In my experience, this works with clients/bosses who are generally flexible and open as individuals, but with the more dictatorial ones - not so much.
Exactly. I have experienced it more times than I am willing to admit. Ironically, the worst micromanagers are the ones who begin with “I will trust your expertise on this”, because they don’t. 
A lot depends on the boss’s/CEO’s management style. Those who are more contemporary, for lack of a better word, are more open to the designer’s input and more willing to trust our expertise. The “old-school” ones, aka those who rule with an iron fist, are the ones who think they know everything about everything and are qualified to judge design.
What makes it harder for in-house designers, compared to freelancers or outside agencies, is that we report to those very bosses. If constructive pushback is misconstrued as defensiveness or worse, aggression or negative attitude, it can threaten the designer’s employment.
I generally agree, but there’s often another aspect of that good boss and good client to consider as part of the larger picture.
Quite often these higher-up bosses, as well-intentioned and smart as they might be, lack the expertise to adequately determine in whom they should place their faith and in whom they shouldn’t. This problem can adversely affect most any kind of for-hire profession that’s outside the immediate expertise of the client or employer — not just design professionals.
In-house situations often make the clearest examples of this phenomenon — at least when it comes to design and other communication professionals. Quite often the big boss has faith in a subordinate who talks a good game but only knows enough to fool the boss who, in turn, knows less than he or she does. This person — often a micromanaging sycophant or borderline psychopath — ends up hiring subordinates unqualified for anything other than taking orders and performing tasks designed to make the sycophant look good in the eyes of his or her naive superior. This often means catering to the whims of the naive big boss who mistakes what’s being done as good work.
This cascading chain of downward, self-reinforcing incompetence and sucking up all too often comes to an end with a designer stuck beneath layers of ineptitude in a dysfunctional situation that couldn’t be better designed to stifle good work while encouraging frustration, discouragement and disengagement.
In my nearly 40 years in this business, I’ve seen this phenomenon repeat itself so often in so many different ways that I would be hard-pressed to count them. I’ve also seen the opposite, where the big cheese boss really does get it, realizes his or shortcomings, and goes out of his or her way to ensure the best people are hired to fill in the missing pieces.
Yes! I totally agree. The think-they-know-it-all higher ups are probably the worst. There’s little to be done in those situations other than going along with it or quitting to find more enlightened work elsewhere.
It’s always nice to hear other designers struggling with the same issues.
I use to be in a similar situation at my work. When I first started I was afraid of losing my job because I was never really confident with the work I produced. So, when I received feedback from a client, my director or the CEO I would make the changes even though it went against everything I learned in University (and made me feel like a fraud).
It took almost a year working there before I worked up enough courage to defend the design choices I make.
I’ve also learned what hills to, and not to die on. Some projects arn’t worth stressing/arguing over regardless of how buchered they become. Others may be well worth defending, especially if you know it will hurt the brand.
As long as your friend voices their concern over the desicions, makes suggestions; and if those suggestions arn’t followed then at least the CEO (hopefully) will see their value and honesty/ethic.
As far as asking non-employees, unless I can speak to the ones giving the feedback or I’ve explained the design adiquetly to my manager who is presenting the design and can defend it/explain it in my abscents; I look at the input as a write-off, because they have little to no context.
I’d suggest to your friend that before they hand off or email the draft, that they explain the design. So if their CEO does show family members, and a family member makes a comment about the Y, they can respond with “oh, that descision was made based on X”. That way there is at least some context, and the input they receive may have more value.
Designers are their own best advocates. In school we had to defend every aspect of our final design projects from the colour choice to the paper we printed on. That type of scrutiny prepares us for these types of situations. Design is about empathy (understanding the end user) and prototyping (creating/testing/refining a solution that works). So often times outside input is good because that’s who your designing for. However, in this case it seems like people who have no business (experience wise) critiquing the design, are.
That’s my [rant] and I’m sticking to it!
3 Likes
It does seem like the subject struck a cord, and the responses here have been valuable. Similar issues, in different manifestations, are encountered by many designers.
I do agree that some projects aren’t worth defending too vigorously. They might be really small in scope or reach, or just something that you know from the get-go the client will butcher and just resign yourself to never including it in the portfolio.
What worries me as a whole in this situation is that when clients or bosses get in the habit of gathering feedback from unqualified people, they usually continue doing it (positive reinforcement), which leads to devaluing the designer’s expertise and standing in the company. If that continues happening, perhaps it IS time to look for a better employer.
1 Like