Apr 06 2008
Just under a week ago I received an email from an employee from what I presume is Lord & Taylor's PR firm telling me (albeit not personally as it was clearly a mass email) all about Lord & Taylor's contest and that I might be interested.
Here's an excerpt:
I thought you would be interested to learn about Lord &Taylor’s first annual Rose Design Competition. In conjunction with the re-launch of their iconic rose symbol on April 1st, the store is kicking off a contest to re-create the Lord & Taylor Rose from submissions of original art work by artists from around the world. The winner will not only have their rose design displayed in all of Lord & Taylor’s 47 stores, on their flagship store’s Fifth Avenue windows, shopping bags, cosmetic boxes, awnings and more, but they will also win $10,000 cash.
Read the full email and press release here [ PDF ]. Read the full contest info here.
If you've read this blog for any length of time, you probably already know where we (and I personally) stand on the issue of speculative design work. We don't tolerate it. Period.
But every so often we still get asked. Typically the folks who ask simply don't know any better or are looking for the cheapest route possible. Yet, it still surprised me that a company that's been around for almost 2 centuries is holding a contest for their "iconic rose".
After my head stopped spinning from picking apart everything that's wrong with this whole thing, one of my first thoughts was, "If you're going to offer that much cash, why not just do your homework and pick an artist, graphic designer or photographer?" (Never mind that for the amount of exposure and branding work to be done, $10k may be low for some firms.)
See, here's the thing... by setting this up as a contest, Lord & Taylor is opening the door to many (all?) levels of entries. In other words, they're going to get entries from high schoolers to the retired who may or may not have any experience in commercial art or design in any way, shape or form, let alone have any information about the company or the rose. That in and of itself should turn off any company that values their brand.
In fact, I'm willing to bet that 95% of the entries will not be from professional artists or designers or photographers with more than just a couple years under their belts (and that's a conservative figure). Why? Because they know better than to waste their time (and paying clients' time) on the promise of "maybe". That, and they know that a solution won't come without a thorough discovery phase which is skipped by contests like this.
"But it's $10k," I hear you saying. Yeah it is - and it's tempting. But so is gambling, and essentially that's what this is - a gamble. That cash isn't guaranteed unless you win. And if you don't win, what do you get? Nothing. Zero. Zilch. A big fat "nada". And you sure as hell don't get your time back.
But, let's say you do win, take a look at the contest disclaimer/rules:
One grand prize winner wins a $10,000 cash prize, and MAY have artwork appear in Lord & Taylor’s Spring 2009 Rose Campaign, all collateral including but not limited to: advertising, direct mail pieces, gift cards, gift boxes, shopping bags, store signage, Fifth Avenue windows and awnings and any other promotional or campaign-related pieces owned by Lord & Taylor and its affiliates.
*Emphasis mine.*
I'm no lawyer, but I don't see anything about a guarantee that your masterpiece will get used. So other than some nice padding in your checking account, you may actually end up with nothing to show for your effort at all. While some people may be okay with that, most won't.
The terms go on and in fact, strip away any copyrights from not only the winning entrant, but ALL entrants:
All submissions of photos, artists’ entries and other materials and elements of this contest are the property of Lord & Taylor and its affiliates and will not be returned to the participants.
So if for some awful reason you enter the contest, the artwork doesn't even belong to you anymore - even if you don't win! This is WRONG. In a real world situation where a company has sought out a design firm, only the finished work is what the company ends up owning. The sketches and thrown out ideas are still the property of the designers. This is the way it should always be. Contests like these (i.e., the kind that ask for new, original work as opposed to already created work), are all wrong. They're wrong for business, wrong for designers (and artists and photographers), and wrong for the design/commercial art industry as a whole.
Businesses lose because the entries are nearly 100% subjective. Without the proper research into the history of the company and talking to the right people on the project, the end result is already heading for failure. But without any guarantee of payment, why would anyone bother to go through all that trouble? Further, due to the subjective nature of it all, it doesn't address the company, or more importantly, the target audience. This goes against the grain of why any company is in business. I mean really, what company is out there with a mission statement that reads, "We're here to serve ourselves."?
Designers lose because they lose time and energy, and in many cases, copyrights. The time you spend on a design isn't compensated, and that energy you spent to get it "just right" could've been spent on a project for a paying client. Contests and similar speculative work usually implies no contract, or very one-sided "disclaimers" that favor the client's interests. This often gives the client the impression that picking and choosing among the entries is okay, when it really isn't. Without a contract, a designer won't have a legal leg to stand on.
The design industry loses because these sorts of situations undervalue what in reality is a profession. Contests like this peg the design profession as something subpar. A commodity. Good, well thought-out, professional design can actually boost a company's image and/or revenue. Would you ask your mechanic to fix your car on the "promise" that you'll pay him if you like the work? Or hold his work up for a contest for the general public to vote on? How about your lawyer? Plumber? Of course not - the notion is ridiculous. And the same holds true for design - be it a logo, website, brochure or some iconic symbol.