It wasn’t just the frigid December weather that sent a chill down my spine as I read Tom Friedman’s column entitled “The Do-It-Yourself Economy” in the New York Times yesterday. The author of the visionary book The World is Flat wrote Sunday about what he calls the “Great Inflection,” which he describes as “the mass diffusion of low-cost, high-powered innovation technologies — from hand-held computers to Web sites that offer any imaginable service — plus cheap connectivity.”
Friedman used a real-life example he invokes frequently—his childhood friend, Ken Greer, a marketing guy from Minneapolis—to elaborate on this theme: Greer told the story of a video project he recently completed for which the budget was “about 20 percent of what we normally would charge.” Greer explained how he was able to use a collection of free or extremely low-cost online services—from the project management tool, www.box.net, and www.istockphoto.com, which offers high-quality, royalty-free images for a few bucks each, to www.voices.com, which appears to be a crowdsourcing site for voiceovers—that enabled him to deliver the project on time and on budget.
So, what’s the problem with this story? It sounds like this guy is pretty savvy and was able to find a way to complete a paying project during really challenging times. Bravo, Ken!
Right?
Absolutely. I have no qualms with Ken Greer rolling up his sleeves and getting the job done. These are outrageously tough times for creative professionals and, in order simply to survive, we must be willing to consider ways of working that only a few years ago would have seemed objectionable…or even offensive.
My problem with this story is that Tom Friedman is amazingly gifted at predicting our economic future—he did so repeatedly in The World is Flat—and if the scenario he depicts in Sunday’s column is, in fact, the future for creative professionals, we need to change the way we work. The point I have made repeatedly here on Merge, is that the way we are being asked to work is changing radically (our world is flattening, to borrow a metaphor), and creative businesses that have been built solely on client services (with hefty fees and mark-ups for outside services like printing or photography) are going to have to adapt before they become obsolete. The thesis of Merge is that designers and creative professionals should be finding ways to build their business that do not rely only on cranking out work for clients whose budgets—and, in turn, the value placed on high-quality creative work—are melting like the polar ice caps.
Does this mean the client service business model will die? Of course not, scrappy innovators like Ken Greer will make sure that “work for hire” will always be a core way for designers and creative pros to make a buck. But, if I can take a turn at predicting the future, what this does mean is that the design businesses we will hold up as models of success a decade from now will be built on an innovative entrepreneurial foundation that will blend traditional client service work with new product development, and direct-to-market strategies.
There are pioneering designers exploring this new territory now—many of which I’ve highlighted on Merge—and many related disciplines, like industrial design, in which the entrepreneurial path is well-worn. Hopefully these examples will help to illuminate the way for the rest of us to follow.

3 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 15, 2009 at 4:04 pm
James Keppel
Very well put, Doug. The “creative economy” is going in some incredible new directions, and the spirit of entrepreneurship in design is alive and kicking, but the numbers are far too small right now. Hopefully things are changing…
December 16, 2009 at 12:28 am
Carl Tully
Thanks for the inspiration to reach out to discover, develop and employ the next generation of entrepreneurial leadership.
Interesting from the perspective of a large scale architectural design practice. The urgency to reinvent the way we work, design, communicate is upon us. Will high quality high value design survive? Current design practices cannot support a sustainable business model based on the fees that are currently winning the work.
December 16, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Michael Ratcliff
Doug,
I enjoy your site and have gotten a tremendous amount of knowledge through it for starting up my own firm.
Like you, I am a big fan of Mr. Friedman’s writings and agree — he has incredible insight into where the world is going. It concerns me, though, because my practice as a designer is profoundly changing, and not for the better. Because of the tools we have available, the speed and ease I can create things is remarkable. The downside is that clients are not wanting to pay for services rendered, or they will but at a significantly lower rate. That fact was even in The NYT piece. Commoditizing services — like eLance iStockphoto, etc. — are great cost savings for our clients, but should our creative practices fall into the same category, which I fear they are, we’re in for a bumpy ride.
Remember how much a web site used to cost back in the late 90s? You could make not just a living, but you were profitable. And this isn’t just the Bubble-on-the-Rise-Days. Today, In many instances I could get the same faster, probably built technically better, for FREE!
Sorry for being a downer and ranting. The upside is we’re creative people. We love to make things and part of our responsibility, to the design profession and to ourselves, is the create new models that work. The genie is out of the bottle and we will never be able to go back to the old ones. Rather than being all gloom and doom, embrace the changes and move forward, or get out of the way. I believe this is going to be one of the major challenges facing us in the coming years.
This is a great topic that bears a lot of discussion. Thanks for your time.