By Bonnie Buol Ruszczyk

I’ve got a bone to pick. (This is typically where my husband shakes his head and sighs.) Two organizations I know, both of whom I respect greatly, have recently rebranded. This is an exciting endeavor, and I know that both took the process very seriously. But when it came to creating a new logo, I was surprised to learn that both went to a contest or crowdsourcing site for the design.

In case you aren’t familiar with these sites, they basically work like this. You tell them what you need, and then you tell them what you’d like to pay. The more money you offer, the more design concepts you’ll get. A few days later, you’ll receive up to dozens of logo options from which to choose, each submitted by a different designer. You pick the winning design and pay the fee to the person who won, minus the commission the site takes.

Here’s the problem. Sites like these turn graphic design into a commodity, something that isn’t worth investing in. It degrades the talent and process used by real designers who create strategic logos that really work for companies.

I don’t really blame the businesses for taking advantage of sites like this; it’s cheap, they get lots of options, and it’s fun to be part of a contest. I get it; I’m a small business owner with a tight budget myself. But in the end, the logos that come from this process are rarely memorable or unique. Most are very generic where company names are easily interchangeable and certainly not memorable. In fact, many of the designers that participate have a stash of logo designs in their pocket, and they resubmit them each time with the new company name in place of the last one.

No self-respecting graphic designer worth his or her salt will do spec work, and this is basically what this is. It’s not a contest, it’s spec work with a small chance of getting paid third world wages for your work. However, it’s the graphic designers who participate in these types of contests that are to blame for its existence. They are undervaluing their work, and creating bland, non-strategic logos for clients who don’t understand the process. The sites themselves simply saw a need and are filling it, and the clients are taking advantage of a great deal.

I see it like this. Say you need to prepare your tax return for 2010. So you go to 12 different tax preparers and ask them to complete your return for free. You’ll then review the returns, and only pay what you want for the one that gets you the best refund. What do you think are your chances of getting a good tax preparer to agree to that scenario? Pretty slim, right? You might find someone fresh out of school to do it for you, or someone desperate for work, but do you really think you’ll get the best return, or any advice for future years, as a result?

Well, the same holds true for good graphic design, and logos in particular. At BBR Marketing, we start with a five page questionnaire where we really learn as much as we can about each client, their industry, their competition, their target audience, their likes and dislikes, etc. We really get to know our clients before we even open Illustrator. We want our logos to convey the professionalism and personality of our clients, be scalable, work in a variety of formats, and be unique to that company. We never pull out logos that weren’t chosen by previous clients and just change out the names. We really spend a great deal of time on this process and are willing to work on it until it’s exactly the right representation for the companies we serve. Yes, you’ll pay more for this, but most agree it’s worth it.

Okay, now I’m verklempt. Discuss amongst yourselves (in the comment box below). Here’s the topic: is this a reasonable new way for companies to purchase logos? Is it killing the graphic design industry? Or am I standing on my soapbox alone? Discuss.

Photo by: Keith Ivey