Should designers keep speculating?

Jul 3 2008 by Alistair Houghton, Liverpool Daily Post

OPINION: Andrew Binns, business development manager at Rippleffect

AS A busy web design agency with a number of clients who expect – and deserve – our attention, the question of allocating time to create designs to win a pitch is a testing one.

Agencies face the question: “Should clients who have paid for services lose priority over potential clients?”

It is a question that every agency has to answer and one that is asked at Rippleffect on a more and more frequent basis. The scenario is that a potential new client will send a brief through, detailing their requirements for the new project.

This then requires a response by defining how we will meet those requirements. Time needs to be allocated to this work to ensure the requirements are fully understood and fully considered.

New business is the lifeblood of any company and it is important that people realise this is an investment.

However, when clients request advanced design concepts within the response, the waters get murky.

Now the speculative design process has served Rippleffect very well and our record in winning projects based on the designs is excellent.

Sometimes, a speculative design can be a good thing.

It gives the agency the opportunity to demonstrate visually how they interpret the brief and allows them to develop new ideas.

We believe speculative designs are a part of the pitch process.

The problem is that the aesthetics may be right, but the reasoning behind the designs may be wrong.

Design concepts require a degree of understanding from the agency – who is the site aimed at, what is its purpose? This can only be achieved by spending time with the client and this is certainly not possible with a speculative design approach.

So, any clients out there about to send a tender out, please do think a little deeper when you add in the sentence: “Two designs are required to demonstrate your reasoning and understanding of the brief”.