I found the guide produced by the d.school of Stanford to be a very informative and insightful document on the Creative Process. Through Mindsets, Modes and Methods, the guide outlines teachings that impart the Design Thinking methodology employed by many designers, educators, and creative teams. There are a variety of practical methods described that they have gathered from a wide range of people and organizations.

First, I was intrigued by the Modes outlined as they don’t fully articulate my own creative process, but I found them insightful. My own process starts with Discovery, which seemed to be missing in the Modes outlined, or perhaps this outline is meant to start AFTER the Discovery process is completed. For me, in the Discovery phase I am meeting with the client to determine the exact scope of work and then writing it out to make sure the client and I are on the same page.

After that, my second step is Research. In this step I am looking into several things: The Client’s business, their competition and the audience we are trying to reach. It seems that the modes Empathy and Define are both covered in my Research step, however I really like how the guide puts a detailed emphasis on each.

My third step is Concept development, then I move into Design/Production, and lastly Revisions until approved to deliver to Vendor. Steps 3-5 outlined in the guide (Ideate, Prototype, and Test) touch upon aspects of the final steps in my process, but go into much greater depths in many areas and don’t touch at all on some of the activities that I do.

Looking through the various Methods in this guide, I noticed that several of them referred to field-work with users. I found that interesting as I have never had the opportunity as a designer to engage in field work with users at all. I have only really seen that performed at larger firms and usually by people on the Account side or in a Research dept. The extent of my own experience in field-work usually involves touring the client’s place of business to learn more about the company and their products/services.

A couple of Methods jumped out at me that were of particular interest that I will use in the future related to Brainstorming:

How May We … (HMW) Questions to facilitate the brainstorming process with my team is one practical and useful approach. I liked how this method will allow me to start with my own Point of View statements, break the large questions up into smaller actionable pieces and get better ideas from the group that are focused on solving specific design challenges.

The Saturate and Group method was also one that I found to be a really cool brainstorming idea. In this method, thoughts and experiences from the field-work are written down on post-it-notes and put up on the wall (Saturate). Then connections and similarities are drawn from the notes; they get organized and placed together to synthesize the information into related groupings and patterns (Group). I can see that this method will be very helpful in facilitating idea generation with my team and organizing peoples experiences and insights into themes that can be built upon.

There were several other methods that jumped out at me as well. What, How, Why questions to analyze photos, as well as creating a Composite Character Profile as a way to understand an average user were two methods that I will incorporate into my working processes where applicable.

Another interesting word has come up in my research and discussions about the topic of Design Style… the word is TREND. When this word was mentioned to me, my first reaction was negative. I have never been a trend watcher or a trend follower, and the word usually brings up images of glass buttons on websites or rainbow gradients and dramatic drop shadows. Those cheesy layer style effects can be cool if used subtly and minimally. As I tell my students, just because you CAN do something, doesn’t mean you SHOULD do it. And learning when a drop shadow (for example) should be used and to what degree can really be a defining factor in your development towards becoming a professional designer.

But what is a TREND? And how do we know the difference between a trend and a STYLE in graphic design?

To start, a TREND as defined by the Merriam Webster Dictionary is “to extend in a general direction, follow a general course.” But that doesn’t quite satisfy the issue when it comes to design trends. Design trends are “cool” techniques and looks (at least for a time) that are developed that have no conceptual or strategic reason to be applied in the design. They are effects that are only “skin deep” and are often copied from popular media at the time. Many of them start out as new and different and for a time may be just that. However, as a wave of copycats follow suit, then the technique or look becomes overused and somewhat cheesy, causing the masses to abandon and disavow the technique in favor of the next hot thing.

A STYLE on the other hand, as I wrote about in a previous blog post, means “a distinctive manner of expression,” or “a particular manner or technique by which something is done, created, or performed.” In graphic design terms, we can understand this as a pre-determined set of specific visuals, shapes or elements that characterize that look. Now, a style can become a trend if it is being overused and applied in popular design without a conceptual basis for its application. But a trend isn’t necessarily a style. Styles live on and are often produced from movements in art and history.

Styles, when used right, are like tools that a designer can manipulate and use to articulate a concept for a design piece. Like all tools, you must pick the right one for the right job and have a good reason why it makes sense to employ a particular style. As for TRENDS, I’m not a big fan of following the masses, but even if a popular technique or look is to be used in a design… glass buttons for example, then remember another one of my favorite quotes, “practice safe design, use a concept!”

While working this unit on creating a Concept Map for the subject of my Literature Review: Design Style, I wrote down an interesting word – Theme. I began to wonder what the differences are between STYLE and THEME.

According to Merriam Webster Dictionary, The word STYLE means “a distinctive manner of expression,” or “a particular manner or technique by which something is done, created, or performed.”

Conversely, the word THEME is defined as “a subject or topic of discourse or of artistic representation” or “a specific and distinctive quality, characteristic, or concern.”

Those definitions don’t actually help too much in understanding the differences. Both speak to being “distinctive” in manner or quality and both imply that something is being created or represented. When I think of how this can be applied to the field of Graphic Design or the Visual Arts in general, I would put emphasis on STYLE employing a “distinctive manner or technique” and THEME being about a “subject or a topic.”

If we think of these words in those terms, then STYLE refers to the characteristics of a visual. For example, one may do a design with a 1950s Retro style and as such use specific visuals that characterize that look – think stars with bubble ends, patterns and rounded corner frames or arrow shaped frames to hold text, bright and pastel colors, overall sense of optimism in the look, etc. We wouldn’t refer to this as a Retro THEME, but rather a Retro STYLE.

THEME on the other hand would be subject or a topic that is present in a design. For example, Romantic would be a theme. While the subject of romance or designing a romantic piece may conjure up images in our heads, there is no pre-determined set of visuals, shapes or elements that characterize a romantic look. It can be achieved in a variety of ways and within a variety of styles. I could for example design a piece that has the STYLE of 1950s Retro, but also the THEME of romance. Or keeping the Romantic theme, I could use a variety of other styles to capture it… How about a Victorian style design with a Romantic theme? Or a Modern, or Grunge, or Art Deco style with a Romantic theme?

In my opinion, if we look at STYLE as a pre-determined set of visual characteristics, and THEME as a topic or subject matter, then we can understand the difference between the two words.

In school, designers learn a variety of techniques, terms, and tools necessary to execute their craft. Skills are developed and nurtured; opportunities are given to produce somewhat “real world” projects that stretch the student’s knowledge and understanding of formal and technical aspects of strong design. Hours upon hours are spent sketching ideas, designing layouts, making decisions, second guessing those decisions, revising, then printing and mounting the final product for presentation.

Then comes the critique.

The critique in art/design school is meant to be an introduction to the very real world practice of design criticism. This can be an overwhelming and somewhat unnerving process of putting the work up, giving a short presentation explaining the ideas and concepts that went into it, and then listening to feedback from the class and instructor. I still remember a professor in one of my undergraduate studio courses explaining, “once the work goes up on the wall you must divorce yourself from it.” No longer can the designer hold on to their work from the point of view of the artist, but now they must stand back and receive critical review of their work for its strengths and weaknesses in hopes that they will improve. This is incredibly difficult for any artist or creative person. So much time is spent in expressing their ideas in visual form that an artist has a very real emotional connection to their work. Many young designers starting out have a tough time with criticism and get very defensive of anything negative being said. And this is why so much time is spent in school showing your work for critique. To work professionally, every designer must develop a “thick skin” so to speak.

When you leave design school and enter the professional world, it doesn’t end there! Giving presentations and receiving critiques are an everyday reality for a working designer. What they rarely teach you in school, however, is the importance of “selling” is. Selling, it turns out, is woven throughout the entire industry! From selling a company on yourself to get the job, to selling your ideas to your creative director for approval, to finally selling your final design to the client, it’s in every aspect of the industry. As Michael Bierut said in his article Graphic Design as a Spectator Sport, “simply having the idea is not enough. Crafting a beautiful solution is not enough. Doing a dramatic presentation is not enough. Convincing all your peers is not enough. Even if you’ve done all that, you still have to go through the hard work of selling it to the client. And like any business situation of any complexity whatsoever, that process may be smothered in politics, handicapped with exigencies, and beset with factors with have nothing to do with design excellence. You know, real life. Creating a beautiful design turns out to be just the first step in a long and perilous process with no guarantee of success.” And weather a given design solution makes it out into the real world, largely depends on the SELL.

I am often heard quoting a phrase I read somewhere, “Great design requires a great client!” And it is so true! I have worked for clients where there is a great deal of trust and respect for what we do and the “sell” is a wonderful exchange of collaboration leading to a great end result, winning awards and most importantly producing results. Conversely, I have worked for clients that had little to no respect for the creative process or the designer themselves. In such situations, “selling” them on an idea was a laborious and often fruitless task. Instead of a fulfilling collaboration, they ruled over each project with an iron fist, squeezing all style and creativity out of it, until the end result was wholly unrecognizable! What makes such a difference in client experiences and my ability to sell them on the work?

Well, I asked this question to a couple of good account executive friends (Art Greene and Ryan Hammond) and learned the following:

Overall and it all starts with developing a good RELATIONSHIP with the client. If the relationship is bad, selling them on a design will be a long road. From there it’s a process that starts by LISTENING to what the client’s needs are. “You don’t want to think about the next thing your going to say. You want to be open eared and listen to your client” says Ryan Hammond.

From there develop the GROUNDWORK, creating a strategy with measurable goals for the work. Then EXECUTE the strategy. “Screw the Sizzle. Give me Steak! I can sell anything if it includes elements to accomplish the goal.” says Art Greene. Only present strategic solutions back to them that are well crafted, meet the agreed upon goals, and directly tied to the strategy.

No matter how amazing the design work is, establishing a good relationship and adhering to a good process with the client can make all the difference in selling the work. Selling isn’t something that comes naturally to designers, but it is an important skill to develop in order to be successful in this industry. My friend Ryan once told me he could “sell a t-bone to a vegetarian!” I may never be that effective, but with practice I keep improving.

Recently I read an interesting article in the most recent issue of Communication Arts, the Typography Annual of 2013, called Cooperative! Part 4 Torn between me and we. This piece, written by DK Holland covered some provocative issues starting with a presentation of post 9/11 design “I Love New York More Than Ever” by Milton Glaser. She uses this work to illustrate how times of crisis can pull a community together, and that conditions for change are often created by crisis. She goes on to show that the logo created by Glaser, both his original “I Love New York” and the expanded “I Love New York More Than Ever” came at just the right moment and was instantly embraced by a hurting community.

Next, she points out that crisis creates cooperatives and moves into a case study to of a food co-op that she co-founded named Greene Hill, after the two neighborhoods that the co-op served Fort Greene and Clinton Hill. In this example, she outlines the various challenges and hardships that the group faced in starting this cooperative, including the “design by committee” process that the branding was produced. After trying several directions and presenting them for feedback from the committee, he design firm had to come up with an entirely new approach based off of that feedback. The new work was unanimously approved and the co-op eventually opens up with everyone doing their part.

Lastly she goes on to talk about peer-to-peer networks, democracy and the need for people to work hard and learn from repeated failures. She makes a great point that “Persistence in many ways is more important than talent or intelligence: trying a new path when one doesn’t pan out, not being intimidated or defeated when at first you don’t succeed.” She ends talking about how changes often take a village and we need to see ourselves in the larger picture.

This article, while only loosely weaving in the design work, made really interesting points about cooperation through crisis and people coming together to solve issues in a democratic, self-organized, power-decentralized way. It really has me thinking about the state of the advertising and design industry and how our current economy has affected so many talented people. The industry has always been competitive and difficult to navigate with corporate pressures and politics that aren’t taught in art school.

When I graduated from art school it took me almost a year of applying at every agency in town and going on multiple interviews to get my big break. Nowadays, it’s at least that difficult if not worse for designers entering the field. In my small design studio, when I put out an ad for an entry level designer, I get dozens and dozens of resumes and portfolios… many of which are from designers and art directors with more experience than me! Large and medium sized firms have continued to downsize creative departments over the past several years and more and more designers are out of work, forced into freelance or other non-design jobs all together to stay afloat. Only the most persistent (not necessarily the most talented) will survive.

The co-op idea is very inspiring and I have heard of groups of freelancers and one or two-man shops that come together under the same umbrella and employ the co-op idea. I myself, early on in my effort to start my own shop, got involved in a “virtual agency” type set-up where I developed a handful of strategic partnerships with very experienced people that had complimentary skills – An Account Man, a Programming Guru, a Copywriter and I served the role of Creative Director. All of us had our own separate businesses, but we would operate as a team when a project called for it. I wonder if in this “New Economy” if the co-op agency set-up will become the rule and not the exception? Here’s a cool example I found of a team in South Dakota that has taken this idea and run with it, The Creative Co-op.