Does anyone remember that blog post about how to ruin a website? Basically it chronicles a hypothetical conversation between a web designer and a client whereby the initial draft is beautiful and modern and by the time it's done, it seriously ugly - but the client loves it? My question is, has anyone actually allowed themselves to go through this conversation or do they try and steer the client away from bad choices? And if the client wants what they want, do you make them happy even though you are not satisfied with the work? Just curious. Please weigh in.

If you have to get business..then you have to accept that "Boss(Client)s is always right" even though that website might not look good in your portfolio

 

Here.. psychology comes into play.. and how efficient are you to convince anybody tht ur choice is better than his.. it all depends on your individual ability

the more better you can read your clients mind .. the more efficient u are as a marketing manager...where u can actually sell your ideas .. the better it is.

 

but some clients are too rigid in their thoughts.. so its difficult to get over them .. so it all varies from client to client

That is the post I was looking for. Thank you. And to Sash - you are right. When an immovable object meets an unstoppable force, the client is always right.

A lot of it comes down to experience, I think confidence also plays a part. I'm happy to discuss with clients what will, and won't work ,and why their bad decision could have a negative impact on the look or functionality of the site. As long as you can prove yourself, or suggest a better alternative, it's not usually an issue.

 

That said, I've had nightmare projects like everyone probably has at some point. These projects don't get added to the portfolio and I wouldn't put my name to them. I've found that most of the time it's down to stubbornness, and a lack of wanting to find a better solution to what they've come up with. Clients like to put their own mark on a site, which is understandable. It just has to be done correctly. The basis to avoid this is:

• Don't get pissy.
• Try and understand what they're trying to achieve, suggest a better alternative.
• Learn how to say no.
• Hold regular feedback sessions, avoid emails and phone calls.
• If all else fails, go over your contract. Make sure there's something in there that prevents the client from making decisions, that could jeopardise the goals you've been hired to solve. After all, the CEO will blame you if the job wasn't executed correctly.

Similarly, when you initially meet with a client, you can usually get an indication of what they will be like to work with. If they seem like hard work, they most probably will be, so don't bother taking the job on unless you have to.

 

Reading Design Is a Job changed my understanding of working with clients. I highly recommended it.

 

• Don't get pissy.

 

That's a good point. Clients suggest changes for a reason, as Jack said, trying to achieve something. It's up to the designer to convince them there are better ways.

 

 

Similarly, when you initially meet with a client, you can usually get an indication of what they will be like to work with. If they seem like hard work, they most probably will be, so don't bother taking the job on unless you have to.

 

Yes, also I would add best don't work with friends or don't do favours to people.

I find startups tend to be the worst for this, one especially bad one was a furniture design company that assumed they could also design websites. We tend to focus most on conversion as that is *usually* the goal of a businesses website, so we try to convince them that our idea / design will be more likely to convert - Obviously if the client has a great idea then of course we'd roll with it!

one especially bad one was a furniture design company that assumed they could also design websites.

 

We need the buttons to look like real mahogany, and they need to shine when you mouseover to give the impression of polishing. That's what our customers like.

That said, I've had nightmare projects like everyone probably has at some point. These projects don't get added to the portfolio and I wouldn't put my name to them. I've found that most of the time it's down to stubbornness, and a lack of wanting to find a better solution to what they've come up with.

 

I agree with every word, Jack. I've made one or two concoctions of websites for clients that defy my personal taste and approval as a designer and therefore don't make it onto my portfolio. It could be down to the fact that I'm often incapable of working outside my comfort zone, or fail to grasp how the client's approach may benefit the site. But when a client isn't open to change or a new way of thinking, especially when their recipe takes inspiration from their old, out-dated, failing site, then it's especially annoying. One client, for example, refuses to accept any other main colour than 'business light blue'. Nothing else works. Bleh.

Client: (accountant) I want my website to greet visitors with a sexy voice like this: welcome to our website, don't worry we are here to manage your accounts.

 

Me: this is s bad idea for a business like yours and beside no one uses sound greetings anymore on their website. Your website is Responsive and it won't play the sound if visited with mobile phones.

 

Client: then disable the responsive mode

-------------------------------------------

 

Client (lawyer): I want to have a frame on the front page, family color code, my family picture to show that I am honest.

 

Me: can you please help me and describe what color you see as a family color code?

 

Client: you know what, if you ask questions like this then looks like you are not up for the job. I will look for a developer who knows this things

--------------------------------------

 

Client: wow what an amazing job, the website looks fantastic. You are really good. £100 bonus with the final cheque.

 

After 5 months he finds out that the website was built on Wordpress, he calls me demanding money back + £4000 compensation.

 

I asked whats the problem exactly? He says my previous developer was using Wordpress as well and I was told that whoever uses Wordpress don't know what they are doing and that their websites are faulty.

 

By the way after 4 months from the launch date he called me once and asked me how did I do it because his phones are ringing nonstop.

 

Normally I am a very calm person and almost never rude but on that occasion the only thing that came to my mind to say to him before hanging up was F**** Off, sue me!

 

Anyway after a while he was keep calling, texting and emailing to apologise but I was keep rejecting him.

 

I am making really good money but my clients are soooooo difficult, I always attract the same type of clients for some reason.

Edited May 27, 201412 yr by newman

This is where we use the argument that design has purpose and meaning, you should be able to explain why things are where they are, why they are that colour or design and why they are right for the business

 

Of course your going to still get the odd dipstick, but that is why to minimise that you in effect vet your clients before agreeing to do the work, don't just take on work because of money, you need to be able to work with these people and if you can't, you are better off just moving on.

I'm not sure if this is the one you were referencing but this is brilliant:

 

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/design_hell

 

Enjoy

 

LOL @ near the end "Please, no more". Seen it years ago but still very funny.

Edited May 28, 201412 yr by HostXNow

In theory client knows what he wants better. But in practice it usually turns out the opposite. Clients forget that it is their users who should like their site (web app, etc.) but not the boss or his wife or their daughter. I've seen many good designs rejected just because somebody of the boss relatives didn't like it.

In theory client knows what he wants better. But in practice it usually turns out the opposite. Clients forget that it is their users who should like their site (web app, etc.) but not the boss or his wife or their daughter. I've seen many good designs rejected just because somebody of the boss relatives didn't like it.

It's a fact that a client most the time does not know their demographic better at all, sometimes they have even collected that information and don't even realise it.

 

If a client rejects work on the basis that a 'relative does not like it' you did not do enough research of your own to make sure the client is right for you to work with, if I were in that situation though due to how I work I would be able to explain why I have done the things I had done and stress to the client that if their suggestions did not bring the results on their website that I would normally expect their choice to do what they wanted would be the cause.

 

It's not necessarily about the audience liking the website, it's mostly about enticing the user to go forward, give them reasons to go deeper into the site to sell them your idea or product.

I know exactly how this can be.. Client's aren't "Design Savvy" so they don't understand what is ruining the website, they think it looks good because its what they want. Just like a designer will like his way better because he likes it (in most cases it probably is).

 

What I do is just say something like "I don't recommend we do that because it won't look so good (and explain why), but if you insist I will make the change".

 

That blog post is pretty awesome though.

Edited June 6, 201412 yr by Varcoe

You should always ask the question why. Why is this here, why is it styled in this particular way, does it enhance the user experience and increase conversion. I saw a great screencast from Harry Roberts who makes a great example of what he calls the 80/20 rule. If you can create 80% of a design with 20% of the code then you should really try to pursue that route.

 

We should not be forced to write horrible un-maintanable code just to suit a designer and if we do have to include something that requires a lot of code then it must have a very strong purpose.

 

You should always ask the question why. Why is this here, why is it styled in this particular way, does it enhance the user experience and increase conversion. I saw a great screencast from Harry Roberts who makes a great example of what he calls the 80/20 rule. If you can create 80% of a design with 20% of the code then you should really try to pursue that route.

 

We should not be forced to write horrible un-maintanable code just to suit a designer and if we do have to include something that requires a lot of code then it must have a very strong purpose.

 

 

A good designer designs with the client and business in mind, a designer will work with a developer but I seriously would not use phrases like 'to suit a designer' as a designer designs for purpose for the client and their users, if you have to create un manageable code (which I cannot think of a reason why this would ever be necessary) then working with a designer will produce far better results than having the attitude of 'to suit a designer' because nothing we do suits us if it's done properly it suits the client and the audience.

 

In all honesty it's not the designers job to create stuff around developers abilities, it's down to the developer to be suitable and good enough for the task in order to come up with a suitable solution.

Have you watched the video because if you have you have it's clear you have not fully understood the points made. It's not about the developers ability it's about whether or not it is sensible to code something that adds little to the user experience yet requires reams and reams of css. NOT good for maintainability, if you ever work on a large scale project with multiple developers the codebase is very very important, You cannot expect a designer to know if a particular design element is going to make sense in the code base, this is why the collaboration is so critical to a projects success.

Edited June 9, 201412 yr by rbrtsmith

this made me laugh

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/websites_stop

Have you watched the video because if you have you have it's clear you have not fully understood the points made. It's not about the developers ability it's about whether or not it is sensible to code something that adds little to the user experience yet requires reams and reams of css. NOT good for maintainability, if you ever work on a large scale project with multiple developers the codebase is very very important, You cannot expect a designer to know if a particular design element is going to make sense in the code base, this is why the collaboration is so critical to a projects success.

 

Precisely why graphic designers who learn design for print only and actually know nothing about website design should not build websites, I was referring to designers with web experience, the comments you said regarding designers did not separate print designers and web designers, so what you said there sound like a snap at all designers even those who are perfectly aware of web standards.

It was not intended to be a snap at designers, I have a lot of respect for them, they are far more creative than I'll ever be. But the fact remains that even when I first get a PSD i cannot tell you straight away how it will be coded line for line, as you are coding you do come across things that you have to write very verbose code to get it to match the PSD. This is where you can check with the designer if it's appearance can be altered in someway which doesn't impact the UI in a negative way but saves you potentially more than half the lines of code. Less code means less potential bugs, less maintenance, faster page speed. I think we can be in agreement that they are all good things to have.

 

It's about the designer and the developer working as a team and the PSD not being a concrete set in stone document as to how the finished product will appear, but it will evolve slightly in the browser.

 

Have you watched the video? The points in it are explained better than I can write on here - The speaker has worked on far bigger projects than any of us have so it's good to listen to his experiences.

 

 

I do agree with what you say about print designers though, they need to re-train as the two are very different.

Edited June 9, 201412 yr by rbrtsmith

Have not had time to watch the video as yet but what you say there sounds much better of which I would wholly agree

 

The only thing I would add is that design evolves, at the end of designing a website, if I were to hand it to a developer I would expect them to come back to me if there is an issue, in fact I openly welcome it as it gives you a chance to revisit and improve not just if something was being awkward but also to question why things are the way they are, keeps a designers mind sharp as a designer when people ask the right questions the best being "why is this like that".