No free ideas

Free pitching originated as a spin-off from the advertising industry. For better or worse, both are popularly regarded as being ‘creative’ , and therefore the methods used in the advertising industry for appointing new business were extended into design. This practice almost always involves superficial, poorly conceived design briefs and it usually results in short term solutions for the client. Free pitching therefore encourages designers to aim to please, rather than to focus on what actually works. So it emphasises the 'creative' aspect of design and suggests a poor understanding of the strategic, commercial and marketing related solutions that designers can bring to projects. If good design is about meeting a client’s communication, marketing or business requirements, then it is hard to imagine that an effective design can be developed without reasonable application of experience, knowledge and time from both the client and the designer.

From the designer's point of view, free pitching dramatically undercuts the financial viability of a design business. By devaluing individual designers or their businesses, pitching denigrates the design industry as a whole and makes it significantly harder for designers to make a viable living.

But free pitching is also used by governments or the European Union for the public procurement of design services. This centralised system of notification of the public procurement of all supplies, services, and works by government bodies in the European Union has been in existence since before 1992. It is estimated that up to 16% of the region's GDP falls within this category. Unfortunately, most public procurement for design services at European level effectively results in free pitching or 'design competitions', as they prefer to call it.

In July 2009, the European Commission launched a competition for the design of a new EU logo for organic products. The use of this new logo will be compulsory for all pre-packaged organic products that originate in the 27 Member States. The competition turned out to be a farce. They invited all European design and art students to send in their ideas for free – they attributed three prizes to the three runners up, and the first prize was 6.000 Euro, which is a ridiculous amount of money for a project with such scope. A jury made an initial shortlist of three logos, and in an online vote, the European public then choose their favourite logo. By organising a public vote, they reduced the design competition to a 'beauty contest' and a blunt PR exercise. There was no briefing and no strategic design thinking was involved. At the end of the day, the winning logo – which I believe is a rather mediocre and unsuitable solution – is not going to do the job required.

The public and private sector should stop organising pitches or design competitions, and use more strategic approaches to find the right partner for the right job. This could be a selection process based on credentials, discussions and price offers, or a well-organised paid pitch with a limited number of carefully chosen designers who are properly briefed and receive a fee to develop a solution. Designers should not provide their services for free, and design organisations should approach clients to explain the negative aspect of free pitching and discuss alternative selection processes.

Over the past four decades, design organisations such as the ICSID and ICOGRADA, along with professional designers’ associations, have developed a broadly aligned set of guidelines for good practice in the running of design competitions. Some Member States have regulations on design and architecture competitions and some EU governments voluntarily follow these guidelines. In Belgium, for example, the Flemish government frequently turns to Design Flanders for advice when organising a design competition. This approach ensures that the processes that are set in place do not undermine the professional practice of design.

BEDA is unequivocally opposed to free pitching. Free pitching is bad for clients and bad for design businesses. It is contrary to good design management, devalues the profession, and produces poor results.