Disruptive
Business Models and Negative Incentives
Outsourcing
has become a growing trend in a variety of industries. As
firms become more specialized in the products and services
they offer, the need to outsource certain tasks has become
apparent. A small business will probably find it more cost
effective to hire a tax accountant than do it themselves.
They also will probably want to hire an artist to create their
logo design and brand identity. This has all become intuitive
to companies that need to focus more and more on their core
business. But what happens when the service company out-sources
its own contracts?
This model
of 'double outsourcing' is relatively new in the business
world. It leaves the service company with virtually no overhead,
only control over marketing, advertising and administration.
In the logo design realm, this means that designers from all
over the world will be contracted to work on any given project
at any given time, working through a centralized network to
submit their work. This free-market mechanism allows designers
to bid freely on jobs, set their own hours and work as they
please.
The model
is supposed to make it so that only designers interested in
a project will bid on a particular job. This has the intention
of encouraging interesting designs. However, it's really a
roll of the dice in terms of the quality of service a client
receives. Who exactly are these designers? What type of qualifications
do they have? In this type of situation, nothing can be certain.
Often times, a logo design may look great initially, but once
you sit down and start to work and manipulate its elements,
design flaws will become apparent, revealing the shortcomings
of the designer. A well-designed logo should be functional,
easy to use in a variety of situations, and be easy to change
and modify. Not every designer is able to accomplish this.
Another
problem lies in the kinds of incentives the competitive design
model creates. The structure is set up so that every artist
competes against an array of other logo designers, creating
multiple concepts for a single project. If a design is chosen,
the artist receives a bonus commission. This business model
has the intention of encouraging the very best from its designers.
However, it can also have the effect of encouraging theft
or excessive borrowing of existing logo design concepts, as
these artists are often put under severe time and budget constraints.
As a more
traditional form of outsourcing, take LogoBee.com for instance.
LogoBee's designers are all in-house, meaning they work as
a team to ensure a project is completed. There are advantages
and disadvantages to this approach. On the downside, the company
is more susceptible to workload fluctuations. Although it
may not be as efficient business-wise, it ensures that a minimum
standard of quality is delivered on every logo design project.
It also helps take advantage of the specific talents of the
designers, using a projects coordinator to handle the distribution
of tasks.
Having
a symbiotic relationship with fellow designers helps to remove
the competitive element from the design process. A team of
artists are more likely collaborate on a project, which puts
them in a better position to create an original identity,
rather than competing to submit a winning design.
From a
distance, the double-outsourcing business model looks appealing,
cost-effective and efficient. However, until 'double-outsourcing'
can iron out the negative incentives that arise in the logo
design field, you may want to stick to a company that employs
in-house designers.