When efficiency is not a design goal, it's not a design flaw. For example: the most "efficient" government structure is an authoritarian dictatorship. Many of the inefficiencies in our government were designed-in to the system (aka checks and balances).
I would argue that inefficiency is part of any good creative design process. Developing multiple design concepts in order to get to the best design is a best practice, and 99designs simply enables it on a broad scale.
One concept to better align benefit with work with 99designs would be to be able to have a sliding scale of payment, so that the project sponsor is actually paying for the design process, as opposed to just the winning design. Give a few bucks to each of the top 10 designs and more to the winner, and maybe you get better quality or more participation.
Authored Comments
When efficiency is not a design goal, it's not a design flaw. For example: the most "efficient" government structure is an authoritarian dictatorship. Many of the inefficiencies in our government were designed-in to the system (aka checks and balances).
I would argue that inefficiency is part of any good creative design process. Developing multiple design concepts in order to get to the best design is a best practice, and 99designs simply enables it on a broad scale.
One concept to better align benefit with work with 99designs would be to be able to have a sliding scale of payment, so that the project sponsor is actually paying for the design process, as opposed to just the winning design. Give a few bucks to each of the top 10 designs and more to the winner, and maybe you get better quality or more participation.