On Jun 3, 2011, at 10:34 AM, Ali Ilhan wrote:
> why we, as
> designers, still try to stick to a outdated concept of professionalism
There are a lot of reasons, just as there are a lot of different sorts of designers. Sometimes it is an actual attempt to protect the public. Sometimes it is a desire to limit competition from sources considered "illegitimate" in some manner.
While a unique body of knowledge might be implausible, the legal exclusion of a profession seems to require a specific and identifiable area of practice.
The subject of certification or licensing of graphic designers comes up every few years, often based on frustrations over competing with people who don't offer parallel services yet may seem to, thus undercutting prices for designers and value for their clients.
The question that nobody has been able to answer for me about licensing is the area of practice question: What would a licensed graphic designer be allowed to do that others would be precluded from doing? Would we have someone arrested for spec'ing type without a license? Is laying out a company newsletter or a church bulletin "professional" territory? In that sense, being called a graphic designer is like being called a writer. It means different things in different contexts. While it's plausible to imagine a specific group of writers being a profession in a full sense of the term, it is implausible to think of all writers being part of a profession.
(The quasi-licensing scheme in Canada is akin to a trademark in US law. Nobody who is not a member of the certifying organization is allowed to use "RGD" or "Registered Graphic Designer" but there is not a legal prohibition against otherwise representing oneself as a graphic designer. It is much like the term "Realtor" in the US. One doesn't need to be a Realtor to sell real estate but one needs to be a member of the organization in order to put the word on a business card.)
The question about certification of graphic designers that alludes consensus is "certification of what?" While I can see the value to someone engaging a graphic design of knowing that a designer has, say, demonstrable strategic skills or specific-field legal knowledge, I doubt the value of a certification of general graphic design abilities.
> On 3 June 2011 04:56, Johann van der Merwe <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> "Professionalism" too often coincides with "what the INDUSTRY wants",
>> but they are mostly too busy with making money to spare any time to
>> finding out what the "real customer" wants/ needs.
In this sense, being "professional" and being a part of a profession are not synonymous. The word "professional" (as well as antonyms such amateur and dilettante ) has a variety of often-contradictory implications.
Gunnar
----------
Gunnar Swanson Design Office
1901 East 6th Street
Greenville NC 27858
USA
[log in to unmask]
+1 252 258 7006
http://www.gunnarswanson.com
|