Technical graphics expert? (job description)

Hi. So I was asked to review/update my job description, and there’s a sentence that says “As a technical graphics expert, work at this level requires the exercise of a high degree of independent judgment and initiative.”. I was wondering if calling it “technical graphics expert” falls short of the creative part that this job also has. Any suggestions or comments?

If you are making content or style decisions, it’s creative. If you are not, it’s technical.

I would say yes. Technical graphics expert does not imply creative in my mind.

1 Like

Would this sound better: As a graphic design expert, work at his level requires creativity and the exercise of a high degree of independent judgment and initiative.
As a graphic design expert, work at his level requires creativity, high technical knowledge, and the exercise of a high degree of independent judgment and initiative.

and yes, I’m making decisions about style, color, fonts, the overall feel of it and its effectiveness in communicating the message with the selected graphic elements. I think it would be exclusively technical if it was more production oriented or just editing other’s peoples files.

My personal opinion: emphasis on technical takes away from the emphasis on creative in graphic design. Unless you are dealing with rare sophisticated media technology, technical should be a given.

With recent generations of graphic designers, technical can be expected as part of creative more often than creative can be expected as part of technical.


thank you!! I agree :slight_smile:

As a graphic design expert, work at his level requires creative thinking, problem solving, and communication skills; a wide array of technical knowledge; and the exercise of a high degree of independent judgment and initiative.

1 Like

Any design job that pays well and is a step up from a mid-level designer starts involving more than moving pixels around to make nice-looking work. The higher up one goes, the more those skills begin to be superseded by broader demands requiring bigger-picture thinking, management abilities, analytical skills, good judgment, comprehensive thinking, extensive experience and solid problem solving abilities that extend beyond what might be labeled as strictly graphic design.

It’s still design and still requires creativity — just from a broader and more inclusive perspective.

I think it’s too formal. I think resumes still need to be written as human as possible. Consider this:

As a skilled designer, I use my willingness to try new things, open communication, and research to guide my creative decision-making process. My technical experience allows me to bring these exciting design solutions for clients.

It’s not perfect, but to be fair… I wasn’t sure where in your resume this was going to fit. I’d personally break apart the technical skill entirely into a section called “TECHNICAL SKILLS” and list the software you’re familiar with. It will be one question in the interview and more of yes/no question of competency. The resume needs to support that you’re smarter than someone that just knows how to work with software.

It’s not for my resume, it’s the job description that my organization has which needs to be updated. But thanks!

Oh sorry for the misunderstanding. My only suggestion beyond what is discussed is to point out what other departments you interface with. For example, if you work with in-house departments or external clients?

Sam, I have an insight and you will know if I am right or wrong. Ready? Your job description phrase, “As a technical graphics expert, work at this level requires the exercise of a high degree of independent judgment and initiative.”

This may be a friendly and very big HINT… So consider this. . . Stop asking people what they think about your work. Make the final decision and take your licks on the backside and learn from real-world feedback. (1.) People may not want to redirect their attention onto your contributions or worse. (2.) If you go to others for their opinions they may secretly want to kill your best work before it sees the light of day (consciously or unconsciously).

(3.) We all must develop the instincts to know when we have it right. Internalize your creative process and minimize any discussions to preserve your energies. (4.) When we verbally express our creative ideas, we unwittingly defuse our power and compassion. (5.) People who want to help us also drain off our creative energies as we disclose our creative thoughts. This weakens our inspiration and we lose the best of our creativity. (6.) You may be young enough to believe people want you to excel and this is almost always incorrect (even if they like you very much).

I believe they like you and want you to succeed and stay with them and this is a kind and professional nudge to get you to take the next step and move up a level. They may want you to become more confident and want to watch you triumphant and to become the person others seek for your opinion.

Finally, we learn and develop in the following four steps (professionally and socially):

  1. We don’t know and we do not know we don’t know (shun these people)
  2. We don’t know, but we know we don’t know (teach these people)
  3. We know, but we don’t know we know (enlighten these people)
  4. We know and we know we know (follow these people)

I suspect you are at level three (3) and it is time to confidently master your craft.

If I am completely wrong in my assessment; it will not be the first time, but it never stopped me before!

I think you missed one: “We do not know we don’t know but we think we do know (actively resist these people).”

As for the larger philosophy you expressed, I’m wondering if you can elaborate on it a bit more. Are you saying, in a nutshell, that people intentionally sap creativity from others and that deliberately refraining from asking the opinions of others helps prevent this?

There are definitely people who will suck the life out of every new idea, but are you saying this idea-killing tendency applies to nearly everyone? If so, I’m not sure I agree with that, but even if it is true, giving life to one’s creativity in this field necessitates collaborating with and engaging others.

I have a feeling I’m not fully understanding. You see, I’m trying to get you to divulge more of your ideas because I really want to be the first here to suck the energy out of them. :wink:

Very Funny. Thank you. I needed a laugh!

You are 100% correct. . . collaboration with other creatives and getting objective viewpoints are very helpful. That’s why focus groups are often used. I wasn’t saying people drain our creative energy. Though some people waste our time and some can bring us down by their own nature.

No. . . when we unload a fresh idea out of excitement and creative energy, we dissipate the energy. No matter who it is. When we unpack a concept before we complete the creation, we lose some of the power of the self generated energy each time we flesh it out until it is gone!

I am suggesting we should try to retain the entire concept and avoid expending our energy through verbal expression until we are ready to leave the incubation stage and present the completed creation. At this point you are not seeking directives, but rather you are sharing the results of your creative energies and it’s contagious and at that point you build enthusiasm after the fact.

Creative people are usually expressive and love to share and are often inclusive of others. This works against original concept development and the healthy growth any good idea needs to grow before being thrown out into the invisible negative energy.

We need to expend the energy and do the work-work alone. Others will have more input than you want once your new baby can walk and talk.

Thanks again!

This is getting off-topic, but I’m finding it interesting (sorry srp2752).

What you’ve written had not occurred to me, but I’m largely agreeing (I think). Anyway, it’s triggered some random thoughts that might or might not be in alignment.

I agree that creativity is largely a solitary activity. I’ve yet to participate in a brainstorming session where anything more than mediocrity was achieved. More often than not, they’re exercises in finding a lowest-common-denominator.

There have been a few instances in my life (literally no more than a few) where the reciprocal nature of a partnership triggered something better than either one of us could have developed on our own. I’m not talking about, for example, a situation where a talented team brings diverse skills to the table — those happen all the time. I’m talking, instead, about two people’s ideas playing off each other in ways that result in a significant joint creative insight or achievement.

I can think of a downside to the notion that creative ideas need to develop and mature before being shared with others. I’m tentatively agreeing with this usually being the case, but I’ve found that fully developed original ideas are resisted by most people.

Unless others have a stake in the success of a new idea and feel as though they’re a part of it, they’re cautious to the point of resisting anything unanticipated or perceived as being a threat to their comfort zones.

People, I’ve found, will typically accept a next logical step, but when the idea skips a few steps — even when it’s totally right and, especially, when it poses a paradigm shift in thought —it’s a very difficult thing to sell without, first, having built a coalition of support by involving others in its development.

Have you ever read Ayn Rand’s, The Fountainhead?

I love Ayn Rand’s work. Yes, and Atlas Shrugged of course.

What you have described is a mastermind alliance and this is rare, where two people synchronize and compliment each other and strike that sweet spot of harmony (I think its called synergy). A Physicist and a Scientist can often benefit in a joint research effort, etc. Inventors often fly solo because they are creating. A Physicist never creates, they discover a natural phenomenon and define the principles at work. Unless you are Einstein, in which case you just make shit up as you go and rely on deception and friends in control of the mass media with an agenda.

I am failing to describe what I have learned through practice. I always talked about my ideas to death; in the areas of both marketing and new product development. Over time and In retrospect, I found if I had kept my ideas to myself and continued to work through the minutia of development, I would enjoy better results without the exhaustion created by always “bouncing my ideas off of others.” Which is really an excuse for validation seeking in the early stages or better phrased; I was being defensive and I was trying to avoid the fear of failure.

My Failures were because everything I was doing came across as a sales pitch generally speaking. If we develop a brilliant idea or a concept whose time has come, we will instinctively guard our intellectual property and work through the early creative nurturing. If you walked into Chic-filet with the cow idea with a dozen examples of silly cow talk against beef. . . there would be no committee deliberations. The whole room would light up and you are brilliant.

Every great creation of true genius originates from one brain. And as you described groups can squeeze the life out of anything. Groupthink functions out of fear. Each individual fears taking a chance on the unknown, they fear looking stupid, they fear not contributing, and in the end, they fear each other and the whole thing is choked in fear.

Final attempt. . . creativity is energy. When you keep it contained and controlled through the discipline of silence, it grows under the pressure. When you pop the cork, the champagne begins to lose its fizz and only grows flat from exposure. No man is an island, but man is not powerful under a hive mentality. Greatness always comes from one single individual who rocks the world with innovation or uncommon valor and courage under pressure.

Example: Communism is a government comprised of a committee, consensus-seeking, and groupthink people living and working under fear and coercion. A Republic requires people to think for themselves and apparently is more productive where fear of loss is not their motivation. The desire for a better life, more abundance and liberty is the motivation and a better life would naturally result. If cows have large pastures, they think they are free and become more productive.

So, if you share your ideas prematurely you are a communist. If you secretly tell me your ideas you are a really good comrade and I will put in a good word for you! There could be an upgrade to a two-bedroom apartment for a certain B. . . just think about it. Ha!

It is the technical side that matters the most visual impact. The creativity gets it’s full credit only when it goes to the hands of a technical expert. Otherwise it’s only an idea.

I’m glad you all feel super engaged with this topic, lol. I just wanted to let you know that it wasn’t up to me to edit the final updated description to pass it to HR, but my boss was kind enough to add the word “creativity” here and there. Not a big deal, it was just a matter to review/update the description that hasn’t been updated probably in a while. I’m just glad “creativity” got in there. Thank you all!

I was thinking what I would put as a description–if I were ever asked to create one. The only description I could think of is ‘I manage peoples expectations’ (which is what I tell people when they ask what I do for a living).

1 Like

©2019 Graphic Design Forum | Contact | Legal | Twitter | Facebook