Archive for the ‘Business’ post category
It’s equally astonishing and frustrating that “small” in a business description is still often regarded as a negative. On more than a few occasions in the last few years, I have heard from prospective clients that they are fearful that Ember is too small to handle their business. I’ve gotten these comments on a variety of projects, everything from ad development to website builds and video productions. I’ve even had people ask about the equipment I use, as if somehow the equipment determines the ability of a company to do the work. To me, it’s akin to asking your plumber what brand of wrenches and torches he uses. Does it really matter if he does good work?
Still, it’s a common complaint of small businesses working in advertising, design, or tech that the team might be too small to do the work. And it’s one that I find difficult to understand when we are inundated with examples of small businesses doing huge things on a daily basis. Here are a few examples of small businesses defying the stigma of their size:
TWiT (This Week in Tech)
In 2005, Leo Laporte and a few friends created a recording of them sitting around discussing technology. In that casual, low-budget homemade recording, a network was inadvertently launched. What began as a weekly internet broadcast distributed under the podcast system of content delivery quickly grew into multiple shows, daily live broadcasts, and big budget ad spots from the likes of Ford, Netflix, Audible, and Citrix. TWiT created an entirely online broadcasting network with a staff of less than 20 and on an operating budget that is a small fraction of their traditional TV broadcast counterparts.
Pinterest
Started in 2008, Pinterest has become a household name and while estimates vary, most put the value of the company at over $1 billion. And with just 7 employees.
Livid Lobster
Similar to TWiT, Livid Lobster is an Internet broadcasting company that produces a few recorded shows and a weekly live show, all distributed online and through podcasting systems. And like TWiT, Livid Lobster is doing things that the large TV broadcast networks simply can’t do. They run a lean business, employing about 10 people (although not all full-time) and produce their shows in a small studio space using relatively inexpensive equipment and techniques to create professional level video content and broadcasts.
Chase Jarvis Inc.
Photographer Chase Jarvis built a name for himself as one of the most sought-after commercial photographers in the business today. No small feat for anyone, especially a photographer working in one of the most competitive creative industries possible. Taking things a few steps further, Chase continued to grow his company and has developed a number of additional products under the Chase Jarvis Inc. name, including a wildly successful iPhone camera app, two books, an online creative education network called creativeLive, and a curator of an ambitious gallery project called Dasein. He also produces a live web broadcast called Chase Jarvis Live in which he interviews well-known figures from photography, art, music, and entertainment. All on top of an already impressive client list that includes more name-brand companies than even need to be mentioned. Let’s just say you own products by these companies, probably several, including the computer you’re reading this on. And all of this has been done with a staff of 8.
Is there such a thing as “too small” these days? If a group of people can build multi-million (or billion) dollar businesses with a few computers in a garage, and these success stories are so well-known today, how is it that we still have to struggle through this stigma that some small businesses are too small to deliver high-quality goods and services?
Personally, I’d take the opposite approach these days. I’d prefer to work with companies that are doing a lot with a little. I would rather not pay for the excessive overhead that big businesses are saddled with, and I know that I can get better work faster from a small, nimble, highly creative small business.
Can small businesses to the big jobs? Absolutely. And they can often do it better, faster, and for a lot less money. The question shouldn’t be whether a small business can do the job. It should be, “What added value does a larger team bring to the table?”
Photo by Scott Beale / Laughing Squid
In a recent Business Insider article, a lawyer named Kristen (who also happens to be a photographer) outlines her adventure through the legal terms of use of Pinterest, an image sharing website in which users can “pin” photos of things that they like to virtual corkboards to share with the public. Pinterest has been under fire recently from the photography community for enabling the sharing and storage of images without consent, credit, or any proper license.
What Kristen discovered was that Pinterest includes some interesting language in their terms of service that essentially allow them to wipe their hands clean of any wrongdoing should they find themselves on the receiving end of a legal proceeding by a copyright holder. In short, by using Pinterest you agree to hold Cold Brew Labs (the company behind Pinterest) harmless in any lawsuit arising out of anything that you pin to the site. Furthermore, you agree to pay their legal fees and damages if a copyright holder should be successful in their suit.
Most interesting to me was that Kristen also likens Pinterest to the original bad boy of online sharing, Napster. And she’s not wrong to do so. Like Napster, Pinterest allowed anyone to share intellectual with anyone else, and ultimately put their own users at risk. Remember the years following Napster’s demise? It wasn’t just the file sharing service that found themselves in court. Average, everyday users of the service, from adults to 12-year-old girls, were subject to lawsuits arising out of file sharing claims.
Are Pinterest users unknowingly putting themselves at risk of being dragged into court for illegal file sharing? Possibly. It does seem a bit less likely that big lawsuits like the ones from the Napster and Limewire court cases will be the result of Pinterest usage. Unlike those cases, there is no billion-dollar recording industry to fund the cases. Claims of Pinterest misuse would come from individual photographers and their individual lawyers, resulting in much smaller cases and settlements. However the possibility of seeing Pinterest users brought to court is entirely real. I expect that we will hear about some such case in the very near future.
I happen to like Pinterest and use it daily. Used responsibly, it can be a fun and helpful service for finding things that you ordinarily might not come across in your daily web travels. Unfortunately, most users are probably unaware that they are possibly misusing the service in a way that could actually land them in front of a judge. This could be the beginning of a change in mindset on the web in which more people become aware of intellectual property rights and what is and is not considered a fair use of someone else’s photos. Much like the Napster days, many people might have no clue that what they are doing is potentially illegal and could be costly.
Did you know: Unless specifically stated in a contract, the agency, studio, or designer you hire holds the copyright to the work they completed. 
That’s right. Under the letter of the law, the person or company who created the work has the rights to it, and are under no obligation to turn over source files to the client. But just because the law allows it, that doesn’t make it right.
To be fair, the legalities of the matter do make sense. In most situations and business transactions, the client/consumer is buying the end product, and not the means with which the product was produced.
The difference between most situations and the typical scenario of a design studio, however, is that giving away the means with which a design was created isn’t really giving away much. We’re talking about some files, usually the sort that require specific software to use, and a certain level of expertise to manipulate. The real value of what we do in a studio is in the idea and the execution, not in any single InDesign file or Photoshop composition.
When a client asks for source files to a project, in most cases I see no reason not to hand them over. If the client paid for the work, as far as I am concerned, they own it and the source files. If a client is asking for source files so that they can take their business somewhere else, I won’t hesitate to hand them over, along with my apologies for not being able to fulfill their design requirements.
Ember Studio is not in the business of nickel-and-diming our clients for every last cent we can get. For some people, that’s the standing policy. As I recently read on a freelance design website, one designer’s suggestion is to “get from every customer as much money as you can,” even when it comes to releasing source files.
It is rare that a request for files ever comes in. It has been over a year and a half since it last happened. But it will likely happen again, and when it does, my clients can rest assured that they will always have access to their files without having to pay some ridiculous transfer fee.
Good Magazine recently hosted a contest asking people to design their ideal workspace. Not surprisingly, the ideal workspace doesn’t include cubicles, spacious views of endless drywall, or anything else we’ve come to expect in most corporate office spaces.
Instead, these ideal environments are adorned with comfy furniture, interesting layouts, huge windows with inspiring views, and personal accessories that make the workspace feel like, well, home.
As it relates to the usual marketing, branding, and design topics covered in this blog, this may seem like an out-of-left-field post. And it is. However I think there is a good lesson in this that spans many areas of modern business and current trends in productivity.
The number one thing that employers say they look for in new hires is creativity. The most valuable asset of any employee is their ability to think creatively and come up with unique and innovative ideas and solutions. And yet where do most employers put those valued assets to work? In dull, drab, uninspiring offices, confined to equally uninspiring cramped cubicles and desks outfitted with uncomfortable chairs and out-dated equipment.
It’s the treadmill mentality. We are less inspired to run harder and faster on a treadmill than on a beautiful mountain road with an expansive view.
Is it any wonder that more and more employees are asking their employers to let them work from home? Our ideal workspaces are most often our own homes, or something a little more home-like. Amazingly, many employers are still opposed to their employees working remotely, despite the piles of research that suggests that we work better, faster, and more efficiently in an environment that we truly enjoy being in.
It would come as no surprise to me to learn that many of the employers who struggle with creating a more inspiring work environment also struggle with innovating in their products and services. If someone is throwing their workers into the same dull environment and expecting different results year after year, it seems likely that they are also throwing the same old dull ideas on the table and expecting something different to happen.
In the new year, if you are looking to make some changes to your business, consider taking a look at your workspace. And definitely give some consideration to allowing remote work situations for your employees. Modern technology has made it easier than ever to get your employees up and running remotely. Take advantage of what’s out there and give your workers an alternative to the cubicle. You will probably find yourself rewarded handsomely with a more productive, happy, and satisfied workforce.
I’m not the guy to wax poetic about Steve Jobs. A quick Google search will turn up thousands of fitting tributes written far better than I ever could do it. That said, what I can’t help commenting on is the company that Steve jobs built, and the brand he created. In the design and branding business we often talk about the image of a company, the vision the company and its founders and management, and how clients and customers feel about the company, its products and services, and the culture of the brand. There are few companies that can compare with Apple when I think about brands that command such loyalty and admiration through incredible product design, iconic marketing campaigns, and a vision of what the future holds for technology that is simply unparalleled. Often imitated but never to any similar success, the Apple branding effort has always found that perfect mix of product presentation, compelling messaging, and brand culture.
That brand was often thought of along with Steve himself, and he was as much a part of that brand culture as the products themselves. He did it better than anyone, and his legacy will be as much about who he was as the face of Apple as it will be about the revolutionary products he created. I doubt that we will see another visionary like Steve Jobs in our lifetimes.
We know that it’s not enough to simply show up to the social media party. Success in social media is found, in part, through conversations. You engage in conversations with your customers, clients, and prospects, to allow them to get to know you and your product/service better and be more likely to purchase that product or service thanks to the social conversation they participated in.
These conversations don’t always result in a sale or a signed contract. And in some cases, the intended conversation can turn into an angry mod scene very quickly. Nikon, the famed camera equipment manufacturer, learned this the hard way. On September 28th, the following message appeared on the Nikon Facebook page:
So, according to Nikon, talent is meaningless in photography, and really it’s all about the gear you use. Ouch.
Obviously this didn’t sit well with many photographers, including many professionals who make their living off of their photographic skill and talent and happen to do it with a Nikon camera in their hands. About 3,500 comments appeared under that post over a 24 hour period, most expressing disappointment with Nikon for making such a foolish and offensive statement. Some even suggested that equipment from Nikon’s primary competitor Canon all of a sudden looked a lot more appealing.
Nikon did later issue an apology, although the angry comments continued to pour in afterwards. With just a few lines of text on a Facebook page, Nikon’s social media effort went from “good” to “holly… that’s bad.”
My guess is that this incendiary post came from someone in the company who is not a photographer and had no idea how insensitive the post was. The popular running joke in the photo world has always been the one about the person who admires an image and says to the photographer something like, “Wow, this is a great picture, you must have a really nice camera.” It’s hard to believe that anyone who has spent any amount of time around photographers would dare to make such a blatantly offensive statement to a group that includes a large number of professionals.
The lesson to be learned here is that it’s easy for the conversation in social media to turn ugly, if you let an uninformed person do the talking for your company. It is a challenge, for sure, to remain active in the social networks on a daily basis with thoughtful posts, engaging discussions, and positive commentary, but it has to be done and it needs to be handled by someone within your company that understands the product, the brand position, and most importantly, the people you are talking to.
Nikon D90 photo by raneko
