Typo Berlin 2009: The Panel

Back from five wonderful days in my beloved Berlin, after an inspiring TYPO Berlin 2009 and several panic attacks during the days last week because of the much too short time left to finish my thesis project, I finally spared time to start evaluate my various TYPO BERLIN impressions and notes. Some of them will be reflected in the one or other blog post in the near future.

I want to start with on of the – a least for me as a young, passionate and uber-idealistic designer – most interesting parts of the conference. Titled New Horizons or Resignation Fontblog's Jürgen Siebert – as announced here some weeks ago – got together representatives of the branch of communications design in Germany like Erik Spiekermann with members of the most important German design-related professional associations. Also the public authorities were represented through pleasent and appreciably motivated Tanja Mühlhans, the referee for media and film industry at Berlin's senatorial administration.

It's becoming the panel owes to the incident I also mentioned here months ago: the competition announced by the city of Cottbus to find a new logo as its representation within the new touristic marketing efforts. The fervid discussions that evolved in answer to accumulating notices of similar competitions on unacceptable conditions and the hardening impression of progressive price dumping within the branch motivated the conference's organizers to provide an adequate and more official context within a symposium to debate on an inflation of appreciation of design services. In the following some of the positions and statements of the discussants on the future of German communications design and the quesition for the possible necessity of the setup of a kind of regulating chamber are reflected along general lines. If anyone of the persons mentioned here feels reproduced falsely, I was glad to put his position back in perspective. Just drop a line!

HD Schellnack

The first part of the panel consisted of the introduction of all discussants. Each one of them did a Pecha Kucha presentation on their person and their opinion on the topic. The first in line was HD Schellnack, designer at nodesign, blogger and ambitious commentator at Fontblog. He diagnosed the designer with obviously turning out to be a kind of pure auxiliary person, an appendix of marketing departments. The market was affected by more and more poor work for less and less budget. In his very entertaining presentation veering between self-mockery and passion he evoked the idea of the designer as a shaman who achieves through design as a way of thinking in interaction with his clients much more than just the right choice and position of images and type. Design had to be considered much more comprehensive, because here added value was created from ideas. Design was applied Science Fiction and designer had to view themselves as adventurers who confronted established structures.

The inflation of appreciation regarding design services was faciliated by the adaption of the bachelor degree at German design schools accompanied by the reduction of the duration of study. But in general, the branch had the problem, that nobody – even from within – seemed to know the actual value of design services anymore. It were a question of self-conception: Design also was a cultural achievement as theater or orchestra were. The time had come for the entire branch to take itself seriously again and to come up with a new self-confidence that not only had to be communicated but lived out.

Steffen Schuhmann

The co-founder of the design studio Anschlaege.de Steffen Schuhmann right at the beginning commented on the idea of the establishment of a design chamber: Alliance was doubtlessly great. The form it was given wasn't that relevant. The question was who would do the accumulating extra work caused by such an organisation. As an aim of any kind of collective engagement to improve the situation of the industry Schuhmann defined the implementation of transparent and understandable conditions of work and competition. As an example he suggested the limitation of the number of participants in pitches to five. So potential customers were forced to consciously select and invite designers or agencies. At least 7% of a budget should be distributed among all pitch participants – at least if the contract was concluded by public authorities.

To protect the job title Designer, he considers problematic. What criteria should be taken as a basis for the decision, who was qualified to call himself a designer? A degree? Quality? Who would judge it?

Further suggestions for improvement were the setup of an official database in which competitions and tenders were listed and rated. Another point was, that design schools had to focus much more on furthering as like as challenging artistic quality. Plausible and comprehensible feedbacks were required reflected in using the full spectrum of grades. A culture of permanent questioning the own artistic approaches and an awareness of quality had to be established as early as possible. The switch to the bachelor degree at German design schools had siginificantly limited the open space that allowed design students to experiment and develop an own artistic way of thinking.
I was very impressed by Schuhmann's statement, that the branch's complaints of the working conditions couldn't be taken seriously as the entire industry itself was suspected of exploiting interns, who often were payed badly – if they were payed at all. Behaviour like this indicated the willingness to join the game of price dumping. The branch in its entirety had to change and to commit itself to standards like – for example – paying interns no less than € 350. Fundamentally the industry had to reconsider what price a designer's work is worth. A common idea of the provided value was the base for lasting changes.

Erik Spiekermann

Often entitled with Type Pope in Germany Erik Spiekermann doesn't need any further introduction here. After he had apologized for his misinterpretation of the Pecha Kucha method and he had announced not to talk very much concomitantly during the projected beamer presentation, he actually talked a lot nevertheless. He inducted the audience into his perfomance by his statement:

Design is an attitude, not a product.

And who should agree with him more than the author of a blog called visual attitudes? Anyway, Spiekermann in general is profoundly convinced that not any kind of design chamber in this world could enact attitude. So he also questioned any criteria that would legitimate a design chamber to exclude or include any of the market's protagonists. For example he would be the first one to go if the authorization to work as a designer was made conditional on a degree because he doesn't hold one.

Spiekermann also assumes the industry beared the blame for its current proplems itself. A self-concept the entire branch noticeably admited to outwards as well as inwards was in great demand. The postion of the designer had to be consolidated on a base of arguments. For example designers had to point out that they didn't work for the client but much more for the client's own customers. Designers had to become acquainted with the fact that they can do some jobs better than other people.

That's why designers had to be trusted and considered partners and counterparts instead of pure deliverers or vicarious agents. Finally Spiekermann in conclusion stated that good clients mostly were a precondition for good design.

Heide Hackenberg

As a member of the Allianz Deutscher Designer (Alliance of German Designers) Heide Hackenberg is besides an author and copywriter a representative of one of the biggest design-related professional associations in Germany. In her presentation she started right with significant arguments against the idea of a design chamber: we should be happy that fortunately the Reichskulturkammer and its employment bans were abolished in 1945 as it happened years later also to the German Democratic Republic analog. We had to learn from such bitter experiences. Designer was a open profession and the idea of a commission of taste that decides whether one was qualified to be a designer or not in her opinion was definitely an absurd one.

Concerning the basic conditions of competitions and pitches she pointed out that the branch itself was complicit with its own problems by briskly responding to those tenders. That a chamber wouldn't change anything about it, was proven by the architects who were organized in and by a chamber but also had the same problems. It's not a chamber the industry of communications design needed to change the situation. The German designers just had to settle on transparent common conditions of competition like e.g. enjoining tenders a duty to give information on the competitors involved in a pitch.

A precondition was the communication of the fact, that design is no hobby but a strong branch of economic activity. And that's why already at the design academies basic economic skills had to be taught. That was the only way to guard against young designers being exploited to beat down prices. But she also asks the question what the actual price is for design services, for the work we designers do. She didn't believe that any kind of chamber can relieve anyone of the responsibility to decide what's the worth of his work.

Johannes Erler

Designer Johannes Erler of factor design believes that the branch itself loses sight of important aspects like authorship and specialization which could endow the industry with identity and legitimation. The respect as a specialist could be reconquered by the designer. Maybe the less worn out term Typographer should be used increasingly, he stated, to build up a new profile beyond today's degenerated idea of graphic design. He also didn't understand the negative attitude towards stardom among designers. Prominent personalities could help draw the publics attention to the industry, its situation and to the discourse on the worth of design.In the second part of his presentation Erler showed some sheets shwowing questions he left uncommented. For example:

Are you a graphic designer? Why do you think you are? Do you know what you want to achieve as a designer? Can you explain to a child / a friend / your parents what you profession is about? Do you take yourself seriously (enough) as a designer?

Tanja Mühlhans

As referee for media and film industry at Berlin's senatorial administration she vehemently gets involved with the creative sector of the German capital. She knew a lot of the problems described by her previous speakers and agrees with them in many points. Within the public authorities there were a lot of people who care about the conditions of the creative industry. Nevertheless the translation of the industries demands into politics was a huge hurdle. At this the support on the part of the creatives was very sparse. But there was no change to achieve without great efforts. In Berlin they were working to capacity as she and her department were responsible for a lot more sectors than communications design. She was bombarded with requests by fashion designers, industrial designers, game designers and so on every day.

To strengthen the position of designers in the face of the public authorities as client whose decisions are based on a least common denominator that resulted from hierarchic skirmish, she also recommended to settle on e.g. general suggested prices for design services. But any change started with yourself by e.g. refraining from entering unfair and intransparent pitches.

Henning Krause

The other important professional association for communications designer, the Bund Deutschre Grafik-Designer (Coalition of German Graphic Designers), was represented by its president Henning Krause. He right jumped into his presentation with the expression of his absolute incomprehension for everyone again and again moaning about always the same list of problems but only a very few getting actually involved with one of the professional associations to work for a change. In fact this behaviour weakened the association's legitimation as a dialog partner to e.g. the politics. The establishment of the joint Initiative Deutscher Designverbände (Initiative of German Design Assosications) hadn't changed anything about the general aversion against the engagement in one of the involved organizations.

He also criticized the design academies for teaching more students than the saturated market could absorb. And like Heide Hackenberg he demanded imparting of at least basic economic skills during the studies.

Florian Pfeffer

Graphic-designer, University lecturer and director of the Amsterdam-based :output foundation Florian Pfeffer responded to the question for the establishment of a design chamber with comparing the situations of designers and architects like Hackenberg had done it before: The architects have a chamber but they all want to get out of it. And the designers – who don't have one – all want to get into one. No one could seriously want to seal off the designer's profession. As we designers – unlike architects – didn't endanger anyone if we do a poor job, the chamber could just protect ourselves from ourselves. Because actually the German designers contributed to the critical developments of the last decade by going along with them for too long. Anyone should try to order 25 buns at his bakery of trust demanding to taste each one before paying just the single one that tasted best. Unlike the baker a designer wouldn't kick you out. He would feel honored because you had come to taste his buns, Pfeffer stated.

The appreciation for the own work had to be communicated believably and pertinaciously to the clients. Impishly smiling Pfeffer called on the audience to immediately start an initiative that committed everyone to never again enter any dubious competition.

The Panel Discussion

After the introductions the panel discussion itself started with the diagnosis that the situation of communications designers today significantly differs from the one designers like Otl Aicher were in. Back then a few designers with small studios did big projects like global visual brand presences. Today, as HD Schellnack remarked, countless designers battle for the client's cadaver again and again. Even industry leader saw themselves forced to invest a vast quantity of working hours and money in advance on the off chance in intransparent pitches. Of course the industries behaviour was utilized by clients to beat down the prices vehemently.

Hackenberg re-emphasized that the fact that design schools released 25 to 40 designers with a Bachelor degree in her opinion is one of the reasons for the current developments. Accepting that many students for the benefit of professorships or bigger budgets would lead to a lacking awareness of quality and a oversaturation of the market. This provoked the inflationary trend of appreciation of design services. Much more rigorous entrance tests were required.

In this point Spiekermann agreed with Hackenberg and refered to the adoption of the bachelor degree courses as nearly a disaster. He was sure in a few years this model would be disestablished. But whether the shortage of the milk (following the current discussion on the development of milk prices in Germany) was the solution for the problem of a lack of appreciation of communications design, he put into question. It had to be put straight that our work as designers was more than what we are currently paid for. Design services were priced far below value and designers were often reduced to the roll of a finedrawer.

Referring to Spiekermann's comment on the public authorities being a bad client and tenderee because of a lack of competence in evaluating design matters, Mühlhans stated slightly displeased, that the authorities very well had competent persons in charge. It was often tryed also to go unusual ways by working with student groups and small studios, but it mostly had caused a lot of problems because of a lack of sense of reality and unreliability in view of deadlines. That's why often bigger and more experienced agencies were chosen to be able to estimate time exposure and costs. As I personally don't think there is no good will and competence regarding design matters within the rows of the public authorities, I guess it's a problem of bureaucracy and hierarchies. But it's absolutely understandable to take a stance against tendering practices as they were applied by the authorities of the city of Cottbus.

Schuhmann approached the democratization of design caused by the general availability of the technical tools with the conviction, that designers actually have a lot of other fields of activity. And the branch now was challenged to open up new and additional ones. These times of change offered new challenges for an artistic way of thinking. In view of the price dumping he recommended establishing a voluntary but definitive agreement, that committed all agreers to defined standards of business, e.g. in dealing with interns.

Someone made a reference to the statistic data on the German creative industry. Actually the industry was bigger and more strong-selling than the world-renowned and cherished German car industry. And even the critical economic climate hit the creative sector as hard, no one ever spent a thought on offering financial support programs for designers. It had to be considered that e.g. the communications design branch was directly a job generator as well as indirectly through working for its clients' business success.

Unfortunately the talk got bogged down in details of the actual validity of the statistic information on the creative industries. Nevertheless it was stated that it had to be communicated more significantly – corresponding to the true sense of the term creative industry – that designers generated not only aesthetic but also economic added value. With this final discourse on the importance and size of the creative sector in Germany the 60 minutes of discussion came to their end. Having heard a lot of interesting statements and views on the current state of the branch I headed for the next lecture which I – unfortunately – prefered to the open discussion that followed.

Some Concluding Thoughts

As I already mentioned in several posts on competitions and in the announcement of the TYPO Berlin Panel some weeks ago, I think the branch of communications design is stuck in the middle of identification process. The democratization of design mentioned above by Schuhmann changed the perception of the things we designer do. The competition between designers of different skills and focuses as well as the demand for the universal genius (a kind of a human Swiss army knife™ for design issues as well as programming and copywriting. Maybe he could brew and serve the coffee, too?) made the market's edges blur. The clearly defined and respectable specialist suddenly is confronted with a confusing system in which he isn't able to locate and advocate himself and the worth of his services. The discourse is about identity. And identity is achieved through differentiation. That's the step to be taken.

Regarding possible rules of competition I'm very taken with the idea of a voluntary agreement. Defining standards and making it a matter of honor to stick to it, I consider much effective and more honest than an act by law. The agreement would separate the wheat from the chaff and a possible label could be established as a kind of guarantor for standards and fairness. In this matter all the skills were challenged the branch claims to have persistently: the ability to develope and communicate visions. I really wonder why the designers aren't able to use these skills they sell to their clients for their own purposes.

The last few weeks I often read comments and notes on links in my Twitter stream on the behaviour of clients and the appreciation of design services in general. I guess, it's not only a German problem at all. Finally I want to link in this context to Win Without Pitching Manifesto @jasonsantamaria hinted at some days ago. And in order that this ends with a smile I recommend to have a look at this nice video on The Vendor Client Relationship – in real world situations. And of course it was great to see some ideas and views on the topic being posted in the comments section. So, feel free!