Discuss further in the
Member's Forums

I think most studio owners are in a position to remember why they jumped ship from thir last employer. Part of it may have been the money, but I would venture the opinion that the driving force was probably "creative freedom," or more realistically, "creative control."

The AGDA 1996 Industry Study showed up some pretty ordinary salary expectations for design employees (around $40K+, with equal numbers of designers above and below that mark), so money is clearly a factor. On the other hand, while I would call that salary level "ordinary," I'd call the business owner's median income of $60K+ truly appalling, given the amount of added responsibility. So in balance, there is a small financial attraction to setting up your own firm, but because the additional money involved is so small relative to the risks, there must be other attractions.

I know several top firms who seem to have no problems with staff loyalty. They are firms characterised by reasonably good, well-disciplined management skills and an empowering attitude towards their employees. Yes, yes, I too cringe at that word, "empowering" but it is the most appropriate one.

I think the distinction between that empowerment and more traditional forms of studio leadership is that the focus is more on nurturing and developing the designer's skills and creative scope rather than taking the attitude, "I got the work, it's my name on the door, and you'll toe my line, or nothing." In the end, who can be surprised that many employees opt for "nothing"?

In practical terms, coaching and nurturing means having the discipline to allow people to truly make mistakes, so that the learning is self-motivated rather than short-circuited and enforced. "How the hell can I let them make a mistake?" you ask. Well, that's the hard part, because it requires building in enough design development time so that the shortfalls can be identified, reviewed and rectified before the client gets the presentation. Your client's well-being is paramount, of course.

Before you say that is an unrealistic way to deal with the problem, how many days, nights and weekends did you work fixing/refining designs, especially in the early days?

In addition to allowing for mistakes and development time, there is also the issue of providing employees with adequate reviews of their work. The typical "I don't think so" is not particularly helpful in identifying the weaknesses in a design, nor is the tendency to dictate the solution without spelling out what is being fixed. How do you define 'good design' in your studios? Is it in a way that can be used to constructively critique work, identifying specific weaknesses that can be rectified with more research, reflection and skill?

Designers who are consciously learning and developing during their employment are generally happy designers. And in the end, they become just the kind of designers that you've been looking for as junior partners and principal designers.

"Andrew you have conveyed my frustrations to a T. Sadly in venting these frustrations with others in the Industry more than just a few feel the same. Is this because as Designers we generally answer to departments who understand very little of what we do?

"That layout shouldn't take more than an hour should it?", "I'd like to change the copy again (for the 60th time) - sorry I didn't proof read it - what do you mean you won't have this done in 5 minutes?"

Like anyone else we crave the elusive work environment where creativity is nurtured - not quashed, where skill development is encouraged beyond exploring help manuals, and where our ability to critically assess and find solutions to a defined problem is valued more than - "can you type this out for me and make it look pretty?".

It's enough to make you pack it all in and open your own studio.. or move to another industry frankly.."

Return to Observations

AGDA Members: Discuss this article in AGDA's Business Forum.

andrew@lam-po-tangcom