I. Welcome back & follow up
Good Morning and thank you again for inviting me into your inbox. I write about insights and provocations on the evolving nature of digital design. You can always subscribe here.
🔎 Related to Lunch, food, and the great equaliser
Last week I regrettably hit “send” and accidentally left in many of my raw notes at the end of the newsletter. It was a slurry of copy-and-pastes from chats and other notes. While embarrassed, I received several comments on this sentence, which I originally deemed as too harsh.
[in regards to working remote] It makes me think about, what if companies treated staff as adults?
Apparently several people felt this way about their work, office, or management. That they should be trusted to get their work done, no matter the area which they work. I agree good management shouldn’t be micromanagement, and if provided proper goals and accountability, then it shouldn’t be an issue of where or how people work. However that does still leave the core question of the topic on how to build culture and bonds if there is no central office.
🔎 Related to nothing specific
Long time Lets Fix Things (LFT) podcast cohost Guus Baggermans and I are now hosting a weekly Clubhouse chat. My Clubhouse handle is @kieselguhr_kid
Last week we discussed vtubers and infinite people. V-tubers are streamers who overlay animated elements on them to adjust their appearance (check out this interview with CodeMiko). On the topic of infinite people, we discussed the ideas of creating digital individuals with personalities and defining visual features (Check out the Instagram profile of Life of Mia). We’re getting closer to the digital or physical mattering less. This entire topic has been a running theme dating back to our Dark Side of Design podcast.
II. Building studio types
“When firms fail to update their assumptions, they die.”
👔 I’ll stick with that opening quote because I love the reminder. Recently at work we’ve had discussions on what the growth trajectory of our studio looks like. Each year, we have to submit an annual plan for revenue and growth to our head office. This indicates the amount of revenue we plan for, and how many new individuals we need to hire in order to achieve that. I covered this previously in 📈Designing studio growth.
Over the last few weeks as we’ve discussed Why we want to grow and What that means, we’ve uncovered a new question…
“As a studio, are we about Innovation or Delivery?”
Over the years, we have defined ourselves as a studio with a rich strategy and research skillset to deliver innovative solutions. At the same time, we’ve discussed the importance of impact in our work through long term multi-year engagements. Over the last year these two drivers have created discussion of the type of work we bring in, and the duration that individuals work on programs.
As a company who wants to drive Innovation we want to create something new or capturing new value for companies. This is why we built up our research and strategy practices. We wanted to work with companies on uncovering new value. For us, and for the companies we work with, this inherently means risk - you’re trying something new and success is far from guaranteed. Innovation and exploratory programs are also often shorter, lasting 8 to 16 weeks. These type of programs allow for a high level of diversity in the studio and the ability for designers to work on many different types of programs through the year.
At the same time, we have said that without the ability to drive the value of what we create into an organisation - without the ability to Deliver - our work is worthless. This often means working with clients over years as we have done with DreamWorks, ING, and the Dutch Railways. Long engagements are the very definition of stability, but also means very little variety for the designers that work on them.
⚙️ Why should we think about this and how have we managed the difference? As we grow, for the individuals we hire, those who are comfortable with long term client work and stability can be quite different from those who embrace risk, innovation, and a high variety of programs.
The type of projects we want and the types of projects that form the studio ultimately determine the people we need to hire to be successful. If you have been working as a studio doing short gigs, to add on ‘Delivery’ as a function can subsequently have an impact on people who have been used to variety, and now have been placed with long term stability.
Ultimately, within argodesign, we’re a mix. We take on both types of programs because of the culture we have, and we accept the challenges on both sides. We are luck to have innovative people who fit the culture of making an impact, and therefore also see the value of long term engagements. At the same time we have to be constantly cognisant of designers burning out working over a year on a single client. Our approach isn’t everyone - and hiring managers should know their company, their programs, and be open with the people they hire to find the best fit.
To this day, we have had zero attrition in the Amsterdam studio coming from Raft into argodesign, and the only reason I can think of, is we luckily found the right mix of people who fit our culture, environment, and drivers.
👩🏾💼 While we’ve been successful within our studio thus far, as we grow, I do feel finding the balance between innovation and delivery will become a topic of more discussion. Individuals who join agencies often do so to be engaged in a multitude of programs and gain a variety of experience. Not to work on one program with a single client for two years. As we continue to hire and staff up, maintaining a program mix and defining the studio further may help answer "“Who we are” and drive who we hire.
Want to talk? Catch me on Twitter.