The debate about speculative work is growing with the rise of “crowdsourcing,” as discussed in this recent Wired blog post. The term applies to a number of websites where designers compete to win projects by submitting concepts from which the client can choose. This trend, working towards the lowest common denominator, can only commoditize the creative process. When designers are pitted against one another to produce speculative work, they do so in a vacuum – making presumptions that can only cheapen the final product. They must “speculate” on the clients’ needs and wants based on what little they can gleaned from a short RFP description or existing marketing materials. Thus, the work presented in the crowdsourcing model can be seen as mere caricatures of a brand – something that neither designer nor client wants. 

As Charles Eames said, “The details are not the details. They make the design”

It is argued that the speculative work provides the client with an insight into the capabilities of particular designer or firm. And it is understandable that those commissioning work might believe this to be the best way to evaluate design skills. Hey, you take a car for test drive, why not a designer? But a car and a company brand are two very different things. A car is a commodity. It’s a product that we want to be manufactured the same way every single time. On the other hand, a brand is the result of a collaborative process that aims to produce a unique result every single time. To evaluate the branding process, you need to evaluate the ability of a design firm to create unique solutions at the end of the creative process.

Here at kor, we recently produced a logo book that serves as an inventory of our identity work to share with potential clients. This document allows them to observe our ability to strategize and communicate the unique personality inherent in each of our clients’ brands. If our work for other companies, schools, hospitals, museums, etc. communicates effectively to potential clients, they can be confident that kor is able to do the same for them. That is a far less risky proposition than making a decision based on the decontextualized gamble of a speculative sketch!