I have written before about why agencies should prioritise “good enough”, and I have come across it again in a different way.
I don’t do paid graphic design anymore, so I was working on a design project with another designer. The designer in question is exceptional at their craft and cares deeply that every element is perfect and tasteful.
They are an absolute asset to any client who will set a brief and leave them to it. Someone who delivers exceptional quality and attention to detail is exactly the sort of person I want to work with every time.
The client in this case, however, was not asking for an interpretation of their brand or brief. They had a very set idea of what they wanted for a piece of large-format print. The first design supplied was rejected, and the client sent a hand-drawn layout that was not what a designer would have done. But it was what they wanted.
In the end, the signed-off work was something the designer wanted nothing to do with, even though the client was over the moon.
The lesson: success on a project has different metrics. For me it was a success because the paying client got what they wanted, even though it was not what they needed. Some clients won’t take advice, and that’s fine. If they pay to ignore advice and get exactly what they asked for, that is a successful project: the client is happy and we have been paid.
After all, is this not why agencies exist? To charge for providing a service to people and organisations that cannot produce the work themselves. It’s not our job to dictate what’s right or wrong. We can only advise on what we believe is best for the client.
The designer sees it differently, and I think most creatives I work with do too, whether they are copywriters, designers, videographers or photographers. They view all work through the lens of their portfolio, their reputation, and their standards. But they don’t need to.
No designer puts all their work in their portfolio, and most people do not judge design work in the same way designers do. Most people are playing a different game.
Another view might be that we should be educating people to have higher standards when it comes to things like design. But that’s not a realistic solution, for the same reason Canva did not replace graphic designers: having the tools does not make you a designer. I have all the tools I need to build a house, but I lack the knowledge and experience. It is people’s lack of knowledge that makes them think they can do it themselves, because they don’t understand the difference between good and bad design.
Are all parties’ objectives equal?
The paying party trumps all others, but you want to work with good people again, so there has to be some compromise. Sometimes you just have to accept that your view of an outcome has nothing to do with the success of the project. Just because it’s not up to your standard does not mean it’s not fit for purpose.