10 Reasons To Be Skeptical of Your Web Designer

Posted: October 1st, 2009 | Author: Sarah Camp | Filed under: Design, General, Web Design | Tags: , , , , , , , | View Comments

We’ve talked about things that you should avoid on your website, and the importance of finding a designer that knows what they are doing. But how do you know? What are the warning signs that so-called “web designer” could be a fake? I’ve compiled a list of flags to warn you to stay away from that web designer you may be considering, or, worse yet, already using. (Thanks to @AnnEvanston for the idea!)

perplexed

While there are many more things than this that can be an indication of a bad designer, I’ve tried to stick with things that are easy to recognize by clients, and not so much things that could be considered subjective. Dealing with design and what is good and bad can be very personal, and also relative to specific projects. So we’ll just be discussing objective skills and practices.

1. No Questionnaire or Q&A Process

I’ve spoken about how important this is briefly in other articles, but it really is one of the most important parts of the design process. There are vital questions that a designer must ask before they can begin to create anything that would be remotely successful. Even questions as simple as finding out your target audience and actions you want your visitors to take upon reaching your site. They should also be concerned with your brand and retaining the image you’ve already established. Check out our questionnaire walkthrough for an example of the questions that we ask.

If the designer you are considering does not have a questions and answers period, they are apparently not concerned with giving you relevant and successful results.

2. Awards Before Solutions

A good web designer’s sole purpose is to deliver solutions to their clients: Solving a problem like more sales, better business, or more phone calls. However, many designer’s sites advertise the awards they have won for their designs instead of talking about the solutions they provide to their clients.

While awards and being published are great prestige and a great way to tell if someone is good at making pretty things, pretty doesn’t always mean effective, and unfortunately, in a lot of cases it’s quite the opposite. A lot of designers whose main concern is to design something to win an award do not take the client’s or project’s needs into consideration.

At Camp Creative Group, we do each project completely for our clients and their specific needs. If, after the project is finished, we think it will be award-worthy or should be published, then we submit it. In fact, many of the projects we have submitted have been chosen to be published solely because they were excellent examples of designing for a target audience.

3. Everything in Their Portfolio Looks the Same

I don’t really feel like I’ve ever seen an exception to this rule (however, I am open to suggestions). As a client, you should look for a designer who is diverse in their design. This will mean that they will be better able to design something specific and relevant to your project.

Even if you are looking for a designer for something specific… Say you’re a construction company and you want to work with someone who works only with other construction companies. While the benefits to working with someone who understands your company inside and out are great, be wary if all the designs in their portfolio look the same. You don’t want your site to look like other companies in your genre – you want your site to stand out and be effective. Chances are, if they haven’t swayed yet, they won’t with your project.

4. Uses Templates

Sometimes it’s difficult to tell if someone uses templates, so this one is a little bit difficult to notice for the untrained eye (although it could be a good reason for #3 above). However, if the design just doesn’t look quite right for the content, or if colors look a little awkward, there is probably a good chance they have used a template design. I’ve even seen “designers” who use a template for their own website.

Some companies will be open about the fact that they use a template, they may even let you pick one out. Some, underhandedly, may not tell you at all and just use one instead of designing a site.

To have a truly successful site for your business, you will want to hire someone to design something to meet your company’s needs. Templates will never be able to solve problems because they were designed to solve someone else’s problems. Besides that, do you really want a website that hundreds and thousands of other unsuccessful companies have?

5. Bad Markup

Right click on the site you are on and select “View Source.” If there are lots of table “<td></td><tr></tr>” and font “<font>” tags, their coding is most likely outdated.

There are several reasons to use better markup. One being accessibility, another is that it greatly benefits SEO (however, it does not necessarily mean you will need that alone).

One of the best reasons is that when you separate your content from your design, it makes it so much easier to make changes to the design in the future. Which means that when you want to redesign later (the average website design lasts about 3 years) it will be most cost effective.

6. Your Browser’s Back Button Doesn’t Work While On Their Site

This means they’ve either disabled your back button, opened a new window, or built their website entirely in Flash (without taking necessary actions to make it work correctly). All of these things are done without consideration for usability. The back button exists for a purpose. Users need to be able to use it. If they have no consideration for users of their own website, they most likely won’t have any consideration for your website’s users.

7. You Can’t Figure Out Their Navigation

Or, it takes you a while to figure out their navigation. Navigation should be obvious. Period. There is no point to having it at all if it’s not. Users will leave your site if they can’t figure out how to get to the information that they need. There is no excuse for a designer’s website to be any different. They are trying to sell their service to you, which means you’re their target audience. If they can’t design something for their own target audience, how can you expect them to design something for yours?

8. No Biography, No Picture

The web can be a very impersonal place, but it is becoming very personal. With social media dominating, people want interactions. They want to know more about the company they will be working with and the key team members in that company. They want to see a smiling, friendly face. Most people want to decide who to work with based on the biography and picture they provide. When doing business on the web this is extremely important because normally there is not going to be any other way to invoke trust.

If someone doesn’t provide a biography or picture, I often wonder “what are they hiding.” I also wonder this when someone provides outdated “elementary school pictures” without providing at the very least a rollover change to a current picture. Instantly, I feel like I am unsure if I can trust them.

9. Banner Ads For Other Companies

While this isn’t always the case, most of the times I have stumbled upon a “web design” company’s website that has banner ads throughout it for other companies (or, worse yet, google ads), they have been hacks. Whether it is for something relevant, such as hosting, or something irrelevant. The main purpose of their site should be to sell their services. Ads on their site just show they are trying to get every little penny they can get – which shows a great deal of concern about making money and not delivering solutions.

Of course, if they have a specific hosting company that they recommend, it doesn’t mean they can’t have their affiliate banner where appropriate. However, most of the time this isn’t the case and the banners will be for several companies, and scattered throughout. The worst culprits are the ones that put put a huge horizontal banner ad right beside their own logo.

10. Splash Page

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The only place where a splash page is appropriate is on a website where you need to confirm your user’s age before they enter, or when they need to select a language. Even having an introductory video or animation is okay, but put it on the home page of your site with supporting content. If your designer doesn’t follow this rule, they are using completely outdated practices and it should be a big flag that they might not be able to give you the best advice and deliver results that will work for you.

Related Articles

Written by Sarah Camp

Sarah's passion for design built Camp Creative Group. Educated in design, she has applied and evolved her knowledge for 10+ years. You can chat with her on twitter or view more posts that she has written.

  • Kemar
    Here is my two cents on this post. I agree with on most issues. But some I strongly believe are misguided and too subjective.
    1.There is/are reasons for now showing picture. It's just the same why people on resumes don't state your race/gender on resumes. It opens the door for discrimination/stereotypes that can steer away the client.

    2. Another point is the browser back button: I can bet you that most websites have a back button even in flash pages. Please recheck that.

    3. Bad Markup: While l won't object to this entirely, this is something subjective to a firm not the client. Clients vary and one won't necessarily know the difference between semantics and presentation. These terminologies are selling points for clients and for you inform or convince if they don't know of it's benefits. Example. With the proliferation of J Query and Flash, it has come to the point that you don't know the difference. So stating a bad markup isn't a strong point.
  • Dan
    Although I can't condone Adam's bluntness, at the core of his rant lies a fair and valid (pardon the pun) point.

    The majority of your points are fantastic and I couldn't agree more. However this site has some pretty glaring problems in the markup and there are also a few fundamental accessibility problems. These do kind of make point 5 stand out as a smidge hypocritical. They wouldn't be too hard for you to fix, though. That's one positive point. Tighten up on your use of inline and in-document styles and appropriate tag attributes and you'll be a lot better off.

    Dan
  • 1432
    Looks like you work for ditley?
  • Hello Dan and thanks for the comment!
    I know, and I agree with you. I agree with Adam as well. Unfortunately, the blog was an afterthought, and – as a work-in-progress – we realize there are some issues with it. However, our clients come first, and we haven't had time to address those issues; we feel they are not important enough to warrant pushing aside our clients' needs for our own. Yes, I agree, that it makes point 5 a tad hypocritical and we will address them as time allows. Thanks again for your feedback!
  • Hey Sarah, I just wanted to say kudos for posting this article and keeping the conversation going, despite the negative reaction by one commenter. While he did have some valid points, they were over shadowed by his delivery method and lack of proof reading.

    Was he correct in suggesting that the goal of this article is to "pimp" your company? I hope so, seeing as how you're in the web design business and this is your company blog. :)

    However, the important take away from this is that you shouldn't stop posting these types of articles just because your site isn't 100% perfect or for fear of a back lash. While "the other" Adam clearly has it all figured out and doesn't need your help, there are many people out there who don't know what to look for in a web designer and would find this article useful. To say nothing of the fact that responding to comments, both positive and negative, make you a better writer, designer, developer, etc. Your readers learn something and you learn something; everybody wins!

    Like Dan said above, most of these problems that Adam pointed out can easily be fixed when time and client work permits. The important thing is that your professionalism is clearly evident in the way you handled these comments. If I'm a potential client doing my homework on a web design firm, you may have just sold me on your company. Maybe you should add "Professionalism" as the number eleven thing to look for in a web designer. Keep up the good work!
  • Kimberly
    Well said, Second Adam. I agree wholeheartedly.
  • Adam
    You obviously should not be writing here using inpage CSS rather than CSS files, what's wrong with a ie7.css ?

    Also you talk about accessibility and although yes you have text behind the nav IMAGES there is NOT A TITLE ON THE LINK, so congrats there.

    Then your navigation uses CSS background images rather than an actual image so there's no img alt tag either.

    Quite frankly if you're going to tell people not to use cowboys I suggest that you are not cowboys yourselves.

    Oh and iFrames? be serious, really.

    People in glass houses should NOT throw stones.
  • Hi Adam,

    Thanks for your comment. I'm sorry you feel that way, however, that is the risk that is run when one writes an article of this nature.

    My goal with this article was to point out to people who are shopping for web services what major glaring issues can be found with the worst of the worst so-called "web design" companies. These are issues that are easy to spot for people who may not be web savvy, and also issues that will cause problems later on.

    I believe that Josh addressed the issues you had with our scripting. And, yes, the only iFrames on our site are within the Disqus scripting. Although I don't personally agree with their specific usage of iFrames (and while I believe there is an appropriate place for everything), Disqus is the absolute best commenting system, and I wouldn't trade it for anything else. The iFrames is just something I will deal with until they release a new version addressing that issue. And no, it doesn't cause any problems with our site.

    I hope that this cleared things up for you - and I welcome you to participate in our discussion any time!

    Thanks,
    Sarah Camp
  • Why include another file when you can simple add a few lines of text?

    The text is not behind the image, it is the link. The image is that little bit of text under the link. You're right there is no title, I will add that.

    Again, our nav only uses images for that bit of sub-text. If they can't see that image, no big deal, they can still click the link.

    What iframes?
  • Adam
    Josh what more can I say? You absolutely are a fail web designer if you believe that, and should in my opinion cease all activities until you have as gamers put it "L2P" and if you clearly cannot see what's wrong with your nav Josh then your retarded quite frankly.

    And what about the other CSS that's not IF for IE7?

    And your ranting about accessibility and using an iFrames plugin, awsome sauce *shrug* what is it? one rule for other web designers, another for you guys?

    Sorry for being out of line but it bugs the hell out of me that people have the balls to sit up and not practise what they preach, I mean, iFrames? Seriously, and in-document CSS, come on, and the nav... fail! seriously, you preach accessibility and you fail at it, badly.

    I can quite easily spit out a HTML Strict Valid, CSS Valid 2.1 (although tend to sway to some CSS 3 now) and WCAG WAI-AAA valid wordpress blogs loaded up with Ajax and Contact forms, infact I've recoded half of a Contact Plugin so it was WAI-AA... and that's the only site I'd preach from... I would not dare preach from a website not following half the thing you've suggested.

    One tip you should have on there is about bullsh1tters, because they're the worse sort.

    This site does not even have a language meta tag.. cmon'

    Oh and look at your source:
    "<div class="clear" style="padding-bottom:50px"></div>"

    Inline CSS aswell as document CSS, absolutely fantastic.

    Sorry, just too funny, this is a "Screenshot or it didnt happen" moment!

    What makes it worse is the backlinking gimp's that are just posting agree'in with you guys and tweeting about it - just as bad as you people? Who knows.

    I know one thing, if your going to preach on a website, make sure that website practises.
  • Hi Adam,

    I think that maybe you need to read the article again. We did not "rant" about accessibility. In fact, I only mentioned it once as a benefit to using standards compliant coding.

    Also, iFrames are okay to use in certain instances, and actually are one of the better practices for banners and other things that track information (and clicks) - which is precisely what the tweetmeme button is (which is the iFrame on our site).

    Otherwise, I'm not sure what your point is about practicing what you preach. Anyone who has experience making websites knows that when you have an organic site such as a blog, there are things that will change and that one can't always control. My concern with the blog is not accessibility. If you go to our website, you will see that it completely validates (we're even featured on w3csites.com and yoursiteisvalid.com) - that can't even be said for boagworld.com - one of the biggest advocates of Accessibility - or smashingmagazine.com. This is why I said nothing about ensuring the site validates, because there are plenty of well built sites that don't validate. Also, one must be aware of the goals of the actual site itself.

    I know that you said that your site was "whipped together" and that's why there are issues with it. The same can be said about this blog - we put this blog together in only a few hours and have not had the luxury of time to go through it and change the things we want to change to make better. The things that are wrong with our blog are not major issues in the grand scheme of things, and we feel they can be put off to be refined later.

    I welcome your messages – no matter how you think we may be offended by them. We don't mind criticism (read our "Signs of a Good Designer" post) because it helps us to continually grow, which is what any good designer will be constantly striving for. However, many of your comments have been more of an attack than a critique.

    Be forewarned: If you – or anyone else, for that matter – name calls or puts down any reader on our site or member of our company in such malicious and unprofessional ways as you have in this comment, you will be blocked so that you cannot make further comments. I hope that it doesn't come to that as I would like this to remain an open forum for discussion, however, it is a professional blog and I expect people to conduct themselves accordingly. We've been nothing but hospitable to you: Be accepting of that grace. :)

    Thank you,
    Sarah Camp
  • Wow, incorrect, it's your website YOU are in control of the content, this is YOUR website and NOT a Clients.

    Even my person blog that was "Whipped Together" is HTML, CSS and WAI-AA valid.

    Your website is obviously wrongly put on their websites:-
    http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=htt...

    37 Errors, 104 warning(s)

    That's on your own portfolio page.

    Your navigation is still deadly inaccessible, and you are STILL USING INLINE CSS.

    Your goal was to pimp your company up suggesting to potential customers that your company does the "Right Thing" which it does not, since it cannot even apply what you've posted to your own website.

    That's HTML Validation of your portfolio page says it all, and the unnecessary CSS spaces confuse the hell out of me, seriously, give it up and admit you're wrong.

    And grace? Be graceful and fix your website or remove the article or suggest to the readers that you dont follow your own rudes, it's quite frankly pathetic. I'm sure you are offended, you've just been made to look like idiots by a blog post you've written trying to make yourselves look the opposite.

    BTW, Since your site uses inline CSS you wouldnt be HTML Strict Valid ;)
  • Hello again, Adam, :)

    The portfolio page was validating fine - which is why we were on those sites. Since launch, there has been information added to the portfolio by request - all of those errors are all coming from that information. I'm glad that you pointed it out because you're right - it needs to be fixed - and so does that one line of in-line css.

    As I said to Dan, our clients come first. We don't even update our portfolio very often. The issues that you have found on our site are small issues in the grand scheme of things. Yes, they cause accessibility problems, and we do want to fix them. However, I can't just put aside our client's projects for our own site (you should have seen what it took to get it built in the first place ;) ).

    I'm still not sure what you are saying regarding the navigation. Our navigation is accessible. I am not concerned with screen readers reading the sub text that is part of the images, if that's what you mean. That does not cause accessibility problems because that's not important (people don't need to read "your new best friends" it is pretty much just there to be there and hang out). The important parts of the navigation - the actual words "home" "portfolio" etc. are text.

    Like I said, these are things that unfortunately, sometimes, happen. I don't think that errors in validators necessarily mean that you've found a bad developer. However, sites built completely in tables with font tags are definitely a sure-fire clue that their scripting is outdated.

    I would be lying if I said that my goal isn't to "pimp my company" - because that is any business owner's goal. However, my first concern is always my clients and my intent with this article in particular is to give clients the ability to notice major problems that will *most likely* lead to issues with their own site (it IS, after all, reasons to be skeptical, not reasons to get rid of). Not to attack other web developers who are trying. No one is perfect.

    Thanks!
    Sarah Camp
  • Oh I guess the iframes you're talking about is the retweet or disqus plugin. Take that up with the creators.
  • Adam
    Or take it up with the nunty who implemented it on a blog that then posts about accessibility and web standards, mad grats.

    Ignorance is Bliss.
  • Hi Sarah,

    Most of these I agree with; if I can just pin in a tiny comment on point 5. We live in a world where 80% of the internet-literate population still use IE 5 or 6. In actual fact, table based markup is still the only reliable and failure-free way of creating stuff in html/css. I agree about <font>s but certainly not the tables (especially when you build sites with lots of dynamic content).

    Other than that, keep up the good work and cheers.
  • Thank you for the comment, Maciej!

    Actually, building with CSS can work fine in IE 5 or 6 without tables, even with dynamic content, it just requires a little more work - and it's worth it! However, I do agree that if you are displaying table-based information, such as charts and rows of data, using tables are the way to go.

    To clarify, tables should not be used to put together the design of a site. The design should be separated from the content. The best way to tell clients who don't know what they are looking for (who this article is targeted towards) to keep an eye out is to let them look for <td> and <tr> tags. Notice, in the article I just said "lots of" - of course, there are times when tables will be needed and found in the coding. :)

    Everything can be done in excess, and unfortunately, there are people who abuse Divs and have crazy and bad markup just as there are people who abuse tables.

    I hope that helps. And thanks again for the comment!
  • The template thing is the one that bothers me the most. If you designed the templates then fine. I see a lot of companies offering templates and say they design websites. I just don't like know people are getting ripped off!
  • While I don't have a problem with using templates, I do have a huge problem with the companies that are not up front and honest about it! There should be no reason to hide it. And really, there IS a market for it. Even if you are buying templates from another company and not making them yourself.

    However, if you are trying to create a legitimate online presence and want to start things out right, you're better off getting an original design.
  • mac
    I think it's not so much if you're using templates or not. In essence, a template is just a wire frame with a bunch of code running underneath (standard code and thus saves you time writing it yourself - so, economically speaking, seems even wise to use them). I guess it's more about if you are able to customize the code and the look and feel and thus create a new value of good quality. If you can do that, I say use templates all you want. Telling people to not use them at all is like telling you to do your monthly bills math without a calculator...
  • Hi Mac, Thanks for the comment!

    I think maybe I should clarify that this is templates in the sense of design templates. The look of the site, and not what is underneath. There are plenty of pre-built solutions that exist, and I agree completely that there is no reason to reinvent the wheel if what you want to do can be done with something that is available already. Unfortunately, the term for "template" is very broad.

    The template thing was something that was a little difficult to work into this article, because it's hard to spot. I would like to elaborate on it more in an additional article and hopefully you'll read and participate in conversation on that as well! :)
  • mac
    Hi Sarah,

    I didn't mean to disagree with point 4. of your article so much as add to it. You are perfectly right about the 'non-professionality' (at least on the creative side, and creative is what we do) of people who use ready made files which they fill with their own content, the look and feel - for the most part - remaining intact... That's bad on all sides. I just wanted to intimate that there is a good side to templates as well, and that's the code. This fact often gets overlooked in the dispute, perhaps because it's so obvious (thought maybe not to the client?).

    Anyway, love the article and think you should look to get it published in some other places as well...

    PS. mac and maciej are the same person - I made 2 comments last night (hope it's ok;))
  • Hi! I realized you were the same person after I posted :) And it's great! I'm glad to have you engaging in the conversation.

    I realize that you weren't disagreeing, and I just wanted to respond and re-enforce what you were saying so that everyone understands what we mean! :)

    Thanks again! Especially for the kind words about the article!
  • bellaziza
    Geez! I'm SO glad I use Camp Creative Group!! 6 websites over 7 years and we're still as happy as ever with you! Thanks Sarah!!!
  • We love hearing things like this. :) Of course, who doesn't :P We love working with you, also, Crista!
blog comments powered by Disqus