Speculative work

Speculative work, also known as spec work, is any kind of creative work that has been completed or submitted by volunteer designers to prospective clients, under the circumstances that a fair or reasonable fee has not been agreed upon in writing. Designers are required to invest their valuable time and resources to contest with each other's to win a contract.[1] This type of practice is common in industries such as arts and architecture.

In design contest, which is an example of speculative work, the client provided participating designers with a brief prize for the eventual winner. They will then submit their work so that the client can select a winning submission. As the winner receives the prize and contract, other entrants receive nothing for their work.[2]

Histories

AIGA holds the belief that professional designers should be compensated fairly for their work. Also there should be an engagement with clients in which the ownership and use rights of the designer's intellectual and creative property are negotiated. To achieve that end, AIGA suggest that designers should enter into the projects of their clients with full engagement to show the true value of their creative endeavor. They should pay more attention when it comes to potential risks of entering into speculative work.[3] The risks of speculative work make some designers feel the repulsion of Crowdsourcing Creative Work.[4]

Categories

Competitions

Designers work in the hopes of winning a prize that comes in an unknown form.

Volunteer work

Designers submit their work as a favor or for the experience without the expectation of being awarded.

Internships

Designers work in the form of volunteer that involves educational gain which could benefit them in further career development.

Pro bono work

Designers work for free for the public good.[5]

Cons and pros

Pros

One main attraction of using speculative work is that it can benefit the clients by bringing cheaper cost and more variations and ideas. As for designers, speculative work can provide them with an opportunity to gain experience, build portfolio, and meet people.[6]

Cons

Efficiency

The fact that designers spend countless hours working on projects without any forms of payment guaranteed is harmful to them. Designers could have used their resources to build portfolios, improve their skills, or make a contract with actual payment.

Plagiarism

Verbal agreement is insufficient in protecting designer's interests in the court of law. As a matter of fact, it is extremely difficult to prove that designers are supposed to be compensated by the clients without formal contracts. Using this strategy, some clients make little changes and then resell the designer's creative work as their own properties.

Quality

Some designers focus on undercharging their products rather than improving the quality of the work. This situation is even more severe when designers try to outbid each other's to get payment in the contest. It devalues the whole skill-set in the design industry.[7]

See also

Crowdsourcing Creative Work

References

  1. ↑ "Why Crowdsourcing Design Doesn't Work. | Needle". Needlehr.wordpress.com. 2013-11-12. Retrieved 2015-12-03.
  2. ↑ "Spec Work | WeeNudge". weenudge.com. Retrieved 2015-12-09.
  3. ↑ "AIGA position on spec work". AIGA | the professional association for design. Retrieved 2015-12-09.
  4. ↑ "Why Designers Hate Crowdsourcing". Forbes. 2010-07-12. Retrieved 2015-12-09.
  5. ↑ "spec work and crowdsourcing - Ethics in Graphic Design". www.ethicsingraphicdesign.org. Retrieved 2015-12-09.
  6. ↑ "The "Pros" and Cons of Spec Work". JUST™ Creative. Retrieved 2015-12-09.
  7. ↑ "Why Crowdsourcing Design Doesn't Work.". Needle. Retrieved 2015-12-09.
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 2/24/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.