Should you enter that contest? When a contest isn't

[Dcrux]

You've seen those contests for designing a logo, layout, or whatever for a new site. I hadn't given these much thought, then Airbag held a contest and the sparks flew. (Check out the comments at the bottom).

There are some good points made, but I'll offer an alternative after sketching out the objection to these 'contests.' AIGA has this to say, "A designer shall not undertake any work for a client without adequate compensation, except with respect to work for charitable or nonprofit organizations. A designer shall not undertake any speculative projects, either alone or in competition with other designers, for which compensation will only be received if a design is accepted or used. This applies not only to entire projects but also to preliminary schematic proposals. A designer shall work only for a fee, royalty, salary or other agreed-upon form of compensation."

The similarity to speculative design work is blatant in many of these “competitions.” Designers are being asked to create work for the chance that their work might be selected or used by the client. In these cases the carrot being dangled is often a prize of significantly less value than the designer could earn if contracted directly to produce the work. Instead of committing themselves and contracting with one design professional, the business or organization in question is setting up a veritable smorgasbord of creative possibilities for themselves, with little consideration for the individual designer or the value of their time and talents.
-- Jeff Fisher; When a Contest Is Not a Contest

Like Airbag, I handn't fully appreciated this perspective before. However, with a few guidlines, perhaps there is an alternative.

1. Fictional companies are probably okay. A design contest for a fictional scenario and design target can be a great way to explore new ideas which can be freely shared.

2. Real contests which can help your career promote you in a press release, throwing their reputation behind yours. In many cases this requires the company to actually have some kind of reputation. If a startup has no money to pay for design work they might not have a budget to advertise or market either, so the promotional value is negligible. If they don't acknowledge your work is yours, nor intend to refer (a lot) of business your way -- and articulate this up front, without prompting -- then reconsider entering.

3. Real companies provide information. Imagine a company which requests a design for ....an application they won't tell you about ...to fit a marketing strategy they won't disclose ...against competition they will not (or can't) brief you about. Again, think twice about this 'contest'. (If they can't trust you by providing the basic information you need to do a competent job, then why should you trust them?)

On occasion, contests simply substitute mass for decision making. The company doesn't know what they want ...except on the off chance they may see it in the stack. If a company doesn't know what they want to do because they have no money for proper planning, the value to your portfolio is minimal (Either 1.The company won't be around long enough for many to check out and/or 2.This lack of focus will show up in any possible endorsement you hope to get, robbing it of effectiveness.)

These contests don't seem nearly enough like a client relationship for entrants to think they'll be getting "experience." They'll get a chance to perform the content creation task, of course. It would be misleading to think this translates to the breath and scope of experience needed in negotiation, specification, and client communication.

Finally content can be the images and styling of a layout, copy, illustration, diagrams and infographics, logos and business identities, even cartoon characters and company mascots. Good content is the embodiment of strategy and tactics, not a substitute. Even if the entrants don't see it that way, these contests are a business decision for the sponsor. How they conduct it is an indirect communication of how they intend to conduct the future business you might hope to gain from the relationship.

[ADAM Web Design]

I'm with you, DCrux. These contests are nothing more than a way for companies to try and find the cheapest, most desperate possible "talent" out there. People will go to insane lengths to win one of these for the "prestige" factor.

I did it once...sort of...in my very early days. I saw this 'logo design contest' where, for the chance at $50, I could design a company logo to be used everywhere.

So...I figured I had a couple of hours to kill at the time, whipped something decent together, and submitted it. Within 15 minutes, I received an email from someone in the company claiming that it was the 'worst' of the entries and that I should do a lot better because there were people spending 10-15 hours on their logos (note: I hadn't told them how long I had worked on the logo.)

Needless to say, I immediately realized what was going on. If my entry were that bad, I never would have received feedback. They just wanted to see how cheaply I would work. I emailed them back saying it was the best I was capable of (which, if I'd bothered to put in the 10/15 hours, wouldn't have been, but not for $50) and never heard from them again. Haven't entered a contest since.

[Dcrux]

Believe it or not, I really can't make up my mind about who is getting the worse end of the bargain. For example, great design work is often about constraints and questioning assumptions.

This process seems to keep everybody involved solidly within their comfort zone. I doubt many companies get what they wanted, and not because of pay. The process seems to be a way to shortcut the process of communication and thought, not just getting work cheaply.

Two examples. One company produced a beautiful animation based around "balance;" never to mention it again in word or deed. A web designer used a photo of a tree. Why? Why not. These are not identities, they are elements dropped into the layout. An identity would be where the company used web copy to relate the concept of balance to their philosophy of business. Same with relating web design to a tree. Imagery and text reference each other. The soul of identity is consistency and integration, not pretty trinkets dropped into a container, in the way a crow lines its nest.

The entrants get out of the work of landing a client. The company gets out the work of considering what their objectives are. The money almost seems like a symptom, in the small sample I looked at.

[JKomp]

I can't believe anyone would do one of these:

http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=327226 (don't click if easily offended, mild content warning)

It's just a little bit of fun for me and the entrants - not all about the money. I think at the end of the day it's down to personal choice and quality. For example, I have to deal with people writing 500 word articles for $5 but I don't mind too much as I know mine are far better quality.