|
|
||||||||
Latest ArticlesWeb DesignArticles on web design, search engine optimisation and digital communication.
|
| 7 Common Design Mistakes that Clients always ask for (and how to fight back) |
From flash intros, to logo theft, to information overload, clients often ask a design team to do a lot of stuff that’s just plain wrong. Here are 7 of the most common mistakes clients might ask you to make -- and how to talk some sense into them. The problem: For some reason, lots of clients will happily pay for hours and hours of a designer's time, printing costs, etc., etc., but they'll freak out when it comes time to pay for photography. Either they'll want to avoid using it altogether, or they'll send you a bunch of lame images from their marketing department. Of course, not every project needs photos. But when you know they would make a big difference to the quality and effectiveness of the design, it's frustrating to be told no. How to fight back: When David Ogilvy wrote his classic book Ogilvy On Advertising, one of the key lessons was the importance of a good image for memorable design. And, as the good folks over at FutureNow write, "Tests Indicate Ogilvy's Old-School Layout Still a Winner". The problem: Seriously people, do we really still have to talk about these? They're just a bad idea. People are impatient, and if they're coming to your client's website, it's because they want something. What they don't want is to see a bunch of vector graphics swooshing around pointlessly. How to fight back: If losing a quarter of their potential traffic isn't enough to convince a client to ditch it, then you can pick up some more ammunition from "How to Convince a Client They Don't Need a Splash Page", at the great SEO blog SEOmoz. The problem: The average client seems to have never heard the old adage: less is more. No matter what you're designing, they'll want to add more copy, links, calls-to-action, logos, headers, footers, global nav elements and 1-800 numbers. Part of the problem is that they think that if it's there, their customers will read it. And sometimes part of the problem is that they're balancing the needs of fifteen different divisions within their company, who all want some of that prime screen real-estate on whatever you're designing. How to fight back: The "Long Neck Theory" by Gerry McGovern states that every website has a very short list of "killer tasks" that visitors to the site want to accomplish. His testing indicates that just 5% of content, which serve those killer tasks, is used by at least 25% of visitors to a site. And past that key 5%, the vast majority of the rest of the content is only useful to a tiny percentage of people. Which means that not every little bit of content on a site needs prominent placement. If you're designing for the web, hopefully you'll have an interaction/information architect on your team to help fight this battle. But if not, a little knowledge of some basic usability guidelines can go a long way. If you want to read a very smart and easy to read introduction to the subject, check out the book "Don't Make Me Think" by Steve Krug. The problem: Okay, admittedly this is a controversial one. There are many designers who love this aesthetically, and feel that it provides the right amount of contrast to make it very readable. And if you're designing for print, it can be effective, especially if it's used sparingly. However, if you're designing for the web, and a client asks you to do it, just say no. And the reason has nothing to do with the way it looks. There's a significant percentage of people who find it very uncomfortable viewing a page with that color scheme. And they will leave the page, never to return. There isn't much agreement on how high that percentage is...but if you're losing any traffic just because of the way text displays, that's a problem. How to fight back: You may not necessarily agree with that idea (and you can judge by yourself, cause what you're reading right now is #333333 on white), but you can still use it to help convince a client to ditch the white on black. The problem: Okay, this is a bit of a cliché joke among designers, but it's cliché for a reason. Almost anyone working directly with clients has had to deal with this design mistake at some point in their career. A big part of the problem? When they look at a design mock-up, many clients have trouble imagining themselves as a customer. They focus on what's important to them – the logo and other branding elements. And so it's only natural they want them to be receive more emphasis, at the expense of all the other really important stuff their customers want, and that you've spent hours and hours putting together in an elegant and effective design. How to fight back: But, if all that doesn't work, then talk to your client about the Nike swoosh. Specifically, how it's one of the best, most recognizable, most remembered logos in history. Then show that client any Nike ad, or bring up Nike.com. And make a show of pointing out that little, tiny, logo waaaay off in the corner of the page. It's not scientific, but it is a good anecdotal case study that might help convince them that you're not crazy for keeping their logo nice and tidy and small medium-sized. The problem: You've been asked to design a logo. Great, you get to test your creativity as you struggle to come up with something cool within the extreme restraints of logo design. But there's one catch – the client shows you another logo (maybe it's for a competitor, maybe it's just for their favorite brand of baby food) and says "make it look kinda like this." How to fight back: If they skew their own logo and branding too close to that of another company, they risk consumer confusion. And while a bit of consumer confusion may actually be appealing to a client who's own company is the new kid on the block, if they ever hope to be top dog, they'll benefit greatly from their own strong brand identity. And that all starts with a unique logo. The problem: Fonts matter. As a designer, you know that better than anyone. But for people who don't really spend much time thinking about them, fonts can be mysterious and confusing. Why IS one font "50's retro cool" while another that is very similar is "50's out-of-date". Sometimes even designers can't put it into words. Words are core to a website, and being able to read the text quickly on screen is critical. On the web there is an additional problem - clients demand their "corporate typeface" but if the reader doesn't have the font on their computer, it will show the next font alphabetically. Which could be ANYTHING! How to fight back: |