News
11 November 2012
Avoid complacency when designing in-house, says industry veterans
TORONTO—An in-house design department shouldn't get lost within a larger company, said speakers during RGD DesignThinkers last week.
Glenn John Arnowitz, director of Global Creative Services at Pfizer, said designers should market their department and there are a number of ways to help the team stand out.
A new website can be built as a team project with the team members featured prominently on the site. A department's "greatest hits" — the work the team is most proud of — can be shown off in brochures produced each quarter, he added.
Hosting an open house is another ideal way to showcase talents. Put out treats for guests — "if you have sugar, they will come" — along with samples of work and (if the budget allows for it) swag such as t-shirts, suggests Arnowitz. "Promote the open house in clever ways ahead of time," he said, adding it's a good time to show off awards with the clients that initiated the projects.
Arnowitz said the creative department should be a "company resource. Welcome all requests. If you can't help, find someone internally or externally that can. Build a network of vendors to go to."
Arnowitz was also part of an in-house design panel during the conference, joined by Julia Hoffmann, creative director of advertising and graphic design at The Museum of Modern Art in New York, and riCardo Crespo, creative lead at 20th Century Fox.
Crespo said one of the challenges of an in-house department is complacency. "We are the most intimate to the brand. Shame on us if we're just waiting for our next assignment," he said. Arnowitz made the same point about complacency earlier. "Assemble your team regularly and assess how you're doing," said Arnowitz.
Let others outside the department know the creative team has a firm handle on the brand and should be the ones calling the shots when it comes to brand communications, said Arnowitz. "You have to back up your design with conviction," he said. "Don't deviate from brand guidelines, they'll walk all over you."
Hoffmann said her department outsources the "mundane stuff" while Crespo backed her up by noting in-house designers can farm out work to the right people because they know the brand so well.
Glenn John Arnowitz, director of Global Creative Services at Pfizer, said designers should market their department and there are a number of ways to help the team stand out.
 |
|
Glenn John Arnowitz
|
A new website can be built as a team project with the team members featured prominently on the site. A department's "greatest hits" — the work the team is most proud of — can be shown off in brochures produced each quarter, he added.
Hosting an open house is another ideal way to showcase talents. Put out treats for guests — "if you have sugar, they will come" — along with samples of work and (if the budget allows for it) swag such as t-shirts, suggests Arnowitz. "Promote the open house in clever ways ahead of time," he said, adding it's a good time to show off awards with the clients that initiated the projects.
Arnowitz said the creative department should be a "company resource. Welcome all requests. If you can't help, find someone internally or externally that can. Build a network of vendors to go to."
Arnowitz was also part of an in-house design panel during the conference, joined by Julia Hoffmann, creative director of advertising and graphic design at The Museum of Modern Art in New York, and riCardo Crespo, creative lead at 20th Century Fox.
Crespo said one of the challenges of an in-house department is complacency. "We are the most intimate to the brand. Shame on us if we're just waiting for our next assignment," he said. Arnowitz made the same point about complacency earlier. "Assemble your team regularly and assess how you're doing," said Arnowitz.
 |
|
riCardo Crespo
|
Let others outside the department know the creative team has a firm handle on the brand and should be the ones calling the shots when it comes to brand communications, said Arnowitz. "You have to back up your design with conviction," he said. "Don't deviate from brand guidelines, they'll walk all over you."
Hoffmann said her department outsources the "mundane stuff" while Crespo backed her up by noting in-house designers can farm out work to the right people because they know the brand so well.
Most Read Stories
Most Recent Comment
 |
|
| Anonymous says: | |
| I'm not a fan of this new re-design. Like they say if it works don't change it.... | |
Most Recent Blog Comment
|
|
| Curious George says: | |
Renee@ I was just about to ask to whom can you complain for working without pay. But my next questio... |
|
Blogs
 |
Do Good D̶e̶s̶i̶g̶n̶ David Berman Most recent posts: |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Design school didn’t tell you... Mark Busse Most recent posts: |
Design Buzz on the Web
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fontest
Calling all typophiles! Enter our font contest and you could win a prize |
FREE Subscription
January/February 2013 Canada's largest circulation design Magazine |
||
.jpg)
FREE Newsletter
Sign up now for our free news and jobs email bulletin |
 |
Live from Twitter
I hasten to add, my experience leading internal creative and advertising teams was quite fruitful—for both parties. Their skill sets were pretty much at par with what's is done by agencies. I built various teams in my career, and I know what to look for when recruiting. I also know know how to retain them. I know how to create opportunities to bring internal clients on side and give us creative license to produce the great stuff that one may only see among agency folk. And it worked time and again.
Nice post!
It is a substantial topic and as you say it requires a substantial animal to address the greater tasks involved in organizational marketing mixes that can't be addressed, at times, by the "bread and butter" solutions of in-house skills. It's just a fact of (industry) life, despite all the rhetoric out there, sometimes.
Unfortunately for the internals, that is, you make a fine point. Integrated, along with top-level strategy—above the line, essentially, is seen to be outsourced. In spades! And to add fuel to the fire, internal departments, generally speaking, it seems, may not attract the same animal that agencies attract. This may be a significant reason why outsourcing is prevalent. Maybe it's viewed as talent being "better" than what's within. The other could be a perception that hiring an agency is needed because they would be viewing the challenge from the outside, yielding to objectivity and new insight vs. perceived complacency and, well, limited insight. Now we've come full circle. I hate when that happens.
Not sparing with you? Your kettle appears to have many exceptional points. However, I was principally talking about integrated not bread and butter work which is the principal backbone of most in-house shops today.
— riCardo Crespo
When you find yourself waiting, you're 2 months away from leadership thinking you're a KINKOs. Change expectations.
I don't disagree with your defense at all. I'm of the ilk that if you have a great leader who promotes growth; who's been around the block; who's seasoned, and has an innate sense of delivering non-pedestrian solutions; and a great book to boot, s/he will go to bat for the team and ensure its members' skill set remains in a dynamic state — not in a bubble or vacuum, laden with perceived complacency and limited skill sets. It's also a cultural and attitudinal point I'm making, which can reside on either side of the fence, btw. Conversely, agency folk have been around VARIOUS blocks and are used to an assortment of creative challenges—often simultaneously and for different clients/brands. Exciting? You bet! I've been on both sides, and I guess as with everything, there are pros and cons.
Now, back to fishing for my kettle. Where the heck did I put it? Let me outsource it to see if "they" can find it. Lol.
Excellent points! Our business whether it is in-house or out, is a constantly evolving one, if desiners learn to shift and adjust your skills with the market forces and you'll both be fine no matter where you go.
The nice thing about the current technology situation is that much like the good old days it puts the work back in the hand of the real creatives. Good luck!
@ Angelo: The panels did cover when it was appropriate for an organization to seek outsourced experts. It's inevitable that smaller in-house groups will need to rely on the expertise of freelancers and outside agencies when requests fall outside of their skill set. But guest speaker Ricardo made the excellent point that the in-house team should be involved in the selection of the outside agency, and should be directly involved with the work that comes back and forth (considering especially that they'll likely be the ones to inherit the files in the future).
There are many circumstances I can think of in my organization where the PR/marketing representatives did not consult the expertise of the in-house printing/design group, and chose various agencies to work on different projects. After everything was said and done (and paid for), I later inherited the files for the minor revisions (anything from logo files to map files) and was often disappointed to find the files had poor layer organization, non-outlined fonts, or not enough versions of a logo. It took a needless amount more hours to clean up/flesh out their work files. Had we been involved in the first place, we might have suggested a list of things that should have been included in the original package.
I agree with you and I don't.
Creatives of all colours have an infinitely larger field of vision provided by the internet, design associations and a larger number of magazines and books written about design today, than say, even 10 years ago.
As well, the field of design is much more respected than in the past. In-house departments have started up again because people are more attuned to what design is and, in turn, who they should hire to support their company's creative needs.
In-house departments don't have the stigma attached to them as they did in the past. (previously, if you couldn't get a job in the field, at least you could go in-house somewhere).
Now-a-days, in-house studios are winning awards for their creative endeavours.
That's a lot of kettle in that fish!
While you make some good points and, structurally there is a place for in-house, good and bad, in our industry, there is also far reaching reason why organizations contract out some of their creative, namely when it's to their advantage.
I was often hired to train in-house creatives, its was never about the talent level but the improved skill set and the knowledge I brought to the table that allowed in-house staff to address problems, better.
Finally, when the company has a crystallized vision of its brand, which is more far-reaching than a logo, by the way, and when it garners total buy-in, especially from the brand evangelist, the CEO, and when it appreciates consistency across all touch points—tangible or otherwise—it allows the creative lead to, well, lead his/her team to break-through solutions. But don't forget to include the creative guys at the outset; it's the right way to go about it, and the results will reflect it.