Two or three times a year, a longstanding design client commissions me to do some work. He normally pays me £5000 ($7907), but recently he told me that for the same amount of work he could only afford £400 ($632). After some harrumphing and eye rolling I accepted his terms. In other words, I grudgingly embraced the new reality: less is the new normal.
Since the banking crises of 2008, Western nations are learning painfully to adapt to this condition of less-ness.
Writing about the current American situation, the economist Joseph Stiglitz paints a bleak picture: ‘middle-aged people who thought that they would be unemployed for a few months have now realised that they were, in fact, forcibly retired. Young people who graduated from college with tens of thousands of dollars of education debt cannot find any jobs at all. People who moved in with friends and relatives have become homeless. Houses bought during the property boom are still on the market or have been sold at a loss. More than seven million American families have lost their homes.’
Here in Europe, the
European Monetary crises has contributed to the gradual realisation that after years of economic growth we have now entered a period of contraction and reduced expectations, and there’s no end in sight.
This is a bitter medicine for designers to swallow. We have become accustomed to prospering by catering for the insatiable appetite for consumption that has characterized the last few decades. But what if there is a fundamental change in the way people think about consumption? And what if huge numbers of people are going to learn to live with reduced spending power? This is not mere speculation; there are signs that this process is already underway.
In a post on the Yale e360 blog titled
‘The New Story of Stuff: Can We Consume Less?’, a report by environmental campaigner
Chris Goodall is quoted at length: ‘In the past decade, Britain has been consuming less water, building materials, paper, food (especially meat), cars, textiles, fertilizers and much else. Travel is down; so is energy production. The country produces less waste, too.’
It is also noted that even in the United States there are signs that something similar is happening: ‘American truck mileage has been on a plateau for a decade now. The number of cars on American highways is also flat. And per-capita mileage is falling. As a result, gasoline consumption is expected to be at a 10-year low this year, according to the Department of Energy.’
How can graphic designers adapt to this new world? For some, life goes on as normal. Digital expansion provides opportunities for modest growth and there will always be a need for specialist skills in areas such as packaging, way finding and information graphics. But for others, there is only contraction and the fight for survival – studios that once employed 10 or 12 people, now get by with two or three interns.
All we can be sure about is that the old way of hoping for big clients with fat fees is no longer viable.
P&G recently announced that it would lay off 1,600 staffers as part of a cost-cutting exercise. CEO Robert McDonald told Wall Street analysts that he would have to "moderate" his ad budget because
Facebook and
Google can be "more efficient" than the traditional media that forms the bulk of P&G's ad budget.
Even the small clients are vanishing: who needs a designer when you can start a business with a Facebook page, a Twitter account,
a crowd-sourced logo, and a
fully functional, oven-ready, customer-targeted website downloaded straight from the internet?
It appears that we are entering a “post-graphic design” era: a time when pretty much anyone can make graphic design, and when, in a networked and “template-for-everything” world, communication can be had more cheaply and more easily than at any time in history. In the post-graphic design era, the demand and need for routine graphic design skills will inevitably diminish.
But I refuse to be defeatist. None of this is unique to design. It’s a problem shared with many other professions: journalism, publishing, filmmaking, music, and advertising are all facing up to the need for wholesale reinvention in the face of the new less-ness. No one knows how designers will earn a living in the coming decades, but the most likely outcome is that for many people, design skills will become the equivalent of owning a driver’s licence: lots of people drive, but very few earn a living from just driving – they drive to do other things. In the long-term, I can see design skills becoming a license – a passport – to do other things. But in the immediate future, survival will depend on adaptability. And as the Darwinians tell us, adaptability is the key to survival.
Comments [12]
02.29.12
04:59
02.29.12
06:01
02.29.12
11:04
Actually a good analogy would also be:
"lots of people drive, but few can drive well." (by "few" I mean in the context of multi-millions, not literally a few.)
I think what we should fear is the dumbing down of design that is occurring quickly because of social media and accessibility to quick solutions (i.e.: crowd-sourcing).
I understand the financial ramifications that are presently affecting how the public approaches and views design services. But we still need to continue to push and strive for higher quality of design along with educating and fostering better design attitudes among the general public, then the design industry will find a way to adapt, evolve and survive as it has in the past. Design isn't about the tools you use, but what you do with them. Otherwise design will become worse than just a "driver's license" type of acquired skill it seems to be heading towards.
03.01.12
09:51
Because of an economic recession people find it easier to rationalize taking advantage of others. Designers create solutions to difficult problems. The need for a designer should increase in a time of political, economic, or social crisis, as we have the capacity to present solutions that people can understand. If we can't do that we are not designers. If that need is not realized it is our responsibility to educate others on the need for design.
03.01.12
12:52
03.01.12
04:46
VR/
03.01.12
10:05
03.03.12
12:29
03.06.12
06:28
1. I can't avoid linking your article with Dmitri Siegel's "Designing Our Own Graves", especially when he touches on the subject of the "templated mind". It is ubiquitous now, and of course key decision makers in enterprises of any scale, as the number crunchers they are, will go for almost zero cost ready-made social media structures and outsourced fast-food services if those measure good results. But feasible businesses will understand it's not that simple, which ensues looking out for expertise and customization, and being willing to pay for it. Good products and ideas want to be a brand, and the people behind them will keep going after branding agencies. Large companies in several sectors will need design specialists to build their own design culture. Competition and hunger for innovation in this scenery will rise while overnumbered design schools will keep churning out designers to the market, which is worrying, but different from design-specific work being shunned away. Even if it is so, designers must adapt, as you suggest, and refuse to scratch their cremaster muscle for £400.
2. Contemporary design expertise isn't built by climbing up to a senior position in an established vertical position graph, but by scope. e.g. You can take on logo design, typography, UX design and Javascript programming, but you various skills rotate around the center of your scope. It's the emphasis you put on each that will determine whether you're a brand specialist, a UX designer or a front-end developer (in that sense all skills abide to your metaphor of the driver's licence). When we aim for scope, the idea of design consultancy seems to be somewhat flawed, as the line between intellectual and technical work tends to be blurry. Current design professionals, as senior as they are, do collaboration, not "consulting". Current aspiring designers should look less to Spielberg – who is capable but has a huge staff below him that does the hollywood feature film happen – and more to Eisenstein – who to realise his vision got hands down with camera parts, cut 16mm film and wrote an essay or two linking linguistic and metaphysical issues with the form of cinema. It's that second class of worker who will thrive.
03.14.12
02:26
04.04.12
02:34
09.23.14
02:44