third party companies and individuals remotely can become a nightmare... In my personal experience, you get what you pay for and with the constant undercutting, you run into many possible negative scenarios...
|
|
| Mons Terwanger (San Francisco) |
on 09 Jun 2009 at 3:25 am |
|
Wouldn't that be cool? Wouldn't that be cool? Wouldn't that be cool? Wouldn't that be cool?
"Hey, let's smoke cigarettes, it's cool!"
Nobody better than people working in advertising know that 'cool' and 'new and improved' is bullshit.
Facebook is 'cool' and it's crowded with f***ing idiots. Twitter is 'cool' and 99% of tweets are crap. Crowdsourcing design means a hit-to-miss ratio of 99-1 when going to a single, professional designer yes, might cost more, but you get a 1-1 hit rate.
And remember - locavoring is 'cool' so why not locadesigning? |
|
| industry veteran (CT) |
on 05 Jan 2009 at 11:15 pm |
|
| At the end of the day, the only ones really profiting here are the owners of "services" like crowdspring. |
|
| Ross Kimbarovsky (Chicago, Illinois) |
on 11 Dec 2008 at 12:02 am |
|
@ Writer HO - I absolutely agree with you about quality. And while quality isn't always driven by price, I suspect you're talking more about the quality of the overall branding effort, not just the logo, as an example. And there's no question that agencies and experienced designers are far more capable. But for companies that are not quite ready for that (yet), the option has been either a template or a $25 logo on a traditional marketplace. That's not much of an option. We see our role as filling the gap and bridging the need. We're thrilled when our customers (both buyers and creatives) move on to bigger and better things. In fact, we don't hesitate to recommend design shops if our customers ask for such recommendations. At the end of the day, we want our customers to get the best design - and sometimes - that means sending them somewhere else. I suspect you and I agree about more things than we disagree. :)
Best,
Ross Kimbarovsky
co-Founder
http://www.crowdspring.com |
|
| Writer Ho (Dallas) |
on 09 Dec 2008 at 12:43 pm |
|
| @Ross, I'm not trying to polarize. I'm just citing fact from working in the business for 20 years. Just look at all the agencies out there that don't even employ writers on staff or marketers that actually try and write the copy (poorly) themselves. Scary. And then they wonder why they don't get ROI and do the revolving agency/change of brand dance year after year. |
|
| Ross Kimbarovsky (Chicago, Illinois) |
on 05 Dec 2008 at 1:26 am |
|
@Writer Ho - Not certain why there's a need to polarize. The US vs. THEM mentality has pretty much failed in just about every industry that's adopted it.
@Creative Dir. - I don't doubt that you are quite capable in your craft and merit the fees you command. And it's hard to argue with your comment that it took you a long time to get to where you are today.
But let me push back. The vast majority of graphic design projects on traditional marketplaces are awarded to Indian designers. On crowdSPRING, over 50% of projects are awarded to U.S. designers. Now - we have no problem with anyone in the world getting the award - this is merely an observation and a response to your comment about supporting American jobs.
I do get that some might feel threatened by increasing competition. I suspect you speak more about others than yourself. But the industry's attitude is far more damaging to the industry than portfolio-less college grads (plenty of professionals with more than 20 years experience work on crowdSPRING). Here's what a friend had to say in response to the attitude reflected in your most recent post:
"The NO!SPEC crowd want to prevent willing parties from engaging in commerce only because they fear that the resulting competition will hurt them. If they were secure in their own business model, they'd not be concerned about others'. They are just the latest incarnation of the "You can work only if you are not part of the right guild/club/gang/race/ethnicity" mobs so popular during every dying gasp of an artificially privileged minority. Grow up. Competition is here."
The words are harsh - and I would not put it quite that way. But they do ring true - especially when someone equates a logo to testicular cancer.
I really do appreciate the back and forth. We can agree to disagree about this issue.
Best,
Ross Kimbarovsky
co-Founder
http://www.crowdspring.com |
|
| Writer Ho (Dallas) |
on 02 Dec 2008 at 1:04 pm |
|
Creative Dir, avantec and Fed Up, I couldn't agree more.
Let's just hope that mktg. coordinators out there listen to US and not THEM. But as I've noticed over the years, and sadly recently, good luck to THAT! For the most part, they're completely clueless. |
|
| Creative Dir (Austin) |
on 02 Dec 2008 at 12:41 pm |
|
I realize that by ideal, you are gaining access to a global brain quesadilla but idealism aside, as a designer, I make twelve thousand dollars a month. People work with me because I have a reputation, because of who I am as a business person with integrity and because I'm a critical thinker. But my rate, when it's not being undercut by silver-tongued portfolio-less college grads with a hot Adobe Suite reflects the years of work and learning I put into the craft.
It's taken me 20 years to reach this point. I used to be a smug know-it-all designer who could do anything but in retrospect, my work sucked, it was hacked and I didn't understand why I was doing what I was doing.
Resources like this are essentially the "T-shirt contest", "get something for your portfolio" hype games with a software back-end and a smiling ring man up front.
If we continue to hold up as shining examples of capitalism, forums that give away or inventory the talent of others, we do a dis-service to our craft. We also allow clients to have work at a discount that doesn't support jobs in America.
At SXSW 5 years ago, a speaker told of how everything that could be memorized will become software. Then, his claim was that the creative class would be shored up because their qualitative product was not attainable by software. Well this auctioning off of intellectual property represents an abuse of the internet against artists. Lay people that don't understand that 20 or more hours would be generated at minimum to solve business problems. The audacity to say "designers could even earn thousands" is simply a statement of idiocy. It doesn't understand that designers earn 5, 10, 20, 30, or more thousand a month when the projects are good and the client understands the time commitment and artist makes to their project.
On paper, crowdsourcing is a remarkable idea. Maybe it could be used to solve the problems of the world but leave our profession out of it. The idea that a family should be able to provide a decent living for itself, put kids in college and add a smarter humans beings to the world isn't such a bad idea. Those persons could even save lives, cure AIDS and cancer. But go ahead and turn another profession into an auction and extoll the benefits of cheap ideas.
Next time you want to figure out what that chest pain is or get a cure for the funny growth on your testicle, ask a crowd. |
|
| Ross Kimbarovsky (Chicago, Illinois) |
on 27 Nov 2008 at 5:07 pm |
|
I wanted to thank everyone for the great continuing conversation...
@JR Moreau - the difference between oDesk and crowdSPRING is in how buyers select. My recollection is that you pick from among proposals and bids on oDesk. On crowdSPRING, you select from among actual designs.
@Will Miller - I am surprised that you think crowdSRING is the nail in the "design" coffin. We aim to expand the industry for both buyers and designers, not to put designers out of business. Most established designers won't work on logo projects below $1000, and few will do work for start-ups and small businesses with limited budgets.
@dvantec - crowdSPRING is about collaboration too. The term "professional" is meaningless in a vacuum. A designer isn't a professional based on their "title". (for a better explanation, please see my blog post at http://blog.crowdspring.com/2008/09/22/professionalism-is-earned/ ). Plenty of established professionals - many with decades of experience at major agencies - work on crowdSPRING. Rather than diluting the industry, we believe that crowdSPRING helps to educate, to provide fair opportunities to a broader group of people, and allows people to compete based on their skill and talent, not title or fancy offices.
@Peter Monk - Your points are spot on. Our job is to educate younger designers (and clients) to avoid "the worst". And it's rarely about chance - good design is good design, and good designers working on crowdSPRING are doing well (some earning in the thousands of dollars per month, month after month).
@Fed Up - We agree that marketplaces where the competition is based solely on price - where copywriting is measured in dollars - present many problems. That's why we set minimums in all our projects and have elected to keep those minimums sufficiently high. We are not about $50 logo projects. Our average for logos is around $300 and we've had many logo projects in the $1000+ range. Our average for uncoded website design (typically one or two pages) is over $800.
@Creative Dir - I certainly agree with you that lack of a reward over time results in diminishing returns. Many designers on crowdSPRING are there to learn. They're quite good, and can hold their own against others, but they want to get better. For them, it's not about money (I didn't believe this at first, but have heard this directly from hundreds of people). But let's be fair - most of the designers working on crowdSPRING are not the "I always wanted to be a designer" crowd. They're real professionals - they are members of AIGA, many have decades of experience, and they are not afraid to compete on a level playing field against others. The market for design around the world is huge. There's room for everyone. While we invite everyone with open arms, we do understand that crowdSPRING isn't for everyone. And let's remember too that the same arguments you've offered were made in countless other industries (music, copywriting, etc.). Creativity knows no bounds and has no borders. It's not defined by a title. Innovation has often been mistaken as arrogance. And plenty of industries have learned the difference.
Best,
Ross Kimbarovsky
co-Founder
http://www.crowdspring.com |
|
| Creative Dir (Austin) |
on 25 Nov 2008 at 10:59 pm |
|
It's like having a thousand people waiting to bag and carry your groceries. In the end, 99% of the effort required was wasted and one guy got to carry the groceries. It speaks to the arrogance of business. For non-creatives who don't understand what it takes to find a real solution, it must seem like a brilliant innovation. For the rest of us, it's appalling. It's the cultural equivalent of the mullet hair style applied to a beloved profession and craft. Perhaps we can also start a blog to diagnose real people's physical illnesses. It's efficient right?
Fortunately, Psychology 101 teaches, the lack of a reward over time will result in diminishing return and ultimately a lack of interest. Let crowdsourcing play out. Let the talking head ultimately roll. For the rest of us who will find clients who get the benefit of individual attention as a competitive advantage, we'll enjoy having the "I always wanted to be a designer" crowd focused elsewhere. |
|
| Fed Up (Tampa) |
on 25 Nov 2008 at 6:19 pm |
|
"I'm also sure that--at least in the near future--Pepsi isn't going to go put their next logo design effort on crowdSPRING. But if they did, wouldn't that be cool?" NO, it wouldn't be "cool". Too many talented, hard-working and highly-experienced, talented mid or senior level professionals are getting squeezed out of the industry completely - despite their solid track record and ability to generate strong client results.
In the '90s and early "00s, there used to be a large "middle" ground of clients - a pool of small to med-sized firms who wanted professional, proven creative experience but didn't want or couldn't afford to pay ad agency markups. These were the people many freelancers marketed to. The clients were glad to pay lower, but still respectful, professional rates for freelance services provided. That market is almost gone.
There now seems to be two groups of clients left: on the low end, online sites mostly feature bottom-feeders who think $25 or $50 is a fair wage for response-generating website copy or strategic tagline treatments - and wouldn't know or care about the difference between amateur and professional work. On the high end, Pepsi and other big clients will rarely give any freelancer a chance- even though a senior-level freelancer can often match or beat many agency writing teams in strategy, creativity and bottom-line results.
"We want to level the playing field for copywriting in the same way we've done for graphic design." Thanks for the warning. It seems those of us with the nerve to remember that we once earned a professional livelihood by our ad copy or design services, (i.e, not just covering the gas bill and rent but actually dining out occasionally, going on a vacation once every few years, sending a kid to college...and other reasonable middle class aspirations,) better wise up. We are now expected to fight each other for every single assignment...all for a fraction of what we earned 5 or 10 years ago...and be oh so grateful for "winning" the work. Don't think so....and so glad I'm getting out. |
|
| dvanetc (L.A.) |
on 25 Nov 2008 at 3:06 pm |
|
| One more thought upon further reflection... I meant no disrespect to my painter/writer/musician friends about starving artists– But when they create on their own, they can hope for a lucrative return as they will most likely retain copyrights. Those of us who choose to practice design are usually working for hire and can expect nothing more than fair wages from our efforts. Unless the industry devolves into a world of crowdsprings. Then all bets are off. |
|
| Peter Monk (Chicago, Illinois) |
on 25 Nov 2008 at 2:33 pm |
|
The best thing that comes from a business model like crowdSPRING is diversity. You get a wide range of thinking and design work, good or bad, that challenges the viewer and pushes the designer's work further.
The worst is the idea that anyone with a computer can design. It becomes a frenzy of people from anywhere throwing darts and hoping something sticks. This only benefits the clients searching for the idea or design they had in mind to be paid off. The experienced designers and art directors are left to put all their years of professionalism up against amateurs. It ultimately cheapens the product and reduces their livelihood to chance. The subjectivity of the business of art and design is thrown to the dogs. |
|
| dvanetc (L.A.) |
on 25 Nov 2008 at 11:14 am |
|
Professional design should be about collaboration. A give and take between clients and professional creatives. When it doesn't work is when it is reduced to a beauty contest. Smart clients value this relationship and learn from it. The process gives trained designers a chance to explain to (Creatively) untrained clients why it's not always a good idea to "make the logo bigger." Would you crowd-source legal advice?
The argument that professional designers should be happy to grind away in hopes of one day being paid is absurd. That the starving artist painter/musician/novelist model applies here is ridiculous. Design is a professional service. The work that I do as a designer is focused on the client's business results. Not my creative muse.
Unfortunately, this kind of attitude toward the creative side of marketing, (Copy and/or art direction) and the advent of sites like crowdspring are diluting the industry. Clients who embrace this will, unfortunately get what they deserve, and the world for the rest of us will just get uglier. |
|
| Will Miller (Cincinnati) |
on 25 Nov 2008 at 10:34 am |
|
| This seems to me to be the nail in the "design" coffin that I knew was coming. I guess my career is well and truly over now. Perhaps I can sit up at night and doodle on the computer for fun - because it sure isn't going to be supporting me or my family anymore. |
|
| JR Moreau (Worcester) |
on 24 Nov 2008 at 4:23 pm |
|
| Very interesting. I have used oDesk in the past. This seems more targeting towards what I'm looking for. Great piece! |
|
| Ross Kimbarovsky (Chicago, Illinois) |
on 21 Nov 2008 at 4:19 pm |
|
@Writer Ho - For illustration, web design and print design projects, fdesigners are creating the designs. At this point, any need "copy" is supplied by clients (often prepared by their own copywriters). However, we will soon be extending our platform to copywriting too, and we'll allow clients to post copywriting projects, such as for website or blog copy. We want to level the playing field for copywriting in much the same way we've done for graphic design.
Best,
Ross Kimbarovsky
co-Founder
http://www.crowdspring.com |
|
| Writer Ho (Dallas) |
on 21 Nov 2008 at 9:59 am |
|
I think this might be great concept for logo design.
But, again, what about the CLIENTS' CONCEPTS????
For projects other than logo's, who exactly is doing all the idea generating/writing?
THAT'S what is scary.
And believe me, I've worked both agency AND client side and on the client side, for the most part, the "marketing" people can only be called that by name. Not from knowledge or experience. |
|
| Ross Kimbarovsky (Chicago, Illinois) |
on 20 Nov 2008 at 5:42 pm |
|
@KW - One would not spend weeks. Initial entries are concepts - not final deliverables. Finals are created after the client picks your work. And our guarantee works both ways. If clients get >25 entries, we require them to select a designer (we require escrow in EVERY project for this reason).
@Jimmer - Our marketplace is actually a response to the "lowball" approaches on marketplaces built on bids and proposals. There - it's truly about lowest price. Buyers set their price on crowdSPRING and designers can beat each other only based on design, not price. As for a guy in his basement - if he has the chops and talent to compete against experienced designers - more power to him. WHERE he works does not define him as a designer. He is no less a designer by virtue of working from his basement. Our own logo was designed by a janitor. Our site design is by a student. |
|
| Jimmer (Chicago) |
on 20 Nov 2008 at 12:18 pm |
|
| I think this technology, while certainly cutting edge, could really lower the bar for design. The designers out there that go to painstaking efforts to learn their craft are going to suddenly be lowballed by some guy in his basement. It sort of reminds me of being in LA where everyone is writing a screenplay. I think we should leave design to the designers. |
|
| KW (Chicago) |
on 20 Nov 2008 at 11:00 am |
|
So, let me get this straight. You could conceivably spend weeks on a project and not get paid? Great. I'll just go become a lawyer or something so I can pay the mortgage and put food on my kid's table, and perhaps occasionally get paid for my creative work once or twice a year.
This makes no sense from a professional sense. But I can see why clients would love it...they pay nothing for the thousands of hours of creative time on the projects they don't pick.
Don't like this at all. Sorry. Hope it fails. And Chris, you're taking home a full-time paycheck. You haven't a clue what it's like right now in the freelance world. |
|
| Ross Kimbarovsky (Chicago, Illinois) |
on 19 Nov 2008 at 11:22 pm |
|
@Chris - thanks so much for writing this article. We're extremely humbled by the recognition, especially given your industry experience.
@John - At least in my experience, nearly every project IS a beauty contest. If you're fortunate enough to never have to compete against others, you've achieved something very few people do. You certainly raise some fair questions. Here is our take on them:
http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/1253-the-nospec-campaign-vs-crowdspring
Best,
Ross Kimbarovsky
co-Founder
http://www.crowdspring.com |
|
| Russ (Chicago) |
on 19 Nov 2008 at 11:10 pm |
|
It's not really all that confusing.
It's as you see it, but the part here that you're missing is that people simply do not have to participate if they don't want to.
It's not a threat. It's a shift in approach to the way things work. I'm sure you're okay with a LendingTree when it can save you on a mortgage rate--but that didn't break the way banks work (banks broke the way banks work, sadly).
You need to ask yourself whether or not you'd want to do a logo for $1000 or less. You also need to ask yourself who needs that particular logo.
If those stars align, then go for it. For people that it does work for, it provides them with projects that they can work on to build a portfolio--even if they do not win. That means a lot, and often it's a challenge just to come up with reasons to generate a portfolio. There are many ways to view this as a win for everyone.
I'm sure plenty of companies have had their share of disappointment from working with a freelancer or trying to find someone on CraigsList, etc. I'm also sure that--at least in the near future--Pepsi isn't going to go put their next logo design effort on crowdSPRING.
But if they did, wouldn't that be cool? |
|
| Writer HO (Dallas) |
on 19 Nov 2008 at 3:21 pm |
|
I tend to agree.
But, as a writer, what's scary to me is that there is an increasingly number of clients AND agencies who forgo writers altogether. And the scariest misnomer of all is when they use the word "creative" to refer only to the visual, as if copy is a completely different thing and not part of the creative equation at all!
It's as if someone who can string a few words together is QUALIFIED to write engaging, smart and effective copy. Not!
I equate it with someone thinking that they can give themselves a proper haircut simply b/c they can use scissors! |
|
| John Sowinski (Greensboro North Carolina) |
on 19 Nov 2008 at 8:54 am |
|
| This still confuses me. It sounds like dozens of designers could submit work and only one "winner" is chosen and paid. How is this good for our industry? It makes every project a beauty contest. And turns a serious profession and skill into a base commodity. This is nuts. Will anyone ever be able to charge what we are worth again? |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
About the Author
Chris Miller |
|
|
 |
 |
For more than 15 years, Chris has created, built and led businesses in the digital marketing space. He is a regular speaker at agency conferences and forums and is a recipient of numerous awards including agency of the year by Revolution Magazine, Cannes Cyber-Lion, One Show, Addy’s and Gold Effie. Currently he is the SVP, Group Managing Director, Interactive at Draftfcb and is actively involved with the majority of Draftfcb’s clients.
christopher.miller@draftfcb.com
http://www.draftfcb.com
Advertising Jobs |
Marketing Jobs |
Media Jobs |
Digital Jobs |
Advertising Assistant Professor
WVU Perley Isaac Reed School of Journalism
Morgantown |
Interactive Director
Two By Four Ltd.
Chicago, Illinois |
Senior Project Manager
Two By Four Ltd.
Chicago, Illinois |
Scientific Strategist
LEAP PHARMA
New York, New York |
Media Supervisor with Multicultural Expert...
Draftfcb
Chicago, Illinois |
Associate Media Director with Internationa...
Draftfcb
Chicago, Illinois |
Accounting/Billing Coordinator
Muse Communications, Inc.
Los Angeles, California |
Account Manager
Freeworld Media
Atlanta, Georgia |
Ad Operations Lead, Technology and Solutio...
COXnet
Atlanta, Georgia |
Junior Art Director
USFI
Dallas, Texas |
Account Supervisor
Vitro
San Diego, California |
Copywriter
MARC USA
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania |
Web Designer
Moore and Scarry Advertising
Fort Myers, Florida |
Art Director
Cranford Johnson Robinson Woods
Little Rock, Arkansas |
|
|
