AIGA discussion on speculative work.
------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Logo Competitions are Spec Work

In my tenure on the board of AIGA Austin, I have experienced many incidents where we have been contacted to participate in what is essentially spec work. Regardless of its guise, whether "competition" or a "request" from your client, it's unethical and entirely antithetical to our mission and profession.

Below are more excerpts from a conversation among the leadership group regarding the same topic. And for more on AIGA's stance on spec work, you can start with this link:

http://www.aiga.org/content.cfm?Alias=designbusinessandethics

Diana Guentzel
President, Austin Chapter
AIGA | American Institute of Graphic Arts

------------------------------------------------------------
on 7/12/05 3:48 PM, Christopher Simmons wrote:
I found a old email to a potential client, addressing the issue of speculative work. It doesn't specifically address competitions, but I thought I'd share it. It's very basic, and benefits by being judgement-neutral. We ended up getting the job:

There are a couple of reasons why we make it a policy not to engage in speculative work: One is that design is a process - one that involves time, creative energy, and dialogue with the client. To work up a direction without going through that process is to create something that is undeveloped and that doesn't reflect your input and participation. As such it is not truly representative of the value or level of service we provide.

The other reason is that speculative or uncompensated work is ultimately damaging to our profession. Let's say you've narrowed your choices down to a short list of three, and that each firm works up direction in hopes of capturing the job. That means that for everyone one designer who is paid for their work, two are not. In the long run, this is not sustainable practice.

The analogy I usually draw for people is that of going to a restaurant and ordering three dishes, but only paying for the one you like best.

I know how difficult a decision it is to select a designer. In large part it's a matter of trust. I hope that you will continue to consider us, and that the quality of our work, our long-standing reputation for excellence, our commitment to service, and the comfort of our rapport will be factors in your decision.

If there is anything else I can do to aid your decision or be of service, please let me know.

Very best regards,
Christopher
------------------------------------------------------------
On 7/13/05 8:21 AM, "Ric Grefe" wrote:

Sorry not to have weighed in earlier. I was actually in one of the few places where it is virtually impossible to get email. I am definitely in favor of demonstrating the moral suasion of a national response to issues that come up like this and we have been very active in responding to issues that come up from any source or any member. We
will post one of our standard letters in the workroom when I get back to the office. When we send a letter, it brings a certain authority to the issue in your defense, yet the most cynical of miscreants would ignore our letter unless we were also a client of theirs. So reinforcing the outrage at the local level is always important. It demonstrates that this is not just an issue of
principle, but also a business issue. Our shared objective should be for the response to become so second nature that no matter where a person turns, designers will say the same thing about this practice. We all know that there will be some designers who are willing to defend the practice as a way for them to gain recognition; for this reason, we need to make sure we do not act simply righteous, but persuasive that this practice compromises the value that a designer can create for a client by truncating the process of designing as a collaborate effort between designer and client.

R
------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 09:38:35 -0500
From: Diana Guentzel
Subject: FW: Response to spec work

More from our national president, Bill Grant:

Forwarded Message
From: bill grant
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:34:50 -0400
To: Ric Grefe
Cc: AIGA Natl Leadership List
Subject: Re: [aiga-leadership] Response to spec work

Ric,

Thanks for the response. I am also sorry that I have not commented before now, but I have been on the road as well. We do have some standard letters on the issue, and I believe Ric is posting one later this week. I agree with Ric that a national response from the chapter and local level is most effective in this case. Just so everyone is clear on this issue, we can be against spec work as long as it is stated in terms of being bad for the client because it trivializes the opportunity for designers to work with clients in a strategic manner to solve complex problems. However, we can no longer state that it is a professional standard or ethical practice that is forbidden by AIGA as this represents restraint of trade and price fixing ­ even fixing the price at more than nothing! (I just double checked this fact with Ric.) I really love the spirit and passion of this dialog, and I think a national response in tandem with local outcry is the way to proceed. So, let's show them how second nature this issue is for 18,000 designers! Go forth and prosper!