We’ve been watching the aftermath of this year’s D&AD awards with interest over the blogosphere these past few days. There have been some interesting and controversial comments floating around which are well worth reading. Stu has voiced his own thoughts on the subject on Creative Review’s blog. You can read all the comments HERE.

‘To begin with, excellent article. But it might say something about the relevance of the results when (as far as CR’s blog goes) people feel more compelled to comment on Sony’s new ad than design’s absence from D&AD’s awards.

I was part of this year’s design jury for the first time in my career, so I got to see the whole judging process for myself. Being selected to judge was a huge honour but I must say my own experience has left me with very little faith in the judging process. It did seem to me that a lot of people felt they had to behave in a particular way – hyper-critical, seen-it-all-before, impossible to impress – just because D&AD had chosen them as arbiters of creative standards. Couple that with tables upon tables weighed down with design work, much of which (but not all) being labeled as “appalling” and it’s little wonder we’ve arrived at this point.

It’s a problem at both ends of the scale. On one hand it would appear (and despite their best efforts) D&AD is failing to attract some of great design work we all see flying around the interweb. And on the other hand, it would appear design judges walk into the judging hall looking for Gold from the outset. Ideas are needed on both sides. But ideas which work alongside the other disciplines. (I’d be interested to hear what folks in adland think about the awards.)

Here’s my thoughts on what’s already been put forward:

Pre-screening of design entries.

Good idea. Please don’t think I’m being “hyper-critical” when I say 50% of what my jury looked at really was awful. And I’m guessing it’s the same every year. I’d like to think I was generous in spirit when I judged but I was left wondering if some UK design agencies really know what D&AD is all about? I know how that sounds, but until D&AD decide to switch to an online vote or you see it for yourself, please take my word for it.

You might argue it makes the good work stand out – to some degree it does, but it’s more a feeling of relief than excitement when you come across a good piece. The point is, So much mediocre work does bring the mood down. It certainly effected me.

(I have to add, every one of my fellow jury members gave their full attention and professional consideration to each and every one of the 500 or so cards, invitations, calendars, stamps, bags, T-Shirts, boxes and letterheads.)

Fewer juries sweating harder over less work.

In my view, Michael Johnson’s recent ‘You say Tomarto…’ thought lays out the problem with design juries. How can so many Witty Young Fogeys / Counterless Geometricals / Gridnik Modernistas etc. agree on what is good design? (And do judges actually enter work into D&AD, themselves?)

Perhaps fewer juries, predominately made up of designers but with a good mix of experienced photographers, writers and illustrators would provide a more rounded view of the work and yield more positive results? Designers judge writing don’t they? Graphic design uses photography, doesn’t it? It might also avoid the “Fuck NB Studios” situation which Ben highlighted or the usual whining about the “big boys sticking together”.

Separate award judging and ceremonies.

Split the awards up. For arguments sake, let’s say Digital / Advertising / Design & Environmental. Make everyone feel a bit special, ADC don’t do it, that’s true, but ADC don’t carry the baggage of their awards being labeled an ad man’s show.

Shelve ‘the book’.

I agree with Tony. (A few interesting jackets aside) If the Annual was really testing the boundaries of book production, then perhaps it has a place. But as lovely as it is to see your name in print, I think an on-line archive is the way to go.

Lower entry fees.

No brainer. It’s probably the one aspect of the awards which everyone can agree on. Sure, there’s a number of design groups out there who couldn’t care less about awards – that’s fine – but judging from the comments made elsewhere in the blogosphere, there’s a number of design groups who are also pushing design forward but have turned away from D&AD soley because of its crippling entry fees.

Separate events could allow D&AD to set entry fees more in-line with what a small design practice can afford.

One small point, D&AD should really be the first people to post the results. 5pm the next day, after the world and his dog have debated them isn’t really good enough.

I’m not really someone who likes sticking their head above the parapet. I’m sure everything I’ve mentioned can be scrutinized and argued against, which is why I much prefer to confine any half-arsed ramblings to the studio. But on this occasion I feel it’s important to speak up and hope it helps bring about the positive changes needed to keep D&AD connected to contemporary design.

I sincerely hope this will be a watershed moment for the ‘D’ in D&AD and something good will come out this year’s results. I passionately believe in what D&AD stands for and hope it will still mean something to the global design community in ten year’s time. I would encourage other people who feel the same way to contribute to the debate – along with D&AD.

So this doesn’t sound all doom and gloom, I must say I was hugely impressed with the way D&AD ran the judging. It is a jaw dropping moment to walk into the judging hall and see all the work on show. I can’t begin to imagine what it must take to put it together and make it appear so effortless – everyone involved at D&AD deserves a big hug and a slice of cake.

And for the record, we did enter one piece into the awards – I watched the jury walk past it when they were reviewing their in-book selection – miserable sods, the lot of them ;–)

Congratulations to all the winners.’

Stuart Price