Eating a ham and cheese sandwich for lunch every day wouldn’t be very adventurous, and it certainly wouldn’t classify you as a risk taker (in terms of your eating habits, that is). But, at least you would get consistent, predictable results. The same rules apply to business. If you follow safe trends and standard patterns you’re likely to come up with the same old, predictable results. In sharp contrast to this, if you’re willing to go out on a limb and take a risk, you will find yourself with three possible outcomes: 1. Failure 2. Success 3. Somewhere in between.
Living a life (or running a business) without risk or adventure can be pretty bland. I’m personally a huge advocate of taking risks and seeking adventure, but not without strategy and purpose. Taking a completely random risk can be down right foolish.
So when is it appropriate?
Every once in a while you’ll see a fairly outrageous commercial on TV that creates a lot of buzz. The commercial may have been completely arbitrary with no real call to action or showing of product, but still somehow seemed to be effective. In order to get away with taking a risk like this you need to have a product that everyone already knows and loves. Take Budweiser for instance, it seems like they can pretty much get away with anything, when it comes to their advertising, and their patrons will just keep growing and growing. Now, their general audience comes to expect this from them, which inevitably turns ‘risky’ advertising into their brand. If, however, an unknown company was to attempt launching a risky advertising campaign there would be a much higher chance of failure.
This same concept applies to web design, which is why I was so surprised by the recent redesign of contrast.ie. This is not to say that I didn’t like their redesign. Quite the opposite actually. My surprise rooted soley from the logic that this new design seemed a bit risky considering their current client roster (which inherently seems fairly corporate).
Screen capture from Dublin based web app designer/developers, Contrast.
If this was a personal portfolio/blog site of a designer, meant to be viewed and admired by other designers then I would say that the overall user experience was excellent. However, considering who (I’m assuming) their desired audience would be (potential clients), the user experience seemed a bit ambiguous. The dominant grunge effect and the nontraditional buttons coupled with the single page nature of this site really narrows the audience of who this would appeal to.
There are many elements which make up the overall user experience, one of which is design aesthetic, while another is functionality. Both of these elements must pertain directly to your intended audience or the whole experience will be a failed attempt, regardless of how unique and creative the outcome is to folks within the industry. Missing your target demographic while appealing to your colleagues would be like an automotive company creating a car that can only be driven by highly trained technicians. It might be a ground breaking creation within the industry but the end user will keep walking after they can’t figure out how it functions.
It’s not all bad though
The structure and hierarchy of content is laid out quite nicely. It’s immediately clear to anyone who arrives at this site just what it is that they do – “We do web apps”. Coupled with this obviously blunt statement is a barrage of chicken scratched testimonials; something any potential client is interested in reading. Immediately following this is what would be considered the team or company section, featuring a small yet competent looking team. After scrolling by a few more testimonials you make your way to the portfolio, then lastly, the contact section. Like I said, this is ultimately a great structure. It informs the user and gives them all the necessary information they would need to be convinced of their work then inquire about working together.
So, in terms of structure, this site seems solid. My concern simply lies within the risk they are taking by appealing to such a niche audience with the design aesthetic and functionality. But hey, who am I to judge? For all I know this could be a strategic move that is in-fact focused on appealing to a specific audience. Either way, I give them a big applaud for taking this risk. After all, the bigger the risk, the bigger the reward.
Hi there,
Good post. Thanks for the analysis. I love your site, by the way!
I designed this and the previous Contrast site. I’d be lying if I said I know exactly what I’m doing. I’m going with my gut here. I’ve designed what I feel best represents the Contrast brand and hoping that potential clients feel that and appreciate it. I’d say there’s at least a 50% chance you’re dead right: that our target market will be turned right off by this site. But you know what? Fuck it. I just don’t want another boring web dev shop site. They’re boring! :-) And that attitude has mostly worked so far. It helps us feel confident in our abilities; happy we’re the real deal and not afraid to show it. We’re ourselves. We think we’re one of the best web app dev shops around. That attitude when applied to the design of our site might negatively affect sales—I’d say it does. But maybe the sales we do get are with clients that aren’t turned-off but rather really like our unique attitude an abilities and want it for their app… and want to pay a premium for it!
One interesting point you made: “Missing your target demographic while appealing to your colleagues would be like an automotive company creating a car that can only be driven by highly trained technicians.” I agree. However… car technicians have very little influence on the market for new cars. But when an executive wants to know who the hottest web app developers around are, they ask their web dev staff or friends, and as you can see from the testimonials on the site, they recommend Contrast!
But seriously, there’s a massive chance you’re 100% right and I’m 100% wrong. But I’ll risk it! :-)
Eoghan, you’ve made a great argument for the concept behind your site design. Creating a company site that represents your true colors is the most important thing you can do. A good client will not only appreciate this but will be much more rewarding to work with because of it. Great work on this new site, I hope it brings you guys lots of success!
Hey Kev,
I completely agree with the notion of ‘taking a risk’ (especially in business) that is backed by strategy and purpose. I think what falls by the wayside though is the other part of the equation, acceptance of potential failure (even if it is temporary). Convincing a business owner to take a calculated risk must also come equipped with the understanding that ‘not every action’ has a positive return reaction. I think possibly that some business owners are aware of this and, perhaps sub-conciously, they would rather stay away from risk — even if an outcome may end up being massively larger than staying within the bounds of a perceived ‘what-works’ mentality.
One disagreement I have is : your explanation of the website above and the audience it appeals to — kind of pigeon-holing only designers as the audience that would be attracted to the design. As you know, *I am no professional designer* but I certainly can see the creativity, professionalism and potential for that company to deliver excellent work. (I admit I didn’t read Eoghan’s comment).
Hey Joe,
The acceptance of failure while taking a risk is a must. After all, it wouldn’t technically be a “risk” if there was no chance of failure. This is essentially why putting a strategy in place is so important.
I agree with your thoughts that some potential business owners may subconsciously stay away from this philosophy because they are scared of anything besides status quo. This can create a dangerous environment though. If you’re not moving forward, then you’re standing still. With this day and age, businesses can’t afford to stand still. If they do, they will be over looked, then passed by.
Lastly, I too agree that there will be many people, beyond designers, who find the new Contrast site to be a great design. However, I’m thinking from the perspective of a typical “decision maker” – the corporate executive type. I suppose it’s a bit of a controversial subject, but in my experience, this is what I’ve found to be true.
Hi!
Interesting article and great inputs for sure when even the make of the piece is active. I agree with Eoghan, there are a risk to take and more often when doing it you get reward for it in the end. The way may be filled with twists and turns but the feeling afterward is a killer. A success after a risk is greater then the safe way.
But how did it go then? How did the audience respond to the redesign?
Cheers!
L i a