Don’t get me wrong — I love marketing as a practice! In the scope of things, marketing is a fairly new practice and one that has to evolve each day to keep up with consumerism and technology. As a designer, coming up with marketing ideas is orgasmic. Guerilla, sabotage and viral marketing are the work of genius and that’s why we don’t see it very often. But you are probably thinking horrid thoughts about marketing practitioners right now. So let’s kill them!

There are a handful of great marketing people I have known in my career and they were smart enough to form their own companies. They always got the delicate dance done to create something that will be effective and not just popular with anyone who may, oddly enough, have an opinion. Then there are the people you see every dreadful day.





I have tons of marketing stories but my favorite one was when I was art directing and designing a major push on a new licensed character over all marketing channels. The staff and I worked like crazy to get the lines done for approval. It took months. That’s how much there was.

After the submission for approvals from the licensor, a member of the marketing staff, lower level, comes to me to tell me the changes needed. First thing, don’t TELL someone — write it down so there’s no misunderstanding. Luckily I was taking notes. One of the changes called for a major surgery on the main character to remove markings on their face. It made no sense to me and I questioned it but he stood fast and insisted that’s what the licensor wanted. I asked to see the email from the licensor.

“No.”

I asked for him to email the licensor to ask them to clarify.

“No.”

The most infuriating thing was that this oversized man with a cherubic face, looked like Baby Huey from the old Harvey Comics. Sounded a bit like him, too. It was hard to speak with him while trying not to laugh. As his new nickname circulated through several departments, it made it a contest among the staff to deal with Baby Huey without laughing.

I knew trouble was brewing and as with all the smart people who make file copies or just turn off layers, the art staff and I stated cutting the image and placing everything on a hidden layer. This was done to hundreds of pieces. A month later, the changes were submitted and the licensor ripped marketing a new one for the marking, so essential to the character, being gone. There was an impromptu witch-hunt held right outside the art department, next to the marketing offices. The president held it.

Yes, without wasting column space on the obvious, Baby Huey was spanked…and I believe the president actually asked him, “what is your major malfunction, Baby Huey!?”

The best part was being asked how long it would take to fix it. Explaining about turning on a layer in Photoshop, took a longer explanation to the layperson then actually turning them on, but I scored big points with the “dad” while my “marketing step-brother” was sent to military school.

It doesn’t happen enough. It does and CAN happen! In another corporation marketing got publicly spanked for taking eleven and a half weeks to work on a twelve-week initiative, giving creative, copy and design three or four days to execute lines of hundreds of products. Creative would always get it done so action to stop it took a while but the grumbling and angry staff meetings got some relief in the form of at least six weeks.

What do creatives look like to non-creatives? Obviously everyone thinks that they can design an ad or logo in MS Word, so immediately we are snooty, whining, snobs. A great marketing person I worked with wrote me a recommendation and included, “…great designs without a lot of creative baggage!”

“Creative baggage?” What could that mean? For anyone who has wrangled creatives, staff or freelance, we CAN be intolerable freaks. It’s hard to remember the last creative who actually followed my art direction without an argument or apology. We are also weak and without the socialization skills to deal with corporate power-speak. Often we give away our own power in an effort to be seen as “flexible” or “a team player.”

A recommendation from an art director, firmly a puppet on the hand of the company for which she worked said of me, “he usually hits strategy, but if some adjustments need to be made, he is very open to suggestion and direction. (Speider) has worked with our team for a long time and understands our process.”

The process was I went into meeting all smiles, told a few jokes and did exactly what I was told to do. The paycheck helped me live with myself.

In most cases that means doing what you are told by anyone bold enough to speak their opinion towards creative efforts and not have that questioned for validity. I have had to pull marketing coworkers aside and remind them that we both report to the same person and nothing was ever said about my reporting to them. I’m not being difficult – I’m taking control of my work for my department so I don’t take the fall for failed initiatives and sales down the road for someone else’s design decisions. I never get angry or attack, although people who have worked with me say my sarcasm could be deadly at times. Baby Huey’s ghost haunts me.

Just the other day, I client who showed me a product catalog that I thought was from 1972. It was the 2010 catalog and the creative department directors asked me to bring some paper product into the present (or future) and do “something different.” I love when they say that.

I did some of the finest work I have done in my career…of fine work. The creatives were really on board and revisions almost non-existant. Imagine basically having free reign on designing some fun and impressive paper products and the full support of your clients? Well, no good effort goes unpunished and I was informed the marketing department rejected the work in favor of the upcoming 1973 catalog.

Where has the fear in business put us for fast, hard decisions in the marketplace? Safe, take-a-step-backwards got us into the mess we’re in right now. How do we get out of it? I included this passage from someone who would only refer to himself as a “suit.” I have put it in another article on “Design-By-Committee.”





“I have to have the confidence that the design solution is meeting the needs of the client and is achieving strategic/tactical goals. Because of that, if there are elements of your design that I’m uncomfortable with, I will call them out, and in some cases, will nix them. Similarly for the client; they have to be comfortable about how their own brand is being presented, how their market will react, even how their own staff will react.”

“How their market will react.” That should be the only concern. And how did the “suit” become the tip of the approval funnel? The truth is that people can’t let go without second and third guessing what will be successful. It’s not like, say, a good marketing plan based on researched demographics would help in the form of a creative brief with which professional designers and writers could work from to incorporate everything into a cohesive package. It’s more the, “just design and I’ll make changes until I see what I like.” That always works out for the best…waste of time and resources.

Business is tight for many reasons but even one wrong move can cost you big. My question is; if the marketing plan is sound and the sales staff is competent, then why would those simple little changes that pop up to please people truly affect the product?

”You know, Bob…I was going to buy that package of Flugglebinders I wanted but I just couldn’t.”

“Too expensive?”

“No. The color of the package put me off.”

Happens like that every day! I used that line in a committee where the background color of an exclusive product had been discussed and sampled for a week. The marketing manager turned to me and said that I had negated marketing’s input. I thought marketing’s input was to figure out whom the target audience is, their habits, income, etc. and how to best reach them through media and other advertising venues and not how blue or green it is? Silly me! Maybe it’s a marketing secret and that’s why they can’t tell creative. We’re spies for…something.

What can one say when sitting in a committee and the subjective suggestions fly, usually contradicting each other, or people echoing previous requests but adding it should be “more” (red), “bigger” (logo), but “will know when (they) see it?” I sit and listen, take notes and then turn to my contact, if it’s a freelance job and ask what he/she would like me to implement. To be sickeningly submissive, I say, “some great insights but some are counter to the creative brief and some other directions suggested here.” I turn to the art director, boss, marketing person or whoever hired me and ask them to go over what they think will be needed. Usually they will tell me to follow what I was told in the committee. This is when I’m thankful for hourly rates because the Frankenstein created in committee is usually too monstrous to please anyone. It goes around and around as long as more than one person has at least a final decision on a project. Imagine what really would happen if too many cooks worked on one dish. The chefs I know are insane and would stab and de-bone each other.

When freelance, you are outside the eternal struggle of creative and marketing. You are only a tool used by creative and a bludgeon used by marketing to show their power over creative. Forget it and let the creative department live with it.

What happens if YOU are the staff art director or designer? Prepare for office politics. The struggle of creative and marketing has nothing to do with design or marketing — it is the good old human condition of having power over others — to be the alpha dog. No matter what your position or department, everyone there is jockeying for some power over others. From the frowning, minimum-wage guard at the front desk who tells you to sign in…while you are doing it, to the mail person who won’t let you get your mail away from your desk, to the coworker who tries to convince you that part of their job is now your job or part of your power is part of their power.

The human animal usually spends a lot of effort blending with the herd and shies away from confrontation. Confrontational people know this and use it. When the counter person asks if you want to super size, do you say, “sure” or “no?” You say yes because your brain and protective nature is telling you to go with the easy route of saying “yes.” Less aggravation. Why do good girls like bad boys? Because we…I mean they go against the herd, break rules and convention and are confrontational.

So, it stands to reason, while in the workplace, where you are in the stress situation of HR rules, progress reports and the always present cliques of workers and executives, you feel alone and stay away from confronting coworkers. But from day one you can bet they are going to at least size you up if not start stealing your power and setting a standard that will follow you throughout your career with that firm. You must start a new job with the basic knowledge of your rights as an employee. Listen and be bold, compassionate and assured, show no fear and show that being flexible is not the same as being a wimp. Any business book will tell you the weak die. You have to set your own tolerances when starting a job. Wait and see will still be setting standards for you while you believe you are in the learning curve. Once you allow any give of your territory, you will not be able to get it back. You are open to, “that’s the way it’s always been done and you said nothing last time.”

*Comeback to that line, “it may have been done that way in the past but part of my job is to streamline the process to get the best results, faster and more efficiently. I’m sure you’ll love what my system will do for the workflow and product.”

As with any situation, your human gut will tell you what feels right and what feels wrong — so will your job description. To whom do you report? To whom do others report? If a marketing person who reports to the same person as you or they are lower on the corporate ladder, why would you allow them to dictate anything if you were not told to follow their lead on the project or in general. Sometimes someone may be assigned to oversee all aspects of a project. They are the boss and that’s that…but that ends when the project ends.

If a peer on the corporate ladder makes a suggestion in a committee, it’s best to nod and either don’t execute it and you will probably never hear another word or it will be brought up by the person and you should respond not that you don’t have to listen to him or her, which might be labeled “confrontational” (it’s always the people who defend themselves who are “confrontational”) but that their idea, after much consideration, had no merit. Simple, easy, ego deflating, leading to sexual performance problems down the line. How can it be argued?

“I thought they were good!”

“Sorry, but I didn’t think so and no other opinions aired echoed your concerns” (this cuts the person off from others by setting a line that people would rather not cross. You are showing strength as the alpha dog. The pack will get on your side).

A more direct and devastating attack is to ask, “why do you think I’m unable to do my job?” This is a heart-stopper because it cannot be answered. They may bring up the team vision or protecting the client’s interests. Again, ask why they think you haven’t fulfilled the team vision from the creative briefings and why he/she sees you as against the client’s interests. It’s like a fistfight. It only lasts a few seconds before the herd breaks it up to stop…yes, confrontation. Even confrontational people are taken aback when confronted themselves, unless they are psychotics and then pray that HR rules will keep them from becoming violent. If they do, a knuckle sandwich to your lunchbox is a small price to pay to see the aggressor fired and marked as being dismissed for violence in the workplace and you can even prosecute legally, make them spend a night or two in county jail awaiting a bail hearing, they get molested with a broom handle and then you can sue them in civil court for your emotional distress. A win-win situation!

From this, you do get the “squeaky wheel” running to the boss to demand “respect” and a title over you. Often, to get to quick resolution, the squealer gets their way. You’re only chance is to calmly state your side, note your accomplishments without the squealer’s input and add that it’s a business office and not a therapist’s office for people to work out their personal problems by laying them on others. Firm, direct and sound. If squeaky gets, his/her way, then you are doomed but really don’t want to work in a place like that. If the boss so easily knocks you down the ladder, you need to find another boss. If you get your way, others will fear confrontation with you. I think coining the name for Baby Huey may have frightened into not incurring my displeasure and gaining a nickname of their own.

Once you establish that you are not a pushover, most people will respect your boundaries and the natural order will flow, with an occasional bump as a member of the herd tries to probe your weak spots. That, as some will discover, is your staff. Lowly designers and writers who will surely tremor when approached by someone outside the office that will storm in and demands changes that were “called for in a meeting.” Now you, as that lowly worker have another problem. You just gave up power to a stranger and put your creative director in a tough spot. Your actions affect how your supervisor controls the department and YOUR job.

The proper thing to do is to tell the intruding stranger that you are just a designer or writer and they will really need to talk to the creative director so they can assign the proper revisions and work. Then smile and point to the creative director’s office. If coworkers are on their toes, one will summon the creative director to come into the department and protect his or her minions from intruders. I’ve done it a gilliondy times. Summon your righteous indignation, flair your nostrils and imitate the tiger. When the interloper leaves, send an email gently reminding them that they must come to you for any creative needs as only you know everyone’s scheduled assignments and all changes must be signed off by you, as the department head. Don’t think HR will intercede to stop it. The opinion is that this process should be flexible to keep work flowing or, you “weren’t around and HR likes as few problems as possible if the bloody wound isn’t squirting arterial red like a fountain.

Points to remember:

1. You WERE around. In fact, aside from an occasional bathroom break or meeting, you are around 12 hours a day on average.
2. YOU are responsible for everything that comes out of your department and will be held accountable for it.
3. People want their way and they will try anything to get it.
4. Don’t allow people inside your power area to sabotage your power and security.
5. Have an objection response ready in your head or make a list of them and be ready to use them when a ridiculous argument is used to corporately castrate you.
6. HR wants the easiest way for quiet and harmony. Play all squealers as troublemakers and not as a team player. Use corporate-speak to your own advantage. If that fails, say you feel threatened physically or sexually.
7. Sometimes you will lose the battle. Sometimes you will also lose the war. Have as many strong allies in the company as you can. The higher the executive level, the better!
8. People want to comment on design during a conference meeting? Make some well-educated comments yourself. Maybe you see a hole in the marketing plan or the project isn’t slated with enough creative time or the sales material is a week past deadline. Bring it up gently and kindly. I believe that’s called passive-aggressive. Use it!
9. Grab power and don’t wait for it to be offered. Take on an extra project, create an initiative yourself or earn a few million dollars for the company and they will sit up and take notice.

Often the power grab comes from people too incompetent to do their own work and public displays of “directing” are thought to mask that incompetence. It often does. Handled correctly, it doesn’t because they won’t get the chance.





Working at one large corporation, I was closing up my office and the art department at 7:00 PM on a Friday night when a young woman from the marketing department caught me in the hallway and asked to step into my now locked office. She immediately went into an act on “her” project that is so important and had to be done by Monday and emailed to her as she was going to be away for the weekend. I looked at her in silence. I asked to whom she reported and found it was one of my subordinates (if you went by the order of the corporate masthead). I told her I would talk to her boss on Monday and find out why she would have the utter nerve to hope I would be in the office at 7:00 PM on a Friday night and then expect me to work all weekend on something that was not important enough to have such a tight deadline. She stormed off.

I don’t remember why I was late on Monday but as I walked down the hall, people were shouting for me to check my email. There was an email from the young lady I had met on Friday evening. She must have gone back to her office and written a very angry message and courtesy copied the entire corporate division about how unwilling I was to work on her project and she was canceling it and I cost the company millions of dollars and immortal souls, hail Satan, hail Satan, etc.

In steps her boss, one of those fine marketing people I mentioned DO exist. The young lady had the project for three weeks (grabbing it as her first project and, naturally wanted to make a big splash) and, as I had guessed, it wasn’t time sensitive…for the previous three weeks she sat on it, but it did have to be to the printer the very next day. Being of sound minds, the head of marketing and I were able to come up with a solution, work hard together and make the deadline. Creative and marketing did it…together, with no arguments or stepping on each others toes or egos and we both shared in the glow of accomplishment. It can happen. Maybe there just needs to be guns to our heads at the time?

Speider Schneider is a former member of The Usual Gang of Idiots at MAD Magazine, “among other professional embarrassments and failures.” He currently writes for local newspapers, blogs and other web content and has designed products for Disney/Pixar, Warner Bros., Harley-Davidson, ESPN, Mattel, DC and Marvel Comics, Cartoon Network and Nickelodeon among other notable companies. He also continues to speak at art schools across the United States on business and professional practices and telling frightening stories that make students question their career choice (just kidding).

Please share your thoughtful comments about this post using the form below.

For daily news about logo design and the creative process, follow Processed Identity on Twitter (link opens in new window)

If you liked this post, please share it.

Sitting one night and Googling myself…online…using the keyboard. It just won’t sound right no matter what. I was dismayed to see I was on the 27^th page behind more accomplished actors, doctors, war heroes and other n’er-do-wells pushing my graphic design career to the sub-basement. People use Google to see a bit more about you and I was showing them I didn’t exist.

My personal branding as a freelancer was a company named, The AFTERLIFE. Lot’s of death motifs as a sick joke on the trend of companies hiring only people under the age of 17. I was dead to them…although, as I would discover, not so as a highly paid consultant/baby-sitter. I had coffin-die cut business cards, great tombstone fonts, a Photoshopped picture of me with wings that made those who know me laugh and a growing trends blog. Other creatives loved it. Clients didn’t know what to make of it, so it had failed. The coolest skull logo in the world is not going to sell you to McDonald’s or Disney/Pixar. Again, the Google search brought up a LOT of companies and bands with the word “afterlife” somewhere in it. Not good enough in a field stuffed with competition. The finest former full-time staffers at the world’s best-known design departments are out there, too.





The failure became a lesson, which is all nature asks of us when we make an ungodly blunder. I looked at all the factors in my restarted freelance career. I took a long look at what would create the buzz that fuels the BS that makes clients want a certain person and fellow designers be damned. I lied. I want to show off my talent. I want to be respected. I want people to wonder what the hell is my problem.

I admit to being tired, loaded and sitting in front of my computer when it struck me how an old nickname would push my name to the front of Google. After some odd laughter, forgetting what I was going to do and then it coming back to me, I signed into LinkedIn and Facebook as “Kaboom J. Schneider.” My friends, who span my lifetime, have all used my various nicknames when posting on my page, so most never mentioned the change but as time went on, most switched to “Kaboom.” Watching my questions and answers on LinkedIn brought people all writing, “well, Kaboom…” and “that’s a great point, Kaboom.” It didn’t take long to establish my new brand. The name itself.





I started to form a campaign based on old space toys and witty captions for an updated-retro look. An edgy fun. One great consideration was to let existing clients and contacts know that I was now Kaboom. My early promotional pieces bore my full name. I still have a few to go and then I switch to pushing the full Kaboom brand.

One marketing tool I use is a print-on-demand/mailing site to send real postcards and greeting cards to a specific list of 100 people. Twice a month, for the next six months, they will receive some odd mailing. Recipients of the early mailings reported that they kept the mailings on their desks or bulletin boards and people would pick them up and look at them. Referrals alone grew my mailing list to other creatives in big design departments. I’m guessing I hit something. Maybe it’s the brand and designs used for promotion, maybe it’s the old fashioned mailings are new again, maybe it’s just a mix of social media and promotional direct mail?

A few of the early pieces. Cute and fun with a fresh retro feel. It formed just as I did an assignment for a new client and each one influenced the other. People felt very warm about this work.

Assignments continue to come in, either wanting me to ape the style of the promotional piece, which is just fine with me, or someone so blown away they would tells me to “do something different” from where their line was. As I worked long hours with Photoshop and illustrator constantly running, I found, as many of us do, some happy accidents that created a look that just amazed me. The techniques were refined and the dark and depressing world ruled by giant robot overlords who exterminated every other design firm, leaving Kaboom Industries to provide the remaining 732 humans the products and design needed to live a modern life, was thriving like it actually existed. Did I mention I am the only remaining human male left and women still tell me they “just want to be friends?” Maybe I didn’t create this world?(Two or three of the darker promotional pieces)

Then there are the quick steps in “hitting the market, “going live” or “bursting on the scene” as many call it. Twitter, Facebook, a website or blog, business cards and they all have to be ready at once. Sadly, my life is still “under construction.”

I was spiraling out of control. The work was again intertwined with another assignment. I loved what I did but wonder where I go from here. I'm thinking more artful pieces of robots or real ads from the 50s and 60s and continue mutating them into nightmarish subliminal advertising.

This starts the process of horror. I find an unusual photograph, add a few layers and effects in Photoshop and Illustrator, distort elements to trap the eye within an image while the brain is screaming to look away and BINGO! a promotional piece you just can't unsee.

The most important thing in branding yourself as a freelance identity, with goals of perhaps growing into a small design firm, or tyrannical ruler of a country comprised solely of designers and dead account executives, is to create something you love, because more often than not, you are married to the name, brand, URL, tattoos, shirts and, as I now have, a huge bag of coffin Halloween candy I bought two days after Halloween to use for The AFTERLIFE. They’ll fit fine besides the unused business cards and other items that are now fit to throw out. There’s also a financial consideration to rebranding aside from the confusion of whom you are when you awaken in the morning. I suggest nametags on everything.

Is this working for me? Yes! I wish I could write about the tremendous feelings of dread I had when first wondering what reaction I would awaken to the morning after changing my social media tag but, thanks to that same social media, it didn’t take more than 24 hours to see the reaction was good. Imagine the old days where you had to wait months for trumped up data on consumer reactions and the money spent.

The other day I was speaking with someone I had spoken to several years ago but he didn’t remember me. Finally, after many promptings for recognition, he said, “I would remember speaking to a Kaboom Schneider!”

Number one brand mission accomplished.

Kaboom Schneider has worked for such human companies as MAD Magazine (Warner Bros.), Hallmark Cards, Golden Books Family Entertainment, and has created products for Disney/Pixar, Harley-Davidson, ESPN, DC and Marvel Comics, American Greetings, SmartHealth, American Express Publishing, Scholastic, United Media, Cartoon Network, Nickelodeon, Merck, the N.Y. Daily News, The New York Times and other firms eventually exterminated by, or on the “honey-do” list of the Most Benevolent Giant Robot Overlord. You can reach him through Kaboom Industries or email him at bigbang@kaboomgoesthe.net.

Please share your thoughtful comments about this post using the form below

For daily news about logo design and the creative process, follow Processed Identity on Twitter (link opens in new window)

If you liked this post, please share it.

I’m often asked, “how do you come up with creative ideas?”. I usually answer, “It’s a process”. It’s true, understanding how ideas are cultivated and developed into great creative executions is why I also say, ”Creativity isn’t a talent, it’s an obligation”.

It’s this obligation that most people never learn to respect and incorporate into their creative personal and professional lives. Every great artist, designer or director of creativity uses some sort of process, bringing successful appreciation or effective results to what they create. But how much time did they spend getting there? Or, did they use the same methods every time to achieve their goals?

John Maxwell, author of Talent is Never Enough, writes, “The key choices you make—apart from the natural talent you already have—will set you apart from others who have talent alone. Talent + right choices = a Talent-Plus Person.” If you have read this book, you’ll know that he is referring to a 13-step process to recognizing and behaving in a way that takes your talent to new a level of value. His steps are not just about cultivating ideas, they are about understanding your abilities and being in- tune with them to reach farther to achieve peak performance—a skill that takes an obligated attitude.

Sure, I have a process. It’s a 9-step journey to uncovering insights and developing ideas. It is also a path to appreciating persuasion, respecting measurement and being in-tune to my creative balance—perspective and objectivity, including steps that allow for ideas to mature (incubate) and finally, understanding the difference between “execution” and “production”—there is a difference.

So if everyone uses a process, why is it that so few actually achieve greatness? It is this question that points to whether someone is seen as successful or valuable. Using a process can make you successful—just ask any ad agency. There have been many books written about process and the science of creativity. Removing subjectivity and adding a proven system for getting results differentiates one ad agency or designer from another.

It is when a creative person becomes so in-tune with their process that he or she pushes the aspects (the details) of that process to a commitment level more similar to an obsession than anything else. He becomes obligated to things like exploration, collaboration, measurement and the art of persuasion, thus becoming more valuable than others practicing the same process. Taking it to another level, this person incorporates balance in her life with other creative outlets of inspiration, helping to remove emotional bias and instilling clarity between their creative professional and personal life.

The difference between good to great shouldn’t be measured by success. Instead, greatness, associated with talent, should be valued by obligation and commitment.

Bruce Stanley is a Creative Director and the Graphic Design Coordinator at Nossi College of Art. His belief in the ability to control your creative destiny is why he enjoys sharing his expertise and experiences with others. You can reach him though his blog, caretocreate.com, twitter, @bsimage or at bruce@nossi.com.

How do you measure the difference between good to great? Share your thoughts and experiences below.

For daily news about logo design and the creative process, follow Processed Identity on Twitter (link opens in new window)

If you liked this post, please share it.

The recent New York Times article Charting Creativity: Signposts of a Hazy Territory, explores how scientists are trying to track creativity in the human brain. In the article, Rex Jung says “Creativity is kind of like pornography — you know it when you see it,” I liked that statement but wonder if it really is that simple in the real world. I believe the definition of what constitutes creativity, like pornography, is determined by the individual exposed to it. It seems as graphic designers, the way we promote and define creativity to our clients has changed.

A recent post by Isabelle Swiderski on the Seven25 blog Design Influence spoke about designers courting the mystery of creativity:

“We’ve been hell-bent on convincing everyone that we’re not ‘creative’ in the pejorative sense of the word. We are creatives who get business. We are business people with a creative streak and a solid process. This may be true to a certain extent but it has resulted in design thinking being understood as a formula, a series of tried-and-tested steps that can only yield the right results and in the end perhaps don’t require the contributions of a ‘creative’ person at all.”

Scientists are debating just what is creativity, with some feeling that the common definition — the ability to combine novelty and usefulness in a particular social context, is no longer applicable. John Kounios, a psychologist at Drexel University believes “creativity is a complex concept; it’s not a single thing”.

How our clients perceive creativity and its role in graphic design is also a complex concept. Any example of graphic design will elicit mixed judgments over just how creative the work is. It is also difficult for me as a designer to separate the different aspects of a design process — to segregate the portions that are creative. In my mind, the entire process is a creative one. But I have, like many designers, turned my back on discussing and selling the magic inherent in this process.

Has talking about creativity in graphic design become like discussing pornography? Have we become conditioned to only talk about creativity in rare instances and not every time we meet with our clients?

Steve Zelle is a logo designer and consultant with over twenty years’ experience working with clients. Based in Ottawa, Canada, he operates as idApostle and is the founder of Processed Identity. You can reach him through his website or on Twitter.

How do you define and promote creativity? Share your thoughts and experiences below.

For daily news about logo design and the creative process, follow Processed Identity on Twitter (link opens in new window)

If you liked this post, please share it.

I was thrilled when Steve asked me to write something for Processed Identity, as I strongly believe in its purpose: To highlight the benefit of a structured creative process over stock solutions when developing brand identities. After all, a brand’s logo/identity is the visual representation of who you are as an organization!

A logo becomes the visual cue for an organization, and this will remain a part of your organization throughout the course of its history. Yes, it may be spruced up over the years to remain stylistically relevant — case in point UPS and AT&T:

UPS logo, left to right: Paul Rand, FutureBrand
AT&T logo, left to right: Saul Bass, Interbrand

But, your logo is not something you change over night. If it does change, there needs to be some pretty strong rationale behind it — like the organization is repositioning itself in the marketplace and is launching new innovations to back up the change.

So, my point is, a logo is something that should be well thought through and reflective of your organization’s brand essence.

Here are some of my thoughts around branding and how the logo fits in:

I’m continually amazed by how many people and/or organizations refer to their brand as a logo, when this is not the case! As I mentioned above, a logo is the visual representation of a brand.

In essence, a brand is the reputation of an organization/product/etc. It’s the emotions we feel towards the organization based on what we’ve heard about it, what we have experienced while engaging with it, and so on. A brand is our gut feeling about the organization, and the logo is our reference point for that feeling. I’m sure just looking at the UPS and AT&T logos, above, evoked some kind of thought or emotion.

To create a successful brand, which evokes consumer emotions parallel to how the organization wants to be perceived, it must be consistent in its actions, whether that be through product innovations, customer service, advertising, visual identity, etc., because the brand is not defined by the organization. Rather, the brand is defined by its consumers. Marty Neumeier said it best in his book The Brand Gap:

It’s not what you say it is. It’s what they say it is.

However, the organization can influence its brand through consistency – if you say you’re going to do something, DO IT! If you say you’re going to be something, ACT LIKE IT!

I like to use this diagram, which I’ve named the Ripple Effect, to illustrate how great brands activate consistency:

All great brands are centered on a guiding purpose. This purpose is why you are in business — it is some crazy, hairy, audacious idea/dream/goal an organization is set on accomplishing. Often, organizations believe their purpose is to make money, however, that is not enough. Making money is what allows you to STAY in business — it’s not WHY you are in business!

Stemming from the organization’s purpose is its value proposition, or as I like to call it, the brand promise. This denotes how consumers will benefit from the organization’s crazy, hairy, audacious idea/dream/goal.

Then there are the reasons to believe. These are the actions an organization takes to deliver its promise. This may come in the form of products, services, employee actions, etc. It is through these actions that the perceptions of the brand begin to solidify.

Lastly, there is the brand’s personality. This is where the logo and visual identity live! These are the elements that give the organization/product/etc. a face ensuring a consistent presentation of the brand! The logo and visual identity tie all the before mentioned elements together stimulating sensory cues for the brand.

So, I recommend considering the ripple effect prior to developing a brand’s visual identity, and ask yourself:

1. What’s the organization’s purpose — why are they in business?
   This allows us to understand the underlying essence of the organization that will transcend throughout its history.
2. What is the brand promising its customers?
   From here we have an understanding of the brand’s industry and competitive set.
3. How is the brand delivering on its promise & satisfying its audacious idea/dream/goal?
   This gives us an idea of what the business is and is not in the eyes of the consumer.
4. Lastly, how does this brand look, feel & sound when being presented to customers, employees, etc.?
   At this point we have collected all the needed data to grasp what the brand is about to be able to interpret it visually.

When it’s all said and done, these 4 layers of the ripple effect work together to form a consistent brand execution, which influences the perceptions of the organization creating a strong brand within the marketplace.

Thanks for reading, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the Ripple Effect!

Nicole Armstrong is passionate about branding. Her goal is to continually help organizations make meaning & live it every day. Currently, she works for Critical Mass helping various brands leverage their purpose by creating digital reasons to believe. You can reach her through her More Than a Logo blog or on Twitter.

Please share your thoughtful comments about The Ripple Effect using the form below.

For daily news about logo design and the creative process, follow Processed Identity on Twitter (link opens in new window)

If you liked this post, please share it.

I needed my appendix removed so while being wheeled into surgery, I told the doctor I only budgeted $200 for the operation but if I liked his work, I had other organs he could remove down the line at a higher fee. I asked if he wouldn’t mind if I had a few people look over his work and make some suggestions on how he performed the operation. One of them was my 10 year-old son because he was a whiz at the game “Operation.” When I came to, I was in the gutter wearing nothing but a hospital gown and my appendix still rupturing.

I see nothing wrong with what I said as my work as a designer seems to be open to such negotiations and “design by committee.” Clients almost always have a child who does creative finger painting and therefore are used as barometers of good design. A recent client, while sitting at a bar had my logo design redrawn by an alcoholic college student on a cocktail napkin and he showed me it in a fit of inebriated excitement. After an hour of my showing him why pencil sketches wouldn’t translate to size, color and readability, he still didn’t understand why the drunken scrawls wouldn’t work.

People never really question the work or bills of Doctors, lawyers and plumbers. They do their job and people accept the work because they are trusted professionals — and they themselves can’t perform the work. So why do people think creatives are easily replaced, functional morons? Although I have a diploma from one of the most respected art schools in the world and a client list of the Fortune 100, some people still seem to think I need help doing my job.

Having put the question of design by committee on LinkedIn, most creatives joined in to complain about the lack of trust they receive in a professional setting. The “design by committee” is not a helping hand but a slap in the face that daily sends a message to the entire staff that a creative is incompetent in their ability to do the job for which they were hired. If a creative, however, joins in with suggestions for marketing, writing or sales for the “team vision,” they are “out of their league” or “stepping on toes.”

On the other side, the non-creatives had a different view. As one “suit,” as he referred to himself put it, “I have to have the confidence that the design solution is meeting the needs of the client and is achieving strategic/tactical goals. Because of that, if there are elements of your design that I’m uncomfortable with, I will call them out, and in some cases, will nix them. Similarly for the client; they have to be comfortable about how their own brand is being presented, how their market will react, even how their own staff will react.”

“How their market will react.” That should be the only concern. Can all of these people be appeased and still have the graphic message work? Should they be appeased or should the suit sell the design, writing and images as the proper method for the best communications to the consumer? Can a proper message work with the “suit” being the one taste censor not schooled in how colors make people react emotionally or how size relationships push the eye around the page but instead playing to individual egos? With this in play, is it any wonder consumers label most commercials and ads as “lame?” Third rate is the new first rate. Expectations have been lowered but increased ROI is still the number one concern.

I blame the home computer and the average person convincing themselves that design is easy because they can create a child’s party invitation using clip art and Brush Script (all upper case) in MS Word. The current economic downturn just might signal that it is not the case and calls for innovation in a company’s products and client/consumer retention and outreach should spell out that creatives hold the key to the thinking that will open a world of possibilities.

Those who managed to put forth creative innovation always did the breakthrough work in the creative field. The risk-takers. The mavericks. The people who sought to be different and distinguish their work from the crowd of copycats, and those who dumbed down innovation. Too many cooks creating a thin broth – pleasing all, and none.

People often ask me, in light of my work for well-known brands, how I get my ideas. “I’m creative,” I reply.

They stand there with a blank look because the word means nothing to them. It’s not tangible. It’s like breathing – we all do it naturally. Perhaps I should just announce that my two small children will be joining my studio because they are creative, as seen in their art class drawings and they will be art directing my client’s big budget branding projects. I wonder if it will be met with a satisfied smile of relief or that same blank look when I tell them to trust me because I’m creative?

Speider Schneider is a former member of the Usual Gang of Idiots at MAD Magazine, Hallmark Cards, among other professional failures and embarrassments and writes for assorted newspapers, web sites and blogs. You can reach him through his blog or on Twitter.

Please share your thoughtful comments about this post using the form below.

For daily news about logo design and the creative process, follow Processed Identity on Twitter (link opens in new window)

If you liked this post, please share it.

The primary demand we place on our brand identity design is that the solution must communicate both the brand proposition and the brand personality to the market — something a solution of style alone can never achieve. Whilst the defined brand personality drives the style dimension of the design, the conceptual message provides the cues for communicating the brand proposition.

Our strategic process has been crafted to provide outputs which directly inform the design process. Those outputs include a brand personality profile, which allows us to define, explore and leverage the relative code of visual language, and a platform made-up of several layers of the brand proposition. That platform provides the inputs to our conceptual brainstorming, and the mind map provides the fame-work.

We’ve recently been working with Australia’s leading specialist Gen Y recruitment brand. We provided GXY Search absolute clarity around their market proposition and layers of brand definition to allow them align and focus their brand and business activities. As it often does, this new-found clarity of brand led to a brief to update the GXY Search brand identity.

We began the conceptual stage of the design process by charting the three key layers of brand proposition on a blank mind map:

• Individualism / Self Expression – this was defined as both a key attribute of the Gen Y tribe, as well as the culture of GXY Search itself;
• The ‘C’ Word — the individual nature if the greater Gen Y tribe means they’re as much defined by what they are not, than by what they are. This was highlighted by the revelation during the strategy process that even for a recruitment firm, the term; ‘career’ was considered ‘off-brand’ for their Gen Y market.
• Multiple, Unique Excitement Tribes — the other thing about GXY Search is that their clients can all boast ‘excitement jobs’ — the kind of jobs most people would give their left arm for. But whilst this was a common denominator, different clients each were part of unique Gen Y tribes from sport to fashion, from lifestyle to advertising.

We brainstormed a number conceptual directions that sprouted from those three starting points. As the discussion evolved, mind maps were drawn and re-drawn over and over as they refined into the richest expressions of the three key layers of brand proposition. The project designers then translated the three mind-map directions into a number loose brand identity concepts. At each creative review, the concepts were assessed against the mind-maps to find the richest vein of both relevance and creative solution. Visual language style was also injected into the design process, driven by the brand personality outputs. As the ideas evolved, the strongest solutions came to the fore, weaker solutions were abandoned, and the first design concept presentation took shape.

As always we presented the strategic context for the creative, walking our client through the journey from strategy to brand personality and visual language, through brand proposition to the mind map, and through each of the mind-map journeys to the design concept. The result as we’ve come to expect was a great outcome. We thought all three solutions were A grade, but had a particular soft spot for the one the client selected. Feedback from the client was firmly positive – we’d hit the mark with all concepts, and the decision was about which style they felt was most right for positioning the business for the next five years of growth.

We’ve found the mind map process to be incredibly rewarding, and a critical part of our brand identity process. Far from restricting creativity, the process allows the creative side of the mind to roam free, once the logical side has set the direction. But just as importantly, the mind map allows us to take our clients on the creative journey, showing the logical pathways that lead to the creative magic.

We think the proof is in the brand identity outcome (Please note these images represent design intent and include ‘positional images’ only. Our client GXY Search has generously agreed for us to use this project as a case study, even as we refine and finalise their brand identity).

David Ansett is the founding Principal of Storm Design. For the last twenty years david has practiced-in, judged-on, written-about, lectured-on, and pushed the boundaries of brand design.

Brand DNA & Storm is a Brand Strategy and Design agency based-in Australia. Brand DNA and Storm work with clients across almost every conceivable market helping them gain absolute clarity around how to position their brands for success, and then design each and every touchpoint to bring those brands to life.

David and the rest of the Storm and Brand DNA squad tirelessly feed brand thinking through their blog www.trulydeeply.com.au/madly

Does your creative process involve mind maps? What benefits do you see as a result? Please share your helpful comments below.

For daily news about logo design and the creative process, follow Processed Identity on Twitter (link opens in new window)

If you liked this post, please share it.

We blame clients too often. We blame them for not having an understanding of what we do as designers. We blame them for not meeting deadlines, and for being upset with additional charges. We blame them when a project doesn’t come together as we had hoped, and we blame them for not providing a clear budget. I am guilty of each of these thoughts from time to time but the reality is the client is my responsibility and sometimes I forget that.

We select the clients we work with; we have an opportunity before the project begins to evaluate their understanding of design, and their fit with our way of working. We have the power to inform them about our creative process, to clarify responsibilities, and expectations. We can outline the consequences of missed deadlines, and the cost of changes to design concepts. We can, and should do a lot to reduce the issues we tend to blame clients for.

The issue that I struggle the most with is when a client makes what I consider to be a destructive change to a design. A recent client insisted that no design was complete without a border — Oh really? I did what I could to influence her, to get her to reconsider, to see how ridiculous a border would be around every design, but I failed in changing her mind on the matter. So yes, there is a border, and yes, the client made me do it, but it’s not her fault. Should clients be expected to make only perfect decisions, or to trust a designer completely the first time they work with them?

Have a look at your portfolio and see if you are free of similar mistakes. Any bad design decisions or missed deadlines? Have you ever misunderstood your client’s business space, or exactly what they do and how they do it?

I enjoy the site Clients from Hell, and I can relate to stories of frustration regarding projects gone awry. I know there are some impossibly difficult clients out there but I also think designers are sometimes to blame for holding our clients to a degree of consistency, perfection and understanding that we ourselves don’t achieve.

Steve Zelle is a logo designer and consultant with over twenty years’ experience working with clients. Based in Ottawa, Canada, he operates as idApostle and is the founder of Processed Identity. You can reach him through his website or on Twitter.

Am I just being soft on clients? Do you feel the blame heard on blogs and Twitter is deserved? Share your thoughts and experiences on the subject of responsibility below.

For daily news about logo design and the creative process, follow Processed Identity on Twitter (link opens in new window)

If you liked this post, please share it.

As an identity designer for twenty years, I can quickly evaluate ideas. Experience allows me to imagine what a rough idea may look like once refined, to imagine its use for different mediums, the issues it may encounter, and to know if I have seen something similar before. I am quick at doing this, but no way quick enough to do it while a client is sitting across the table from me. I fear that a really bad idea will come out of my mouth before I have the chance to edit it. Worse than the bad idea coming out is the thought of a client jumping on it and hanging on for dear life.

I don’t spend time thinking about ideas until I have gathered information and reviewed it, asked more questions, done more research, fleshed out a creative brief and direction, and created a mind map and a vocabulary for the project. Even at that point I don’t think brainstorming works for logo design. For me, logo design is an exercise in minimalism, balance, and abstract forms. It is something that doesn’t lend itself to discussion but rather to exploration and experimentation on paper by one individual or a number of designers working individually and then coming together.

I believe clients risk damaging the value of the final deliverable by being involved in the early visual stages of logo design. I recommend that instead of focusing on ideas, they influence the design through information. The time they spend providing information is much more valuable than time spent throwing around ideas with me.

Perhaps brainstorming with a client works for other designers and for other forms of graphic design. Does it ever work for logo design?

Steve Zelle is a logo designer and consultant with over twenty years’ experience working with clients. Based in Ottawa, Canada, he operates as idApostle and is the founder of Processed Identity. You can reach him through his website or on Twitter.

Do you feel there is value in brainstorming with Clients? Please share your helpful comments below.

For daily news about logo design and the creative process, follow Processed Identity on Twitter (link opens in new window)

If you liked this post, please share it.

One of the key factors influencing a client when selecting a design studio, is its past work. A portfolio is seen as proof of talent, experience, and design aesthetic. Clients are drawn to work that is often in the same business space as they are in or that has a similar approach to what they would like to accomplish. They expect that what they see is a good indication of what they will get. While most designers and studios are open about the work contained in their portfolio, I do know of situations where this is not the case. I think clients often miss asking some pretty important questions.

What clients rarely ask when selecting a studio is “Who designed this particular piece, and will they be working on my project?” It is seldom discussed, but portfolios can contain work by designers no longer with the studio, or who will not be working on every identity project. Is there any value in seeing work you like by a designer who will not be directly involved in your project?  What can clients and designers do?

For Clients:

Ask the right questions so you know who was responsible for what portion of the project. Even solo designers sometimes work with a partner or subcontract work out.

Ask:

• Who are all individuals that worked on this particular project?
• What was everyone’s role?
• Will the same individuals be working on my project?
• Will they be designing themselves or overseeing other designers?

For Designers:

Be transparent with clients; explain who did what in your portfolio. If the client likes the work of a designer who is no longer with you, you have an opportunity to manage the situation head on. If you can justify the inclusion in your portfolio of work by a designer no longer associated with you, you may overcome the clients concern. If you can’t, then you may want to reconsider keeping the work in your portfolio.

Managing Expectations

On both sides of the equation, managing expectations is something that needs to happen from the beginning of a project. The success of any project is a result of the people involved, perhaps even more so when speaking about design. Realistic expectations can be set by openly discussing the skill sets and experience of those that will be directly involved.

Steve Zelle is a logo designer and consultant with over twenty years’ experience working with clients. Based in Ottawa, Canada, he operates as idApostle and is the founder of Processed Identity. You can reach him through his website or on Twitter.

Should studios be more open regarding the specifics of the work in their portfolio or is it the clients’ responsibility to ask? Please share your helpful comments below.

For daily news about logo design and the creative process, follow Processed Identity on Twitter (link opens in new window)

If you liked this post, please share it.