I have always had a sensitivity to the challenges confronting inhouse design, in part because of my own past as an inhouse lawyer at NBC. There, I had experienced the highs of working closely with upper management, having a deep knowledge of the company vision, collaborating with first-rate colleagues, developing positive relationships with outside suppliers, and arriving home at a reasonable hour to my then-very-young children. Similarly, I had felt the lows of trying to stay fresh when work got repetitive, of needing consistently to justify and validate our department, and of having the juiciest cases outsourced to the latest law firm flavor of the month.
Even with this shared background, I was not fully prepared for the enthusiasm generated by our increased attention over the past few years to the inhouse marketplace. Even more to the point, I was stunned by the quality and quantity of projects submitted to the inaugural American Inhouse Design Awards. I urge you to review the pieces shown in today’s issue, a selection from nearly 3,000 entries. They reflect the best work of a vibrant and talented community, and tell a fascinating story of how smart people can create design that adds meaningful value for the client and the enterprise.
Two additional points.
First, we have sought to provide context about the state of inhouse design and the constraints that even the best design departments face. In this endeavor, we are grateful to InSource, an important association of corporate creatives, and founders Glenn John Arnowitz of Wyeth and Andy Epstein of Gund; to special awards sponsor The Creative Group, an important and generous industry resource; and to Tim Needham, Tom Kleimeyer and the Smart Papers team for encouragement and support.
Second, since two-thirds of our readership is at independent graphic design firms and advertising agencies, we struggle with the question of whether the inhouse versus independent agency relationship is primarily adversarial or complementary. Most creatives work and play well with others — the handful of tempermental egomaniacs aside — and my sense is that most of the time productive cooperation prevails.
If that is wrong, I am sure you will let me know.
Even with this shared background, I was not fully prepared for the enthusiasm generated by our increased attention over the past few years to the inhouse marketplace. Even more to the point, I was stunned by the quality and quantity of projects submitted to the inaugural American Inhouse Design Awards. I urge you to review the pieces shown in today’s issue, a selection from nearly 3,000 entries. They reflect the best work of a vibrant and talented community, and tell a fascinating story of how smart people can create design that adds meaningful value for the client and the enterprise.
Two additional points.
First, we have sought to provide context about the state of inhouse design and the constraints that even the best design departments face. In this endeavor, we are grateful to InSource, an important association of corporate creatives, and founders Glenn John Arnowitz of Wyeth and Andy Epstein of Gund; to special awards sponsor The Creative Group, an important and generous industry resource; and to Tim Needham, Tom Kleimeyer and the Smart Papers team for encouragement and support.
Second, since two-thirds of our readership is at independent graphic design firms and advertising agencies, we struggle with the question of whether the inhouse versus independent agency relationship is primarily adversarial or complementary. Most creatives work and play well with others — the handful of tempermental egomaniacs aside — and my sense is that most of the time productive cooperation prevails.
If that is wrong, I am sure you will let me know.