The Dreaded Photo

Sigh. The marketing dept of a company I just began freelancing for just returned all excited with lots of photos from a beautiful trade show (no comment on how they got them). From these photos they created a gorgeous presentation describing marketplace trends, etc.

At first I was excited - here’s a company who seems to care about design and would like me to do some fun and fresh designs. And then. They asked me to create designs “inspired” by specific items featured in the photos.

Now here’s the thing - they specifically stated they don’t want to knock anybody off - these were just their “great ideas” that they got at the trade show and I should somehow incorporate these features into new items. Now, these are decent people, and they honestly believe that their intentions are, well, if not exactly pure as snow, at least not dishonorable, and that this is what product development and design direction are all about.

Is this the first time I’ve encountered this scenario in my career? Of course not. But it’s the first time in a a number of years, and I now feel the intense desire to spew my little theory about why designers are often asked, by well-intentioned marketing departments, to create designs based on a photo of an already existing product, which is this:

People who are not trained artists or designers have a difficult time envisioning objects which don’t exist - and even if they can envision it, they have no means by which to express it to other people. They don’t have the verbal language to describe color and texture, don’t know how to draw in order to develop ideas and express form, haven’t constructed anything in order to understand materials, and don’t know the history of the fine and decorative arts in order to put it all into a context.

Now, before you go thinking that this is another rant against marketing, I actually have some sympathy for these guys and don’t mean this in pejorative way - my first drawing teacher insisted that everyone can learn to draw, and in fact I believe all of the above skills can be learned by almost everyone, just like we all learn to read. True, some will be much better at it than others. But an artist or designer is someone who has invested the time and money necessary to learn these communication skills, among other things (notice I haven’t even mentioned talent or creativity or taste - that’s another subject).

So, as it stands, you have all of these people in sales and marketing who may or may not be creative or have good taste (whatever that is), and whose only means of developing product is by using existing product. So, it seems logical that if they have access to a designer, they hand them a photo and ask them to design something like it. Which makes a designer want to puke.

Once again, I’m struggling with what to do here. Obviously I can walk away. But the money is decent and I like the product category. I can try to educate the company, but what am I supposed to be, a one-woman design crusader? In the past I would just continuously bust my ass to design something that was even BETTER than what they showed me, so that they’d they’d have a hard time turning it down. But now I’m just getting depressed.

Any comments or suggestions? How have YOU dealt with this scenario? What worked and what didn’t?

Every designer faces this, it is a universal ‘ethical’ dilemma. Don’t do it. Or, don’t do it specifically.

Probably, optimistically, they don’t want copies. You have the design skill to interpret the metaphor represented by the samples provided, it’s why they’ve contracted you. After you present them some interpretive designs, if they respond they do want more copy-like features, as a contract ‘freelancer’ you must respond you can’t unless they have a licence, or evidence the designs are public domain and free-issue.

I would make the argument they are less than competent marketing innovators if they continue old ideas of looking at the competetion for inspiration.



Twice I faced this situation for real. My very first job, one day president comes in and says “You should get down to the shop floor and do some drawings. They’re taking apart a ___. We’re going to be making them and need some drawings.” The product was a new German design, imported by our dealer representative in the US. In this case, the preseident was smart enough to let it be known the US representantative had a licence from the Germans, although I never saw it.

Second time president of the company (different one) walked up to my desk with a gun! Put it down, pulled up a chair, and proceeded to politely lecture me how much he liked the “ruled graticule” on the pistol grip and that I should copy it. I could only mumble how much it would cost on a surfaced injection mold tool. He got what he wanted: he was the president, he had a gun!

My company faces this situation about 3 times every year. When it is clear the person does want to copy, I immediately ask them if they have a licence or have they contacted the company to negotiate a custom design of their original equipment. Unfortunately, these people usually are convinced of the worth of their pursuits, and do not want to do either, often disbelieving that I can’t somehow copy it without doing either. I frequently also point out that lawyers will make the distinction of degree of copy, not the designers, and any part of a legal dispute process is exceedingly expensive. Just about always this ends the conversation.

It goes deeper still…

Most people reject things that are new and unfamiliar. This is a visceral human trait, and Don Norman devotes some time to it in “Emotional Design.”

Competitive products give marketers a warm-and-fuzzy for a few basic human reasons: 1) They didn’t do them. Therefore they’re not at risk for doing something new that could be wrong. 2) The competitor did them, so they must be right. (I know these are conflicting, but so is human emotion and logic…) So marketers see these things and bring this warm-and-fuzzy feeling home with them. But as soon as you show them something different, they’ll start to squirm…

This is a standard procedure in Hong Kong. What I try to do is explain that what they see in trade show is “today’s” product. By the time design, product development, manufacturing and shipping are finished these will be “yesterday’s” product. I usually say I will look at the photos as a snapshot of where the industry is today and present either research or designs to show the possible directions it will go tomorrow.

Most marketing people can quickly grasp the concept that today’s products will probably not sell well on tomorrow’s store shelves.

The funny thing Timf, is that these guys are in the development process so they know how long your new product will take to get to market and they can bet that their competitor will have at least another generation on the way so you might be 2 to 3 steps back if you merely mimic your competitor… but as you said, reminder to this effect goes a long way.

You might want to remind these guys that you don’t “get ideas” from a trade show. You steal them. You get ideas from people. Back in school an instructor once told me “you can’t design cars in a parking lot”

Great comments, thanks. That gun story is crazy! And ironically a great example too, because copying the “ruled graticule” is exactly the sort of thing this company is asking me to do. I’m in housewares though, so not very likely to get blown away by the product.

Competitive products give marketers a warm-and-fuzzy for a few basic human reasons: 1) They didn’t do them. Therefore they’re not at risk for doing something new that could be wrong. 2) The competitor did them, so they must be right. (I know these are conflicting, but so is human emotion and logic…) So marketers see these things and bring this warm-and-fuzzy feeling home with them. But as soon as you show them something different, they’ll start to squirm…<<

cg, I think you’re dead on.

You might want to remind these guys that you don’t “get ideas” from a trade show. You steal them. You get ideas from people. Back in school an instructor once told me “you can’t design cars in a parking lot”<<

That parking lot comment is the greatest - I might have to use it myself - with attribution, of course. :slight_smile: I’m still mulling this thing over, but I’m leaning towards trying to take a shot at educating the marketing folks, and if they’re not receptive, then to walk away.

This will be a new approach for me - I’ve always tried to design around the problem, but at this point in my career I think I finally have the confidence, and luckily I have enough things on deck so that losing this client won’t cause me much financial suffering. It’s the potential loss of working in a new product category that chafes…

If you are in the housewares industry then your marketing monkeys probably just returned from the Housewares Show in Chicago. I walked the show for a day and noticed the following:

  • A lot of big names have left the show (Rubbermaid). The only people at trade shows are your competitors. There are only 20 real customers left - and you go see them , they don’t come see you!!

  • Most of the companies with decent designs have now constructed walled cities or enclosed booths to protect their new designs. Anything visible from the show floor is last year’s designs.

  • I was focusing on the home organization area, not the cleaning or cooking areas, but frankly I wasn’t impressed by any of the products on display. A lot of noise.

Back to the topic… I’ve been there and done that, It feels dirty, but you have two choices when asked by someone higher on the food chain to knock-off an existing product: do it or leave. I’ve done both in my career.

Go for it, I’ve morphed it to “you can’t design shoes at Footlocker”

Most marketing people are pretty bright, if you frame it up the right way, you might be able to get through. How looking like a “fast follower” hurts the brand over time. I also email my marketing guys this:

I also try to always show a number of options, What they ask for, what I think it should be, and something much much farther out. When you line up all three, theirs looks too safe, the out there one looks to far, and your looks just right… :wink: