Discuss further in the
Member's Forums

To whom it may concern

There are few questions raised about the way in which AGDA conduct its judging and award presentations each year by various designers in the industry. There was a specific lack of recognition for real designers who are not only creating brilliant design, but also answer the brief, and most importantly, create revenue for businesses.

The judging technique is not used to judge design as everyone else knows design to be. AGDA judges by way of 'ART' / asthenic quality, and 'Design for Designers', and 'niche' design.

What about REAL design?

Designing is not about art for art sake. Design is not about breaking the artistic barriers of the world without any point or purpose. Design is about answering a brief. Design is about making clear communication to the public. Design is NOT to communicate to other designers or other art critics (of which you seem to be in abundance). Design is being clear and creating revenue for businesses, allowing everyone to remember the design. Design is meant to be fundamentally timeless.

Upon looking at the categories that you choose your award recipients, it was noted that you have small, niche business where the design does not make a real significant point or impact in the marketplace. Your finalists mostly missed the reason to design in the first place -- to communicate a point & purpose.

Companies do not employ designers to spend all their budget on something which is not timeless and does not make the best possible statement about their company/product.

I now note your attention to Fusion Design and the way in which the individual designer of website design was given no personal recognition. This is unacceptable. Each designer has his/her own personal mark to make on the world, the company is a vehicle in which they use to express that, making the individual valuable. Without individually designers, companies would have no work.

I also note the larger corporations such as Optus, Telstra, or even Australia Post had little or no mention in the awards. Only small businesses were mainly 'winning' and they make a small impact on the marketplace. There must be something done about this immediately before the next awards are presented.

1999 AWARD Awards Presentation (ie Advertising Awards) are categorised by company & type. This is the correct way in which to judge a communications based industry.

Design must be judged by what the client asks of the industry and how it performs in the greater community both locally and internationally.

AGDA must look outside the very small square that it occupies. The award winners embarrassed the real design community of Australia with its lack of real recognition of the industry. AGDA embarrassed Australia with its obvious lack of thought into what exactly design means to the world locally and internationally.

AGDA must restructure its awards to include commercial design, website design, niche design and fashion led design. With all those categories in place, abolishing its traditional 'packaging', 'corporate design', and 'corporate literature' tier.

The entire world is going into the next millennium and AGDA needs to re-evaluate its way in which it recognises the design community.

To use the different categories by the businesses that 100% of designers are used by with the sub-division of the traditional three tiered design styles would not only bring designers in Australia together but put our designers in line with the international market. AGDA is a large body which inexperienced & highly experienced designers are looking at to reflect its trends and changes.

AGDA, it is time you changed.

In response to Maria Awards feedback

WOWø?°!

It either took Maria 13 months to write her email or, she discovered that black doorstop holding her office door open from November 1998 was a creative biennial. I love the delayed feedback.

1998 award results are a reflection of the state of Australian Design in the big end of town. Many of our cashed up, larger clients don't really understand the difference between safe and engaging design. they don't need the hassles and can't afford to take risk. It doesn't help when designers ( excluding the top design companies ) haven't got a handle on selling evocative, intelligent, relevant and functional design solutions. Not to say that designers are not trying address this issue. I guarantee that any designer worth their salt would love the opportunity to sell and execute a compelling Corporate design solution. Like our cousins in the States, Japan and Europe. The constant talk of design management is a testament to designer wanting to go there with their bigger clients.

Questions:

Why don't the EVAs [Emery Vincent Associates] and Cato types submit to AGDA?

Why is it that most Australian Creative Awards have this support problem?

If the support is dropping for awards how do they have a future?

Maria comments in essence question the relevance of creative awards, I question her motives nevertheless. Having done a little judging in the last year, I have seen the great resources spent on a very small audience. The next question you have to ask, bearing in mind that sponsorship has evolved into another industry sector is, "How do our awards stack up as a sponsorship package compared to the many sponsorship choices?" My call is that we need to re address sponsorship values, open our awards up to a greater audience.

I don't think the Maria[pi]s problem is with small projects. I don't think she understands that these projects seem to function as R&D work that ultimately influence large corporate work. Show me a Telco brochure that doesn't have people with hard hats on a building sites talking on mobiles; or Computer Co that doesn't have ambient blurry images of computer keyboards; or an Accountancy/law firm that doesn't have busy, busy, blurry people in suits rushing off somewhere; or a bank that has an image of two old people walking down a beach, for retirement savings plans.

Corporate design work is stagnating, while smaller volatile clients often choose engaging over a safe design. Design judges recognise the risk, thing to themselves why can't this happen in Corporate Australia and reward the smaller more enterprising groups. After all making a engaging design call is more likely to turn a dollar, than kill anyone. The trick is to turn this spirit onto Corporate Australia and help raise design standards by involving clients in the process of recognising excellence.

Questions:

How can we make Corporate Australia recognising design excellence?

Name a small business that is in the position to sponsor design year after year?

If Corporates use volumes of design work, why aren't they interested in fostering local development?

Why do all the big Australian ID projects go off shore?

Questions:

How can we make Corporates want compelling design?

How can we make the AGDA award interesting to Corporates?

There is a case to make the AGDA awards, (all awards I think have this problem) more relevant to our industry and clients. It is a lost opportunity for all entrants, that not all studios, big and small, are not supporting the AGDA awards. I believe it is because the AGDA Awards (and the other programmes)are inward focused. We speak to each other very well, yet we are not relevant to the rest of the world.

Exception: Photographers ACMP Awards -- these guys get a lot of attention.

The Adelaide AGDA awards, I believe made a good start to being more relevant with value adds such as: local wine packaging exhibition open, AGDA awards street banners and some press coverage by the Adelaide advertiser all very GP. There is an opportunity to build on this experience and swing our 2000 event and maybe go front frontal with the general public. NB. Local awards tend to flag local interest.

How to start the ball rolling?

Make our awards controversial. Listen to a little of the Maria factor, ask our clients to judge the submitted work and publish it to the clients in parallel with the design awards.

Similar to what the Art Gallery of NSW did with the Archibald Prize by creating a Peoples choice category

A client component with the design awards can transform this event into something very newsworthy. A new wider audience, will attract the designer that give AGDA the steer, because the awards have exposure to this bigger audience. heck when there is limelight involved, I don't think many would pass it up.

Andrew Ashton [andrew.ashton@panopera.com.au]

"i work as a designer for a large( australias largest) retailer. this is my first job since graduating and ive been employed for just over one year. in this time ive come to the the conclusion- in relation to the relevence of the agda awards- I DO REATIL! WHO CARES. in my first year of employment ive seen, and still see, my fellow employees trying to push the envelope in a sector that is renowned for its tight deadlines (3 weeks for 48 pages) extreme placement (in some cases 18 to 20 products per page with copy) and bigger saves(in a star burst goddammit!). selling the same idea to four countries over six companies differently every time- with excellent design is a huge ask. this "artistic design" selling tourism or a bottle of plonk with cellarglaze or matte finish or 300 gsm is so far from my world. i dont care. but jealousy aside we look at,and in some cases apply, a watered down version of what they create, (always muttering swearwords). so agda has a place - if only to be watered down and washed out.

(sooo...why did you buy that new plasma?)

celebrate it.
once its seen it gets adapted,
and then becomes part of everyday language.
thats the point."

"In a business environment where graphic designers/clients spend more time maintaining the status quo rather than creating new ground breaking design, why not celebrate those that have the foresight and courage to do something different.

Perhaps what we should be looking at is not the design per say, but the model on which it is based. ie. the relationship between the designer and the client. God knows someone has to recognise it because design companies and designers, on a whole, are stagnating because of it."

"I hear a lot of discussion but no one seems to talk about the real issue. What is the relevance of design in the 20th/21st Century? What do you think it is?"

"Awards blah-blah-blah!!!!!!!!

Someone said to me once that he didn't bother entering his co's work into awards because to him it was a sign of a co. with too much time on their hands! Great for the ego, some prospective clients may coo over the bit of paper, but in the end a good paperweight. Not sure I agree with his diatribe but you can see his point

Ever compared the judging list /AGDA committee list with the wining list? Perhaps these people should be excluded from entry. Not very practical I admit but it would stop the widespread whispers that have surrounded these awards since inception.

I myself witnessed one of our industry's lumniaries during one year's awards judging process rush back at lunchtime after doing their judging stint, telling staff to quickly collate material in specific categories b/c they were light-on for quality work -- gives you great faith in AGDA, doesn't it!!!

Awards will always be a great way for a young studio to build a profile; wouldn't they be better off building a business?

No more self-promo work as it starts with a too-open brief.

Perhaps a category/s for different budget price bracket. This would probably reflect fairly accurately what most suspect: Bigger money = scared money"

"Why do we enter awards? Are they about ego, marketing, or the betterment of design? I feel they're about all three. Should we be judged by our peers because this is all about pushing the boundaries of design and raising standards, or should we be judged by non-designers because we need to know how effective the work really is? I feel we should do both, if possible. Should we sit back and criticise an organisation but choose not to get involved in changing things?

I've been annoyed in the past about the ways in which AGDA functions at times, but I think it's important to remember that AGDA exists because generous, hard-working members of our community give their time and efforts to ensure that we have this association. So if you really want things to change, I suggest that you listen to what Kirk Forder had to say, and get involved. What's that saying about actions speaking louder etc?"

"Having been on the AGDA committe in SA for 5 years, as a student rep and now councillor, it is always refreshing to hear other points of view, particilarly the more passionate.

AGDA SA is currently making in-roads into the general business community, with particular relevance to education of the business community about the role of Graphic design as part of their marketing strategy, something I feel passionate about. It may be a small start, but its a start!

World Graphic Design Day: again banners in the main street of Adelaide and a full page feature in the Advertiser. Next year we expect a better response (2 pages). We expect this with some modification to our strategy/plan.

We are currently in the process of developing a plan for an event which will have particular community interest, or news worthy story, which newspapers like. One doesn't have to be contraversial to get attention. (I'm an Advertiser employee... it's a job)

My point being: I agree with some of Marie's comments (and I know others will), what I don't understand is that if you are so passionate about these issues, why aren't you more involved with AGDA. Change is not made by words

but with action. "Bitchin is futile"

Most everyone involved with AGDA have the same or similar concerns as yourself, but take time away from family, work commitments etc, and make considerable effort in achieving goals on a purely voluntary basis.

It ain't perfect but with more business targeted awareness programs, we will make in-roads.

Anyway thats another story!

GET INVOLVED"

"You can go on and on about categories and judging crieria for awards such as AGDA's but let's remember what we do. We provide innovative, creative and functional visual solutions. The idea is clear, the visual is communicated effectively, the design works.

It must strike a cord in the audience that it is aimed at, not just pretty pictures on paper to make a company look like they are with it, hoping that the target audience will appreciate it. Good design forces people, (NON DESIGNERS) to say "hey that's great design" or "that's clever."

Let's stop patting each other's backs and start asking question such as "Did it work?"

"timeless design behind the scenes eh.

We wish, not all that is designed has to be so perfect as if it will always be around like a new pair of shoes we update the shoes we sometimes take a risk and buy some way out style of shoe wearing them for a few weeks to scare a few people off then buy something a little less inconspicuous.

Directors and designers need to think of the client not only as an outlet to experiment but also as a forefather of ingenuity that in not always perfect for to succeed at anything we must learn from our mistakes even if it means some cutting edge design that captures the imaginations of almost every consumer that is exposed to it.

unemployed graphic designer Brisbane."

"Awards always seem to create some form of controversy, either major or minor, as we generally have differering views on how the judging system should operate. You can understand the frustrations of some designers who are unhappy with a system which appears to award the same high profile designers each time and celebrate small run, often high cost design work. But is this simply a result of their consistently high standard of design? Often it is easy for one designer to pick the work of another designer by their unique style (although many designers refuse to believe they have a 'style') and so you could argue that the judges may be able to identify the designer of a piece and reward designers they admire! (I assume that the judges evaluate each piece of work without knowing who the designer is)

The problem of relevancy to the public has also occured in other professions. In the wine industry it has often been argued that wine judging is flawed by the fact that many of the judges are winemakers themselves and may be trying to promote the styles of winemaking that they practice. The Hyatt/Advertiser Wine Awards has tried to address this problem by creating a consumer panel which judges the wine in parallel to the wine industry judges. The people are selected to include a cross section of professions and the community. This may also be a good idea for the AGDA Awards as a way of promoting the awards amongst the community and of introducing judging criteria which the end user of the design applies to the work, rather than the criteria of other design professionals. "Shock, horror! Consumers judging our work! But they don't know anything about design". Designers may squirm in their seats, but at the end of the day aren't consumers the real judges of design? Consumers are !

Also less likely to be able to recognise a particular designers work and will therefore judge the work on its merits - not on its reputation!

Just a thought!

PS: I can understand designers wanting individuals credited for their work on award winning design but many companies see awards as a marketing tool. A lot of money is spent to enter awards and many companies would like to see some return through promoting their company name if they win an award. What happens if no one knows the designers name at Bloggs Enterprises? What if the designer leaves the company the next day after winning an award? Lots of money spent by the company to promote the designer, not the company. Designers love to see their names up in lights! It's an ego thing. You shouldn't criticise a company for not listing the individual designers names on awards. It's up to the individual to negotiate this with the company. (Besides wouldn't a pay rise be better!)"

"Awards never seem too connected with the everyday reality of a design studio business

I believe that in order to legitimise awards and make them have some value there needs to be a different set of criteria than that used currently. Every design project has a fundamental need that it must fulfil - a marketing objective / financial result or some other measurement. Any project, no matter how small a target niche it is pitched towards either sinks or swims on it's successful answering of the set brief. No matter how aesthetically pleasing, funky, or technically brilliant in it's execution it may be, it either worked for your client or not. Really, there has to be more of a focus on the client and our work for them.

An entry for any award could be accompanied by a written brief for that project and the clients summary of why this project was successful for them. This could be part of the overall process of judging and form a percentage of the overall tally of points for that entry - with the design judging being the other.

This takes both parts of the project as being important."

"Stepping out

The term graphic designer is still relatively unheard of in the everyday life of most people. If I you walked down the street and told everyone I am a graphic designer I suspect only 1 in 10 could give an accurate explanation as to what I do every day. A somewhat dismal number I'm sure when compared to say a architect.

When I was in college studying design my friends would sometimes say I draw pictures, partly of which I am to blame, I hadn't then quite the confidence nor experience to enlighten them any further. Occasionally I would explain that I design logo's, letterheads and brochures, but was still met with bewildered faces. Maybe it was because most of my friends lived deep in the suburbs, nonetheless still disheartening.

I guess a lot of this can be down to the the fact that graphic design is still a very young industry in light of other professions such as architect's, dentist's and panel beater's. Or maybe these people are more confident in knowing what they do.

Some graphic designers explain how their work is subjective or intangible, and that 'normal people' don't understand what they do. Quite frankly if I was in their shoes I would probably be displaying the same bewilderment.

As a collective I feel designers need to step away from the shadows of other designers and walk amongst the shadows of everyday people on the street. The comments made recently have pointed out that the AGDA awards are too self contained, where work is judged only by selected designers and viewed mostly by designers with seminars drifting in and out of major Australian cities with only designers knowing about it.

Why not bring the awards out into the public after all they are the people who the work is directed to. Are we too scared to show our work to the masses or is the fear that the pedigree of the ADGA awards will go to the dogs.

The AGDA awards is a celebration of Australian Graphic Design with the help of businesses both large and small yet they don't have a contribution to make. I say Australian Designers need to stop holding their cards so close to their chests and help the term 'graphic design' become part of the social vocabulary.

Simon Pemberton had began one such initiation with Design For Business, a 2 day seminar consisting of 50% business leaders and 50% design leaders. The seminar was a forum showing the business sector and public what design is, and key business people asking what can design do for them. Although there is still long way to go at least more people are hearing about design.

Andrew mentioned in his letter concerning why large design companies are not supporting the awards. It seems to me that these companies don't have enough time to, their too busy educating large clients the value of graphic design. Although Andrew submitted some worthwhile points, I don't agree that corporate design is stagnating and that smaller clients are willing to take a 'risk' thus producing better design and thus awards.

I believe AGDA tends to award the small run, lavishly produced, leading edge, experimental design because it pushes our craft, which I agree has its place. But large design companies are creating responsible, well implemented (under often complicated circumstances), functional and entirely appropriate design work which is often pushed aside by a hairdressers 'sexily designed' stationery. Each solution has arisen under entirely different parameters, often the larger the job the tighter the parameters. I do realise that ADGA does try to acknowledge large corporate identities in a special category but it still seems to close to its own 'art'. A step back with a client in hand maybe it will better at judging good design. After all how can good design be 'risky'."