The creative gap is the seemingly inevitable breach between the creative and the stakeholder (AKA the client).
For example, maybe the client feels that the designer doesn't understand their goals, or the designer feels like they are being boxed in by unnecessary restrictions.
Whatever the specifics may be, the Creative Gap can lead to frustration on both parts.
The creative gap is the seemingly inevitable breach between the creative and the stakeholder (AKA the client).
For example, maybe the client feels that the designer doesn't understand their goals, or the designer feels like they are being boxed in by unnecessary restrictions.
Whatever the specifics may be, the Creative Gap can lead to frustration on both parts.
I'm going to break it to you – there is no way to flip a switch and force two people to work together in perfect harmony.
We are human.
Just like any relationship, both parties need to work to understand the other. Both need to pull their weight in their own realm of responsibility and allow the other space to do the same.
The client is not an obstacle to be overcome. The designer is not an obstacle to be overcome. Each has much needed perspective and strengths.
Keep scrolling to see how:
understanding
Creatives have the ability to use systems
in their brain together in ways that non-creative minds normally don't.
The brain has two networks that it can switch between during thought:
the default network and the executive control network.
The default network lights up for aimless brain activity – activities like recalling past memories, imagining different scenarios, pondering, etc.
The executive control network lights up when the mind is doing the opposite – like focusing and intentionally controlling their thoughts.
Creatives are able to activate both networks at once.
This allows their minds to simultaneously wander and ideate while brining them back down to earth to sort out the results as either viable concepts to explore or as trash.
Creatives have the ability to use systems
in their brain together in ways that non-creative minds normally don't.
The brain has two networks that it can switch between during thought:
the default network and the executive control network.
The default network lights up for aimless brain activity – activities like recalling past memories, imagining different scenarios, pondering, etc.
The executive control network lights up when the mind is doing the opposite – like focusing and intentionally controlling their thoughts.
For that reason, from here on out, clients and stakeholders are being rebranded as "visionaries". If we refer to the designer by their strength, we should see the stakeholder for what they bring to the table – that is, vision and direction.
Visionaries are leaders. They have their sights set on outcomes rather than means only, which keeps projects in line with goals.
So often we imagine the creative process with the client stepping aside and the designer stepping up to complete the project.
But what would be an effective design without a powerful goal and message?
Paula Scher said it well:
The more the client steps up and gives valuable and relevant direction, the more information and insight the designer has to formulate powerful ideas.
For that reason, from here on out, clients and stakeholders are being rebranded as "visionaries". If we refer to the designer by their strength, we should see the stakeholder for what they bring to the table – that is, vision and direction.
Visionaries are leaders. They have their sights set on outcomes rather than means only, which keeps projects in line with goals.
So often we imagine the creative process with the client stepping aside and the designer stepping up to complete the project.
But what would be an effective design without a powerful goal and message?
Paula Scher said it well:
The more the client steps up and gives valuable and relevant direction, the more information and insight the designer has to formulate powerful ideas.
The creative process is exactly what it sounds like – a process. Both parties must work together in bringing about the end product. Skipping steps or rushing through without giving each side the space to do their part results in shallow work.
step one:
This is the phase in which the visionary and the creative should communicate the most.
The more mutual understanding in this step, the better.
The research phase is not where either party goes and finds out what someone else did that can be mimicked. Sure, you can be inspired by another creative work – but consider the context and the company's goals.
If you're already thinking of ideas for actual execution in this phase, you're jumping the gun.
The visionary should take their time to evaluate and self-reflect.
- Why am I requesting this design?
- What are the goals?
- What would make this design successful in reaching our goals?
- Who is the audience?
The creative should gather this information from the visionary and seek out inspiration that worked in a similar way. Design styles/approaches can better be determined with this knowledge from the visionary.
step two:
In this phase, the skeleton of the project is determined. The visionary explores messaging and parameters, and the creative produces things like mood boards, sketches, storyboards, etc.
This phase tends to have a struggle I like to call the fishbowl effect:
It is said that goldfish only grow as big as their tank will allow.
So in the ideation phase, I believe that the ideas are only as big as their limits. Too often we default to an idea because it's "what people do", but we fail to ask ourselves WHY NOT do something different?
It is critical in this phase that the visionary checks that only the absolutely necessary restrictions be put on the project. This makes a "bigger bowl" for the creative's mind to explore, and will lead to stronger, more original ideas.
step three:
After the best ideas are chosen, they are further developed by the creative. This is their time to shine.
While there has been ample communication leading up to this point, there is still some ambiguity until there is something tangible that both parties can evaluate. This shouldn't be seen as the final product, but rather a temporary assembly of the building blocks collected thus far - neither one should be too attached to the concept to revise.
step four:
Check yourself before you wreck yourself.
Here the visionary can weigh in and determine if the design is still in line with the original goals set. They then pass that insight on to the designer who then revisits the design and revises to better align with the desired outcomes.
You may think that this is the last step... But it may not be... Step 3 and 4 can be repeated as many times as it is necessary to get a final outcome that works.
Remember objectivity in this phase – it is easy to want to hold on to something that isn't working because you thought of it. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. Move on.
step one:
This is the phase in which the visionary and the creative should communicate the most.
The more mutual understanding in this step, the better.
The research phase is not where either party goes and finds out what someone else did that can be mimicked. Sure, you can be inspired by another creative work – but consider the context and the company's goals.
If you're already thinking of ideas for actual execution in this phase, you're jumping the gun.
The visionary should take their time to evaluate and self-reflect.
- Why am I requesting this design?
- What are the goals?
- What would make this design successful in reaching our goals?
- Who is the audience?
The creative should gather this information from the visionary and seek out inspiration that worked in a similar way. Design styles/approaches can better be determined with this knowledge from the visionary.
step two:
In this phase, the skeleton of the project is determined. The visionary explores messaging and parameters, and the creative produces things like mood boards, sketches, storyboards, etc.
This phase tends to have a struggle I like to call the fishbowl effect:
It is said that goldfish only grow as big as their tank will allow.
So in the ideation phase, I believe that the ideas are only as big as their limits. Too often we default to an idea because it's "what people do", but we fail to ask ourselves WHY NOT do something different?
It is critical in this phase that the visionary checks that only the absolutely necessary restrictions be put on the project. This makes a "bigger bowl" for the creative's mind to explore, and will lead to stronger, more original ideas.
step three:
After the best ideas are chosen, they are further developed by the creative. This is their time to shine.
While there has been ample communication leading up to this point, there is still some ambiguity until there is something tangible that both parties can evaluate. This shouldn't be seen as the final product, but rather a temporary assembly of the building blocks collected thus far - neither one should be too attached to the concept to revise.
step four:
Check yourself before you wreck yourself.
Here the visionary can weigh in and determine if the design is still in line with the original goals set. They then pass that insight on to the designer who then revisits the design and revises to better align with the desired outcomes.
You may think that this is the last step... But it may not be... Step 3 and 4 can be repeated as many times as it is necessary to get a final outcome that works.
Remember objectivity in this phase – it is easy to want to hold on to something that isn't working because you thought of it. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. Move on.
We're just skimming the surface here. The successful cooperation between visionary and creative is a process – not a quick fix. Quick fixes may treat the symptoms, but not the actual issue.
