Comments on: The Heart of the Matter

By: Eric Karjaluoto

Eric Karjaluoto — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 00:37:37 +0000

Thanks for the comments Joanne,

I don't really bemoan clients not understanding the details so much. It's simply our job to take care of these points, and that's what they come to us for.

Similarly, I don't care how my mechanic fixes the family car, just as long as it works again. ;-)

Cheers,

Eric

By: The Curated Object

The Curated Object — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 16:09:42 +0000

Hello again and *thanks* for directing me to this post as well! It does address my questions I had re: the F*** Style post :) You're right, it is funny... designs' ability to have a pointed purpose without necessarily revealing its purposiveness....always captivating and ground for thought.

So your client wanted hear about how his clients would "feel" about his product but your work was actually doing both-- evoking a feeling but also doing something quite specific in terms of harnessing different elements to evoke that reaction.

Does it bother you when clients want to skim over the "technicalities" (that you labor over!!) .. It's seems to be a kind of intellectual laziness that disturbs me and would seem to me to be dangerous if you're trying to run a successful business.

Again, thanks so much :) Super thoughts :) Cheers ~ Joanne

By: Eric Karjaluoto

Eric Karjaluoto — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:57:09 +0000

Hi Craig,

Thanks for the comment and question.

First, I'll respond to the challenge in general.

There is no clear answer as to how one affects an emotional reaction. We don't just press "Button A" and have "happy" come out the other end. As such, we have to rely more on abductive reasoning (i.e. "We know this, and we know that; therefore, we can postulate that...") to establish a reasonable direction.

It's not foolproof, and some have better track records than others. In my mind a firm's ability to deliver on such expectations is largely related to how thorough and deliberate their process is.

As campaign budgets increase there's more room for testing and measurement. That being said, with this kind of work, it's very difficult to get an accurate read on how the audience will respond outside of a controlled environment. “New Coke” is good example of how testing can provide inaccurate results.

Although the testers preferred it to old/classic Coke, the process was in fact flawed. Taste-tests are based on a quick sampling, not the consumption of the whole can, which is how people actually drink soda. As a result, a smash hit in testing turned out to be a dismal flop. (Malcolm Gladwell talks about this in much greater detail if you're interested in further reading.)

The point I'm trying to make, is that there are no clear paths here, and all data must be carefully scrutinized.

…and now, the second part of my response.

When working with clients on projects, we do rely on our past successes and third-party examples, to help quantify our approach.

We don't so much "guarantee" a result; instead we work to establish a set of project expectations with the client. It's our duty to meet these goals, and it’s important that we remain focused on the part of the work that we can in fact affect.

There are some things that remain outside of our control. For example, we could deliver a highly effective strategy, but if the client was unwilling to perhaps remedy a problem with their customer service, our contribution might be obstructed.

It's all about a dialogue: between our firm and clients, and in-turn between them and their customers. To summarize, I think it’s all about establishing realistic expectations, doing the appropriate legwork, and being open to change if the end-result isn’t what was desired. It’s not easy, but that’s what makes it interesting.

I hope this helps answer your question. :-)

Best,

Eric

By: Craig

Craig — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 15:56:11 +0000

Excellent post! Thanks for putting this out there. This is an ongoing struggle for many creatives selling their talents and services. I count agree more with all you have said.

My question(s) to you and others on this topic is;
What do you say to the client if/when they attempt to quantify your response of emotional theory? What I mean is that if a client asks how you intend to guarantee your theory of 'how other will feel', do you suggest that nothing is for certain?...do you state your track record with other brands/clients?...a combination of these and other things?

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts and others on these extensions of your post.

Thanks again for posting this.

By: Links of the Week Vol. 5 | april.holle.blog

Links of the Week Vol. 5 | april.holle.blog — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 18:30:36 +0000

[...] Great article on selling customers on emotion rather than technology and process. [...]

By: » Blog Archive » The Design of Flexible Identity Schemes - StevenClark.com.au

Sun, 27 Jan 2008 00:11:56 +0000

[...] Eric Karjaluoto’s The Heart of the Matter, published in the January 2008 edition of Applied Arts Magazine, points out that emotion is at the very heart of design. I wonder if we need to temporarily put aside our talk of brand, strategy and execution, and consider our power to influence emotion. This is what we’re doing when we get people to stop and admire a wine label, laugh at a magazine ad, slow down to observe a billboard or put a promotional poster up on the office wall.Eric Karjaluoto [...]

By: Tammy (Eric's Cousin!)

Tammy (Eric's Cousin!) — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:39:51 +0000

Eric,

Great post and website. It's different and catches my eye!

Here's a view from the client's perspective...

As a Business Manager who has created, implemented, and commissioned advertising and web-site design, I agree with Eric. Your clients are looking for price but they want to know how you are different. As clients, we want to know how you will make and treat us differently. When seeking new vendors I currently shop for price, but I shop for RELATIONSHIP first and foremost. Clients want and need your support from your outstanding business relationship with them. They don't want to be left out in the cold once they have your product/finished project.

In this economy, it's especially my job to cut expenses. However, some of the 'economic' options I have right now could potentially reduce our performance. Therefore, I value existing and potential vendor RELATIONSHIPS more. When clients and vendors (graphic artists) have a strong business relationship, the client often values the relationship over price.

Your clients are not just committing to your service, they are committing to you. Having a good relationship with them will keep them returning to you and recommending you and your services to their colleagues.

By: Steven Clark

Steven Clark — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 04:36:09 +0000

You could always say go and buy that $300 logo (or get Tommy to whack up a website for that amount) and come and see me if it doesn't get the ROI they expect.

Ultimately the idea is to achieve business goals and objectives - like gaining customer confidence for example. You're entirely right that its about tapping into the emotions too, I'd never thought of it in that way. But yes. I have been listening to a few interviews of Chip Kidd the book cover designer recently and when you think of book design that's a huge factor. What makes you pick up a book? What interests you (the hook)? The cover doesn't tell the story but it leads you into picking it up by conveying an emotion.

Inspiring article, thanks.

By: pietwulleman

pietwulleman — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 06:13:57 +0000

For many years, writing a creative brief in ad agencies was about answering many (marketing) questions: what do we want to achieve, what do we want to say, who's the target group, what's the insight, etc. We've moved to writing a creative brief by answering 2 questions: which people should do what?

Which is essentially your point: what reaction do we want to get?

the advantage of using this simple state-of-mind (because that's what it basically is) is that
- you're forced to focus on the essential, and make relevant choices
- you don't mix up goals and means (an ad is a means to a goal, if there are better means available, then forget the ad)
- you keep your eye on the people you're working for: the consumer (therefore not the client, although obviously he has a say:) - nor the advertising community as represented in the jury of one or another creative award)

Of course, it's not because the questions are simple, that answering them is easy. And here I have to agree with "Unorthodox": you can only do it when you are in a completely open and honest dialogue with your client, and you have full insight in his (business) situation (this latter again means two things: he has to let you get an insight, and you have to be insightful).

Anyway, great piece. Makes me (again) realize how close the design and graphical industry is to the advertising industry - and how much we share the same problems and challenges

By: unorthodox

unorthodox — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 20:48:34 +0000

The difficulty I see here is that the third party has been introduced into a process that they neither understand nor have been briefed on. I like your approach in the end saying that design should be assessed on it's results not it's process but I'm convinced more that it's about a search for truth rather than emotion. Just as Kevin points out in his book - the lovemarks have to be real and deliver on their promises. If you're halfway through a project and the client decides to add stakeholders, unless the stakeholders come on board under the same premises that you are designing, they have just changed the fundamental nature of the organisation, and thus the truth of your design is compromised because the principles that your design communicates, are now not necessarily adhered to by the rest of the organisation. The flow on affect is that your identity now tells their customers something, albeit subliminal, that the company now has no intention of living up to.

I like the illustration of the merc but I know people who are ditching euro cars and going to Toyota because even in Germany Toyota is better at keeping its brand promises than the patriot companies are.

Word of mouth is still the most effective marketing tool. It doesn't matter how good the ads, emotion, or design is, if somebody tells me they've had a bad experience with that particular product or company, I drop the emotion and move to logic to assess from a more pragmatic perspective what the real value is in doing business with them.

What these companies don't understand and therefore part of our job is to tell them, is that design and marketing is not a particular portfolio or department in a company. It is as integrated as the policy and philosophy by which the company runs and exists. That's why you shouldn't buy a logo for $300, because you can't hope to even figure out the soul of a company or product for that, much less communicate it through art or design.